Bush sucks
- Thread starter 12ParkRat60
- Start date
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Ok, my thing is ready. Please note: it's mostly bits from other places, but the information is correct, and this should shut you up. If any conservatives have an issue I have not written about, PM me and I'll write another mini-article to own you. If you're not satisfied with me copying the article on Iraq, that's because everyone knows everything by heart.
Also: there are no personal attacks like 'Bush didn't do his service' and 'Kerry got three purple hearts'. And all of the 'sections' titles got their inspiration from one source, don't accuse me of copying.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
Also: there are no personal attacks like 'Bush didn't do his service' and 'Kerry got three purple hearts'. And all of the 'sections' titles got their inspiration from one source, don't accuse me of copying.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
TAX CUTS
Reagan and Bush I also did tax cuts on the rich, also believing it would stimulate the economy. By the end of the Bush I administration, the deficit was of 300 billion dollars: a recession. Clinton, on the other hand, raised taxes on the wealthy and lowered them on the poor. People predicted another even greater recession, But between 1992 and 2000, the U.S had the greatest economical growth in it’s history. More than 18 million new jobs. The defecit became the largest surplus in history, 236 billion dollars.
Bush II did like his father, and in one term, managed to transform the 236 billion dollars of surplus into the largest deficit in U.S history, 500 billion dollars. The wealthy prosper like never before, but this makes healthcare costs go up, social security funds go down, and debt pile up.
Bush blames the “Clinton recession�, Al qaeda, and the war in Iraq. Whose fault is it? In his first days in office, Bush took most of the surplus to give it back to the rich. This did little to boost the economy. In addition, Bush had promised not to touch the 2.5 trillion reserved for Social Security in the future. Within 1 year, he had broken his promise.
Within another, it was all gone. Hello deficit. I can see conservatives saying “this all went to the wars we fought to liberate Iraq�. The cost of the tax cuts is estimated at three times the cost of the war. The second wave of tax cuts in 2003 were even worse and the former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil said it could have been spent better (guess why he’s out of a job). Spending increased almost twice as much as with Clinton. And now, silly programs like missions to mars and missile defence are really helping to slow down the spending (sarcasm).
Ultimately, the middle class is paying off the debts with the soaring health care costs, depleted retirement funds, lower salaries and record unemployement. So it will leave you with 5.6 trillion dollars of extra debt, to be paid off in the future. Nice legacy.
THE ESTATE TAX
The estate tax is a tax you have to pay when you inherit something. It has been repealed by Bush, with the argument that farmers could be obliged to sell their farms just to pay the tax. But basically, it only affected the richest 2% of the population, because you only paid it if your estate was worth more than 1.5 million dollars. This will reduce the revenue of the goverment by over 928 billion in the next years. So that money can stay in the hands of rich inheritors. Oh yeah, this will save the Bush family 10- 15 million dollars, Dick Cheney’s family 9-40 million, Donald Rumsfeld’s family 30 to a 120 million, and other members of the bush cabinet 23 to 111 million dollars. And Bush’s friends like Ken Lay (59 million dollars) Martha Stewart (324 million), Bernie Ebbers ( 254 million) would all save too. But the real thing is...
... no farmer in the history of the united states has ever had to sell his farm in order to pay off the Estate tax. It had special exemptions to prevent this... In the end, it would save the rich 2400 estates, whose worth equals that of 142 million of the poorest americans. It was all a grand scheme. Oh, yes.
THE TAX CUTS, PART 2:
Here’s how the 2001 1.3 trillion tax cut was distributed among the American people.
41 % of it went to the richest 20 % (of it 7 % to 1 % of the polulation).
Not “too� bad, eh? How about 2003?
71% went to the richest 20 % (of it 38 percent to the 1 % of the population). You call this fair? It’s the perfect plan: tricking the poor into thinking they’re benifitting from little tax breaks when it truth the money buys Bush political influence and campaings contributions. Woo hoo!
And at the end of the 10 year plan...
By 2010, 68 % of the tax breaks will have gone to the richest 20 %, and OF IT 51 % OF IT TO 1% OF AMERICANS!!!! When 1/3 of americans can’t even afford healthcare, the social security system was fucked by Bush, thus denying safe retirement to midddle class, Bush gives more money to the rich than he has to education!
Bush says that the rich, after receiving money, create jobs and help stimulate the economy. The facts: the economy has been improving as of may 2004. This is a good thing. However, everyone knows that cutting taxes when the economy is plummeting is going to help the economy. If you borrow trillions of dollars against the deficit and throw it at the most resilient economy in the world, some growth is guaranteed. It’s a short-term economy stimulis! But former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil (appointed by Bush), did not agree with the tax cuts because all of the money given was money that could be trickled back into the pockets of the rich over the next ten years instead of immediately providing a stimulis to shock the economy back into shape. On the other hand, giving the money to middle-class americans would have provided a boost in economy that would truly last. This was proved by Clinton. Even Bush was appaled by the 2003 tax cuts. It truly isn’t HIS work, but that of manipulators such as Cheney and Rove. Billions were thus wasted, borrowed straight against the deficit, and it was overall, a just plain stupid investement that could have been used so much better.
THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WHITE HOUSE (I coined this one)
Kenneth Lay, CEO of the energy company Enron, created one of the greateast corporate bankruptcies in US history, leaving thousands of employees jobless, decimating employee retirement savings, and devastating thousands of small investors. Corporal officials forced employees to hold onto the stock as its value went down drastically, Executives meanwhile distributed 100 million dollars in bonus on the eve of declaring the bankruptcy. Enron was one of Bush’s greateast financial contributor throughout his career; in the 2000 election, Lay and Enron gave more than 2 million dollars to Bush’s election efforts.
Five out of seven of Bush’s contributors had strong ties with Enron. Enron was the only energy company given the privilege to meet alone with Dick Cheney during secret meetings relating new energy policies. In exchage for contributions and profits from outside business deals with Enron, Bush helped Lay kill laws designed to protect the consumers. Where was the FERC? The federal energy regulatory commision is supposed to stop these kind of things. Let’s see...
In 2001, Curtis Hebert Jr was chairman of the FERC, the committee that made laws for companies like Enron. He had barely received his new job when he was asked by Ken Lay to pass legislation that would essentially grant Enron greater power and freedom to exploit consumers and drive up energy costs. Disgusted, Hebert refused to comply. Then, Lay got Bush to fire Hebert and replaced him with Pat Wood, who was totally under Lay’s control. Great job of defending our interest, Bush. Weird that a committee supposed to ensure fair prices is headed by the friend of the CEO of an energy company... this is one of the hundreds of examples of how the White House was bought. This proves that...
Bush is not in power for being a great leader, but instead he has been boosted into the presidency to serve as a money-making tool for the wealthy, the elite, the powerful, and the corporations, all while hiding under a criminal veil of secrecy and denial.
TAX SHELTERS
What a great place America is. If you have a company, but just don’t want to pay taxes, don’t! Put up a mailbox in the Bermudas and you’ll no longer be held accountable by your shareholders. Example: Enron had 881 subsidiaries in Bermuda, and thus avoided paying any taxes for their four last years! TYCO stole 1 billion dollars by setting up a mailbox in 1997! But don’t worry, Bush did it when he was head of Harken energy, and the secretary of treasury, Paul Snow, does it also. But the most blatant example of how good the Bush cabinet is...
Halliburton hasn’t paid any taxes since 1999. In fact, in that year, they got an 85 million dollars tax rebate! Woo hoo! So Cheney’s company now enjoys 23 billion tax-free dollars of contracts every year for tapping into Iraq alone! Good for them! To be fair, Halliburton did have to pay a 2 million dollar fine for this, but can still do it. Accidents happen!
All in all, the islands save corporations and cost americans 70 billion dollars every year! By the way, don’t vote for JOHN KERRY, who will eliminate these offshore tax heavens when he’s elected, and make big companies pay their dues. Just when Bush preaches patriotism, corporations express more of it towards the Bermudas...
THE ENVIRONNEMENT: Simple. Owned by the coal, utility and mining industries, it’s of no surprise that the actual goverment is called the worst environmental adminstration of the U.S. No more clean air act, kyoto protocol, more drilling in environmental refuges and over 200 environmental laws rolled back. 30 years of environmental policy trashed to save a few bucks.
HEALTHCARE, JOBS, AND WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR KERRY
You still live in a country where is so many ways there are 2 seperate Americas. One for the people with positions with privilege, and one for the others. You have two health care systems; one for those who can afford the best healthcare, and one for everybody else- rationed out by insurance companies and HMOs. Two public school systems: one for the affluent communities, and one for everybody else. Two tax systems, one for those who have lawyers and accountants who take care of every tax loophole and every tax advantage, and one for the others. Two economies; one for all those families that have everything they need inculding security for their kids and grandkids, and one for all the families that go from paycheck to paycheck, saving nothing and going deeper into debt. 35 million americans live everyday in poverty. Today in america, the average CEO earns more in one day than the average employee in one year. In 1980, the acerage CEO made 41 times the salary of the average empleyee. In 1990, 85 times. In the U-K, it’s 14. But today, the average CEO MAKES 531 TIMES THE SALARY OF AN AVERAGE EMPLOYEE. At a time when the minimum wage is only 5.15 an hour and that salaries have only gone up 1 or 2 %, CEOs’ salaries do not stop going up, and up, as well as receive record tax relief. In the meantime, 2 million workers lost their health insurance last year, and workers who still had coverage faced skyrocketing costs and larger co-payments. 40 million americans have no form of health insurance. The cost of drugs has skyrocketted due to the fact that the Bush administration is in the pocket of several drug companies who donated millions to his campaign.
And even if Bush applauds himself for giving mild tax relief, the rise in healthcare costs has cancelled out any of these tax cuts. Bush said: “My economic security plan can be summed up in one word: JOBS�. As of March 2004, the Bush administration has lost 63 000 jobs for month. The U.S needs to create about 150 000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth. About 2 million jobs have dissapeared since March 2001. The only president to lose more jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover, during the Great Depression. The Bush administration points out that productivity is at an all time high and that the hiring of new employees isn’t happening because the present employees are doing a good job. But what it really means is that employees are working harder and longer than ever before for little money and fewer benefits. Americans now work nine weeks longer than Europeans. Americans also work the equivalent of five hours more a week than in 1973- about 200 extra hours a year. Worker productivity is up because it’s in the interests of companies to work one worker 60/80 hours a week rather than two workers 30-40 hours a week each. This is because healthcare costs for companies are so high, it’s more cost effective to stretch one worker to the bone than hire more workers and have to pay for more healthcare and retirement plans. So how do we ease the burden and create new jobs? What is the point of this particular rant?
To prove why you should vote for Kerry. First, he’ll roll back all of Bush’s tax cuts to the rich, and use this money to create tax incentives for companies to create new jobs and introduce health care reform to make basic health care available for all people of all income levels. He’ll also pass laws that prevent CEO’s from exporting jobs and exploiting their workers and making off them exorbitant amounts of money.
RELIGION, OSAMA and FOREIGN POLICY
God is on our side. We are good, they are evil. If you’re not with us, you’re terrorists. Let’s remember that Christianity’s first message is to love thy neighbor and thyne enemy. Preaching that God hates homosexuality, among others, is fundamentally not a christian virtue, no matter what the Bible says. Bush is a perfect example of how any fool in error can distort religious scripture to justify hatred and violence... the rethoric “in the name of God� is the same terrorists use... Many people Bush is the only one with enough “guts� to protect the country from terrorists. This is not true. First of all, it is of utmost importance that we recognize Osama Ben Laden as more of a man, he is a MINDSET. Every time America starts a war such as the war in Iraq, whether it is justified or not, the Muslim blood that is spilled will plant seeds of Ben Laden in the minds of Muslims who have become angry, and dishounoured by America. While some Bush supporters might argue that hunting down terrorists is all there is to be done to get rid of them, this is not the solution. THE SOLUTION IS TO STOP GIVING THEM REASON TO HATE AMERICA. The sympathy gained after the 9-11 attacks was quickly smothered by your arrogance, and inability to work as an international community. Half of the people in America may like you, but 90% of the world doesen’t. This is the work of one man. Bush was naive enough to think that getting rid of Saddam Hussein would bring peace and love in Iraq, and is still naive enough to think that hunting down Ben Laden will change anything. You are not safer now than you were before 9/11. People all over the world hate you more than ever. America needs a president who has a plan to work with the international community, who will not start wars based on shoddy evidence and lies, a president who has a plan to restore America the image of hope, prosperity and freedom, and defeat the new image of being imperialistic, greedy, arrogant, stupid war bent!
“If Ben Laden could vote, would he vote for Bush or Kerry?� If Osama Ben Laden could vote, he would vote for Bush, and he would thank you for spreading the Ben Laden gospel of Anti-americanism like never before!
IRAQ
I think all of you know this by now. Based on lies, your country went to war, bla bla bla. So if you care to reread this a millionth time, I took another article and pasted it. Let's get this straight right now: the war in Iraq has NOTHING TO DO with the war on terror. al-Qaeda is unrelated to Saddam Hussein. The destruction of downtown Manhattan and the lost lives of thousands of New Yorkers are unconnected with any persons, groups, or events that have transpired in Iraq. Simply stated, these are two different issues.
Why then would we actively pursue Iraq with the greater issue of terrorism still at hand? Because President Bush knew that he could. With a soaring popularity unlike any president has seen in years, the unconditional support of the majority of Americans gave him the green-light to pursue this longstanding interest. All he had to do was set the ball rolling. Allow me, for a moment, to take a stroll down memory lane…
On February 5th, 2003, Colin Powell presented to the United Nations “undeniable evidence� that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction, evading UN weapons inspectors, and actively developing a nuclear weapons program. Using as-of-then recently declassified intelligence, including satellite imagery and bits of intercepted phone calls, Powell did his best to prove to the UN that Iraq was blatantly refusing to disarm, and even producing new weapons in the meantime. He also called on UN Resolution 1441 to give the Iraqi government one last chance to completely yield to weapons inspectors or prepare for “serious consequences�.
The general reaction to this presentation was not favorable of Powell's implications. Naturally, the Iraqi delegate denied all the charges against his country. Other delegates almost immediately took sides on the issue, with only Britain and Spain backing the US. Nearly all other countries were in favor of a peaceful solution to this problem.
As it became increasingly clear that war was at hand, the world rallied against it. On February 15th, 2003, the largest protest in the history of the world was held. Estimates of the number of protesters demonstrating range from 6 to 15 million. Converging in immeasurable crowds in cities across the globe, these people came together to convey a single idea: don't go to war with Iraq. (Consider that these are just the people who were willing to give up a day from their lives to express their views. One can only assume that the number of non-protesters with similar views was exponential in comparison.)
To make things official, Bush declared war on Iraq on March 19th, 2003. Despite the peace protests. Against the urgings of the greater part of the United Nations. To hell with all of it, let's get that Saddam.
The problem here is, in my opinion, when declaring war in the name of international policy, it would be a good idea to have international support. It seems entirely hypocritical to advance into battle using a United Nations resolution as reason and justification without the consent or approval of the United Nations itself. The foreign policy that justifies this rationale is irresponsible, dangerous, and, as suggested by congressman Dr. Ron Paul, even unconstitutional.
As the fighting raged and cities fell, no weapons were found. Even traces of the ghosts of weapons past were hard to come by. On May 1st, 2003, Bush declared an end to “major combat operations in Iraq� after making a dramatic entrance by Navy surveillance jet onto the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. He later gave a speech to the sailors and the world under a banner declaring “Mission Accomplished�. Some have since argued that this banner was not placed under the direction of the Bush administration, but rather by the soldiers on board the aircraft carrier. Even if these allegations are true and the banner was indeed a mistake for which Bush was not accountable, his words on that day still marched to the beat of the same drum. 'In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed' was the exact phrase used. That was over a year ago.
The number of US soldiers who have lost their lives as a direct result of this war is over 500 and counting, with more than 100 of these deaths in April alone.
As of this writing, we are still in Iraq, with plans to “hand over control� on June 30th. As the deadline looms, a major question still remains to be answered by Bush and friends: who exactly are we turning power over to, and how do they plan to govern and control a post-Saddam Iraq? It is all but clear that when the official occupation ends in June, an unofficial occupation of similar magnitude will be needed in July, lest Iraq collapse into complete and utter chaos.
Because we have acted with haste, and alienated most potential allies in the process, we find ourselves in quite the precarious situation. It is obvious that the Iraqi people will refuse any government established by US forces. Even if an international team is assembled to remedy the situation, it will most certainly call for heavy US backing in the way of military support. Either way, our armed forces have a long fight ahead of them with no certain end in sight.
In the meantime, President Bush has been cracking jokes about those wacky WMDs. The worst part of all of this is that we still have a war on terror to fight. Saddam Hussein may have been captured as a result of all of this, but the man responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks is still at large. The fact that we put aside our efforts to destroy al-Qaeda in favor of a war which was largely unnecessary is deeply disturbing. Even more troubling is the lack of international support we will have, if and when this anti-terror effort is resumed, as a direct result of our global disregard for the opinions of our former allies. It was a dangerous gamble that Bush took in leading us into Iraq, and we’re already paying the price for it.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
Reagan and Bush I also did tax cuts on the rich, also believing it would stimulate the economy. By the end of the Bush I administration, the deficit was of 300 billion dollars: a recession. Clinton, on the other hand, raised taxes on the wealthy and lowered them on the poor. People predicted another even greater recession, But between 1992 and 2000, the U.S had the greatest economical growth in it’s history. More than 18 million new jobs. The defecit became the largest surplus in history, 236 billion dollars.
Bush II did like his father, and in one term, managed to transform the 236 billion dollars of surplus into the largest deficit in U.S history, 500 billion dollars. The wealthy prosper like never before, but this makes healthcare costs go up, social security funds go down, and debt pile up.
Bush blames the “Clinton recession�, Al qaeda, and the war in Iraq. Whose fault is it? In his first days in office, Bush took most of the surplus to give it back to the rich. This did little to boost the economy. In addition, Bush had promised not to touch the 2.5 trillion reserved for Social Security in the future. Within 1 year, he had broken his promise.
Within another, it was all gone. Hello deficit. I can see conservatives saying “this all went to the wars we fought to liberate Iraq�. The cost of the tax cuts is estimated at three times the cost of the war. The second wave of tax cuts in 2003 were even worse and the former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil said it could have been spent better (guess why he’s out of a job). Spending increased almost twice as much as with Clinton. And now, silly programs like missions to mars and missile defence are really helping to slow down the spending (sarcasm).
Ultimately, the middle class is paying off the debts with the soaring health care costs, depleted retirement funds, lower salaries and record unemployement. So it will leave you with 5.6 trillion dollars of extra debt, to be paid off in the future. Nice legacy.
THE ESTATE TAX
The estate tax is a tax you have to pay when you inherit something. It has been repealed by Bush, with the argument that farmers could be obliged to sell their farms just to pay the tax. But basically, it only affected the richest 2% of the population, because you only paid it if your estate was worth more than 1.5 million dollars. This will reduce the revenue of the goverment by over 928 billion in the next years. So that money can stay in the hands of rich inheritors. Oh yeah, this will save the Bush family 10- 15 million dollars, Dick Cheney’s family 9-40 million, Donald Rumsfeld’s family 30 to a 120 million, and other members of the bush cabinet 23 to 111 million dollars. And Bush’s friends like Ken Lay (59 million dollars) Martha Stewart (324 million), Bernie Ebbers ( 254 million) would all save too. But the real thing is...
... no farmer in the history of the united states has ever had to sell his farm in order to pay off the Estate tax. It had special exemptions to prevent this... In the end, it would save the rich 2400 estates, whose worth equals that of 142 million of the poorest americans. It was all a grand scheme. Oh, yes.
THE TAX CUTS, PART 2:
Here’s how the 2001 1.3 trillion tax cut was distributed among the American people.
41 % of it went to the richest 20 % (of it 7 % to 1 % of the polulation).
Not “too� bad, eh? How about 2003?
71% went to the richest 20 % (of it 38 percent to the 1 % of the population). You call this fair? It’s the perfect plan: tricking the poor into thinking they’re benifitting from little tax breaks when it truth the money buys Bush political influence and campaings contributions. Woo hoo!
And at the end of the 10 year plan...
By 2010, 68 % of the tax breaks will have gone to the richest 20 %, and OF IT 51 % OF IT TO 1% OF AMERICANS!!!! When 1/3 of americans can’t even afford healthcare, the social security system was fucked by Bush, thus denying safe retirement to midddle class, Bush gives more money to the rich than he has to education!
Bush says that the rich, after receiving money, create jobs and help stimulate the economy. The facts: the economy has been improving as of may 2004. This is a good thing. However, everyone knows that cutting taxes when the economy is plummeting is going to help the economy. If you borrow trillions of dollars against the deficit and throw it at the most resilient economy in the world, some growth is guaranteed. It’s a short-term economy stimulis! But former secretary of treasury Paul O’Neil (appointed by Bush), did not agree with the tax cuts because all of the money given was money that could be trickled back into the pockets of the rich over the next ten years instead of immediately providing a stimulis to shock the economy back into shape. On the other hand, giving the money to middle-class americans would have provided a boost in economy that would truly last. This was proved by Clinton. Even Bush was appaled by the 2003 tax cuts. It truly isn’t HIS work, but that of manipulators such as Cheney and Rove. Billions were thus wasted, borrowed straight against the deficit, and it was overall, a just plain stupid investement that could have been used so much better.
THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WHITE HOUSE (I coined this one)
Kenneth Lay, CEO of the energy company Enron, created one of the greateast corporate bankruptcies in US history, leaving thousands of employees jobless, decimating employee retirement savings, and devastating thousands of small investors. Corporal officials forced employees to hold onto the stock as its value went down drastically, Executives meanwhile distributed 100 million dollars in bonus on the eve of declaring the bankruptcy. Enron was one of Bush’s greateast financial contributor throughout his career; in the 2000 election, Lay and Enron gave more than 2 million dollars to Bush’s election efforts.
Five out of seven of Bush’s contributors had strong ties with Enron. Enron was the only energy company given the privilege to meet alone with Dick Cheney during secret meetings relating new energy policies. In exchage for contributions and profits from outside business deals with Enron, Bush helped Lay kill laws designed to protect the consumers. Where was the FERC? The federal energy regulatory commision is supposed to stop these kind of things. Let’s see...
In 2001, Curtis Hebert Jr was chairman of the FERC, the committee that made laws for companies like Enron. He had barely received his new job when he was asked by Ken Lay to pass legislation that would essentially grant Enron greater power and freedom to exploit consumers and drive up energy costs. Disgusted, Hebert refused to comply. Then, Lay got Bush to fire Hebert and replaced him with Pat Wood, who was totally under Lay’s control. Great job of defending our interest, Bush. Weird that a committee supposed to ensure fair prices is headed by the friend of the CEO of an energy company... this is one of the hundreds of examples of how the White House was bought. This proves that...
Bush is not in power for being a great leader, but instead he has been boosted into the presidency to serve as a money-making tool for the wealthy, the elite, the powerful, and the corporations, all while hiding under a criminal veil of secrecy and denial.
TAX SHELTERS
What a great place America is. If you have a company, but just don’t want to pay taxes, don’t! Put up a mailbox in the Bermudas and you’ll no longer be held accountable by your shareholders. Example: Enron had 881 subsidiaries in Bermuda, and thus avoided paying any taxes for their four last years! TYCO stole 1 billion dollars by setting up a mailbox in 1997! But don’t worry, Bush did it when he was head of Harken energy, and the secretary of treasury, Paul Snow, does it also. But the most blatant example of how good the Bush cabinet is...
Halliburton hasn’t paid any taxes since 1999. In fact, in that year, they got an 85 million dollars tax rebate! Woo hoo! So Cheney’s company now enjoys 23 billion tax-free dollars of contracts every year for tapping into Iraq alone! Good for them! To be fair, Halliburton did have to pay a 2 million dollar fine for this, but can still do it. Accidents happen!
All in all, the islands save corporations and cost americans 70 billion dollars every year! By the way, don’t vote for JOHN KERRY, who will eliminate these offshore tax heavens when he’s elected, and make big companies pay their dues. Just when Bush preaches patriotism, corporations express more of it towards the Bermudas...
THE ENVIRONNEMENT: Simple. Owned by the coal, utility and mining industries, it’s of no surprise that the actual goverment is called the worst environmental adminstration of the U.S. No more clean air act, kyoto protocol, more drilling in environmental refuges and over 200 environmental laws rolled back. 30 years of environmental policy trashed to save a few bucks.
HEALTHCARE, JOBS, AND WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR KERRY
You still live in a country where is so many ways there are 2 seperate Americas. One for the people with positions with privilege, and one for the others. You have two health care systems; one for those who can afford the best healthcare, and one for everybody else- rationed out by insurance companies and HMOs. Two public school systems: one for the affluent communities, and one for everybody else. Two tax systems, one for those who have lawyers and accountants who take care of every tax loophole and every tax advantage, and one for the others. Two economies; one for all those families that have everything they need inculding security for their kids and grandkids, and one for all the families that go from paycheck to paycheck, saving nothing and going deeper into debt. 35 million americans live everyday in poverty. Today in america, the average CEO earns more in one day than the average employee in one year. In 1980, the acerage CEO made 41 times the salary of the average empleyee. In 1990, 85 times. In the U-K, it’s 14. But today, the average CEO MAKES 531 TIMES THE SALARY OF AN AVERAGE EMPLOYEE. At a time when the minimum wage is only 5.15 an hour and that salaries have only gone up 1 or 2 %, CEOs’ salaries do not stop going up, and up, as well as receive record tax relief. In the meantime, 2 million workers lost their health insurance last year, and workers who still had coverage faced skyrocketing costs and larger co-payments. 40 million americans have no form of health insurance. The cost of drugs has skyrocketted due to the fact that the Bush administration is in the pocket of several drug companies who donated millions to his campaign.
And even if Bush applauds himself for giving mild tax relief, the rise in healthcare costs has cancelled out any of these tax cuts. Bush said: “My economic security plan can be summed up in one word: JOBS�. As of March 2004, the Bush administration has lost 63 000 jobs for month. The U.S needs to create about 150 000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth. About 2 million jobs have dissapeared since March 2001. The only president to lose more jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover, during the Great Depression. The Bush administration points out that productivity is at an all time high and that the hiring of new employees isn’t happening because the present employees are doing a good job. But what it really means is that employees are working harder and longer than ever before for little money and fewer benefits. Americans now work nine weeks longer than Europeans. Americans also work the equivalent of five hours more a week than in 1973- about 200 extra hours a year. Worker productivity is up because it’s in the interests of companies to work one worker 60/80 hours a week rather than two workers 30-40 hours a week each. This is because healthcare costs for companies are so high, it’s more cost effective to stretch one worker to the bone than hire more workers and have to pay for more healthcare and retirement plans. So how do we ease the burden and create new jobs? What is the point of this particular rant?
To prove why you should vote for Kerry. First, he’ll roll back all of Bush’s tax cuts to the rich, and use this money to create tax incentives for companies to create new jobs and introduce health care reform to make basic health care available for all people of all income levels. He’ll also pass laws that prevent CEO’s from exporting jobs and exploiting their workers and making off them exorbitant amounts of money.
RELIGION, OSAMA and FOREIGN POLICY
God is on our side. We are good, they are evil. If you’re not with us, you’re terrorists. Let’s remember that Christianity’s first message is to love thy neighbor and thyne enemy. Preaching that God hates homosexuality, among others, is fundamentally not a christian virtue, no matter what the Bible says. Bush is a perfect example of how any fool in error can distort religious scripture to justify hatred and violence... the rethoric “in the name of God� is the same terrorists use... Many people Bush is the only one with enough “guts� to protect the country from terrorists. This is not true. First of all, it is of utmost importance that we recognize Osama Ben Laden as more of a man, he is a MINDSET. Every time America starts a war such as the war in Iraq, whether it is justified or not, the Muslim blood that is spilled will plant seeds of Ben Laden in the minds of Muslims who have become angry, and dishounoured by America. While some Bush supporters might argue that hunting down terrorists is all there is to be done to get rid of them, this is not the solution. THE SOLUTION IS TO STOP GIVING THEM REASON TO HATE AMERICA. The sympathy gained after the 9-11 attacks was quickly smothered by your arrogance, and inability to work as an international community. Half of the people in America may like you, but 90% of the world doesen’t. This is the work of one man. Bush was naive enough to think that getting rid of Saddam Hussein would bring peace and love in Iraq, and is still naive enough to think that hunting down Ben Laden will change anything. You are not safer now than you were before 9/11. People all over the world hate you more than ever. America needs a president who has a plan to work with the international community, who will not start wars based on shoddy evidence and lies, a president who has a plan to restore America the image of hope, prosperity and freedom, and defeat the new image of being imperialistic, greedy, arrogant, stupid war bent!
“If Ben Laden could vote, would he vote for Bush or Kerry?� If Osama Ben Laden could vote, he would vote for Bush, and he would thank you for spreading the Ben Laden gospel of Anti-americanism like never before!
IRAQ
I think all of you know this by now. Based on lies, your country went to war, bla bla bla. So if you care to reread this a millionth time, I took another article and pasted it. Let's get this straight right now: the war in Iraq has NOTHING TO DO with the war on terror. al-Qaeda is unrelated to Saddam Hussein. The destruction of downtown Manhattan and the lost lives of thousands of New Yorkers are unconnected with any persons, groups, or events that have transpired in Iraq. Simply stated, these are two different issues.
Why then would we actively pursue Iraq with the greater issue of terrorism still at hand? Because President Bush knew that he could. With a soaring popularity unlike any president has seen in years, the unconditional support of the majority of Americans gave him the green-light to pursue this longstanding interest. All he had to do was set the ball rolling. Allow me, for a moment, to take a stroll down memory lane…
On February 5th, 2003, Colin Powell presented to the United Nations “undeniable evidence� that Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction, evading UN weapons inspectors, and actively developing a nuclear weapons program. Using as-of-then recently declassified intelligence, including satellite imagery and bits of intercepted phone calls, Powell did his best to prove to the UN that Iraq was blatantly refusing to disarm, and even producing new weapons in the meantime. He also called on UN Resolution 1441 to give the Iraqi government one last chance to completely yield to weapons inspectors or prepare for “serious consequences�.
The general reaction to this presentation was not favorable of Powell's implications. Naturally, the Iraqi delegate denied all the charges against his country. Other delegates almost immediately took sides on the issue, with only Britain and Spain backing the US. Nearly all other countries were in favor of a peaceful solution to this problem.
As it became increasingly clear that war was at hand, the world rallied against it. On February 15th, 2003, the largest protest in the history of the world was held. Estimates of the number of protesters demonstrating range from 6 to 15 million. Converging in immeasurable crowds in cities across the globe, these people came together to convey a single idea: don't go to war with Iraq. (Consider that these are just the people who were willing to give up a day from their lives to express their views. One can only assume that the number of non-protesters with similar views was exponential in comparison.)
To make things official, Bush declared war on Iraq on March 19th, 2003. Despite the peace protests. Against the urgings of the greater part of the United Nations. To hell with all of it, let's get that Saddam.
The problem here is, in my opinion, when declaring war in the name of international policy, it would be a good idea to have international support. It seems entirely hypocritical to advance into battle using a United Nations resolution as reason and justification without the consent or approval of the United Nations itself. The foreign policy that justifies this rationale is irresponsible, dangerous, and, as suggested by congressman Dr. Ron Paul, even unconstitutional.
As the fighting raged and cities fell, no weapons were found. Even traces of the ghosts of weapons past were hard to come by. On May 1st, 2003, Bush declared an end to “major combat operations in Iraq� after making a dramatic entrance by Navy surveillance jet onto the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. He later gave a speech to the sailors and the world under a banner declaring “Mission Accomplished�. Some have since argued that this banner was not placed under the direction of the Bush administration, but rather by the soldiers on board the aircraft carrier. Even if these allegations are true and the banner was indeed a mistake for which Bush was not accountable, his words on that day still marched to the beat of the same drum. 'In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed' was the exact phrase used. That was over a year ago.
The number of US soldiers who have lost their lives as a direct result of this war is over 500 and counting, with more than 100 of these deaths in April alone.
As of this writing, we are still in Iraq, with plans to “hand over control� on June 30th. As the deadline looms, a major question still remains to be answered by Bush and friends: who exactly are we turning power over to, and how do they plan to govern and control a post-Saddam Iraq? It is all but clear that when the official occupation ends in June, an unofficial occupation of similar magnitude will be needed in July, lest Iraq collapse into complete and utter chaos.
Because we have acted with haste, and alienated most potential allies in the process, we find ourselves in quite the precarious situation. It is obvious that the Iraqi people will refuse any government established by US forces. Even if an international team is assembled to remedy the situation, it will most certainly call for heavy US backing in the way of military support. Either way, our armed forces have a long fight ahead of them with no certain end in sight.
In the meantime, President Bush has been cracking jokes about those wacky WMDs. The worst part of all of this is that we still have a war on terror to fight. Saddam Hussein may have been captured as a result of all of this, but the man responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks is still at large. The fact that we put aside our efforts to destroy al-Qaeda in favor of a war which was largely unnecessary is deeply disturbing. Even more troubling is the lack of international support we will have, if and when this anti-terror effort is resumed, as a direct result of our global disregard for the opinions of our former allies. It was a dangerous gamble that Bush took in leading us into Iraq, and we’re already paying the price for it.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Oh yeah and it starts abruptly because I didn't feel like doing an introduction, and there are probably many typos and mistakes because English isn't my first language. Enjoy!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
wuestinator
Active member
you should read it and learn something and stop saying he didn't do anything. he might not be the best but he will be better than kerry in office, thats for sure.
_________________________
sanctioned outerwear -http://sanctioned.tk
jacket comming fall 04.
tshirts & hoodies available now.
_________________________
sanctioned outerwear -http://sanctioned.tk
jacket comming fall 04.
tshirts & hoodies available now.
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Bump.
I knew no one would read it.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
I knew no one would read it.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
Ok its took 2 seconds of reading before I could tell how ignorant you are. Here is your quote
'The estate tax is a tax you have to pay when you inherit something.'
Ummm WRONG!! You do not pay tax of property inherited. The estate of the dead person is the party responsible for the estate tax (hence the word estate tax). DUH!
Also the estate taxes provides less than .05% of the entire budget for the government, plus it taxes property and income that have alreay been taxed. Think about it, you estate grows as you make more money. As you make that money you pay tax on it. Soooo. When the government taxes it again its double taxes and the rates are very progressive.
It is a very unfair tax and has hurt many many small business owners. Many family business are sold after the death of the owner so the estate can pay the taxes.
Once you start speaking in fact i will listen
'The estate tax is a tax you have to pay when you inherit something.'
Ummm WRONG!! You do not pay tax of property inherited. The estate of the dead person is the party responsible for the estate tax (hence the word estate tax). DUH!
Also the estate taxes provides less than .05% of the entire budget for the government, plus it taxes property and income that have alreay been taxed. Think about it, you estate grows as you make more money. As you make that money you pay tax on it. Soooo. When the government taxes it again its double taxes and the rates are very progressive.
It is a very unfair tax and has hurt many many small business owners. Many family business are sold after the death of the owner so the estate can pay the taxes.
Once you start speaking in fact i will listen
bigJ
Active member
The death tax is the most ludicrous tax out there, other then the tax on scholarships. It is a tax on money that has already been taxed before, possibly several times before. If you start off with a 6 million dollar estate, after taxes and everything is said an done your family will receive 2 million, that is only 30% of the original estate. I must say, what the fuck. The money has already been taxed by means of income taxes and then it gets taxed again, and again, and again depending on how long the original money survives from the first estate and subsequent estates.
Now since I have a life i will not be able to decry the entire 'argument' that has been laid out, so yall need to pitch in so that he does not succeed by default form typing a thousand words of bullshit.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
Now since I have a life i will not be able to decry the entire 'argument' that has been laid out, so yall need to pitch in so that he does not succeed by default form typing a thousand words of bullshit.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
Also along the whole 'tax cut' issue. Umm any reduction in taxes is not the government givng you a 'tax cut' Why you ask? Simply b/c its your money to start off with.
Most people dont realize how much you pay in taxes bc it comes out of your paycheck b/f you ever see it. I guartee you that if you had to write a check to federal government each month you would be fighting for lower taxes.
Most people dont realize how much you pay in taxes bc it comes out of your paycheck b/f you ever see it. I guartee you that if you had to write a check to federal government each month you would be fighting for lower taxes.
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
^read the whole thing, dipshit. It's been calculated than any meager amount of money you saved on the tax cuts will be canceled out by the rising healthcare costs.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Oh and BigJ, since you can't read the whole thing, here are a few things:
-Bush let Ken Lay, CEO of Enron, put his friend at the head of the FERC so that laws that protect consumers could be changed to ensure Enron sucess.
-As of March 2004, the Bush administration has lost 63 000 jobs for month. The U.S needs to create about 150 000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth. About 2 million jobs have dissapeared since March 2001. The only president to lose more jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover, during the Great Depression.
-And at the end of BUSH'S 10 year plan...
68 % of the tax breaks will have gone to the richest 20 %, and OF IT 51 % OF IT TO 1% OF AMERICANS. Do they really need help?
There are tons of other things, these are just a few selected at random. Ask more, I'll give more.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
-Bush let Ken Lay, CEO of Enron, put his friend at the head of the FERC so that laws that protect consumers could be changed to ensure Enron sucess.
-As of March 2004, the Bush administration has lost 63 000 jobs for month. The U.S needs to create about 150 000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth. About 2 million jobs have dissapeared since March 2001. The only president to lose more jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover, during the Great Depression.
-And at the end of BUSH'S 10 year plan...
68 % of the tax breaks will have gone to the richest 20 %, and OF IT 51 % OF IT TO 1% OF AMERICANS. Do they really need help?
There are tons of other things, these are just a few selected at random. Ask more, I'll give more.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
what the hell does that matter
So what butter at Wal-Mart has gone up too. Does that mean the government should interfere and give us deeper cuts.
the united states has no obligation for your health care. Hey, you say you need healthcare, well I see I need free airfair anywhere in the world. I mean who are you to say that is not a necissty for me? I see you can dictate your nesscities to others but others cant dictate theirs to you?
Kinda one sided isnt it
So what butter at Wal-Mart has gone up too. Does that mean the government should interfere and give us deeper cuts.
the united states has no obligation for your health care. Hey, you say you need healthcare, well I see I need free airfair anywhere in the world. I mean who are you to say that is not a necissty for me? I see you can dictate your nesscities to others but others cant dictate theirs to you?
Kinda one sided isnt it
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Obviously you've never had a major health problem in your life. When you will, and you're of age to pay your own bills, you'll realise what I mean.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
bigJ
Active member
I like the whole part about Bush saying God hates Gays, you are are a real class act. Bush is a man of principal, and he is not just going to betray his beliefs due to an uppity minority. He is not going to appease every little group because that is not what he is supposed to do. The president is supposed to do what is best for the nation, and he is just trying to lay down measures so that rouge courts do not hijack the American people and the faith and values they ascribe to. The whole reason for the constitutional amendment issue is so that a few radical judges are not able to take control of the American social structure, it is supposed to be in the hands of the law makers, be it state or federal, and this measure is a step forward in keeping it in the populous' hands.
What you are suggesting above is that we appease foreign nations so that they like us. I warn you, this is how Carter fucked up in the middle east in the first place, with Iran. This is Kerry's strong point, he can bend in the wind to every opinion that is set forth by foreign leaders. The United States does not need to rely on the opinions of all the other nations, in fact granting their requests is a sure fire way to fuck ourselves up. What if we do start down the Carteresque appeasement road again, the first thing that we would end up doing in order to calm down the middle east would be throw them Israel, which is evil and amoral. Sometimes the right thing to do is not always the most popular thing, and always our interests need to come before those of other nations. We are not a member of the Global community, we are the global community, and if we become a pawn of the UN, we will just do the dirty work of other nations. We will be funding all their peace keeping efforts and clean up their messes too. These nations must realize that we will not be their bitch, and if it means they hate us, so be it, but I would rather them hate us then we having to do their shit for them.
As for the two americas, the world needs ditch diggers too. We can't all be wealthy, and if thats what you want then you have been reading too much Marx. Welcome to capitalism, this is what happens and will continue to happen. Also, it is incentive to get to the higher america from the lower america, see the american dream, good stuff, and it is real.
Also, all the candidates are from the second America.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
What you are suggesting above is that we appease foreign nations so that they like us. I warn you, this is how Carter fucked up in the middle east in the first place, with Iran. This is Kerry's strong point, he can bend in the wind to every opinion that is set forth by foreign leaders. The United States does not need to rely on the opinions of all the other nations, in fact granting their requests is a sure fire way to fuck ourselves up. What if we do start down the Carteresque appeasement road again, the first thing that we would end up doing in order to calm down the middle east would be throw them Israel, which is evil and amoral. Sometimes the right thing to do is not always the most popular thing, and always our interests need to come before those of other nations. We are not a member of the Global community, we are the global community, and if we become a pawn of the UN, we will just do the dirty work of other nations. We will be funding all their peace keeping efforts and clean up their messes too. These nations must realize that we will not be their bitch, and if it means they hate us, so be it, but I would rather them hate us then we having to do their shit for them.
As for the two americas, the world needs ditch diggers too. We can't all be wealthy, and if thats what you want then you have been reading too much Marx. Welcome to capitalism, this is what happens and will continue to happen. Also, it is incentive to get to the higher america from the lower america, see the american dream, good stuff, and it is real.
Also, all the candidates are from the second America.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
bigJ
Active member
Pay your own damn healthcare bills, if you want socialism move north, but I don't think America should hold your hand the whole way through life. Grow up, get a job, and buy your own health care, everyone else does and it is working pretty well.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
bigJ
Active member
Oh, and why is right to take more of one group of peoples money more then another. I am not supporting a flat tax, but these guys are paying out of their ass already to send your ass to school and build the roads that you drive on, and keep you safe. Bitch, be grateful, these guys are paying so much you would not be able to fathom it, I guarantee the school that you go to was paid for by one mans annual income tax. Ungrateful sack of shit, why don't you pay for your own school, roads, defense, and then take care of all the poor and elderly, and see how much you have left over.
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
yhea man sorry if you ahve bills. but hey man I have high electric bills sometime. I mean if i dont have those paid my power gets shut off in the summer time and i could die of heat stroke. Fact of the matter is everyone has bills. Key is they are YOURS not mine. You have no right to tell me I am going to have to start helping you pay. sorry
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
First of all, I'm canadian. Second of all, they're evading taxes. Read the part called tax shelters.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
bigJ
Active member
Well I sure as hell would if I had to pay 80% of the governments budget, I mean damn, what do you expect. Also, nice blanket statement there, it goes well with the whole 'If you make over 200,000 then you are the spawn of satan.'
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
Politicaly Active Since 1992
'Soberity is not an option.'
Drivin that Train
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
I am a CPA and am very familiar with shelters. I agree, they can be dangerous but to conform to the letter of the law just not the spirit. The IRS has started to go after these thigns BIG time and they have been reduced substainlly. However, most are by the way perfectly legally.
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
bigj your my hero?
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Ok, so this is what you're both saying as a rebuttal (sp) to my statements.
-Kerry wants to LOWER healthcare costs: socialist. Pay your own bills
-Huge corporations, high-placed employees and CEOs, (who make on average 351 times the salary of an average worker of the same company) should get more tax breaks and should be allowed to not pay tax by using tax shelters because if they don't, they pay a lot of taxes.
-The Estate tax was vile, even though it had special exemptions for people who could not pay it and represents 0.5 % of the American Budget, which is a lot.
-Bush's own personal opinion should represent a whole administration's and party's beliefs, because he is a man of principal.
I can't see the logic in these.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
-Kerry wants to LOWER healthcare costs: socialist. Pay your own bills
-Huge corporations, high-placed employees and CEOs, (who make on average 351 times the salary of an average worker of the same company) should get more tax breaks and should be allowed to not pay tax by using tax shelters because if they don't, they pay a lot of taxes.
-The Estate tax was vile, even though it had special exemptions for people who could not pay it and represents 0.5 % of the American Budget, which is a lot.
-Bush's own personal opinion should represent a whole administration's and party's beliefs, because he is a man of principal.
I can't see the logic in these.
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
1080_n_ARkaNsaS
Member
u got it!!
You probably dont know this b/c your and American wanna-be, but in our politcal system the President is the head of the political party from which they come. So yes he is the leader of the Republican party. Just like Clinton was and is the leader of the Democrat party.
You probably dont know this b/c your and American wanna-be, but in our politcal system the President is the head of the political party from which they come. So yes he is the leader of the Republican party. Just like Clinton was and is the leader of the Democrat party.
CanadianSkiGod
Active member
Are you serious??? I was trying to make you elaborate more...
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
*******************
'I'm the master of low expectations.'
'I understand small business growth. I was one'
-Dubya!
Uh... BigJ, you might want to distance yourself from this raving lunatic, I believe he just implied that everyone outside the states was a 'wannabe American'. Newsflash for you, Arkansas: very few people outside your country are actually big USA fans. Nice place to visit, but no, no thanks, I don't think I'll live there unless there's a lot of cash in it for me.
Secondly, if any of you ever bring up a point of ethics or morality again, be prepared to defend it, because as far as I'm concerned you have no business dictating what's 'right'. And really, I hope you do actually read what he wrote at some point. Willful ignorance is a big enough problem as it is, without your completely disregarding alternative points of view...
------------
In a haze
A stormy haze
I’ll be around
I’ll be loving you
Always
Always
Here I am
And I’ll take my time
Here I am
And I’ll wait in line
Always
Always...
Secondly, if any of you ever bring up a point of ethics or morality again, be prepared to defend it, because as far as I'm concerned you have no business dictating what's 'right'. And really, I hope you do actually read what he wrote at some point. Willful ignorance is a big enough problem as it is, without your completely disregarding alternative points of view...
------------
In a haze
A stormy haze
I’ll be around
I’ll be loving you
Always
Always
Here I am
And I’ll take my time
Here I am
And I’ll wait in line
Always
Always...
Sim, I'm a soft non-consequentialist (actions are moral based on the goodness of the will that motivates them, but in some cases, this theory leaves room for alternative obligations to override what might immediately appear to be 'the right thing', and unlike a Kantian theory, it owes more to nicomachean virtue ethics than to deontologism, which is concerned with the logical consistency of the action rather than the character of an agent). It's quite complicated, but in any case, I'm always willing to amend my views... I've dropped a lot of absolutist allegiance in my moral theory over the past year. At any rate, what I think isn't the point. The point is that if ANYONE wants to make sweeping statements as to what is 'right', 'good', 'morally correct', and so on, they'd damn well be able to support those statements. I'm not saying my theory is better (although it is better than some theories; namely, the logically wrong ones), I'm saying that you should be able to state your own.
------------
In a haze
A stormy haze
I’ll be around
I’ll be loving you
Always
Always
Here I am
And I’ll take my time
Here I am
And I’ll wait in line
Always
Always...
------------
In a haze
A stormy haze
I’ll be around
I’ll be loving you
Always
Always
Here I am
And I’ll take my time
Here I am
And I’ll wait in line
Always
Always...
Ice-Is-Scary
New member
I'm reading a book right now on the history of the U.S economy.. Its pretty interesting I often hear you guys talking about The elite who rule this country and opress everyone else such as working class from reaching their ranks. I've always thought this was a paranoid theory not backed up by much evidence. I'm reading these interesting study's and charts right now I figured I'd share some. People in the 1950's top 1/5 of income earners in the U.S are less wealthy (quality of living) than the bottom 1/5 of income earners in 2001. This bares evidence to the cohesion, welfare and security of our economic system.
In 2001 the richest 1/5 of the population receive 50.1% of the total income that year. While the bottom 1/5 recieved 3.5% (not inlcuding foodstamps,medicaid,and other government assistance) 1975-2001 the income gap appears to have grown a bit while the top 2/5ths drift upwards the remaining three stay level.
The question begging is whether people in the bottom 1/5 in 1975 were still there in 2001? A study was undertaken by the University of Michigan Panel Survey on Income Dynamics covering 1975-2001. They found that only 5.1% of the people in the bottom quintile were still there in 2001. 29% Of the people in the bottom quintile moved up to the top 1/5th.
0.9% of the people in the top 1/5th in 1975 had moved to the bottom 1/5th by 2001. 62.5% from the top 1/5th in 1975 remained there in 2001.
I think that is very good evidence that people do move up throughout their lives and arn't 'trapped' in the 1/5th they start out in.
God is an American.
In 2001 the richest 1/5 of the population receive 50.1% of the total income that year. While the bottom 1/5 recieved 3.5% (not inlcuding foodstamps,medicaid,and other government assistance) 1975-2001 the income gap appears to have grown a bit while the top 2/5ths drift upwards the remaining three stay level.
The question begging is whether people in the bottom 1/5 in 1975 were still there in 2001? A study was undertaken by the University of Michigan Panel Survey on Income Dynamics covering 1975-2001. They found that only 5.1% of the people in the bottom quintile were still there in 2001. 29% Of the people in the bottom quintile moved up to the top 1/5th.
0.9% of the people in the top 1/5th in 1975 had moved to the bottom 1/5th by 2001. 62.5% from the top 1/5th in 1975 remained there in 2001.
I think that is very good evidence that people do move up throughout their lives and arn't 'trapped' in the 1/5th they start out in.
God is an American.
SKItheBURG
Active member
'The president is supposed to do what is best for the nation, and he is just trying to lay down measures so that rouge courts do not hijack the American people and the faith and values they ascribe to.'
so are you saying that except from a few rogue courts everyone in america has the same faith and values? faith should have nothing to do with this argument.
____________________
Chappelle's Show Cult...BITCHES
so are you saying that except from a few rogue courts everyone in america has the same faith and values? faith should have nothing to do with this argument.
____________________
Chappelle's Show Cult...BITCHES
12ParkRat60
Active member
this has turned into a battle, but im really afraid of seeing what our country will become over the next 4 years
He who hesitates masturbates
He who hesitates masturbates