ganja_enthusiast
Active member
great post! K+
Joe Republican
- Thread starter Zimmerman
- Start date
Wis_Skier_23
Active member
no only give them a check for the times they pass the test. If they fuck up then they gotta wait until they can pass a drug test again. Dont think that is too far fetched, but some seem to think so
Ben.
Active member
Right, because drug testing is free. Definitely doesnt cost anything, and totally wouldnt contribute to the deficit, since id be willing to bet on the failure % being less than 50%. So now for a large portion of the candidates, you are not only paying them their checks, but paying for drug tests they are passing as well.
Wis_Skier_23
Active member
a drug test is way cheaper than the check they collect so it is worthwhile unless like 95% passed and I guarantee the rate is not that high. I dont know where you are pulling 50% from but an average drug test costs around $16 dollars and I am pretty sure it could be negotiated down with the high volume of testing
http://www.ohsinc.com/drug_testing_cost_drug_test_cost_home_page.htm
http://www.ohsinc.com/drug_testing_cost_drug_test_cost_home_page.htm
Mr.Huck
Active member
Fact - Obama and the democrats have not passed a Federal Spending Budget for 821 days. This has never happened before in U.S. history. It's supposed to be passed annually. The democrats in the senate are rejecting any plan that limits spending. There is no way that this can continue, and simply raising taxes and the debt ceiling will not solve the problem. IMO the best thing that could happen is that the Chinese would stop buying our debt.
Seriously, this isn't just a sound bite. You may not like the Republicans, but for the most part, they are just trying to make sure that your kids don't inherit a bankrupt country.
Seriously, this isn't just a sound bite. You may not like the Republicans, but for the most part, they are just trying to make sure that your kids don't inherit a bankrupt country.
wasatch_rat
Active member
Fact: everyone knows we have to decrease spending. a lot. the question is in what areas? this is where bipartisanship falls apart. just because someone is a dem doesn't mean they don't want to curb all the spending, they just don't want to approve a plan that would kill planned parenthood or hurt other important social programs. just like republicans tend to be uncompromising in their belief that we shouldn't cut military spending. both sides just need to be more empathetic and realistic
but i also think that we should start taxing the richest more like we did before the bush years, and i am utterly amazed that the american people can be convinced that an increase in taxes on those making 300k+ a year is an injustice. thats the tiniest percent of our population its absurd
but i also think that we should start taxing the richest more like we did before the bush years, and i am utterly amazed that the american people can be convinced that an increase in taxes on those making 300k+ a year is an injustice. thats the tiniest percent of our population its absurd
Ben.
Active member
Someone needs to work on their comprehension.
"Today, I estimate that average price per drug test nationally overall (large corporations and medium-sized to very small businesses included) is about $44 per test. That includes cost of collection and lab analysis, but not necessarily the cost of optional Medical Review Officer (MRO) services which usually add about another $2-$3 per test. "
That being said, I really dont know the number of users vs non users enrolled in welfare programs. And ironically the only way to know would to begin drug testing. However the naive assumption is that drug testing costs nothing, and that its guaranteed to reduce the deficit.
"Today, I estimate that average price per drug test nationally overall (large corporations and medium-sized to very small businesses included) is about $44 per test. That includes cost of collection and lab analysis, but not necessarily the cost of optional Medical Review Officer (MRO) services which usually add about another $2-$3 per test. "
That being said, I really dont know the number of users vs non users enrolled in welfare programs. And ironically the only way to know would to begin drug testing. However the naive assumption is that drug testing costs nothing, and that its guaranteed to reduce the deficit.
The Republicans couldn't give a shit about not spending... they just care about where the spending tends to go. If it goes to programs and things that they believe in, then they're all for it... Things like the Military, and that really silly Marriage Protection act bullshit? Yeah. They have NO problem spending on it. In fact, they are all 100% for upping spending on Medicare...
Basically, at this point, everyone's grandparents hold all the keys to this country, because nobody has the sense to vote...
Unless it's for president, or something thought to be more important, people dont come out at all.
The real problem I see is that theres a gazillion old fools running around on government paid for hoverrounds bitching that they aren't getting enough medicare funding for the treatments they need to keep being a lazy fuck, and they aren't getting enough back on social security, even though they probably voted against it their entire pre-senior life... and meanwhile our tuitions being raised through the roof and we are being forced to join the military, where we get so fucked on our redeployments that we come back and end up on the streets addicted to drugs... shits fucked yo.
Old people the folks that vote. So guess what, until we are senile and have impending Alzheimers, we at our ages are all fucked for anything we might want from the government.
Basically, at this point, everyone's grandparents hold all the keys to this country, because nobody has the sense to vote...
Unless it's for president, or something thought to be more important, people dont come out at all.
The real problem I see is that theres a gazillion old fools running around on government paid for hoverrounds bitching that they aren't getting enough medicare funding for the treatments they need to keep being a lazy fuck, and they aren't getting enough back on social security, even though they probably voted against it their entire pre-senior life... and meanwhile our tuitions being raised through the roof and we are being forced to join the military, where we get so fucked on our redeployments that we come back and end up on the streets addicted to drugs... shits fucked yo.
Old people the folks that vote. So guess what, until we are senile and have impending Alzheimers, we at our ages are all fucked for anything we might want from the government.
skiminnesota
Active member
intertwining a federal issue, with a state issue, with conscription? 3 totally independent issues, that share little to nothing in common with the next.
bravo
bravo
EVERYTHINGS LINKED! =)
Zimmerman
Active member
Finally, some intelligence in this thread. Dingosean: well put with the voting issue. And whoever talked about spending, bravo.
My point in sparknotes:
1. End Bush tax cuts and institute graduated income tax. The rich don't create jobs because they have extra money laying around. They do it when they see a profit to be made. Even when they do, they're overseas, where we make little profit.
2. Cut Military spending A LOT. We just passed a nearly 700 Bil Military budget. Come on now, America has no major economic enemies. What a waste.
My point in sparknotes:
1. End Bush tax cuts and institute graduated income tax. The rich don't create jobs because they have extra money laying around. They do it when they see a profit to be made. Even when they do, they're overseas, where we make little profit.
2. Cut Military spending A LOT. We just passed a nearly 700 Bil Military budget. Come on now, America has no major economic enemies. What a waste.
The Bush tax cuts are based on the trickle down theory which is absolute HORSE SHIT. It's just a ploy for the rich to be richer and powerful. the end.
America DOES have economic enemies, but they sure as FUCK aren't in all the places we are posted up with our military. spend that money on defensive measures, NOT offensive-defense.
America DOES have economic enemies, but they sure as FUCK aren't in all the places we are posted up with our military. spend that money on defensive measures, NOT offensive-defense.
skiminnesota
Active member
1 there is a graduated income tax. DURRRRRRRRR or maybe you actually knew that?
also what do you think happens when some rich guy decideds he wants to spend that money and open up a hotel or something? he definitely doesnt create lots of jobs when he builds it. he also definitely doesnt create jobs when he operates it. big fucking deal if he makes a profit, thats why you create a business right? you dont open a business to be a sanctimonious, altruistic social experiment do you?
2 yes, lets. let us also cut other parts of government.
my own opinon, lets simplify the tax code and make it that companies like GE actually PAY taxes. lets end the bullshit subsidy here and the garbage loophole there. But our president isnt gonna bring that up. instead hes gonna talk about accelerated depreciation on corporate jets. which will do JACK SHIT in the way of increasing revenue.
also what do you think happens when some rich guy decideds he wants to spend that money and open up a hotel or something? he definitely doesnt create lots of jobs when he builds it. he also definitely doesnt create jobs when he operates it. big fucking deal if he makes a profit, thats why you create a business right? you dont open a business to be a sanctimonious, altruistic social experiment do you?
2 yes, lets. let us also cut other parts of government.
my own opinon, lets simplify the tax code and make it that companies like GE actually PAY taxes. lets end the bullshit subsidy here and the garbage loophole there. But our president isnt gonna bring that up. instead hes gonna talk about accelerated depreciation on corporate jets. which will do JACK SHIT in the way of increasing revenue.
Lol, you think the congress would even remotely allow him to cut said subsidies?
There would be an uproar and lots of flagging going on for sure.
I totally agree with you there, but there's NO reason why massive corporations should be spending their subsidy money on ridiculous bonuses, employing foreigners, or spending on capital that would decrease jobs so they could make a higher profit on top of that anyways...
but too much money goes to special interest groups, who then use a lot of that money to just buy off congressional votes that would keep the status quo.
and with that, I highly highly doubt anything Obama does is going to change that... there would have to be a massive sweeping change in government policy, that is mostly out of the realm that can be accomplished.
Obama can preach change all he wants, but those old rich fools are content with how things are going for them.
There would be an uproar and lots of flagging going on for sure.
I totally agree with you there, but there's NO reason why massive corporations should be spending their subsidy money on ridiculous bonuses, employing foreigners, or spending on capital that would decrease jobs so they could make a higher profit on top of that anyways...
but too much money goes to special interest groups, who then use a lot of that money to just buy off congressional votes that would keep the status quo.
and with that, I highly highly doubt anything Obama does is going to change that... there would have to be a massive sweeping change in government policy, that is mostly out of the realm that can be accomplished.
Obama can preach change all he wants, but those old rich fools are content with how things are going for them.
skiminnesota
Active member
its not just Obama, or the republicans. its a giant perversion of what government ought to be by the American people.
governemnt shouldnt be handing out ethanol subsidies, wind, corn, the list goes on and on and on. this isnt one sides falt over the others. its everyones fault for accepting it. and even worse taking the money when its offered to them.
it comes down to the american people looking at what others have and thinking that through the power of law they can lay claim to other peoples property. whether that be directly, or indirectly. thats really the crux of the issue.
everyone hates the "other" sides subsidy, or program. but when it comes to "our or my" program or subsidy that is somehow beyond the pale. like i said a giant perversion and lack of moral fortitude.
i agree that they shouldnt be spending it on the things you listed, but not for the same reasons that you listed. my rational is that they shouldnt be getting it in the first place.
governemnt shouldnt be handing out ethanol subsidies, wind, corn, the list goes on and on and on. this isnt one sides falt over the others. its everyones fault for accepting it. and even worse taking the money when its offered to them.
it comes down to the american people looking at what others have and thinking that through the power of law they can lay claim to other peoples property. whether that be directly, or indirectly. thats really the crux of the issue.
everyone hates the "other" sides subsidy, or program. but when it comes to "our or my" program or subsidy that is somehow beyond the pale. like i said a giant perversion and lack of moral fortitude.
i agree that they shouldnt be spending it on the things you listed, but not for the same reasons that you listed. my rational is that they shouldnt be getting it in the first place.
Mr.Panda
Active member
As all my buddies in the military say "just remember your gun was made by the lowest bidder."
Instead of cutting it I say take the bases in countries like Korea, Germany, and Japan that we obviously don't need anymore and use the money that used to be used to run them for better tech and such. Because frankly, some medical/technological breakthroughs come from the military.
Instead of cutting it I say take the bases in countries like Korea, Germany, and Japan that we obviously don't need anymore and use the money that used to be used to run them for better tech and such. Because frankly, some medical/technological breakthroughs come from the military.
Funnel
Active member
Yeah, we spend an absurd amount of money on useless bases around the globe. If we're going to spend it on military, I'll side with you and say that we should be investing in better military tech, just as we should get NASA and the space program back afloat ASAP so that we can employ great minds and develop cutting edge technology.
Proletariat.
Active member
The Russians are laughing at NASA right now accompanied by their brutal and sometimes down lack of morals in the Russian Space Corps
And that's what I mean... there really needs to be a fundamental change in a lot of things. It's not just Obama or the Republicans, no... but those with the power definitely wield a lot of the blame for allowing such things to continue.
I do believe sometimes subsidies are necessary for growth in a certain area... for example, if there's a large tract of very arable precious farmland, that some developers focus their eyes on to pave a strip mall, or a housing development or something else, then, there SHOULD be farm subsidies to keep a farm aloft on that land, due to the potentially high output of crops...
You dont pave a mall over a goldmine, and as undervalued as we might see crops in our massive country with miles of land, we shouldn't poison it just for short-gain profits.
As far as ethenol goes, I feel like corn is a retarded method of making it, but that's a whole other story that involves me making a point that clean biomass power plants are the future (aka growing things that burn cleanly and cheaply, utilizing the farmland we have, and thus being utilizable to cut down on a nation's dependence on foreign fuel sources)
there are things that make sense to spend it on as not to in turn pervert the land and pollute shit hardcore, but subsidies to military weapons contractors and textile or publishing companies which just move all their manufacturing overseas is just plain silly spending that comes down to wants over needs.
I hear it all the time on Cspan.. "Hey, if the farms can get subsidies, then why cant my company get subsidies to prop up our capital, and remain competitive! (AKA: move overseas to make higher profits to outproduce and outsell competitors - who then jump on the same bandwagon)"
What usually happens is... "uhhh okay thats not a good enough reason..." at first... and the bill doesn't pass... leading to this..
"uhmmm well how does 20 grand towards your upcoming election campaign sound?" "VOTE SOLD!"
the bill gets 're-introduced' and passed... if it wasn't already paid off to begin with...
Shits corrupt as fuck. It really goes for any country that takes special interest and lobbying money... but why can't we set the moral standard, and do whats right for once, and BAN that shit!
I do believe sometimes subsidies are necessary for growth in a certain area... for example, if there's a large tract of very arable precious farmland, that some developers focus their eyes on to pave a strip mall, or a housing development or something else, then, there SHOULD be farm subsidies to keep a farm aloft on that land, due to the potentially high output of crops...
You dont pave a mall over a goldmine, and as undervalued as we might see crops in our massive country with miles of land, we shouldn't poison it just for short-gain profits.
As far as ethenol goes, I feel like corn is a retarded method of making it, but that's a whole other story that involves me making a point that clean biomass power plants are the future (aka growing things that burn cleanly and cheaply, utilizing the farmland we have, and thus being utilizable to cut down on a nation's dependence on foreign fuel sources)
there are things that make sense to spend it on as not to in turn pervert the land and pollute shit hardcore, but subsidies to military weapons contractors and textile or publishing companies which just move all their manufacturing overseas is just plain silly spending that comes down to wants over needs.
I hear it all the time on Cspan.. "Hey, if the farms can get subsidies, then why cant my company get subsidies to prop up our capital, and remain competitive! (AKA: move overseas to make higher profits to outproduce and outsell competitors - who then jump on the same bandwagon)"
What usually happens is... "uhhh okay thats not a good enough reason..." at first... and the bill doesn't pass... leading to this..
"uhmmm well how does 20 grand towards your upcoming election campaign sound?" "VOTE SOLD!"
the bill gets 're-introduced' and passed... if it wasn't already paid off to begin with...
Shits corrupt as fuck. It really goes for any country that takes special interest and lobbying money... but why can't we set the moral standard, and do whats right for once, and BAN that shit!
Zimmerman
Active member
That's not at all what i was saying. I meant, when rich people get tax cuts (the extra money lying around) they don't go "HEY! Let's go use this money to start a business!" They spend it on themselves. And even when they start a business, it is generally going to be overseas where we can make little profit off of it. Trickle-down theory economics simply does not work.
That's the thing... if they DID spend it on themselves, it would mean the trickle-down theory would work...
They buy a rich ass huge yacht boat, and that money goes to the workers who build big boats which goes down and down... but you know what? This doesn't happen enough at all.
and especially today, people are sitting on their money and its just staying at the top, and creating a stagnant and static economy.
People have all the rights in the world to sit and not spend that money, surely... but to expect to keep all of it free from being taxed? please...
Death and taxes bitches. grow up and realize it.
They buy a rich ass huge yacht boat, and that money goes to the workers who build big boats which goes down and down... but you know what? This doesn't happen enough at all.
and especially today, people are sitting on their money and its just staying at the top, and creating a stagnant and static economy.
People have all the rights in the world to sit and not spend that money, surely... but to expect to keep all of it free from being taxed? please...
Death and taxes bitches. grow up and realize it.
7springsprod
Active member
I call bullshit! You die if you take medicine with caffeine. Bad troll is bad.
bobby.brown
Member
in ten years joe is growing corn on his lawn, hunting for rats, eating bugs, and taking shits in the woods and wiping with leaves because the liberal unions bankrupted the usa into 3rd world status. also joe republican sounds like a liberal to me
bobby.brown
Member
in ten years joe is growing corn on his lawn, hunting for rats, eating bugs, and taking shits in the woods and wiping with leaves because the liberal unions bankrupted the usa into 3rd world status. also joe republican sounds like a liberal to me
Proletariat.
Active member
For too long has the world been concerned over left and right, instead of right and wrong
bobby.brown
Member
in ten years joe is growing corn on his lawn, hunting for rats, eating bugs, and taking shits in the woods and wiping with leaves because the liberal unions bankrupted the usa into 3rd world status. also joe republican sounds like a liberal to me
Didn't even read it. Started it, sounds like it's going to be one of the most ignorant reads of the day.
Rep vs. dem fighting = fucking brilliant. Both of the "sides" currently blow.
GTFO OF AMERICA
Rep vs. dem fighting = fucking brilliant. Both of the "sides" currently blow.
GTFO OF AMERICA
Proletariat.
Active member
For too long has the world been concerned over left and right, instead of right and wrong
bobby.brown
Member
the real "joe republican" moved to singapore, where his hard work was rewarded with less taxes. His water was still clean, and he lived happily ever after in the extremely capitalist free market of singapore. He watches on tv as america burns and becomes a wasteland of retarded liberals, who are finally starving to death as they should be, and thus too hungry to complain about the rich and blame the rich, because the rich will all have left for the next capitalist society, as the cancer of liberal socialism swallows america whole
^ DING DING DING
bobby.brown
Member
i actually like the socialist movement, because eventually they are going to get whats coming to them. Its like a dog that you feed scraps, and it bites you in the hand every time you feed it because it wants more, and eventually you stop feeding it, because you are tired of having your hand bitten, and you watch the dog slowly starve to death, and then the dog eventually realizes that he was the greedy one, and he should not have expected shit for free. then the dog realized that the man who fed him scraps was his friend, and the dog started watching fox news, and appreciating the rich, and the rich man started to feed him again
bobby.brown
Member
another interesting scenario is this, joe republican watched glenn beck. glenn beck told him to buy gold. he did, and made alot of money. jane liberal watched msnbc, who told her gold was a bubble, so she shorted it, then went bankrupt. So then jane liberal broke in to joe republicans house to rob it, but joe republican had bought a gun with his gold earnings, and he shoots jane liberal in the face, and the world lives happily ever after.
Proletariat.
Active member
Proletariat.
Active member
That was possibly the worst post I've ever read on this site. Did you actually read what you just posted.
The correct response from anyone reading that shit would be "KYS" but I'm trying to be nice.
If you want to talk about the lack of productivity these days, start with the right vs. left war. Neither "side" is helping these days. In many situations both "sides" are doing the same things. I really hope you just copied and pasted that from another site. Even if that made a remotely valid point(which it doesn't) that would still be a piece of incredibly shitty writing.
The correct response from anyone reading that shit would be "KYS" but I'm trying to be nice.
If you want to talk about the lack of productivity these days, start with the right vs. left war. Neither "side" is helping these days. In many situations both "sides" are doing the same things. I really hope you just copied and pasted that from another site. Even if that made a remotely valid point(which it doesn't) that would still be a piece of incredibly shitty writing.
bobby.brown
Member
haha, its always so easy to find the liberal losers on this website, they get so angry when they get put in their place... and their best response is " hes a tea partier"... haha. im actually a libertarian, but i dont really look down at the tea partiers that much, because their cause is mostly fixing the budget. But if you really think i care about the thoughts of people like you, seriously, I have to laugh
ILLinoisance
Active member
no, you're 12.
bobby.brown
Member
if im 12 then hot shit, because somebody called me a bigot, which implies superiority... in which case i would be a dank ass 12 yr old.
trolling101.gov
Check it out and learn something
Check it out and learn something
Zimmerman
Active member
yes, i just copy/pasted it. And I also agree, both sides are fucking things up and this battle is terrible, but what actually did you find incorrect? and you have to admit that the republicans are the most radical and irrational of the two.
And to Bobby.brown, where exactly have you put anyone in their place on this site? usually I see you responding to getting learned with more senseless bullshit. Where exactly did you make a smart, well educated point that "put me in my place"? The only thing you did in this thread along with countless others is shun what you think is "socialism" and insult peoples intelligence.
And to Bobby.brown, where exactly have you put anyone in their place on this site? usually I see you responding to getting learned with more senseless bullshit. Where exactly did you make a smart, well educated point that "put me in my place"? The only thing you did in this thread along with countless others is shun what you think is "socialism" and insult peoples intelligence.