| Author |
Message |
    
S1wmike
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 07:42 pm: | 
|
. We will have some progress on healthcare. Which is going to be huge with all the layoffs that are coming.
With all the unemployment were do you think the money for this heath care is coming from.
HINT HINT from those of us who are still fortunate to be working. TAX TAX TAX
"spread the wealth"
(Message edited by S1wmike on October 27, 2008) |
Ironken
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 07:44 pm: |
|
Garyb, you my friend are pissing in the wind here....Nobody wants to hear from the other side here. Read the above drivel. |
Etennuly
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 07:47 pm: |
|
I wonder what we could have done with infrastructure, social security, alternative fuel, etc, in this country with the money.
Probably not much with the terrorists whom attacked the U.S. still running amuck and holding a sword to our throats without some sort of consequence. Things would be so much different if 911 hadn't happened. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 07:57 pm: |
|
you my friend are pissing in the wind here
We've had the same feeling.
For two years.
About Obama.
Frustrating, ain't it. |
Teeps
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 07:58 pm: |
|
Garryb,
We will have to agree to disagree on our choices for president. Regardless of our rational or irrational reasons.
That said, is this: Espresso Blend - Special Prep - 1 Lb Bag ground or do I have to grind it? |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 08:01 pm: |
|
Last chance for reality guys.
The money we save from getting out of iraq will go far.
The war on terror is in afganistan/pakistan.
If we were committed to wiping out the taliban/al-quada there, we would have avenged sept 11 and put the terrorists on the run.
Instead, they have prospered and we have the largest deficit ever. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 08:21 pm: |
|
What about Iran?
They are the heart of terrorism in modern times beginning in the late 60's and 70's.
You think they are just going to go away quietly?
You think they are going to leave an abandoned Iraq to their own devices?
You think they won't work diligently to "win" the Iran/Iraq war from the 80's that never ended it stalemated?
You think Iran won't continue to fund Syria, Lebanon, the Palesinians?
Were Al Quaeda gone tomorrow, there would still be terrorists. There would still be a threat. What does Obama plan to do about that threat?
While we are on the subject of short sighted solutions (like the CRA in the subprime debacle created and protected by the Democrat Congress), what will be NEXT after universal healthcare, free education, and confiscatory tax welfare for everyone under $250,000 of income, free mortgages, and guaranteed, paid retirement for all?
When these solutions fail to bring about the change that Obama promises (like social security, medicare, medicaid, prescription drugs, Hope Scholarships, public education, and other social programs have failed to deliver any material changes in the lower and middle class), what will Obama and the rest of the "progressives" tackle next? What else will there be to promise?
There will HAVE to be something more. When Utopia fails to materialize, what will be the cause? Who will be to blame?
I mean, I watched Sicko. Cuba couldn't possibly be anything but an island paradise. China must be heaven with no poor, no sick, no lower class, right? The USSR MUST have been the pinnacle of Utopia, right?
If a little socialism/marxism is good, a LOT must be really good, right?
Why not go all the way with it? Cap maximum incomes at $1M with a 100% tax for all income above that? Why not a 100% tax on all wealth transfers to children so that no "trust fund babies" can be created. Make each generation reset at zero. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 09:10 pm: |
|
It was iraq that was keeping iran is check.
When we trashed Iraq we destablized the middle east.
But you knew that... |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 09:22 pm: |
|
That's fine as long as we have no interest in the area and they pose no threat to us.
That changed when they attacked Kuwait.
After that, it was a 15 year war ended by us. They needed to be removed. We removed them.
We will fill the vacuum.
Leaving isn't really an option. A reduction, yes, but leaving, no. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 09:23 pm: |
|
Maybe its time we had a president who could engineer political solutions in concert with other major powers, instead of bogus pre-emtive strikes. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 09:44 pm: |
|
What would have happened when Saddam died?
How unstable would Iraq have become at the hands of his two murderous sons?
How long would it have been before Iraq would have become Darfur. Iraq wasn't the same country as it was in the 80's. Iran would have wiped it's ass with Iraq.
How long until the Kurds were exterminated? Sunnis?
Now Iran would have been in control of how much of the oil reserves.
Iran has about 136B barrels of oil
Iraq has about 115B barrels of oil
Saudi Arabia has 260B barrels of oil
If Iraq falls into the hands of the Iranians, they would possess nearly equal quantities of oil with SA and are definitely NO friendly to the US.
In the end, we will have access to Iraq's oil. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 10:15 pm: |
|
Nice thought, but, in the middle of the energy crisis, we didn't even get a discount.
Not much of a return on investment.
You think we are now more popular with the iraqis, and they are going to give us their oil? |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 10:19 pm: |
|
We've started a world depression and now you want to start ww3?
Gotta love conservative republicans |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 10:25 pm: |
|
Iraqi's want to sell their oil. We would like to have access to more oil. Gaining access to another 50% of Saudi Arabia would be nice.
The ONLY think Iraq has to sell is oil.
Under Hussein, we couldn't buy oil from Iraq. The UN was buying it under the table.
We can gain access to as much or more than is in ANWR with a lot less lead time than 5-10 years.
We didn't start WWIII.
We didn't cause a world depression. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 10:39 pm: |
|
I think we have caused major world economic upheaval.
If we don't find political solutions to Iran in concert with the russians and china, etc, then we will likely have major world conflagration.
I think there is also chinese interest in oil, and the russians like doing business with the iranians.
We can call it what ever you prefer. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2008 - 11:55 pm: |
|
Well, hopefully things will improve, either way, its going to be interesting.
Teeps, all our coffee is green (unroasted) |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - 12:06 am: |
|
Other countries chose to place their dollars in the US economy. They lose the same as the rest of us. When we have a giant hit because of our investment in the Pacific Rim, we don't cry about it. It's just business.
Yes our policies (and lack of foresight on the part of Congress) led to the problem but we didn't put a gun to their heads and make them spend their dollars here.
Sometimes there isn't a diplomatic/political solution to the problem. One entity or another believes that it's a zero sum game.
During the Cold War Russia didn't want a "diplomatic solution". They wanted our very destruction. China doesn't want a "diplomatic solution". They want our very destruction. Iran doesn't want a "diplomatic solution". They want our very destruction.
We are only able to provide a "diplomatic solution" when THEY realize that they can't win any other way.
Iran won't be interested in seeking a "diplomatic solution" if we leave the battlefield in Iraq in defeat. They will see it as weakness.
China won't be interested in seeing a "diplomatic solution" if we continue to contract them at the cost of US workers. They will continue to send us tainted goods and signing contracts with Cuba to drill 20 miles off our coast for our oil.
What "diplomatic solution" can we offer Russia?
If we are going to have a world "conflagration", it won't be because we didn't try a "diplomatic solution".
WWI and WWII were both begun in spite of those who felt they could secure a "diplomatic solution".
And while we are at it, the UN, a completely "diplomatic solution" inspired entity, does not have OUR best interest at heart in a single move it makes. The UN as an entity is NOT our friend nor are those present there. |
Toona
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - 12:20 am: |
|
I think we have caused major world economic upheaval.
"We" didn't. I blame the liberals in congress, both Reps and Dems alike. Passing rules that make banks have to have a certain percentage of sub prime loans, or penalize them if they don't meet that criteria is a bunch of bull.
The banks HAD a basic set of guidelines that potential borrowers had to meet before they would get a loan. Those borrowers were PRIME candidates, if they met the guidelines. 20% down payment, monthly mortgage payment not more than 25-30% of their take home pay etc. When the banks were forced (or penalized if they didn't) to offer the loans to SUB PRIME candidates that's was the beginning of the end.
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but if you can't save enough money to put 20% down on a house-you don't deserve it. Borrowing 125% (even 100%) to buy a house is just plain ludicrous. You can be the nicest person, but if your financial "house" isn't in order, why in the world would any bank want to take the risk of LENDING you money that their (prior) calculations say you probably can't make in a timely fashion.
Wanting something you can't afford isn't a bad thing. I've got a mental list of "things" I'd love to own and I have certain benchmarks that I have to reach before I allow myself to acquire things on that list. I look at that list as a series of goals. When you put forth and honest effort and achieve the goal, the item is much more satisfying-to me anyway. If I just pull out a credit card and charge it, it doesn't have the same "value" to me. BTW, I don't have a credit card, just a debit card linked to my checking account. If the $ isn't in the account, I don't buy. Maybe being self employed for the past 25 years has taught me a few things.
Getting back to the subject at hand: People who just walked in to the bank and took out a sub prime loan WITHOUT the ability to make timely payments, deserve to loose their house. I don't and won't feel bad for you. You did that to yourself, I didn't make you take out the loan. Making me "Bail you out" really TICKS ME OFF!!! I work hard to run a successful business and to get taxed, to pay for your mistake, isn't the reason why I pay taxes.
Obama's "Economic Justice" (read Marxist) plan is the same thing. Just because I make more than my neighbor next door doesn't give the gov't the "right" to take my extra money and give it to someone who doesn't make what I do. I pay taxes so I can live in a free country (paid military), have basic governmental supplied items (paved roads, local/state police, etc). There are somethings that need to be performed/organized by a gov't entity, just for standardization. I personally am a "get the gov't the heck out of my way" kinda guy. Where I see the gov't crossing the line is to tax me just to give it to someone else - WHO HASN'T EARNED IT.
Welfare, should be limited to a set time frame, say a total of 6 months. You lost your job. Sorry. You get 6 months to find another one. If it takes you 2 months to find the next job, you have 4 months "available to you" if you should happen to loose your next job. Once your 6 months is up, your outta luck. Maybe you'll work harder to keep employed next time. People that "work the system" get no sympathy from me. I do realize that parts of the USA are hit harder with job loss than others. But a job at McD's flipping burgers still puts food on your table. Maybe the food isn't steak, but it's food. Sitting at home throwing yourself a pity party won't fill your stomach. People need to adjust their lifestyle to match their income. Getting downsized is a bummer, and out of your control, to an extent. I realize that. You need to make yourself more valuable to your employer, have a skill set that the guy in the next cubical doesn't have. |
Doubled
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - 12:38 am: |
|
+1000 Toona!! |
|
