"..._Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can't afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can't afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that's who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that's paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That's not right, and it's not going to happen as long as I'm President.
...There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There's nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don't have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know."
President Barak Obama
This is the most articulate intelligent president America has seen for a long time.
Most of the developed world are well pleased America has a decent honest man in the seat. Australia loves him, as he actually knows something about us and other countries apart from America.
I believe he will see another term.
I guess you think Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Swiss, China are not developed countries? These countries think he is a joke! The man knows nothing about running a country, Foreign affairs are a joke as just stated, Bows down and weak to Muslim Leaders. I have an Idea why don't you make him your President! NOWAY he gets a second term! I guess you are blind also not seeing what the country said in the last election.
Danny - Obama is not running against himself. You have to come up with a candidate. Right now the front runner is a gazilionare, birther, real-estate tycoon who has never held office. The other front runner is a Mormon the evangelicals won't accept who passed Obamacare on a state level before Obama was elected. In short - you got nuttin'!
either has Obama and he makes Bush look good! Trump would be a very good president! all the fools who say he has declared Bankruptcy and can not run his own companies do not have the slightest clue what they are talking about, you use the laws to succeed and that is what he has done, he starts different companies and in the end he comes out smelling like roses! If Obama ran a business like he runs this country he would have been bankrupt in 5 months! you people are wishful thinking and talking BS that the TP is imploding, I laugh when I hear that. they just caused the biggest defeat in over 70 years and gain so many seats and you guys talk $hit. funny
They have basketball games and elections for the same reason - to see who can put more points on the board.
The TP was elected to do a job - and they aren't doing it. There have been no moves by the House to create jobs. They have gone after unions and women (Planned Parenthood) and public broadcasting. It's like they are pursuing a vendeta - and to hell with the country.
They stepped ona mine today - they went after Medicare. That's where the GOP base is. Obama will fight to preserve Medicare and the GOP voted today to throw seniors to the lions.
I agree. The Senior Vote, and those about to become seniors, might see this a bit differently than your 30-something who wears a tri-corner hat.
They did not go after woman, stop the BS they didn't look to shut them down only stop giving taxpayer money! the same with NPR that is a one sided news organization and you want tax payers money to fund this? please if Fox received federal funds you would be screaming. Believe what you want you know the TP is here to stay! where is that bet Mr. know it all? I just found a air France ticket from heath-row to Paris and a train tick the same time, was not my last trip but from 10/09 make a bet big shot know it all.
obviously you do not read very well, Show me where in the budget that the seniors will not get SS or medicare? the system is broke, do you understand that? they are revamping for people 45 and younger. please read and do not spew that MCNBC/ socialist nonsense. Obamas budget actually takes away part of medicare how come you did not mention that?
Oh come on Danny, you don't even know the difference between Americans and Brits. How can you cope with anything complicated.
John.. isn't the airport in England Heathrow - not heath-row. To his credit Danny spelled Paris right. If you were reading off the ticket, couldn't you spell it right?
sorry was on my cell phone and it has spell check and that is what it put. excuse me! like I said I have the ticket from Heathrow to Paris already loaded to show, make the bet if you don't think so. so petty
Thank you soooo much, Doug, for saving me the trouble of pointing that out. Was getting on my nerves seeing the name of my favorite international airport misspelled. Airline and train tickets can be purchased by anyone but intelligence can't. ;D
I can well imagine the gray-haired crowd getting dresses up and heading to the polls in 2012.Going after Medicare was a big oops.
It's fine to talk against Obama, but it is getting too obvious that the Republicans just want to line the pockets of the rich at the expense of the poor.
that is socialist nonsense! this country was built on you can also make millions if your hungry enough. there are too many lazy people looking for handouts! I helped my South American Landscaper get a mortgage years ago, this man was so hungry he has 3 houses 2 he rents out and lives in the other, has broken English and living the American dream. this man works his tail off landscaping and in the winter he does basements and snow removal. that is someone who deserves what he earns. We became friends and he thanks me for helping him. this is what America is!
Danny, your landscaper is poor, he owns three houses! Probably about the size of the rich persons garage!
The idea that in America anyone can become a millionaire (which is true) has been spun to the concept that everyone can become a millionaire (which is false).
The idea that those who don't become rich in America are defectives unworthy of assistance is cruel and a slight on the ideals this country was founded on.
Doug wrote, "The idea that those who don't become rich in America are defectives unworthy of assistance is cruel and a slight on the ideals this country was founded on."
Which ideals, exactly, would those be Doug?
If you don't work, neither shall you eat? That was an early statement after an initial brush with socialism. Under socialism the earliest settlers went hungry. Once people were able to keep the wealth they created everyone was better off.
Are you a millionaire? I bet not or you wouldn't be hanging out here.
Obviously you have bad impressions of people. why wouldn't someone who has struggled when growing up and made it through hard work not be a regular person? why wouldn't someone who is a millionaire be on here? Please explain, I would really like to hear this.
You tell 'em Danny! Us millionaires have just as much right as the commoners to post here!
we are all commoners. I'm also a registered democrat. a lot of people accuse me of being republican. oh well
That's right Danny, your political views carry just as much weight as Donald Trump's does. Money doesn't enter the picture.
Trump runs many of his businesses poorly. His greatest asset is his name, which he sells out to other businesses to give them a mark of prestige and luxury. He knows he can make huge gambles because he'll never personally go bankrupt as long as he has his name to sell.
Trump is a millionaire because of hard work... by his father, from whom he inherited his fortune. I'm not sure how any of Trump's business "skills" will apply to leading this country. Trump's idea of showing off American exceptionalism is gold-plating the White House.
Trump knows how business works and has made tons of money. he used the system well, He never claimed bankruptcy personally, just some businesses. He is a Leader, what ever you feel about him he is a leader and knows how to get things done. If he was such a bad businessman why is he a billionaire? you do not get to that level without being smart. Yes his father gave him the start but I know many people who took over their fathers companies and went under and are broke now. He built it up to a astronomical level. He would be much better than the last two presidents.
Well of course he never claimed bankruptcy personally, that's part of the reason why people incorporate their businesses. Trump tends to separate his businesses so if one fails the others won't have to pay for it. His most recent business bankruptcy was in 2009. He tried to claim in bankruptcy court that this particular business shouldn't have to pay its creditors because the worldwide financial crisis was "an act of God".
Trump inherited hundreds of millions of dollars from his father. His personal wealth has fluctuated from the millions to the billions, back and forth since then. Stable growth is not a term I would use to describe his finances. He has tried (unsuccessfully) to sue anyone who estimates his personal wealth below $500 million, as he believes it damages his image and the Trump brand.
I agree with you 100%. Just what our country needs, a man who has filed bankruptcy more than once for president. When a real working American files for bankruptcy our credit is screwed for awhile but if you're a corporation or rich you get a slap on the hand.
You are quite wrong - most everybody outside the US either likes him or has no opinion except that anybody is better than Bush. It is the US itself that is the laughing stock, with foreign policies exposed as cynical attempts at controlling world trade and oil, your politics and media the most inherently corrupt in the 'developed' world.
Most people outside the US cannot imagine how one man could possibly sort out the mess, especially with the primeval level of political awareness in your population, the dumbing down of education and the habit of living in constant debt that is as enslaving as iron chains.
Ok I do travel to many countries and speak to people. Please I know from experience. The UK many laugh, France even more, Swiss a lot think he is a joke, Italy and Germany see him as weak, China also.
The only thing I've heard from Europeans is that he's too far to the Right.
I deal with many in Europe(business people) and it is totally the opposite. they feel he is weak. Many said they have great confidence he is a socialist. Like I stated if you read his books(even though he did not write both of them, the first is done so Professionally and the second could not have been done by the same person) they clearly show his mindset. his record as a senator was far left and of course he can not get everything done right away without having a chance for another 4 years. He is definitely not to right or even close to center.
So what the hell are tax cuts for trillionaires???
Let me guess.....communists believe the rich are deserving of even more of the common fund?
Actually,....come to think of it.... it IS socialism!
So you see--I geuss he IS a leftist.
He believes in socialism for the rich. Just like you.
I think you are bluffing.
Nobody liked the cowboy politics of Bushco and Marshall Cheney.
Obama is very much in the center. You are just too far right to understand.
WHAT TAX CUTS? YOU want to RAISE the riches taxes who already pay 70% of all taxes! You do not seem to realize that if you tax these people they will not hire and probably fire people to make up the difference and they will not expand either! they may even leave or move the company to another country like many have already! THAT LINE IS A SOCIALIST LINE!!! tax cut for the rich! be honest you want to tax them more! like I said they pay 70% already how much do you want them to pay???? I guess you are blind and did not see S&P downgraded us to NEGATIVE from stable! you people better wake up!
Danny, please check your facts. The current maximum tax rate for individuals is ***35%***. That's half the 70% you claim (or have been told) the rich are paying. You really should stop drinking that Faux Noise Kool-Aid.
OK smart a$$ if 50% of the people pay NO TAX and If the rich make most of the money, where does that 50% who don't pay's money come in? If you make under 45K you pay ZERO taxes, If the rich pay 35% which you are being shady as you are not calculating CAPITAL GAINS @25% which you conveniently left out, pay 35% of the majority of the Money and the bottom does not pay anything, that is how you come up with a REAL number of 69.1%. Just because you say they by 35% how can they pay 70% of the taxes is false!
By the way, you sound a bit like a MSM shill yourself with the let’s soak the rich stuff – that is simply the politics of envy unless you can back it up with facts!
In 2008, the top 10% pay 69.94% of America's tax burden.
check it out o the government site!
stop with your half truths!
Trillionaires? Today that is funny. But with the coming inflation it will be normal.
I understand that J. Carter is a very strong Obama supporter. he is so thankful that he is no longer the worst president in US history. From my perspective the Obama presidency is the second Carter term.
Aw, you have to admit it is funny. Real humor always carries a grain of truth. Jimmuh Carter was the worst president in recent history, say the last one hundred years or so...
Danny, again, i am English, nobody liked bush, and we were all glad to see Obama get elected. We were actually stunned to see Bush get a second term.
From the way you speak I actually doubt you travel as much as you say you do, and if you have travelled to those countries you must not have actually spoken to the people.
If you are seeing anti-obama statements in the paper then chances are you are looking at a paper owned by an American. If you actually talk to the British people - you will soon find out what they think.
From my own experience travelling around Europe, which I have done extensively, the sentiment is exactly the same.
I felt the same way.
The first time driving in my car and hearing Obama speak, I was stunned too; "Is that our president?"
...Being so used to the spit and anger and putting people down unintelligent hehe eheh hehe talk of Bush.
I couldn't believe we actually had a calm, intelligent funny man in that position.
But not to worry--the Baggers have stepped in where ElBushbo left off. *sigh*
I did not like Bush either, you heard me state this a million times. and talk is cheap!! you can buy his lies! and the first one started when he said he did not hear reverend wright speak that way after going to his church for 20 years and dedicated a book to him and said he is a mentor! Sorry I do not want an Anti-American has my president who believes in wealth distribution! that is socialism and that was not what this country was founded on and what made this country great! why don't you move to Europe if you want that? we were never built on those ideologies and don't want to change what made us great. as far as your other post I can show you a list of democrats 10 times larger getting free $hit from the taxpayers! you conveniently left those out!
Look at you!
Calling out Reverand Wright, while at the same time calling your president anti-American!
Oh, and the one I saw call him that too--was Oliver North.
This one, of ALL people! After he lied to Congress,shredded documents, and was involved in an illegal war which was funded by gun and drug smuggling. FACTS, not conjecture!
And he still walks the streets!
You have a funny way of defining anti-American.
As per ususal, it's ideology uber alles.
I also said that was BS. it doesn't work one way! it works both ways dem and repub. he should not get away with anything! why put words into my mouth? where did I justify that? please show me. again talking something other than what was said and bringing others into it. and Yes if he sat in that church for 20 years and listened to that and dedicated a book to his mentor then he believed that nonsense! read his books, it is very clear what he believes in. he even said it to joe the plumber! he wants to redistribute the wealth! that is socialist!
Oliver L. North -- Indicted March 16, 1988, on 16 felony counts. After standing trial on 12, North was convicted May 4, 1989 of three charges: accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents. He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation, $150,000 in fines and 1,200 hours community service. A three-judge appeals panel on July 20, 1990, vacated North's conviction for further proceedings to determine whether his immunized testimony influenced witnesses in the trial. The Supreme Court declined to review the case. Judge Gesell dismissed the case September 16, 1991, after hearings on the immunity issue, on the motion of Independent Counsel.
Now your going to tell me I do not communicate with people in Europe? Son I travel a lot and deal with many business people in London alone. Swiss and Germany a lot also. France, Italy. China and Japan. Like I stated 7 out of 10 people in London Canary Wharf area think he is not very good. I will be back in London the last of June or July, would you be willing to bet me if we take a survey outside the train station at Canary wharf? I'm talking about business people not students of people who take from the government for a living. Even John an admitted Socialist said sure those people don't like him, they are the bankers etc... put your money where your mouth is.
Danny, I have no objection to you quoting me, however I strongly object to you twisting my quote to suit your agenda.
oh so now your denying you said that? I can clearly go back to you stating that of course the people that work in canary wharf believes like that? are you sure you want to go there? you did not state that?
Do you not think it makes a difference that I also pointed out that they would not be a typical cross section of the British public?
want to change what you said?
well that is strange because I do a lot of business in the UK and I would honestly say out of the business people I deal with 7 out of 10 think he is bad! Go to canary wharf and do a survey! I would lay 1000-1 I win! I should be there in June or July I will meet you there and we will survey 100 people if you win I will give you $1,000 if I win you just do a hub on how you don't even know your own country, How is that?
Canary Wharf!! I doubt if you'd find one person there who would have a good word to say about Obama!
Fortunately, though they hold most of the power, the bankers don't actually dictate how we think.
Canary Wharf!! I doubt if you'd find one person there who would have a good word to say about Obama!
Fortunately, though they hold most of the power, the bankers don't actually dictate how we think.
IS THAT NOT WHAT YOU SAID?????? I said 7-10 you said you doubt if you would find one person! DID I MISS QUOTE YOU ABOUT CANARY WHARF???????? PLEASE STATE THAT AGAIN.
Just for record it is those people who you call not the typical section of Britain who actually give the most money to feed your a$$ they are the ones flipping most of the bills! If they didn't exist you would starve to death!
Rather warped thinking Danny, they don't feed anybody but them selves, they actually drive up the price of food.
I would be in no danger of starving without the bankers!
yeah you would think like that! they pay most of the taxes in your country, maybe you should look into it a little further!
Yes Danny, I looked into it a little further and read your long, long post which states
"The industry accounted for about 10 percent of Britain’s economic output in 2009, up from 7.7 percent in 2006, and paid the most in corporation tax last year, according to the government. Financial firms generated about 11 percent of the nation’s tax revenue in the year ended March 2010, contributing 53.4 billion pounds ($87 billion) in corporation, sales and employee taxes, according to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP for the City of London Corporation."
I don't think 10% equates to most, do you?
financial firms regained their position as the largest contributor to the Exchequer, comprising 11.2pc of the total UK tax take.
they are the biggest contributors and that is just the banking sector. What about the other businesses? that is just one field. And if you have good credit and good numbers on your small business you can get a loan! if not I will get it for you. I have many lenders who will lend to qualified borrowers.
But there is a world of difference between being the biggest contributor and paying most of the tax.
If borrowing for small businesses is all down to good credit and good numbers why does the government find it necessary to put pressure on banks to lend to small businesses?
BTW, thanks for the offer but I'm sound, don't need to borrow.
Those people do not have very good credit. It is a system they use, The government gets involved because these people are below the system numbers and the banks are forced to give them loans and these are the ones who cause most of the problems. the government needs to stay out of private business. these people can go to alternative financing if it is just credit problems and all other numbers are good, rate is higher but that is their fault. I have seen small companies get 2.5M credit lines for their business! If everything is legit you will have no problems.
Yes it is a small business. he is a friend of mine. he only has 14 employees and him and his wife. they just do big numbers. I have another friend who only has no more than 7 employees and he has a 100M credit line. those are considered small businesses.
In the United States the Small Business Administration establishes small business size standards on an industry-by-industry basis, but generally specifies a small business as having fewer than 100 employees.
I forgot to add the first part of your post. That is just the actual companies that contribute! you are totally forgetting all the Employees that have to pay because their salaries are high, that will take it up to at least 30-35% and that is just one industry! the 11.2% was just the actual banking companies. as you stated many times these people make serious bonuses.
No Danny, the 11.2% includes employee taxes.
And no, it isn't just bad risk companies that the banks refused credit to, it was all small businesses.
No that 11.2 was just the business paid taxes! they do not add that to the total, never do, each person has different deductions. that is false! well I do not know personally for the UK but here in the states it goes by numbers, I would assume it is pretty much the same system. I will ask some people I know in the next few days if it is different.
Danny, from your posting;
"Financial firms generated about 11 percent of the nation’s tax revenue in the year ended March 2010, contributing 53.4 billion pounds ($87 billion) in corporation, sales and employee taxes,"
Note, corporation, sales and EMPLOYEE taxes
twist some more! here is the proof! they pay the majority of the taxes!
Banks and Finance
Financial services sector pays most tax to UK Government
The financial services industry regained its place as the largest individual contributor to Government finances in the latest financial year, according to figures from the City of London Corporation.
Aerial Views of London's Financial Centre. Financial services sector pays most tax to UK Government
Taxes paid by financial services companies were worth £53.4bn in the 12 months to March Photo: Bloomberg News
By Harry Wilson 7:00AM GMT 16 Dec 2010
Taxes paid by financial services companies were worth £53.4bn in the 12 months to March, according to a City of London report produced by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
While total tax revenues from the industry were down by £8bn on the previous year, the financial firms regained their position as the largest contributor to the Exchequer, comprising 11.2pc of the total UK tax take.
Stuart Fraser, policy chairman of the City of London Corporation, said the report highlighted the "vital contribution" made by financial services businesses to the economy.
"The industry has demonstrated resilience in these challenging global economic conditions but we must be wary of crossing a threshold when it comes to taxation," he said.
The British Bankers' Association welcomed the report and said the industry was "determined to play a full role in the UK economy's recovery".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news … nment.html
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-0 … -u-k-.html
Banks Bring Jobs to London as Finance Pays Most Tax in U.K.
March 23, 2011, 11:27 AM EDT
More From Businessweek
By Simon Clark, Ambereen Choudhury and Gavin Finch
(Updates with Moulton comment in 21st paragraph.)
March 23 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc. employs almost as many people in London today as it did in 2007, before Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for the biggest bankruptcy in history, sparking a global recession.
Goldman Sachs isn’t alone. Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, recipient of the world’s biggest bank bailout, has more workers in its securities unit than four years ago. Barclays Capital, under Robert Diamond, hired 1,800 in 2010.
Investment banks in Europe’s financial capital are adding jobs, helping to bolster headcounts at law and accounting firms across London, as the rest of Britain struggles to recover from the worst economic contraction since the 1930s. Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne has little alternative except to do all he can to keep companies such as Barclays Plc and HSBC Holdings Plc from leaving London.
“We want London to remain a global financial center, and one that will continue to flourish and grow because of the employment it brings,” Treasury minister Mark Hoban said at a conference in the City of London last week. “We want to see more employment in the U.K., not less and I think a blooming financial services sector can help deliver that.”
The industry accounted for about 10 percent of Britain’s economic output in 2009, up from 7.7 percent in 2006, and paid the most in corporation tax last year, according to the government. Financial firms generated about 11 percent of the nation’s tax revenue in the year ended March 2010, contributing 53.4 billion pounds ($87 billion) in corporation, sales and employee taxes, according to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP for the City of London Corporation.
“We want the City of London to remain the world’s leading center for financial services,” Osborne told lawmakers in Parliament today as he presented his budget. Still “prosperity must be shared across all parts of the U.K.”
The nationwide unemployment rate based on ILO standards rose to 8 percent in the three months through January from 7.9 percent in the three months ended October. In London’s City and Canary Wharf districts, the number of workers will rise to 318,000 in 2011, from 315,000 in 2010 and 305,000 in 2009, according to the Centre for Economics & Business Research Ltd.
Accounting firm KPMG LLP plans to increase its London headcount to 14,000 from 11,000 in the next three years, while PricewaterhouseCoopers raised the number of graduate and internship openings it has in 2011 to a record of more than 1,600. Deloitte & Touche LLP plans to add about 1,500 employees in the U.K. this year.
‘Sense of Normality’
The number of partners hired at London-based law firms rose 28 percent in the first seven months of 2010 from the prior year, according to data from Motive Legal Consulting and LegalMoves.
“A sense of normality is returning to the market,” said Mark Cameron, chief operating officer of London-based recruiter Astbury Marsden. “I don’t think you will see the outright bullishness of 2007 where the sky was the limit and everyone kept growing because they had to.”
HSBC, Barclays and Standard Chartered Plc, three of Britain’s biggest banks, had combined profits of 14 billion pounds last year, excluding asset sales, up from 8.3 billion pounds in 2009.
RBS, the largest lender owned by the government, expects to post its first annual profit in 2011 after three years of losses, Chief Executive Officer Stephen Hester said last month. Lloyds Banking Group Plc may almost double pretax profit in 2011 to 4.1 billion pounds, according to the median estimate of 21 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.
U.K. taxpayers have invested 45.5 billion pounds in RBS for an 83 percent stake and 20 billion pounds in Lloyds for a 41 percent holding.
The increase in jobs occurred as Barclays, HSBC and Standard Chartered said last year that government attempts to force their breakup or raise taxes risked triggering an exodus from London.
John Vickers, chairman of the government-backed Independent Commission on Banking, ruled out a full split of the lenders when he said in January that his panel was reviewing other ways to protect consumer deposits. The banking panel will publish its draft plans for the industry on April 11.
Prime Minister David Cameron is raising taxes and embarking on budget cuts that will slash 330,000 public-sector jobs during the next four years. As employment in finance rebounds to within 10 percent of 2007’s peak, the government’s emphasis switched from scrutinizing bankers’ pay, bonuses and tax contributions to counting on the banks, which required about 1 trillion pounds from taxpayers to shore them up, to lead the recovery.
Britain’s four biggest banks have said total bonuses for U.K.-based employees will be lower than last year and pledged to boost business lending in a bid to end what RBS’s Hester has called “banker bashing.”
Goldman Sachs employs about 7,500 people in Europe -- 6,200 of them in London -- according to Michael Sherwood, 45, co-head of the international unit and one of the New York-based firm’s vice chairmen. In 2007, Goldman Sachs had about 8,000 people in Europe, including consultants.
RBS employed about 17,600 people at its securities unit in 2007 and 18,700 in 2008 after the Edinburgh-based lender absorbed ABN Amro Holding NV’s investment bank. After falling to 17,900 in 2009, the total has since risen to 18,700, company filings show.
Barclays Capital boosted its headcount last year as it expanded the equity and mergers-advisory teams outside the U.S. following its purchase of Lehman’s North American operations.
“I would like to see U.K. financial companies employing more people, with a change of emphasis from making the most money possible to providing the best service with the highest integrity,” said private equity dealmaker Jon Moulton, who started his latest company, Better Capital Ltd., in 2009.
Jezz Farr, a spokesman for London-based HSBC, and Barclays spokesman Jon Laycock declined to comment on hiring. HSBC is Europe’s biggest bank and Barclays is Britain’s third largest.
Not every financial institution has increased headcount. UBS AG, Switzerland’s biggest bank, employed 6,634 people in the U.K. as of Dec. 31, down 25 percent from 2007, according to the Zurich-based company’s quarterly filings.
The number of people registered with the U.K.’s Financial Services Authority as having a so-called approved function was at 172,077 in 2008, and fell to 166,420 in 2009 and 161,175 in 2010, the fewest since 2004.
“There is a more buoyant mood,” said Anthony Thomson, chairman of Metro Bank Plc, a consumer bank he co-founded with U.S. investor Vernon Hill. Metro Bank opened its first London branches last year. “The siege mentality of the past few years is receding and people are starting to say, ‘How can we create more value, how can we create new businesses?’”
Bankers are softening their rhetoric about leaving, with Barclays’s Diamond, 59, telling lawmakers in January that London is the “premier financial center in the world.” HSBC said March 7 it would prefer to keep its headquarters in London amid speculation the company is preparing to relocate, possibly to Hong Kong.
London is home to about 240 overseas banks, including the European bases for JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley. About 80 percent of Europe’s hedge funds and about 60 percent of the region’s private equity firms are based in Britain. The U.K. also accounts for about 37 percent of global foreign exchange trading and 46 percent of all trading of over-the-counter interest rate derivatives, according to lobby group TheCityUK.
As regulators such as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision introduce rules aimed at preventing a repeat of Lehman’s collapse, banks are hiring people with regulatory and reporting expertise, Astbury Marsden’s Cameron said. The so- called Basel III rules, endorsed by world leaders in November, require banks to have common equity equal to at least 7 percent of assets weighted according to riskiness, up from 2 percent.
“Regulatory and reporting requirements are hot topics at the moment,” Cameron said. “They are on very tight timeframes to implement those, so there’s quite a focus in the banks on dealing with that change.”
Job opportunities for people working in compliance rose 26 percent in the three months ended Jan. 31, while those in consulting increased 29 percent, according to eFinancialCareers, a London-based careers website. Openings were up 41 percent in equities and 30 percent in fixed income, eFinancialCareers said.
“Anything to do with structured credit has disappeared,” said James Chappell, a financial-services industry strategist at Olivetree Securities Ltd. in London. “There is no demand for that type of product.”
Former London bankers are starting companies to profit from new regulation or areas where rivals have retreated such as lending. Vincent Dahinden opened a London-based firm in December 2008 to advise banks on derivatives and risk management as the U.K. government bailed out his former employer, RBS. Six months earlier, he left the Edinburgh-based bank, where he oversaw exotic derivatives traders.
Solum Financial Partners LLP may double its team of six former bankers by the end of the year, Dahinden said in an interview. Solum Financial values derivatives contracts when banks dispute prices and advises lenders on creating systems to manage the risk of their trading partners defaulting.
“We have recently advised a European bank” from “a governance, IT architecture, modeling, hedging, accounting, regulatory and best-practice perspective,” Dahinden said. This is “an area of hiring” opportunity within banks, he said.
Haymarket Financial LLP, the London-based provider of specialist financing to companies that’s part-funded by Jacob Rothschild’s RIT Capital Partners Plc, has hired about 30 people since it opened in 2009.
“Right now there are many more borrowers out there than lenders,” Haymarket CEO Tim Flynn said in an interview. “We’d be better off with more businesses like ours starting up because there is a need for more capital on reasonable terms.”
Stephen Welton, a partner at JPMorgan’s former private equity unit, was last month named CEO of Business Growth Fund Plc, a 2.5 billion-pound fund backed by the U.K.’s six biggest banks.
“Coming out of a recession is the ideal time to think about creating new capital sources for smaller businesses,” Welton said in an interview. “In 10 years time, I hope to look back at having created the funder of the future big businesses of Britain.”
Nasir Zubairi wants to create a new source of funding for U.K. companies. The former RBS and ICAP Plc electronic-trading specialist is starting London-based EuroTRX Ltd., a trade- receivables exchange, to help speed payment of invoices to companies with 1 million pounds of annual sales.
Zubairi wants to create an electronic market where new investors such as hedge funds and asset managers can buy invoices at a discount to face value from companies that sometimes wait 100 days for payment. The firm may expand to 30 people in a year, he said.
“Smaller businesses have a big problem raising capital,” Zubairi, 35, said in an interview. “We are trying to solve that by making invoice finance more accessible and transparent.”
Zubairi may be part of a wave of London financial technology innovators, including risk-management company Hyper Rig Ltd. and Funding Circle Ltd., an online market for people to lend directly to small businesses, said Julie Meyer, founder of London-based investment and advisory firm Ariadne Capital Ltd.
‘Spotting a Gap’
“New financial technology companies are emerging with entrepreneurs who see things that were either done wrong in the last credit cycle or who are spotting a gap,” Meyer said.
Entrepreneurs are even making money from people who want to quit the industry. Former Ernst & Young LLP consultants Dom Jackman and Rob Symington started a blog that turned into recruitment website Escape The City. They’ve placed finance sector workers with a beach lodge in Mozambique, a Mongolian investment company and a Ugandan non-profit.
“We felt like our jobs just didn’t matter to anyone,” said Symington, 27. “So we started a website to connect with people who felt like us and wanted an exciting alternative.”
--With assistance from Jon Menon in London. Editors: Edward Evans, James Amott.
To contact the reporters on this story: Simon Clark at firstname.lastname@example.org; Ambereen Choudhury at email@example.com; Gavin Finch at firstname.lastname@example.org.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Edward Evans at email@example.com
A Brit who emigrated to the US told me that GB is clearly a socialist country. Was he wrong?
Yes, he was wrong.
Although the UK does have some aspects of socialism that the present right wing government is trying its hardest to eradicate, fundamentally we are a capitalist country.
You only have to look to your own businesses which have branches in the UK to see that there is no way we are a socialist country.
Feel free to come and set up a business in the UK, you'll find the government may not go out of its way to help you but neither will they tell you that you can't do it.
Personally, I think we have things about right here, I could not bear to live in the US and be faced with the poverty and abject squalor that many of your citizens are forced to live in.
Our citizens do not have to live in the streets, we have section 8 welfare, medicaid etc... most people who live on the streets are drug and alcohol addicts or mental issues. we also have shelters and food centers. You have no clue what you are talking about! I seen homeless in the UK, why? like I said our poor have air condition, cell phones TV and many other things many other countries do not have.
http://www.businessinsider.com/15-shock … poverty-15
Dream on Danny, your country has poverty, masses of it and much worse than anything we know in the UK.
your own link shows that we have safety levels in place and they are saying they do not know how to get these people off the programs??? And it also said one out of 5 is getting into the poverty level, Like I stated our poverty level still includes air condition, TV, computers etc... and the sad part is many on these programs are just milking the system!
OK Danny, live in your little bubble. I do realise that accepting the truth would be a bit earth shattering for you.
Much better you go on believing that all the poverty in the US is voluntary and nobody need live on the streets or in awful conditions.
I'm living in a bubble? do you even live here? do you see what I see? When was the last time you were here? Yes we have issues here now, but like I stated and your link stated we have safety nets in place and they are section 8, welfare, medicaid, foodstamps, shelters, food centers etc... Yes some people need it and that is why it is there, but a lot milk the system! I see it with my own eyes, people collecting food stamps and then getting into new cars, have kids and do not get married so the government pays for a lot and live with the father and they go on vacations etc... please you do not live here and do not know what your talking about. Yes it has been harder here, but nothing like you are stating. I know that is the way you socialist try to convert people with fear! oh so many is on the streets etc... and like I stated many are on the streets that do not have to be, they are drug addicts, alcoholics and some have mental issues. Have you ever been to Manhattan? I can take you to many food and shelter places, churches have food kitchens. I'm convinced Obama wants to break the system so he has a chance on making this a socialist country. S&P just warned about losing our AAA credit rating and this fool is still talking about spending? Your country just got its credit rating back after it was down graded!
Well I seem to have hit the spot there don't I Danny!
Do you never wonder why there are so many people with drink, drug and mental health problems?
It couldn't be anything to do with being dealt a sh!t hand in life could it? You try never knowing where your next meal is coming from and see how long you remain sane for.
By the way, did you only look at the page I posted or did you look at the other 14 related pages?
Did you read the sentence at the end of the page that you did look at-
"But most Americans have become so "dumbed down" that they don't even understand what the real problems are anymore."
They wouldn't have been talking about you would they?
Yes a lot of those people did it to themselves, lets call it like it is! they did not want to study in school, they did not want to be responsible people! and made poor choices, yes I would like to try and help them but they must help themselves! and if they don't know where the next meal is coming from why are they buying drugs and alcohol? also I showed you many articles from good news sources that in socialist countries drugs and alcohol are way out of hand. why is that? because they do not have anything to grow on? because the handouts keep you down so you have to vote for the same fools who will give them shelter and food. Please like I said show me one instance in a decent size country where socialism works. You did not upset me.... I live here you do not I know what I see. I seen London also and let me tell you It is nice to visit but I would never live there.
as I recall, the "good" news sites you posted where from the American point of view, a site discussing the problems of alcoholism in a county in transition from socialism to capitalism, and finally drug use amongst US soldiers in Afghanistan!
You really must try harder.
Danny, I know this will come as a surprise to you but Manhattan-slash-NYC is only an itty-bitty piece of America. In other parts of the country, the picture is not as rosy as you think. Yes, there are programs for the poor such as Section 8, food stamps, church food banks, etc. But they are now so overwhelmed by the effects of the foreclosure debacle coupled with high unemployment that they can no longer provide these services to everyone who needs them. Which means the majority of the poor and homeless DO NOT have AC, cell phones, or computers, and many don't have cars either. And they are NOT all drug addicts and alcoholics. Many were laid off when their jobs were sent overseas or they were forced to sell their homes to pay astronomical medical bills. So instead of jetting off to Europe, perhaps you should take a drive across America and see for yourself how bad things REALLY are. Make sure Kansas City KS and Oklahoma City are on the itinerary.
"So instead of jetting off to Europe, perhaps you should take a drive across America and see for yourself how bad things REALLY are. Make sure Kansas City KS and Oklahoma City are on the itinerary."
These people have NO idea of the reality of life in America...only the sanitized, pro-Capitalist commercial version they like to peddle.
And if they started out poor, and made it...then shame on them! They should know better than any how it is.
These people have NO idea of the reality of life in America...only the sanitized, pro-Capitalist commercial version they like to peddle."
Reality Check would be dropping them into the "wrong" side of Cleveland or Detroit...dressed in jeans and a T-shirt that's seen better days...and sans cell, laptop, credit cards and all other forms of ID. See how long it takes to decide having a roof over one's head and food IS a right. ;D
How all our citizens live is the important thing, not how many trillionaires can make it rich here. (imo)
Humanity is missing. It's all about the Benjamins.
Maybe just maybe you have no Idea! I guess I'm the only person who thinks this way but the last election proved otherwise!
earning less than 45k pay no tax. That is half. Deadbeats is your word. It is reasonably accurate given there share is carried by the top approx 15 percent. The band from 85 to 50 percent carry themselves.
What is your point – that they should not pay taxes at all? As I pointed out I believe everyone has an obligation. Everyone. Or is that too libertarian for you? I do not care what they make. Why should the the FSA be 50 percent of the population? Give me a break.
Also, do you read what I post or do you just fling shit like an irate gorilla when it has its bananas stolen?
I'm for increasing the capital gains tax to a more reasonable level. I talked about cutting spending. Etc. Etc.
I am amazed you are against this position. Truly. What happened to your positions re “personal responsibility”?
We are using democracy as a means of theft when we target the “super rich” because “they can afford it”.
I can afford to pay for everyone’s meal when we go out, but no one expects me to. Why do we expect to take from the rich who already are paying forty times their fair share when half the earners are paying nothing? Nothing is fair? Fix that first and control costs and I will back other taxes on the rich, too.
Too many members of the FSA screaming for my money that I worked my life for, when I already pay taxes you would not believe.
That is why I empathise with the rich and super rich. I do not see them as the all-evil beings that many do. Certain excesses need to be controlled and influence pefalling needs to be stopped. But it isn’t a crime to be rich. It isn’t a crime to be poor. But it isn’t right that so many are leeches.
again another asinine response with out even knowing me! I have traveled and lived in poor neighborhoods as a kid. seen it all, been there done that! I also know to take responsibility for my own life! I could have gotten into drugs with others, or skipped school and partied, you pay for your actions! have some pride! take the bull by the horns instead of complain like a little baby! oh the rich people are evil! no, your just not motivated enough to do something about it! tell the truth! stop blaming others.
"again another asinine response with out even knowing me!"
Touche. And Danny, if you want people to believe you truly left those poor neighborhoods behind, try improving your grammar, spelling and punctuation. Especially punctuation. Excessive use of the exclamation point in forum comments is not the mark of a well-read international traveler.
You see I do not care what anyone believes. I know what I went through and where I come from. I have no reason to Lie and never change my story. Now you want to say because of my punctuations that shows I'm not a international traveler. OK I'm lying, but If you want to bet on your assumptions I will be more than glad to prove you wrong. I do not write for a living, I use my skills and mind to come up with smart investments. I know the banking system and how it works. I travel to a few countries and do deals which are in the financial field. So I do know when your spilling your half truths when it comes to the financial part. I also know when the right does the same. Most politicians give you those Half Truths and the weak minded on both sides believe them. I love to read much more than write.
I have not seen any Facts from you and only LIP service. Talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words. I will be ready to prove anything about me if you have the Guts to put your money where your mouth is! that exclamation mark was just for you!!!
The Fed caused the collapse! Blame the Federal Reserve!
Get over your higher than though mentality! If you actually have facts before you post it may mean something sweetheart! I know what it is to be poor, I wrote about being from Immigrant parents and struggling as a kid, being made fun of for not having designer jeans. I also know that everyone should take responsibility for their own lives! we were never a socialist country and would have never grown to being the best if it wasn't for capitalism.
I was born in east New York Brooklyn, I went to a high school that was 23% white, check it out Franklin K lane H.S you do what you do best ASSume everything without knowing any facts! I seen many people milk the system, not wanting to advance themselves always making excuses! I have been to many states in the US
I have many friends of all religions and color! You think because you been on HB for three years make you special in some way
??? sorry honey. In one statement you say when you think it suits you its quality not quantity but you didn't even now you made a fool of yourself and then another because you been here for 3 years you know better! LMAO yeah your brilliant!
Thanks for your thoughtful points. As I have time I shall do more research. Perhaps we can continue so I gain a better appreciation of your country's economic model.
You did write this, "Personally, I think we have things about right here, I could not bear to live in the US and be faced with the poverty and abject squalor that many of your citizens are forced to live in'
Do you believe your view of us is about right? If your belief is true then why would so many people work so hard to get here legally and illegally?
Yes I do feel that my view of you is more or less correct, or at least my view on poverty. It has several sources, personal experience and general observation via the media.
I think the reason why so many work hard to get to the US are probably very similar to the reasons why many people work hard to get to the UK.
They tend to be the ones with drive and initiative, who see opportunity and like so many of our countrymen turn a blind eye to poverty and deprivation.
Perhaps if they do see it they apply the same sorts of justification as we do, you know, they can't be bothered, they'd rather live like that and all the rest.
Then again, with a nod to Danny here, perhaps even poverty in the first world looks a lot more attractive than poverty in their home country.
Actually been following American politics for 35 years.
I suppose you would prefer the talking in tongues Pailin and the goof with the dead rodent strapped to his head.
Where did you come up with that? If you are a typical bagger I doubt you would even know where those countries are!
Obama is well liked by all of them.
Danny, one right wing journalist does not speak for the whole of Britain.
Right just one! you can go on youtube and pull up pages, but I guess in your world it is one! My next trip to the UK i will bring back the papers and scan and download for you, just one.... god!
Oh well, you obviously know far better than I do how my fellow country men think, why should I bother arguing with you!
By the way, would you like countless refs on youtube to how stupid Americans are? I don't believe them, but they are there.
they say that also, and yes we do have some very stupid people here! It is true, look at our news and you can see it clearly. I was talking about Obama you know the person who holds the highest office in our country, not some random people. and the youtube ref i was speaking about is your news doing the reporting!
OK,put up then,lets see your youtube effort then.
Why do I doubt that Danny as ever been out of the US....
Gosh Doug, you mean Danny isn't an international banker.
Surely you're wrong there.
How much do you want to bet Mr. Know it all? make me a wager and I will scan and post my last trip with airline tickets, hotel and some other London info, I can actually send a pic in front of Harrods Dept store. Then France and Swiss that was my last trip. lets see how much of a man you are. money where your mouth is! you can have john ask me questions about C.Wharf , Piccadilly circus I'm sure I can prove it that way also! You just show again you just talk $hit.
why so quite Mr. Know it all? Money where your mouth is!
here is the train ticket both sides, make the bet and i will post the Air France ticket from Heath-row to Charles DG
A ticket a year and and a half old is hardly evidence of frequent visits is it? More like the American tourist, London in the morning,Paris in the afternoon.
yeah OK, like I said that was in my desk draw just to show I was in the UK. did you conveniently not see what Mr. know it all wrote? I bet he never left the country? Like I said If you want to bet I will find the one for Jan. 2011 and like I said will return Late June or July. I offered to meet you to do a survey. Put your money where your mouth is. When I went back then I was actually in Europe from the 4th Oct till 24 Oct. but again he said I never left the US. good try though
Hm, that the best you can do? Four American (not British) news stations, one British newspaper on how really bad the US army is and one BBC about how well the Canadians get on with Obama in 2009.
I think that you've failed to demonstrate how much we laugh at your President.
they weren't British citizens speaking? I guess that gentleman Jim Rogers is not very well respected?
Not very well respected! Quite possibly in his birth place of Baltimore.
I didn't know that he'd taken up British citizenship.
The Tea Party keeps talking about the 2010 Elections while neglecting the present. Polls show TP support is down. We will never vote a TP into the White House now that everyone can see the racist & hatred in them. Koch Bros have to pay the TP & GOP to do their dirty work. Go to kochbrosexposed.com & watch what they & the Walton Family (Wal-Mart) have in common. Oh, Michelle Bachmann, stay out of the bushes!
Eh, they neglected the 2008 election too!
Kind of like horses with the blinders on.
Run Run RUUUN.
Don't look behind. Just Forward. Don't see the mistakes. Just make them again and again and again.
And that sounds like a good video.
keep believing the nonsense! you and everyone else said the same thing in November, how did that work out for you? expect even more the next time because Obama keeps making things even worse! take those blinders off. It truly is not too hard to see. And I'm not a TP member or will ever be one! I'm a true conservative democrat. The Democratic party has been infiltrated by socialist, and as I stated the TP is trying to infiltrate the republicans. stop watching MSNBC it will do you good.
you don't know what i said in 2010 but i will tell you, i told people the tea baggers are all working for the koch bros & if they voted them in they would regret it, hello present day your support is down, fyi msnbc is real news & fox is sci/fi news
If you think MSNBC is real news I truly have nothing to say to you! LMAO
Spoken like a true TP & Republican, if we don't agree with you. Everyone knows FOX is a joke!
sorry I'm not a TP person and actually a democrat. when someone disagrees with your nonsense they are wrong! sorry I speak the truth, MSNBC doesn't have the lowest rating for nothing! they are biased way more than FOX. fox leans right no doubt but they have real people from both sides and speak much more truth than MSNBC and some other stations! you do not get high rating for BS. face the facts. stop lying to yourself.
You wrote, " We will never vote a TP into the White House now that everyone can see the racist & hatred in them."
I have seen the local footage of Tea Party rallies. They were positive, civil, and clean. They even picked up their trash before the left the rally. Are you sure you didn't (briefly) dip into the democratic play book for your comment?
Look who's talking!
CLASSIC righty-spew...even down to the "we picked up, you dirty slobs."
Cult of Superiority.
I haven't been to any rally's, bagger or otherwise. But another righty poster mentioned the same thing you did, after she read it on a right-wing blog.
Torch--pass it on. "dirty slobs" socialists" "anti-American" "lazy" "not born here"
...it's getting quite predictable, really. That's why I suggested you have lunch with the Queen!
(she's used to being bored to sleep)
So you haven't actually seen any rallies. I have. We have had several Tea Party Rallies in the town I live in. I watched a minute or two on a local news station. They were clean cut, civil, and yes, they picked up the trash.
I have seen four Tea Party rallies. They were orderly, except for the fact that some of the "partiers" continued to enter upon private property and became belligerent when asked to leave.
Yours and mine are merely anecdotes, though.
If what you say is true then why is Bachmann & other so-called TP presidential candidates catering to hate groups & they don't care who knows it. What happend to going after Wall Street , the bank bailouts & jobs? So far its been about abortion, NPR, EPA, Gay marriage, cutting Medicare, SS, Education, busting unions & workers rights. Can't leave out the e-mail that TP from CA set depicting our President Obama as a monkey. I'm sure African Americans really loved that. Need I say more!
You write, "why is Bachmann & other so-called TP presidential candidates catering to hate groups. . ."
Why do you think anyone concerned about the excesses of government should go after the targets of socialist/Marxists?
I do not understand why you believe that conservatives, in or out of the Tea Party, should have any concerns about targeting the same groups of people that you do.
I completely agree in destroying the government unions. They should be made illegal. Today is a good day to do so. Tomorrow is okay if it is too late to do it today.
How about the conservatives in Iowa who hate Gays & pretend to be Pro-Life. If you claim to be Pro-Life why does your party want to cut benefits for seniors & the poor. For someone who supports this party how are you missing all the stupid bills they passed in the House & not the Senate. I see you didn't respond to the ?'s about what the GOP & TP ran on in 2010. What happened to going after Wall Street, bank bailouts & jobs, jobs, jobs? I love how you turn a blind eye when polls are not in your favor.
You wrote, "How about the conservatives in Iowa who hate Gays & pretend to be Pro-Life."
How about them? Are they major figures in a political party?
How do you know they are conservatives?
How do you know they hate anyone?
How do you know they are pretending to be pro-life?
"If you claim to be Pro-Life why does your party want to cut benefits for seniors & the poor."
Are you asking how if I can prefer that women not kill their babies, I can, at the same time believe that people have responsibilities to take care of themselves? is that the question you are asking?
"For someone who supports this party how are you missing all the stupid bills they passed in the House & not the Senate."
What specifically? Which bills are stupid? Do you believe that all bills that originate in the House will be passed in their Senate version? Has that ever happened in the history of this country?
"I see you didn't respond to the ?'s about what the GOP & TP ran on in 2010."
Perhaps I did not see anything to respond to. If you reply to this with your specific complaints I will happily look into them. The Tea Party, by the way, is not a political party. They did not run any candidates.
"What happened to going after Wall Street, bank bailouts & jobs, jobs, jobs?"
That is the class warrior in you. I am not envious of others. Read carefully. My issue is the return of this government to a constitutionally-based limited government. i do not embrace socialism as an economic model because it fails every time it is tried. I do embrace free market capitalism because it has generated more wealth for more people in more places than any other economic model ever devised. It works every time it is tried.
"I love how you turn a blind eye when polls are not in your favor."
Which poll, specifically, are not in my favor (whatever that means)? What are the trends? Are they generally downward as for the boy president? What questions were asked? Can we see the poll internals or are we forced to rely upon interpretations by people who are not likely to have our interests in mind? Post some links and I will gladly review them and give my response.
I see you have internet service but how about a TV? How is it that the rest of us see & hear what your party is doing & you don't? Look, listen, read, research that's where I get my info, you should try it. Here try this, go to kochbrosexposed.com, google Heritage Foundation & Grover Norquist & read. Your party has already done so much damage to this country that you can search for yourself. I have seen no proof to believe otherwise.
You wrote, "I see you have internet service but how about a TV?"
i started one of the first internet service provider companies where I lived at the time. So yes, I do have internet service. I have more televisions than I use. Each bedroom has one. My living room has one. My exercise room has one. I usually watch DVDs I have purchased from the Learning Company or listen to podcasts.
"How is it that the rest of us see & hear what your party is doing & you don't?"
It is not clear to me that you are actually seeing anything. As for my party, I am a conservative. I have no political party. But I do have political interests and I have a long view of history. My political interest is in moving this country back to a constitutionally-based limited government with a free market capitalist economic engine.
"Look, listen, read, research that's where I get my info, you should try it."
Sage advice. Both my wife and I Google excellently.
"Here try this, go to kochbrosexposed.com, google Heritage Foundation & Grover Norquist & read."
But those are websites. I thought you wanted me to watch more television. :-)
"Your party. . ." Which party? Let us assume that you mean the Republican party. If we conservatives succeed in regaining control of it hen it shall be my party.
". . .has already done so much damage to this country. . . '
What damage specifically? If you refer to President Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism" I will agree with you. That was not compassionate. Nor was it conservative. It was statism through and through. But President Bush was never a conservative. Nor were his top advisors.
On the other hand President Bush did fulfill his Constitutional obligation to provide for the common defense. For that I am grateful and admire him.
". . .that you can search for yourself."
I believe we have a significant difference of opinion about the purpose of a nation-state and the limits of a state's power.
"I have seen no proof to believe otherwise."
What is your thesis? Republicans bad. Democrats good? Or the slightly more sophisticated, Lower tax rates, more liberty, more individual responsibility bad. A government program for every want good.
Spoken like Paul Harvey.
Lets just say Koch brothers are real, what about George Soro's? he is 10X that of Koch, so what is your point????
Our resident "Democrat" spews his anti-Obama venom.
He really blew his cover when he said he liked Bachmann...
mmmmmm, no. That one does not pass the smell test.
I blew my cover? You just prove yourself with almost every post! Why is thinking Bachman is a good woman bad???? She adopted like 20 kids and does a lot of wonderful things! everybody should be as caring as she is! I do not agree with everything she says but as a human being she is Incredible! She is extremely smart and has a wonderful heart more than I can say for a lot of other people. Sorry If I do not believe in socialism! It is a disease that destroyed many countries, It really doesn't do any good. Like I told socialist John show me a country that thrived on Socialism! I will be waiting. You do not pass the smell test in my view.
First, let me say that I do admire those who take in foster children; it is not an easy job and they money provided from the government to assist does not usually come close to making up for the time and effort required.
That said, as LMC pointed out, Bachmann is all for cutting programs that help the disadvantaged raise their own kids but is willing to take money from the government to help her raise someone else's kids. If she were living by her principles, then she would have taken in foster kids without asking for government help. Same with the farm subsidies she receives.
She's a big hypocrite. Maybe she's a nice person, but she's a hypocrite.
Bachmann divided her own family & that's what the TP will continue to do to our country. From the MinnPost.com:
During the battle in the Legislature over Bachmann's proposal to ban gay marriage, her step-sister Helen LaFave emerged to publicly announce that Bachmann had divided the family with her polarizing views on the issue. LaFave wrote this letter to the Star Tribune:
For someone whose dream job has always been that of a wife and mother, state Sen. Michele Bachmann seems to have made an odd career choice. The Jan. 1 photo depicting her vacuuming in heels is just as confusing. Perhaps what she really meant to say is that her dream job has always been that of politician and actress. — Helen LaFave, Minneapolis
This is just one of Bachmanns memorable moments. Go to the MinnPost for more.
Danny, first off, most of the British people I know, myself included, are more than happy to see Obama in charge.
Secondly, why do you use socialist as a dirty word, all developed nations are socialist to a degree, don't you have public schools, public roads, city controlled garbage disposal? What happens if your house catches on fire? You get mugged?
Civilization NEEDS socialism, because socialism is co-operation between the people to provide centralized utilities and protection which are essential to the wellbeing of the country.
yes to a small degree but socialism as a whole does not work. Capitalism is what made the USA a great nation and why so many want to come here. I also do not consider schools, firemen, policemen socialism because we pay for those things through taxes! actually where I live the firemen are volunteers. they do not get paid. I have home taxes on my house that are 12,400.00 a year and they break it up like 5500.00 school taxes, 3500.00 police 2000.00 garbage etc... so where is that socialism? Everyone around the world benefited from our Capitalism as we came up with a lot of great new technologies, advancements in medicine etc... without Capitalism We would have never become so strong. look at china they have about the same amount of land as we do, they have 3Billion people and there GDP is like 2T a year we only have 300 million people and our GDP is much greater! the further we go towards socialism the weaker we get. I do not want this. Anyone who wants to put in the hard time here and take some chances there is the opportunity to be rich, successful and not depend on anybody. I prefer to have that option.
There are virtually no pure capitalist or pure socialist economies. Nearly all are mixed democratic welfare capitalist systems. The only argument is over what regulations are needed to insure that the system works fairly in the interest of all citizens. Even Cuba is gradually exhibiting signs of adopting some free market ideas.
yes because socialism doesn't work!! never has and never will! can you deny that everyone benefits from our capitalism? like I stated even our poor lives much better than other countries. The world benefits from capitalism. eventually all this technology gets cheaper and then other countries get it also.
"We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both." Louis D. Brandeis, 1941
"Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society." Oliver Wendell Holmes, 1927 in a dissenting opinion in Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinos v. Collector of Internal Revenue, 1927.
yes to a small degree not what socialist want! of course we have to pay some tax but not 50-75% of what is earned! if the socialist have their way they would take almost everything! we need to contribute to protection of foreign invasion and maybe some other smaller factors. that is all the government should do.
Oh Danny "we do something therefore it cannot be socialism"!
And you do not consider [it] to be socialism because "we pay through taxes"!
I totally despair.
We understand that government is for protecting from foreign invasion. the other is state. yes we use roads police etc... this is understandable but not all the other nonsense. Yes a safety net for people who actually need it but not to rely on it.
You wrote, "Civilization NEEDS socialism, because socialism is co-operation between the people to provide centralized utilities and protection which are essential to the wellbeing of the country."
This is completely false. Socialism is an economic model. It puts the state in the role of master and the citizen in the role of the slave. I recognize that in England you are Subjects. In the United States we are citizens. I would never want to live the squalid life of a Brit under the oppressive heel of a socialist state. Nor do I want the chains of socialism to shackle my children, nor my children's children, in order to buy the votes of this greedy, grasping generation.
The right choice is the obvious choice. Free market capitalism has generated more wealth for more people in more places than any other economic model. Just say "No" to socialism. It feels good. Try a bit of freedom. Once you get over your fear you might embrace it.
very nice post! glad to have you on board. Just a little heads up, these people will twist everything around so beware! and they want freebies so you will be talking to the wall. Capitalism is what made this country and even the world a better place.
SPEAKS THE TRUTH, I know it hurts but feels good to me. open the mind and the truth will follow!
It is okay. I enjoy bringing the fight into the enemy's camp.
Danny, having been at HP for close to 3 years now, I can tell you you wouldn't be the first to set up a separate account for the purpose of having an ally in a forum where you had none otherwise. Nice try, now go write some hubs as your alter ego and let the grownups have a real discussion.
now you throw out BS comments about having an alternate account? This just proves what kind of fool you truly are! why don't we show everyone what kind of A$$ you are , Send HUBPAGES an email and ask them if I have any other accounts! This totally proves you need to grow up and take responsibility for yourself! what a dam shame you have to accuse someone of opening another account... Yeah I need someone to help me? with what? fools like you who accuse people of things they no nothing about? You just proved your stupidity. GO ahead ask hubpages if any other account is on my IP address! I dare you! I want everyone to see what kind of fool you truly are! NO real facts you put out just HALF TRUTHS!
Do you believe that Danny and I are one? Do we have a similar writing style? I don't believe our writing styles are even close. Writing styles are very difficult to conceal over a long period of time. Since I have been posting now for several days I am certain that you can do a cursory examination yourself.
In the UK we are subjects, not because of socialism, but because we are the opposite, a monarchy.
I'm laughing at the image of Brits living under the oppressive heel of socialism, we aren't a socialist country!
You wrote, "In the UK we are subjects, not because of socialism, but because we are the opposite, a monarchy."
You have a long history of being subjects, not a free people. In the US we have a history of being citizens. Just as your history of being the property of the state has fitted you for wearing the chains of socialism easily, our history make American citizens unfit to be state property.
"I'm laughing at the image of Brits living under the oppressive heel of socialism, we aren't a socialist country!"
Oh, but you are. Who runs your health care? The state. Who regulates every facet of your almost private enterprises? Is that not also the state? When you want to do any trivial thing to whom do you go to beg for permission? Is it not one or more government bureaucrats? Do you not redistribute wealth in your country?
@Danny.. Excuse me? Britain, France, Germany, etc. think Obama is a joke? I don't know which planet you're living on but most of them believe that Obama is the first decent president America has had for four decades.
I was curious whether you were European to say that and see that you live in New York. I have European nationality (and South African) and have lived and worked on the continent, and what you say simply is not true.
You wrote, "This is the most articulate intelligent president America has seen for a long time."
He has a good teleprompter.
He is articulate, but note what's happening with the actual administration. The wealthy are still getting the tax breaks. The oil companies are still getting their licenses to drill deep-sea wells. Education is still getting cut, and now the EPA is under attack. At least there's some money coming out to support Green Technologies.
Obama speaks and the people listen, but the government does not. He's a very articulate front man. And that's apparently all he is. The political machines are putting up people against him that help to polarize this country, but they're all essentially front men. That means we, the people, need to take action.
DREAMING AGAIN? don't you wish. I think it is the end of the socialist Obama
This is the most ignorant president we have ever had...by far.
Your opinion means so much to the world! We thank you so much, you should be king of America. No, really. Why don't you save us all
And your opinion means what to the world? At least mine is correct.
That's merely YOUR opinion. Youdon'tholdthosetruths too well!
The fool. There is no money to waste on pointless, politically favored, but financially disastrous and pointless spending on windmills, etc.
Obama makes the mistake that "America" can invest in anything.
Only individuals can act, everyone knows this. But using the term "America" makes one sound more grandiose.
You quoted President Obama, who made these misleading statements, "Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can't afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can't afford to care for seniors and poor children. . ."
So do you and the Prez believe we will no longer spend money in this country to educate?
So do you and the Prez believe we will no longer spend money on clean energy (whatever that is)?
So do you and the Prez believe we will no longer spend money taking care of senior citizens?
So do you and the Prez believe that we will no longer spend any money taking care of poor children?
If we go from spending 3.6 trillion dollars (1.6T of which we must print (think inflation ala J. Carter, or borrow, therefore crowding out the potential for new growth in the private sector) down to a mere two trillion dollars, do you and the Prez believe that means we will no longer spend on any of those things? If so what do you think the two trillion dollars the government spends will go?
There's a story that Richard Nixon was the kind of guy.. if you were drowning 20 feet off shore, he would throw you a rope 10 feet long and say he met you half way.
Privatizing Medicare will reduce benefits to seniors by 25% net. There will be death panels for real but they will be part of the private sector insurance industry protecting the profit margin.
There's one class of people who won't be affected - people so rich they don't NEED Medicare. The Ryan plan gives them a tax CUT!
You wrote, "Privatizing Medicare will reduce benefits to seniors by 25% net."
Fascinating. No current senior will see any change to their entitlements. But future generations will not be shacked to this failing system.
"There will be death panels for real. . ."
Obamacare, the unconstitutional takeover of 1/6th of the US economy already has death panels.
"...but they will be part of the private sector insurance industry protecting the profit margin."
The nice part about the private sector is that the individual consumer gets to decide. If you don't like the deal go to one that you do like. And if you think there is money to be made then get into the market and make the money.
Just don't be a spoiler who demands that the government mug me in order to give you my stuff.
Ah yes, the wonderful "free" market that lets you chose just who will rip you off.
So negative! I never heard you say one positive thing ever. must be depressing to feel like you do. Have you ever heard John positive brings positive energy, negative brings negative.
So it's OK for you to constantly criticise my country and me, that's obviously positive, but let me say one word of criticism of capitalism and I'm entirely negative!
I like the UK. I like everybody I deal with in the UK. I never said I didn't like the UK. I also Don't dislike you either, I do not agree with your ideology.
But that doesn't stop you constantly criticising though does it?
Do you really believe anything this man says? Just wondering.
The boy president, Barry what's his name, said this, "...spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts..."
What does this imply? Does Barry mean that all of the wealth of the individuals in this nation belongs to the government? I think so. He believes we are his chattel to do with as he pleases.
I think we can dismiss with your claim of never insulting anyone now?
As if it wasn't obvious anyway.....my good man.
I'll take some honey with that arsenic waitress.
Do you refer to Barry, what's his name, the boy president? The boy who would be king? Let me go search for his name. Soetero. That's it. Barry Soetero. Or, Barack Hussein Obama.
I admit that I am having fun with Soetero pages. There are many hundreds of them.
Oh, is he posting here? Have I ever made fun of one of his posts? Nope.
But this is a political thread and skewering the boy president is legitimate, in my opinion.
Why do you refer to him as the "boy" president?
He reminds me of a child who had not yet matured into a man. It is all about him. He behaves as if he is a king. An inept king perhaps. But a king nevertheless. A boy king had a Regent. This boy president needs an adult to guide him. Unfortunately, for us. he chose Saul Alinsky.
Here is more: http://latter-rain.com/ltrain/alinski.htm
Thank you for answering my question.
But do you think that Saul Alinsky influenced or influences Obama more than say, his law studies at Harvard? Or his current cabinet?
Also, by your criteria, could we not suggest that George W Bush could have picked a better mentor than Dick Cheney?
Millions (finally) think so.
And not to get too het up over that old separation of church and state thing, but quoting a fringe sect of Christianity called latter rain? Really???
My favorite (a button toward the bottom of the "Latter Rain" explanation section:
Help To Prepare A Holy Bride!
I was afraid to click it, lest I end up on their mailing list *shudder*
LOL. Yes. S. Alinsky had two very great successes. H. R. Clinton and BHO.
I believe that anyone who becomes a rabble rouser, which in polite company is called a community organizer is a radical. BHO clearly is. He cannot hide the major influences of his past. They all slant toward radicalism, socialism, and a hatred of white American society. That is where his roots are.
Ah, GWB. What can one say? I liked the most important thing he did. And I intensely disliked the second most important thing he did.
I have to laugh about latter rain. It was one of a half dozen web sites I looked at. I selected it because it did the best job in the first two paragraphs of establishing what Saul Alinsky believed.
Well I must confess I am relieved. I was seriously starting to worry that being swayed over to your so-called "good" side would require me to convert religions as well. Whew!
HR Clinton. Well that is interesting, isn't it? So one way or the other, Saul Alinsky was destined to have a protegee in the WH in 2008 (assuming, and it was pretty much assured it would be a Dem).
I read HR Clinton's book, but it's been awhile. I know she comes from solid midwestern Methodist (I think I have that right) stock and was imbued with a sense of giving back early on. I don't recall mention of SA, but then I would not have been watching for it (this being well before Obama).
And how interesting that she started out as a Republican but changed affiliations -- gotta love those thinking Wellesley women
Now you know you've hooked me. I HAVE to know to which Bush accomplishments you refer. Do tell.
The only conversion I ask is more of a return. Our founding documents are both amazing and unique. The founders understood how tyranny in a nation occurs. All governments have two tendencies. One is to accumulate all of the real power (to tax, to spend, to regulate, to control) over ever facet of our lives. Hence we have government regulations that tell me what kind of toilet I may legally use. And what light bulb. And now even what doctor and how I am to pay for it. The second tendency is the accumulation of mediocrity. We see it at all levels. That is why government unions must occur when government gets big. The mediocre go there and they need a means of protection from the taxpayer.
HRC, I suspect, is no where near as generous with her money as she wants to be with ours. When someone gives their own money or resources they are generous. When the take others people's money or resources they are tyrants.
Any President has, as his first obligation, the responsibility to defend the nation from attack. President Roosevelt had his Pearl Harbor attack. The he went on to lead the war on fascism and national socialism. President Bush had the 9/11 attacks. He made sure there were no more attacks on US soil while he was in office.
The most damaging thing he did was an another entitlement program, weakening the nation and hastening our economic collapse.
He's your president. If you choose to degrade and deride him, that's your perogative.
Just don't come around here telling me what a great American you are.
Or is that wehold who does that?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LjsoYOz … re=related
And so, more often than not, I refer to him as President Obama. (in a whisper...But he is still the boy president) Or Barry Soetero.
Have I ever said I am a great American? I strive to be a great American. That is why I intend to join my local Tea Party organization.
"He believes we are his chattel to do with as he pleases."
I offer as evidence his belief that tax cuts must be paid for. Only one who believes that all wealth is his, and therefore all wealth creators are his, would believe such nonsense.
Ryan's proposing that the tax cuts for the rich be paid for by the poor.
Would you please explain to me how that works? If the government does not force me to pay, say, $1K, do you believe the government is going after some poor guy (or maybe two or three of them) to insist they pay?
If your income was $100,000 per year how long do you think you could spend $150,000 per year before you would be in very serious trouble?
Can you see the difference between what would happen to you as an individual and what will happen to us as a nation?
BHO has been spending between 1 and 2 trillion dollars that we do not have every year. he knows that he will be out of office when it all comes crashing down.
Do you know the US is in danger of a credit rating adjustment, downward. When that happens the interest we pay on borrowed money will go up. If you plan on buying a house you had better do it soon.
Are you old enough to remember President Jimmy Carter? He is the worst President we have had in at least a century. He and BHO are like peas in a pod. BHO's first term is J.C.s second term. Imagine 21% inflation...
That is where we are heading.
More likely 21% unemployment. Reagan, Bush I and Bush II put us in our current hole by cutting taxes and increasing expenditures. Bush passed a big bucket of shit to Obama--two long wars, an unpaid for Medicare drug plan (which was a gift to the drug companies) and a big tax cut for the richest Americans.
Isn't it wonderful to have President Bush? At what point do you think the boy president will man up?
I am surprised you did not include Eisenhower in your list of reasons why this president is unable to lead.
What does that mean exactly....what kind of logic are you using? Twisted Logic?
You just gave me the name of my new band: Twisted Logic. Thanks Anon!!
You actually feel Bush was "Running Things"? Did you see the film footage of him at that school in FL on 9/11?
Hm, running things? Yep. That is the ticket. I liked the most important thing he did. I disliked the second most important thing he did.
I cannot recall him ever blaming a previous administration. I did not like President Bush but he was a mature being who took responsibility and acted.
Contrast this with the boy president who has not matured and does blame everything on President Bush, Bush and Reagan. The first is an example of adult behavior. The second the behavior of a spoiled child.
That is not evidence; it is your opinion. Everyone has one. By the way, your description of a Boy King sounds so familiar....
He means when the Bush tax cuts expire, those making $250K+ will pay more taxes.
Get used to it.
If the Bush tax rate cuts ever expire everyone who earns income will pay more.
May I ask you a personal question? What is it about the slavery of others that so appeals to you? Why is it so important that you steal from me and from others who have created a good life for you?
Is paying your electric bill slavery? If you don't pay, they will 'steal' your deposit and cut off services.
People at the top benefit MOST from our democratic, free-enterprise system. It's not just that the richest 20% take HALF the total earnings. They benefit from a court system, they benefit from police and fire protection. They have the most expensive property. Their businesses benefit from the public infrastructure. Public schools and grants for higher education give the rich the labor pool they need to get even richer.
In total utter stupidity, the rich have decided they don't want to pay their share. The society that made their wealth possible - they now curse. If they succeed in bringing down this country, they have the most to loose.
You wrote, "Is paying your electric bill slavery? If you don't pay, they will 'steal' your deposit and cut off services."
Of course not. The electric company sets a rate. I buy power from them which I use to benefit me. They don't care how much money I earn. They don't insist that I work two days a week so they can redistribute (that means steal) my labor to others. The government does. The government takes two days out of every week of my life, stealing my labor, therefore my hours of life.
My boss takes my labor and time...and in return, I get a paycheck.
Your country takes money from you, and in return,you get to live in a great country....what's the problem?
Can I tell my boss how much to pay me?
uh, yeah...and he can kick me to the curb!
Can you expect all the benefits of a country without the price?
Grow up--you always toot America's greatness, but seem to think it all comes for free.
And btw--we are SERIOUSLY slipping in the greatness dpt.
If your boss is smart he is paying for you to solve his problems. You are selling your ability to solve his problems to him. you are trading your time and brainpower for a medium of exchange.
Can you tell your boss how much to pay you? Sure. All you have to do is begin performing at a value greater than you are providing today. Then in a while show him how valuable you are to him. And ask for the money.
if he does not give you what you are worth then go find someone who will. I have nearly 70 engineers who work under me. Some were very surprised to discover that I was all too happy to tell them how to become a top performer and command more dollars.
Of course the dirty little secret is that most of us are actually overpaid. Very few of us actually work the whole time we are at work.
Speak for yourself!
And no, I'm not paid enough. In fact, with the cost of living and the price of everything, you have to make a darn good amount just to stay above water.
This has changed in only the 3 generations my family has been here.
Grandfather: blue-collar job, yet still able to provide a decent life--although grandma had to work part-time too.
Father: White collar, much better off. Mom stayed home.One job sufficed.
Kids: No way in hell can only one parent work. Sometimes both people have 2 or 3 jobs!!
Not greedy or anything, but the cost of living has sky-rocketed. Oddly enough, my goodness--at the same time the top 2% has gotten so very very rich!
Such a ball of malarkey they throw.
My grandfather would not recognize America if he came back from the dead. That's how much the Robber Barons have ruined this country.
There is a difference between not being paid enough and being paid what you are worth. You are paid what you are worth. If you want more pay you must be worth more. It is a very simple formula. Once you learn it six figure incomes are easy. Until you learn it anyone who earns it will be rich and hated. The fun part is that you get to chose. The sad part is that you already have.
Just read this BS and had to jump in - sorry Chris.
What you are worth is decided by market forces and your employer - not by you. Market forces are just the bunch of employers working for those 2% super rich.
With these levels of 'not really thinking' with short posts, no hubs and just forum posts I guess you are a troll ? yes ?
Don't make me laugh. The minimum wage is $7.15 cents....who is only worth that much?
Ya can't even buy a pack of smokes with that.
Meanwhile, the average ceo makes 11.5 million.
Who are you trying to fool?
LMC, you're a hard woman!
Don't you realise that if you were paid a living wage it would probably mean the CEO taking a pay cut and do you really want to live in a world where CEOs are forced to get by on poverty wages of only $11 million!
That's what my boss says: "sorry-can't afford to give you a raise...daddy needs a new pair of ski boots, to go with the other 45 pairs!"
JUST KIDDING. But you get the drift.
Oh I more than get the drift.
One year at a works meeting to discuss the next years pay rise, the meeting was late starting because it had taken the boss longer than expected to collect his new Rolls Royce.
When he finally turned up he parked his new Roller in full view of everybody and then proceeded to tell us that there would be no pay rises that year because there was no money left for them.
Oh, and of course, they CANNOT have any tax increase!
Tea-Party needs a binky.
the usually cries of JEALOUSY! Nothing to better your situation just cry that someone is taking advantage of you! I do like how you twisted the story into the victim.
What! I was jealous of my boss for spending my money on a new car, you really are not in touch with life are you Danny?
Oh I forgot his money is yours! right... I forgot how socialism works for a minute. unless you own the company then it would be your money...but wait you said your the boss....wait If you owned the company you would be the boss.
Oh sure, every day he could be seen running around operating the 300 machines single handedly whilst processing all the orders, running the sick bay and keeping the place tidy.
He started with nothing and without the workforce would have finished with nothing.
So it is your money? If he failed and lost all the money he put in to start that company would you have paid him back? If you think your being mistreated then find a better job! I believe If you are truly worth it for him, He would give you more. Unless he is a fool. If you are that valuable that he would not make money I believe he would make sure your happy.
You think so,huh?
Well, check this out:
"The fact is, I’m neither implying, espousing, nor equivocating. I’m stating a demonstrable fact. The GOP leadership is un-American, period.
The GOP contends that their assault on the poor and middle class is absolutely necessary to address the nation’s deficit. But what they don’t tell us is that they created the deficit through Bush’s reckless spending in the first place. John Dyer of MSN Money points out that Bush alone cost the nation $11.5 trillion, and I suggest that it wasn’t purely due to incompetence.
So the GOP has but one step left. If they can gain control of our national government and establish the same rules that now exist in Michigan, America’s beautiful experiment in democracy is over.
So yes, Tom, the GOP is indeed the Devil incarnate – and worse."
This man sees the world as I do!
Read it and weep, and try and dispute it.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/22 … tic-enemy/
John wrote, "if you were paid a living wage..."
What is this living wage?
I am not trying to fool anybody. Are you?
You earn what you are worth. If you are not worth very much then you won't earn very much. The formula is very simple. To earn more you must be worth more.
How do you become worth more? Start by observing which problems are not being solved effectively. Figure out how to solve them. Repeat.
Okay, let's talk about YOUR worth vs pay, sn534Anon. Were YOU really worth what we the taxpayers began paying you as a brand-new U.S. Army Lieutenant on graduating from college? (Who paid the tuition for those 4 years, btw?) And how about all the perks that came with that commission? Subsidized (or free) housing...free medical care for you (AND at some point a wife and family too?)...deeply discounted food, clothing and other goods at the commissary...a nice pension for life when you retired as a 40-something in 1995. Other than the tush-kissing required to advance through the ranks over 20 years, what exactly made you WORTH the pay and benefits you received and still receive???
But,of course, HE is worth every tax-payer dime.
Give me a break, The tea-bags take hypocricy and entitlement to a whole new level!
You wrote,"Okay, let's talk about YOUR worth vs pay, sn534Anon. Were YOU really worth what we the taxpayers began paying you as a brand-new U.S. Army Lieutenant on graduating from college?"
In fact I think the amount was about right. I earned almost $600 per month. In 1975, a new college graduate commanded the princely sum of around $1,000 per month. For me it was off to the Officer Basic Course followed by three years in a foreign land. My typical work week in my first year overseas was full time. I lived in the field, literally, in the field, for 200 days of my first year. I was learning the craft of leading soldiers. My days in the field ran close to 20 hours per day with little naps scattered over the 24 hour clock. In the field my work week ran the entire seven days.
Out of the field my life was much easier. The days were usually only half of the day. I commonly left work to go to my small apartment after a mere twelve hours. That was six days each week. On Sunday's my work day was only four hours. I was expected to study my craft in addition to my on-duty hours. So yes, I think that $600 dollars a month was about what I was worth.
"(Who paid the tuition for those 4 years, btw?)"
I competed for, and won an Army ROTC scholarship. There were 60 of us who competed for two positions. I received one. You, dear taxpayer, did pay for my tuition, fees, books, and $50 dollars each month. In return I agreed to spend 6 years on active duty.
"And how about all the perks that came with that commission?"
Perks? Yes. I got to live in the bachelors officer's quarters. The first one I remember was similar to a college dorm. I had my own bedroom. It had a 20 year old metal-framed single bed with a thin mattress, one shaky chest of drawers, and a night stand with a lamp that was about my age.
I shared a living room, bathroom and kitchenette with one other lieutenant. Not that it mattered. I spent very little time there.
"Subsidized (or free) housing..."
Yep. See above.
"free medical care for you (AND at some point a wife and family too?)..."
Yep. It was free. But I exercised with 200 of my closest friends every morning for more than an hour. So I did not suffer many of the common illnesses one might expect in less active people. Most of my free medical care resulted from damage and injuries received while on the job. One of my favorite stories involves lots of blood and many stitches. But yes, I did not have to pay by the stitch.
"deeply discounted food, clothing and other goods at the commissary..."
Overseas perhaps. We thought of it more as American food. In the US the prices were not that different. We went because it was closer to where we lived.
"a nice pension for life when you retired as a 40-something in 1995."
Somehow the people who put these plans together are much smarter than the one's who rely upon them. When they said I would get one-half of my pay for the rest of my life, in return for remaining available for recall to active duty, I though they mean my whole pay. Boy was the joke on me. They cleverly divided my pay into pay and allowances. The part the retirement is based upon is called, well, base pay. It was always less than half of my total pay. They really got me with that one. My federal taxes are more than my retirement. Lots more.
"Other than the tush-kissing required to advance through the ranks over 20 years, what exactly made you WORTH the pay and benefits you received and still receive?"
It is a fair question. I do know that today's military pay is more in line with civilian pay. One of my first really big jolts in life came while reading the results of a congressionally directed pay comparability study. It seemed that the military could not keep people on active duty. Despite the easy, sorry, your term was cushy, butt-kissing environment of ease and coddled comfort, it seemed that people could more than double their pay while halving their work hours simply by hanging up their uniforms and allowing their hair to grow longer. So, as a Captain, my pay suddenly went up. Way up. I think it increased by about 25%.
Back to your question. What exactly made me worth what I was being paid? I did all that I was asked to do and, in addition, what the job required. That is the same secret to success today in my civilian job. Putting aside my time as a combat support arms lieutenant I really hit my stride as an intelligence officer. I studied military history extensively over my entire 20 years of active duty. I applied both managership to my tasks and leadership for my people to accomplish each mission as efficiently and effectively as possible. I helped people become the best people they could become. That continues to be the most rewarding part of my current job as a senior manager with about 70 engineers I have responsibilities for.
I am grateful for my Army experiences. It was a crucible for learning about life, leadership, managership, and even about how to think. I would recommend it to any who have the fortitude and endurance to suffer privation and hardship to accomplish a greater good.
In other words, you are entitled to every tax-payer dollar.
You just spent 10 paragraphs expaining why you deserve your tax-money.
Same way as you all told us how Bachmann was a saint for taking tax money to raise kids.
Yet, teachers are paid too much, and not worth the tax money we pay them.
And a poor mom who takes money to help her raise kids is a bum.
IE: YOU and Bachmann are entitled to tax money, but everyone else is sucking off the teat.
You wrote, "You just spent 10 paragraphs expaining why you deserve your tax-money."
Well, no. I answered the questions I was asked. I do not recall one time saying whether or not I deserve tax dollars. Still, providing for the defense of the nation is a primary purpose for a government. It is an enumerated power of government. It is a constitutionally-based requirement. Others determined the best way to meet that government obligation. I served because it was a means to lift myself out of a life of poverty. In hindsight, it was the right decision.
"Same way as you all told us how Bachmann was a saint for taking tax money to raise kids."
You are confusing me with someone else. I made no claim that I recall.
It's a wonder he wasn't fragged by his own men.
I have come to the conclusion that you are way to filled with hate for my taste. Let's not be friends. As you deleted some of my messages in one of your hubs I think it is important that I fire you permanently. I shall no longer respond directly to anything you post. Nor shall I help turn your hub from an area where all the like-minded go into an area with vibrant discussions.
Still, I hope you shall have the best of all possible lives.
In an ideal world. . .
Rather more common is the employer in the UK paying his workers (all skilled men) just above the minimum wage who when asked for a pay rise said "no money, can't afford it" and when they pointed out to him that their requested pay rise was actually less than his new fitted kitchen had cost him, sacked the lot.
That is what happens in a socialist country. You are overtaxed, over regulated. And now, so are we.
Why and how are we a socialist country?
The last time I looked socialism and private enterprise do not mix.
The incident that I described had nothing to do with being over taxed or over regulated, it was no more or less than an example of capitalist greed.
Your questions are reasonable. Here is the start point for my evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of … nvolvement
"In the 20 year period from 1986/87 to 2006/07 government spending in the UK averaged around 40 per cent of GDP. As a result of the 2007-2010 financial crisis and the late-2000s global recession government spending increased to a historically high level of 48 per cent of GDP in 2009-10, partly as a result of the cost of a series of bank bailouts. In July 2007, the UK had government debt at 35.5% of GDP. This figure rose to 56.8% of GDP by July 2009. As of June 2010 there were approximately 6,051,000 public sector employees in the UK (compared to approximately 23,107,000 private sector employees)."
Don't feel too bad. The US is rushing headlong into the same error.
For a start, don't patronise me, OK?
When government spending in the UK = about 40% of the GDP, US government spending = about 35%. However, it is important to remember that UK government spending included health care, which at 8% of GDP actually brings government spending, like for like, down to 32% of GDP, which I'm sure you will agree is less than the 35% the US government spends.
Again, as the government employ almost all the health care workers in the UK and as the NHS is the biggest employer in Europe, again you are not comparing like with like.
Nice try but no cigar.
You wrote, "Can you expect all the benefits of a country without the price?"
I do not expect many benefits. I expect the government to do what our Constitution says and no more. I do not expect the government to determine the kind of toilet I may legally flush. I do not expect the government to determine the kind of light bulb I may legally illuminate. I do not expect the government to pick winners and losers, to bail out corporations or unions. I do not expect the government to be my enemy.
And yet it is.
"Grow up--you always toot America's greatness, but seem to think it all comes for free."
No. I expect the country to get along without so much government.
"And btw--we are SERIOUSLY slipping in the greatness dpt."
Why do you think that is?
Have we intentionally damaged our culture by importing poverty from Mexico?
And Muslims from the Middle East?
And millions of others who come here with no intention to become Americans?
Perhaps our politicians do not have their country's and our interests at heart.
I believe you are confused about a few things. You wrote, "People at the top benefit MOST from our democratic, free-enterprise system."
I would argue that the most productive citizens provide the most benefits to society. It is we who create the goods and services that you want, and are therefore willing to pay for. We do not benefit from so nearly as much as we provide benefits to...
"It's not just that the richest 20% take HALF the total earnings."
And here is your second point. The government takes. Thieves take. We earn. We provide goods and services that people want. That is the difference. We do not take from anyone. If you want a product we provide it. You pay us what the product is worth to you. That is how free market capitalism works. The really nice part is that if you see me making money in one part of the market you can emulate me and get into that same market. You can offer a better product to the same people, at a lower price. And then you can become one of the hated rich.
You also write this, "In total utter stupidity, the rich have decided they don't want to pay their share."
How much, exactly is my share? Isn't two days of slavery enough for you? Would three days of slavery to you be enough? No? Four out of five days? The trouble that tyrants always get into is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
BTW I'm an environmental activist, not a Tea Partier.
Thank you Tea Party, for helping President Obama win a 2nd term! Hoooooaaaaaah! hooooaaaaah!
Personally I don't see what they have accomplish.Still corrupt and unrighteous of all parties concern.Money and power is the focus.We the people is a by-word.
What your drive by headline on the TEA Party has to do with an excerpt from another Obama speech baffles me....The TEA Party has set the debate. EVERYONE even Obama is talking about entitlement reforms and smaller Government.The End of TPM? LOL...
Yeah--funny isn't it? When NOBODY wants their platform at all!
Ask the majority of Americans!
They WANT the rich to pay more taxes
They WANT medicare
They WANT their healthcare
TP goes against what people want....there is something else going on, what, I don't quite know.
I KNOW it is a huge psy-op, and they get all the press....could that be the whole answer?
I don't think so.
Right on, Mr. President!
Who says he's not a leader?
I am sooo glad he has publicly state he REFUSES to extend the Bush tax cuts. He's drawing his line in the sand.
If the TPers want to throw a tantrum over it, they are the one who will look bad.
I have also read recently that the demise of Glenn Beck is another strong signal that the TP is fizzling out.
There are lots of good signs if you look for them.
I guess that's the problem with "Express" trains. They go super fast without making any stops until the final one -- whiz, whir, blur... then GONE! :LOL:
"Who says he's not a leader?"
Most anyone who listens to his dribble.
Except for those who have a hard time thinking for themselves or supporting themselves, they love the guy.
He has been widely criticized for not taking a strong enough stance. I think he's been biding his time and giving Boehner and his boys enough rope. They're definitely hanging themselves now with Medicare. Poor Paul Ryan doesn't even know he's the fall guy. Boehner too. But he took it on. After only 3 months I want Pelosi back!
he's not a leader at all. The man's a liar, dishonest, stupid, ignorant, and an adherent to a wide array of radical ideological stupidities.
And you find liberals offensive?
You are not objective in the least.
Rescind the tax cuts for the billionaire's and remove the cap on FICA.
So--what about this, then?
You wrote, "Rescind the tax cuts for the billionaire's"
What does this mean to you, exactly?
Clinton-era tax rates.
and it won't even hurt.
Shall we return all of our tax laws to the Clinton era policies?
No-just the top ones. They are the ones who benefitted from Bushco.
Leave the rest of us alone.
Now your turn, since wehold never answered.
How much are you willing to pay for the priveledge of living here?
I have a better idea. let's go for the Ryan Blueprint for Prosperity. Let's widen the tax base so that every citizen has a stake in the country and in limiting the size and scope of government.
Let us not vote on whom we shall enslave. Let us, instead, distribute the burdens across all of our citizens.
How much am I willing to pay? If there were any other alternatives I would have voted with my feet already. We looked at a few. So I shall reframe the question. How much am I willing to fight for the way of life I want? I am willing to fight plenty for it.
We have already distributed the burden to the middle and lower class...we have been enslaved since Reagan! In case you haven't noticed, the upper class flourished and grew from 2000-now,while the rest of us have paid for it.
And Ryan is not limiting anything.
FIRST of all--adding 700 billion with the tax give-aways to people like Russsshhhhh helps no one but Russshhhhh.
That's 7000 billion we could have shaved from the deficit right off the bat!
He doesn't even touch the military...which had doubled since 2000.
Hmmm--top incomes and military, bank and ceo bonuses...all these have grown, while middle wages have stagnated, jobs have left, and the cost of living has gone through the roof.
I say you increase the burden on the top...let THEM be patriotic for a change.
Let the military do without extreme political funding.
Let the corproations actually PAY what they are supposed to.
Lift the cap on FICA.
And, no offense, but if you won't answer my question, then why don't you stop asking them?
Here's where all the prosperity is my good man;
http://www.afscmeblog.org/2011/04/19/20 … 4-million/
2011 PayWatch: Average CEO Salary=$11.4 Million
April 19th, 2011
If these people can't pay 1% more in taxes, THEY are the ones who are anti-American!!! IMO
Explain to me how you have paid for anything the productive have created. How did you pay and who did you pay?
Every second of labour pays for what you call the productive who create nothing but help them selves to plenty.
What does your question have to do with my post?
The wealthy are not productive, they are destructive.
Us po-people do all the producting. You just take the money and run.
Vouching for your own objectivity really helps your credibility out too!
It wouldn't matter if I held every credential known to exist, you would still still insist I know nothing and am assorted versions of perverted, maladjusted, criminal, immoral, etc, etc.
So, no, my comment is not mean to change your mind, what's the point in speaking to a concrete block?
I've never suggested you were guilty of any of the referenced slurs you posted here. Nice try though, too bad you have to resort to such tactics, but you have nothing else to offer.
And yes, a concrete block would be a good choice for you to converse with.
You wrote, "I have also read recently that the demise of Glenn Beck is another strong signal that the TP is fizzling out."
Demise? Is he dead? As he kicks off his newest project will you then speak of the meaning of his resurrection? Will you mirror the Prez in his comments about Easter (...there is just something about His resurrection that puts everything in perspective) as you wax eloquent about Glen Beck?
I have always believed that the Tea Party was a front for very rich Americans who don't want to pay taxes. Not that the teabaggers will be eager to admit that they've been suckered. But Paul Ryan took the wrapping off the Tea Party package.
Here it is in unmistakable clarity. HUGE tax cuts for the rich and a redesign of Medicare that is a gift to the insurance industry which eliminates all the security seniors have under a system they overwhelmingly approve. A system that will be gone in all but name.
The republican party is now a front. A facade. A joke. Conservatism does not mean being a tool of the rich. Independents may or may not vote for Obama in 2012. That will depend on how quickly a 3rd party will emerge. But independents and a lot of conservatives are going to jump ship on the republican brand. We know what's in it for everyone in the bottom 90%.
From the LA Times...
March 30, 2011 | By Michael Muskal | Los Angeles Times
The “tea party” movement, born out frustration with Democrats and Republicans, is viewed unfavorably by roughly half of Americans, putting the conservative protest group in the same political boat as its older, more established rivals, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Wednesday.
According to the survey, 47% of those surveyed said they had an unfavorable view of the tea party, a collection of different groups that are loosely united in their view of opposing big government, taxes and spending. The number of those who see the tea party in a negative light has increased 21 points since January 2010, when the group was becoming a significant force in fielding conservative candidates in GOP races around the country.
That 21% bump in unfavorability includes a 5% bump since the GOP took over the House. But here's the kicker.
The poll was taken BEFORE the Ryan plan announced that an integral part of "less government" means throwing seniors under the bus.
The rich paid higher taxes during the Reagan years. There's no reason why the wealthy should be able to have all kinds of tax cuts, while people who make considerably less have to suffer. The conservative right in the US only cares about their money, they don't care about the country. And all these teabaggers keep shouting about the Constitution, but then they don't even know what it says. Most of them appear so dumb they probably can't read.
Soviet propaganda is working. How can somebody trust on polls?
You look to the source of the poll for accuracy. CNN and Galup do scientific polls with a large sample and unbiased questions and a statistical margin of error listed. A lot of rightie and a few leftie organizations solicit 'poll' responses on biased questions from a select audience.
LOL, with the media lying a blue streak, and endless propaganda (false, of course) by such as yourself and your millions of paid minions... It's a small wonder you can tweak the polls.
But the polls that matter are the ones you WILL lose.
"Most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor."
You have to think that, because the truth - that the TEA Party is simply the natural reaction to mass stupidity in Washington DC - would mean that you're part of the mass stupidity.
It might have been that once upon a time, but it's that no longer. It started as nonpartisan but it's been co-opted by the partisans on the right. And now it's part of the problem, because while the Tea Party is great at pointing out the bad things the left does, it's also great at pointing out the any things the Left does and spinning them to look like bad things. It's also a great smokescreen for the bad things the Right is trying to do.
The Tea Party isn't some benevolent grassroots effort to improve the US for all. Not anymore. It's now a giant spin-factory and smokescreen, deftly wielded by its corporate masters to get most of America to vote against the interests of most of the population, and to protect the interests of the wealthiest 1%.
is this the new insult style for hubpages?
Just claim that the person you disagree with is a paid forum poster?
This seems to be the way that everyone is responding this month.
I don't recall anyone calling Ann a liar.
Truth-out does it near-about every-time.
I don't care what truth does.
I've noticed a sharp increase in the number of "your a paid forum poster" comments, and the claims are completely unbacked by evidence.
It's the new "shout racist" defense card when you can't back up your own claims.
You wrote, "The Tea Party isn't some benevolent grassroots effort . . ."
The Tea Party has never been benevolent. Unlike the boy president who started a war in Libya and then walked away, the Tea party intends to have a regime change in the US. Democrats and Republicans-in-name-only are going to be replaced, over the next few elections, with conservatives who will return us to a constitutionally-based limited government.
You wrote, "HUGE tax cuts for the rich. . ."
The tax cuts are for everyone who pays taxes. The rich pay the most. So when rates are reduced they get to keep more of the money they earned, of the wealth they created.
Are you always for slavery, for plunder, for rape? How is your stance any different than that of the thief on the corner? or is it just better for you when the state does the stealing on your behalf?
"and a redesign of Medicare that is a gift to the insurance industry which eliminates all the security seniors have under a system they overwhelmingly approve."
Doug, now there you go again. The Ryan plan makes no changes to people who are about my age. But it will free the younger men and women from a failed system. I almost want to ask you the really big question, 'are you a fool? Or a liar?' but I am way too polite to ask you.
Regarding the first lie. The Ryan plan does not cut all taxes. It targets the top bracket only.
"Yet the Ryan plan would not only retain the Bush cuts for those who earn more than $250,000 a year; it would increase the cut for those who make more."
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/20 … wont-work/
Regarding the second lie...and I quote from the same article -
"Critics on the left are up in arms because Ryan’s proposal to force Medicare recipients to buy private insurance will raise the amount those now under 55 will pay when they are old enough to get Medicare by an average of $6,000 a person.
In other words, critics say, we are trying to cut health care costs—and supposedly reform it through more privatization—on the backs of future elderly Medicare recipients. But the Ryan plan won’t reduce health care costs. As Peter Orszag, the former White House budget director, told me recently, the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office calculates that overall health care spending will go up as Medicare recipients are forced to buy private insurance, since private insurance has far higher administrative expenses than Medicare. Health care expenditures, as Orszag nicely puts it, are not being reduced on the backs of seniors, they are. being raised on the backs of seniors."
You wrote this, "Yet the Ryan plan would not only retain the Bush cuts for those who earn more than $250,000 a year; it would increase the cut for those who make more."
I downloaded and read the Ryan blueprint. The blueprint says the we should consolidate the current brackets (six, I believe) down to three with the top bracket reduced from a plundering, looting, 35% rate down to 25%.
His blueprint also broadens the tax base so that many of the plunderers and looters will now pay their fair share. Wouldn't that be a novel approach?
Tea Party Tailspin
By CHARLES M. BLOW
Published: March 4, 2011
TEA PARTY TAILSPIN
THE TEA PARTY IS synonymous with anger. Anger defined it. Anger fueled it. Anger marred it. Anger became its face and its heart. But anger is too exhausting an emotion to sustain
A poll released Thursday by the Pew Research Center found that a
nger at the government among Tea Party supporters fell by 40 percent from September 2010 to this month. Furthermore, anger among Republicans fell by more than half, and anger among whites, the elderly and independents fell by 40 percent or more.
On the other hand, the percentage of Tea Party supporters who said that they trusted the government always or most of the time doubled from last March to this March, and the percentage of Republicans saying so nearly doubled. In fact, the percent of both Republicans and independents saying so is now higher than it has been since January 2007.
Less anger? More trust? What happened? The midterms happened, that’s what.
Elections have a way of cooling passions, especially when voters get what they want. Electoral success not only satisfies, it pacifies. The enormous gains by Republicans during the midterms assuaged much of the country’s grief. The pressure began to subside. The novelty dimmed. The urgency evaporated.
Yet Tea Party leaders are still sniping from the sidelines, holding politicians to overreaching promises made when the electorate was still stewing.
Judson Phillips, founder of the Tea Party Nation, wrote a post on its Web site this week saying the House speaker, John Boehner, looks “like a fool” and should face a primary challenge in 2012 for not pursuing enough spending cuts this year.
For these Tea Partiers, any concession is a crime worthy of expulsion.
A September Pew Poll found that only 22 percent of those who identify with the Tea Party admire political leaders who make compromises. This is not the way the rest of the country feels. Fifty-five percent of Democrats and 36 percent of Republicans said that they admired politicians who compromise.
Staunch Tea Partiers seem to be guided by the worst kind of fundamentalist political extremism — immutable positions derived from a near-religious adherence to self-proclaimed inviolable principles. This could well be their undoing.
If Tea Party leaders continue to operate as if anger is still a major part of their arsenal and Republican politicians continue to feel pressured into untenable positions, Democrats could enjoy their very own Charlie Sheen-ism come 2012: “Winning!”
This person is desperately clinging to lies, hoping to create a self fulfilling lie.
Admiring compromisers? I understand when liberals admire compromise between right and wrong. But, a third of the GOP loving wrong? Makes about the right amount of sense.
Of course nobody likes a compromiser. They're a traitor to the nation.
From CNN - Scientific poll on exactly this topic. And it explains why TP stands for toilet paper.
"In a sample of 1,1,89 random respondents polled from October 21-26, 2010, 75 percent of likely voters -and 66 percent of Republicans -said that, if the GOP wins control of Congress, the party should compromise some of its positions to get things done.
Seventy-one percent of all voters, and 79 percent of Republicans, said that Obama should compromise given the possibility of a GOP takeover."
Well, as we all know, CNN is a liberl media propaganda source .
Surely that poll did not include ANY voters of the TP persuasion. They would never agree to the GOP compromising on ANYTHING! Because they are right and we are wrong.
Compromising on their rigid beliefs? NEVER!
Give me liberty or give me death! (In other words, compromise over my dead body -- and no, I am not inciting violence against TP members of Congress here )
We're gonna see more and more stormtroopers on the HP forums. The tactic seems to be to blanket the forum with post after post. LaLo and this wahoo. The other technique seems to be to try to shout down all opposition.
For the moment, I'm glad he's here to discredit his own position. There is a point, however, where the idiocy will chase away any moderates interested in honest debate. It is for them that I bother to post.
I love the way that we've been so conditioned to think that when Congress doesn't vote on new bills, everything thinks they're doing nothing.
brilliant. Orwell would be proud.
The very self-serving idea of admiring those who compromise was top notch humor.
One does not compromise with a party intent on the destruction of the country as a capitalist nation. One fights. One fights at every opportunity. One fights with all of the tools one has. Wherever the enemy is we take the fight to him. We do not compromise. We win. We defeat the enemy. We destroy the enemy.
Only a fool or a knave admires compromise with an enemy such as this nation has running the Senate and the Executive branch.
Well then, I guess half of Republicans are fools or knaves.
The rest are just heartless.
Stand by your principles even if it means shutting down the government. Nice.
"In the weeks leading up to the budget showdown, the Pew Research Center found that 50 percent of Republicans wanted their elected representatives to “stand by their principles,” even if it meant causing the federal government to shut down. Among those who identified as tea party supporters, that figure was 68 percent. Conversely, 69 percent of Democrats wanted their representatives to avoid a shutdown, even if it meant compromising on principles."
you wrote, "Well then, I guess half of Republicans are fools or knaves."
About half. Perhaps a little more or a little less. They will be replaced in future elections.
"The rest are just heartless."
Or as I might say, responsible adults willing to make difficult choices. See, that is the difficulty of giving up your childish ways. You have to be willing to make choices.
"Stand by your principles even if it means shutting down the government. Nice."
We agree once again. Perfect.
Sn53anon - Love your hubs.
Does it get crowded under that bridge?
you have the nerve to talk about HUBS? you have 6 in 14 months? This person joined 2 days ago! you have serious issues. I will pray for you. I would think you would try and at least give a real educated answer, guess that went right out the window.
You know when I first looked at your hubscore, I figured you for a troll, too. Normally, a score that low indicates no hubs. My apologies for the mistake.
yours is much better? you have been on for 14 months and you have 74 i have been on 2 months, and just a few weeks ago I had 72, now 53 sorry been busy and have not been writing hubs, But I never claimed to be a writer, I like to read. This site is for reading also, with out them it would be useless! I don't do this for money either. Your such an angry mean spirited person. You must have a horrible existence? I feel sorry for you.
Danny, it's called QUALITY over QUANITY. You should try it sometime.
If you actually read the whole post and who started it this comment should be for your BOY DOUG! He was the the one saying something about someone not being worthy because they had no HUBS... I guess your foot went in your mouth on this one also! SAD!
I suppose Hubs are my responses? I am glad you love them. I know I do. I relish taking the fight right into the enemy's camp.
If you mean something else I suppose I shall catch on. Or not. It is, after all, my choice, isn't it?
On the subject of compromise Sn53anon wrote,
"Wherever the enemy is we take the fight to him. We do not compromise. We win. We defeat the enemy. We destroy the enemy."
I commented about this attitude 2 days ago - about the time dimbulb created his hubless profile.
"We're gonna see more and more stormtroopers on the HP forums. The tactic seems to be to blanket the forum with post after post...The other technique seems to be to try to shout down all opposition."
Thanks for proving my prediction.
Oh my god...you're right!! err, I mean correct!!
Well congratulations. By golly. You figured me out. Except that I am not shouting anyone down. I do notice that some people, perhaps including you, prefer to snipe rather than discuss.
If you want to notice, I provide more hard facts and numbers to disprove Teabagger lies than almost anyone.
That's not sniping.
"What happened during last week and the debate over the budget and the possible shut down of the entire government because of certain issues of concern to a new party “Tea Party” a party driven by very narrow ideological and self serving interests with “veto” powers over the affairs of the nation and the interests of people. The Tea Party thanks to lackey spineless politicians became more powerful than both Democrats and Republicans holding the entire nation hostage."
Crazy on a stick.
Today is the day the House should vote for on the republican plan to demolish Medicare & Medicaid. (The Ryan plan) There are rumors that some non-TP republicans will defect. That re-election thing.
If they pass it, it will be the biggest mass suicide since Jonestown.
"When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure, he's just being America's accountant ... This is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for," Mr. Obama told his supporters. "So it's not on the level."
Its time some people wised up to the fact that the uber rich are in control already and are afraid of losing it. They have taken the bail out maoney and our kids futures now they want to try to bail the country out on the back of the poor, the defenseless, and the weak. Teabaggers are the worse thing to happen to conservative movement since the John Birth Society in the late 50's and Macathyism.
This mind set that the social programs can all be eliminated and privatized is insane.
Yes we have a huge debt now, whos fault, not the social programs but the bail outs to the fat cats on wall street that's what shot it to hell, and now theyh are trying to switch the blame and to bring down the debt without having to pay a dime back themselves.
We dont own this country anymore Goldman Sachs does.
So the 'best' alternative to President Obama is the GOP candidates who bow down to the rich, who BTW, want to see us dead probably More so than the so called 'terrorists' and the 'terrorist' scare is to take our mind off of the GOP who Really are systematically trying to kill most of us? I guess Americans who hate the President will be lining up to be killed by the GOP, 'for their own good' of course? Where's the reasoning powers most humans used to have? Obama is a good President, but the GOP are firing up gas chambers as we type. There's no doubt about it. Cut Medicaid and Medicare? The GOP might as well say: "Would you all mind dropping dead for us?" For 'our own good' of course. Wise up America!!!!
Can you provide the numbers that show how SS and Medicare and Medicaid can be paid for in the future?
A nice neat little compendium to show how the vast number of new enrollees will be paid ever increasing benefits while a decreasing percentage of the population has to pay the bill.
Run the numbers for us... Or, you're just another propaganda artist with no integrity.
Rescind the tax cuts for the billionaire's and remove the cap on FICA.
I asked for numbers, not stupid nonsense.
If you would examine facts, you'd see why.
And me, three. LMC presented a plan. It's pretty barebones, and I'd like some more details, but the general idea seems pretty feasible. If you have information (not ideology, but information, please) that demonstrates that LMC's idea is a bad one, I'd love to hear it. Because, see, I want what's best for the country. If what's best for the country is different from what I already think, I will readily change my mind. But you're going to have to do more to convince me than say, "That plan is bad." You'll have to tell me why that plan is bad. I already have reasons to think it's good.
LMC presented rhetoric. Not a single fact.
MATH is the proof, dude, not emotion. Math proves t hat it can't be done. Redistribution as a matter of public policy to address all common needs is the most idiotic nonsense ever dreamed up. Not even children are that stupid.
No the GOP have cornered the market on propaganda. So you think it is good for Americans to just drop dead? Your mother, your father, your kids, even yourself to just drop dead if you are in need? SEE the problem with lack of 'reasoning'? weholdthesetruths? WHAT 'truth' you talking? The rich see no future for middle class, poor, or elderly so we ALL just drop dead? Your own family too if it comes to that? So EASY to say 'other people' isn't it?
Here's some numbers:
Tax cut is 60% of current deficit.
Could have 70 mil(or bil?) a year MORE going into SS, rather than the pockets...very few pockets.... of the upper class!!
You wrote, "Tax cut is 60% of current deficit."
What? Are you implying that a nation that collected about 2 trillion dollars from people who actually pay taxes, could have had nearly another trillion taken from them? Astonishing.
You are talking about the poor and middle class. They had their taxes raised, so the very wealthy could have a cut.
I'm surprised you haven't noticed...it's only been going on FOR 30 YEARS!!
The poor pay nothing. The middle class, for the most part pay a pittance. The majority of the income taxes are already paid by people just like me.
I understand your envy. While you were making poor decisions concerning your life I was making slightly better decisions concerning mine. And now you want me to make up the differences between us.
Middle pay fed, state and FICA.
You pay fed and state
Poor pay FICA
And you have all those cute little loop-holes to escape into. Don't pretend you don't.
And, my newly-learned phrase: *tax-expenditures*, like subsidies, mortgage deductions, charity deductions, I look good deductions, I'm married so I deserve more deductions, I have a fancy car deduction, I drink luxury water deduction...etc etc.
The tax codes have been altered to fit the rich.
They can now be altered back.
LMC- the teabaggers are not going to be able to overcome the fact there are a lot more poor people in America than there are rich ones. All we have to do is get out the truth and get out the vote.
Yes, because their little trick is to blame Obama for all the poverty, and they then become the saviors who will "bring America back to prosperity" "path to prosperity".
What a collassal joke. This is Gingrich's plan that he sent out in a memo for god's sakes.
And their philosophy is to blame for the poverty.
Gingrich: Now THERE'S a flip-flopper of EPIC proportions...almost as epic as Trump.
what about Obama? did he not say in 2006 that he will not vote to raise the debt ceiling, He said it was a sign the president was not doing his job! Now he says the complete opposite? is that a flip flop? This man has no clue how to run a country! he is a GREAT community organizer. But not a president! his policies are horrible, his foreign affairs stink, he is weak and even though S&P warned that if we keep spending we will lose our AAA rating, nad today he is still talking about spending???? no clue
You wrote, "Oh please.
Middle pay fed, state and FICA.
You pay fed and state
Poor pay FICA"
Would you please look up, and if you have the courage to do so, identify the percentage of the tax take that comes from the bottom 50% of all wage earners, the top 50%, the top 20? the top 10% and the top 1%?
Then repeat that the poor and the middle class pay while the rich do not.
For purposes of definition let us define the top 10% as the evil, despised, envied, rich.
"And you have all those cute little loop-holes to escape into. Don't pretend you don't."
Well, no. Most people do not. But let's decide we can agree on something. Can we agree that the tax system is horribly broken and should be replaced with something else? I prefer the fair tax. It is a tax on consumption instead of on income. If we had the fair tax then everyone would pay their fair share.
"And, my newly-learned phrase: *tax-expenditures*, like subsidies, mortgage deductions, charity deductions, I look good deductions, I'm married so I deserve more deductions, I have a fancy car deduction, I drink luxury water deduction...etc etc."
So join me in a call to repeal that horrible amendment that allows the government to take from our income and create a new law, after its repeal, to implement a Fair Tax.
"The tax codes have been altered to fit the rich.
They can now be altered back."
Actually--FICA is the one paying for SS, isn't it?
SO--take off the cap...it is funded forever more!!!!
You know, if you all REALLY practiced "trickle-down", we would be SO solvent and good!
How does giving Russsshhhhh a tax cut help America?
We had 10 years of it.....where are the jobs?
They all left!!
How come a school teacher pays federal, state and fica, but a hedgefunder pays fed and state, no fica?
How come the answer is to give more to the wealthy, while taking more from the poor and middle?
How come Obama is a bum, when he gave the poor and middle class a tax cut?
Why are Baggers heros for giving cuts to billionaire's?
When has trickle-down ever worked?
Somebody, SHOW ME!
In the 1950s we had an expanding economy, and the top tax rate was close to 90%. In the 2000s, we were told that lower taxes were key to economic expansion. For some reason we believed it, and now the top tax rate is closer to 30%. And--I have no idea how this happened--in spite of the massive tax cuts, we somehow ended up in a big ol' recession!
Clearly, tax rates and economic expansion do not have the same relationship that conservatives think they do.
please explain how high taxes expand the economy.
Congratulations on your successes.
Are you aware that under President Kennedy the top rate of 90% was reduced to around 70%. The economy grew. Prior to that the economy just fizzled out. We were booming after WWI because there was so much pent up demand for everything after a long and destructive world war.
The U.S. economy boomed after WWII **only** because we were the only western nation whose factories hadn't been heavily damaged as to be inoperable or totally destroyed. It was a "boom by default" and destined to fizzle out as soon as Europe's factories were rebuilt and operating again. Our mistake was thinking the "boom" would last forever.
Okay. Americans had money. Americans had goods and services. Americans had optimism. Boom.
Today, under President Obama do Americans have optimism? Do Americans have goods and services? Do Americans have money? The government has the money, real and imagined. Bust must come.
The un-Federal Reserve ensures Boom and Bust. Also after WW-2 We bought our own products and led in innovation.
You wrote, "The un-Federal Reserve ensures Boom and Bust."
Why would they ever want a recession? If the Federal Reserve had that much power and foresight why wouldn't we see steady growt forever? After all, that is where the real money is.
"Also after WW-2 We bought our own products and led in innovation."
Wasn't that all pre-union?
I believe we can live within our means and live up to our shared values—and I'll work with anyone willing to get it done. http://OFA.BO/Ddt9
(notice the e.pluribus unom , and watch out for the neuro-linguistic-programming )
Everyone reading this forum needs to read my new hub "Class Warfare - The American Way". It gives some historical perspective to this debate. But wear your seatbelts. It's a long one.
"Anger defined it. Anger fueled it. Anger marred it."
Let me guess, wehold is going to say this is not allowed.
Anger cannot marry the tea-party! It is against our religion!
What does socialism have to do with ANYTHING?
This is America, we are talking political parties, and the Koch side has made socialism the issue!
It is not an issue. It is a smear-tool.
I am Democrat. You call me Socialist. Who is spreading the disease here?
Not that socialism is a disease, but it has nothing to do with this discussion....until you make it.
And I'm glad you like Bachmann....did you know she took in those kids for the extra income? She said so.
Do you care that she got a $250,000 gift from the gvt she derides so much?
5 kids on your healthcare dime....that doesn't bother you?
If it was a poor mom, you would call her a mooch, wouldn't you?
Bachmann could have provided foster care to a million kids and it wouldn’t matter. What somehow makes Bachmann anti-children is that she’s opposed to creating generations upon generations of government dependent sucklings saddled with multiple lifetimes of insurmountable debt. If you ask me, that’s anti-children.
She took in 23 kids over the years! do you think it was all paid for by the government? she is extremely successful and did not have to do this! just goes to show how you truly are! you talk as though you are for the needy than this woman who doesn't have to, takes in 23 other kids besides 5 of her own and you try to degrade her? you people are messed up! you can spin it all you want I would love to see you take in that many! Just because she isn't for making people dependent on the government she is bad... really sad for you!
Remind me of how much government money she took for taking in these children!
Between that, and the farm subsidy, it was a lot!!
And check this out:http://www.thisis50.com/profiles/blogs/racist-tea-party-member-sends
This "thing" from the TP sent out this e-mail...go see it and tell me there are no racists in the Tea Party!
ps; I'm bittersweet over there...you can see a pic of me and my grandson...sort of.
SHOW ME HOW MUCH!!!! YOU HAVE THE PROOF BIG GUY??? I WILL BE WAITING FOR THAT ALSO> ADD IT TO THE LIST
Well there you go again! I ask a question and not only do you refuse to answer it, you expect me to answer it!!
You stated how much government money she received, obviously you know so tell me??? I will be waiting! your doing it again as usual
No, I asked. Do work on your comprehension.
How did you ask when you answered my post to someone else? you are the one who needs the comprehension lesson. go back like a big boy and check, you will see you answered my post to LMC.
Quite simply, I asked "Remind me of how much government money she took for taking in these children!"
It makes no difference who you were posting to or are you the type of person who in a group conversation will tell somebody to shut up because you weren't speaking to them!
Tell you what, if you want a private conversation move it out of the public forum, OK?
ok so tell me how much the government gave her! you seem to know as your post indicates. you keep try and twist so it fits your illogical views. HOW MUCH DID SHE RECEIVE?
This is one I found that seemed the most accurate:
Minnesota pays $30 a day, tax free, per foster kid.
“So if Bachmann has fostered 23 children, let’s say for an average of five years, that would come out to a non-taxable $1,259,250,”
Plus, they get food stamps, healthcare, clothing allowance, etc.
And then, there is the quarter mil she got for her farm.
Do you know how a welfare mom would feel to get a quarter of a million dollars?
So, why does Bachmann rate all that $$ for just her personal fortunes?
Of course, the story really gets ugly when you read about all the things she doesn't want to fund...things for veterans, poor families, children....
THAT is the sad part.
Sod that, how would a welfare mum feel about $30 a day plus benefits?
Ooops! I didn't see your previous post John...but we must be right!
No problem LMC, well not for you and I, can't say there's no problem for Danny though
she claims that she did not take anything near what the give, please show me real proof not what is what the can receive.
You haven't got the hang of this debating lark yet have you?
You dispute the figures we give, it's up to you (not us) to demonstrate that they are wrong.
you did not prove $hit! just what they give to families who take in kids, she stated she did not get much money, so where is the proof she received what YOU claim????
No Danny, where is your proof that she did not take what she could claim.
I'm convinced that she did, prove otherwise, OK?
Danny, knowing how much you struggle to search the internet I decided to give you a hand and try to find evidence that Bachmann did not take all the money she was entitled to or even part of it.
I spent about 15 minutes (a long time) searching pro Bachmann sites all of which made great play of what a wonderful woman she was for taking in 23 children.
Unfortunately, not one of them even suggested that she hadn't taken the full whack.
That does not prove anything! how can this be a bad woman....especially the way you people think! and again I do not believe in everything she says. she is a wonderful person and anyone who says otherwise is an A$$ in my opinion.
ROTFLMAO! Shoulda come to this party MUCH earlier! ;D
Are you blind? $30 a day tax free. Assuming an average of five years in her care £1.25+ million.
And LMC agrees with those numbers!
OK, I give in! Minnesota pays $30 a day, tax free. Assuming each child was in her care for 5 years, that makes a total of $1,259,250.
$1.25 million yes, very little, I don't know how she managed! And so public spirited of her.
She is for not allowing OTHER people to be dependent on the gvt...it's fine and dandy for her!!
How do you not see this?
she has stated she gets very little for them. please show me proof of what she gets. thanks
Wait, you mean you WANT people dependent on government?
And Danny, LMC has been throwing this accusation around on a couple of threads. No proof there, so why should we suddenly expect it here?
Typical liberal approach, say something often enough and some people will start to buy it as truth...
As much as I hate conservative nincumpoopery, it still makes me amazed when i hear people say "I want government to run my life for me".
In the words of Mr. Milton Friedman:
"Is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed? Do you think Russia doesn't run on greed? Do you think that China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? Of course none of US are greedy, it's the other fellow who's greedy. The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests... Excuse me, pardon me, but do you think that the American Presidents reward virtue? do they choose their appointees on the basis of the virtue of the people appointed, or on the basis of their political clout?"
1. excessive consumption of or desire for food; gluttony
2. excessive desire, as for wealth or power
It's always the other person who defines "excessive", isn't it!
Oh Johnny, what we goin' do wit'cha!?
No, who can deny that billions of $$$ is much more than is needed for a good life.
That's not a definition, that's nothing more than a random number generated as an artificial boundary.
Nice try though.
Still waiting on a definition of "excessive wealth".
(Psst, here's proof that you're venture to define the term will be impossible: kings use to be "excessively wealthy" by the standards of their days, but today they'd be amongst the poorest of the poor!!)
Oh, and, until you actually define excessively wealthy, then I'm afraid the entire argument about greed is completely moot.
Hm, well Kings may be poor but our Queen, with c£650 million to her name in 2008 doesn't, in my book, qualify as poor by any standards.
If you can argue that, say, Trump with his $50 billion really needs that to live a good life then the distance between us is so great that nothing will ever close it.
If you are so lacking in imagination that you have absolutely no concept of excessive then I can't help you with that either.
the man works 7 days a week and invests his money! why should he give his up to some lazy people who want hand outs? Also one day Trump will die and his money taxed 50% which is also not fair and his beneficiaries will get to do what they want. If you were that hungry to be rich you could also IN AMERICA! not your UK. Like I said if it wasn't for Capitalism most of this great technology you would not be playing with! there would be no sense in someone devoting all their time and energy to just give everything they worked hard for away to people who did not work for it! everyone benefits from Capitalism!
I don't know, we haven't done so badly, we did after all invent the computer (at about the same time as several other countries) we did invent the telecommunications that made the internet possible, Tim Berners Lee is actually a Brit.
Do your history Danny, don't show yourself up.
Despite what he may have claimed, Al Gore did not invent the Internet. The Internet was invented in the United States during the late 1950s to the 1970s by a group of researchers and scientists at the newly formed Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) after the former Soviet Union launched Sputnik. Realizing that the United States had suffered a great technological blow by allowing the USSR to hold the first successful satellite launch, ARPA set out to create a brand new technology unlike anything that had ever been done before; and the Internet was the result of their hard work.
Although there were many people working for ARPA on the Internet project, there are five individuals who can really be credited with actually creating the Internet. Among them was J. C. R. Licklider, the head of the Information Processing Technology Office at ARPA. In his position, he thought up the idea of the Internet itself as a way of potentially unifying humans from around the United States (and the world) through a universal network.
J C R Licklider Who Invented the Internet?
Because Licklider's previous experience was not in actual computer programming, however, he had to recruit others in order to help create the Internet for ARPA. The obvious choice was Lawrence Roberts. Roberts went on to lead the team which would eventually develop ARPANET (the early precursor to the Internet) in 1967. He was the scientist to finally utilize the proposed method of packet switching first created by Leonard Kleinrock. The Internet still uses packet switching as its primary way of transferring data.
After several years of work, a computer at the University of California, Los Angeles, became the first computer to connect to the Internet. In time, three more computers would be connected to the Internet in 1969, leading to the start of the Internet revolution.
Despite the massive success that Lawrence Roberts had received while working at ARPA, he promptly quit his position in 1973 in order to form the world's first commercial network, known at that time as Telenet. However, in his place, he assigned Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf to continue working on the Internet at ARPA. Together, Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf worked to modify the original method of packet switching pioneered by Roberts and Kleinrock and eventually created what is now known as the TCP/IP protocols. It was at this point when ARPANET was finally changed to the more easily pronounced Internet.
The initial idea is credited as being Leonard Kleinrock's after he published his first paper entitled "Information Flow in Large Communication Nets" on May 31, 1961.
In 1962 J.C.R. Licklider becomes the first Director of IPTO and gave his vision of a galactic network. In addition to the ideas from Licklider and Kleinrock, Robert Taylor helped create the idea of the network, which later became ARPANET.
The Internet as we know it today first started being developed in the late 1960's.
In the summer of 1968, the Network Working Group (NWG) held its first meeting chaired by Elmer Shapiro with the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) with attendees: Steve Carr, Steve Crocker, Jeff Rulifson, and Ron Stoughton. In the meeting the group discussed solving issues related to getting hosts to communicate with each other.
In December 1968, Elmer Shapiro with SRI released a report "A Study of Computer Network Design Parameters." Based on this work and earlier work done by Paul Baran, Thomas Marill and others; Lawrence Roberts and Barry Wessler helped to create the final version of the Interface Message Processor (IMP) specifications. Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. (BBN) was later awarded the contract to design and build the IMP sub network.
Introduction of the Internet to the general public
UCLA puts out a press release introducing the public to the Internet on July 3, 1969.
First network equipment
August 29, 1969 the first network switch and the first piece of network equipment called "IMP", which is short for (Interface Message Processor) is sent to UCLA. On September 2, 1969 the first data moves from UCLA host to the switch.
The first distributed message and network crash
On Friday October 29, 1969 at 10:30 p.m., the first Internet message was sent from computer science Professor Leonard KleinRock's laboratory at UCLA, after the second piece of network equipment was installed at SLI. This connection not only enabled the first transmission to be made, but is also considered to be the first Internet backbone.
The first message to be distributed was "LO", which was an attempt at "LOGIN" by Charley S. Kline to log into the SLI computer from UCLA. However, the message was unable to be completed because the SLI system crashed. Shortly after the crash, the issue was resolved and he was able to log into the computer.
E-mail is developed
Ray Tomlinson introduces network e-mail in 1972. The first messaging system to send messages across a network to other users.
TCP is developed
Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn design TCP during 1973 and later publish it with the help of Yogen Dalal and Carl Sunshine in December of 1974 in RFC 675.
First commercial network
A commercial version of ARPANET known as Telenet is introduced in 1974 and considered by many to be the first Internet Service Provider (ISP).
Ethernet is conceived
Bob Metcalfe develops Ethernet idea in 1973.
TCP/IP is created
In 1978 TCP splits into TCP/IP driven by Danny Cohen, David Reed, and John Shoch to support real-time traffic. This allows the creation of UDP. TCP/IP is later standardized into ARPANET in 1983 and is still the primary protocol used for the Internet.
DNS is introduced
Paul Mockapetris and Jon Postel introduce DNS in 1984.
In 1990 Tim Berners-Lee develops HTML, which made a huge contribution to how we navigate and view the Internet today.
Tim Berners-Lee introduces WWW to the public on August 6, 1991.
Internet experiences large growth
In 1993 the Internet experienced one of its largest growths and today is accessible and used by people everywhere in the world.
~~still waiting on that definition~~~
Sure, the queen is rich today, but I'm sure that she would sacrifice it all for a "modest income" by 4057 AD standards.
but with no definition of excessive then any argument against greed is pointless.
Lord knows that what I want isn't excessive, it's merely a bit flagrant. And I know that the things in life that you want could NEVER be described as "excessive", but merely "unnecessary".
Milton Friedman hit the nail on the head: of course none of US are greedy, it's always the other fellow who is greedy.
no definition of excessive! I'm glad you concede.
No, not conceded, just given up arguing with those too blind to see.
Listen to the music I posted instead.
what do you think of this John? just curious.
LONDON (Reuters Life!) – London police said on Tuesday they had banned a radical Muslim group from holding a protest outside the church where Britain's Prince William will marry Kate Middleton next week.
However, talks are ongoing about allowing Muslims Against Crusades (MAC), whose members include some of Britain's best-known Muslim extremists, to stage some form of demonstration in the capital.
Meanwhile the English Defense League (EDL), a right-wing anti-Islamist group, whose past protests have been marred by violence, has also applied to stage a demonstration should MAC get the go-ahead.
"So far we've had two request from groups wishing to protest and we're currently engaging with them to decide whether we think that's appropriate," London Assistant Commissioner Lynne Owens told Sky News.
"It's a celebration and we want the day to be focused on that celebration."
MAC said on its website its aim was to disrupt the April 29 wedding.
"We find that one of the biggest advocates of British imperialism, Flight Lieutenant Prince William, wishes to enjoy an extravagant wedding ceremony, ironically at the expense of the tax-payer," the website says.
"We promise that should they refuse, then the day which the nation has been dreaming of for so long will become a nightmare."
Last month, Emdadur Choudhury, 26, a member of MAC, was fined 50 pounds for burning a poppy on Armistice Day and shouting "British soldiers burn in hell" during rival protests by MAC and the EDL outside London's Royal Albert Hall.
The EDL on its Facebook website page has warned protesters it would "be there in our 1,000s waiting for you to slip up."
ATTACK "HIGHLY LIKELY"
The protest is one of a number of security issues facing police in the run-up to the royal wedding with Britain currently at its second highest threat level of "severe," meaning an attack by militants is considered highly likely.
Hundreds of thousands of people are expected in London, and with many dignitaries and royals from Britain and abroad attending, the event is considered to be an obvious target.
About 5,000 officers will be on duty and there will be covert operations taking place.
Search teams and sniffer dogs have already been scouring drains, bins, peering inside lamp posts and even hunting inside traffic lights for any hidden bombs or weapons on the short route the couple will take between Buckingham Palace and Westminster Abbey.
The couple will travel in separate cars to the abbey, but return along the procession route together in an open-topped horse-drawn carriage, waving to the crowds, and then appear on the balcony of the palace with the rest of the royals.
"Officers are trained to be vigilant and check areas where items may have been hidden," said Inspector Ian Fairman who is in charge of the search teams.
"Officers will be checking vulnerable areas all along the route of the procession."
There is also concern that anarchists will target the event after riots last month. In December, a car carrying William's father Prince Charles and his wife Camilla was attacked during student protests in the British capital.
Police confirmed that 60 people, who have been charged with committing public order offences, were banned from central London on the day as part of their bail conditions.
(editing by Paul Casciato)
Funny--I've been reading about possible Zionist false flag attacks planned for the Passover holidays.
The attacks, of course, will then be blamed on Muslims.
What do you think of that?
well I see this is by Reuters and I do not see anything your saying so I have no clue. show us something so we can see if they are doing what you say.
April 19, 2011
By Captain Eric H. May, GT CO
HOUSTON, 4/19/11 — A cascade of indicators argue that a false flag terror attack, probably nuclear, is impending, perhaps imminent, during the Jewish Passover, which begins today:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/19 … ril-19-22/
Haven't checked any other alter-sites yet....but I'm sure there will be plenty of speculation. Many people are in-tuned to what is going on, thanks to the internet. The bs doesn't fly like it used to.
LMC please tell me you do not believe this. #5 is just the kicker!
The European Parliament is demanding answers about reports that the U.S. is using its ultra-secret HAARP weather weapon to affect global climate, and perhaps induce earthquakes.
Please tell me you do not believe this! did they also create the tornadoes the last few days? please this country has 1 major catastrophe and we are done, we are already at the ceiling on debt. and you think we can create earthquakes? I really heard it all now! I will also pray for you.
I have a philosphy that I heard from John Lennon: I believe everything unless proven otherwise.
As far as people go--I believe they will do anything to get and maintain power.
You sound like a macho kind of dude...watch Jesse Ventura's show..you know, the Navy Seal?
He has a very interesting episode on HAARP. google it.
And you can read Global Analysis:http://www.worldreports.org/news--LOT of stuff, HAARP is in there.
Or global Research://www.globalresearch.ca/ Or any other numerous accounts. HAARP has a wealth of info on it. YOU may have already dismissed it, I don't.
And like I said, people in power will do anything to stay there, imo.
Believe what you wish...I'm searching for truth.
I'm not doubting that the military is looking for ways to stay secure, but to cause earthquakes? that is a little far fetched. As far as Jesse I do like him, I think he is a little out there on some issues but I still like him. I believe they may be trying to stop an incoming nuclear missile but we are not even close to that yet.
Well, it's far-fetched to you, but I have read a lot about it, and it is not far-fetched to me.
Factions within factions. Right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
Blackmail...threats, it's an ugly ugly scene!!
And if you can't see it, or don't want to...fine.
But I see you have no problem believing that Obama was a gay cocaine user who had his gay lover killed.
Sorry You want me to believe the Military has the power to cause the tectonic plates to move and cause earthquakes? sorry can not unless I see more proof, Like a retired Military officer and give some details. As for Obama, I do believe that Larry Sinclair guy, he did prove he was in Chicago when he said he was, he had actual phone number of the gay man that was killed along with text messages. See that is some proof! He even gave the name of the Limo driver and he disappeared also...that is strange to me. He is asking the court to have Obama turn over his cell records and he refused that also, That is why he is not suing, he paid that porn site guy 750K to go after him, and he is losing, the judge just gave a motion to Larry and soon will be over! that is at least some proof but you can believe something so outrageous as to creating earthquakes without proof but this man has actual numbers text from the dead man and you deny that? really crazy if you ask me. think about that logically....things that make you go hmmmmmm
You claimed that "greed" is bad, but then can't define it.
Shbalckafatz is also bad, and you're guilty of it.
Sorry Evan, I can define it to anybody except you. In fact, I did, you then demanded a definition of excessive which again I defined to the satisfaction of everybody accept yourself.
No. You never defined "excessive".
You said that "well, people with a billion dollars are bit excessive".
That was it.
That isn't a definition. ESPECIALLY when you think long term: in 500 years, the wealth of Bill Gates will seem meager.
I know you're trying to keep your "i'm right, you're wrong" attitude, but you have NOT defined "Excessive wealth", which is integral to the definition of the word "Greed".
Quit being such a Shbalckafatzer.
The definition of "excessive" greed will always be subjective. I recently quit a job because the owner of the business was making money by taking advantage of the poor and disabled. It was all perfectly legal, but sleazy. In my opinion, hurting people to gain wealth is excessive greed, but many good Christians here in the bible belt appear to have no problem with it.
The pursuit of wealth is not always noble.
So, give me a definition that I can start applying to people so that I can determine - quantitatively - if they are greedy.
I need a cut-off line.
Until you can give me that definition, this "they're greedy" nonsense NEEDS to be stopped.
I just said I believe it to be subjective, so I see no point in trying to define a specific benchmark for greed.
When the work and/or productivity and contributions towards the economy does not correlate to the wealth they are making. These bankers and ceo's who made sure they got a prime cut of the bailout money after helping to drive the economy right into the ground are not only especially greedy but they are commiting this excess at a time when it is in especially poor taste.
It was one thing when you had this going on in the Clinton era because the economy was doing well, but now, with this cycle of the wealthy desperately feeding off of the federal cash cow to cover their oversites having now repeated itself for four decades and finally got severely burned . . . not in jail let alone still taking huge bonuses? Do I really need to elaborate further on how vulgar that is???
excessive, immoderate, inordinate, extravagant, exorbitant, extreme mean going beyond a normal limit. excessive implies an amount or degree too great to be reasonable or acceptable <excessive punishment>. immoderate implies lack of desirable or necessary restraint <immoderate spending>. inordinate implies an exceeding of the limits dictated by reason or good judgment <inordinate pride>. extravagant implies an indifference to restraints imposed by truth, prudence, or good taste <extravagant claims for the product>. exorbitant implies a departure from accepted standards regarding amount or degree <exorbitant prices>. extreme may imply an approach to the farthest limit possible or conceivable but commonly means only to a notably high degree <extreme shyness>.
going beyond the usual, necessary, or proper limit or degree;
exceeding the normal or permitted extents or limits; immoderate; inordinate.
much more than is reasonable or necessary
and so on and so on.
ALL OF THESE TERMS ARE RELATIVE!!!
Define "normal"!! I need a cut-off line!!
I need to have an equation that I can apply to someone's life to determine if they are "greedy".
I need an quantitative definition that I can apply to determine if Bill Gates is actually more greedy than Steve Jobs. Is Robert Kiyosaki more greedy than Donald Trump? Is John Holden more greedy than Evan Rogers?
Is Osama Bin Laden a terrorist? What about George Bush?
John: these "they don't actually have a definition" words are the same reason you hate when people call others "terrorists" and then deny them a trial. Greedy is the same way: You call someone "greedy" and then just ignore that they have rights.
I STILL want a QUANTITATIVE definition of greedy.
All that you did was use a bunch of vague words that don't mean anything.
"Extravagant", "normal limit", "immoderate", "necessary restraint", "imposed by truth", "departure from accepted standards", "approach to the farthest limit possible or conceivable", "going beyond the usual", "Exceeding the normal", "more than is reasonable or necessary".
I meet ALL of these "requirements" depending on WHO YOU ASK.
Ask the homeless guy on fifth street if my having 3 computers in my home is "Greedy" or "extravagant" or "immoderate" or a "necessary restraint". He'll tell you "yeah, Evan's a greedy jerk!"
Ask Sir Arthur if it's "extravagant" or "exceeding the normal" that I have electricity that gives me enough light to operate at ANY time of day.
Ask the richest man of 4016 if my life is "exceeding the normal" and he'll tell you "Evan? That guy's life must've sucked without Intropepseral!"
ALL OF THESE TERMS ARE RELATIVE!!!
You are right, it's all subjective as well as relative. However, when you live within a culture and enjoy its benefits, you might also have to live within its value system, which may be reflected in its laws. Many people believe it is not okay to pursue wealth at the expense of other people's welfare. That is why we have laws against abuse of the environment, for example.
Evan, not everything in life can be absolute.
But if you can't see the problem with one man having more than a whole country then you are sorely lacking in imagination.
Not everything in our lives is laid out in a 200+ year old document, some things change with time, others with relativity.
Haven't you heard that "greed is good," at least according to Gordon Gekko, and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldmine Sucks who claims to be "doing the Lord's work."
I watched that new Gordon Gecko movie.
I'm surprised that you haven't noticed the obvious mistake that made the entire movie's argument completely flawed.
Wealth isn't a Zero Sum game. Just because I make a dollar doesn't mean that everyone else is one dollar less rich.
Marx was wrong.
And don't you even TRY to use Goldman Sachs and all those other "We got bailed out by the taxpayer-suckers" companies. Those clearly are the mistake of government.
Nowhere have I seen LMC say this, or even imply it.
You have to be a strong contender for Danny's twister award.
You've never seen LMC say how great government is or how much she wants them to do for us, blah blah blah....I've never seen one person so on the hook for government as the answer to every problem....
There is a difference between wanting government to do everything for everyman and expecting government to fulfil its role properly.
That seems to elude you who seems to construe every effort to get government to butt out of peoples private lives as wanting government to do everything for us.
she is a socialist like John! If you see what see writes, she claims she is mad at obama for not being more left! at least John admits he is a socialist. she is a closet socialist. And they talk smack whether you like Bachman or not she took in 23 kids and you know even if she received some sort of assistance that would not equal to what came out of pocket to do such a wonderful thing! and what about the time, all the clothes to wash, cooking etc... I'm truly starting to believe these people are insane! I would like to see her Take 23 kids in!
There you go--always with the labeling.
Socialist, Jew-Hater, blah blah blah
You want to play?
You are a closet fascist, how you like that?
You don't want gvt to do anything, but make the roads safe for Donald Trump.
You want American kids dying overseas to fill the coffers of Haliburton and Xe.
See how it goes?
Let me try again...for the MILLIONTH and three trillionth time!!!
I want every citizen in my country fed, housed, healthy and warm. I want every child to have the opportunity for a great eduction and a nice life.I don't want wise, elderly seniors to suffer lives of poverty when they can't work anymore. PERIOD.
You want to make billions-kill yo-self!
Just DON'T expect to pay next to nothing for the priveledge.
And DON'T take out of the pot to stick in your account, what rightfully belongs to the people who have to work 2 or 3 jobs just to afford your over-priced, low-quality goods and services!
Comprende? Capiche? Get it?
This is a capitalist country! always was and hope it will stay that way! I'm for helping people and in case you have not heard we have section 8 welfare, medicare and all that is happening is people are taking advantage of it! The rich pay 70% of the taxes and they are only 10% of the population! how much do you want them to pay???? people need to be responsible for their own actions and life! yes, I want people who fall on hard times to be able to get help and believe we need to help the elderly! you keep screaming the republicans are taking away SS and Medicare for the elderly! THEY ARE NOT! READ THE DAM BILL!! it does not effect anyone even 55 and up! The system is broke and they are fixing what has been destroyed! What they did was a CRIME!! they stole the money over the last 50 years instead of putting it in a special account! that is robbery! now its broke and we do not have enough coming in to pay what has to go out! what part of that don't you understand? like I stated I'm a fiscally responsible democrat and to me that means Get your house in order financially and help the elderly and some people who need it but not make them rely on the help!! IT is NOT a RIGHT to have health-care, a roof over your head or food!
Social Security is the ONLY government program that has worked as designed AND not only pays for itself, but earns interest doing it. The money to pay SS benefits DOES NOT come out of the U.S. Treasury and is NOT part of the Federal budget. Wall Street simply can't stand that there's a huge pile of money over which they have no control, can't touch, and can't gamble with.
Also, the U.S. is the ONLY developed country that does NOT have some version of national (aka single-payer) health care. So citizens of the rest of the developed world obviously believe health care IS a right. And because a huge chunk of their paychecks is NOT going into the coffers of the health "insurance" industry and BigPharma, they have much more money than Average Americans do to spend on shelter, food AND vacations several times a year.
If social security was the one actual program that worked why is it broke? Yes it could have worked if the thieving Politicians did not spend the money. Criminals if citizen did that they would be in Jail!
Health-care is not a right! Shelter and Food is not a right! we as a civilized society put measures in place to help people who need it, problem is many abuse the system! Yes I would like to see a system put into place for health-care but not for the government to run it! they will screw it up as they do everything else!
In a civilised society health care, shelter and food are a right
No it is not! it is a privilege!
Is it your right to walk into a restaurant and eat and not pay?
Is it a Right to see an empty house and claim it as yours?
If you went out to dinner with someone who is richer than you, do you expect them to pay for you?
What has any of that to do with a civilised society?
A civilised society provides a back stop below which nobody can fall.
It is a privilege not a right!
As a civilized society, we can put up safety nets for people who fall on hard times. We shouldn't allow them to rely on this forever! People are generous and if the government wouldn't waste money on ridiculous things there would be more available for helping people get back on their feet. get rid of the fraud and wasteful spending and things would be better.
S&P warned about lowering the rating and this administration is still talking about spending! ludicrous!
Health care is a privilege not a right in a civilised society!
Danny, pack your bags and leave for any third world country now.
For the sake of your fellow countrymen, don't take the US any further down the road to being a third world country.
Crash your socialist country like has been done many times over! Health-care is NOT a right! IT is a Privilege! thinking like yours will make your country a 3rd world country.
In a civilised country it is a right.
Don't assume that just because you are in the US everything you say is absolutely correct.
Thinking like mine will ensure that we maintain the Great in Great Britain.
Do you really think that it's a privilege to have your work force turning up for work fit and healthy rather than sick but unable to pay for healthcare or take time off work?
I expect them to work and get medical benefits and keep fit! big difference
And in a part time job with no health benefits?
why do they have a part time job? if it is temporary..ok but here in the states they never refuse medical help! so to say we let anyone not go to the hospital is false!
It's not about letting people go to hospital, it's about what happens to them when they get there.
they take care of them. Look I'm all for some sort of health-care, but first they need to stop the stupid spending and playing politics. They are paid by lobbyist who stop them from allowing us to compete across state lines which would bring costs down drastically. We need to stop paying for wars in Iraq and Libya and charge if they want our help! We need to allow drilling here instead of worrying about wildlife! If they actually ran the government correctly we could have all that and not take away more from people who pay enough. 50% of our people do not pay anything! don't you think that isn't fair either? Now I know some people have legitimate excuses but believe me a lot just milk the system. our government spent 4million dollars on the menstrual cycle of a gopher! is this smart? nothing is perfect but our system has proven to be very good! If the politicians actually worked for the people instead of themselves it would be much different. 80% capitalist mentality 20% socialist would be OK and do much good. We do need to help the people who need it.
BTW, we aren't a socialist country, we are a capitalist country suffering from all the same maladies that your country suffers from (except health care for now).
you are much more socialist than capitalist! your right is our left here. you are subjects we are citizens. you are definitely more socialist than capitalist.
And that's the magic word, John, SOCIETY.
We, as a society, have to decide what we, as a society, value.
America has struggled with what is a right vs. what is a privilege.
If we walk around believing nothing is a right in this country, then it's a free-for-all. Like the wild west (or worse).
There are some who want a cowboy nation -- might is right.
There are others who want fairness -- no suffering.
The two mindsets are getting further and further apart.
But now the TP is advocating taking away the fairness -- the Medicare, the Social Security, individual (women's) rights.
And suddenly Americans are saying, "Now wait a minute here... these programs ARE important to us! We want you, government, to figure out a way to maintain them...."
And that's where we are. At least, that's how I see it.
Social Security is not - I repeat NOT - broke. That's the myth continually spread by the Republicans via Fox and the TP so that Wall Street can privatize it and turn it into another vehicle for the same type of financial smoke and mirrors that caused the crash of 2008. And we know what happened there: "We lost YOUR money. Too bad, so sad...gotta go now...we're due at a "retreat" at a luxury hotel in AZ on the dimes you dug out of YOUR penny jar and handed us on a silver platter".
Rightfully belongs? Um, hate to break it to you, but the money rightfully belongs to whoever gets out there and earns it. As in works for it, either through hard, nose to the grindstone work, or by making wise financial decisions.
or by being born to it, or not bothering how many rules are bent.
Being born into money is not a crime. Earning money through hard work or wise decision is not a crime.
Bending rules is another story, although the left seems determined to portray all rich people as having acquired their money through fraudulent means.
True, being born into money is not a crime but making out that it makes you somehow superior to those not so gifted should be a crime.
And show me where hard work ever made the hard worker richer than the person who lives off their hard work?
Um, John, hate to break it to you, but bad attitudes are not criminal acts.
And I'd be lying if I said I even remotely understood your second question....
That's the problem Bill, you don't understand things that don't fit your narrow view.
Why am I NOT surprised that you don't understand the second question....
another great quality, put down someone who doesn't agree with you! yes your an adult! no facts just insults and half truths!
When you implement “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” magically, everyone starts having quite a lot of need and very little ability.
Socialism works fine as long as there is Capitalism to pay for it, but sooner or later, Socialism runs out of other people’s money.
On the surface it does seem “fair”that those that have should share with those that do not. However, history has shown that the more this is enforced by a government, the more people become unmotivated to work. Most people that do work, produce goods, perform services and generate wealth do so to get a reward. When that reward is diminished the production and wealth is also diminished, leading to an inevitable downward spiral. We are already seeing this happening. The government taxes people and businesses to the point that it is cheaper to move overseas or scale down, this leads to less money coming into the government than it expected and they increase taxes again…… and so on.
The closest humanity has come to a system that works is capitalism. It is not “fair” but it is just. When those that can make money are allowed to make money, the government can prosper if it realizes that 1% of a really big pie is better than 50% of a really small pie.
also I love how people say things like “Socialism and Communism is not the same!”. Yes they are pretty much the same. Socialism/Communism doesn’t work because we are human. With Socialism and Communism, economic competition is totally wiped out which is extremely bad for a country because that will eventually lead the whole nation into poverty. Socialism and Communism doesn’t work because not everybody is hard working and is sooo passionate about busting their butt off working so someone they completely don’t know can live off that money while they might not have to do anything, became parasites. It is also an open flaw to dictatorship because it gives government too much control to monitor the people in almost all aspect of their lives. I do not want to go to school for 20 years to make as much money as someone who works at McDonald or might not be working at all. Competition is what empower the people, make them grow and push human forward.
It's no accusation, it's the truth.
She took 1 and 1 half MILLION dollars from the "evil" gvt....the "ganster" gvt....
So what does that make her?
She's a gangster herself.
If you don't believe she took money for those kids...well, then at the very LEAST she took $250,000 for her family farm.
But-she did say she took in foster kids to supplement her income. You want to believe she didn't take the max allowed, you go ahead. I do belive it. I think she squeezed every last dime she could get.
Then told the veterans to take a hike.
And your proof for all this is.....where? It's been asked of you several times, LMC.....
And I've answered several times!!!
You telling me you never heard of the quarter MIL she took for her farm?
Go look over this whole thread...you will see that John and I both found the same info about foster kids in Minnesota.
You say she didn't take any money for it? I say she did. She said she did it to supplement her income.
Welfare momma!! Just deal with it.
Um, I haven't really researched this issue until just now, but even a cursory search reveals that the farm in question belonged to Bachmann's father, not the congresswoman herself.
Nice try, though....
Geuss you didn't look vewwy hard...he managed it, not owned it.
"December 22, 2009
Categories:House Republicans.Anti-socialist Bachmann got $250K in federal farm subsidies
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) — so fond of accusing the Obama administration of foisting socialism on an unwilling America — has apparently been the recipient of about a quarter of million bucks in government handouts.
Liberal site Truthdig links to an Environmental Working Group analysis of federal agricultural subsidies and found that the Bachmann family farm, managed by her father-in-law until his recent death, received $251,000 in farm payments between 1995 and 2006.
Bachmann’s financial disclosure forms indicate her stake in the Wisconsin farm is worth up to $250,000. Her income from the farm has grown from $2,000 a year a few years back to as much as $50,000 for 2008.
Truthdig calls her a "Welfare Queen":
Bachmann's family farm received $251,973 in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2006. The farm had been managed by Bachmann's recently deceased father-in-law and took in roughly $20,000 in 2006 and $28,000 in 2005, with the bulk of the subsidies going to dairy and corn. Both dairy and corn are heavily subsidized — or "socialized" — businesses in America (in 2005 alone, Washington spent $4.8 billion propping up corn prices) and are subject to strict government price controls.
Bachmann isn't alone in her selective socialism: EWG found that the top four districts receiving the largest ag payments are represented by conservative Republicans.
1. 3rd district of Nebraska (Rep. Adrian Smith - Republican) - $1,736,923,011 in subsidies go to 51,702 recipients.
2. 1st district of Kansas (Rep. Jerry Moran - Republican) - $1,315,979,151 in subsidies go to 75,802 recipients.
3. 4th district of Iowa (Rep. Tom Latham - Republican) - $1,288,622,912 in subsidies go to 35,696 recipients.
4. 9th district of Texas (Rep. Randy Neugebauer - Republican) - $1,227,192,312 in subsidies go to 21,290 recipients.
Who says politics doesn't pay?
Either way, it is still the Bachmann "family farm", not necessarily Michele Bachmann's (she doesn't exactly strike me as a "farm girl").
Also, such money isn't always an "option" if you look deeper into it, and however it plays out, if it is legal and above board, you still have nothing.
Except of course for those sour grapes you continually throw at those who have made more productive use of their lives financially than you have.....
She is benefitting monetarily from that farm--
She has taken money from the gangster gvt to do it.
Ergo-she is a gangster herself; by her own words she is condemned.
As is the Bagger motto (imo):
Socialism for the Rich. As for the rest?
Let them eat cake.
Chill, LMC, you'll give yourself a brain hemmorhage.
If you ever get around to actually writing a hub, I'd sure like to see one on your vision for the United States. I'm betting it would make for an interesting (if frightening) read.....
You can already read them...pretty much what goes on here.
And I'm not in the least close to hemmorhaging...
I will just refer to her as Gangster Bachmannn from now on.
"psssst, hey lady...ya wanna buy some meat" (Lucy and Ethel, selling meat disguised as babies in a pram)
Lucy smuggling French cheese on a plane disguised as a baby...now I'll have to go and you-tube I Love Lucy!!
And if she did take the money, as long as it was legal, your arguments hold no water.
This is funny, pro-lifers get slammed for not doing anything for these unwanted children, yet when somebody like Bachmann does something, well, then their motivation must be wrong.....wow.....
SHE is the one saying no one deserves money from the gvt, not me!
Michelle Bachmann...oh hellsyeah!
I am sure it was legal her taking the money - if she did. I don't begrudge her the money. But it is damn hypocritical at the very least given her vitriolic track record.
She didn't take in those 23 kids out of the goodness of her heart, but to >>>augment her family's income<<<. What part of 'she did it for the MONEY' do you not understand???
And you would know this how? It's already been established that Ms. Bachmann doesn't need the money.
Or are only liberals capable of doing anything out of the goodness of their hearts?
She DID need the money. And after the gift from Uncle Sam, THAT'S when her income soared!
Like we've been telling you: She is a welfare Queen! She used Socialism (tax money) to further her personal wealth,which is what Corporate America does ALL the time!
They just complain about it for everyone else.
They want THEIRS, they don't want you to have any.
It's really very simple. Politics of superiority and greed.
But let me guess, if a liberal had done it, it would have only been for the purest of reasons, right?
Any body with commonsense will tell you what they give you doesn't even come close to what it costs to take in those children! that is a jealous fools statement! what about the time and energy to do such a thing? you people are never happy. Just miserable envious people. I bet if a person from your party did it they would be a Mother Teresa!
Well, how come when single moms do it, they're bums? Just cause it's their kids? That makes the kids somehow less deserving?
Face it--it's still ALL about superiority! You act like foster moms are saints, while welfare moms are no-good slobs. Oh-and here's another one: single dads!
OH my GOD...do you ever hear how people gush??
They don't even CARE what the gvt gives him, it's not enough.
Take more! Take more! but a single mom......it's a whole different story. It's curious.
Boy, you are as slick as slick willie. Wikipedia reports she rented out the farm. She did not get far subsidies directly. The individual she rented the farm to did. She received rents from a farmer who did what the current laws encourage.
Wait, her farm subsidy went to a renter? HUH?
It is the Bachmann family farm.
And funny how her income from the farm ballooned.
She's a hypocrit.
"Give to me, but the hell with you."
First law of conservatism: Never confuse a liberal with facts....
That would explain why you never cite any facts.
Everything I posted is verifiable....look it up. Or does that make too much sense?
Interesting accusation coming from a guy who quotes a source called "crooks and liars" in another thread. Now that couldn't possibly have any sort of bias at work, now could it?
Wikipedia show that she rented the farm. One newspaper article shows she has a 1/4th interest in the farm.
You asked about democrats and socialism. The democrats are a political party. Socialism is an economic model used to guide one's decisions about how to implement politics. Democrats, as a political party, have embraced socialism as an economic model. That may be why the democrat talking points are full of Marxist class warfare rhetoric. You hear of the glory of labor unions, of the need to tax the rich, who already pay way more than their fair share, and the needs of the poor, the downtrodden, the disenfranchised, etc ad nauseum.
Oh for God's sakes, go have lunch with the Queen!! She's used to dozing at mealtimes.
Perhaps you are just not up to the challenge of real discourse. I understand.
Challenge me then.
So far, all you've done is ask me to believe you over my own eyes.
I think we are done. You know way too many things that are not so to have your mind changed on anything.
TRANSLATION - I think I am losing this debate and better withdraw - trying to save face if I can.
I love needling LMC, but to attempt rational debate with her is pointless.
You cannot have a rational conversation with somebody who a) continually buys into nutjob conspiracy theories, or b) believes the answer to every problem is "more government"
My background is intelligence and engineering. I like facts. I like to interpret them. I love to discuss ideas. In this thread love has run out of things to say. So it is time to move on to another thread.
If you believe that means I am losing this debate (where, in fact very little has actually taken place) I am good with your interpretation. It seems a bit shallow but I am a guest here.
Then I'm an A$$.
Why don't you read what she wants to NOT fund, while her happy a$$ was collecting 1 and a half mil from Uncle Sam.
A couple of days ago I heard a pundit refer to the current crop of GOP leading candidates as "the seven dwarfs."
And David Brooks's op-ed today entitled "Why Trump Soars" is worth a read if you like a little political humor. (Brooks is a moderate, old-fashioned non-Tea Party Republican.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/opini … ef=opinion
"Weekly reminder: Paul Ryan voted for the Bush tax cuts, Iraq war, Medicare Part D & TARP"
"Teabaggers will protest raising taxes on billionaires but won't protest commodity speculators driving up the prices of gas"
"Republicans take control of the house & the price of gas skyrockets. Ayn Rand governance on the march. Commodity speculators running wild"
Paul Ryan is a fan of Ayan Rand. Do the math.
Over and out.
You wrote, Republicans take control of the house & the price of gas skyrockets."
I suppose there is no connection to the President Obama's shut down of oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, his disastrous Middle East policies (destroy your allies while coddling your enemies), his enormous deficit spending, along with a growing China and India and the rising cost of gasoline?
As we enter the era of jimmy Carter levels of inflation combined with the double digit growth in government workers I suppose those symptoms of failed fiscal policy will also, in your mind be the result of the Republicans control of the House of Representatives.
She said you are not worthy of a real comment because you have no BIO or any Hubs. Personally I do not see the logic behind that answer, maybe you do? Personally I think it is hard to fight commonsense and logic.
From Les Visible:
"One of the things that depart (and there are several of them) when you inevitably give in to the gravitational pull of self interest is gratitude, after that compassion is by the side of the road with its thumb out. We cease to care about our fellows because we are in survival mode and the conditions worsen or temporarily improve according to the actions of those pulling the strings.
I believe I understand the real value of these qualities; compassion, gratitude, integrity etc. They are a kind of protective armor which is much more effective than Dragon-Skin. Most people do not see how incredibly valuable these things are. They might have some idea that these are components of good character but the magical efficacy of it escapes them. These are powerful forces. As Lao Tzu once said, “Compassion is a weapon from the sky against being dead."
You Socialist do not understand the reality of socialism or are just lazy looking for handouts! If every country was socialist there would not be advancements as we have today! everybody would be doing what was needed to survive, but because we have opportunity to be better and richer people invest in ideas. why should someone work 16 hours a day 7 days a week if they had to give up most of what they earned while others worked basic jobs and was home after an hour lunch and 2 15 minute breaks and worked 5 days a week? who would want to do this??? also our poor here in the states have air condition, electricity, cars maybe not new but cars, cell phones, computers etc... is that the same in many other countries? even our poor who many made bad choices, drugs, alcohol, partying not going to school etc... get to have a better life then many other countries. Our poor in some other countries is like living the high life in those countries. You want more go earn it!
So you see some great nobility in working an insane amount of hours? I do not. I have come close, on many occasions, to working what you describe. And I did because my business owner believed I was "exempt" from any semblance of a normal life. You will find, quite paradoxically, that the "noble" working-your-fingers-to-the-grindstone doesn't greatly improve productivity - bragging rights, yes.
Average people, most of us, are not lazy - they are just "average." But I do see some of what you are saying in regards to welfare.
DTR, I know a lot of people are hard workers. And when you own your own business and trying to make your self better it bothers you when you now how hard you worked and then to be given to people who are working the system, IT HURTS. I'm all for helping the people who truly need it, but Hate when I see people working the system. My brother is an average Joe, he loves his free time and enjoys bowling. he is a pizza guy. That is what makes him happy so that is fine, he doesn't look for anything free, he works hard and enjoys life. Of course me and my other brother always buy him things and he complains for us to stop, even stopped us from visiting him for a few months. but that is our brother and we want him to have things and hopefully put away for his retirement.
Sweden, one of the most developed nations in the world with one of the highest standards of living, has a rather strongly socialist government.
You were saying?
You are aware, aren't you, that the Swedes are backing away from their socialism. It seems they too, are running our of other people's money.
Here's how it works:
Pay the gvt, they're stealing your money
Pay a CEO, it's his due.
I don't actually pay the CEO. I buy a good or a service. A portion of that cost covers all of the overhead that it takes to provide that good or service. The nicest part is that with the CEO I get to choose. The government forces me to pay.
When you TP people speak of socialism look to Gov. Snyder of Michigan selling off his state to corporations. FYI, polls show 86% of Americans hate Ryans plan. He got an earful at his townhall & it was awsome because one man giving him hell said he was a republican. Polls also show the 48% of Republicans also hate Ryans plan. I'm sure the TP on this site will ask for proof like they do about everything & so I say look, read, listen, research like i did. It's really hard to find & accept proof when you're in denial!
This is interesting...
KKK calls Tea Party "socialists", orders members not to attend their protests. http://bit.ly/gJAguC
"We do NOT support any political party, all have betrayed the trust of the American people, and they have compromised their agenda to support the Progressive Socialist enslavement of the American people."
of course, I don't have the time to browse through. Being an interest group, the Tea Party will survive as long as there are "rich cuddlers" who don't realize the basic motto "No Man is an Island".
Well last week I realised we have a few representitives in the house going up to bat for the American people. Was very happy they were stating how the government has become greedy, about money and power, and they were stating the problems the local and state goverments are having because the federal goverment is taking to many freedoms to allow the local goverments any say in helping them, when they are the best to know what their people need in various communities. It is not a one size shoe fits kind of thing. Like they stated depending on where you are located, depends a lot on the employment, healthcare, transportation all away cross the board. Was happy at least the 5 i listened to on c-span were actually going up to bat for the people instead of the goverment itself.
people centric style of government is long forgotten hah..
In politics it is always a question of which people. Who pays? Who takes?
As I read many of the messages here I realize that for many of you it is a matter of goading the government to loot and plunder the productive parts of our society on behalf of the unproductive who will sell their votes for a small amount of someone else's stuff.
I am reminded of the images of the LA riots. The only difference between the thugs carrying off other people's property and the many of the people who post here is the government acting as the go-between, smashing windows, setting fires, and stealing for them.
PDH - that's a great motto and one I really try to live by, but therein lies the fundamental difference between liberal and conservative thinking. Don't you agree?