What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Alternative to bush and kerry!

  • #81
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Finch @ May 04 2004,3:25)]Back in the time they killed hundreds in days, just because they could. Bloodlust, its not a pretty thing.
Nope, you're wrong. They didnt kill hundreds of buffalo. They killed hundreds of millions
sad.gif
But it wasnt because of blood lust, it was to take away the indians natural food source
sad.gif
mad.gif
 
  • #82
Is it too late to nominate Pat Paulsen - again?
biggrin.gif
tounge.gif
laugh.gif
 
  • #83
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]This old liberal believes in public service. (I teach school so I can care for my now remaining invalid parent.)

Sounds to me, that you didn't go into "public service" untill you had to leave your career to take care of your parents. Doesn't sound quite as noble this way (the public service part, not taking care of your parents, for that I commend you, and I am truely sorry about the health issues)

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I would require mandatory 2 year public service from ALL high school graduates -- no exceptions. This could be military service, Peace Corp, community, conservation, education, health care, senior care, welfare, etc. This would be a 24/7 duty for 2 years.

Hmm, forced slavery after high school, I have an 8 X 10 of how the American people would feel about that.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I would require prisoners to be society's maids.

Agreed.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I would provide federal jobs as a foundation of welfare -- no work no money.

Well, although it is better than our current system. I am still an advocate for smaller gov't, not bigger.
Take a look at the airline industry vrs. the Space industry.

The private sector has grown the Airline industry in leaps and bounds.

The gov't is still flying 20+ year old shuttles.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I would end all private and religious schools and make everyone attend public schools

That is absurd. You are taking away my freedom to choose where my child goes to school. If I want to send my child to a Catholic school so that they are around other Catholics that is my choice.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] You know, simple 3 bedroom, 2 baths, 1 car garage ranch homes for truly middle class people to buy as they did in the 40's, 50's and 60's.

I bought my first home a year ago. I payed 120K for it, a 4 bedroom, 2 bath home in a nice neighborhood with a big yard, and 15 minutes away from the city. ANY family should be able to afford a home like mine on a combined income of 40K a year. Not real hard for a single person, but 20K a year a piece? You gotta be kidding me.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] Yes, throw the Re-pubs back to the private sector they all confuse with god gov't (Enron good gov't? hahahahahaahah)

Seems to me, Enron got away with it during the Dems candidacy, they where caught under the repubs, hmmmm.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I believe the core problem with our education system is two fold. 1) It is a racial issue and everyone tries to pretend otherwise

Are you saying the country is now racist against whites, because statisticaly there are more whites than any other minorities in public school. Heck, blacks even have there own higher education funds.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I think its great that you do all these things but they are all good advertising for your company and they are all good examples for building a great public image. You are supporting the "cream" of social needs that your customers approve of and that lead to business deals.

We are a commercial company, public image means nothing to us. We have a great image with our customers because of our performance, not our image. I have yet to see our company make a single dollar off of any of these donations. It really bothers me that when we even try to do something good, it is construed to be something we actually did for ourselves.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Maybe they feel their job, as is, is part of why the profits increase and that without taking on more duties deserve a raise for the contribution their job is obviously already making? Also, contentment is a value and factors into a raise.

You have got to be kidding me, right? Someone deserves a raise because they simply showed up and did there job? Newsflash buddy, thats what they get a paycheck for. You get a raise by going above and beyond, by learning more aspects of the trade, and by being a leader of men.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I think your own personal need to prove yourself successful in this society by amasing wealth is skewing your ability to understand all people.

This is our inherint difference. I don't want to understand all people. I don't really care to either, I have a hard enough time understanding myself and the people that I care about.


I have one for you. You want to increase taxes, then thats fine, but lets even the playing board a bit. Lets make a flat federal income tax. Everyone making over 22K a year gets taxed the exact same percentage, clear accross the board. Why should someone who works there tail off to make more be punished for it? If it where up to people like you everyone would be taxed untill we all came home with 30K a year.

AMBITION is what made this country great.
DESIRE is what drives a man to better himself.

I pitty the man who has neither.
 
  • #84
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Take a look at the airline industry vrs. the Space industry.

The private sector has grown the Airline industry in leaps and bounds.

The gov't is still flying 20+ year old shuttles.

Actually, the gov't is still using these 20 year old shuttles becuase they're still effective at what they do. Although recent design flaws in light of the Columbia tragedy will probably warrant design of a new shuttle.

Meanwhile, the Airline industry has had to be bailed out of bankruptcy by the federal gov't. Several times if memory serves. And it was suffering from financial problems even before 9/11.
 
  • #85
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Cynic81 @ May 04 2004,7:45)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Take a look at the airline industry vrs. the Space industry.

The private sector has grown the Airline industry in leaps and bounds.

The gov't is still flying 20+ year old shuttles.

Actually, the gov't is still using these 20 year old shuttles becuase they're still effective at what they do. Although recent design flaws in light of the Columbia tragedy will probably warrant design of a new shuttle.

Meanwhile, the Airline industry has had to be bailed out of bankruptcy by the federal gov't. Several times if memory serves. And it was suffering from financial problems even before 9/11.
Good at what they do? They can carry a miniscule load, have an extremely poor range (read: They can get into orbit and come back) Extreme ammounts of downtime, and you can't find replacement parts for them anymore.

Whats so good about that?

In the last 20 years there has been very little advance in space vehicles. Can you honestly say that in the last 20 years there has been little advance in earth bound flight?

And there are 100's of airline corps. around the world, because 1 or 2 of them get into financial trouble is no reason to blanket the entire industry.
 
  • #87
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I bought my first home a year ago. I payed 120K for it, a 4 bedroom, 2 bath home in a nice neighborhood with a big yard, and 15 minutes away from the city. ANY family should be able to afford a home like mine on a combined income of 40K a year. Not real hard for a single person, but 20K a year a piece? You gotta be kidding me.

Good Heavens!!! Where do you live?? ?? ??
120K for a 4 bedroom, with a yard?
wow.gif

My Word! PLEASE tell me that was a fixer upper, at least...

I had to pay 195K for my TWO bedroom 1 1/2 bath TOWNHOUSE (read: no yard).
I HATE living near NYC! Property values are outrageous!
mad.gif


Enough crying, Dave....
 
  • #88
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Casper @ May 04 2004,6:38)]
Hi,

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Sounds to me, that you didn't go into "public service" untill you had to leave your career to take care of your parents. Doesn't sound quite as noble this way (the public service part, not taking care of your parents, for that I commend you, and I am truely sorry about the health issues)

Actually, I started teaching before the health of my parents collapsed. I found out that it was something I love. Few advancement opportunities, income ceilings, no profit motive but like so many things in life outside of a business worldview -- absolutely crucial to society's existence. The motivation , like most necessary things in life is not external (financial) but internal -- the basic idea most of the world's great religions try to teach every time they gather to worship. Using religion as so many do to justify selfishness and bigotry and to simply save their own souls is a mockery of religion's deep origins inside the human being. Our inability to understand priorities outside of the bottomline is destroying this country every day.

{quote]
Hmm, forced slavery after high school, I have an 8 X 10 of how the American people would feel about that.[/quote]

Not slavery at all. Social responsibilty. Although from Reagan on, we have raised a generation that only knows buy buy buy consume consume consume want want want me me me as the highest moral order of FREEDOM -- it is a lie. Germany requires such service. Israel requires such service. I am sure most western democracies require what you label selfishness. The easiest way to measure the moral collapse of the American ideal is to ask for required social service. You are right, 90% of the people would have a fit and the richer they were the bigger the fit would be. There is no accident that liberal thought disappeared from the 60's draft protesters the moment their lives were no longer on the line. It was a self serving liberalism and not a deep understanding of society and responsibility. It amazes me that patriotic, America is great Love it or Leave it, Americans would think of required public service -- after this great nation has given you freedom for FREE -- as slavery. Can reasoning be any more selfish than that?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I would require prisoners to be society's maids.

Agreed.

So, crooks must earn freedom but everyone else can just consume it at will without a price or let poor boys and girls who want a college education do the dying and serving for them? Gee, that's a healthy national character.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Well, although it is better than our current system. I am still an advocate for smaller gov't, not bigger.
Take a look at the airline industry vrs. the Space industry.

You are comparing apples and oranges. The airline industry is a business and space exploration is research and development science. It may finally be time to privatize space -- and its happening and business will benefit mightily from the 40 years of NASA's R&D. Business has long benefited from tax dollars spent by the gov't -- look at the internet and computers. Our knee-jerk Re-pub anti-gov't propaganda (so deeply Uuamerican, btw) has blinded us to the real benefits of big gov't since Reagan. The South would still be a mosquito infested, backwater, unair-conditioned, racist swamp without federal tax dollars starting in the 1930's. The MidWest farm states that support small gov't would be broke without the higher taxes New Jersey pays. Iowa gets more federal aid than New Jersey does and NJ pays more. Odd that NJ votes for Dems who take more of their money and not Repubs who would supposedly give it back to them. I wonder what NJ "gets" that the South and Midwest do not? Who are the real freeloaders here?
To compare NASA to the airlines you would have to compare the airlines from 1903 to 1940 to NASA from 1960-2004.
Contrary to all the Re-pub propaganda since Reagan, big gov't works and works well -- and remember it is tackling the truly difficult problems in society and not the profit making "cream" problems the private sector loves to roll out as proof of its being "better" at the job.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
The private sector has grown the Airline industry in leaps and bounds.

The gov't is still flying 20+ year old shuttles.


apples and oranges


/quote]
That is absurd. You are taking away my freedom to choose where my child goes to school. If I want to send my child to a Catholic school so that they are around other Catholics that is my choice.[/quote]

Yes, that is your choice but I believe it is a bad choice for America overall and I would fight to change the law. I believe we need institutions that ALL go through so that we socialize everyone into one big nation. That is more important here than your personal choice. I believe people should have to contact and learn to deal with and respect all kinds of people with all kinds of beliefs and all kinds of income. There should be no "gated" communities in America -- physically or mentally. Income should not be used to isolate and separate society. It will destroy our weak bonds and that is a greater danger and loss than your loss of personal choice on this issue. I would also do away with home schooling. Public school. Period. Make it work. Public school represents the very fabric and challenge of America itself.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
I bought my first home a year ago. I payed 120K for it, a 4 bedroom, 2 bath home in a nice neighborhood with a big yard, and 15 minutes away from the city. ANY family should be able to afford a home like mine on a combined income of 40K a year. Not real hard for a single person, but 20K a year a piece? You gotta be kidding me.

I don't understand you here.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Seems to me, Enron got away with it during the Dems candidacy, they where caught under the repubs, hmmmm.

LOLOLOLOLOL. The Repubs didn't expose Enron. It collapsed as **** Cheney had Enron making US energy policy and funding the Bush campaign. Enron was the perfect example of me me me ambition ambition ambition greed greed greed that the Re-pubs preach. Thay ran their tax scams on the gov't and screwed Calif. on energy with the deregulation and profiteering Enron loved and worked to produce. Enron is the poster boy for Re-pub philosophy practiced without any big gov't restraints. What a lovely image of the future.


[quote
Are you saying the country is now racist against whites, because statisticaly there are more whites than any other minorities in public school. Heck, blacks even have there own higher education funds.[/quote]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's ok, whites have their good old boy system that gets C student mental midgets like Bush into Yale.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
We are a commercial company, public image means nothing to us. We have a great image with our customers because of our performance, not our image. I have yet to see our company make a single dollar off of any of these donations. It really bothers me that when we even try to do something good, it is construed to be something we actually did for ourselves.

Image or no, you are funding nice safe middle class programs. That is great but not a recipe or example for attacking social problems or ills. Your donations stay safely in the world you value and believe in.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
You have got to be kidding me, right? Someone deserves a raise because they simply showed up and did there job? Newsflash buddy, thats what they get a paycheck for. You get a raise by going above and beyond, by learning more aspects of the trade, and by being a leader of men.

So doing one's job well year after year is not worth a raise? Interesting. As you age I hope you learn to see past your youthful mindset. Doing just one's job well is ONE REASON profits go up and therefore a real reason for a raise and bonus -- not the only reason but a real reason. I'm sorry you do not see that.


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
This is our inherint difference. I don't want to understand all people. I don't really care to either, I have a hard enough time understanding myself and the people that I care about.

Yes, exactly. It becomes so much easier to understand one's self and family once one learns to understand others -- ironic and non-linear but oh so so so true. You have a wonderful discovery yet to come through age and living.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
I have one for you. You want to increase taxes, then thats fine, but lets even the playing board a bit. Lets make a flat federal income tax. Everyone making over 22K a year gets taxed the exact same percentage, clear accross the board. Why should someone who works there tail off to make more be punished for it? If it where up to people like you everyone would be taxed untill we all came home with 30K a year.

A flat tax benefits the rich and hurts the poor as say 10% of $35,000 hits that guy alot harder than 10% of $1,000,000. The flat tax sounds fair but is as unfair as it comes. Why do you think that the rich love it so -- because it helps the poor? LOLOLOLOL. It is regressive and wrong. I believe in progressive taxes and in closing more and more loopholes the richer the income climbs. I think that anyone making over a million a year should be taxed out the whazoo. If that destroys their ambition -- great. Let them stop at that level because someone else will then come along and take over the unworked extra and make another million dollar business and on and on. I'd rather have 500 unmotivated stagnant millionaires stuck making a million a year with no reason to work any harder due to taxes than one billionaire who is an ambitious tax cheat! Ponder that idea!

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
AMBITION is what made this country great.
DESIRE is what drives a man to better himself.

FREEDOM and EQUALITY made this nation great -- along with stealing a continent rich in easy to grab natural resources and a lack of real competition in its young development.

Desire firmly attached to deep SOCIAL morality -- not just PERSONAL morality the fav of Re-pubs and Christians today -- made us live up to our best ideals -- "The angels of our better nature" as Lincoln wrote.

Where we differ is on the fault line of America today -- a culture defined only by personal greed and ambition or a culture defined by social morality and justice. Yours is alot more fun and sexy -- all religious posing to the contrary. Mine is kind of dull and unsexy but it is truly deeply moral.

Bobby
 
  • #89
[b said:
Quote[/b] ] after this great nation has given you freedom for FREE

They don't give me this freedom for free. It costs me 50% of my annual wages to enjoy said freedom.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] It collapsed as **** Cheney had Enron making US energy policy and funding the Bush campaign. Enron was the perfect example of me me me ambition ambition ambition greed greed greed that the Re-pubs preach. Thay ran their tax scams on the gov't and screwed Calif. on energy with the deregulation and profiteering Enron loved and worked to produce. Enron is the poster boy for Re-pub philosophy practiced without any big gov't restraints.

Like I said, all done during the Demo's tenure, guess that one just slipped by ?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] That's ok, whites have their good old boy system that gets C student mental midgets like Bush into Yale.

PUHLEASE! With the advent of AA, if I have slightly better grades than a minority applying to the same school, and there is only 1 slot left, 9 times out of 10 the minority will get the slot.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]So, crooks must earn freedom but everyone else can just consume it at will without a price

Your darn right! The minute they became a FELON they lost all of there rights in my eyes. Your darn right they have to EARN there way back into society. Cause and effect my friend.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] I think that anyone making over a million a year should be taxed out the whazoo. If that destroys their ambition -- great. Let them stop at that level because someone else will then come along and take over the unworked extra and make another million dollar business and on and on.

This is probably one of the worst things I have ever heard. Do you really think the rich will sit around at let you tax them upwards of 90%? You know what would happen? The Bill Gates of the country would pack up and move to Canada or Mexico. Lets say Bill salaries himself 100M a year. In a 50% tax bracket thats 50 mil a year in taxes paid. Lets say you up that to 90%, Bill packs up Microsoft and opens up shop in another country, now you get 90% of 0. Ah, but wait, then we can just put tarrifs on all of Billys imports, right? So Bill raises the price, the consumer pays more for a product, while being taxed more by the liberal gov't. Trust me when I say, this would happen on a wide scale. You start getting that outraigeous with taxes and you will see the investment firms, developers, R & D companys all leave, among the few. Now you have less money being made in the US, less US jobs, and ultimatly less taxes. You think outsourcing is bad now, wait till a liberal gets in office.

What we need are tax INCENTIVES to make more jobs, and keep the current jobs here in the US. You may change the laws, but you will not change the mentality of people. When it becomes exceedingly expensive to operate in the US, they will seek better alternatives. That is a fact.
 
  • #90
[b said:
Quote[/b] (schloaty @ May 05 2004,7:14)]I had to pay 195K for my TWO bedroom 1 1/2 bath TOWNHOUSE (read: no yard).
I HATE living near NYC!  Property values are outrageous!  
mad.gif


Enough crying, Dave....
Here, you can get a fixer upper bungalo hut for only 600K!
wow.gif
 
  • #91
I just read this and decided to put in my 2 cents, so here I go and jump into the fire...

I am completely against big government.

It is all about incentives. Who has more inventive to improve quality of a product or service, the government, or a company that can profit? Of course, there are exceptions such as the military, which should remain with the government etc., but other than that, I would rather get a service from a private company that has a vested interest in me.

In this case, the government has little competition with any service or product that it provides, so they should they make it better until it hurts someone or becomes completely useless? Really, give me a reason and an example where this has worked, and you can find so many more examples of where it has failed miserably.

On the other hand, products and services provided by private companies in a potentially profitable sector will always find competition. Now, there are incentives to improve product and services to compete with other businesses. (This can even work with highways and just about anything else.)

Who benefits from bigger government? Big government and the people who profit from their services do.

Who benefits from small government? Everyone does (except of course big gov.), including you. The economy would be larger from the increased competition and resulting jobs and better products and services. Plus, there are more opportunities for hard working Americans to make more money, and thus spread that money. It also gives "less working" Americans incentives to become hard working Americans because they are no longer given a fee ride; an element of society that was costing money is now producing and providing it. What is so bad about small government?

That is my opinion, what is yours?

JA

PS
I don't like seeing people argue against something they just suggested because someone on the other side of the river agrees. It makes no sense other than to perpetuate arguing for its own sake.
I would like to see people make up their minds about their opinions before they "pull a Kerry" or if that is too strong a term, "pulled a monica" for you Freinds fans.



Quote
I would require prisoners to be society's maids.

Agreed.


So, crooks must earn freedom but everyone else can just consume it at will without a price or let poor boys and girls who want a college education do the dying and serving for them? Gee, that's a healthy national character.
 
  • #92
[b said:
Quote[/b] (hamata @ May 05 2004,11:22)]I just read this and decided to put in my 2 cents, so here I go and jump into the fire...

 I am completely against big government.

  It is all about incentives. Who has more inventive to improve quality of a product or service, the government, or a company that can profit? Of course, there are exceptions such as the military, which should remain with the government etc., but other than that, I would rather get a service from a private company that has a vested interest in me.

  In this case, the government has little competition with any service or product that it provides, so they should they make it better until it hurts someone or becomes completely useless? Really, give me a reason and an example where this has worked, and you can find so many more examples of where it has failed miserably.

  On the other hand, products and services provided by private companies in a potentially profitable sector will always find competition. Now, there are incentives to improve product and services to compete with other businesses. (This can even work with highways and just about anything else.)
I disagree. Look at the privatization of electricity in California.
Prices went up, and suddenly, because of not making improvements with the extra money, they weren't able to make enough electricity to meet the demand.

Privatization works in theory. But that doesn't always translate into the real world.

I'm not saying it couldn't work, I'm just saying that, in the recent past, it hasn't worked well.
 
Back
Top