Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
November 23, 2014, 10:00:26 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: WHEN?  (Read 3820 times)
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 6204

Location: Randleman, NC


« on: July 24, 2012, 05:59:49 PM »

     *Looking back thru the past 4 years, many "Whens" pop up.*
*Read them all to better understand where we are going as a country.*

*
WHEN** - he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign,
as other candidates had done, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan, Muramar
Kaddafi and Hugo Chavez, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - it was pointed out that he was a total newcomer and had absolutely
no experience at anything except community organizing, people said it
didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and
Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals, people said it didn't
matter.*
*
WHEN** - his voting record in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate
came into question, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he refused to wear a flag lapel pin and did so only after a public
outcry, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools
were taught to sing his praises, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the
National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he surrounded himself in the White House with advisors who were
pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage and wanting to
curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition, people said it didn't
matter.*
*
WHEN** - he said he favors sex education in kindergarten, including
homosexual indoctrination, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - his personal background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing
could be found about him, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to
produce a birth certificate, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco - a man of
questionable character and who is now in prison and had helped Obama to a
sweet deal on the purchase of his home - people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist,
spent a ton of money to get him elected, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he started appointing White House Czars that were radicals,
revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxists +/or Communists, people said it
didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he stood before the Nation and told us that his intentions were to
"fundamentally transform this Nation" into something else, people said it
didn't matter.**

WHEN** - it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and
served as an attorney for ACORN, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed cabinet members and several advisers who were tax
cheats and socialists, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed a Science Czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced
abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers, people
said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed Cass Sunstein as Regulatory Czar who believes in
"Explicit Consent," harvesting human organs without family consent and
allowing animals to be represented in court, while banning all hunting,
people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual and organizer of a group
called Gay, Lesbian, Straight, Education Network as Safe School Czar and it
became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers, people said
it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed Mark Lloyd as Diversity Czar who believes in
curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the
wealth, who supports Hugo Chavez, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - Valerie Jarrett, an avowed Socialist, was selected as Obama's
Senior White House Advisor, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director, said Mao Tse Tung
was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for
inspiration, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed Carol Browner, a well known socialist as Global
Warming Czar working on Cap and Trade as the nation's largest tax, people
said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he appointed Van Jones, an ex-con and avowed Communist as Green
Energy Czar, who since had to resign when this was made known, people said
it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - Tom Daschle, Obama's pick for Health and Human Services Secretary
could not be confirmed because he was a tax cheat, people said it didn't
matter.**

WHEN** - as President of the United States , he bowed to the King of Saudi
Arabia , people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he traveled around the world criticizing America and never once
talking of her greatness, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - his actions concerning the Middle East seemed to support the
Palestinians over Israel , our long-time ally, people said it didn't matter.
**

WHEN** - he took American tax dollars to resettle thousands of Palestinians
from Gaza to the United States , people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he upset the Europeans by removing plans for a missile defense
system against the Russians, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he played politics in Afghanistan by not sending troops early-on
when the Field Commanders said they were necessary to win, people said it
didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he started spending us into a debt that was so big we could not
pay it off, people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he took a huge spending bill under the guise of stimulus and used
it to pay off organizations, unions, and individuals that got him elected,
people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he took over insurance companies, car companies, banks, etc.,
people said it didn't matter.**

WHEN** - he took away student loans from the banks and put it through the
government, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he designed plans to take over the health care system and put it
under government control, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he claimed he was a Christian during the election and tapes were
later made public that showed Obama speaking to a Muslim group and
'stating' that he was raised a Muslim, was educated as a Muslim, and is
still a Muslim, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - he set into motion a plan to take over the control of all energy
in the United States through Cap and Trade, people said it didn't matter.*
*
WHEN** - **he finally completed his transformation of America into a
Socialist State , people woke up--- but it was too late.*
*Add these up one by one and you get a phenomenal score that points to the
fact that Barrack Hussein Obama is determined to turn America into a
Marxist-Socialist society.*
*All of the items in the preceding paragraphs have been put into place. All
can be documented very easily. Before you disavow this do an Internet
search. The last paragraph alone is not yet cast in stone. You and I will
write that paragraph.
Will it read as above or will it be a more happy ending for most of America
?*
*
Don't just belittle the opposition. Search for the truth.*
*We all need to pull together or watch the death of a free democratic
society. *
*Pray for Americans to seek the truth and take action for it will keep us
FREE.*
*Our biggest enemy is not China , Russia , North Korea or Iran.*
*Our biggest enemy is a contingent of politicians in Washington , DC .*
*The government will not help, so we need to do it ourselves.
*
It's your decision. I believe it does matter. How about you?*
*WHEN** - **November 2012 comes, it will matter who you vote for!*
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4387

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2012, 12:26:59 AM »

How about WHEN the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House under Bush Jr and what the result of that was?  The complete destruction of the US economy.  All that destruction can’t be fixed overnight my friend.  WHY would anybody give them the keys again!
Logged
ApalacheeRiverFarms
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53

Location: Hopelessly Lost


« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2012, 02:09:16 AM »

it can't be fixed by spending money and setting policy that doesn't create jobs and makes people worldwide afraid to
spend any money.  I'm still waiting for that plan to get us back on track... right... He isn't a businessman... But he was a stellar senator... Nope, not that either. if he gets reelected, he will try to get the two term limit removed so he can maybe one day figure out that socialism doesn't work.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15268


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2012, 10:29:21 AM »

Quote
How about WHEN the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House under Bush Jr and what the result of that was?  The complete destruction of the US economy.  All that destruction can’t be fixed overnight my friend.  WHY would anybody give them the keys again!

you mean that time when the unemployment rate was a statistical 0 and the economy was booming.....which all lasted right up to the time the dems took the congress...and their reckless demands on the banks caught up with them! 

yup, we remember and i am amazed that we gave the keys to the dems again.....says a lot about the average voter, i guess.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4387

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #4 on: July 25, 2012, 12:48:24 PM »

The Republicans are masters of spending the next generation’s dollars to live high on the hog in the here and now.  Sure it felt like the economy was “booming” with “0 unemployment” when we were all spending other people’s money like drunken sailors.  The housing boom also felt nice when our homes were going up in value by 50K a year too didn’t it? 

But as with the housing market, the chickens eventually come home to roost.  We can’t live off the kids forever.  Only Clinton made a genuine effort to stop spending the next generation’s dollars.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15268


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2012, 01:51:11 PM »

all parties are masters at spending what they don't have.
 the economy was booming.  it was especially significant since bush took office in a recession and then the economic impact of 9/11. 

there is a difference between the health of the economy and spending. while it is true that the spending was high, as a percent of GDP, it was no higher than many other admins of both parties. 

clinton was dragged to spending cuts and welfare reform by a republican congress.  if you look at his/democrat spending record it was a lot of deficit spending and with no outside influences like war, terrorism, etc.

what is a fact is that there are currently a number of plans to rein in spending and begin to pay down the debt.  all come from the republican congress and are rejected by the democrat senate. 

http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/us_national_debt_chart.html
here is debt to GDP real and projected. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
beemaster
Site Founder
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6267


Location: Manchester, NJ

It is my pleasure to bring the forums to you.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2012, 02:13:56 AM »

The Economic disaster started when Janet Reno declared Microsoft a monopoly: and even-though little changed to Microsoft's function and foothold on the tech sector, DOUBT was born in the Tech Sector's ability to drive the US and the world's economy into the 21st century.

Doubt that started a crumble on Wall Street long before the towers fell - when the booming tech sector took that heavy hit from the departing Clinton Administration, Bush was handed a problem that would trickled down to every American in one form or another. Reno handed Clinton a stick of dynamite, he lit it and handed it to Bush as a welcoming gift.

This belief is echoed by Steve Forbes and Warren Buffet who wouldn't put a penny of his money in techs, but knew how they were driving more than Nasdaq in 2000.
Logged

NJBeemaster my YOUTUBE Video Collection
Follow us on TWITTER
SKYPE NJBeemaster - include your FORUM NAME in contact request
My Personal FACEBOOK Page


"All donations to our forums are greatly appreciated"
Please click HERE to help support our forum.
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2012, 12:19:50 PM »

The Economic disaster started when Janet Reno declared Microsoft a monopoly: and even-though little changed to Microsoft's function and foothold on the tech sector, DOUBT was born in the Tech Sector's ability to drive the US and the world's economy into the 21st century.


I for one welcome our new corporate overlords!   "Doubt" seems to be the new rightwing buzzword.  Why are corporations sitting on trillions of dollars that they refuse to invest (prior to the elections this fall)?  Doubt!  They aren't sure what will happen in the future so they are forsaking their presumed role of driving private sector growth.  Well when has there not been doubt?  When have corporations or anyone else known for sure what the future holds?  While we are not currently in a recession, we are in a depression.... a prolonged period of growth below that necessary to match population growth or allow for expansion of the economy, investment in infrastructure, education, trade, etc.   

So how could the "doubt" be removed?  Do you want to guarantee the big corporations a profit?  Like the big banks were guaranteed survival and a profit even though they were using our money as chips at the casino?  The doubt that exists is there because Congress is totally deadlocked.  The continuous use of the filibuster in the Senate means that nothing can pass.  Obama has proposed the American Jobs Act to jumpstart investment in infrastructure like roads, bridges, and rapid transit trains.  He has proposed a second stimulus that would keep teachers, firefighters and cops on the job.  But those laws, that would end the doubt about governments intention to invest in America, will not pass the Congress.  Do you blame Obama for that?  He got more legislation through the Congress in his first 2 years than any President in modern times.  But there is nothing he can do beyond a few executive orders until the Republicans who are blocking progress are removed.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4387

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2012, 01:13:48 PM »

+1 what Frameshift said.  

I agree with Frames logic here, but it’s not the corporations sitting on the Trillions of dollars, it’s the top 1% of private citizens.  The richest corporation in the world is Apple and it only has 100 billion in cash; far shy of trillions.  The problem is we can't pry any $$$ from the 1%ers and they won’t invest it in the economy.  I think it’s what is called greed Sad
Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 5495


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2012, 06:18:22 PM »

Perhaps a correlation between the most legislation passed in two years and executive orders to the largest slowdown in history?
Government meddling and regulation does not promote investment .
Neither does fear of confiscation of profit. It just goes to show punishing success is a bad idea.
Perhaps the next step is for the government to confiscate all the money? It has been shown if the earnings of all the rich were taken it would not put a dent in the deficit,let alone spur confidence in the market place.
Logged
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8186

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2012, 06:27:00 PM »

I work for a lot of people with a lot of money.   They are sitting on that money because they do not know what to do with it.   It is not greed.  Sitting on cash looses value and does not keep up with inflation.  They can not invest in business because there are too many questions with the future and what the government is going to do.   I hear this every day.   
Logged
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #11 on: July 29, 2012, 06:47:26 PM »

Perhaps a correlation between the most legislation passed in two years and executive orders to the largest slowdown in history?
There is a correlation and it's not what you imply.  The economy is MUCH better now that it was when Obama came into office.  Instead of losing 750k jobs a month, we are gaining jobs and have 24 straight months of GDP growth.  But the growth is too slow to absorb the new workers coming into the job force.  The American Jobs Act was (and is) an attempt to build needed infrastructure and create jobs at the same time.  If business refuses to invest (and if banks refuse to make loans), it is the government's role to pull us out of depression.

This is what happens when half the country's capital is in the hands of the richest few percent of the population.  What is left of the middle class does not have money to buy anything.  And the people with the money are sitting on it.  This is not a supply side depression, if such a thing could ever exist.  This is a demand side depression.  It won't end until money sitting in the bank accounts of the rich is moved into the productive economy.  That has to happen, one way or another.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15268


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #12 on: July 29, 2012, 08:19:40 PM »

Quote
it is the government's role to pull us out of depression.

really?  i missed that in my class on the enumerated powers of the fed.  and....when has it ever worked?  since the government must take, to spend, it's like pulling water out of the deep end of the pool, dumping it in the shallow end, and watching for the water to rise....

 
Quote
It won't end until money sitting in the bank accounts of the rich is moved into the productive economy.

included in this admins definition of rich, is the majority of small businesses.  on what should they, or anyone with money, spend their money?  people invest when there is something worth the investment.  the "rich" don't make money sitting on money, but they don't lose it either when they hold on for a growth environment.  as long as regulation and mandates from on high make for a bad business environment, they will not spend.  since they create the majority of the opportunity for all, the fastest way to get them to invest is to get rid of the environment that is stopping them. 

come quickly November!!
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #13 on: July 29, 2012, 08:51:29 PM »

Quote
it is the government's role to pull us out of depression.

really?  i missed that in my class on the enumerated powers of the fed.  and....when has it ever worked?  since the government must take, to spend, it's like pulling water out of the deep end of the pool, dumping it in the shallow end, and watching for the water to rise....
Of course that is the role of government.   It is  an implied power of the welfare clause.  When the depression is severe enough it becomes a national security issue as well.  Are you seriously saying that you would watch the country cease to function because you don't like the redistribution of wealth?  

It was government spending that  pulled us out of depression in 1932 and again in 1939-1945.   But there are many other occasions when stimulative spending has helped shorten recessions.  

 
Quote
It won't end until money sitting in the bank accounts of the rich is moved into the productive economy.
Quote

included in this admins definition of rich, is the majority of small businesses.  on what should they, or anyone with money, spend their money?  people invest when there is something worth the investment.  the "rich" don't make money sitting on money, but they don't lose it either when they hold on for a growth environment.  as long as regulation and mandates from on high make for a bad business environment, they will not spend.  since they create the majority of the opportunity for all, the fastest way to get them to invest is to get rid of the environment that is stopping them.  

First, it is not true that the majority of small businesses make more than $250k per year.  I think the number that make that much is 3%.    I understand why the rich are sitting on their money.  If they won't spend and invest, then the government has to do it.  The government could print the money but that means more debt.  Or... the government can raise taxes on the rich and spend the money on infrastructure, education, health, etc.  The things that make growth possible.  Somehow the money has to move from the savings accounts of the rich into the economy.  They can invest it or the government can tax it.  And THAT is the fastest way to get that money spent.  

As to your pool analogy, it's not just moving the water around in the same pool.  It's moving from the kiddie pool to the pool the economy lives in.  The level of water may fall in the kiddie pool but it will rise for the rest of us.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15268


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #14 on: July 29, 2012, 09:44:58 PM »

FRAME, i have to admit that every time i read or hear someone still clinging to that kind of economic theory, i am surprised...but then, people do cling to various mythologies....

first, you are wrong about government spending and the depression.  there have been a number of studies, most notably one from UCLA, that show this not to be true.  in fact, they came to the conclusion that the government interventions actually extended the depression by years.  i have posted the link before, so i won't bother again.
this president chose to do the very things that let to the extended depression of the 30's and 40's.  guess what?  we are getting the same result!  surprise!!!

Quote
  It is  an implied power of the welfare clause. 


yes, liberals like to do all kinds of implied things.  that doesn't mean they are right.  we could make a long list of the claimed implications that have led to oppressive legislation.

Quote
First, it is not true that the majority of small businesses make more than $250k per year.

depends on how the government reads it.  gross, net, assets??? 
the government is printing money.


Quote
Or... the government can raise taxes on the rich and spend the money on infrastructure, education, health, etc.  The things that make growth possible.  Somehow the money has to move from the savings accounts of the rich into the economy.  They can invest it or the government can tax it.  And THAT is the fastest way to get that money spent. 


none of those things make growth possible...except the growth of government.  if you want business to spend you do what needs to be done to free the private sector.  you do not take from them so that you can support pet projects and increased food stamp roles.

your economic solutions have always failed, as they are failing now. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4387

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2012, 10:18:16 PM »

really?  i missed that in my class on the enumerated powers of the fed. 
LOL.  I have become concerned you might have dozed off during some important topics in Econ and Poly Sci….

Frameshift is spot on with his analysis. +2.
Logged
sterling
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044

Location: mt juliet tn


« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2012, 06:23:01 PM »

+1 what Frameshift said.  

I agree with Frames logic here, but it’s not the corporations sitting on the Trillions of dollars, it’s the top 1% of private citizens.  The richest corporation in the world is Apple and it only has 100 billion in cash; far shy of trillions.  The problem is we can't pry any $$$ from the 1%ers and they won’t invest it in the economy.  I think it’s what is called greed Sad

Greed or not it's there money. They earned it.   WHY DO THINK YOU DERSERVE ANY OF IT. huh

And don't think for a minute after Obama gets the 1%ers money he ain't comming after the middlemans money. Obama Care is just one example.
Logged
FRAMEshift
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1681


Location: North Carolina


« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2012, 06:47:44 PM »


Greed or not it's there money. They earned it.   WHY DO THINK YOU DERSERVE ANY OF IT. huh

Really?  They didn't get it the old fashioned way, by stealing it?  The bankers who got rich off bonuses from TARP money.... they didn't earn it.  The executive at the Health Insurance companies didn't earn it.... their companies don't dispense any medicine, give any shots, perform any heart surgeries, or take any blood pressure measurements.  All they do is take your money and then give SOME of it back.  At least Obamacare requires that they give 80% of it back.

There are plenty of people in this country that did earn their money, and plenty of others who didn't.  Most of the top earners in companies I've worked for were specialists at claiming credit for work done by others and firing people to protect their own power base.   Unfortunately, there is no way government can police every boss at every company to be sure that they really do earn their money.  But what government can and must do is redistribute some of that money to build the infrastructure, schools, and heath care systems that serve all of society.  Without that, we fail to be an equal opportunity society.  And if society does not provide equal opportunity for hard working people to get ahead, it serves no purpose at all.
Logged

"You never can tell with bees."  --  Winnie-the-Pooh
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15268


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2012, 07:09:21 PM »

Quote
Really?  They didn't get it the old fashioned way, by stealing it?  The bankers who got rich off bonuses from TARP money....


unlike the auto companies, the banks paid back TARP money with interest.  some were forced to take money that they didn't want.  it's really the auto companies and their unions you should be mad at.

funny how all rich people stole it, except for maybe a kennedy, or soros, or a gates.....this is why liberals want to take from others.  the concept of earning is beyond them.  they just want stuff given to them.

Quote
The executive at the Health Insurance companies didn't earn it.... their companies don't dispense any medicine, give any shots, perform any heart surgeries, or take any blood pressure measurements.  All they do is take your money and then give SOME of it back

and yet, they provide a service that most Americans demand as part of their employment.

Quote
At least Obamacare requires that they give 80% of it back.

and why should they?  you want something.  they provide it.  they take all the risk.

Quote
Unfortunately, there is no way government can police every boss at every company to be sure that they really do earn their money

sure there is.  they can nationalize companies and set compensation rates.  they can fix prices and profit.  is that what you want?

Quote
But what government can and must do is redistribute some of that money to build the infrastructure, schools, and heath care systems that serve all of society.  Without that, we fail to be an equal opportunity society.  And if society does not provide equal opportunity for hard working people to get ahead, it serves no purpose at all.

you confuse equality, which is what liberals want, with opportunity, which is what conservatives want.  the liberal quest for equality kills opportunity because it must take the rewards of work and gives it to another who has not earned.
government only provide equal opportunity to the extent that it can stay out of the way of the earner.  it is the individual effort that decides success.   

Quote
And if society does not provide equal opportunity for hard working people to get ahead, it serves no purpose at all.

again, individual effort is the key.  you confuse government and society. government can't make a person successful, can't make them make wise choices, can't make them stay out of debt....
society exists as a framework within which the individual chooses to exist.  it may be as small as your family, or as large as your state, but it is not the engine of your success or failure...unless it gets in your way or oppresses you....although it may be, to some extent, a support mechanism.

redistribution, as many times as it has been tried, and as many names as it has been called, has always depended on bringing the successful down.  it never brings the "downtrodden" up.  the only people who experience improved circumstances are those in charge of redistribution.

hmmm...i think you are just confused!   Wink
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
sterling
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044

Location: mt juliet tn


« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2012, 05:35:24 PM »

Iddee listed about 30 things about Obama that are serious reasons for not giving him a second term as a president of a once free country, and all you liberals want to concern yourselves with are the people who made over 250,000 dollars last year. Which proves the class warfare approach that Axlerod is using for the Obama campaign works to keep your minds off the real Obama record.
Amazing for sure.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.43 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page November 12, 2014, 10:12:05 AM
anything