Are you all ok with increasing the minimum wage to $100/hour? Why not if it doesn't cause unemployment?
Why, when it's finally proven that they are wrong, do conservatives always resort to saying absurd crap like ^that^?
No matter how much you might like it or not like it... the world isn't all black and white. There has to be a balance and there has to be a "sweet spot." Allowing employers to pay pennies per day and then not giving a social safety net to workers would create a slave population, desperately poor. Crime would sky-rocket along with poverty, hunger and the gap between the very rich and very poor would be astronomical. We'd be like a third-world nation in months.
The point of a minimum wage is that it's supposed to allow employers to pay a fair wage but still be able to turn a profit from the employee's work. If you're talking about someone whose job it is to say "would you like fries with that," an employer isn't going to be able to sustain his business if he has to pay $100 per hour.
Are you sure you're a PhD in economics?
I guess us "liberals" are able to find a middle ground and conservatives only understand extremes in either direction?
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
News flash: Being pro-business is being pro-worker.
no, NEWS FLASH...being probusiness is being PRO PROFIT at the expense of and on the backs of said workers.
why is it called pro business and not pro worker when a corporation moves operations and maunfacturing overseas when it cuts american jobs?? they do that to avoid paying american workers what the workers command and for the tax breaks.
pro business? yes.
pro worker? fuck no.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
News flash: Being pro-business is being pro-worker.
no, NEWS FLASH...being probusiness is being PRO PROFIT at the expense of and on the backs of said workers.
why is it called pro business and not pro worker when a corporation moves operations and maunfacturing overseas when it cuts american jobs?? they do that to avoid paying american workers what the workers command and for the tax breaks.
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
News flash: Being pro-business is being pro-worker.
no, NEWS FLASH...being probusiness is being PRO PROFIT at the expense of and on the backs of said workers.
why is it called pro business and not pro worker when a corporation moves operations and maunfacturing overseas when it cuts american jobs?? they do that to avoid paying american workers what the workers command and for the tax breaks.
pro business? yes.
pro worker? fuck no.
Let me add to this. I work at a hotel (Marriott) and the past 3 years have been kind of shitty. Not terrible but worse months than years prior. The first thing corporations do to make bigger profit is cut the hourly worker hours. It's a fact. That is the best way to make budget is to cut hourly pay. Corporations are looking for ways to cut hourly workers. That's why they have tried these automatic check in kiosks, to cut out the worker completely. What happened was you start losing the "Human" experience and guest scores go down. So now they are doing it the old fashioned way by putting fewer workers on a shift for overall lower hours. That’s what corporations do.
Getting back to the topic, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Bachman. I'm done with voting for turd sandwich and giant douche. If Ron Paul, or even Gary Johnson(snowballs chance) doesn't get the nomination, I will not vote for Obama or the Republican. Its been the same back and forth BS for too many years.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
Getting back to the topic, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Bachman. I'm done with voting for turd sandwich and giant douche. If Ron Paul, or even Gary Johnson(snowballs chance) doesn't get the nomination, I will not vote for Obama or the Republican. Its been the same back and forth BS for too many years.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
I'm kinda with you on the Ron Paul ticket but I would like to hear his take on the seperation of church and state. As this has come up in many debate forums before.
Getting back to the topic, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Bachman. I'm done with voting for turd sandwich and giant douche. If Ron Paul, or even Gary Johnson(snowballs chance) doesn't get the nomination, I will not vote for Obama or the Republican. Its been the same back and forth BS for too many years.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
^ This exactly. I'd definitely vote for Nader again (or the Libertarian or Constitution Party nominee) if Paul or Johnson found no to be nominated as Republicans or as 3rd party guys.
Getting back to the topic, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Bachman. I'm done with voting for turd sandwich and giant douche. If Ron Paul, or even Gary Johnson(snowballs chance) doesn't get the nomination, I will not vote for Obama or the Republican. Its been the same back and forth BS for too many years.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
I'm kinda with you on the Ron Paul ticket but I would like to hear his take on the seperation of church and state. As this has come up in many debate forums before.
What are do you mean specifically? He is for both economic and personal freedom. I know is generalizing, but I think it is pretty simple to me.
Getting back to the topic, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Bachman. I'm done with voting for turd sandwich and giant douche. If Ron Paul, or even Gary Johnson(snowballs chance) doesn't get the nomination, I will not vote for Obama or the Republican. Its been the same back and forth BS for too many years.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
I'm kinda with you on the Ron Paul ticket but I would like to hear his take on the seperation of church and state. As this has come up in many debate forums before.
What are do you mean specifically? He is for both economic and personal freedom. I know is generalizing, but I think it is pretty simple to me.
Ron Paul Quote "The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion."
The Word God never appears in the constitution. It does appear inThe Declaration of Independence but this is not a legal document for this nation. What this means is that it has no authority over our laws, our lawmakers, or ourselves. It cannot be cited as precedent or as being binding in a courtroom
“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
Let me add to this. I work at a hotel (Marriott) and the past 3 years have been kind of shitty. Not terrible but worse months than years prior. The first thing corporations do to make bigger profit is cut the hourly worker hours. It's a fact. That is the best way to make budget is to cut hourly pay. Corporations are looking for ways to cut hourly workers. That's why they have tried these automatic check in kiosks, to cut out the worker completely. What happened was you start losing the "Human" experience and guest scores go down. So now they are doing it the old fashioned way by putting fewer workers on a shift for overall lower hours. That’s what corporations do.
I wouldn't say that's the first thing "corporations do".
I'd say they try a myriad of approaches to max profit when faced with tough economic situations ( and lower demand for their product). I agree that one could be, corporations cutting back on costs in order to continue maximizing profit. That behavior is not bad, it's predictable and understandable given the circumstances. The corporation goal is to continue to operate... they don't like making their workers unhappy, but economic conditions are forcing their hand.
So many of you act like you are entitled. You're entitled to nothing. If your employer wants to cut your hours, you can cry/bitch or moan. I'm not saying you shouldn't be upset, I'm saying it won't do any good. You aren't entitled to anything. You can act like you are, but you're not. You should be thankful to have a job in this economic climate, even if you make less or work a bit less.
“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
I thought Libertarian meant, you mind your business -I will mind my own.
Libertarians don't think it's okay to kill people. They believe every human being is entitled to life and personal freedom. If a human is attached to another human, neither person should be permitted to kill the other because, of course, you'd be restricting one person's personal freedom by killing that person.
“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
I thought Libertarian meant, you mind your business -I will mind my own.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
Her family farm has also received more than $250K in federal subsidies in the last 10 years. Looking forward to hearing her explain her way out of that one.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
We'll see. I have a lot of respect for him.
As long as he continues to be allowed to debate, he may not win but his questions about the fed and our economic and foreign policies will need to be addressed...Either way his name will be hand written on my ballot if it has to be
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
Her family farm has also received more than $250K in federal subsidies in the last 10 years. Looking forward to hearing her explain her way out of that one.
“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
I thought Libertarian meant, you mind your business -I will mind my own.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I know that on a personal level, the more I have studied libertarian philosophy and classical liberalism, the less divisive I find this issue to be. Fundamentally I do believe the fetus is a life that should be protected by law, especially if viable or is not a threat to the life of its mother. But, I also believe that making laws against abortion isn't going to change all that much from the desired net result for everyone: less abortions. If abortion were made illegal tomorrow, there would be a larger abortion black market, a lot of it using modern technology -- it's not going to be all coat hangers in a back alley somewhere. However those types of abortion will also rise in numbers again.
Bottom line, abortion isn't going anywhere until people choose to stop having them. I think improving life for those already alive and breathing will bring down the number of abortions more than any laws against it will.
Let me add to this. I work at a hotel (Marriott) and the past 3 years have been kind of shitty. Not terrible but worse months than years prior. The first thing corporations do to make bigger profit is cut the hourly worker hours. It's a fact. That is the best way to make budget is to cut hourly pay. Corporations are looking for ways to cut hourly workers. That's why they have tried these automatic check in kiosks, to cut out the worker completely. What happened was you start losing the "Human" experience and guest scores go down. So now they are doing it the old fashioned way by putting fewer workers on a shift for overall lower hours. That’s what corporations do.
I wouldn't say that's the first thing "corporations do".
I'd say they try a myriad of approaches to max profit when faced with tough economic situations ( and lower demand for their product). I agree that one could be, corporations cutting back on costs in order to continue maximizing profit. That behavior is not bad, it's predictable and understandable given the circumstances. The corporation goal is to continue to operate... they don't like making their workers unhappy, but economic conditions are forcing their hand.
So many of you act like you are entitled. You're entitled to nothing. If your employer wants to cut your hours, you can cry/bitch or moan. I'm not saying you shouldn't be upset, I'm saying it won't do any good. You aren't entitled to anything. You can act like you are, but you're not. You should be thankful to have a job in this economic climate, even if you make less or work a bit less.
Never said I was entitled slick. Actually I am one that feels the same way about people and the me, me, me generation. But let's cut the shit. First thing that goes is hours. Always is always will be. So explain this one Corporate Carl. Why have so many companies (Walgreens, Goodyear, GameStop, Del Monte Foods, Apple, Anheuser Busch & every oil company just to name a few cause the list is much larger than this) have banner record breaking 1st quarters but job growth is down? Because they cut hours.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
We'll see. I have a lot of respect for him.
I find it strange that anyone could throw support around for two candidates as completely different as Paul and Bachmann.
I can't even imagine how destructive Michelle Bachmann's foreign policy would be as God tells her to destroy all the other religions around the world. :roll: Paul on the other hand has the foreign policy that I believe would ultimately save America.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
We'll see. I have a lot of respect for him.
There's not a chance that Paul could beat Obama. It does alleviate intellectual stress when someone believes the overly simplistic "government bad, free market good" world-view that Paul pushes. By and large, Americans want government to be at a higher level then what Paul proposes. Many Ron Paul supporters have this cult-like response to him and overestimate his popularity and appeal. I guess it does make life easier when you can blame the government for just about everything.
Never said I was entitled slick. Actually I am one that feels the same way about people and the me, me, me generation. But let's cut the shit. First thing that goes is hours. Always is always will be. So explain this one Corporate Carl. Why have so many companies (Walgreens, Goodyear, GameStop, Del Monte Foods, Apple, Anheuser Busch & every oil company just to name a few cause the list is much larger than this) have banner record breaking 1st quarters but job growth is down? Because they cut hours.
Corporate profits can dip awful fast, as we've seen during the recession. Yet, as you mention, they can also return to a heightened level. There's been a hell of a lot of volatility.
What you don't mention is stability. A company is not going to take on more workers in a climate where there is so much instability. The corporation, like the U.S. saver (personal savings rates have also broken records recently) will continue to hold cash until they feel safe, until they feel it's the right time to take on the investment because it will bring about a rate of return (yes, hiring someone can be considered an investment).
No one,... corporations, small business nor people in general want to make investments in an environment with so much doubt.
I find it strange that anyone could throw support around for two candidates as completely different as Paul and Bachmann.
I can't even imagine how destructive Michelle Bachmann's foreign policy would be as God tells her to destroy all the other religions around the world. :roll: Paul on the other hand has the foreign policy that I believe would ultimately save America.
They aren't that different at all, actually. Sure, there's a few differences. But, take a look at her stance on the issues. She's more in-line with Paul then the majority of Republican candidates.
She's certainly more in-line with Paul then our Keynesian President.
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
We'll see. I have a lot of respect for him.
There's not a chance that Paul could beat Obama. It does alleviate intellectual stress when someone believes the overly simplistic "government bad, free market good" world-view that Paul pushes. By and large, Americans want government to be at a higher level then what Paul proposes. Many Ron Paul supporters have this cult-like response to him and overestimate his popularity and appeal. I guess it does make life easier when you can blame the government for just about everything.
why do people who support someone other than your guy have to be dimwits? why are they simply looking to alleviate the stress of thinking too hard?
seriously, I would love for Paul to be on a debate stage with Obama. Not because he would wipe the floor with him or anything dumb like that, but more because they differ so much in economic philosophy it would actually be interesting to listen to...I have no grand illusion that Paul will ever be able to win a general election, but the more he is allowed to participate in the actual campaign the more people will start to realize that his ideas aren't crack pot or fringe as he is portrayed...or we can continue doing things exactly the same way with people like Obama or Romney or whoever else the establishment loves and change nothing.
I suggest reading a little more about Paul if you think it is simply a "government bad, free market good" world view. That is like suggesting that Obama has a "government great, people too stupid" world view...obviously that isn't true either.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
There's not a chance that Paul could beat Obama. It does alleviate intellectual stress when someone believes the overly simplistic "government bad, free market good" world-view that Paul pushes. By and large, Americans want government to be at a higher level then what Paul proposes. Many Ron Paul supporters have this cult-like response to him and overestimate his popularity and appeal. I guess it does make life easier when you can blame the government for just about everything.
The President lost 4 approval points OVER NIGHT. http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx
His Presidency is a train-wreck. Any one of these candidates on the Republican side could beat Obama if the economy doesn't turn around.
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
News flash: Being pro-business is being pro-worker.
no, NEWS FLASH...being probusiness is being PRO PROFIT at the expense of and on the backs of said workers.
why is it called pro business and not pro worker when a corporation moves operations and maunfacturing overseas when it cuts american jobs?? they do that to avoid paying american workers what the workers command and for the tax breaks.
pro business? yes.
pro worker? fuck no.
does dr. greenspan have a response for this?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
why do people who support someone other than your guy have to be dimwits? why are they simply looking to alleviate the stress of thinking too hard?
seriously, I would love for Paul to be on a debate stage with Obama. Not because he would wipe the floor with him or anything dumb like that, but more because they differ so much in economic philosophy it would actually be interesting to listen to...I have no grand illusion that Paul will ever be able to win a general election, but the more he is allowed to participate in the actual campaign the more people will start to realize that his ideas aren't crack pot or fringe as he is portrayed...or we can continue doing things exactly the same way with people like Obama or Romney or whoever else the establishment loves and change nothing.
I suggest reading a little more about Paul if you think it is simply a "government bad, free market good" world view. That is like suggesting that Obama has a "government great, people too stupid" world view...obviously that isn't true either.
Never said I was entitled slick. Actually I am one that feels the same way about people and the me, me, me generation. But let's cut the shit. First thing that goes is hours. Always is always will be. So explain this one Corporate Carl. Why have so many companies (Walgreens, Goodyear, GameStop, Del Monte Foods, Apple, Anheuser Busch & every oil company just to name a few cause the list is much larger than this) have banner record breaking 1st quarters but job growth is down? Because they cut hours.
Corporate profits can dip awful fast, as we've seen during the recession. Yet, as you mention, they can also return to a heightened level. There's been a hell of a lot of volatility.
What you don't mention is stability. A company is not going to take on more workers in a climate where there is so much instability. The corporation, like the U.S. saver (personal savings rates have also broken records recently) will continue to hold cash until they feel safe, until they feel it's the right time to take on the investment because it will bring about a rate of return (yes, hiring someone can be considered an investment).
No one,... corporations, small business nor people in general want to make investments in an environment with so much doubt.
This quote is taken from an article written in November of 2010. I believe they have had a great 2011 as well.
"Since the end of 2008, when corporate America began enjoying the resumption of growth, profits have swelled from an annualized pace of $995 billion to the current $1.66 trillion as of the end of September. Over the same period, the number of non-farm jobs counted by the Labor Department has slipped from 13.4 million to 13 million."
she, like anyone else against the minimum wage, is pro-business and anti-worker. just like the governors of wisconsin, ohio, florida, indiana, and many other states. this alone makes her unelectable.
Her family farm has also received more than $250K in federal subsidies in the last 10 years. Looking forward to hearing her explain her way out of that one.
i would also like to see that...
Bachmann:
"uhhh but you see, i am DIFFERENT. it is ok for me to take money from the government because i am not into the subsidy business...oh wait, yeah i am.... but i i am different because that money was given to me, and not the poor, so it is not a subsidy nor an entitlement..."
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Comments
Why, when it's finally proven that they are wrong, do conservatives always resort to saying absurd crap like ^that^?
No matter how much you might like it or not like it... the world isn't all black and white. There has to be a balance and there has to be a "sweet spot." Allowing employers to pay pennies per day and then not giving a social safety net to workers would create a slave population, desperately poor. Crime would sky-rocket along with poverty, hunger and the gap between the very rich and very poor would be astronomical. We'd be like a third-world nation in months.
The point of a minimum wage is that it's supposed to allow employers to pay a fair wage but still be able to turn a profit from the employee's work. If you're talking about someone whose job it is to say "would you like fries with that," an employer isn't going to be able to sustain his business if he has to pay $100 per hour.
Are you sure you're a PhD in economics?
I guess us "liberals" are able to find a middle ground and conservatives only understand extremes in either direction?
Or maybe raise it a bit to stimulate the economy from the bottom since giving mega tax breaks to billionaires clearly doesn't work?
Give it to people who'll actually spend it instead of the people who just stock-pile it?
why is it called pro business and not pro worker when a corporation moves operations and maunfacturing overseas when it cuts american jobs?? they do that to avoid paying american workers what the workers command and for the tax breaks.
pro business? yes.
pro worker? fuck no.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
XLNT POST GIMMI !
Godfather.
Who will actually change our foreign policy? Who will change the government corporatism? Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Gary Johnson. I will vote for anyone that will actually do something about it.
^ This exactly. I'd definitely vote for Nader again (or the Libertarian or Constitution Party nominee) if Paul or Johnson found no to be nominated as Republicans or as 3rd party guys.
What are do you mean specifically? He is for both economic and personal freedom. I know is generalizing, but I think it is pretty simple to me.
Ron Paul Quote "The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion."
The Word God never appears in the constitution. It does appear inThe Declaration of Independence but this is not a legal document for this nation. What this means is that it has no authority over our laws, our lawmakers, or ourselves. It cannot be cited as precedent or as being binding in a courtroom
“The first thing we have to do is get the federal government out of it. We don’t need a federal abortion police. That’s the last thing that we need. There has to be a criminal penalty for the person that’s committing that crime. And I think that is the abortionist. As for the punishment, I don’t think that should be up to the president to decide.”
So is he against personal freedom here?
This also worries me
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52941.html
I thought Libertarian meant, you mind your business -I will mind my own.
I wouldn't say that's the first thing "corporations do".
I'd say they try a myriad of approaches to max profit when faced with tough economic situations ( and lower demand for their product). I agree that one could be, corporations cutting back on costs in order to continue maximizing profit. That behavior is not bad, it's predictable and understandable given the circumstances. The corporation goal is to continue to operate... they don't like making their workers unhappy, but economic conditions are forcing their hand.
So many of you act like you are entitled. You're entitled to nothing. If your employer wants to cut your hours, you can cry/bitch or moan. I'm not saying you shouldn't be upset, I'm saying it won't do any good. You aren't entitled to anything. You can act like you are, but you're not. You should be thankful to have a job in this economic climate, even if you make less or work a bit less.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
Libertarians don't think it's okay to kill people. They believe every human being is entitled to life and personal freedom. If a human is attached to another human, neither person should be permitted to kill the other because, of course, you'd be restricting one person's personal freedom by killing that person.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
libertarian does mean that, and no he isn't against personal freedoms, he just defines the aborted fetus as a person. so if you think it is a human being, it wouldn't be very libertarian of you to allow it to be killed with no legal repercussion. I disagree with him here, but there are so many more important things that I agree with for this to be a big concern.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I also like Ron Paul a lot. I think he's a great candidate. He understands the economy, from what I've seen, better than any other candidate. My only concern is that he can't win the Republican primary. I do think he could beat Obama.
We'll see. I have a lot of respect for him.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
As long as he continues to be allowed to debate, he may not win but his questions about the fed and our economic and foreign policies will need to be addressed...Either way his name will be hand written on my ballot if it has to be
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
She also gets free health care.
I know that on a personal level, the more I have studied libertarian philosophy and classical liberalism, the less divisive I find this issue to be. Fundamentally I do believe the fetus is a life that should be protected by law, especially if viable or is not a threat to the life of its mother. But, I also believe that making laws against abortion isn't going to change all that much from the desired net result for everyone: less abortions. If abortion were made illegal tomorrow, there would be a larger abortion black market, a lot of it using modern technology -- it's not going to be all coat hangers in a back alley somewhere. However those types of abortion will also rise in numbers again.
Bottom line, abortion isn't going anywhere until people choose to stop having them. I think improving life for those already alive and breathing will bring down the number of abortions more than any laws against it will.
Never said I was entitled slick. Actually I am one that feels the same way about people and the me, me, me generation. But let's cut the shit. First thing that goes is hours. Always is always will be. So explain this one Corporate Carl. Why have so many companies (Walgreens, Goodyear, GameStop, Del Monte Foods, Apple, Anheuser Busch & every oil company just to name a few cause the list is much larger than this) have banner record breaking 1st quarters but job growth is down? Because they cut hours.
I find it strange that anyone could throw support around for two candidates as completely different as Paul and Bachmann.
I can't even imagine how destructive Michelle Bachmann's foreign policy would be as God tells her to destroy all the other religions around the world. :roll: Paul on the other hand has the foreign policy that I believe would ultimately save America.
There's not a chance that Paul could beat Obama. It does alleviate intellectual stress when someone believes the overly simplistic "government bad, free market good" world-view that Paul pushes. By and large, Americans want government to be at a higher level then what Paul proposes. Many Ron Paul supporters have this cult-like response to him and overestimate his popularity and appeal. I guess it does make life easier when you can blame the government for just about everything.
Corporate profits can dip awful fast, as we've seen during the recession. Yet, as you mention, they can also return to a heightened level. There's been a hell of a lot of volatility.
What you don't mention is stability. A company is not going to take on more workers in a climate where there is so much instability. The corporation, like the U.S. saver (personal savings rates have also broken records recently) will continue to hold cash until they feel safe, until they feel it's the right time to take on the investment because it will bring about a rate of return (yes, hiring someone can be considered an investment).
No one,... corporations, small business nor people in general want to make investments in an environment with so much doubt.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
They aren't that different at all, actually. Sure, there's a few differences. But, take a look at her stance on the issues. She's more in-line with Paul then the majority of Republican candidates.
She's certainly more in-line with Paul then our Keynesian President.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
why do people who support someone other than your guy have to be dimwits? why are they simply looking to alleviate the stress of thinking too hard?
seriously, I would love for Paul to be on a debate stage with Obama. Not because he would wipe the floor with him or anything dumb like that, but more because they differ so much in economic philosophy it would actually be interesting to listen to...I have no grand illusion that Paul will ever be able to win a general election, but the more he is allowed to participate in the actual campaign the more people will start to realize that his ideas aren't crack pot or fringe as he is portrayed...or we can continue doing things exactly the same way with people like Obama or Romney or whoever else the establishment loves and change nothing.
I suggest reading a little more about Paul if you think it is simply a "government bad, free market good" world view. That is like suggesting that Obama has a "government great, people too stupid" world view...obviously that isn't true either.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
The President lost 4 approval points OVER NIGHT.
http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx
His Presidency is a train-wreck. Any one of these candidates on the Republican side could beat Obama if the economy doesn't turn around.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Good points.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
"Since the end of 2008, when corporate America began enjoying the resumption of growth, profits have swelled from an annualized pace of $995 billion to the current $1.66 trillion as of the end of September. Over the same period, the number of non-farm jobs counted by the Labor Department has slipped from 13.4 million to 13 million."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/2 ... 87573.html
I guess it depends on your definition of stable.
Bachmann:
"uhhh but you see, i am DIFFERENT. it is ok for me to take money from the government because i am not into the subsidy business...oh wait, yeah i am.... but i i am different because that money was given to me, and not the poor, so it is not a subsidy nor an entitlement..."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."