OT - Standing at the political crossroads

[ohsherrie]

Well maybe those companies need to scale back on the billions they pay their CEOs and CFOs for fucking over the workers in those companies. That way they can pay their workers and their taxes.

I agree that some of those companies give their executives way too much money but this is a free market and they have the right to do so.

Having the right doesn't always make it right. Sometimes good judgement and human decency have to prevail when people have the rights and freedoms that this country allows. I think maybe the evolution of our government as those in power define it by their interpretation of the Constitution has surpassed the evolution of the human decency of the people that we allow to govern us.

[RedWingFan]

Well maybe those companies need to scale back on the billions they pay their CEOs and CFOs for fucking over the workers in those companies. That way they can pay their workers and their taxes.

I agree that some of those companies give their executives way too much money but this is a free market and they have the right to do so.

Having the right doesn't always make it right. Sometimes good judgement and human decency have to prevail when people have the rights and freedoms that this country allows.

So it's better to abolish those rights and freedoms so we can force them to your good judgement and human decency?

I think maybe the evolution of our government as those in power define it by their interpretation of the Constitution has surpassed the evolution of the human decency of the people that we allow to govern us.

You just got done railing against the Constitutional protections afforded to the private sector. Which is very black and white about their/our rights against the gov't.

[bluejeangirl76]

McCain just took VA over the Huckster.

Virginia is full of fuckohs...But it ain't red anymore!

You stupid red stated evngelicals...dumb fuckers.



VA may go Blue November.

Oh absolutely. Like I said, the Dems are turning out 2 to 1 over the reps. If they did that for the primary they'll do that for the big one. We're tired of getting fucked over.

Spot on. I firmly believe that the holder of the Dem nomination is going to be the president. And I mean this not as a wishful thinking thing - my own hope or wish or vote aside, I think that's how it's going to go. It's going to be President Clinton or President Obama. I'm not even paying attention to the Rep side at this point because a) clearly it's going to be McCain, no mystery there, and b) whether it's McCain or not, I don't think it's going to matter.

[ohsherrie]

Well maybe those companies need to scale back on the billions they pay their CEOs and CFOs for fucking over the workers in those companies. That way they can pay their workers and their taxes.

I agree that some of those companies give their executives way too much money but this is a free market and they have the right to do so.

Having the right doesn't always make it right. Sometimes good judgement and human decency have to prevail when people have the rights and freedoms that this country allows.

So it's better to abolish those rights and freedoms so we can force them to your good judgement and human decency?

I think maybe the evolution of our government as those in power define it by their interpretation of the Constitution has surpassed the evolution of the human decency of the people that we allow to govern us.

You just got done railing against the Constitutional protections afforded to the private sector. Which is very black and white about their/our rights against the gov't.

Well let me put it another way RWF. I don't think the human race is evolved, civilized enough to manage the rights it's given itself and/or the technology it's developed for it's use. There's nothing to be done about that other than to hope human compassion will somehow prevail over human greed.

[strangegrey]

Lets give them another quiz..

Multi choice

Who makes the most money from the sale of gasoline?

A. Oil Companies (Exxon, Chevron, BP etc..)
B. Refiners
C. Gas Station Owners
D. Distributors
E. None of the above

The answer is E. The government makes more than anyone on gas because of all the ridiculous taxes. Oil companies actually make a rather low profit margin on their product compared to most other industries, normally somewhere between 7 to just over 9%.

You (and a few select others in this thread) missing the economies of scale issue here.

Oil companies have enjoyed a MASSIVE increase in revenues over the past 10 years under Hayseed George. Hell, between 2004 and 2007, Exxon Mobil's revenue went from aproximately 250 billion to about 380 billion. That's 150%!!!!!!

I'm sorry, I don't give a fuck who you are. If I told you you had to eat 41 percent of your income in the form of taxes, but not to worry, that you'd be making 150% more than what you make. You'd take the tax hit too!

it seems like the republican catch phrase here is taxes, taxes, taxes.....but we seem to forget the primary drivers here....revenues and gross profits....on a grand scale, those numbers are bigger, simply because more volume moves, thanks to good ole Hayseed.

[conversationpc]

You (and a few select others in this thread) missing the economies of scale issue here.

Oil companies have enjoyed a MASSIVE increase in revenues over the past 10 years under Hayseed George. Hell, between 2004 and 2007, Exxon Mobil's revenue went from aproximately 250 billion to about 380 billion. That's 150%!!!!!!

I'm sorry, I don't give a fuck who you are. If I told you you had to eat 41 percent of your income in the form of taxes, but not to worry, that you'd be making 150% more than what you make. You'd take the tax hit too!

it seems like the republican catch phrase here is taxes, taxes, taxes.....but we seem to forget the primary drivers here....revenues and gross profits....on a grand scale, those numbers are bigger, simply because more volume moves, thanks to good ole Hayseed.

You and others like you are the kings of projection. I never said the oil companies don't make a ton of money and the fact that their profit margins are lower than other industries doesn't tell the entire picture. I never said it did. My intention was to show that the government makes more money off gasoline than does an oil company.

[ohsherrie]

So it's better to abolish those rights and freedoms so we can force them to your good judgement and human decency?

How did I miss this one last night? This coming from someone who wants to tell women they have to let their bodies be used for an incubator even in cases of rape and at risk to her own life or well-being? This from someone who thinks creation should be taught in public schools as if it was fact?

You are a socialist aren't you? A "benign socialism" of course. You, me, the gov't have no business telling them what they need to do.

No, I'm not a socialist, but whatever you call it there's something seriously wrong with a system that allows a government to give companies incentives to take jobs, retirement fund, and health care benefits from millions of people and thereby forcing many if not most of them into poverty while the executive administrative and financial officers of those companies make billions of dollars.

I don't see how someone who lives where you do can fail to see that there is something way out of whack going on.

Did you bother to read any of the material I posted the other day that explained in some detail how the Bush economic policies have caused this disaster?

Did the constitution that you're so fond of using as validation for your viewpoint intend for the government, or in the case of the last 8 yrs, a political party, to manipulate the economy and distribution of wealth in that way?

If it's socialism to encourage, or even allow, an equitable distribution of wealth, what do you call a government that encourages, or even facilitates, taking from the "lower class working dogs" to benefit the "corporate barons"? That's exactly what this regime has been doing for 7 years and that's not free enterprise.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

[Did you bother to read any of the material I posted the other day that explained in some detail how the Bush economic policies have caused this disaster?
.

Its worth noting that Bush is no economic conservative. Even his tax cuts were justified by Keynesian, Democratic arguments as opposed to supply side or libertarian ones. Furthermore, Bush embraced every big government, big spending bill which came his way.

If we would have had a real conservative economic policy-tax cuts for the right reasons, empowering and encouraging people to help themselves and their neighbors, and not spending wildly the past 8 years, we'd be in far better shape.

just make sure your blaming the right crowd- Bush has been riding a donkey, not an elephant!!

[ohsherrie]

[Did you bother to read any of the material I posted the other day that explained in some detail how the Bush economic policies have caused this disaster?
.

Its worth noting that Bush is no economic conservative. Even his tax cuts were justified by Keynesian, Democratic arguments as opposed to supply side or libertarian ones. Furthermore, Bush embraced every big government, big spending bill which came his way.

If we would have had a real conservative economic policy-tax cuts for the right reasons, empowering and encouraging people to help themselves and their neighbors, and not spending wildly the past 8 years, we'd be in far better shape.

just make sure your blaming the right crowd- Bush has been riding a donkey, not an elephant!!

Did I call Bush a conservative? I don't think so, and I don't recall any of the ecomomic who-do bullshit he's pulled over the last 8 years being embraced by the Democrats either. His spending hasn't benefitted anybody but his corporate cronies and special interests. That's not the liberal way.

What's been missing is the "empowering". When you lose your livelihood, your retirement, and your health care benefits with no realistic prospect of an opportunity to ever gain anything of the same level back, you're not empowered. You're embattled by the struggle to maintain some decent life for your family.

Oh, and I'm only a Democrat by default. It's much the lesser of two evils and the only current realistic alternative. And needs to remain so, at least until they can get the economic mess we're in now straigthened out. Once the playing field has been leveled a bit maybe a libertarian philosophy could gain a foothold.

As things stand now though, without a dramatic swing to the left we're headed for an economic disaster the likes of which haven't been seen since the 1930s. Not that bad because of social programs and economic monitoring functions that have been implemented since, but the worst since and disastrous for many.

[ohsherrie]

[Did you bother to read any of the material I posted the other day that explained in some detail how the Bush economic policies have caused this disaster?
.

Its worth noting that Bush is no economic conservative. Even his tax cuts were justified by Keynesian, Democratic arguments as opposed to supply side or libertarian ones. Furthermore, Bush embraced every big government, big spending bill which came his way.

If we would have had a real conservative economic policy-tax cuts for the right reasons, empowering and encouraging people to help themselves and their neighbors, and not spending wildly the past 8 years, we'd be in far better shape.

just make sure your blaming the right crowd- Bush has been riding a donkey, not an elephant!!

Did I call Bush a conservative? I don't think so, and I don't recall any of the ecomomic who-do bullshit he's pulled over the last 8 years being embraced by the Democrats either. His spending hasn't benefitted anybody but his corporate cronies and special interests. That's not the liberal way.

What's been missing is the "empowering". When you lose your livelihood, your retirement, and your health care benefits with no realistic prospect of an opportunity to ever gain anything of the same level back, you're not empowered. You're embattled by the struggle to maintain some decent life for your family.

Oh, and I'm only a Democrat by default. It's much the lesser of two evils and the only current realistic alternative. And needs to remain so, at least until they can get the economic mess we're in now straigthened out. Once the playing field has been leveled a bit maybe a libertarian philosophy could gain a foothold.

As things stand now though, without a dramatic swing to the left we're headed for an economic disaster the likes of which haven't been seen since the 1930s. Not that bad because of social programs and economic monitoring functions that have been implemented since, but the worst since and disastrous for many.

[conversationpc]

Dude, please read this and then look at the chart closely. The gov makes fucking twice as much moola from gas as the fucking oil companies do...

Between 1977 and 2004 the government made double the money from gas taxes as did oil companies from making it, drilling it, exploration of it, shipping it, refining it, and distribution of it.

That's right,... the gov had nary a thing to do with production of that gallon of gas, yet the gov takes more cash from it than the companies that produce it do.

That was my point but a "few select others" in this thread apparently missed that.

[conversationpc]

As things stand now though, without a dramatic swing to the left we're headed for an economic disaster the likes of which haven't been seen since the 1930s. Not that bad because of social programs and economic monitoring functions that have been implemented since, but the worst since and disastrous for many.

Now this I agree with. The national debt is MUCH higher than we've been lead to believe. The federal government makes all kinds of exceptions on which numbers to include and has been doing so for many years now. We're told the debt is somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-10 trillion dollars but it's probably much closer to 40 trillion.

[strangegrey]

You and others like you are the kings of projection. I never said the oil companies don't make a ton of money and the fact that their profit margins are lower than other industries doesn't tell the entire picture. I never said it did. My intention was to show that the government makes more money off gasoline than does an oil company.

But your argument is flawed, in that the point of contention is in the dramatic raise in gas prices, NOT the taxes energy companies pay. As a consumer, I give two shits about that.

ESPECIALLY, when the taxes on gas has not changed in tandem with the increases we've experienced.

It's impossible to explain away the raise in gas prices to taxes, based on the above. The raise is classic demand/supply generated inflation. Generated by conditions established by the wheat chewing dickweed in orafice.

[strangegrey]

Dude, please read this and then look at the chart closely. The gov makes fucking twice as much moola from gas as the fucking oil companies do.

I've seen the chart, long before you tried to march into this thread waving a few government statistics websites around...

You, sir, are still skirting the issue here. I don't care how much fucking money the government makes on oil. The taxes on energy have not dramatically changed between 2000 and 2008. Not so much as the price of gas has. Your argument is flawed. What concerns me is whether or not the middle class can afford higher gas prices than they currently are. *I* cant afford gas they way it is now, and our family is in the 33% bracket. How the fuck do you expect people making 80k a year or 40k a year to be able to put $50 every week into their ford explorer?

Now, tell me again about that economy of scale issue. Please.

Why bother, you haven't been able to address the issue up until this point anyway? If you're a republican, you should be smart enough to understand the FACT that taxes are not the cause of a 150% increase over the past 10 years. But by harping on such a flawed argument, you only call more attention to your inability to support your position on this.

In fact, lets throw some of your silly 'facts' back at you. What is the fenderal tax rate?

Do you know?

Tell you what, I'll save you from spending another 30 minutes desperately looking for websites to support your 'argument'!

The federal tax rate on gasoline is 18.4%.


Wanna know when the last time the federal tax rate on gasoline was changed?

1993


So if the federal tax rate has remained static since 1993...

....HOW THE FUCK CAN ANY OF YOU SIT THERE WITH A STRAIGHT FACE AND SAY TAXES ARE THE REASON FOR A 150% + INCREASE IN GAS PRICES OVER THE PAST 8 YEARS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!



I can tell you why...because most of you listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and you're repeating what they tell you, however, you dont think enough to go and research the actual tax rates. If you had, you would understand that a 150% increase in gas at the pump was NOT a result of increased taxes, because for the most part, federal taxes havent changed since 1993.


Ugh....



Are we still going to blame taxes?

or are we going to blame the fucking piece of shit in the white house that created a global economic environment that demands higher gas prices from us?!?!?!

[conversationpc]

But your argument is flawed, in that the point of contention is in the dramatic raise in gas prices, NOT the taxes energy companies pay. As a consumer, I give two shits about that.

ESPECIALLY, when the taxes on gas has not changed in tandem with the increases we've experienced.

It's impossible to explain away the raise in gas prices to taxes, based on the above. The raise is classic demand/supply generated inflation. Generated by conditions established by the wheat chewing dickweed in orafice.

There's no flaw in the argument because I never said the increases in price had anything to do with the taxes.

[ohsherrie]

I was responding to ohsherries bs about corporate welfare, and trying to bring some facts to the table. Dems started corporate subsidies, Bush tried to cut them. Thats your facts.

So you're saying the oil companies don't get subsidized?

Remember that Hillary and Obama are very much in favor of "big government
programs" that means to tax the working man to pay for the "others".

Exactly what programs have either of them said they plan to introduce?

Can you honestly say, with a straight face that Bush hasn't created the "biggest goverment" with the worst record of spending since, damn, I don't even know since when? The difference is, like I said in an earlier post, that the only people who've benefitted from any of it are his corporate cronies and special interests.

Do you really even know what this administration has done to the middle class? Did you read any of the material that I provided? What taxes they may have to pay are the least of the worries the middle class, or what's left of it, have facing them as a result of Bushonomics.

Do you work for George Bush or are you just a blind worshipper?

If not, why don't you quit trying so desperately to justify supporting him and take a good hard look at what he's really done?

Last I looked neither, FDR, Lyndon Johnson, nor Jimmy Carter were running this year.

[conversationpc]

Do you work for George Bush or are you just a blind worshipper?

In your mind, EVERYONE who doesn't disagree with everything Bush has done, good or bad, is a blind worshipper, unintelligent, uninformed, or worse.

[strangegrey]

Never once did I say anything about taxes being the reason for higher gas prices. Please read more carefully. Prices for commodities are based on supply and demand as I did say earlier in this thread.

There's no flaw in the argument because I never said the increases in price had anything to do with the taxes.

Actually, you *both* involved yourselves in gas discussion in this thread which, at the point of your initial involvement, was centered around Hayseed George's contribution to the price of gas that we as consumers, pay at the pump.

You both recited republican/limbaugh talking points of taxes, with respect to gas prices....so it's plain to see why you said what you said. You might not have overtly said it, but why else would you involve yourself in the conversation? if not to try, unsuccessfully I might add, to divert the attention away from history's dumbest president and what he did to cause me to go from paying $1.70/gal to 3.50/gal!?!?!?!?!

[conversationpc]

Actually, you *both* involved yourselves in gas discussion in this thread which, at the point of your initial involvement, was centered around Hayseed George's contribution to the price of gas that we as consumers, pay at the pump.

You both recited republican/limbaugh talking points of taxes, with respect to gas prices....so it's plain to see why you said what you said. You might not have overtly said it, but why else would you involve yourself in the conversation? if not to try, unsuccessfully I might add, to divert the attention away from history's dumbest president and what he did to cause me to go from paying $1.70/gal to 3.50/gal!?!?!?!?!

The part of the discussion I was involved in had to do with who was making more profit off gasoline. Don't try to twist what I was saying into some kind of contorted reasoning that it wasn't intended for.

BTW...I've NEVER seen any republican talking points NOR do I listen to Limbaugh because I can't stand the self-important SOB. Besides that, I've never tried to divert attention away from Bush because I've never been a Bush apologist on all issues and, in fact, have ripped him a new one on several different issues.

[RedWingFan]

So it's better to abolish those rights and freedoms so we can force them to your good judgement and human decency?

How did I miss this one last night? This coming from someone who wants to tell women they have to let their bodies be used for an incubator even in cases of rape and at risk to her own life or well-being?

Ummm..that's not me forcing anything. That's just pointing out that nowhere in the Constitution is there a right to privacy clause when it comes to taking a human life.

This from someone who thinks creation should be taught in public schools as if it was fact?

When did I ever say that? I do think that teachers shouldn't be threatened with expulsion or firing for mentioning God, Jesus, or the possibility of creation. I'm guessing you think they should be fired, huh?

Did the constitution that you're so fond of using as validation for your viewpoint intend for the government, or in the case of the last 8 yrs, a political party, to manipulate the economy and distribution of wealth in that way?

The government should have no role in any re-distribution of wealth. Those that earn it through their labor should be the only one receiving it if taxes are reduced. PERIOD!

[RedWingFan]

BTW...I've NEVER seen any republican talking points NOR do I listen to Limbaugh because I can't stand the self-important SOB.

Dave, seriously if he was only "self-important". He wouldn't be mentioned in the media constantly or smeared by Democrats in the US Senate. He IS going to be the main target when Democrats have all 3 branches and they try to re-enact the fairness doctrine. It is him they want to silence. That's not "self-important".

[scarygirl]

When I was in school, I had many great teachers. Teachers who talked about everything under the sun, including religious issues. Those were imo the best. They made learning fun. It saddens me to think that some of those same teachers would probably be fired due to political correctness.

[Rockindeano]

When I was in school, I had many great teachers. Teachers who talked about everything under the sun, including religious issues. Those were imo the best. They made learning fun. It saddens me to think that some of those same teachers would probably be fired due to political correctness.

I don't want religion being taught in my kids classroom. Take them to a private school if that's what you want. I went to private school and had religion jammed down my throat and out my fuckin ass. Look at me now. Think it worked?


Church and State are separated for a reason.

[scarygirl]

When I was in school, I had many great teachers. Teachers who talked about everything under the sun, including religious issues. Those were imo the best. They made learning fun. It saddens me to think that some of those same teachers would probably be fired due to political correctness.

I don't want religion being taught in my kids classroom. Take them to a private school if that's what you want. I went to private school and had religion jammed down my fuckin throat and out my ass. Look at me now. Think it worked?


Church and State are separated for a reason.

They didn't teach it. However, if discussions led that way they didn't tell us we couldn't. And if we had questions they shared with us. It was in no way shoved down anybody's throat.

[Enigma869]

I don't want religion being taught in my kids classroom. Take them to a private school if that's what you want. I went to private school and had religion jammed down my throat and out my fuckin ass. Look at me now. Think it worked?


Church and State are separated for a reason.

A FUCKING MEN!!!!!! Keep religion (ALL RELIGION) out of school! It doesn't belong there, period, end of story! While I certainly respect everyone's right to have freedom to practice whatever religion they choose, they don't need to be jamming it down my kid's throat in school!

I've always been a bit skeptical of religious zealots, as the MOST devoutly religious people I ever met in my entire life were inmates in a state prison, when I was beginning my career. You'll have to look long and hard before you ever find a more religious person than a convicted felon! They may have raped, murdered, or molested children, but they're "Good Christians", so it's apparently okay, in their eyes!


John from Boston

[Enigma869]

I hate when ignorant people blame the president and republicans and so forth for the price of gas. That view is uninformed and lazy. You want gas prices to decrease? Invent an alternative and stop relying on the government for everything -- they are not an efficient entity.

I hate to piss on your argument but if you truly believe that the administration has absolutely NOTHING to do with gas prices, I would say that you're just as "uninformed and lazy"! If you seriously think gas would be over $3.00 a gallon if not for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, you're VERY naive! Incidentally, if you need any proof that there just may be a hint of validity to that statement, look no further than when the last Bush decided to start dropping bombs on Iraq, and what the gas prices were then! You may just think it's a coincidence! Not all of us do!


John from Boston

[scarygirl]

I don't want religion being taught in my kids classroom. Take them to a private school if that's what you want. I went to private school and had religion jammed down my throat and out my fuckin ass. Look at me now. Think it worked?


Church and State are separated for a reason.

A FUCKING MEN!!!!!! Keep religion (ALL RELIGION) out of school! It doesn't belong there, period, end of story! While I certainly respect everyone's right to have freedom to practice whatever religion they choose, they don't need to be jamming it down my kid's throat in school!

I've always been a bit skeptical of religious zealots, as the MOST devoutly religious people I ever met in my entire life were inmates in a state prison, when I was beginning my career. You'll have to look long and hard before you ever find a more religious person than a convicted felon! They may have raped, murdered, or molested children, but they're "Good Christians", so it's apparently okay, in their eyes!


John from Boston

Those aren't Christians. They are wolves in sheep's clothing. Don't brush us all with the same strokes.

[Enigma869]

I don't want religion being taught in my kids classroom. Take them to a private school if that's what you want. I went to private school and had religion jammed down my throat and out my fuckin ass. Look at me now. Think it worked?


Church and State are separated for a reason.

A FUCKING MEN!!!!!! Keep religion (ALL RELIGION) out of school! It doesn't belong there, period, end of story! While I certainly respect everyone's right to have freedom to practice whatever religion they choose, they don't need to be jamming it down my kid's throat in school!

I've always been a bit skeptical of religious zealots, as the MOST devoutly religious people I ever met in my entire life were inmates in a state prison, when I was beginning my career. You'll have to look long and hard before you ever find a more religious person than a convicted felon! They may have raped, murdered, or molested children, but they're "Good Christians", so it's apparently okay, in their eyes!


John from Boston

Those aren't Christians. They are wolves in sheep's clothing. Don't brush us all with the same strokes.

I wasn't brushing anyone with "the same strokes". Simply stating the facts, as they existed in my world, at that particular point in time. I suspect if you asked these guys, they certainly wouldn't think you were any more "Christian" than they were, in spite of their heinous crimes!. I'm not saying that I agree with them, because I certainly do not. Simply stating that these guys were all VERY religious, and almost NEVER even put their bibles down!


John from Boston

[conversationpc]

I wasn't brushing anyone with "the same strokes". Simply stating the facts, as they existed in my world, at that particular point in time. I suspect if you asked these guys, they certainly wouldn't think you were any more "Christian" than they were, in spite of their heinous crimes!. I'm not saying that I agree with them, because I certainly do not. Simply stating that these guys were all VERY religious, and almost NEVER even put their bibles down!

I do think most of these prison conversions are bogus, however, Jesus did come to save ALL the lost, not just those who haven't been convicted of a crime. Yes, that means even rapists and murderers.

[Rockindeano]

So Jesus is going to save ALL? You mean he won't snub the poor, the lazy or the self pitied??

Jesus must be a Democrat. A republican god would never take a poor out of work black man.