Author Topic: State Of The Union Address (Read 3457 times)

Elfie · « **Reply #75 on:** January 23, 2007, 11:58:06 PM »

Quote

My opinion... the one to which I am entitled, your grace... is that the American military will not support a government that has driven the populace to open revolution.

I think you're right on that one Toad.

chancevought · « **Reply #76 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:16:41 AM »

Diablo..thats not fair...with a divorce rate of over 50% how can u assume she had it out of wedlock? And if she did, you ever hear of the bumper sticker that says S*#t Happens. So because of one instant or one bad choice in men, she and her child are subject to struggle and recieve no help? This seems like a human response to you? It's Ok for a company to charge taxpayers $100 for a bag of laundry cleaned, or $45 dollars for a 6-pack of soda, but this American mother and her American child should not recieve a few food stamps because she doesn't have a husband now? This seems right to you?

Thrawn · « **Reply #77 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:17:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
Oh noes, t3h moms & pops will have to open storez again

Oh noes we would have to take the covered wagon instead of drive.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #78 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:20:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by chancevought
Diablo..thats not fair...with a divorce rate of over 50% how can u assume she had it out of wedlock? And if she did, you ever hear of the bumper sticker that says S*#t Happens. So because of one instant or one bad choice in men, she and her child are subject to struggle and recieve no help? This seems like a human response to you? It's Ok for a company to charge taxpayers $100 for a bag of laundry cleaned, or $45 dollars for a 6-pack of soda, but this American mother and her American child should not recieve a few food stamps because she doesn't have a husband now? This seems right to you?

No it doesn't seem right. But then again so little in life is "fair". Having a baby whether in or out of wedlock is a choice and a risk. You didn't state in your initial post that she was a divorcee so I just had to assume she had the baby out of wedlock. Sounds like she made two bad decisions; to marry this p.o.s. guy and then to have a baby by the aforementioned p.o.s. It's a matter of living with the choices one's made. She's made her choices, she has to live with them. No one promised everyone born in this world a worry and risk-free life.

chancevought · « **Reply #79 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:31:56 AM »

very true..there are no gaurantees, but why do hospitals try to save people? why do u want ur parents to live as long as possible? why do want your kids to prosper? None of these things are gauranteed, but if you have a heart that still beats, you want the best for everyone around you, right? So my point originally was that I cant have sympathy for companies and millionaires when a working American cant get help feeding her kid. We dropped 21 billion helpin Iraq rebuild from their mistakes (and ours), but we cant feed a baby? Who cares if she has a husband or not, that kid deserves to be fed just because he is American...take of your own you know...

SteveBailey · « **Reply #80 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:33:07 AM »

Quote

Will Bush abandon the ones that have been carrying the water for him

That happened a long time ago.

Sixpence · « **Reply #81 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:34:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by LePaul
I was really impressed with one thing he mentioned....and none of you guys touched on it.

Eliminating earmarks.

lol! Huh? The rupublicans had total domination, senate, house, president, but their budgets had so many earmarks Reagan rose from his grave and fainted!

But guess who's gonna control those earmarks now? haha! Now you can't have them!!

That's rich

Debonair · « **Reply #82 on:** January 24, 2007, 02:33:54 AM »

didn't catch teh speech, anything about planes on a conveyor belt in there?

DiabloTX · « **Reply #83 on:** January 24, 2007, 02:37:50 AM »

No, but he did say something about free shark mouthed C-150's for every man, woman, and child in the country, legal or illegal.

Debonair · « **Reply #84 on:** January 24, 2007, 02:52:14 AM »

well i guess thats kewl for just about evary 1 but me & Andrew Stahlin

:cry:cry:cry:cry:mad:boosh:mad:

DiabloTX · « **Reply #85 on:** January 24, 2007, 03:49:40 AM »

Heh, suXXXorz 2 b u!111!!1!!

Rolex · « **Reply #86 on:** January 24, 2007, 07:14:31 AM »

Twenty nine states already have minimum wages above the federal level, some of them for over a decade now. The same dire consequences were offered up by business groups then.

How would you explain the fact that economic calamity didn't happen in those states, and that there is no evidence that the last two increases in federal minimum wage caused significant job losses?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #87 on:** January 24, 2007, 07:52:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Who do you think will ACTUALLY pay the taxes you impose on corporations?
Who do you think will feed, clothe, and house all the people you put out of a job by raising the minimum wage?
How many more ILLEGAL aliens do you think will become gainfully (albeit illegally) employed here when they are used as replacements for those people who lose their jobs because companies cannot afford to pay more than the current minimum wage?
Some people need to THINK, and RESEARCH, before they toss out their "brilliant" ideas.

I have thought..and that's exactly why I came up with that brilliant idea.
Normally I would agree with you. In the end the little guy would be hurt just as he normally is by continually taxing the rich more and more

Doing it that way they cant raise prices on goods without increasing the taxes on themselves.

the only addition I can think of to ad is some sort of tax break for domestic labor under say..70 K per year

Then perhaps corporations will start trimming at the top where its usually needed most instead of at the bottom.

Get rid of one 100 K executive and you can save the jobs of four 25 K FTE's

The middle class is being squeezed out of existence as we rapidly approach a 2 class system of the very rich and the very poor.
Something, at some point is going to have to be done out of necessity for the good of the country as a whole.

If your not in that middle class. Its hard to comprehend or relate to the trouble its in.
Just as its hard to relate to someone with a bad tooth not going to the dentist.
For Alot of people its like. Just go get it fixed.
But for that middle class person it can be a decision of. Either get the tooth fixed. Or pay the electric bill.

Thats the type of problems a lot of people are in.
They make too much money to get government assistance. But too little money to be able to afford even the slightest thing going wrong.

and if your not in that situation or have never been in that situation. You just cant relate to it.

At some point something will have to be done. And if business wont do it themselves.. Like it or not. For better or worse. The government will have to do something for them. For the good of the country as a whole.

Other wise your going to be having a lot of companies going out of business due to lack of people being able to afford their products.

then EVERYONE including the rich. Gets hurt

and if they shot illegals at the boarder there wouldnt be an illegal immigration problem on the scale we have now.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #88 on:** January 24, 2007, 08:28:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Great solution!

The corporations will go right out and fire half their minimum wage employees, if not more. Then they'll go ahead and increase the cost of products to cover the costs of the new corporate taxes. Ontop of that, they'll increase prices even more to cover the raised costs of the outsourced jobs. The jobs they outsourced to keep prices for US low in the first place.

To sum up, about half of the minimum wage population will be out of a job and to just throw salt on their wounds, everything will cost twice as much.

Ontop of that (as if it couldn't get any worse), all salaries will decrease. Due to Supply and Demand and there being a sudden influx of supply, the amount of money an employer would have to pay to retain an employee just drops sharply.

Good job dred, YOU'VE JUST CRIPPLED THE NATION WITH YOUR SOCIALIST PROGRAMS.

No minimum wage earners and the corporations will have exactly who to produce their products?

The execs? LOL I highly doubt it. Most execs I've come across. The only thing they have going for them is a degree. 2/3s of the time not even in the field they are working in. And largely these people are highly over rated and over paid

They cant increase the prices of their products without increasing the tax burden on themselves.
And its kinda silly to produce and sell a product for more then people can pay for it.
If they dont keep prices reasonable. They simply price themselves out of business

With no minimum wage workers to produce the goods
Where is this sudden influx of supply coming from?

The continuing outsourcing of jobs may help keep costs down. but it also costs American jobs in the process.
As more jobs are lost. there are less people to buy the goods you offer.

Now that works fine for anyone who is in for the short term gain. but eventually. Long term, which is what the government SHOULD be thinking about.
Long term,at some point something has to give. Or we will end up being the next 3rd world country

this is perfect. in the last week I've been called a "right winger" by my neighbor. for my views on taxing he rich and now you are insinuating I'm a left winger.

that tells me I probably have it just about right

Sixpence · « **Reply #89 on:** January 24, 2007, 08:35:51 AM »

Dear lord, the hike in minimum wage will reduce execs salaries from 23 million to 21 million, it's an outrage