Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Greece Protests; Anti-Austerity Violence Breaks Out
Topic Started: Oct 19 2012, 11:07 PM (1,085 Views)
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Sea Dog
Oct 21 2012, 12:14 AM
I wish that I could have spent some time in the Canada
that Ban knows so well,
The Canada where no one works and everything is free!
Yup, it's amazing how Martin and Harper have our economy in such good shape with all us freeloaders just coming along for the ride.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Sea Dog
Oct 21 2012, 12:14 AM
I wish that I could have spent some time in the Canada
that Ban knows so well,
The Canada where no one works and everything is free!
Not quite sure what that's suppose to mean?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
That means your hero worship of Harper is not based on the entire picture of what's happening in Canada.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:21 AM
Quote:
 
So, you're saying the FACTS presented in the article are not true and not an influence in this election? Besides the jest of the article is what will determine the vote and will it change the nation (for the first time in 3/4 century to government-granted,dependent society or a private/business growth oriented society... one that built our nation.
I said no such thing. The facts are accurate. It's your one sided interpretation, ignoring the root causes behind the facts, that's the problem.

And what exactly do you say my interpretation is?

Quote:
 
Facts are facts. Numbers are what they are, no matter how anyone want's to spin it. We are becoming Greece, Spain and Portugal.
Well, thats a bit of an exaggeration. At least the middle class in the U.S. is willing to pull its weight, unlike Greece. It's just the rich who are trying to avoid their responsibilities.

The facts and numbers are being used to determine if there are enough of them that would cause a vote swing and resulting government based upon government-granted benefits rather than private sector aspirations..... which is what has occured in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portagal resulting in the need for more frugal nations to bail them out. "Private sector aspirations" is what has built our nation, not government-granted benefits. Which will determine who wins the election? The articlew is suggesting that the numbers are getting to a range that could determine many future elections, national and state, in favor of a "government-granted" society. I think most rational thinking folks would think that that wouldn't be a good thing.

Quote:
 
And, for God's sack, doesn't the left every get tired of blaming our economy on Bush and anything other that this administration.... even in foreign affairs others are to blame. IT's so old it's sickening. We need a leader not a complainer.
No, I only blame Bush for starting it. I blame the Republican-led House and the filibustering Reps in the Senate for the ongoing situation.

The Democrats had the Senate and the House for two years after Obama's election. It was the direction of the present administration that caused the people to change that advantage... it's what the American people who favor "less government" and private sector asperations wanted.

You have a leader. You also have an anchor in Congress. And putting Romney back in will mean you have an anchor on both ends of the chain.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:37 AM
That means your hero worship of Harper is not based on the entire picture of what's happening in Canada.
You and Sea are going to have to tell me "what's happening in Canada."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Quote:
 
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:37 AM
That means your hero worship of Harper is not based on the entire picture of what's happening in Canada.
You and Sea are going to have to tell me "what's happening in Canada."

I have told you repeatedly, and all you grasp are the tax cuts, completely missing the work being done spending money on education and infrastructure, the putting of reasonable regulations in place, the maintaining of a social safety net, the targeted stimulous plans, etc.
Edited by Brewster, Oct 21 2012, 12:54 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:21 AM
Quote:
 
So, you're saying the FACTS presented in the article are not true and not an influence in this election? Besides the jest of the article is what will determine the vote and will it change the nation (for the first time in 3/4 century to government-granted,dependent society or a private/business growth oriented society... one that built our nation.
I said no such thing. The facts are accurate. It's your one sided interpretation, ignoring the root causes behind the facts, that's the problem.

And what exactly do you say my interpretation is? Come now, Ban, you're not that stupid. You keep talking tax cuts, especially those for the rich, and cutting the benefits that keep people functioning, making the ridiculous claim that people are deciding NOT to work, in spite of no evidence to support it.

Quote:
 
Facts are facts. Numbers are what they are, no matter how anyone want's to spin it. We are becoming Greece, Spain and Portugal.
Well, thats a bit of an exaggeration. At least the middle class in the U.S. is willing to pull its weight, unlike Greece. It's just the rich who are trying to avoid their responsibilities.

The facts and numbers are being used to determine if there are enough of them that would cause a vote swing and resulting government based upon government-granted benefits rather than private sector aspirations..... which is what has occured in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portagal resulting in the need for more frugal nations to bail them out. "Private sector aspirations" is what has built our nation, not government-granted benefits. Which will determine who wins the election? The articlew is suggesting that the numbers are getting to a range that could determine many future elections, national and state, in favor of a "government-granted" society. I think most rational thinking folks would think that that wouldn't be a good thing. BullSh*t. There is no such thing. I have yet to hear a single person on this forum or anywhere else who wants the government to support them in every way. That's just Romney's "47%" lie phrased a different way.

Quote:
 
And, for God's sack, doesn't the left every get tired of blaming our economy on Bush and anything other that this administration.... even in foreign affairs others are to blame. IT's so old it's sickening. We need a leader not a complainer.
No, I only blame Bush for starting it. I blame the Republican-led House and the filibustering Reps in the Senate for the ongoing situation.

The Democrats had the Senate and the House for two years after Obama's election. It was the direction of the present administration that caused the people to change that advantage... it's what the American people who favor "less government" and private sector asperations wanted. BullSh*t again. Or else a serious case of Romnesia. Obama had control of the Senate for a very short time. How Long did Dems Control the Senate?

Second BullSh*t on the voters wanting less government - they were just in panic mode because of the recession, and the Koch-a-Cola was flowing freely, with the Kochs funding a "grass-roots" Tea Party movement.

You have a leader. You also have an anchor in Congress. And putting Romney back in will mean you have an anchor on both ends of the chain.
Edited by Brewster, Oct 21 2012, 01:42 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:53 AM
Quote:
 
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:37 AM
That means your hero worship of Harper is not based on the entire picture of what's happening in Canada.
You and Sea are going to have to tell me "what's happening in Canada."

I have told you repeatedly, and all you grasp are the tax cuts, completely missing the work being done spending money on education and infrastructure, the putting of reasonable regulations in place, the maintaining of a social safety net, the targeted stimulous plans, etc.
Yes, all that is good, but the austere measures came first. The tax cuts, the cut back on entitlements, the reduced government size and spending; THEN, as fiscals were brought into balance a nation is in better shape to address and prioritize other program costs. The US has never reduced to any significance it's spending on education, only to have us drop to 25 on a success scale globally. Infrastructure in the European countries are less expensive due to geographical expanse. And, many feel that "regulation" is being overdone hurting small businesses here. The maintaining of "a social safety net" for citizens.... The black population in Toronto is 8.4% (3.8 for GTA). Detroit has 82%, Birmingham, AL 73%m Baltimore has 64%. Your dependent population is growing but it's got a long way to go to even come close to that in the US which the artical shows has significantly increased in the last two years, which addresses the theme of the article in terms of what will influence the direction our nation will take in the future... government or private aspirations. THAT is no minor consideration. The ramifications will determine how fast/far the US will go FROM or TOWARD being the world super power it was. Another may take our place (if it hasn't already) and that no doubt would be China.

I don't "worship" Martin and Harper, I just recognize the common sense measures they used to get from A to Z and the timing and sequence of those measures.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 01:01 AM
Brewster
Oct 21 2012, 12:21 AM
Quote:
 
So, you're saying the FACTS presented in the article are not true and not an influence in this election? Besides the jest of the article is what will determine the vote and will it change the nation (for the first time in 3/4 century to government-granted,dependent society or a private/business growth oriented society... one that built our nation.
I said no such thing. The facts are accurate. It's your one sided interpretation, ignoring the root causes behind the facts, that's the problem.

And what exactly do you say my interpretation is? Come now, Ban, you're not that stupid. You keep talking tax cuts, especially those for the rich, and cutting the benefits that keep people functioning, making the ridiculous claim that people are deciding NOT to work, in spite of no evidence to support it.

I've never advocated not taxing or reducing tax cuts for the rich. I have always said that our tax program should be overhauled, completely. Do 50% of Canada's citizens pay no Federal 1040 type Income Tax?). Revision, tax revision is what I would like to see. I would suggest that the US reduce entitlements at a % rate similar to what Canada did initially, including and especially at the public employee level where many benefits and exceed the private sector's which ultimately pays the bill. I'm not saying people don't want to work. There are no jobs for them and the govenment incentive (as the "facts and numbers, which you agreed are accurate, support) which makes it attractive for them (see, we are back to those numbers). That's a 40 year observation that I've discussed with MR about. We are entitlement poor.... like Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal... the main theme of this thread.

Quote:
 
Facts are facts. Numbers are what they are, no matter how anyone want's to spin it. We are becoming Greece, Spain and Portugal.
Well, thats a bit of an exaggeration. At least the middle class in the U.S. is willing to pull its weight, unlike Greece. It's just the rich who are trying to avoid their responsibilities.

The facts and numbers are being used to determine if there are enough of them that would cause a vote swing and resulting government based upon government-granted benefits rather than private sector aspirations..... which is what has occured in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portagal resulting in the need for more frugal nations to bail them out. "Private sector aspirations" is what has built our nation, not government-granted benefits. Which will determine who wins the election? The articlew is suggesting that the numbers are getting to a range that could determine many future elections, national and state, in favor of a "government-granted" society. I think most rational thinking folks would think that that wouldn't be a good thing. BullSh*t. There is no such thing. I have yet to hear a single person on this forum or anywhere else who wants the government to support them in every way. That's just Romney's "47%" lie phrased a different way.

It's not BS Brew. The numbers are enough to swing any election. If you figure the "independent" Left and Right are about equal and that would bring any election close to a 50% / 50% tie, then figure in the "independent" / undecided, those numbers in the article could well decide the election and have in some states and community elections. But the numbers have not ever been at the level they are in number and percent.

Quote:
 
And, for God's sack, doesn't the left every get tired of blaming our economy on Bush and anything other that this administration.... even in foreign affairs others are to blame. IT's so old it's sickening. We need a leader not a complainer.
No, I only blame Bush for starting it. I blame the Republican-led House and the filibustering Reps in the Senate for the ongoing situation.

The Democrats had the Senate and the House for two years after Obama's election. It was the direction of the present administration that caused the people to change that advantage... it's what the American people who favor "less government" and private sector asperations wanted. BullSh*t again. Or else a serious case of Romnesia. Obama had control of the Senate for a very short time. How Long did Dems Control the Senate?



110th Congress (2007-2009)
Majority Party: Democrat (49 seats)
Minority Party: Republican (49 seats)
Other Parties: 1Independent; 1 Independent Democrat
Total Seats: 100
Note:Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut was reelected in 2006 as an independent candidate, and became an Independent Democrat. Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont was elected as an Independent
---------------------------------------------------------

111th Congress (2009-2011)
Majority Party: Democrat (57 seats)
Minority Party: Republican (41 seats)
Other Parties: 1 Independent; 1 Independent Democrat
Total Seats: 100
Note: Senator Arlen Specter was reelected in 2004 as a Republican, and became a Democrat on April 30, 2009. Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut was reelected in 2006 as an independent candidate, and became an Independent Democrat. Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont was elected in 2006 as an Independent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

112th Congress (2011-2013)
Majority Party: Democrat (51 seats)
Minority Party: Republican (47 seats)
Other Parties: 1 Independent; 1 Independent Democrat
Total Seats: 100



Second BullSh*t on the voters wanting less government - they were just in panic mode because of the recession, and the Koch-a-Cola was flowing freely, with the Kochs funding a "grass-roots" Tea Party movement.

Most working tax paying voters want smaller, less costly government. Again, the significance of the "FACTS" and numbers of the article and how they may play a negative future for our nation's direction if they play a significance in the result and it appers that they will.

I don't know why you libs always bring Koch into these discussions. He has no more play in the FACTS and NUMBERS of this article topic than does Soros.

You have a leader. You also have an anchor in Congress. And putting Romney back in will mean you have an anchor on both ends of the chain.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jackd
No Avatar
Sr. Member
[ * ]
Quote:
 
The US has never reduced to any significance it's spending on education, only to have us drop to 25 on a success scale globally.

Canada has INCREASED spendings on education during the same period.
Quote:
 
Infrastructure in the European countries are less expensive due to geographical expanse

But infrastructure on average are much older than those in the U.S., thus requiring more maintenance.
Edited by jackd, Oct 21 2012, 03:02 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis