pinko Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 That's your business...not mine. Remember, American federal and state government never has to live up to your expectations vis-a-vis "freedom and democracy", and it certainly doesn't based on the history you are clearly unaware of. There is no argument. I hope you realize you are making a fool of yourself. If, as you suggest, there was a similar event in Texas then it should be quite easy for you to provide the necessary reference material to support your contention. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 Translation: I don't know, but I call upon my vast experience as an anonymous resident of Regina to pretend I won this argument. P.S. Did I mention I make lots of money? I'm glad you make lots of money...but you can have Regina all to yourself. If you're gonna play this American wannabe game, better get your poop in a group. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
pinko Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 I'm glad you make lots of money...but you can have Regina all to yourself. If you're gonna play this American wannabe game, better get your poop in a group. You seem distracted. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 You seem distracted. I always make time for the posers and wannabes....even you. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
pinko Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 I always make time for the posers and wannabes....even you. Your arrogance is duly noted. Where is that information about Texas? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 (edited) Your arrogance is duly noted. Where is that information about Texas? In Texas? Please use the arrogant American inventions to Google: "texas" +"democrats" +"quorom" +"redistricting" +"2003".....or "Texas Eleven". Then you can pretend to know all about it! Edited March 11, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
pinko Posted March 11, 2011 Report Posted March 11, 2011 In Texas? Please use the arrogant American inventions to Google: "texas" +"democrats" +"quorom" +"redistricting" +"2003".....or "Texas Eleven". Then you can pretend to know all about it! Just provide the link. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Just provide the link. No...my country has provided everything for you including the drama...you can do the very minimum amount of work for yourself. Edited March 12, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Scotty Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Ah...Ha Ha Ha. It's the adjective. HaHaHa. "Amazing" is an entirely subjective term. "Better" may or may not be quite amazing and listening to your position, Scotty, sqeezing another nickel out of greedy businesses would be "amazing". Regardless, it is not really critical to the issue of the discussion except perhaps from a rhetorical point and to claim you have been misinterpreted is not just disingenuous but facetious. I guess as Pogo called it, it is a bogus argument. You know, the next time you have absolutely nothing of substance to contribute you might reconsider contributing it. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Yes, they have. Ubderstanbd this simple economic principle. Corporations, all businesses, offer a product or service for sale to a consumer. Taxation of corporations or businsesses are a "cost" to the production of their product or service. They cannot operate at a loss and so the cost of the product or service must be less than the production costs. So corporate taxes, being a production cost, are incoroprated in the price of their goods or sevices. So the taxes are paid for by the consumer or by cost reductions in other areas of production, labour being one of those costs. Essentially, the consumer pays the coroporate tax which is embedded in the cost of production. If the corporation, due to competition or other economic factors, must keep the price to the consumer down then he must cut other costs to production, such as labour. Either way, the consumer pays the corporate tax and the loser of high corporate taxes could be, and more often than not is labour. And all of this is supposed to instruct me in why it is necessary to lower the income taxes of people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 In "our" system of democracy, elected representatives do not abandon their responsibilities in contempt by hunkering down in another state. You are clearly in error. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
pinko Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 No...my country has provided everything for you including the drama...you can do the very minimum amount of work for yourself. Yes. The drama Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton provide on a daily basis is reflective of the mindset offered up in your bannana republic. Quote
GWiz Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Yes...go unionize Somalia and let us know how that works out for jobs, income, social services, and starvation. I hear that the pirate business is booming...start there. Somali Pirates don't hold a candle to US pirates... Hell, in the states they call themselves CORPORATIONS and are Government sanctioned... Or do THEY sanction the Government... It's really hard to tell... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
punked Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 In Texas? Please use the arrogant American inventions to Google: "texas" +"democrats" +"quorom" +"redistricting" +"2003".....or "Texas Eleven". Then you can pretend to know all about it! Wait are you referring to the incident where Tom Delay used his office improperly to try to get Democrats back to Texas? and in the end the courts slapped down the Republicans because they were trying to disenfranchise voters under the voter rights act? Not really sure that is a great example for you. Quote
pinko Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Wait are you referring to the incident where Tom Delay used his office improperly to try to get Democrats back to Texas? and in the end the courts slapped down the Republicans because they were trying to disenfranchise voters under the voter rights act? Not really sure that is a great example for you. Is Tom Delay currently in crowbar hotel? Quote
no1ninja Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Yes, they have. Ubderstanbd this simple economic principle. Corporations, all businesses, offer a product or service for sale to a consumer. Taxation of corporations or businsesses are a "cost" to the production of their product or service. They cannot operate at a loss and so the cost of the product or service must be less than the production costs. So corporate taxes, being a production cost, are incoroprated in the price of their goods or sevices. So the taxes are paid for by the consumer or by cost reductions in other areas of production, labour being one of those costs. Essentially, the consumer pays the coroporate tax which is embedded in the cost of production. If the corporation, due to competition or other economic factors, must keep the price to the consumer down then he must cut other costs to production, such as labour. Either way, the consumer pays the corporate tax and the loser of high corporate taxes could be, and more often than not is labour. This is absolutely true. However, I don't mind paying 1500 bucks for my laptop instead of 399, as long as I have the same job I had when we were actually paying our workers for having a hand in designing them. Price is relative, to your employment opportunities. You can dangle something really cheap, but if none of the costs of the product go into paying for workers in the economy, schools, roads and services... then eventually you get what you have in the USA. The gap keeps increasing. The rich there are building up China and looting their middle class. Simple rule would be that if a product does not meet our labour or environmental standards, it can't be sold on our shelves. Seriously, why would you want to hire an Engineer in the US if you can get the same engineering in China for $400 a month? How is education going to help this, when corporations there have freedom to go anywhere they want and people don't. As a person, you are balled and chained to the house you bought to do your bid to spur the economy. ...and the best part was, that when all this was happening, the prescription was to tell the union worker to SPEND, SPEND, wrack up those credit cards, boost our economy. Show how patriotic you are. The money that goes into union hands actually gets circulated in the LOCAL economy. The money earned by the corps does not stay in the country... the interest rates are too low. You either use it, or lose it. So the drain is not from the consumer who is spending his ducets, it is from the corporation who IS NOT. (at least not on their home comsumer soil) (they want to make money from the consumer, but prefer to employ the slave - it's called "having your cake and eating it too") Edited March 12, 2011 by no1ninja Quote
BubberMiley Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) Not really sure that is a great example for you. True. But if he doesn't address it, he can pretend it's the perfect example. Press him on it, and he'll pull out his anonymous resume. Edited March 12, 2011 by BubberMiley Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
no1ninja Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) If we are going to abolish all laws of competition for corporations... lets abolish all laws for workers. Let the Indian and Chinese worker who makes 400 bucks a month, come to the US, Canada, Germany. Lets open the flood gates for people just like we opened the flood gates for corporations on the world stage. (if we are going to leave it to capitalism, let the workers have the same capitalistic opportunities to move, this way the system works fairly - investment in poor areas and slums, will make those who get exploited there sell their services on the broader market. You educate the Chinese worker, suddenly he can get himself a job in Geneva, and you need to train a new one. Fair is fair.) It's nice wanting the freedom to do business anywhere you want, but not allowing your worker the same freedom only serves one side of the equation. Do you guys know that even a Chinese worker needs papers to work in Beijing. That is right, even in their own country, rural migrants are not allowed to seek jobs in cities without permits. The control on the right side of the equation does not match the control on the left. This is why corporations are having the bonanza. They have the $$ to bribe favourable trade laws for themselves. The migrant worker does not. So if you guys want to bust the regulations on one side, bust them on the other. Lets do away with borders. Why are corps getting all the benefits of globalism while we get stuck with the loans and paying a greater share for services? Edited March 12, 2011 by no1ninja Quote
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Democracy in action? Good clip. Clearly there is a violation of law. Which is abhorent in of itself. And only a couple posters commented on that. No...I am quite satisfied with your very superficial knowledge of American political history at the federal and state level....including union "busting". I would be equally clueless about Canadian politics and labor relations. And that's OK. You seem to be equally clueless about American politics as well. Clearly a law was violated and you have no problem with that. Price is relative, to your employment opportunities. You can dangle something really cheap, but if none of the costs of the product go into paying for workers in the economy, schools, roads and services... then eventually you get what you have in the USA. The gap keeps increasing. The rich there are building up China and looting their middle class. Seriously, why would you want to hire an Engineer in the US if you can get the same engineering in China for $400 a month? How is education going to help this, when corporations there have freedom to go anywhere they want and people don't. As a person, you are balled and chained to the house you bought to do your bid to spur the economy. ...and the best part was, that when all this was happening, the prescription was to tell the union worker to SPEND, SPEND, wrack up those credit cards, boost our economy. Show how patriotic you are. The money that goes into union hands actually gets circulated in the LOCAL economy. The money earned by the corps does not stay in the country... the interest rates are too low. You either use it, or lose it. So the drain is not from the consumer who is spending his ducets, it is from the corporation who IS NOT. (at least not on their home comsumer soil) (they want to make money from the consumer, but prefer to employ the slave - it's called "having your cake and eating it too") Great post, well said. My thoughs are in line with this. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Yes. The drama Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton provide on a daily basis is reflective of the mindset offered up in your bannana republic. It sure beats dying from boredom in Canada. I think your fellow Canuck said it best: "My my, hey hey Rock and roll is here to stay It's better to burn out than to fade away ...It's better to burn out than it is to rust". "Rock and roll" could never have have been born in Canada! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 It sure beats dying from boredom in Canada. I think your fellow Canuck said it best: "My my, hey hey Rock and roll is here to stay It's better to burn out than to fade away ...It's better to burn out than it is to rust". "Rock and roll" could never have have been born in Canada! Correct, but some Canadians seem to be much worthy of a 'rocknroll' quote than any american rocker. Quote
pinko Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Correct, but some Canadians seem to be much worthy of a 'rocknroll' quote than any american rocker. Neil Young will remember. He went to Kelvin High School here in Winnipeg. Quote
pinko Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 NFL Lockout Under Way This has been a bad week for collective-bargaining agreements. National Football League team owners locked out the league’s players Saturday, shutting down pro football for the first time since 1987. The owners took this course of action after labor talks with the players’ union collapsed Friday, with the two sides failing to come to terms on a new collective-bargaining agreement by a set 5 p.m. deadline—their 16th day of mediated talks—resulting in players decertifying the NFL Players Association, and moving the dispute into the courts. After the decertification, the NFL Players Association filed antitrust litigation against the owners late Friday, with star quarterbacks Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees among the 10 named plaintiffs. Owners have criticized the NFLPA’s refusal to alter its stance on key issues, while the player’s union, headed by executive director DeMaurice Smith, demanded the owners turn over 10 years’ worth of audited financial records. Neither side complied. The central issue is how to divide the $9 billion in annual revenue that the NFL generates. Under the current deal, owners receive $1.3 billion off the top and players get 60 percent of the rest. Owners wanted an additional $1 billion before the players’ share kicked in. With the regular season six months away, there’s no telling whether this will result in any type of delay. Read it at The Washington Post Quote
Shady Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 Clearly a law was violated Complete nonsense. "unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical" I'd contend that giving notice to a group of people who's whereabouts are unknown, is both impossible, and impractical. But that's for lawyers to decide if necessary. How ironic is it that a group of people fleeing a state in order to stop a democratic process, are now complaining about said democratic process! The irony metre is off the charts, and now utterly destroyed! Quote
Shady Posted March 12, 2011 Report Posted March 12, 2011 NFL Lockout Under Way This has been a bad week for collective-bargaining agreements. Not really. The old contract had expired, and they're bargaining over a new one. This is the usual course of action. This or a strike. That's when the real negotiations begin. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.