“I sincerely regret that my words were misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform and I personally apologize to any service member, family member or American who was offended,” Kerry said in a statement.
So now that we know John Kerry thinks troops are stupid, he also thinks Americans are too dumb to understand his complete grasp of the english language. Hes sorry that you dont know what he meant and apologizes for your ignorance.
I never post political stuff on here, but man politicians really think this way. It goes on both sides and the average American shouldnt even think about being able to live they way they see fit. These people think that we need them to legislate us to keep us safe.
I ask is that freedom?
Fuck John Kerry
Mike
Kerry = asshat.
What chaps me…
I may like kerry, I may like bush….but it don’t matter one way or another,
I can’t vote for another 20 years. A lot of people don’t vote, that is their choice, a lot of american citizens can’t. I was convicted of a felony when I was 17, did my time and state laws prohibit me from participating in any state or federal elections for 20 years past termination of sentence. Whatever politician changes that will have my vote…….probably……:)
Resouh
I didn’t like Kerry or Bush..
What I am waiting for is Sen. John McCain to run for President, not only is he hilarious, but willing to smack down and call out other Congress members for being idiots.
Besides.. how could Alice Cooper’s Senator be bad? :twisted:
In the past day, I’ve seen this same type of statement on like 7 of my
forums that I frequent.
Call me dumb, but I STILL don’t know what he said to offend the entire
nation against him.
I’m sorry that he misspoke himself and people assumed that he thought
everyone in uniform was stupid. I think the people who think that are
probably the ones who should worry. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not for Kerry
but it’s sort of a lesser-of-evils situation here and the choice is clear.
[img:1r3kt32k]http://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/carry.jpg[/img:1r3kt32k]
Don’t like Kerry? or Bush? Nods, I see.
**** it! Vote for Putin!
:twisted:
p.s. He needs you vote in America. Cause he can’t stand for presidents post on next election in Russia. :wink:
The only reason I voted for Kerry in ‘04 was because I ******* hate that ******* ****ing piece of ****ing **** GW ****ing Bush! Kerry was the lesser of 2 evils in my opinion.
Anyway, I was watching the Daily Show last night and thought that Jon Stewart said it best when he said something like “John Kerry is losing an election that he isn’t even in!” Aren’t there more important things in the world that our candidates should be focusing on?
I love Jon Stewart and the Colbert Report.
nod, both great shows.. and dont forget Bill Mahr.. he’s pretty damn good too.
btw.. if you have not seen the movie [b:2fbogzsi]Man of the Year[/b:2fbogzsi] you should check it out.. :twisted:
Really, if you think about it, generally speaking, I would say the majority
of our soldiers are uneducated. Here is my reasoning:
A high school diploma is not an education and someone with a diploma cannot be said to be educated.
And 18 years old is the standard age of joining. Officers are required to
have a degree, but the ratio of officers to worker bees is probably 10:1.
Really, if you think about it, generally speaking, I would say the majority of our soldiers are uneducated. Here is my reasoning:
A high school diploma is not an education and someone with a diploma cannot be said to be educated.
And 18 years old is the standard age of joining. Officers are required to
have a degree, but the ratio of officers to worker bees is probably 10:1.[/quote:2il1lrrb]
I can’t find the article now, but the level or precentage of educated members (meaning bachelors degree or better) is actually higher in the US military than it is in Corporate America. There were full stats right up to PhD level, and the military actually comes out more educated per capita, believe it or not. I was impressed.
Given this information, saying “the majority of our soldiers are uneducated” is a misleading statement - it’s effectively meaningless, as it is not in the context of being compared to the population of non-military. However if I recall correctly, I believe the majority of US soldiers were actually educated anyway, if you include associate degrees or at least a certain amount of college-level education as being educated. Certainly more than Corporate US, and WAAAAY more than the political US, no doubt. heh.
Reasoning means nothing if you haven’t looked at the actual numbers. You might be surprised.
I’d like to see the numbers and where they came from. And I’m not really
down with ‘corporate us’ or ‘political us’ much.
You have to remember this is the same guy that made up false statements about Vietnam to further his political career. He also said in front of Congress that a volunteer army would be comprised of blacks and browns and most likely commit war crimes. I guess this isnt a racist statement? Im willing to bet that people that are forced to fight in a draft are alot more likely to do bad stuff than people who openly join of their own free will. He has constantly attacked the military, not George W. If he thinks GW is so stupid he should say it and leave the military out of it. They just follow orders. I guess he cant call G W stupid since he made better grades than Kerry. Bush also received a degree from harvard as well. This is just common pre election slander, it goes on every cycle. Finally someone stood up for the military and asked for an apology, a halfass apology that he posted on his website. Kerry doesnt even have the balls to offer a real apology to a reporter. He posts it on the internet so the media circus can say, “Oh hes apologized lets move on to Rush Limbaughs statements from 2 weeks ago.” Politicians need to be held accountable for their actions, radio hosts dont.
Mike
PS Seems to me that if you didnt vote in the last election then you really dont have any rights to complain. We all know that politicians on both sides are corrupt, but at least the Republicans support the troops.
Kerry’s reply was interesting.
[quote:2bf6yxlz]“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.
I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq . It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.
The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.
Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq .”[/quote:2bf6yxlz]
Support the troops by sending them into a flagrant war?
I’d like to see the numbers and where they came from. And I’m not really down with ‘corporate us’ or ‘political us’ much.[/quote:32vixfe4]
I wish I could find them again for you - I read a whole slew of sites when this crap came out and it was amonst it.. altho you probably wont see it in many mainstream papers like NYT etc as they are anti-establishment and, by ther own admission, are biased in their reporting - biased against Bush that is.
Kerry’s reply was interesting.
[quote:28c1o25o]“If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.
I’m not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq . It disgusts me that these Republican hacks, who have never worn the uniform of our country lie and distort so blatantly and carelessly about those who have.
The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war and have given us a Katrina foreign policy that has betrayed our ideals, killed and maimed our soldiers, and widened the terrorist threat instead of defeating it. These Republicans are afraid to debate veterans who live and breathe the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor.
Bottom line, these Republicans want to debate straw men because they’re afraid to debate real men. And this time it won’t work because we’re going to stay in their face with the truth and deny them even a sliver of light for their distortions. No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut and run policy in Afghanistan and a stand still and lose strategy in Iraq .”[/quote:28c1o25o][/quote:28c1o25o]
LOL - he IS a stuffed suit, does he not realize that? Kerry has been attacking the military for years, this is nothing but rhetoric. BTW, he has apologised since this statement.
I’m not a democrat or what someone would call a Kerry-supporter. I am
a voter and a veteran. You’re a conservative libertarian by your own
admission. I hate Bush. You have said plenty of times that you agree.
Why are we arguing over donkies and elephants?
Are you a Bush-supporter Weas, or just open season on all suits?
Some things I agree with, some I don’t with Bush. I don’t believe in blindly saying I’m a supporter for anyone in particular, as it infers I am in total support, which I am not. I do however think that of the two options last elections - Bush and Kerry - Bush was the better choice. That doesn’t mean I think he’s the best President, but I don’t believe Kerry would have been better. As someone else said earlier, it was the choice of the better of two evils. Does that answer your question? If a better option than Kerry had been available, I may have gone that way, and I believe a LOT of people felt the same way.
John Kerry is totally right. A republican has never joined the military, and never will. Hes the only one who ever served in Vietnam and cannot be refuted. The shit about common GOP playbook cracks me up. Does anyone know that Michael J Fox wrote a book where he describes going in front of Congress without taking his meds? He did this on purpose to try and maximize his symptoms so that we can better understand his disease. Now hes reportedly admitted that he was overmedicated and that is why he was moving so much. Fox never even read the MO stem cell initiative and I feel sorry for him being used by the left to further cloning legislation. This man is being used.
Mike
Some things I agree with, some I don’t with Bush. I don’t believe in blindly saying I’m a supporter for anyone in particular, as it infers I am in total support, which I am not. I do however think that of the two options last elections - Bush and Kerry - Bush was the better choice. That doesn’t mean I think he’s the best President, but I don’t believe Kerry would have been better. As someone else said earlier, it was the choice of the better of two evils. Does that answer your question? If a better option than Kerry had been available, I may have gone that way, and I believe a LOT of people felt the same way.[/quote:fuuci78f]
could u vota against both candidates or u have to choose evil one?
Just saw this on the Ween Forum
[quote:hvas1xn1]
Florida voters using electronic ballot machines are having persistent problems choosing Democrats in early elections, the Miami Herald reports.
The touch-screen gizmos seem strangely attracted to Republican candidates. One voter needed assistance from an election official, and even then, needed three tries to convince the machine that he wanted to vote for Democrat Jim Davis in the gubernatorial race, not his Republican opponent Charlie Crist.
Another voter who went Democrat across the board kept finding Republicans listed in the summary screen. He made repeated attempts until, finally, the machine registered his votes correctly, and he cast his ballot.
Yet another frustrated voter who complained of difficulties selecting a Democrat was told that the machine she was using had been troublesome. Poll workers fiddled with it for a bit, and then it seemed to work properly.
Apparently, this happens all the time. According to the Herald, “Broward County Supervisor of Elections spokeswoman Mary Cooney said it’s not uncommon for screens on heavily used machines to slip out of sync, making votes register incorrectly. Poll workers are trained to recalibrate them on the spot - essentially, to realign the video screen with the electronics inside. The 15-step process is outlined in the poll-worker’s manual.”
Well that’s a relief. Only we have to wonder, if the screens “slip out of sync,” might other components do so as well? And why are poll workers permitted to fiddle with the machines?
Unfortunately, the article tells us little. It sounds as if the machines are of poor quality, but the paper neglects to mention the manufacturer(s) responsible for them. The elections supervisor’s spokesperson seems altogether too comfortable with the notion that the machines are unreliable. ‘They do that all the time?’
With early elections already underway, it looks as if Florida will again be in the headlines for the wrong reasons, as it so often is.
[/quote:hvas1xn1]
Very little in politics is black and white. You effectively vote for the candidate that you think will suck least. They’ll almost certainly have many views that you disagree with, which makes them unpopular. They may also have insights that we are not privy to, which may make a good decision seem poor because we don’t entirely understand it.
There’s also times you have to simply live with a bad decision. While I agree with nearly everyone that going into Iraq was a horrible decision, it’s one that simply cannot be unmade. Discounting the original bad decision, he’s played the rest as well as can be expected.
Unfortunately, as even the Art of War will tell you, the cost of keeping an army in the field is an incredible drain on the resources of the state. They need to be brought home as soon as is expedient. For the wellbeing of the soldiers, but also the economy and ultimately the country. That’s not to say I begrudge the soldiers in any way. They got the raw end of the deal and are performing to the best of their ability depite the fact.
Unfortunately, the situation as it stands now requires a lot of wisdom to resolve. Its unfortunate that it wasn’t employed initially. It’s not something that Rush Limbaugh, John Kerry or anyone else is going to do anything about talking on the radio, tv or in the newspaper. The soldiers will ultimately come home when the situation improves, or deteriorates to civil war, at which point we will be completely combat ineffective. Until then, the only meaningful thing we can do is support the people being put at risk.
That probably wandered off topic quite a bit… but seemed appropriate at the time.
Ever wonder what the quickest way out of a recession is? Go to war. Time and time again when the country is headed to or in a recession the nation will go to war to bring its self out of it or to mask it. Look at all the lost jobs in the country.And the only way we haven’t lost jobs if you believe what is being spead- is low paying jobs that you can’t live on-ie McDonalds, Walmart. How many more people would be out of work if all the people in the military who have been called up never went over to Afaganistan/Iraq? Thousands of more men and women would be unemployed here, not just the jobs that we have to back-fill from the brave men and women who were called to serve, but all the support industries that are needed to send the amount of people we have to fight and support. Bush has let Oil companys rip us off and Corportations get greedy and move operations out of the country to cheap labor. This is why we NEEDED to go to war. Ever wonder why before Bush went into office gas was 99cents a gallon and now its between $2-$3 and doesn’t seem to fall much? Sorry to rant some but it stirs in my craw that people can go on and just swallow whats being fed to them. I’m not telling you Kerry would have been better, I don’t know but I did like some of the policies that he endorsed. If you don’t like whats been happening in the world of politics please go out and vote. And if you think everything is peachy you can vote or stay home and everything thing will continue as it was.
Nov 7th is comming fast and I hope you all will go out and vote whether it be Republican, Democrat, or Indepentant.
but preferably Democrat cause I wanna have a job after the 1st of the year, although it might be too late for that too.
regards,
Alias
While this is an interesting sentiment, Alias, I think it’s an overly simplistic view of the world. The reason why gas is so expensive now is that 2 billion people in China and India now own cars and are consuming at an unprecendented rate. More gas being consumed equates to higher demand, and so the price goes up given that the supply is about the same. It has nothing to do with Bush.
Regardless of who is in office, the US is going to struggle over the next 100 years with the job situation. The reason is that the world is shrinking. It’s now reasonable for companies to use a work-force in India (or insert your favorite 2nd world country) to perform the same job at half the cost. And you know what? I cannot fault these companies for doing this. It’s capitalism at its best. What this means is that the wealth in the US is going to get re-distributed across the world economy over time. It will happen at such a slow rate, though, that the US economy will be able to adjust and as such will never collapse.
I think it is way too simple to say that we went to war in order to fix our economy. The machinery of the Bush administration is far more complicated than that. It may have been one component of the machinery, but by no means was it the only component, or even the primary component.
I agree about the voting part… go vote!
Ever wonder what the quickest way out of a recession is? Go to war. Time and time again when the country is headed to or in a recession the nation will go to war to bring its self out of it or to mask it. Look at all the lost jobs in the country.And the only way we haven’t lost jobs if you believe what is being spead- is low paying jobs that you can’t live on-ie McDonalds, Walmart. How many more people would be out of work if all the people in the military who have been called up never went over to Afaganistan/Iraq? Thousands of more men and women would be unemployed here, not just the jobs that we have to back-fill from the brave men and women who were called to serve, but all the support industries that are needed to send the amount of people we have to fight and support. Bush has let Oil companys rip us off and Corportations get greedy and move operations out of the country to cheap labor. This is why we NEEDED to go to war. Ever wonder why before Bush went into office gas was 99cents a gallon and now its between $2-$3 and doesn’t seem to fall much? Sorry to rant some but it stirs in my craw that people can go on and just swallow whats being fed to them. I’m not telling you Kerry would have been better, I don’t know but I did like some of the policies that he endorsed. If you don’t like whats been happening in the world of politics please go out and vote. And if you think everything is peachy you can vote or stay home and everything thing will continue as it was.
Nov 7th is comming fast and I hope you all will go out and vote whether it be Republican, Democrat, or Indepentant.
but preferably Democrat cause I wanna have a job after the 1st of the year, although it might be too late for that too.
regards,
Alias[/quote:2zp4yeva]
The reason why gas is so expensive now is that 2 billion people in China and India now own cars and are consuming at an unprecendented rate.[/quote:1ftol7mu]
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding was that USA was and is the biggest energy consumer, the biggest oil consumer and the biggest Carbon based polluter in the world, both in absolute terms as a country and on a per capita basis.
Anything India, China or anywhere else are doing isn’t therefore unprecedented, and it makes me feel uneasy to hear an implication that they are to blame for the ‘high’ oil prices in USA, that are in fact only just over half that currently seen in Europe.
I love anon. alts.
Im wondering why a country like china or india would pay so much for gas just so Bush can get his friends rich at the big oil companies. I think that the price of something has to do with supply and demand moreso than the 8% that big oil is raking in. The thing about profit is that when you take a cut , the larger the number the more you make. Oil had a huge year and the industry got its rake. I mostly blame politicians for not allowing more oil refinerys, offshore and inland drilling and other technologies like coal-gasification. They all get rich on both sides at the tax payers expense. The argument of parties is a lame duck.
Mike
Actually, it might be anonymous, but mudder does have a point. When I was in Germany about a decade ago, gas was about $3.50 a gallon after all the conversions from liters to gallons and marks to dollars. When I went on leave my parents were apalled that I was paying $1.30 a gallon without giving it a second thought. They thought it was horendously expensive, I thought it was a bargain.
We have been the largest consumer of oil for forever. I’m more inclined to believe that the increase is affected more by obsoletion of the oil for food program. But I have no hard facts for that and it may not be the case.
Anyway, the point being, the rest of the world has been dealing with prices much higher than what we have now for quite some time. Since no one in the states really cares about other countries enough to wonder what the price of gas is, we tend to have a very spoiled attitude to issues like these.
Sea Life takes a KO in 2048.
Don’t tell Pisces.
:twisted:
Actually, what is happening in China and India is unprecedented. They are going through what we went through in the 50’s except that their populations combined are roughly 12x what ours was. It’s not whats happening, it’s the sheer scale of it.
The US may be the largest energy consumer however, when you look at the increases in China and India’s consumption, it is obvious that it is having a major affect on the cost of oil. That and those damn speculators driving up the cost every time the wind blows.
And, if you dont believe that China and India are consuming vast quantities of everything, ask a plumber what’s happened to the cost of copper over the last 3 years…or is that a republican conspiracy too? Just about all construction materials have skyrocketed in the past couple years. China and India are improving their standard of living and given that they account for what, 40%? of the population of the planet, how can you think that it has no affect on the cost of everything including oil?
[quote:24b9zrwg]Just about all construction materials have skyrocketed in the past couple years. [/quote:24b9zrwg]
War. We blow it up, we then pay to rebuild. It’s very clever.
Your right we didn’t just go over to Iraq to fix our economy, we also went so the son could finish the job the father didn’t. I feel grateful for the men and women who have volunteered to serve our country I just wish we didn’t send them to die for bullshit reasons.
Yes China is using more oil and yes we don’t have enough refinerys and yes corportate greed is among us, but when the US asks OPEC to cut exportation of oil because they don’t want the price of gas to drop too fast whats that tell you. Its all good tho ‘caue were growing lots of corn here in Indiana and our ethonal plants will be online soon. So while Ill be paying probally close to the same amout for gas or whatever at least I can help my local economy more than supporting some of the richest nations in the world that hate my guts for living.
Its true oil companys are only making around 10 percent profit but when that 10 percent equals more billions than you can really comprehend and its record amounts when is it enough?
And if the govt really wanted the economy to be strong they would influence the price of gas as it directly affects the economy. If gas is $3 a gal then people don’t drive as much, have as much to spend on other things, go out to eat as much, buy newer veichles, ect.
anyway I respect your opnions on China and India using more oil but they really arent the reason were paying what we are for oil. We do need better refinerys to be able to refine the oil that we have here in our country- Since we sell almost all the oil from Alaska to Japan because it doesnt meet our standards. And the extraction of Oil from the shale in montana and huge off shore deposit in the gulf.
And yes gas is much more expensive in Europe as I was there this summer ,but they seem to deal w/ it better than we do as in much more mass transit. Things more centered to where they need to be, much less industrialization.
Well its time to go to town, so i need to get the horse and buggy ready, have fun all.
Alias
You misunderstood what I said. My comments were in no way an attempt to compare India and China to anyone else. My point reflects exactly what Roadrunr said… now that India and China are expanding, the levels of fossil fuels being consumed worldwide is unprecedented. This is the cause of the increased gas prices… like I said, increased demand has outpaced the supply, and so gas prices have gone up.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding was that USA was and is the biggest energy consumer, the biggest oil consumer and the biggest Carbon based polluter in the world, both in absolute terms as a country and on a per capita basis.
Anything India, China or anywhere else are doing isn’t therefore unprecedented, and it makes me feel uneasy to hear an implication that they are to blame for the ‘high’ oil prices in USA, that are in fact only just over half that currently seen in Europe.[/quote:1tfg2zd1]
[quote:3o076wce]Sea Life takes a KO in 2048.
Don’t tell Pisces.
Twisted Evil[/quote:3o076wce]
The polars bears are screwed by 2070.
Don’t tell the penguins.
Your right we didn’t just go over to Iraq to fix our economy, we also went so the son could finish the job the father didn’t. I feel grateful for the men and women who have volunteered to serve our country I just wish we didn’t send them to die for bullshit reasons.[/quote:24sguqr7]
Who is now falling prey to the effect you said?– “the people can go on and just swallow whats being fed to them”… this is pure liberal rhetoric.
Yes China is using more oil and yes we don’t have enough refinerys and yes corportate greed is among us, but when the US asks OPEC to cut exportation of oil because they don’t want the price of gas to drop too fast whats that tell you. [/quote:24sguqr7]
Just playing devil’s advocate on this one, because I am not up-to-speed on this action… but perhaps the government did this to stabilize the oil industry? Significant, sudden shifts in capital can lead to de-stabilization of the industry. Typically this correlates to a loss in jobs… err, sorry, I’m a Republican, I’m not allowed to use liberal arguments against you… I take it all back. LOL.
Its true oil companys are only making around 10 percent profit but when that 10 percent equals more billions than you can really comprehend and its record amounts when is it enough?[/quote:24sguqr7]
This rhetorical question “When is it enough?” concerns me as it reflects a heavily socialist attitude. Should the government also force Microsoft and Intel to forfeit half their sales to Apple? To answer your question directly, there is no limit to the absolute amount that any person, group, or industry can or should profit. Any limit that you attempt to infer through emotional pleas, suggestions, policies, or laws is just plain disgusting (barring the existence of monopolies that are exploiting the public-at-large, of course).
And if the govt really wanted the economy to be strong they would influence the price of gas as it directly affects the economy. If gas is $3 a gal then people don’t drive as much, have as much to spend on other things, go out to eat as much, buy newer veichles, ect. [/quote:24sguqr7]
Yea, I guess this is par for course for a Democrat. We could argue until we’re blue in the face, but at the end of the day you think it’s government’s responsibility to control industry for the benefit of the little guy, and I think the government should, as a whole, stay out of the way of capitalism. I guess this is par for course for a Republican :)
[quote:12i9mc9v]Sea Life takes a KO in 2048.
Don’t tell Pisces.
Twisted Evil[/quote:12i9mc9v]
The polars bears are screwed by 2070.
Don’t tell the penguins.[/quote:12i9mc9v]
Governments worldwide will crumble under the onslaught of the ensuing penguin bloom, led by this guy[/url:12i9mc9v] and, if current trends are any indication, this guy too[/url:12i9mc9v].
One of the basics of the economy is that there’s never any more money, just a change in circulation. Ie. if your country exports more money than it imports, you’re eventually going to have to do something to get it back or you’ll simply run out of money.
The advantage of ethanol is that it keeps the money from being exported. Considering the huge amounts of fuel we consume, I’d rather give it to the farmers who have historically had a pretty rough time of it than some shiek who’s purchasing custom made islands. Also, since the farmers have had a rough time of it, they’re much more likely to return that money to the economy for circulation. Either way, oil will theoretically run out someday and I can plant corn for the better part of forever.
But yes, I agree that continually finding reasons to give money to other countries is a very poor solution to… anything. Especially when that requires sacrificing some of your own citizens to do so.
What’s the current gas price in America? I have it at about 2,88$ per gallon here in Russia and as I know Russians have enough oil to cover our domestic needs. Other words we don’t buy oil from other countries and don’t grow so fast like China and India - so I don’t understand why do you think $2-$3 is unfair price.
Here I go making friends again….
Sorry should have been clearer its not the price of gas I object to its the way its controlled.
If you wanna talk about making laws about emotional pleas being disgusting lets talk about abortion….shall we mr republican?
and fyi microsoft owns shares of apple and apple now uses intel chips.
And I dont ever recall anyone ever telling me the sad story of billy who lost his job because the price of gas went down too fast.
And since when did you not think the oil companies arent a monolopy (opec ?)
Are you a fan of the trickle down theory? where the wealth is poured on the rich and then it trickels down to the poor? guess what my friend it doesnt work. Ive been on both ends of it, rich and poor.
Hmm I do think I recall govt regulating business… I think it was called
“ma bell” ever hear of it. And I do recall govt fining microsoft a million dollars a day because of their business practice - so dont tell me that govt doesnt regulate business, they just pick and choose which ones to regulate depending on who is in office at the current time. and no I wish there were less govt but the problem is Republicans have made more govt than we had before. I don’t expect to change your opnion of things but I hope your rich otherwise your sorely misled as to what the republican party is about. And sense Im damn liberal Ill just go drink my booze and then take a nap.
I have an opnion that can be changed by a compelling argument, but you don’t have one.
Nov 7th Ill see you at the polls and hopefully send a message to the republicans that 3 day work weeks in congress dont cut it.
p.s. I’m a registered Republican. just thought you might want to know.
Alias
hey, I’m all for 3 day work weeks! - and I’m not even a politician..
One of the basics of the economy is that there’s never any more money, just a change in circulation. Ie. if your country exports more money than it imports, you’re eventually going to have to do something to get it back or you’ll simply run out of money.[/quote:324ncs7j]
So, logically if there is never any more money, then a thousand years ago when there were 1/20 as many people they must have all been super-rich! Man, I wish I could have lived back then. (I tried to just let that one go without mocking you but that apparently would require a better man than me.)
I have like 20 minutes so this will be length. Wow que on my server is
415 people (25 min wait). Sigh.
[quote:1uanlnhi]One of the basics of the economy is that there’s never any more money, just a change in circulation. Ie. if your country exports more money than it imports, you’re eventually going to have to do something to get it back or you’ll simply run out of money.[/quote:1uanlnhi]
MY 42 cents.
Inflation states that the gold backing the price of the money rises in amount
stockpiled even as much as more money is being printed. But that amount
of money is being made more of then is being taken out from circulation.
We’re always making about the same, but there is more to spend the excess
capital on.
Secondly there is also foreign backing from other countries. So the trickle
down affect is also the trickle around affect. The stock market ensures this.
Hawaii is nearly owned in lump sum by the Japaneese. There are some
sub divisions in Hawaii which are Japaneese only now days. They bought
it out and moved in.
Why. Because we as Americians will sell it.
Civ 4 actually touches on this in some aspect, as to how cities can branch
out as a cultural expands its borders. I think its a very neat feature of the
game, since it allows you the financial victory, as in, you never have to
make that ‘army’ to go take what you want. If you push enough cultural,
your borders will finitely expand (assuming someone larger doesnt gobble
you up in the 1st place).
This process how ever, takes many years. Most processes do. Financial
analysts can spend years studying markets and trends, depressions. It
is also about as rocky as being a weather reporter.
Theres always another wal-mart to take your cash or your credit.
Another place to get fast food.
That car part you need. Each Carquest store can carry between 200-000
to 400-000 individual parts that you or someone you know could need.
They wouldnt stock it, if they didnt feel someone would buy that part.
We’re watching a de-evolution of cash. Soon most people wont even use
cash. They will probably stick a small cell phone/wallet/credit card on your
arm as a bar code. 1984 by Orwell is NOT that far off from seeming legit.
Darwinism as a whole says that only the strong survive. But, as beings
who spent the 1st couple Million years having to bash wildlife over the
head to eat at night, let alone to have a tent or a cave, then settling down
in your overcoat and easy chair for a smoke and a beer is a long way off
from the primal instincts we left behind. Money markets are one way of
ozzing this affect on our mind. Everything is cut-throat. In a dog-eat-dog
world, then this is why OPEC had epic profits this year.
Because they could. Dependency on a controlled resources is what cause
people to have needs. This is why the Bush’s who were raised on oil, did
they thing. They had to protect what they saw as interesting to them, oil
so ‘we’ could drive our cars to the dairy queen and the hospital and to
wal-mart.
Its to blame on big-busniess, because republicans will watch each others
backs.
There are alot of hybrid cars out now days, which run on a combonation of
water and gas/oil. It would be self-destructive to our own busniess’s (ie:
those who already have the cash), for their to be an all water, all air, all
solar, all fusion, all electric car. Yet even back in the 80’s, there were
some test models, which you never, ever heard about now days. Why.
Because it kills everything we have been taught around since Henry Ford
(a mason no less), started rolling out black model T’s. ‘They can have the
model T in any color, as long as they like black’.
Its counter productive to a society to change back upon it’s self.
Election’s would be very, very different, if the people who ran to run the
country, would have to budget forth their entire financial means to do so.
And when their term was up, if they made money, then they got a cut of
it. How ever, if they lost money, they wouldn’t leave with anything.
Controlled practices are usually and effortlessly provided by what the
controller will practice. Let them eat cake and all that shit, so long as they
fear.
More over, a country founded on masons is ruled over by masons.
Mason’s created the entire banking system. You dont think they could
have mastered that system in the past 900 years?
Enough rambling, I actually hate politics.
If we killed all the lawyers and tried politics without lawyers, then we could
really make some progress. Until then, ahh, were screwed.
OPEC - Organization of Oil Exporting Countries ie, not oil companies necessarily but countries. exxon-mobil buy oil from saudi, iran, whomever.
Also, we dont control OPEC, we can ask them to do things sure but they dont have to. They decided that they were going to cut production, we asked them to maintain.
Ethanol. Please. lets waste natural gas so that we can produce an alternative to gasoline at a net loss in energy content based on the amount of fuel consumed to farm the corn and produce the ethanol. Great plan. The ONLY reason you hear anything about E85 is because the car companies get a credit toward their CAFE requirements for every E85 car they build…and they get the credit whether the vehicle actually uses E85 or not. This allows detroit to pump out far more gas guzzlers than they would otherwise be able to produce and meet their CAFE requirements
Ever seen what kind of mileage you get on E85? 20% less than on regular, good old dino fuel. Any guess where the natural gas used in the processing of the ethanol comes from?
oh, and I suppose the price of gas is high in canada because ‘dubya ’ is controlling it there too right?
One of the basics of the economy is that there’s never any more money, just a change in circulation. Ie. if your country exports more money than it imports, you’re eventually going to have to do something to get it back or you’ll simply run out of money.[/quote:j5de0e4t]
So, logically if there is never any more money, then a thousand years ago when there were 1/20 as many people they must have all been super-rich! Man, I wish I could have lived back then. (I tried to just let that one go without mocking you but that apparently would require a better man than me.)[/quote:j5de0e4t]
Sort of true, but we were still on the gold standard then, so they literally just printed more money and deposited more into the federal reserve. Now this is no longer the case. The banking system is in place to speed the rate at which money moves. Instead of sitting in someone’s matress for a year or two, it’s placed in a savings account and the bank lends that money to other people.
Therefore, if I have a dollar and put it in a mattress, I have a dollar.
If I have a dollar, and I give it to you for an apple, and you give it back to me for a pack of gum, and I give it back to you for another apple… it’s 4 dollars, and the government will tax both of you for 2 dollars of income off the single physical dollar.
So yes, there’s not really any more money, but the rate at which it circulates is increased, which makes the dollar produce more money. Which is why savings accounts are all secured by the government, they need something to assure people that when they go to the bank to get their money it will actually be there, nevermind that the bank has lent almost every dollar stored there to other people.
opec = organization of petroleum exporting companies
Heh, hey gang fyi the price of gas in Canada has been steadily dropping lately, and ethonol made with sugar rather than corn has a much higher energy conversion rate, we just have to start growing real sugar in the US again! Just my half cents worth. :lol:
opec = organization of petroleum exporting companies[/quote:156anice]
no, it’s countries. as in IRAN, IRAQ, SAUDI, etc.
not companies as in EXXON, GULF, SHELL
nod, it’s what these countries belong to, it’s an ‘organization’
yeah, just like NATO or the UN or NAFTA or the Commonwealth.. except the OPEC countries have oil.. lots of it.
One sure way to weaken that organization - reduce dependancy on petroleum products. Unfortunately too many big businesses are tied into that product and are too greedy to look beyond their own bottom line.
Funny way of phrasing it. General Motors is already flirting with bankruptcy. You have to be concerned with your bottom line to a certain extent, or you won’t be a company for very long. Besides, there’s already a few alternatives to normal petrol out there… and look how many people are buying.
And I don’t know about your area, but my state is getting fewer funds from the government and so my town is getting fewer funds from the state… so my property and school taxes have been skyrocketing as my income taxes come down. Which pretty much garrentees that when I go shopping for a vehicle that I’m looking for a good deal, not what’s good for the planet.
Government is expensive, war is more so.
Diazz, server/name?
mike, stomp442@gmail.com hit me, it’s aaron.