When corporations do this it is successful because of what they are spending the money on. Infrastructure, Advertising, streamlining the production process, adding automation to improve per employee productivity, etc. What Obama and the government have been doing is giving away the money as extended unemployment benefits, bad loans to selected large Democrat party donors, fraud, waste and abuse. Adding more jobs to the government sector is simply adding overhead and reducing the chance of success.
And I defy you to find a single country that has followed the path Krugman extolls that has succeeded in borrowing it's way out of debt. It has never worked in the past and probably never will. By contrast, the countries that have reduced their spending and reduced taxes are seeing record growth while the rest of the world economy sinks.
Are you talking about the same Paul Krugman that believes when you run out of money and nobody will lend you more, you should double down and spend your way out of debt? The one who believes that you should not stop spending more money than you have and that austerity measures are bad for the country? If that is not the very DEFINITION of "shit-your-pants insane", I don't know what is. If he is your touchstone for rational thinking, then you are probably beyond help.
There was no link except for Saddam Husein allowing terrorist training camps in Iraq, the Iraq government paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, etc. There was no link to the 9-11 terrorist attacks, but there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein sponsored terrorism in many cases.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm
"A Hamas suicide bomber's family got $25,000 while the others - relatives of militants killed in fighting or civilians killed during Israeli military operations - all received $10,000 each.
Another banner in the hall described the cheques as the "blessings of Saddam Hussein" and PALF speakers extolled the Iraqi leader in fiery speeches.
"Saddam Hussein considers those who die in martyrdom attacks as people who have won the highest degree of martyrdom," said one.
The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000. "
"and fight against (christian and islamic) fundamentalism."
What war has been started by Christian fundamentalists in the past 50 years?
Every war religion based war that am aware of was started by Islamic peoples. Please enlighten me how a fight against Christianity helps the world? As a second point, do you live in America? If so, how do you resolve the inherent conflict of your desire to fight against religion and the Constitutional right to be free to practice that religion without government interference?
Even the most religious farmers understand that evolution is a fact. What they dispute is the creation event.
Clarity in you statements is critical for your arguments to have weight and be persuasive. Debate 101.
Logical fallacy here. Our government is NOT founded on the concept of separation of church and state, it was founded on the concept of religious freedom. i.e. the freedom of people to worship whatever god they chose, how they chose, without government interference. The reason for the 1st Amendment was not to keep religion out of government but to keep the government out of religion. Church services were held every Sunday in the House of Representatives until after the Civil War. Jefferson, who was responsible for the phrase "wall of separation" attended services most Sundays in the House chambers.
"Throughout his administration Jefferson permitted church services in executive branch buildings. The Gospel was also preached in the Supreme Court chambers."
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html
I really wish schools actually taught history now days. How is it that you young people have so much trouble understanding this? I strongly recommend that you go to the library and pick up a copy of the Federalist Papers. Read them and learn what the founders were discussing and what the reasoning was for the actual wording that they settled on.
So where does George Soros show up in your world view? He has given more than $50,000,000 since 2003 for progressive policies in America. The Koch brothers have given $100,000,000 over 30YEARS. So in recent times, I would put Soros as a much more active supporter of a political party than the Koch brothers.
Make no mistake, the tech research solutions proposed 25 years ago would now be paying off, making billionaires of the successful implementers and giving the rest of us the energy we crave.
The same could be said for energy production in America. Had the Enviro-wackos not filed endless lawsuits, appeals and delaying tactics, then the U.S. could have sufficient modern nuclear reactors, gassified goal and oil production to be completely energy independent. The technology has been available for quite some time, but the permitting process and the legal battles creating years or decades of delays create an environment where the costs to pursue energy projects can never be recovered.
Wow! Just Wow!
I would suggest removing the tinfoil hat ans seeking help form a qualified mental health professional.
You are openly advocating the arrest, trial and killing of millions of people because they don't believe the same thing you do? You are comparing the failure to agree with you to the Nazis and the murder of millions of Jews, gypsies and infirm? You really need to seek help.
It would also be appropriate for anyone who knows who this guy is to contact law enforcement as what he is advocating is the mass murder of millions of people who have a difference of opinion with him. This is not a stable individual.
It is difficult to describe the AGW alarmists work as science so pseudoscience would be appropriate. Point to one model the AGW people rely on that can predict the historically recorded past, let alone the future. You can't because none of the models work. And for scientific theory to have been proven, then the theory must have criteria with which the data can change to disprove the theory. So far, nobody has come out with a way to disprove the theory, no matter what you do to manipulate the data.
Face it, you have a theory that doesn't track proven facts, can't predict the past and has no criteria that can be changed to disprove the theory. Epic Fail for your science.
I would call for responsible IT professionals working in Universities, research institutes and government agencies to look for similar incriminating data that indicate illegal collusion, fraud or evidence of a confirm-able political agenda behind the "science" of Global Warming and to release them "for the good of mankind".
Just because someone has a secularist agenda does not mean they have YOUR best interests at heart.
In that case, we should be looking at the process used to award government grants to people who propose studies with the goal of proving man-made global warming while denying funds to those who are trying to disprove man-made global warming. After all, the vast majority of funding for pro-global warming studies comes from government grants where even one grant exceeds the total spent by private groups to oppose this viewpoint.
Actually, it can. There is such a thing as backlash. The pressure to change the meaning of a word that has so much history for the religious has created an environment where people who were neutral in the past have become polarized against gay marriage. When the MA courts forced gay marriage upon the people there, they created a groundswell of resistance that has lead to 40 states enacting bans on gay marriage. Many prominent gays have stated that pushing too fast for gay marriage has set the movement back at least 20 years. I believe this to be true.
"yet if this were a law revoking the right..."
Funny that the "right" that is being "revoked" was entirely the creation of 4 judges who overturned an existing law banning recognition of gay marriages. Those same 4 judges then created the entire mess of people thrown into limbo over the status of their "marriages" when the court refused to stay their ruling until after the election. Remember that Prop. 8 was already on the ballot when they overturned the existing law.
Also, the state allowed the proposition to go forth as a standard proposition requiring 50% when they certified it for the ballot. It was only after they lost that the idea that it was a rewrite came up. Sounds to me like playing the game, losing, then demanding that the rules be changed retroactively to benefit themselves.
You have a point as far as you go here. The problem is that the federal tax code does not acknowledge gay marriages. Sorry. Changing CA laws on marriage will not get you the federal tax benefit.
Or thrown out. The people of California have voted repeatedly that gay marriage is a none starter. It can be argued that the incessant screaming for "equal rights" has done more harm to the gay agenda than not. 30 states have passed and implemented laws banning gay marriage. These laws were a response to the Mass. courts imposing gay marriage on the people there. The fact is that everywhere that anti-gay marriage laws have made it to the ballot, the measure has passed and been implemented.
If the CA supreme court overturns this amendment, I would expect to see a new amendment which would allow CA citizens to through out those same supreme court justices.
1. Use the military to assist the border patrol. Anyone crossing the border illegally would be given 10 lashes with a cane and deported. Same with people found to be in the country illegally after a 90 grace period.
2. Prosecute all employers who are hiring illegals. Arizona's law sounds good.
3. Give all recipients of welfare a physical. If they are physically capable of working, take them out of the welfare system after 6 months and require a 2 year delay before they can be re-enrolled.
4. Stop all the nanny state financial giveaways that make it more lucrative to be getting a government handout than it is to work.
5. Use the suddenly available labor pool to take over the jobs vacated by all the illegals self-deporting after #1 goes into effect.
6. Make all prison sentences "at hard labor". Chain gangs and work parties to do most of the public works jobs.
7. Cut the number of people on government pay role by at least 50% by using prisoners to do most manual labor jobs currently being done by unionized civil servants.
8. Revisit all the laws currently on the books and eliminate any that have no basis in common sense and the constitution. Re-write remaining laws in plain language that do not require an education in Latin to understand.
9. Implement term limits that limit politicians to 6 years max and then forbid that person from receiving a government pay check for at least 6 years before being able to run for office again.
10. Eliminate the IRS. Institute a 3% sales tax on all sales and services. This should be more than enough income to support the remaining government functions.
11. Implement a law that requires all bills in Congress and the Senate to be single subject. No more Omnibus bills with thousands of set asides. All amendments must be read and debated on the floor. A filibuster would only last as long as the politician could continue talking ABOUT THAT SUBJECT.
12. Implement a 5 year limit on appeals for the death penalty. Using hanging or firing squad as the method. Televise on all stations in the region where the person is being executed.
13. Limit frivolous lawsuits by making the person filing pay the court costs and lawyer fees if they loose.
Slashdot Mirror
When corporations do this it is successful because of what they are spending the money on. Infrastructure, Advertising, streamlining the production process, adding automation to improve per employee productivity, etc. What Obama and the government have been doing is giving away the money as extended unemployment benefits, bad loans to selected large Democrat party donors, fraud, waste and abuse. Adding more jobs to the government sector is simply adding overhead and reducing the chance of success. And I defy you to find a single country that has followed the path Krugman extolls that has succeeded in borrowing it's way out of debt. It has never worked in the past and probably never will. By contrast, the countries that have reduced their spending and reduced taxes are seeing record growth while the rest of the world economy sinks.
Are you talking about the same Paul Krugman that believes when you run out of money and nobody will lend you more, you should double down and spend your way out of debt? The one who believes that you should not stop spending more money than you have and that austerity measures are bad for the country? If that is not the very DEFINITION of "shit-your-pants insane", I don't know what is. If he is your touchstone for rational thinking, then you are probably beyond help.
There was no link except for Saddam Husein allowing terrorist training camps in Iraq, the Iraq government paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, etc. There was no link to the 9-11 terrorist attacks, but there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein sponsored terrorism in many cases. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm "A Hamas suicide bomber's family got $25,000 while the others - relatives of militants killed in fighting or civilians killed during Israeli military operations - all received $10,000 each. Another banner in the hall described the cheques as the "blessings of Saddam Hussein" and PALF speakers extolled the Iraqi leader in fiery speeches. "Saddam Hussein considers those who die in martyrdom attacks as people who have won the highest degree of martyrdom," said one. The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000. "
Could be. But that has yet to be proven. Lots of theories but no actual verifiable results.
"and fight against (christian and islamic) fundamentalism." What war has been started by Christian fundamentalists in the past 50 years? Every war religion based war that am aware of was started by Islamic peoples. Please enlighten me how a fight against Christianity helps the world? As a second point, do you live in America? If so, how do you resolve the inherent conflict of your desire to fight against religion and the Constitutional right to be free to practice that religion without government interference?
Even the most religious farmers understand that evolution is a fact. What they dispute is the creation event. Clarity in you statements is critical for your arguments to have weight and be persuasive. Debate 101.
Logical fallacy here. Our government is NOT founded on the concept of separation of church and state, it was founded on the concept of religious freedom. i.e. the freedom of people to worship whatever god they chose, how they chose, without government interference. The reason for the 1st Amendment was not to keep religion out of government but to keep the government out of religion. Church services were held every Sunday in the House of Representatives until after the Civil War. Jefferson, who was responsible for the phrase "wall of separation" attended services most Sundays in the House chambers. "Throughout his administration Jefferson permitted church services in executive branch buildings. The Gospel was also preached in the Supreme Court chambers." http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html I really wish schools actually taught history now days. How is it that you young people have so much trouble understanding this? I strongly recommend that you go to the library and pick up a copy of the Federalist Papers. Read them and learn what the founders were discussing and what the reasoning was for the actual wording that they settled on.
So where does George Soros show up in your world view? He has given more than $50,000,000 since 2003 for progressive policies in America. The Koch brothers have given $100,000,000 over 30YEARS. So in recent times, I would put Soros as a much more active supporter of a political party than the Koch brothers.
Make no mistake, the tech research solutions proposed 25 years ago would now be paying off, making billionaires of the successful implementers and giving the rest of us the energy we crave.
The same could be said for energy production in America. Had the Enviro-wackos not filed endless lawsuits, appeals and delaying tactics, then the U.S. could have sufficient modern nuclear reactors, gassified goal and oil production to be completely energy independent. The technology has been available for quite some time, but the permitting process and the legal battles creating years or decades of delays create an environment where the costs to pursue energy projects can never be recovered.
Wow! Just Wow! I would suggest removing the tinfoil hat ans seeking help form a qualified mental health professional. You are openly advocating the arrest, trial and killing of millions of people because they don't believe the same thing you do? You are comparing the failure to agree with you to the Nazis and the murder of millions of Jews, gypsies and infirm? You really need to seek help. It would also be appropriate for anyone who knows who this guy is to contact law enforcement as what he is advocating is the mass murder of millions of people who have a difference of opinion with him. This is not a stable individual.
It is difficult to describe the AGW alarmists work as science so pseudoscience would be appropriate. Point to one model the AGW people rely on that can predict the historically recorded past, let alone the future. You can't because none of the models work. And for scientific theory to have been proven, then the theory must have criteria with which the data can change to disprove the theory. So far, nobody has come out with a way to disprove the theory, no matter what you do to manipulate the data. Face it, you have a theory that doesn't track proven facts, can't predict the past and has no criteria that can be changed to disprove the theory. Epic Fail for your science.
I would call for responsible IT professionals working in Universities, research institutes and government agencies to look for similar incriminating data that indicate illegal collusion, fraud or evidence of a confirm-able political agenda behind the "science" of Global Warming and to release them "for the good of mankind". Just because someone has a secularist agenda does not mean they have YOUR best interests at heart.
I could not have described the Global Warming Alarmists and the Democrat Party 's position any better! Very insightful.
In that case, we should be looking at the process used to award government grants to people who propose studies with the goal of proving man-made global warming while denying funds to those who are trying to disprove man-made global warming. After all, the vast majority of funding for pro-global warming studies comes from government grants where even one grant exceeds the total spent by private groups to oppose this viewpoint.
Actually, it can. There is such a thing as backlash. The pressure to change the meaning of a word that has so much history for the religious has created an environment where people who were neutral in the past have become polarized against gay marriage. When the MA courts forced gay marriage upon the people there, they created a groundswell of resistance that has lead to 40 states enacting bans on gay marriage. Many prominent gays have stated that pushing too fast for gay marriage has set the movement back at least 20 years. I believe this to be true.
"yet if this were a law revoking the right ..."
Funny that the "right" that is being "revoked" was entirely the creation of 4 judges who overturned an existing law banning recognition of gay marriages. Those same 4 judges then created the entire mess of people thrown into limbo over the status of their "marriages" when the court refused to stay their ruling until after the election. Remember that Prop. 8 was already on the ballot when they overturned the existing law.
Also, the state allowed the proposition to go forth as a standard proposition requiring 50% when they certified it for the ballot. It was only after they lost that the idea that it was a rewrite came up. Sounds to me like playing the game, losing, then demanding that the rules be changed retroactively to benefit themselves.
You have a point as far as you go here. The problem is that the federal tax code does not acknowledge gay marriages. Sorry. Changing CA laws on marriage will not get you the federal tax benefit.
Or thrown out. The people of California have voted repeatedly that gay marriage is a none starter. It can be argued that the incessant screaming for "equal rights" has done more harm to the gay agenda than not. 30 states have passed and implemented laws banning gay marriage. These laws were a response to the Mass. courts imposing gay marriage on the people there. The fact is that everywhere that anti-gay marriage laws have made it to the ballot, the measure has passed and been implemented. If the CA supreme court overturns this amendment, I would expect to see a new amendment which would allow CA citizens to through out those same supreme court justices.
1. Use the military to assist the border patrol. Anyone crossing the border illegally would be given 10 lashes with a cane and deported. Same with people found to be in the country illegally after a 90 grace period.
2. Prosecute all employers who are hiring illegals. Arizona's law sounds good.
3. Give all recipients of welfare a physical. If they are physically capable of working, take them out of the welfare system after 6 months and require a 2 year delay before they can be re-enrolled.
4. Stop all the nanny state financial giveaways that make it more lucrative to be getting a government handout than it is to work.
5. Use the suddenly available labor pool to take over the jobs vacated by all the illegals self-deporting after #1 goes into effect.
6. Make all prison sentences "at hard labor". Chain gangs and work parties to do most of the public works jobs.
7. Cut the number of people on government pay role by at least 50% by using prisoners to do most manual labor jobs currently being done by unionized civil servants.
8. Revisit all the laws currently on the books and eliminate any that have no basis in common sense and the constitution. Re-write remaining laws in plain language that do not require an education in Latin to understand.
9. Implement term limits that limit politicians to 6 years max and then forbid that person from receiving a government pay check for at least 6 years before being able to run for office again.
10. Eliminate the IRS. Institute a 3% sales tax on all sales and services. This should be more than enough income to support the remaining government functions.
11. Implement a law that requires all bills in Congress and the Senate to be single subject. No more Omnibus bills with thousands of set asides. All amendments must be read and debated on the floor. A filibuster would only last as long as the politician could continue talking ABOUT THAT SUBJECT.
12. Implement a 5 year limit on appeals for the death penalty. Using hanging or firing squad as the method. Televise on all stations in the region where the person is being executed.
13. Limit frivolous lawsuits by making the person filing pay the court costs and lawyer fees if they loose.