the First 100-Hours.

[theHawk]

I'm glad that you find it entertaining. Please tell us all what you find entertaining about it. As I am sure that there are quite a few losers who would find what I post and your take on it entertaining but it's quite amusing to me what sort of people remain to post here and I believe this problems stems from jerks like you, Kathianne, Manu1959 and Gunny L who are most of the problem and I am not afraid to say that I believe you are all retards. And YES this is intended as an INSULT and I hope that you trolls take it as. Unlike some people who just leave and move on to other things as a result of the trolling you jackasses do here (i.e., you find it entertaining that others would want a normal conversation instead of an asinine one like the ones that normally occur here). I am sure that comment will earn me quite a few infractions but I don't give a damn as it's necessary that someone takes a stand and speaks out about what kind of forum this has become as a result of the asinine and retarded trolls here who choose to pontificate out of their ass.

This, coming from someone who calles pychoblues and spidermanTuba the "winners" of this board? Quite a crew you three would make. The disgruntled poser vet who had way too much LSD in the 60's and can't quite remember which unit he actually served in, the pot-smoking college liberal whose elitism knows no bounds, and I wonder what you could be...possibly the Femi-nazi?

 

[SilentKnight]

This, coming from someone who calles pychoblues and spidermanTuba the "winners" of this board? Quite a crew you three would make. The disgruntled poser vet who had way too much LSD in the 60's and can't quite remember which unit he actually served in, the pot-smoking college liberal whose elitism knows no bounds, and I wonder what you could be...possibly the Femi-nazi?

I wonder whether you will get an infraction for that as it insults others but I doubt it because the assholes here who hand out infractions are of the same ilk as you which is L.O.S.E.R. Which stands for lots of shit eating retards. I hope you jackasses get what is coming to you. There are many people in this forum who rightly deserve to be added to my Winner's list and will be added as I become aware of their exceptional attitude as opposed to those on my loser list who have an asinine attitude.

 

[theHawk]

I certainly understand where you're coming from, although I think you've shifted off the argument you want. What you're saying is the same as instituting a tariff, but we don't want protective tariffs to protect American companies. The original point is revenue to pay for the searches, not protectionism.

Personally, I would prefer for Homeland Security to be nationally financed. You'll run into a lot of bureaucratic waste and red tape when you have companies pay for every search, and it can result in a lot of fraud by the companies. Your argument is that only those that receive a service should pay for it, but I believe that the overall service here is Homeland Security (which effects all taxpayers) and thus its cost should be spread through the population.

Who says we don't want protective tariffs to protect American companies? We sure know the neocons don't, but apparently the Dims are in the same boat? And here I thought we all voted in the Dims to 'protect the American workers'. I guess not, in the end maintaining the status quo for 'international business' is more important thus lets make the American taxpayer pay for it. I see what you are saying, every American would benefit from the security of it, and I wouldn't object to taxpayers paying for some of it. But I think its a good opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

edit:
On another note, if your saying since everyone benefits from this security measure, then why is it customers who fly on airliners have to pay an additional 'security fee' to cover the extra costs of security on commercial airliners since we all benefit from that as well?

 

[theHawk]

I wonder whether you will get an infraction for that as it insults others but I doubt it because the assholes here who hand out infractions are of the same ilk as you which is L.O.S.E.R. Which stands for lots of shit eating retards. I hope you jackasses get what is coming to you. There are many people in this forum who rightly deserve to be added to my Winner's list and will be added as I become aware of their exceptional attitude as opposed to those on my loser list who have an asinine attitude.

I'm not name calling anyone, I'm calling a spade a spade. If they or you are offended then I appologize, I didn't know you could so easily be offended.

 

[Hamiltonian]

Who says we don't want protective tariffs to protect American companies? We sure know the neocons don't, but apparently the Dims are in the same boat? And here I thought we all voted in the Dims to 'protect the American workers'. I guess not, in the end maintaining the status quo for 'international business' is more important thus lets make the American taxpayer pay for it. I see what you are saying, every American would benefit from the security of it, and I wouldn't object to taxpayers paying for some of it. But I think its a good opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

No, I think that Democrats are more in favor of free trade. Remember Clinton made NAFTA happen. I'm not in favor of free trade, or protective tariffs, mainly tariffs for revenue. I think that protectionism interferes with the free market too much, and I don't think it really helps anyone long term.

And here I thought we all voted in the Dims to 'protect the American workers'.

No, that would suggest they were elected because they are organized and have some sort of plan.

They were elected because people began to dislike President Bush.

 

[wiggles]

It would only pass the bill onto Americans that chose to buy products from foreign countries (or from American companies using imported goods). The point is doing it that way would give American companies that use American resources/goods would be given a competitive edge. Thats a much better route than simply taxing every American even if they only buy made in America goods.

There's a part of the Alternative Minimum Tax for corporations - HR. 4520 - The America Jobs Creation Act - that gives corporations a tax break for saving on manufacturing costs by taking manufacturing overseas. It's costing us a lot of jobs, but it's hard to explain to voters without putting them to sleep and there are a lot of well-paid lobbyists that would prefer you didn't try to.
So on top of saving fistfuls of money by having things manufactured in countries that have no regulation and where they can pay workers 25 cents an hour, corporations also get a tax break for doing so.
We can at least take the tax break away and the corporations would still probably come out on top.

 

[theHawk]

No, I think that Democrats are more in favor of free trade. Remember Clinton made NAFTA happen.

Yea, I know. Thats why I find it hilarious they are always claiming to protect the American worker with their 'feel-good' agendas such as minimum wage and health insurance.

 

[theHawk]

There's a part of the Alternative Minimum Tax for corporations - HR. 4520 - The America Jobs Creation Act - that gives corporations a tax break for saving on manufacturing costs by taking manufacturing overseas. It's costing us a lot of jobs, but it's hard to explain to voters without putting them to sleep and there are a lot of well-paid lobbyists that would prefer you didn't try to.
So on top of saving fistfuls of money by having things manufactured in countries that have no regulation and where they can pay workers 25 cents an hour, corporations also get a tax break for doing so.
We can at least take the tax break away and the corporations would still probably come out on top.

That sounds good to me. The problem is both Republicans and Democrats support such free trade but Dems are constantly dictating their 'business morality' onto our companies, but turn a blind eye to foreign companies. They are essentially forcing high cost socialist ideals onto American companies and allowing low cost totally free capitalism in other countries to compete directly with each other. Its a double standard that is killing us.

 

[wiggles]

Yea, I know. Thats why I find it hilarious they are always claiming to protect the American worker with their 'feel-good' agendas such as minimum wage and health insurance.

What's equally hilarious is Republicans pretending corporate welfare has something to do with job creation and protecting small businesses.

 

[wiggles]

That sounds good to me. The problem is both Republicans and Democrats support such free trade but Dems are constantly dictating their 'business morality' onto our companies, but turn a blind eye to foreign companies. They are essentially forcing high cost socialist ideals onto American companies and allowing low cost totally free capitalism in other countries to compete directly with each other. Its a double standard that is killing us.

We can't really tell foreign companies how to operate. We can take away some incentives for U.S. companies to do business with them though.

 

[eots]

your both right unfortunately no left , no right ,just the globalist (FREE TRADE one world government ) agenda . just to factions vying for CEO of slavery Incorporated

 

[trobinett]

That sounds good to me. The problem is both Republicans and Democrats support such free trade but Dems are constantly dictating their 'business morality' onto our companies, but turn a blind eye to foreign companies. They are essentially forcing high cost socialist ideals onto American companies and allowing low cost totally free capitalism in other countries to compete directly with each other. Its a double standard that is killing us.

You make good points, that most aren't willing to listen to.

For years, we've heard about the "level playing field", Americans don't mind playing on a "level playing field", in fact, we INVITE it.

Just as in sports, auto racing, boxing, are anything that is competitive, there has to be rules, so the competitors have a chance to compete.

Tilted rules, allowing unfair advantage, begets ENGLAND, and at this point, looks like it will also get the alliance that made the European Union.

You just CAN'T keep paying out benefits, and try and compete with those that don't , its simple economics.

If you can't understand that, then just apply COMMON SENSE.