Current Topics
RoundTable for Fall 2019
by pondering_it_all
0 seconds ago
The Impeachment of Donald trump
by pondering_it_all
6 minutes 40 seconds ago
What is a far leftist, anyway?
by perotista
12 minutes 17 seconds ago
The Trump/Biden/Ukraine thing
by pondering_it_all
14 minutes 38 seconds ago
Public option vs Medicare for All
by pondering_it_all
Today at 03:04 AM
auto industry, unions and strikes
by jgw
Yesterday at 07:14 PM
Where have all the conservatives gone?
by NW Ponderer
10/20/19 04:16 PM
What is "old"?
by Greger
10/19/19 03:03 AM
Never-Before-Seen Trump Tax Documents Show Major Inconsistencies
by pondering_it_all
10/19/19 02:26 AM
Hyper-partisanship and irrationality
by logtroll
10/19/19 12:47 AM
If ISIS does the unthinkable...
by chunkstyle
10/18/19 01:09 PM
Are both "sides" equally corrupt?
by chunkstyle
10/18/19 12:18 PM
The Departed - 2019
by pdx rick
10/17/19 01:12 PM
Why do humans fight so much?
by Greger
10/15/19 02:13 PM
Global warming predictions
by logtroll
10/13/19 08:47 PM
Turkey's Erdogan threatens to release millions of refugees into Europe over crit
by pdx rick
10/12/19 07:35 PM
Partisans' Trust in Legislative Branch Has Shifted in Past Year
by perotista
10/11/19 03:37 AM
Trump unleashes ISIS in Kurd Country
by Greger
10/10/19 05:31 PM
SF Board of Supervisors declare NRA a domestic terrorist organization
by NW Ponderer
10/09/19 03:08 PM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by chunkstyle
10/07/19 02:44 PM
Forum Stats
6282 Members
59 Forums
16715 Topics
291000 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 6 of 10 < 1 2 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Topic Options
#314383 - 08/28/19 04:07 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: Greger]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1604
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: Greger
I don't think any of us are especially proud of Bubba Clinton's antics between the sheets. But he was impeached for his shenanigans. Do you, Senator, also endorse the impeachment of President Trump?

Since Pres. Trump has done nothing that justifies an attempt impeach him, I do not endorse it being done. The trumped up charges that have been made against him are worthless. (Pun intended.)
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314384 - 08/28/19 04:22 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: Senator Hatrack]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6851
Loc: Highlands, Tx
You are simply restating your belief, since Pres Madison was "father" of Constitution it implies we should only believe what he believed, which fails to comprehend the whole document was a compromise between people who wanted a strong federal government and those who essentially did not want a central government. Should we conclude Pres Madison also believed some men were property and should be only accounted as 3/5's of white folk. Perhaps we should apply Madisonian beliefs on black folks?

The Constitution allows laws to be written without hindrance of applying for Constitutional amendments. Pres Madison was the stickler but all other people involved in writing the Constitution immediately upon being elected to federal office began the expansion of the government. One has to know what the boundaries are, and there are boundaries, as is evidenced by the SC ruling on laws which they deemed as unConstititional.

So again I ask, why arbitrarily select Pres Madison's view and not Hamilton's.

aside: just musing .... I have to wonder what written in stonists view of modern government would look like from the 1790 perspective of Pres Madison? no army ... no air force ... 4 cabinet positions ... no judicial review ... NO INCOME TAX!!!!. Kinda looks like 50 independent countries with about 35 of them 3rd world nations /// sweet
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#314386 - 08/28/19 04:30 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: Senator Hatrack]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6851
Loc: Highlands, Tx
If Sec Clinton had been elected and she had done what Mr Trump has done, wouldn't the list of impeachable offenses be long? I mean didn't she order Seth Rich to be assassinated? or run a child porn operation out of a Pizza joint? didn't Pres Clinton get some kind of emolument from the Russians for a speech which he donated to the Clinton Foundation? can you imagine Sec Clinton trying to get dirt on Mr trump from the Russians or making deals to lift sanctions?

Let me tell ya, if Sec Clinton had done the things Mr trump has done, I would have led the charge to impeach her.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#314387 - 08/28/19 04:36 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: rporter314]
Greger Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 15512
Loc: Florida
Quote:
Kinda looks like 50 independent countries with about 35 of them 3rd world nations /// sweet


That's the Madisonian Utopia.

Have you heard of that Broadway hit "Madison"?

Me either.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."ó Oscar Wilde

Top
#314390 - 08/28/19 05:17 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: rporter314]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1604
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: rporter314
LOL .... ROFLMAO

Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Trump has made some racist comments does not make him a racist
Originally Posted By: rporter314
so when a "real" racist makes racist comments apparently you believe that does not make him a racist.

Look!!!! ... if a person says something idiotic, then I can say they said something idiotic. If a person continues to say idiotic things, then I can conclude they are an idiot. So I am forced to conclude you do not believe people who continue to say idiotic things are idiots. Other options are they are .... {sheepishly} stable geniuses?

As much as you would like to believe it Pres. Trump is not a racist.
Originally Posted By: rporter314
a comment about grabbing a pussy. Comment??? He clearly stated he grabs pussy's because women and girls allow "stars" to do anything they want to do. He was not fantasizing or making juvenile locker room remarks. Mr Trump stated he grabs pussy ... because HE is a STAR. The reality is he is a putz, who has to pay porn stars for sex and then is too stupid to comprehend they may go public with this escapade and so pays them again to not say anything. And you think this character is brilliant.

Unfortunately women do allow men to grab their pussy because they are stars or powerful men. Case in point Harvey Weinstein and other LIBERAL Hollywood stars. He offered Stormy Daniels money for sex. She did not take it. Later he did pay her keep quiet before the 2016 election. I never said or even suggested that I think Trump is brilliant. That is something you have, again, read into my comments. Something that wasn't and isn't there!
Quote:
So you made some kind of equivalence between someone who actually grabs pussy and someone who was accused of rape. Pres Clinton was accused of one act of sexual assault (I guess penetration is necessary for rape) and one account of rape and 2 accounts of sexual misconduct. He paid off one accuser and no charges were filed in other cases. Pres Clinton denies all charges. Now I have no direct evidence other than accusations of his conduct. Should I speculate? So we have one person who admits to his conduct and another who does not and you think I have a double standard? Better check your argument for partisan hackery.

Two accounts of sexual misconduct by Pres. Clinton? To downplay or ignore that Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct more than twice is a double standard and political hackery. Try ten accusations of sexual misconduct by Clinton. https://heavy.com/news/2016/05/bill-clin...hotos-pictures/

Originally Posted By: rporter314
It takes more than someone saying they are a stable genius for me to get weak in the knees. People with big egos had better have a large portfolio to impress me. Narcissists need not apply. They need help.

Where did I say, imply or suggest Trump is a stable genius? I didn't. This is another example of you reading something into what I said.

Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
What a crock of snit!
and yet you presented no refutation. .... that was the cue for you to present evidence Mr Trump does not act solely to benefit his own delusions of grandeur or as a racist.

Does Pres. Trump act solely for his own benefit? No, he does not. If he did he would not have run for the presidency and thus subjecting himself to all of the abuse he has received. Although to some extent Trump, like everyone else, does act for his own benefit. Doing so is a part of human nature.

Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
But like many liberals you seem to have trouble reading what I wrote. Instead you read into it something I did not say.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
One of the most difficult problems in trying to discuss anything with a conservative (that being you) is their belief that no one can derive a conclusion based on what they say or to put it another way if the conservative did not use the precise words of a conclusion then they did not say it or believe it or think it.

If you say A, B, and C and they are logical parts of an argument then certainly I can conclude certain things about what you believe or think based on your own statements.

When you do you your conclusions are wrong. They are because they are clouded by liberal bias.
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Where in my comment did I praise Pres. Trump? I didn't!
Originally Posted By: rporter314
you didn't say it but you suggested by your statement that liberals do not praise him, that praise is due Mr trump which also suggests YOU have or will praise him for something he has done or said. My question was WHAT has Mr trump done or said which deserves my praise? Now since you believe Mr Trump is deserving of praise ... that is also the cue for YOU to present the evidence. Maybe we can all praise him together.
Show me some praise Trump has received from a liberal. If it has happened finding it will take a long time because it has not happened very often. When any of our elected officials do something that deserves praise I will give them the praise they are due.

Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
I have not pledged fealty to Trump but you have shown that you have done so to Pres. Obama.You did by claiming that Trump's efforts to rescind what Obama did is not only wrong but bad for our country.
Originally Posted By: rporter314
Yikes. Wrong!!!! You have erroneously concluded your own belief of what I believe or think. I made no claim as to whether rescinding anything Pres Obama did was good bad or ugly. My observation was Mr Trump has made it a mission to rescind everything the black president enacted as if Mr Trump is repealing what he believes is a bad black presidency.

Why are you injecting race into this discussion? I never mentioned Pres. Obama's race! If Trump had a mission to rescind what Obama did it was because he disagreed with what Obama did. NOT because of Obama's race! Thanks for showing who is the real racist here.
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
If the lowest unemployment rate for blacks, Latinos, and women is bad for the country than Trump is a terrible president.


Originally Posted By: rporter314
Are you for real????

By repeating administration talking points I have to wonder if you have ever really thought about what they are trying to say. Mr Trump is trying to suggest he is not a racist because ethnic rates are lower than previous administration. So just why would that be valid?

The rates for women and ethnic groups at end of Pres Obama's term was also the lowest. So should I derive some notion about Pres Obama's racism?

The rates are the lowest because the overall rate is lowest in years which has been the downward trend since 2010. If you want to impute Mr Trump has initiated some programs or laws or EO's which were purposefully directed to help women and ethnic minorities to mitigate the disparity found between those groups and whites ... here is your cue ... present that evidence, otherwise it turns out that the differences in rates are essentially the same from 2010 to now i.e. blacks about 100% more than whites ... Latinos about 50% more than whites ... and guess what .... women about the same as men

So again I ask .... what has Mr trump done to get your praise????

The difference was the spike in unemployment rates during the Obama administration that started to decline in 2010. Pres. Obama deserves praise for the start of the decline in the unemployment rates in the last two years of his administration. That Trump has continued what started during the Obama administration is a good thing.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314391 - 08/28/19 06:03 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: rporter314]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1604
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: rporter314
You are simply restating your belief, since Pres Madison was "father" of Constitution it implies we should only believe what he believed, which fails to comprehend the whole document was a compromise between people who wanted a strong federal government and those who essentially did not want a central government. Should we conclude Pres Madison also believed some men were property and should be only accounted as 3/5's of white folk. Perhaps we should apply Madisonian beliefs on black folks?

Did you not read where said that Madison had help from a lot of very intelligent men in writing our Constitution? Or did you ignore it? It appears that you ignored it. Again you are bringing race into this discussion thus showing who the real racists is. Unfortunately, without the 3/5 compromise our Constitution would never have been written. Because of Article V, which was created by the committee of the whole, the idea that a black man only counted as 3/5 of a person was removed from our Constitution.
Originally Posted By: trporter314
The Constitution allows laws to be written without hindrance of applying for Constitutional amendments. Pres Madison was the stickler but all other people involved in writing the Constitution immediately upon being elected to federal office began the expansion of the government. One has to know what the boundaries are, and there are boundaries, as is evidenced by the SC ruling on laws which they deemed as unConstititional.

Our Constitution created the legislative branch of our government for the express purpose of writing laws that do not require amending it. In Madison's plan for our Constitution he wanted our federal government to have the power to negate state laws. Fortunately he lost that argument.
Originally Posted By: rporter314
So again I ask, why arbitrarily select Pres Madison's view and not Hamilton's.

There are several reasons why that should be done.
1) Hamilton was only at the Constitutional Convention about half the time it was in session.
2) He was not an active participant in the convention. The aforementioned Pickneys were more active in the convention than Hamilton was.
3) The New York delegation to the convention originally consisted of three men; John Lansing Jr., Robert Yates, and Alexander Hamilton. Lansing and Yates left the convention early and never returned to it.

The rules of the convention required that a majority of the delegates from a state must agree on what is being discussed for the state to vote on it. Each state had one vote. Since Hamilton was the only delegate from New York at the convention he was not allowed to vote on what was being discussed. Because Hamilton was not there all of the time and wasn't an active voting member of the convention he did not have as much the influence on the writing of it that Madison did. Hamilton's opinions of our Constitution only became influential when he helped write The Federalist Papers.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
aside: just musing .... I have to wonder what written in stonists view of modern government would look like from the 1790 perspective of Pres Madison? no army ... no air force ... 4 cabinet positions ... no judicial review ... NO INCOME TAX!!!!. Kinda looks like 50 independent countries with about 35 of them 3rd world nations /// sweet

Because the men at the Constitutional Convention wrote Article V our government has changed when it has been necessary to do so.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314392 - 08/28/19 06:05 PM Re: Good bye? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 9474
Loc: One of the Mexicos
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Long before the Laffer Curve was created cutting taxes raised government revenue.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/20...g/#64465fc8799e

You are equating tariffs with income taxes.

Note that Trump is drastically increasing tariffs (and not for a stated purpose of raising revenues). This unreasonable increase of tariff/taxes appears to be hastening the economy into a recession.

Perhaps you could explain how cutting income taxes on the wealthy serves to raise government revenues?
_________________________
You canít solve a problem without first understanding what the problem is.

Top
#314397 - 08/28/19 06:42 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: Senator Hatrack]
Greger Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 15512
Loc: Florida
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Originally Posted By: Greger
I don't think any of us are especially proud of Bubba Clinton's antics between the sheets. But he was impeached for his shenanigans. Do you, Senator, also endorse the impeachment of President Trump?

Since Pres. Trump has done nothing that justifies an attempt impeach him, I do not endorse it being done. The trumped up charges that have been made against him are worthless. (Pun intended.)

More common ground! We practically stand in solidarity comrade!

The charges were trumped up by Republicans, investigated by Republicans under a Republican administration. It was a little mini coup that failed. But he most certainly has been accused of rape, rape of a minor, He has been accused of molestation, of harassment, and of paying off mistresses and prostitutes who slept with him willingly.

Those charges and more have been flushed away for another day, some maybe "TRUMPed" up some not...Yer boy is no saint Senator so don't throw the first stone.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."ó Oscar Wilde

Top
#314399 - 08/28/19 06:52 PM Re: Good bye? Nope! I'm sticking Around! [Re: Senator Hatrack]
rporter314 Offline
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6851
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Quote:
Does Pres. Trump act solely for his own benefit? No, he does not. If he did he would not have run for the presidency and thus subjecting himself to all of the abuse he has received. Although to some extent Trump, like everyone else, does act for his own benefit. Doing so is a part of human nature.
You completely ignored my rebuttal, so I am forced to conclude you have arbitrarily determined nothing Mr Trump does is in any respect controversial. So should I also conclude if Sec Clinton had done or said the same things Mr Trump has done or said she is also absolved? LOOK!!!! Had she done or said the same things Mr Trump has done or said I would excoriate her and bring the tar. Your partisan tolerance is disconcerting.

Quote:
When you do you your conclusions are wrong. They are because they are clouded by liberal bias.
Should my conclusions be wrong (and certainly they could be but I am pretty objective when I analyze stuff) please point it out but don't point out a conclusion which offends you when it is valid.

Quote:
Show me some praise Trump has received from a liberal.
Show me something for which he is deserving of praise!!!!! I keep asking and you continue to ignore my begging.

Quote:
When any of our elected officials do something that deserves praise I will give them the praise they are due.
Yes I see you praised Mr Trump for his actions during the campaign for currying Russian favor, requesting assistance, and when the FBI became suspicious of possible criminal activities Mr Trump obstructed their investigation .... and you praised him. Do you really believe Pres Madison had that in mind for our republic????

Quote:
Why are you injecting race into this discussion? I never mentioned Pres. Obama's race! If Trump had a mission to rescind what Obama did it was because he disagreed with what Obama did. NOT because of Obama's race!
I think you better read what Mr Trump has said. He is the one who uses racist memes for which you reject as being racist. I can only conclude Mr Trump only walks and talks like a racist but is the rara avis of not being what he is.

I have no problem with Mr Trump rescinding policies which does not comport with conservative ideals, but everything Pres Obama did was bad!!!! Really!!!! Maybe you didn't hear about Mr Trump leading Obama birtherism. Mr Trump lied about doing an investigation so the only thing left which was true and valid was his racism.

Quote:
The difference was the spike in unemployment rates during the Obama administration that started to decline in 2010.
OK ... and ...what?

Quote:
Pres. Obama deserves praise for the start of the decline in the unemployment rates in the last two years of his administration.
I guess you haven't seen the stats. It started in 2010 with big government economic packages aimed at turning a severely contracted economy around. The unemployment rates started declining in 2010 as a direct result of those economic policies enacted, and they continued to decline throughout the next 7 years of the Obama administration.

You can say you don't like the way it was done but you can't say it didn't work. Of course I can ask what policies would you have enacted to achieve the same of better results. At the time conservatives said do nothing. Maybe you had a different prescription.

Quote:
That Trump has continued what started during the Obama administration is a good thing.
Again, I guess you have not seen the stats.

Job Gains :: Mr Trump has not bested the jobs gains under Pres Obama

Unemployment Rate :: it has fallen 1% since Mr Trump took office. It has been falling since 2010.

Growth :: Looks about the same as Pres Obama's stats for last few years or nothing to write home about.

Middle Class income :: higher but it was already rising the last few years of Obama's term. Should be expected as more people are working.

Stock Market :: Under Pres Obama DJIA up 46% at same time as Mr Trump's 25%. A bit misleading as Mr Trump is reaping the benefits of Pres Obamas bootstrap of the market.

and so forth. For all the bluster from Mr Trump he has not done much of anything except not blow it up. Now that could be BIG, as he is the chaos in chief and he is in the start of a trade war which every rational economist says will not end well for America and maybe the world. So while Mr Trump hasn't blown it up yet .... give him some time, he is working on it

So again .... what has Mr trump done or said which deserves my praise???
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#314401 - 08/28/19 10:04 PM Re: Good bye? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17116
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Because when taxes are cut the revenue to our government increases.
That is not now, nor has it ever been, true. That, my friend, is what is called "fraud". It is fraud of long and storied history. Have you ever heard of the "Laffer curve" (which I refer to as the "laughable curve")? We have been at the low end of that "curve" for nearly all of our national history, so it has never been functionally accurate. At best, a tax cut will return about 28% in revenues. Even the tax foundation, a rah- rah proponent of tax cuts, acknowledges that "[the TCJA] will reduce federal revenues by $1.47 trillion on a conventional basis and $448 billion on a dynamic basis over the 10-year budget window."

Long before the Laffer Curve was created cutting taxes raised government revenue.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/20...g/#64465fc8799c

Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Our government cannot create wealth, it can only tax it. Again, laughably untrue.
Do you know how treasuries work? Where does a government treasury get the money that is in it? By taxing people. A government's treasury is not and does not create wealth. A government's treasury is a repository for the wealth that has been collected through taxes.
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Our government doesn't have the revenue to fund Medicare so the idea of a tax funded healthcare system has already been proven to be a solution that does not work! How many times does that FACT have to be repeated before people understand it?
Whether you like it or not NW Ponderer it is a fact.
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Repeating something that is demonstrably false does not make it "a fact", no matter how often you make the same claim. That only works in "conservaworld."
Here is the proof that our government does not have, nor will it ever have, the revenue to fund Medicare in its current state much less extend it to everyone. Where is the $79,000,000,000,000 to pay for Medicare as it currently is going to come from?
http://www.usadebtclock.com/
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
The reason the cost of healthcare is too high is due to many factors. The primary factor is government interference in the private sector with a wage freeze shortly after WWII. Expecting our government to fix a problem it created is like expecting that no one will ever tell a lie again.
It would be nice if you did some research NW Ponderer.
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Again, a repetitive fantasy based upon a falsehood. I'd ask where you get these bizarre ideas, but I don't really care.

No it is not a fantasy based on a falsehood. But then since you just state your opinion and expect it to be accepted as fact you wouldn't know that. (I was a little bit mistaken about the wage freeze. It happened during WWII not after it.)
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/c...0224-story.html
"The Revenue Act of 1942 triggered another rush to enroll employees in health plans. By slapping corporations with tax rates of 80 or even up to 90 percent on any profits in excess of prewar revenue, Congress all but guaranteed a frenzied search for loopholes. Employee benefits, according to the new law, could be deducted from profits. As an anonymous employer observed in a study published on trends in health insurance, "it was a case of paying the money for insurance for their employees or to Uncle Sam in taxes."

In 1943, two rulings helped accelerate the movement toward employer-sponsored health insurance. The first was a directive by the Internal Revenue Service that employees did not have to pay taxes on premiums paid by their employers. The second was a decision by the National War Labor Board reaffirming the exemption of fringe benefits from the wage freeze."
Our government did create the healthcare problem.
I appreciate your citations. I really do. Would that they actually supported your assertions. First, it is worth noting that the first source is dubious, at best (an opinion piece from the Cato institute). Second, it had zero to do with your assertion (that cutting taxes increases government revenues) or cutting taxes generally, and was almost entirely about cutting spending. It also ignores the horrendous costs to society the austerity programs "lauded" actually wrought. In addition it fails to note either the brevity of Harding's tenure (17 months) nor the egregious scandals, personal and presidential, that he created in that brief period. It is why he is still ranked as one of the worst Presidents in American history, until the current occupant took the crown.

Where do you get those ridiculous Medicare figures from? Certainly not reality. Try some reality-based sourcing: Medicare Budget Basics; CMS: Trustees Report & Trust Funds; CBO- Medicare 2019 Baseline; The Facts on Medicare Spending and Financing (Kaiser). The "Debt Clock.com" source is not even close to reliable, or even rational.

Does Medicare need adjustment? Absolutely. Would universal healthcare reduce actual costs? Again, absolutely. Would taxes go up? Yup. Is it sustainable? Of course it is. I don't intend to be derisive, my friend, but your assertions are so far from rational or coherent that they are hard to take seriously.

With regard to the employer-based health insurance system, however, I agree that it's essentially an accident/condition of history. That being the case, why try to maintain it? Do you recognize what how detrimental it is in international trade?

Top
Page 6 of 10 < 1 2 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 16 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Snarky_Politics, Moot, Ikari, perotista, ttwtt78640
6282 Registered Users
A2