Katrina, and the UN - Page 6

Kevin · #76 07-30-2006, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by f8nacn

Yet there is a thing called PRIDE that some people would not enlist government assistance nor would they seek after unemployment benefits (a company would have to agree to that anyway - ask anyone in HR).

Pride is a personal choice. When you've sucked at life enough to get yourself into such a hole, you have nothing to be proud of. At any rate, even if you don't believe that, you're still admitting it's a personal choice which I've been arguing all along. Looks like we're basically on the same page.

Quote:

And how many people have the will-power to begin something like this! Again, you are talking about personal experience and not something that happens 90% percent of the time (if not greater).

You're arguing that there is no personal choice involved. I'm citing examples proving that you can't make such sweeping generalizations. That anyone can overcome difficulty in their life proves that it can be done. If it can be done, we're talking about a personal choice existing to succeed or fail, no matter what.

Quote:

I agree...they maybe eligible but that doesn't mean that they will tap into that resource.

Personal choice.

Kevin · #77 07-30-2006, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by f8nacn

You honestly believe that???

I can't see any other alternative. It's harsh, but you can make excuses for failure all you want. At the end of the day, it's still failure.

f8nacn · #78 07-30-2006, 10:04 PM

I agree with you...in the end it is about personal choice! It's about deciding whether you will continue to be in the minority or if you will be in the top percentage of Americans - those who are working, aiming for a better life, and "struggling" as I say to pay bills and make ends meet from month to month. Of course, as stated above, again, it is about personal choice! I can't refute you on that.

shinerbock · #79 08-04-2006, 01:56 AM

Back to the sub-argument about minimum wage, the 2 dollar minimum wage hike failed in the Senate.

Unfortunately though, so did reductions to the death (estate) tax...

Kevin · #80 08-04-2006, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Back to the sub-argument about minimum wage, the 2 dollar minimum wage hike failed in the Senate.

Unfortunately though, so did reductions to the death (estate) tax...

I'd be all for any kind of tax cut as long as we could figure out first where we were going to cut the spending to pay for the tax cut. As it stands, the estate tax was only going to affect estates valued at over 2 million dollars. I know that the rich share a disproportionate amount of the tax burden, and I strongly believe that they should be the first to receive tax cuts, but before we cut taxes anywhere, we need to find some federal spending to cut at the same time.

An 8.5 trillion dollar deficit is going to catch up with us one of these days.

DeltAlum · #81 08-04-2006, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ktsnake

I'd be all for any kind of tax cut as long as we could figure out first where we were going to cut the spending...

An 8.5 trillion dollar deficit is going to catch up with us one of these days.

Amen. Please tell George and Congress.

Rudey · #82 08-04-2006, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Back to the sub-argument about minimum wage, the 2 dollar minimum wage hike failed in the Senate.

Unfortunately though, so did reductions to the death (estate) tax...

Yeah I'm going to cry for the multi-billionaire .0000001% of the US population that is so hurt by that.

-Rudey

shinerbock · #83 08-04-2006, 03:21 PM

You guys act like the estate tax only effects the uber-rich. Thankfully the exemption status will be raised until about 2010, but if it goes back to how it was, it'll effect a lot of people, including many on this site.

Kevin · #84 08-04-2006, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

You guys act like the estate tax only effects the uber-rich. Thankfully the exemption status will be raised until about 2010, but if it goes back to how it was, it'll effect a lot of people, including many on this site.

The proposed change was only going to affect people whose estates were valued at over 2 million dollars.

shinerbock · #85 08-04-2006, 03:43 PM

Theres a lot of people whose family's estates are worth 2 million dollars.

AKA_Monet · #86 08-04-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

How have they failed them?

Shinerbock-

I really am unsure where you are coming from with posting this thread and what you are really trying to ask.

Are you upset about the article on Fox.com? Or what it says? You know that Fox posted this kind of article to incite chit and piss folks off--a usual way of propagandizing folks or a classic "divide and conquer" method. It's like they are making folks choose sides--NOW!!! And IMO, this lunacy will worsen the closer the US gets toward the November, 2006 election--barring anything else "globally" happening to the US after the summer--which is very impropable...

All I got to say is don't believe the hype...

We've got, ALL OF THE UNITED STATES, and Bush and co., larger problems than chit that happenend ~1 year ago... Dude in N. Korea is lightin' up missles, Iran is about to lose it's dayum mind--I don't think we can afford to rehash that drama...

IMO, if there is one more "disaster issue" during the Bush presidency (9-11 and Katrina), then some VERY powerful people are gonna start getting involved--now, that worries me... I mean, I'm no fan of Bush, but the man can only take so much drama. And some of this isht is tough to deal with as a leader, how does on reconcile it, personally? Most folks would cut and run and Mr. Bush as stayed into the mix of things, seeing it through--yeah, he could do better--but nunna us are in his shoes... I guess, my thinking would be, can't we all just get along, dayum!!! Can't we just bring back peace-pipes and smoke it? Why do we have to deal with leaders of rogue countries that refuse to be medicated? The US has enough drama within its borders and the chit is about to be worse for some groups of people... And, it ain't like chit in the US is all that tight right now... Gas prices are atrocious... Food prices are about to be crazy... Folks are gonna starve for the basic necessities that were conquered after the depression... Do we really need to relive that history?

I think that is where some folks are coming from.

shinerbock · #87 08-04-2006, 04:38 PM

I was asking that about how the administration has failed so many people, as they claim. I agree with you that we have bigger problems to worry about, and that the administration has a lot on its plate, more than than many have.

About Fox, I don't really see them having a "divide and conquer" attitude. I mean, Fox is obviously conservative, so the UN condemning America is something conservatives wanna hear about. Likewise, MSNBC and CNN are liberal media groups. It really annoys me when people accuse Republicans of trying to divide the country. I think some republican stances are naturally devisive, but I don't think that is the purpose. However, I think the Democrats do make a point to divide, most often by attacking the administration at every chance. Now even if you disagree with Bush, you should admit that some of what the media and the DNC blames on him really has nothing to do with his presidency. The Democrats have a vested interested in breaking apart American unity on issues. It is paying dividends right now for them in the polls.

DeltAlum · #88 08-04-2006, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I was asking that about how the administration has failed so many people, as they claim. I agree with you that we have bigger problems to worry about, and that the administration has a lot on its plate, more than than many have.

About Fox, I don't really see them having a "divide and conquer" attitude. I mean, Fox is obviously conservative, so the UN condemning America is something conservatives wanna hear about. Likewise, MSNBC and CNN are liberal media groups. It really annoys me when people accuse Republicans of trying to divide the country. I think some republican stances are naturally devisive, but I don't think that is the purpose. However, I think the Democrats do make a point to divide, most often by attacking the administration at every chance. Now even if you disagree with Bush, you should admit that some of what the media and the DNC blames on him really has nothing to do with his presidency. The Democrats have a vested interested in breaking apart American unity on issues. It is paying dividends right now for them in the polls.

I think you've just described politics. But the finger points both ways.

shinerbock · #89 08-04-2006, 04:53 PM

Of course, however, I think it is pointed towards the Democrats right now. If and when the Democrats begin to fully control the political agenda, you'll see republicans causing more trouble too.

AKA_Monet · #90 08-04-2006, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I was asking that about how the administration has failed so many people, as they claim. I agree with you that we have bigger problems to worry about, and that the administration has a lot on its plate, more than than many have.

About Fox, I don't really see them having a "divide and conquer" attitude. I mean, Fox is obviously conservative, so the UN condemning America is something conservatives wanna hear about. Likewise, MSNBC and CNN are liberal media groups. It really annoys me when people accuse Republicans of trying to divide the country. I think some republican stances are naturally devisive, but I don't think that is the purpose. However, I think the Democrats do make a point to divide, most often by attacking the administration at every chance. Now even if you disagree with Bush, you should admit that some of what the media and the DNC blames on him really has nothing to do with his presidency. The Democrats have a vested interested in breaking apart American unity on issues. It is paying dividends right now for them in the polls.

The thing is Fox posted this article on their website I agree, a condeming UN report concerns most conservatives and what they may want to hear about. By why do the conservatives give a rat's ass what the UN human right's commission says? Who cares? The U.N. as a whole pulls only so much power... It is really the National Security Council that has the "pull", but that hasn't stopped some countries from acting "buckwild"--they are still dropping bombs on places they ought not be doing, like Hezabollah on Israel... It is a matter of time when Hezabollah slips in just ONE nuke device to Israel--unless that chit can be maintained and Israel flexes like they need to be doing... But that's my opinion and I could be wrong...

And I think both parties, republicans and democrats, ride on the ability to divide people. Just republicans are better at doing it than democrats. Democrats can only do it to a point unless they want to piss off the constituency they are trying to pimp votes out of. Republicans are too self-righteous to pimp for votes...

My thing is let the games begin... We are in for a trip to Congress unlike that seen in a long time... There will be gained seats and lost seats--specially in the senate. If it goes all to one party again, there will be an underground activity that the Secret Police--I mean Homeland Security--would haveta shutdown.