Obama won...

RenegadeRows

RenegadeRows

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
and I bet he'll wipe the floor with McCain
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
The greatest danger this county has faced in it entire history is now a reality.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, ithout
knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas, 1948
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I have to say from my vantage point (Indy) I love the idea of watching repubs screaming about socialism and dems screaming about a bush 3rd term. It is too funny.

At the end of the day, the Obama/Clinton ticket will win, and most likely win handily. To discuss how they will do as a ticket will be premature at this point, as it will be with McCain, but it will be a stark change from where we are now, which could very well be a positive considering how terrible the Bush administration has been on so many levels
 
Australian made

Australian made

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Wasn't really a suprise he won though was it. Well originaly Clinton was hot favourite but that didn't last long. I got a fair bit of cash riding on Obama becomming president..........thats right i gambled on this sh1t.
 
Ribo68

Ribo68

Member
Awards
0
The greatest danger this county has faced in it entire history is now a reality.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, ithout
knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas, 1948
+1 !
 
RenegadeRows

RenegadeRows

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Obama is telling us what we want to hear ... and he's damn good at it too.

McCain - old and boring
Obama - fresh and young.

Do you really think the public cares about policy? LOL. We want a good show!
 

ReaperX

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Indy ? You live in Indianapolis Reaper ?
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
I have to say from my vantage point (Indy) I love the idea of watching repubs screaming about socialism and dems screaming about a bush 3rd term. It is too funny.

At the end of the day, the Obama/Clinton ticket will win, and most likely win handily. To discuss how they will do as a ticket will be premature at this point, as it will be with McCain, but it will be a stark change from where we are now, which could very well be a positive considering how terrible the Bush administration has been on so many levels
1. I'm not a republican - don't make assumptions.
2. That quote is from 1948 and still rings true, doesnt it now..? Both Clinton and Obama are both socialists. I might add some of Hillary's politics mimic the communist manifesto.
3. McCain is not a whole like like Bush. He is about as liberal as a republican as you can get. Unless he picks a strong VP he's got no chance as the core republicans despise him.
4. Any change is good right?
5. I want them to win, it might force the republicans to put their party back together.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
Obama is telling us what we want to hear ... and he's damn good at it too.

McCain - old and boring
Obama - fresh and young.

Do you really think the public cares about policy? LOL. We want a good show!
No, they don't care about policy. But when their guy wins its all gravy. Until.... their personal taxes jump 20%, corporate taxes are increased (sending more jobs overseas), they lose a job to a lesser qualified black person simply because of race, abortions are available at walmart, then maybe they will realize what was important.

8/10 social issues on Obama's website are race issues. How bout that... Affirmative action by definition puts the black man in a higher class than the white man. Arent we ALL supposed to be EQUAL? lol..
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
1. I'm not a republican - don't make assumptions.
2. That quote is from 1948 and still rings true, doesnt it now..? Both Clinton and Obama are both socialists. I might add some of Hillary's politics mimic the communist manifesto.
3. McCain is not a whole like like Bush. He is about as liberal as a republican as you can get. Unless he picks a strong VP he's got no chance as the core republicans despise him.
4. Any change is good right?
5. I want them to win, it might force the republicans to put their party back together.
1. not making assumptions about you personally, your political persuasion is meaningless for the sake of this discussion
2. calling them socialists is kinda like calling bush a fascist, not entirely true
3. If you look at McCain's policies, specifically on the war and on nwealthy tax cuts (as well as education) he sounds a lot like ihm, and many people are going to see a republican and think of him. McCain has the misfortune of following a horrible president
4. No, not any change is good, but people do want change and they see the POSSIBILITY of that in Obama
5. Wow, and you say you are not a republican, interesting last statement then
 
BodyWizard

BodyWizard

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
At the end of the day, the Obama/Clinton ticket will win, and most likely win handily.
I profoundly disagree - the surest way for the DP to lose is to have HRC on the ticket - in *either* role. What the frack do you think Operation Chaos was all about?
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
1. not making assumptions about you personally, your political persuasion is meaningless for the sake of this discussion
2. calling them socialists is kinda like calling bush a fascist, not entirely true
3. If you look at McCain's policies, specifically on the war and on nwealthy tax cuts (as well as education) he sounds a lot like ihm, and many people are going to see a republican and think of him. McCain has the misfortune of following a horrible president
4. No, not any change is good, but people do want change and they see the POSSIBILITY of that in Obama
5. Wow, and you say you are not a republican, interesting last statement then
I am a strong libertarian and also a catholic, for this reason in general elections I typically have to side with the republican party at least for social issues. But FWIW I disagree with them on numerous issues.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
I profoundly disagree - the surest way for the DP to lose is to have HRC on the ticket - in *either* role. What the frack do you think Operation Chaos was all about?
I agree completely. I actually think Obama is going to hand her the "F you" and pick someone lese.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
Not letting inbred morons succeed their fathers in public office?
I agree here, he is a moron. But, he did 2 things during his tenure that actually made me glad I voted for him over the other putz.

1 Roberts
2 Alito

If we need conservatives anywhere its our court system.
 
boxmeman

boxmeman

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
wow..think of all that wasted money spent on Clinton's behalf....
 
BodyWizard

BodyWizard

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
No, they don't care about policy. But when their guy wins its all gravy. Until.... their personal taxes jump 20%, corporate taxes are increased (sending more jobs overseas), they lose a job to a lesser qualified black person simply because of race, abortions are available at walmart, then maybe they will realize what was important.
so, *you* are better off now than you were under dem dam' Dems? I'd like to know how you managed it: heavily invested in defense industries?

8/10 social issues on Obama's website are race issues. How bout that... Affirmative action by definition puts the black man in a higher class than the white man. Arent we ALL supposed to be EQUAL? lol..
Hyperbole is typically used to make a point but the only point you seem to be making is that you have no point - only hyperbole.

If you think (for example) that corporate taxation is "sending more jobs overseas", you don't know as much about business (or taxation, or corporate capitalism) as might profit you.
 
BodyWizard

BodyWizard

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
If we need conservatives anywhere its our court system.
I'd say that's a big "if", personally - heil, most of what gets described these days as "conservative" is nothing of the sort: much more a form of radical revisionism. Barry Goldwater would b!tch-slap the lot of 'em, and Bill Buckley would block the exits....
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
so, *you* are better off now than you were under dem dam' Dems? I'd like to know how you managed it: heavily invested in defense industries?


Hyperbole is typically used to make a point but the only point you seem to be making is that you have no point - only hyperbole.

If you think (for example) that corporate taxation is "sending more jobs overseas", you don't know as much about business (or taxation, or corporate capitalism) as might profit you.
LOL, funny you mention that I actually am invested in some defense industries. Guilty as charged as I am not helping our economy, I am invested over 60% in foreign markets. Our corporate taxes are already very high compared to other markets, increasing them is going to make more fluid companies look elsewhere. How can you say it wouldn't?

And btw, I strongly, strongly disagree with any legislation put out to "help" an "oppressed" class/race. Laws like this create a vicious cycle and actually keep the "oppressed".. well "oppressed." I live in the ghetto, I see it daily.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
If you think (for example) that corporate taxation is "sending more jobs overseas", you don't know as much about business (or taxation, or corporate capitalism) as might profit you.

Are you joking?
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
I'd say that's a big "if", personally - heil, most of what gets described these days as "conservative" is nothing of the sort: much more a form of radical revisionism. Barry Goldwater would b!tch-slap the lot of 'em, and Bill Buckley would block the exits....
LOL, nice I agree here. I guess conservative was a poor choice of words.

A lot of my feelings there come from some of the more liberal judges throwing repeat child predators 6 months of probation instead of jail time. I do not think it is possible to correct these people.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
I profoundly disagree - the surest way for the DP to lose is to have HRC on the ticket - in *either* role. What the frack do you think Operation Chaos was all about?
I disagree, I think she will be on it to attract based on name recognition. WIll she isolate some, of course, but I will say that she will bring in a working class vote that already voted for her before. It is his best option
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
LOL, funny you mention that I actually am invested in some defense industries. Guilty as charged as I am not helping our economy, I am invested over 60% in foreign markets. Our corporate taxes are already very high compared to other markets, increasing them is going to make more fluid companies look elsewhere. How can you say it wouldn't?

And btw, I strongly, strongly disagree with any legislation put out to "help" an "oppressed" class/race. Laws like this create a vicious cycle and actually keep the "oppressed".. well "oppressed." I live in the ghetto, I see it daily.
As an aside, would you mind pointing out the similarities between HRC's policies and the Communist Manifesto; as a Sociology/Philosophy double-major, I am interested in your interpretation.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm

There is a link!
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
As an aside, would you mind pointing out the similarities between HRC's policies and the Communist Manifesto; as a Sociology/Philosophy double-major, I am interested in your interpretation.

Manifesto of the Communist Party

There is a link!
Shoot, I have the handbook on my desk here (kidding)! A lot of it has to do with the redistribution of wealth and seizure of money, land, etc for the "common good" and some specific quotes shes said during her campaign. These are a few of my favorites (see below) - since you are a sociology/philosophy major (those are degrees?) I shouldn't need to point out the similarities to ol' Karl's handbook. Truthfully I havent paid much attention to Marx since my first year of college. If it makes you feel better I can do it when I get home from work. She is a definite socialist but I never said she is an all out commie.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society, I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none." That means pairing growth with fairness, to ensure that the middle class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEO’s.”

"The other day the oil companies recorded the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will actually begin to move us in the direction of independence.”

"Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A couple other good ones...

"We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it."

"The unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation."
"Too many people have made too much money."
 
Nabisco

Nabisco

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
so, *you* are better off now than you were under dem dam' Dems? I'd like to know how you managed it: heavily invested in defense industries?


Hyperbole is typically used to make a point but the only point you seem to be making is that you have no point - only hyperbole.

If you think (for example) that corporate taxation is "sending more jobs overseas", you don't know as much about business (or taxation, or corporate capitalism) as might profit you.
The economy has nothing to do with who was in office. The United States economy and furthermore, the world economy follow a cyclical pattern since the beginning of the stock market days and even before. Clinton reaped the benefits of the "bubble years" and Bush is taking a beating for the "recession" (which by they way is not a recession, we're still seeing positive growth as a country).

Sadly the majority of American's are uneducated morons (not directing this at you or anyone else on this thread). So they connect everything to the president when the president really has no power to shift the economy himself.

On another note, if you've failed to make money in the past eight years of Bush's terms, then you are obviously doing something wrong. Because even when the stock market is going down, you can make money. Options trading comes to mind, and even when the market as a whole is going down, there is always at least one sector going up.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
The economy has nothing to do with who was in office. The United States economy and furthermore, the world economy follow a cyclical pattern since the beginning of the stock market days and even before. Clinton reaped the benefits of the "bubble years" and Bush is taking a beating for the "recession" (which by they way is not a recession, we're still seeing positive growth as a country).

Sadly the majority of American's are uneducated morons (not directing this at you or anyone else on this thread). So they connect everything to the president when the president really has no power to shift the economy himself.

On another note, if you've failed to make money in the past eight years of Bush's terms, then you are obviously doing something wrong. Because even when the stock market is going down, you can make money. Options trading comes to mind, and even when the market as a whole is going down, there is always at least one sector going up.
I am glad you pointed out that we are not, and have not been in a recession. There is a specific definition for a recession and we do not meet it.

Also, i'd like to add i've been seeing 30-60% gains in all of my mutual funds over the last few years. I have made more money on my investments in the last 2 years than I have made working in that time.

FWIW the number 1 (although its very speculative and thus risky) way to make money in a market that is in a "downturn" is by shorting stocks. I've dabbled in it and it's really paid off.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
wow..think of all that wasted money spent on Clinton's behalf....

Clinton hasnt conceded yet. Ill bet she fights it to the convention, she is the leader in the vote still, i believe, regardless of how many superdelegates she has.

Clinton will win in 4 years when Obama f#cks up and becomes the black bush that we know he his.

He has no experience, no intelligence and he's a liar. He says that hes goin to end the war within the first year of office!!! If he knows thats a lie then hes being deceitful, if he doesnt he's dumber that he looks, and he looks pretty dumb.

We are never leaving Iraq, we wouldnt have built our most recent embassy there if we planned on leaving. So his entire campaign is based on a lie.

Also he says all the time that he voted against the war. Well if you check his voting record he wasnt even in office when the vote for the war was held, then as soon as he got into office he voted to fund the war with another couple hundred millions dollars.

He's just another snatch thats conned everyone into thinking that begging for change is a proper way to spend your day.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
Clinton hasnt conceded yet. Ill bet she fights it to the convention, she is the leader in the vote still, i believe, regardless of how many superdelegates she has.

Clinton will win in 4 years when Obama f#cks up and becomes the black bush that we know he his.

He has no experience, no intelligence and he's a liar. He says that hes goin to end the war within the first year of office!!! If he knows thats a lie then hes being deceitful, if he doesnt he's dumber that he looks, and he looks pretty dumb.

We are never leaving Iraq, we wouldnt have built our most recent embassy there if we planned on leaving. So his entire campaign is based on a lie.

Also he says all the time that he voted against the war. Well if you check his voting record he wasnt even in office when the vote for the war was held, then as soon as he got into office he voted to fund the war with another couple hundred millions dollars.

He's just another snatch thats conned everyone into thinking that begging for change is a proper way to spend your day.
Does it not frighten you that he is a presidential nominee? It's unbelievable!!! As I said before this country is seeing dangerous times and the worse is yet to come. I would honestly rather have Hillary, socialist or not as I believe she is slightly more grounded.

If she doesnt get the nom or the VP nod who wants to take bets on when she divorces Bill? lol
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Shoot, I have the handbook on my desk here (kidding)! A lot of it has to do with the redistribution of wealth and seizure of money, land, etc for the "common good" and some specific quotes shes said during her campaign. These are a few of my favorites (see below) - since you are a sociology/philosophy major (those are degrees?) I shouldn't need to point out the similarities to ol' Karl's handbook. Truthfully I havent paid much attention to Marx since my first year of college. If it makes you feel better I can do it when I get home from work. She is a definite socialist but I never said she is an all out commie.

"I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society, I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none." That means pairing growth with fairness, to ensure that the middle class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEO’s.”

"The other day the oil companies recorded the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will actually begin to move us in the direction of independence.”

"Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A couple other good ones...

"We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it."

"The unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation."
"Too many people have made too much money."
This is just incorrect. Liberal democrat? Most definitely. Socialist? Not even bordering on the term.

Unfortunately, American politics (and followers) have a somewhat ethnocentric and muddied view of certain terms. My political affiliations aside, I can assure you, HRC's resemblance to any of Marx's work is very little. I find people often misunderstand Marx's work - not necessarily defending it, as it definitely fails to withstand contemporary economic criticism, but merely you are misunderstanding/misreading it.

For example, by political default via the system she is apart of, HRC is not socialist; socialism is an entirely different incarnation of the economic-political entity, with communism being the ideological determination. Ironically enough, Marx focused much of his early writings on the manner in which the governments of his day had remitted the fundamental freedoms of the newly emerged democracy. Believe it or not, he was very passionate about natural and citizen rights, but felt they were enacted through different manners!
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
This is just incorrect. Liberal democrat? Most definitely. Socialist? Not even bordering on the term.

Unfortunately, American politics (and followers) have a somewhat ethnocentric and muddied view of certain terms. My political affiliations aside, I can assure you, HRC's resemblance to any of Marx's work is very little. I find people often misunderstand Marx's work - not necessarily defending it, as it definitely fails to withstand contemporary economic criticism, but merely you are misunderstanding/misreading it.

For example, by political default via the system she is apart of, HRC is not socialist; socialism is an entirely different incarnation of the economic-political entity, with communism being the ideological determination. Ironically enough, Marx focused much of his early writings on the manner in which the governments of his day had remitted the fundamental freedoms of the newly emerged democracy. Believe it or not, he was very passionate about natural and citizen rights, but felt they were enacted through different manners!
Please correct me how HRC is not even close to being a socialist. I am all ears. You dont go to a state school do you?

Re Marx, You dont see any similarities here?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Please correct me how HRC is not even close to being a socialist. I am all ears. You dont go to a state school do you?
No, I graduated from a reputable University in Canada - thank you for the arrogance and sarcasm at any rate!

Well, I defined to you why she was not below:

For example, by political default via the system she is apart of, HRC is not socialist; socialism is an entirely different incarnation of the economic-political entity, with communism being the ideological determination.
HRC is a liberal-democrat, with some pseudo-socialistic tendencies; however, unless she plans to implement some form of market socialism in which individual agents are allowed to perform within centrally planned market parameters, she is not a socialist.

Re Marx, You dont see any similarities here?
Please point them out. Marx, ironically, focused very little on the political infrastructure of a potential socialist world government, which is where much of the controversy stemmed from. However, you can 'Google' the Preface to Political Economy (III edition) to find the most explicit contribution to political doctrine and point out the similarities for me!
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Truthfully I havent paid much attention to Marx since my first year of college.
You skip much that year?

:lol:
 
Red Dog

Red Dog

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
US Presidential Election '08 = South Park School Mascot Election '04

Ron Paul! Git 'er done.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
You skip much that year?

:lol:
Personally I found much of those years worthless in terms of learning anything pertinent other than coffee table discussions. I didn't skip the core classes required for my degrees. Incidentally I also doubled majored but am now seeking a further edjukashun to become an attorney.
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Ron Paul! Git 'er done.
Oh god, please dont tell me that you believe that Ron Pauls goin to get rid of the IRS. Please, please dont say it....He may be an idealist, but thats just uneducated of him to think that we would ever get rid of such and ingrained federal institution.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
No, I graduated from a reputable University in Canada - thank you for the arrogance and sarcasm at any rate!

Well, I defined to you why she was not below:



HRC is a liberal-democrat, with some pseudo-socialistic tendencies; however, unless she plans to implement some form of market socialism in which individual agents are allowed to perform within centrally planned market parameters, she is not a socialist.



Please point them out. Marx, ironically, focused very little on the political infrastructure of a potential socialist world government, which is where much of the controversy stemmed from. However, you can 'Google' the Preface to Political Economy (III edition) to find the most explicit contribution to political doctrine and point out the similarities for me!
Wasn't trying to be sarcastic bud, some of the state schools teach with a different goal in mind. Be glad you went to a school in Canada, it's probably better for your education.

I think we're picking points here. Sure, she is a member of the democratic party which makes her not a socialist by default... If she were in a socialist party she, for obvious reasons, would not have came this far (at least politically). Any politician that jumped ship into a socialist party, at least in todays climate, would be committing politcal suicide. In my opinion her pseudo-socialist agenda is simply a 'sign of things to come' in that if America were to willingly adopt a socialist party she would be all over it like monica to bill's dong. What are your thoughts on this? This is precisely what scares me about her.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
Oh god, please dont tell me that you believe that Ron Pauls goin to get rid of the IRS. Please, please dont say it....He may be an idealist, but thats just uneducated of him to think that we would ever get rid of such and ingrained federal institution.
Have you read the fairtax book? Good read IMO
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Have you read the fairtax book?
I know the idea behind it, no medicare, no taxes on companys, no social security. I'm down for no alternative minimums tax, and capital gains derived from stock dividends (me likey my DRIP's) but in our life time?

I would rather see the electoral college be abolished first, the IRS employs too many people, it would be like instead of making electric cars forcing Ford to close down because we dont like them any more, the economic impact would be devistating, auditors, preparors and the like would have no job skills.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
I know the idea behind it, no medicare, no taxes on companys, no social security. I'm down for no alternative minimums tax, and capital gains derived from stock dividends (me likey my DRIP's) but in our life time?

I would rather see the electoral college be abolished first, the IRS employs too many people, it would be like instead of making electric cars forcing Ford to close down because we dont like them any more, the economic impact would be devistating, auditors, preparors and the like would have no job skills.
Funny you should mention some of that lol.. Obama is all about the AMT and wants to spike the capital gains.. cant wait for that.

You into dividend stocks? Do you play with canroys i.e. canadian royal trusts? I'm in some great ones with ridiculous dividends. Although I toy with these in my RIRA so I reinvest every bit of the drip.

I agree w/you about the electoral college. What a debacle
 

futurepilot

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
You into dividend stocks? Do you play with canroys i.e. canadian royal trusts?
I've looked into AAV, and some other energy plays, they have lots more oil up there than most people would imagine. Lots of it is sand oil, but some day that will be extremely profitable.

To claim the withholdings tax credit dont you have to hold foreign funds in a taxable account?
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
Personally I found much of those years worthless in terms of learning anything pertinent other than coffee table discussions. I didn't skip the core classes required for my degrees. Incidentally I also doubled majored but am now seeking a further edjukashun to become an attorney.
Hey, me too! Just got accepted into the U of T's Faculty for Sep.
 
Usf97j4x4

Usf97j4x4

CEL Rep (Z's lacky)
Awards
1
  • Established
I've looked into AAV, and some other energy plays, they have lots more oil up there than most people would imagine. Lots of it is sand oil, but some day that will be extremely profitable.

To claim the withholdings tax credit dont you have to hold foreign funds in a taxable account?
Not sure on the tax question - I don't do mine at all. I have it all through fidelity and have no issues. They even handle the reinvestment.

I am heavy in PWE and HTE. They are making me happy..
 
BodyWizard

BodyWizard

Registered User
Awards
1
  • Established
Sure, she is a member of the democratic party which makes her not a socialist by default... If she were in a socialist party she, for obvious reasons, would not have came this far (at least politically). Any politician that jumped ship into a socialist party, at least in todays climate, would be committing politcal suicide. In my opinion her pseudo-socialist agenda is simply a 'sign of things to come' in that if America were to willingly adopt a socialist party she would be all over it like monica to bill's dong. What are your thoughts on this? This is precisely what scares me about her.
I honestly mean no offense here, but this reminds me of Kevin Parrot (insert real-last-name here), squawking on and on about "appeasers" without even knowing what it meant.

Socialism is a theoretical construct contrived as a thought experiment in parallel w/ a critique of the dominant "lassaiz-faire" capital economy being spread by the European powers from the mid-1700s ("Das Kapital"); the purpose of the thought-experiment was to imagine an economic system that was not subject to the very real ills that are predictable results of capitalism (*as it was critiqued*), yet would still get the job done.

The failure of socialism is inarguable, and not exactly rare in the annals of ivory-tower exercises, and it's perennial popularity among university students has been an accurate pointer toward its eventual failure all along - but then much teh same could be said about libertarianism, too - although libertarianism is still untested in the real-world, its hijacking by the neo-cons over the last 10 years is not unlike the appropriation of socialism by the Bolsheviks (later to name themselves "Communists").

Some nations have taken some of the Marx/Engels critique of capitalism to heart, and have tried a variety of things in the effort to ameliorate the effects of capitalism's worst failings; often these things don't work, because there's not much understanding of the processes, and therefore no predictive ability. One might say that this country or that is in some ways inspired by the loftier aspirations of socialist idealism - but that in no way makes this or that nation "a socialist nation", any more than praying for strength makes one an Apostle.

Similarly, Norman Thomas is no more germane to the current discussion than Harold Stassen or Boss Tweed.

In the actual political landscape in this country (USA), HRC is just John McCain w/ titz, neither is recognizably socialist in any particular: they are both extreme opportunists who will take any position, pander as necessary, and lie on demand in order to fulfill their inner mandate to power. Not a dime's worth of substantive difference between them beyond the predictable party branding IMO.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
I honestly mean no offense here, but this reminds me of Kevin Parrot (insert real-last-name here), squawking on and on about "appeasers" without even knowing what it meant.

Socialism is a theoretical construct contrived as a thought experiment in parallel w/ a critique of the dominant "lassaiz-faire" capital economy being spread by the European powers from the mid-1700s ("Das Kapital"); the purpose of the thought-experiment was to imagine an economic system that was not subject to the very real ills that are predictable results of capitalism (*as it was critiqued*), yet would still get the job done.

The failure of socialism is inarguable, and not exactly rare in the annals of ivory-tower exercises, and it's perennial popularity among university students has been an accurate pointer toward its eventual failure all along - but then much teh same could be said about libertarianism, too - although libertarianism is still untested in the real-world, its hijacking by the neo-cons over the last 10 years is not unlike the appropriation of socialism by the Bolsheviks (later to name themselves "Communists").

Some nations have taken some of the Marx/Engels critique of capitalism to heart, and have tried a variety of things in the effort to ameliorate the effects of capitalism's worst failings; often these things don't work, because there's not much understanding of the processes, and therefore no predictive ability. One might say that this country or that is in some ways inspired by the loftier aspirations of socialist idealism - but that in no way makes this or that nation "a socialist nation", any more than praying for strength makes one an Apostle.

Similarly, Norman Thomas is no more germane to the current discussion than Harold Stassen or Boss Tweed.

In the actual political landscape in this country (USA), HRC is just John McCain w/ titz, neither is recognizably socialist in any particular: they are both extreme opportunists who will take any position, pander as necessary, and lie on demand in order to fulfill their inner mandate to power. Not a dime's worth of substantive difference between them beyond the predictable party branding IMO.
Exactly - unfortunately, people do not care to learn the definition of the words they use. In American politics, anything determined to be a negation of Neo-Con, by default, must be 'socialist'.
 
Dwight Schrute

Dwight Schrute

I am faster than 80% of all snakes
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
In American politics, anything determined to be a negation of Neo-Con, by default, must be 'socialist'.
It works both ways as you have just shown.
 
Mulletsoldier

Mulletsoldier

Binging on Pure ****ing Rage
Awards
2
  • Legend!
  • Established
It works both ways as you have just shown.
In what manner? I did not classify usf498495783 as a Neo-Con, though he is obviously identifying HRC as the opposite of that - a 'socialist'.

:)
 

Similar threads


Top