Hawke wrote:
"Andrew Barss" wrote in message
...
snip of hysterical rant about the coming end times

A fine example of intolerance -- well done! Who is the
loony you quoted?

That's a good question. Obviously he's nobody anyone ever heard of.
But I have to feel sorry for the Roger though. Here it is in the 21st
century and he's still reading the fairy tale called the Bible and
believes it like it really came from a supernatural being when it was
obviously written and printed by other men. That puts him in the same
boat as the Taliban loonies and other Muslims who think the same
think about the Koran. They all fall for the same line of bull.
Believe this book and don't believe what science or reason says.
Heaven is up in the sky. Guys like him still believe that even when
we all know there is nothing in the heavens but outer space. It can't
help but make you wonder how anyone with even an average IQ believe
such nonsense. But damn, they sure do and by the millions. Lucky for
us the trend is for people to drop those ancient beliefs more and
more as time passes. In another 20 years people like him will be rare
as hen's teeth.

Or in 20 years there will have been a resurgence of religious zeal and they
will be burning people like you at the stake. Don't assume that any given
social trend will continue. But 20 years is far too short a time frame for
either to happen.

By they way, your post is a fine example of intolerance in itself. If you
don't believe in a deity that is your privilege. But when you argue that
anyone who does is a gullible, insane fool you throw away the high ground.

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:58:09 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:


Until/unless the Sheeple decide that being free is better than being a
well kept by the political classes, the republic is doomed ...


I've sent some of your shtick over to Jeff Dunham. Please send him a
photo so he can carve a good likeness.




Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...and made most of it disappear.

So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

And how *exactly* do you now it's flushed away. As usual, you make all sorts
of wild claims before any type of final result is in. If you had any iota of
common sense, you'd know that it takes years for final results to be
tallied.

Not so for Tim Daneliuk, your mind is made up now. You're just full of all
kinds of criticism about your current government, but the truth is that
people like you are the least able to judge it. You didn't vote for either
incumbent, you contributed nothing, gave nothing and whine all day about how
much it's going to cost you. The fact is that all you do is talk. And, that
talk is based on nothing more than lack of experience, lack of action and
lack of any kind of involvement.

You're a "nothing" Tim and that's the worst kind of citizen.

HeyBub wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 7, 11:05 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When
you're young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work
and start paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old
and start looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you
become liberal again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been
mugged lately."

So what does that make the Republicans that just robbed this Country
of TRILLIONS?

Uh, no. Every single Republican in the Congress voted AGAINST the
multi-trillion dollar bailouts. The thing the Republicans supported - in
the last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall correctly).

These arguments have been made for eons and I wonder if they've ever solved
anything? I'm staying out of them but they are fun to read! Although I have
always thought the Government is the Problem not the Solution. So now you
know my politics. Liberal or Conservative?
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

J. Clarke wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote:

Liberals are just as intolerant as conservatives, what's different
is the things they find intolerable.


Especially the ability to think for yourself.

Uh, both sides are intolerable of such and have their shining lights
of idiocy.

I refer you to Jane's Law: The party in power is arrogant, the party out of
power is insane.

Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...and made most of it disappear.

So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

And how *exactly* do you now it's flushed away. As usual, you make
all sorts of wild claims before any type of final result is in. If
you had any iota of common sense, you'd know that it takes years for
final results to be tallied.


Good question. Aside from the observation that "stimulus" spending never has
worked*, there are three possible outcomes:

1. That extra spending means extra taxes which means the whole thing is a
wash. (Government spending having some "multiplier" effect unknown to
consumer or business spending is a big, fat lie.) [Just today the
administration floated the idea of extra taxes on the more affluent to pay
for health-care reform]

2. That extra spending means extra debt, which drives up interest rates,
which chokes off growth.

3. That extra spending means extra money being printed, which means
inflation which means any growth is illusory.
http://pajamasmedia.com/vodkapundit/...ry-of-sucking/

One of the biggest problems, in my view, is uncertainty. As long as the
government keeps tinkering with the system, those who make decisions will
postpone them. If an employer is confounded by what will happen six months
out regarding taxes, inflation, and the like, he'll most likely put off
hiring, borrowing, expansion, or any other business decision.

Even worse, the Obama administration is muttering about a complete overhaul
of the nation's health-care system. This potential upheaval is driving
employers nuts. Will their expenses go down? Or will they double? Who knows?
Best to just hunker down and take no chances, place no bets.

---------
* In an analysis by researches at UCLA, the conclusion that FDR's tinkering
with all manner of government programs actually delayed recovery from the
depression by seven years!

"We found that a relapse [into a depression] isn't likely unless lawmakers
gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla...sion-5409.aspx

wrote:

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Because it's easier.

C. Northcott Parkinson observed:

"When a member of your party makes a speech, you need only respond with
'Hear, hear!' and when the opposition party claims the floor, you need only
shout 'Shame! Shame!' "

Politicians like to make their lives easier.

Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

And how *exactly* do you now it's flushed away. As usual, you make all sorts

Because it has been committed by our Dear Leader and thus must be spent.
Most of it is being spent on things that are not necessary and not
permitted of the Federal government under the Constitution Of The US.
Most of it is political pork our Dear Leader is using to pay off his
political IOUs with Other People's Money.

of wild claims before any type of final result is in. If you had any iota of
common sense, you'd know that it takes years for final results to be
tallied.

It will take far less than "years". We will see raging inflation
within less than a decade if the economists are even close to right.


Not so for Tim Daneliuk, your mind is made up now. You're just full of all

That's because my mind is made up by facts and analysis not from smoking
Hopeium.

kinds of criticism about your current government, but the truth is that

The current government is full of fools and charlatans and is led by
by a dangerous malignancy. There are precious few patriots and thinkers
in the current government.

people like you are the least able to judge it. You didn't vote for either
incumbent, you contributed nothing, gave nothing and whine all day about how

There was only one incumbent and he was not eligible to run again, so
you're right - neither I nor anyone else voted for him. I also didn't
vote for either candidate since cooperating with people that wish to
terminate at least some (or all) of your freedoms is self destructive.

much it's going to cost you. The fact is that all you do is talk. And, that

How much will it cost me, my children, my grandchildren, and possibly
my great-grandchildren to pay off The Messiah's grandstanding? How
much will it cost the nation in prestige and future influence globally?
How much freedom will be undermined and power instead passed to the
government?

I don't know what's going on, huh? So far The Messiah has:

1) Stolen wealth from those that legitimately owned it.
2) Attacked, killed, or nationalized (same as killing) some of the very
largest institutions that produce *new* wealth.
3) Sold out our key ally in the Middle East and at the same time,
bowed his head to the evil dictators of the Middle East.
4) Openly supported the killing of children just weeks before birth.
5) Supported a system of political corruption nation wide that buys
votes with tax money in the form of pork projects. He's done
this at a breathtaking scale never before seen.
6) Generally spent more money that doesn't actually exist in a shorter time
than any U.S. president before him.
7) Demanded public "sacrifice" while government lives like pigs.


talk is based on nothing more than lack of experience, lack of action and
lack of any kind of involvement.

It's based on a desire to not be anyone's slave. I realize that a good
many people like been well kept pets, but I'm not one of them.


You're a "nothing" Tim and that's the worst kind of citizen.

I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On Jun 8, 9:22*am, evodawg wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 7, 11:05 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When
you're young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work
and start paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old
and start looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you
become liberal again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been
mugged lately."

So what does that make the Republicans that just robbed this Country
of TRILLIONS?

Uh, no. Every single Republican in the Congress voted AGAINST the
multi-trillion dollar bailouts. The thing the Republicans supported - in
the last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall correctly).

These arguments have been made for eons and I wonder if they've ever solved
anything? I'm staying out of them but they are fun to read! Although I have
always thought the Government is the Problem not the Solution. So now you
know my politics. Liberal or Conservative?
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Addresshttp://rentmyhusband.biz/

You're a right-winger through-and-through.

Robatoy wrote:

On Jun 8, 9:22Â*am, evodawg wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 7, 11:05 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Doug Winterburn wrote:

As my dear old departed mum told me almost 50 years ago - "When
you're young, you're idealistic and liberal, then you got to work
and start paying taxes and become a conservative, then you get old
and start looking for help because you didn't plan ahead and you
become liberal again".

Or "a conservative is a former liberal who's been robbed."

One maxim that floated around New York during the Guiliana years:

"A Republican is a Democrat who suddenly realizes he hasn't been
mugged lately."

So what does that make the Republicans that just robbed this Country
of TRILLIONS?

Uh, no. Every single Republican in the Congress voted AGAINST the
multi-trillion dollar bailouts. The thing the Republicans supported -
in the last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if
I recall correctly).

These arguments have been made for eons and I wonder if they've ever
solved anything? I'm staying out of them but they are fun to read!
Although I have always thought the Government is the Problem not the
Solution. So now you know my politics. Liberal or Conservative?


You're a right-winger through-and-through.

Yep, you got that right, RIGHT

--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

Tom Watson wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:58:09 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

Until/unless the Sheeple decide that being free is better than being a
well kept by the political classes, the republic is doomed ...


I've sent some of your shtick over to Jeff Dunham. Please send him a
photo so he can carve a good likeness.


I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. It often ends up behind me.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On Jun 8, 11:43*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Tom Watson wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:58:09 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

Until/unless the Sheeple decide that being free is better than being a
well kept by the political classes, the republic is doomed ...

I've sent some of your shtick over to Jeff Dunham. *Please send him a
photo so he can carve a good likeness.

I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. *It often ends up behind me.


Ahhh, so THAT is the source for your ideas...

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:43:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. It often ends up behind me.


I am gratified to hear that you keep my shtick in your leebrary.



Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

In rec.woodworking Tim Daneliuk wrote:
: Andrew Barss wrote:
: snip of hysterical rant about the coming end times
:
: A fine example of intolerance -- well done! Who is the
: loony you quoted?
:
: -- Andy Barss

: You and yours love to parade your "tolerance" around like
: a Boy Scout merit badge. Oddly all that tolerance
: disappears when someone like this poster shows up whereupon
: your sneering and condemnation proceeds immediately.
: Does the irony of this not strike you at all?
: How very intolerant of you.


I complimented the poster on finding an excellent example of intolerance.
That's hardly condemnation and sneering.

As to calling Ralph C. Barker a loony, well, I was just being polite.

Being tolerant does not mean accepting all points of view as equally valid
and sensible. His (RCB's) is neither.

-- Andy Barss

On Jun 8, 11:08*am, Tom Watson wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:43:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. *It often ends up behind me.

I am gratified to hear that you keep my shtick in your leebrary.

Mr. Daneliuk in the leebrary with a shtick?

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
wrote:

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Because it's easier.

C. Northcott Parkinson observed:

"When a member of your party makes a speech, you need only respond with
'Hear, hear!' and when the opposition party claims the floor, you need
only shout 'Shame! Shame!' "

Politicians like to make their lives easier.

Of course the resorting to the use of Stereotypes does require the reduction
in observing and thinking and being open minded. I was at a fly-in standing
by my little homebuilt helicopter which closely resembles a Bell 47 when a
little middle-aged lady in a print dress approached. Without consciously
doing it I had her as a sunday school teacher type person. Whooee. She had
flown Sky Crane helicopters doing logging and fire fighting and only had
4500hrs in the Bell 47. Yes my stereotyping couldn't have been much more
wrong.

wrote:
On Jun 8, 11:08 am, Tom Watson wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:43:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. It often ends up behind me.
I am gratified to hear that you keep my shtick in your leebrary.

Mr. Daneliuk in the leebrary with a shtick?





Hey! A new game for the wreckers to play: Clueless.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On Jun 8, 1:22*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I recall
correctly).

...and made most of it disappear.

So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk * *
PGP Key: * * * *http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT

On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:14:30 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

wrote:
On Jun 8, 11:08 am, Tom Watson wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:43:23 -0500, Tim Daneliuk

wrote:
I sometimes find myself in the smallest room of the house with a
printout of your "shtick" before me. It often ends up behind me.
I am gratified to hear that you keep my shtick in your leebrary.

Mr. Daneliuk in the leebrary with a shtick?





Hey! A new game for the wreckers to play: Clueless.


"A hit! A very palpable hit!"

Touche'





Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Jun 8, 9:16*am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

And how *exactly* do you now it's flushed away. As usual, you make all sorts

Because it has been committed by our Dear Leader and thus must be spent.
Most of it is being spent on things that are not necessary and not
permitted of the Federal government under the Constitution Of The US.
Most of it is political pork our Dear Leader is using to pay off his
political IOUs with Other People's Money.

of wild claims before any type of final result is in. If you had any iota of
common sense, you'd know that it takes years for final results to be
tallied.

It will take far less than "years". *We will see raging inflation
within less than a decade if the economists are even close to right.



Not so for Tim Daneliuk, your mind is made up now. You're just full of all

That's because my mind is made up by facts and analysis not from smoking
Hopeium.

kinds of criticism about your current government, but the truth is that

The current government is full of fools and charlatans and is led by
by a dangerous malignancy. *There are precious few patriots and thinkers
in the current government.

people like you are the least able to judge it. You didn't vote for either
incumbent, you contributed nothing, gave nothing and whine all day about how

There was only one incumbent and he was not eligible to run again, so
you're right - neither I nor anyone else voted for him. *I also didn't
vote for either candidate since cooperating with people that wish to
terminate at least some (or all) of your freedoms is self destructive.

much it's going to cost you. The fact is that all you do is talk. And, that

How much will it cost me, my children, my grandchildren, and possibly
my great-grandchildren to pay off The Messiah's grandstanding? *How
much will it cost the nation in prestige and future influence globally?
How much freedom will be undermined and power instead passed to the
government?

I don't know what's going on, huh? *So far The Messiah has:

1) Stolen wealth from those that legitimately owned it.
2) Attacked, killed, or nationalized (same as killing) some of the very
* *largest institutions that produce *new* wealth.
3) Sold out our key ally in the Middle East and at the same time,
* *bowed his head to the evil dictators of the Middle East.
4) Openly supported the killing of children just weeks before birth.
5) Supported a system of political corruption nation wide that buys
* *votes with tax money in the form of pork projects. *He's done
* *this at a breathtaking scale never before seen.
6) Generally spent more money that doesn't actually exist in a shorter time
* *than any U.S. president before him.
7) Demanded public "sacrifice" while government lives like pigs.

talk is based on nothing more than lack of experience, lack of action and
lack of any kind of involvement.

It's based on a desire to not be anyone's slave. I realize that a good
many people like been well kept pets, but I'm not one of them.



You're a "nothing" Tim and that's the worst kind of citizen.

I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk * *
PGP Key: * * * *http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

So Tim...what's your plan?

How would you save the United States from the brink of The Great Bush
Depression we are standing at the edge of?

I'm listening.

TMT

Someone said:
The current government is full of fools and charlatans and is led by
by a dangerous malignancy. There are precious few patriots and thinkers
in the current government.

That would be true whether you're talking about democrats, republicans,
or both.




--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 9:16 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.
And how *exactly* do you now it's flushed away. As usual, you make all sorts
Because it has been committed by our Dear Leader and thus must be spent.
Most of it is being spent on things that are not necessary and not
permitted of the Federal government under the Constitution Of The US.
Most of it is political pork our Dear Leader is using to pay off his
political IOUs with Other People's Money.

of wild claims before any type of final result is in. If you had any iota of
common sense, you'd know that it takes years for final results to be
tallied.
It will take far less than "years". We will see raging inflation
within less than a decade if the economists are even close to right.



Not so for Tim Daneliuk, your mind is made up now. You're just full of all
That's because my mind is made up by facts and analysis not from smoking
Hopeium.

kinds of criticism about your current government, but the truth is that
The current government is full of fools and charlatans and is led by
by a dangerous malignancy. There are precious few patriots and thinkers
in the current government.

people like you are the least able to judge it. You didn't vote for either
incumbent, you contributed nothing, gave nothing and whine all day about how
There was only one incumbent and he was not eligible to run again, so
you're right - neither I nor anyone else voted for him. I also didn't
vote for either candidate since cooperating with people that wish to
terminate at least some (or all) of your freedoms is self destructive.

much it's going to cost you. The fact is that all you do is talk. And, that
How much will it cost me, my children, my grandchildren, and possibly
my great-grandchildren to pay off The Messiah's grandstanding? How
much will it cost the nation in prestige and future influence globally?
How much freedom will be undermined and power instead passed to the
government?

I don't know what's going on, huh? So far The Messiah has:

1) Stolen wealth from those that legitimately owned it.
2) Attacked, killed, or nationalized (same as killing) some of the very
largest institutions that produce *new* wealth.
3) Sold out our key ally in the Middle East and at the same time,
bowed his head to the evil dictators of the Middle East.
4) Openly supported the killing of children just weeks before birth.
5) Supported a system of political corruption nation wide that buys
votes with tax money in the form of pork projects. He's done
this at a breathtaking scale never before seen.
6) Generally spent more money that doesn't actually exist in a shorter time
than any U.S. president before him.
7) Demanded public "sacrifice" while government lives like pigs.

talk is based on nothing more than lack of experience, lack of action and
lack of any kind of involvement.
It's based on a desire to not be anyone's slave. I realize that a good
many people like been well kept pets, but I'm not one of them.



You're a "nothing" Tim and that's the worst kind of citizen.
I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

So Tim...what's your plan?

How would you save the United States from the brink of The Great Bush
Depression we are standing at the edge of?

I'm listening.

TMT

1) It was not particularly a "Bush Depression". A good many governments
before him conspired to make stupid decisions that led us to this place.
So did the dishonest, incompetent legislative fleabags like Frank,
Pelosi, Schumer, et al. Let's also not forget the role of the individual
Sheeple that decided to live way beyond their means. Let also also
not forget that the Bush administration - warts and all - *repeatedly*
try to warn the Congress that Fannie/Freddie were on very shaky
ground only to be waved off by the polluted social justice groupies
in he Congress (like Frank).

2) You don't "fix" economies. You stay out of their way and let them "fix"
themselves via market mechanisms.

3) The government should have focused entirely on any question of fraud or
outright illegality. Among these would include the cozy relationships
between rating agencies and the people constructing the CDOs as well as
the outright illegal practice of naked short selling.

The best thing to do here would have been more-or-less *nothing*. We would have
had a very deep recession, possibly even depression which - like all market
cleansings - gets rid of driftwood and leaves healthier companies behind.
This pain - and it would have been immense pain - is far preferable to the
death by a thousand paper cuts being inflicted by our Dear Leader by means
of deficit spending, shadow and overt tax increases, inflationary monetary
policy, and picking and choosing marketplace winners.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Larry W wrote:
Someone said:
The current government is full of fools and charlatans and is led by
by a dangerous malignancy. There are precious few patriots and thinkers
in the current government.

That would be true whether you're talking about democrats, republicans,
or both.





Agreed. But today this dearth is coupled with the worst executive officer
ever seen in our government. The combination is deadly.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:22 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I recall
correctly).
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT

Bush's administration tried to warn the Congress there was a big problem
(repeatedly). It is the liberal Democrats that had their fingers in
their ears screaming "la la la". Moreover, even if it was all W's
fault (it isn't) the absolute worst thing that Obama could have done
was to enter upon the profligate spending plan he followed. You don't
quit heroin by taking more heroin. You don't fix an economy over
leveraged with more debt.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Stu Fields wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
wrote:

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Because it's easier.

C. Northcott Parkinson observed:

"When a member of your party makes a speech, you need only respond
with 'Hear, hear!' and when the opposition party claims the floor,
you need only shout 'Shame! Shame!' "

Politicians like to make their lives easier.

Of course the resorting to the use of Stereotypes does require the
reduction in observing and thinking and being open minded. I was at
a fly-in standing by my little homebuilt helicopter which closely
resembles a Bell 47 when a little middle-aged lady in a print dress
approached. Without consciously doing it I had her as a sunday
school teacher type person. Whooee. She had flown Sky Crane
helicopters doing logging and fire fighting and only had 4500hrs in
the Bell 47. Yes my stereotyping couldn't have been much more wrong.

Each has its place. You'd go nuts trying to get personal with every tree
when you could use the word "forest."

It also saves time.

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

Bush Depression? That's not true.

During the Bush years we had 22 consecutive quarters of economic growth. Low
unemployment, high productivity, and negligible inflation. All this in spite
of Katrina, two wars, and a couple of bursting bubbles.

Then the Democrats took over Congress.

It took them less than 18 months to **** it all up.

Here's one chart I could find regarding recent GDP growth by quarter:
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/ec...th-statistics/

Notice the rough average for the Bush years shown is about 2.25%. Since the
3rd quarter of 2007, the growth of GDP has plummeted and is now about -4%
and unemployment is 9.8%.

And if you can blame Bush for what happened during the last 100 days of his
administration, then you've got no complaint when criticism is leveled at
the first 100 days of Obama's.

On Jun 8, 4:52*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:


And if you can blame Bush for what happened during the last 100 days of his
administration, then you've got no complaint when criticism is leveled at
the first 100 days of Obama's.

That, of course, is a crock of ****.
Bush had the best part of 7 years to take a run at his last 100 days,
as opposed to Obama who got the aftershocks AND he started from
scratch.
To compare both is ludicrous.
I can't believe you made that comparison.

r

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Stu Fields wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
wrote:

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Because it's easier.

C. Northcott Parkinson observed:

"When a member of your party makes a speech, you need only respond
with 'Hear, hear!' and when the opposition party claims the floor,
you need only shout 'Shame! Shame!' "

Politicians like to make their lives easier.

Of course the resorting to the use of Stereotypes does require the
reduction in observing and thinking and being open minded. I was at
a fly-in standing by my little homebuilt helicopter which closely
resembles a Bell 47 when a little middle-aged lady in a print dress
approached. Without consciously doing it I had her as a sunday
school teacher type person. Whooee. She had flown Sky Crane
helicopters doing logging and fire fighting and only had 4500hrs in
the Bell 47. Yes my stereotyping couldn't have been much more wrong.

Each has its place. You'd go nuts trying to get personal with every tree
when you could use the word "forest."

It also saves time.
It also is very useful in the world of bigotry. Stereotyping can be used to
benefit if intelligence is used. That is the cautionary word. In all my
friends, I don't know a "Liberal" or "Conservative" they all have a panoply
of beliefs that even sometime encompass anarchy. What would I gain by
sticking a Liberal or Conservative label on any of them?

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Stu Fields wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
wrote:

Why not just make one sterotype for both, they are just different
sides of the same coin. Saying you are liberal or conservative means
you giving up on the thought process and rely on faith to guide your
life. It's an easy way to live your life though, imagine trying to
think about questions before answering them, instead of just
regurgitating the party line.

Because it's easier.

C. Northcott Parkinson observed:

"When a member of your party makes a speech, you need only respond
with 'Hear, hear!' and when the opposition party claims the floor,
you need only shout 'Shame! Shame!' "

Politicians like to make their lives easier.

Of course the resorting to the use of Stereotypes does require the
reduction in observing and thinking and being open minded. I was at
a fly-in standing by my little homebuilt helicopter which closely
resembles a Bell 47 when a little middle-aged lady in a print dress
approached. Without consciously doing it I had her as a sunday
school teacher type person. Whooee. She had flown Sky Crane
helicopters doing logging and fire fighting and only had 4500hrs in
the Bell 47. Yes my stereotyping couldn't have been much more wrong.

Each has its place. You'd go nuts trying to get personal with every tree
when you could use the word "forest."

It also saves time.


You are right to a point. Here in this discussion where the individual
characteristics of the "trees" are being discussed, the use of the word
"forest" to describe them would lose a bit. Big difference in Sugar Pine
and Redwood.

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:22 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall
correctly).
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT

Bush's administration tried to warn the Congress there was a big problem
(repeatedly). It is the liberal Democrats that had their fingers in
their ears screaming "la la la". Moreover, even if it was all W's
fault (it isn't) the absolute worst thing that Obama could have done
was to enter upon the profligate spending plan he followed. You don't
quit heroin by taking more heroin. You don't fix an economy over
leveraged with more debt.

Just curious, Tim, and with no pre-judgment, but what's your background in
economics?

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:22 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall
correctly).
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT
Bush's administration tried to warn the Congress there was a big problem
(repeatedly). It is the liberal Democrats that had their fingers in
their ears screaming "la la la". Moreover, even if it was all W's
fault (it isn't) the absolute worst thing that Obama could have done
was to enter upon the profligate spending plan he followed. You don't
quit heroin by taking more heroin. You don't fix an economy over
leveraged with more debt.

Just curious, Tim, and with no pre-judgment, but what's your background in
economics?

--
Ed Huntress



What I know about economics I learned from Adam Smith, F.A. Hayek, Hazlitt, and
Friedman. I also learned a lot of negative things about economics watching
politicians (on all sides) tap dance around Reality.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 8, 4:52 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

And if you can blame Bush for what happened during the last 100 days of his
administration, then you've got no complaint when criticism is leveled at
the first 100 days of Obama's.

That, of course, is a crock of ****.
Bush had the best part of 7 years to take a run at his last 100 days,
as opposed to Obama who got the aftershocks AND he started from
scratch.
To compare both is ludicrous.
I can't believe you made that comparison.

r

OK, so with what do you disagree:

1) Bush had over 5 years of quarter-over-quarter growth.

2) The Dems took over Congress and in less than two years
the growth stopped.

These are both factual statements BTW, but I am less inclined to a
cause-effect relationship in 2) than the political Right believes. The
underlying problem here started way before Bush was every in office.
It has its roots in the neverending evil of believing that government
should be in the "social justice" business and that government can
ignore economic reality - to whit, that it could jigger the financial
system to "encourage" lending to low income earners, crack whores, and
other Democrats and that there would be no consequence to such a
program. The people who affirmed such programs were dead wrong. It's a
tribute to the strength of our markets and the power of Capitalism
that it took as long as it did to crater. In short, this is not a
"Bush" problem. It is a "stealing from some to give to others" problem
that's been around well over 5 decades.


BTW, Obama did not "start from scratch". He exploited an economic
problem to implement his quasi-Marxist lunacy. There were far less
overreaching ways the government could have engaged with the economy
other than taking everything over. Even assuming that the credit
liquidity problem was as bad and dangerous as claimed, Obama could
have had his silly little bailouts without also signing up for the
biggest pork spending bill in history.


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:22 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall
correctly).
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT
Bush's administration tried to warn the Congress there was a big problem
(repeatedly). It is the liberal Democrats that had their fingers in
their ears screaming "la la la". Moreover, even if it was all W's
fault (it isn't) the absolute worst thing that Obama could have done
was to enter upon the profligate spending plan he followed. You don't
quit heroin by taking more heroin. You don't fix an economy over
leveraged with more debt.

Just curious, Tim, and with no pre-judgment, but what's your background
in
economics?

--
Ed Huntress



What I know about economics I learned from Adam Smith, F.A. Hayek,
Hazlitt, and
Friedman. I also learned a lot of negative things about economics
watching
politicians (on all sides) tap dance around Reality.

Aha. Those are all good ones, although, if you actually read them, you
probably recognize that many of their fundamental philosophies have fallen
pretty badly in practice. For example, Friedman's theory is that the dollar
should now be trading for a very a small fraction of its current price on
world markets. He'd be scratching his head over all of the money we've been
printing for over six months with no signs of inflation. Smith would have
been appalled at the idea of letting financiers self-regulate. Hazlitt had
the unfortunate circumstance (for him) of writing about how government
deficit spending was the road to perdition, even as the US economy was
getting its biggest boost in history, and quickly reached unprecedented
levels of production, from history's enormous, and equally unprecedented,
deficit-spending spree and make-work project: World War 2. Our national debt
soared to more than twice as much as a percentage of GDP as it is now, and
the debt was paid off in less than a decade. In economics terms, that was
deficit spending and make-work all the way. The fact that the output was
economically useless -- exploded shells, sunken ships -- only further proves
the point.

All of those writers were excellent theorists and contributed a great deal
to what we know about economics. But they represent less than half of
current understanding. If you haven't read the others, from Keynes to
Schumpeter to Galbraith (a minor one, but important to understand money and
oligopolies), to Stiglitz, you'll have a one-sided view that's based on
comfortable-sounding theories that have, for the most part, been little
supported in actual practice. Their logic is great. Their ability to
predict, however, sucks in a major way.

You could get a job at George Mason University, though, or Loyola, and join
the last remaining covens of the Austrian School. g

BTW, congratulations for reading Smith. I hardly know anyone else who has.
I've gone through my 1072-page two-volume set twice, which probably is a
sign of an ill-spent youth, but it's worth it just to be able to explain to
right-wing cranks what foolish impressions they have about _The Wealth of
Nations_. Smith assumed that economic activity had to be regulated, or greed
would run the show. It's too bad that Greenspan didn't take him to heart.

--
Ed Huntress

This has become quite the healthy thread, as might be expected from
the subject.

It begs the question as to whether this is an occluded troll, or if
this is the result of miscegenation between the metal group and the
wooddorking group.






On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 22:12:43 +0000 (UTC), Curious Man
wrote:

There seems to be a stereotype that "liberals" are the lazy sorts of
people who interrupt TV viewing only to go to soup lines, or smoke
harmful substances, whereas "conservatives" are hard working, self
reliant people who are very well off due to their own perseverance and
work ethic.

And yet, the few self proclaimed or suspected liberals and Obama
supporters of this newsgroup, seem to be very well off, accomplished
people, whereas many conservatives, while intelligent and interesting
people on many levels, are not exactly above that kind of level of
attainment.

If that is the case, is that perhaps the time to reconsider our
stereotypes?

Curious Man
Regards,

Tom Watson
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Jun 8, 1:22 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 7, 10:17 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
. The thing the Republicans supported - in the
last administration - was less than a trillion ($837 billion if I
recall
correctly).
...and made most of it disappear.
So much unlike the nearly $4T Our Dear Leader at present a flushed in
less than 6 months.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

TMT
Bush's administration tried to warn the Congress there was a big problem
(repeatedly). It is the liberal Democrats that had their fingers in
their ears screaming "la la la". Moreover, even if it was all W's
fault (it isn't) the absolute worst thing that Obama could have done
was to enter upon the profligate spending plan he followed. You don't
quit heroin by taking more heroin. You don't fix an economy over
leveraged with more debt.
Just curious, Tim, and with no pre-judgment, but what's your background
in
economics?

--
Ed Huntress


What I know about economics I learned from Adam Smith, F.A. Hayek,
Hazlitt, and
Friedman. I also learned a lot of negative things about economics
watching
politicians (on all sides) tap dance around Reality.

Aha. Those are all good ones, although, if you actually read them, you
probably recognize that many of their fundamental philosophies have fallen
pretty badly in practice. For example, Friedman's theory is that the dollar
should now be trading for a very a small fraction of its current price on
world markets. He'd be scratching his head over all of the money we've been
printing for over six months with no signs of inflation. Smith would have

I'd argue that this is hysteresis in the system and that we will see
massive inflation down the road. I *really* hope I'm wrong.

been appalled at the idea of letting financiers self-regulate. Hazlitt had
the unfortunate circumstance (for him) of writing about how government
deficit spending was the road to perdition, even as the US economy was
getting its biggest boost in history, and quickly reached unprecedented
levels of production, from history's enormous, and equally unprecedented,
deficit-spending spree and make-work project: World War 2. Our national debt

Noted, but it has to be said that this was money directed (for war reasons)
at projects that had enduring value after the war: roads, machinery,
manufacturing, and so forth. This is very much unlike the social justice
spending and pork projects that are the hallmark of this administration.

soared to more than twice as much as a percentage of GDP as it is now, and
the debt was paid off in less than a decade. In economics terms, that was

It's helpful when you win a big war.

deficit spending and make-work all the way. The fact that the output was
economically useless -- exploded shells, sunken ships -- only further proves
the point.

But it wasn't useless. It created a reusable infrastructure that carried us
well into the 1980s in some cases. The actual work product was ultimately
destroyed, but so too is a new Chevy - it just takes longer. The
individual artifacts may have been economically useless but a
wealth creation engine was brought into being.

Note also that Hayek warned what would happen if the West didn't
back off its collectivist regulated economies after the war -
and then we all went off and did an experiment. Europe kept trying
to manage its economies, Easter Europe doing so with considerable
force. The U.S. threw off the shackles more-or-less as Hayek
suggested. Canada, NZ, and Australia ended up somewhere between
these two options. Guess who won the economic war? Hayek was
both predictive and, as it turned out, entirely correct.


All of those writers were excellent theorists and contributed a great deal
to what we know about economics. But they represent less than half of
current understanding. If you haven't read the others, from Keynes to
Schumpeter to Galbraith (a minor one, but important to understand money and
oligopolies), to Stiglitz, you'll have a one-sided view that's based on
comfortable-sounding theories that have, for the most part, been little
supported in actual practice. Their logic is great. Their ability to
predict, however, sucks in a major way.

You could get a job at George Mason University, though, or Loyola, and join
the last remaining covens of the Austrian School. g

BTW, congratulations for reading Smith. I hardly know anyone else who has.
I've gone through my 1072-page two-volume set twice, which probably is a
sign of an ill-spent youth, but it's worth it just to be able to explain to
right-wing cranks what foolish impressions they have about _The Wealth of
Nations_. Smith assumed that economic activity had to be regulated, or greed
would run the show. It's too bad that Greenspan didn't take him to heart.

--
Ed Huntress



Honesty compels me to admid that my study of Smith was limited to
listening to a series of lectures that summarized WON. I keep meaning
to go back and read the whole thing from cover to cover, but other
reading intervenes. In the mean time, I've sampled bits of him here
and there.

I would take some issue with your claim that the Austrians are not
well supported by practice. Because ... *no* economic school is well
supported by practice nor do any of them do a great job of macro
prediction. FDR's New (bad) Deal is cited as a victory for Keynes,
for instance. But in reality, it was the industrialization for
war that bailed him out of the Depression. It wasn't some kind
of profligate Obama-like government spending on random activities
that did it.

I also stipulate that some regulation to prevent fraud or force
is appropriate. But the intention is not to prevent greed, the
intention is to prevent theft. I am happy to see the greediest
capitalist pigs get fabulously wealthy so long as they don't
cheat people or - just as bad - do it with tax money.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

On Jun 8, 6:07*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Jun 8, 4:52 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

And if you can blame Bush for what happened during the last 100 days of his
administration, then you've got no complaint when criticism is leveled at
the first 100 days of Obama's.

That, of course, is a crock of ****.
Bush had the best part of 7 years to take a run at his last 100 days,
as opposed to Obama who got the aftershocks AND he started from
scratch.
To compare both is ludicrous.
I can't believe you made that comparison.

r

OK, so with what do you disagree:

1) Bush had over 5 years of quarter-over-quarter growth.

2) The Dems took over Congress and in less than two years
* *the growth stopped.


I see neither component in my post.
Stop trying to steer the discussion with your straw men and red
herrings.

HeyBub wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
LOL...another winger who would like to live The Great Bush Depression.

What's the matter? Disappointed that Obama hasn't fixed in a 100 days
what Bush screwed up in EIGHT years?

Bush Depression? That's not true.

During the Bush years we had 22 consecutive quarters of economic growth.
Low unemployment, high productivity, and negligible inflation. All this in
spite of Katrina, two wars, and a couple of bursting bubbles.

Then the Democrats took over Congress.

It took them less than 18 months to **** it all up.

Here's one chart I could find regarding recent GDP growth by quarter:
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/ec...th-statistics/

Notice the rough average for the Bush years shown is about 2.25%. Since
the 3rd quarter of 2007, the growth of GDP has plummeted and is now about
-4% and unemployment is 9.8%.

And if you can blame Bush for what happened during the last 100 days of
his administration, then you've got no complaint when criticism is leveled
at the first 100 days of Obama's.

Is this "to many tools" dude a spammer? Or a member of Rev. Wrights Church?

--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

Upscale wrote:
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

So, I dare you to explain how I'm a ward of the state? That's your area of
experience with your absolute lack of contribution to anything. Instead of
using my healthcare to stay well enough to keep working and pay taxes
contributing back the best I can, you'd have me be completely indigent to
receive the same healthcare and give absolutely nothing back.

Huh? Who called you a ward of the state. I was making a general
observation. You're going to have to adjust to the idea that you are
almost entirely alone here in making everything personal. Most
of the rest of manage to disagree - even vehemently without it
being about the other person's character, person, or pant size.



Which way costs the system more money?

That sad fact is that people like you take in life and give nothing. That's
ALL that can be said about you and it's a really sad state of affairs. An
extremely large part of the current economic crisis in the US was caused by
people who take and take and take. The incessant whining you do is only
because you've never been in the position of taking enough to be
independently wealthy. And, it looks good on you.


All you are is a whiner. You don't contribute anything either physically or
metaphorically which is confirmed with your presence here. How long as it
been since you've been here? Two, three years? In all that time you've
managed to inject ONE woodworking comment. You are a waste and you
demonstrate it every day. You accuse me of wallowing? Try looking in the
mirror at least ONCE in your sorry life.



You know, I generally give you a lot of latitude because of your
having told us all that you have a physical infirmity. Since I don't
and can't possibly know what that's like, I give you more room than
most to be crabby. Nonetheless, you behave badly, you attack several
of us personally with absolutely no knowledge of us a humans. Worst of
all, you have nothing to contribute to the conversation but your angry
spittle. You may continue to do so, but I shall go back to ignoring
you. If and when you grow up and learn to disagree in an adult manner,
I'll be pleased to reengage.

Oh, and now that I think about it, I guess you would react to the
previous message the way you have. You've proudly defending mooching
off your fellow citizens. Worse than that, you've proudly defended
the system the makes others pay for your way through life. I guess
the shoe must fit or it wouldn't have provoked another one of your
screechy responses. Ta, ta and enjoy your mooching, secure in the
knowledge that some other citizen cannot spend their earnings on
*their* family because *you* have them ...



--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Upscale wrote:


"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

So, I dare you to explain how I'm a ward of the state? That's your area of
experience with your absolute lack of contribution to anything. Instead of
using my healthcare to stay well enough to keep working and pay taxes
contributing back the best I can, you'd have me be completely indigent to
receive the same healthcare and give absolutely nothing back.

Which way costs the system more money?

That sad fact is that people like you take in life and give nothing.
That's ALL that can be said about you and it's a really sad state of
affairs. An extremely large part of the current economic crisis in the US
was caused by people who take and take and take. The incessant whining you
do is only because you've never been in the position of taking enough to
be independently wealthy. And, it looks good on you.

All you are is a whiner. You don't contribute anything either physically
or metaphorically which is confirmed with your presence here. How long as
it been since you've been here? Two, three years? In all that time you've
managed to inject ONE woodworking comment. You are a waste and you
demonstrate it every day. You accuse me of wallowing? Try looking in the
mirror at least ONCE in your sorry life.
Just heard today from one of the State News Organizations that 60% of the US
population is receiving government money in one way or another. How long
can this go on? We are truly becoming a Socialist Country!
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Website Address http://rentmyhusband.biz/

"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message
I guess it's more honorable to be a citizen that wallows in being
a ward of the state.

So, I dare you to explain how I'm a ward of the state? That's your area of
experience with your absolute lack of contribution to anything. Instead of
using my healthcare to stay well enough to keep working and pay taxes
contributing back the best I can, you'd have me be completely indigent to
receive the same healthcare and give absolutely nothing back.

Which way costs the system more money?

That sad fact is that people like you take in life and give nothing. That's
ALL that can be said about you and it's a really sad state of affairs. An
extremely large part of the current economic crisis in the US was caused by
people who take and take and take. The incessant whining you do is only
because you've never been in the position of taking enough to be
independently wealthy. And, it looks good on you.

All you are is a whiner. You don't contribute anything either physically or
metaphorically which is confirmed with your presence here. How long as it
been since you've been here? Two, three years? In all that time you've
managed to inject ONE woodworking comment. You are a waste and you
demonstrate it every day. You accuse me of wallowing? Try looking in the
mirror at least ONCE in your sorry life.