Wack-a-doodle liberals are...

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Let's make this a free-form thread where anyone can add anything they like.

[fast4522]

Let's make this a free-form thread where anyone can add anything they like.

Now now, your going to get a few of them complaining to Mike that your being mean to them and he might lock the thread.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...gonna wang dang doodle, all night long.

[Inner Dirt]

Liberal hypocrites, two words that go together like a horse and carriage. Or a horse and jockey or sulky for people like us.

[burnsy]

Liberal hypocrites, two words that go together like a horse and carriage. Or a horse and jockey or sulky for people like us.


Yeah , they are hypocrites there's no denying that. But this is the tripe that cracks me up......no hypocrites on the other side. I guess footsies under the bathroom stall, humping everything in sight including little boys and lying is all one sided........ :lol:

Newsflash for the political "geniuses" there's enough hypocrites on both sides to go around, if you get your ass off of the sofa (sulky), pop the ear plugs and remove the blinkers. Yeah, their side, they are all the hypocrites......brilliant thread by the way.......... :D I'll have to remember that, one side is full of upstanding people and the other isn't.

See, I can make fun of all the morons, not just half of them.....better shut this down......

[Inner Dirt]

The biggest hypocrisy I found from liberals recently is the few I knew personally that know how much I despise Hillary Clinton. Before the election they said "don't worry the sun will come out tomorrow no matter who wins." Then Trump wins and then they freak out, one is still angry to the max muttering how stupid people are that voted for him, totally ignoring all the likewise stupid people who vote for democrats.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... still possessed of way more common sense and intelligence than any conservative.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... responsible for all the social progress in this country over the last eighty years.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... the only thing standing between us and an Oligarchy of the ultra rich.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... the reason women can vote.

Hey, this is fun.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are...why gay people who love each other can get married.

What a great thread.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are...why the elderly can get medical care and not live in poverty.

Thanks for starting this Jess Hawsen Aroun.

[mostpost]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are...why workers have the power to negotiate wages, benefits and working conditions.

[MONEY]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... the reason women can vote.

Hey, this is fun.
When women received the right to vote in 1920, both houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans.

[MONEY]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are...why the elderly can get medical care and not live in poverty.

Thanks for starting this Jess Hawsen Aroun.
Thank You, Wack-a-doodle liberals.

[Parkview_Pirate]

...gonna wang dang doodle, all night long.

Channeling Ted?

ZTVDHnwlz5k

[classhandicapper]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... the only thing standing between us and an Oligarchy of the ultra rich.

You are way off on this one.

It was the left that wanted to eliminate gold as the anchor of our money and allow the Fed to print unlimited fiat to fund the welfare state. That in turn lead to the corrupt alliance between the warfare state, welfare state, and Wall St. which lead to a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to rich and powerful.

If conservatives had their way and we actually had sound money, none of the major economic problems we have now would exist because government could not borrow cheaply and irresponsibly to fund war or promises it cannot keep and Wall St firms could not promote extreme bubbles and then get bailed out.

[Parkview_Pirate]

You are way off on this one.

It was the left that wanted to eliminate gold as the anchor of our money and allow the Fed to print unlimited fiat to fund the welfare state. That in turn lead to the corrupt alliance between the warfare state, welfare state, and Wall St. which lead to a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to rich and powerful.

If conservatives had their way and we actually had sound money, none of the major economic problems we have now would exist because government could not borrow cheaply and irresponsibly to fund war or promises it cannot keep and Wall St firms could not promote extreme bubbles and then get bailed out.

You shouldn't confuse Mostie with the facts - his posts can all be swapped out with links to pro-DNC websites. And he has the audacity to claim he's not a paid troll.... :D

Whack-a-doodle liberals....will be leading the charge into the soylent green grinders.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

When women received the right to vote in 1920, both houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans.
Of course those were Teddy Roosevelt style Republicans, not Teddy Cruz style.

[Tom]

...gonna wang dang doodle, all night long.

i3knsW3paQg

[dartman51]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... the reason women can vote.

Hey, this is fun.


Wasn't the "women's right to vote" passed in 1919?? Republicans controlled BOTH houses, in 1919. While you did have a Democrat in the White House, he did not WRITE the bill, he only signed off on it.

[dartman51]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... still possessed of way more common sense and intelligence than any conservative.


Strictly YOUR opinion, and you are certainly no proof of the fact. :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

You are way off on this one.

It was the left that wanted to eliminate gold as the anchor of our money and allow the Fed to print unlimited fiat to fund the welfare state. That in turn lead to the corrupt alliance between the warfare state, welfare state, and Wall St. which lead to a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to rich and powerful.

If conservatives had their way and we actually had sound money, none of the major economic problems we have now would exist because government could not borrow cheaply and irresponsibly to fund war or promises it cannot keep and Wall St firms could not promote extreme bubbles and then get bailed out.
The reason for the ever increasing discrepancy between the ultra rich and everyone else has nothing to do with the Gold Standard. It has to do with the decreasing power of unions and the lax enforcement of anti trust laws. All of which are policies espoused by conservatives.

As for the Gold Standard, there were many valid reasons to come off the Gold Standard. I think this article expresses them much better than I can.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/12715/why-did-us-abandon-gold-standard

According to the article, the downsides to a return to the Gold Standard are:
A fixed link between the dollar and gold would make the Fed powerless to fight recessions or put the brakes on an overheating economy.

In other word, it limits flexibility.
Greece is a good example of how a fixed currency hurts countries.
“If you like the euro and how it’s been working, you should love the gold standard,” said economist Barry Eichengreen. Beleaguered Greece, for instance, cannot print more money or lower its interest rates because it’s a member of a fixed-currency union, the euro zone. A gold standard would put the Fed in a similar predicament.


Gold supplies are also unreliable: If miners went on strike or new gold discoveries suddenly stalled, economic growth could grind to a halt. If the output of goods and services grew faster than gold supplies, the Fed couldn’t put more money into circulation to keep up, driving down wages and stifling investment.


Just to back the dollars now in circulation and on deposit—about $2.7 trillion—with the approximately 261 million ounces of gold held by the U.S. government, gold prices would have to rise as high as $10,000 an ounce, up from about $1,780, causing huge inflation.


It seems like you might be the only person who wants to return to the Gold Standard.

From the same article:
In a University of Chicago poll this year, not one of 40 top economists surveyed supported a return to gold. The last gold standard commission, established by President Ronald Reagan, voted by a wide margin against bringing it back.

[mostpost]

When women received the right to vote in 1920, both houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans.
It is true that more Republicans than Democrats supported woman's suffrage at that time, but we are not talking about Democrats and Republicans. We are talking about Liberals and Conservatives and many of those Democrats were conservative southerners.

[mostpost]

Wasn't the "women's right to vote" passed in 1919?? Republicans controlled BOTH houses, in 1919. While you did have a Democrat in the White House, he did not WRITE the bill, he only signed off on it.
Come back when you learn how the ratification process works. Congress proposes the amendment. The States ratify it. Or not. The President has no role in the process.

[woodtoo]

Hey mostpost a rock is missing you.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

lotsa nice action after properly identifying the liberals for what they are.

[maddog42]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage. At one time trump said $7.25 was too high.

[mostpost]

lotsa nice action after properly identifying the liberals for what they are.
Posts # 7,8,9,10,11,12,13 and 28 certainly did a nice job of that.

[zico20]

The reason for the ever increasing discrepancy between the ultra rich and everyone else has nothing to do with the Gold Standard. It has to do with the decreasing power of unions and the lax enforcement of anti trust laws. All of which are policies espoused by conservatives.

As for the Gold Standard, there were many valid reasons to come off the Gold Standard. I think this article expresses them much better than I can.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/12715/why-did-us-abandon-gold-standard

According to the article, the downsides to a return to the Gold Standard are:
A fixed link between the dollar and gold would make the Fed powerless to fight recessions or put the brakes on an overheating economy.

In other word, it limits flexibility.
Greece is a good example of how a fixed currency hurts countries.
“If you like the euro and how it’s been working, you should love the gold standard,” said economist Barry Eichengreen. Beleaguered Greece, for instance, cannot print more money or lower its interest rates because it’s a member of a fixed-currency union, the euro zone. A gold standard would put the Fed in a similar predicament.


Gold supplies are also unreliable: If miners went on strike or new gold discoveries suddenly stalled, economic growth could grind to a halt. If the output of goods and services grew faster than gold supplies, the Fed couldn’t put more money into circulation to keep up, driving down wages and stifling investment.


Just to back the dollars now in circulation and on deposit—about $2.7 trillion—with the approximately 261 million ounces of gold held by the U.S. government, gold prices would have to rise as high as $10,000 an ounce, up from about $1,780, causing huge inflation.


It seems like you might be the only person who wants to return to the Gold Standard.

From the same article:
In a University of Chicago poll this year, not one of 40 top economists surveyed supported a return to gold. The last gold standard commission, established by President Ronald Reagan, voted by a wide margin against bringing it back.

Obama could have rectified that by raising the top tax rate to 70 percent when he had complete control of Congress. There would not be the ultra rich that you so despise if Obama would have taken all their money years ago. ;)

[tucker6]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... responsible for all the social progress in this country over the last eighty years.
I don't know about that. Reagan cracked the unions and liberated the masses from the shackles of union tyranny. That has done more for the average worker than the Great Society, which has brought institutionalized poverty to us. Any time a new social program is initiated, it has to be paid for on the back of the common man. That common man is thus thrust closer to needing social programs himself to survive. What a wonderful downward spiral you liberals have created. Tax the common man into poverty so that the govt can dole out that tax as a benefit and get credit for helping the poor man. Only in your world is that good.

[Tom]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage. At one time trump said $7.25 was too high.

And he was right.
$7.25 is ridiculous for some jobs.

[davew]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are... SJWs (social justice warriors)

[ElKabong]

I just find it very amusing that mostpost has posted 'the most posts' in a thread titled Wack-a-doodle liberals

Very fitting

[woodtoo]

I just find it very amusing that mostpost has posted 'the most posts' in a thread titled Wack-a-doodle liberals

Very fitting
It would fit better if he was winning, not whining. :ThmbDown:

[ElKabong]

It would fit better if he was winning, not whining. :ThmbDown:

Haters gonna hate, whiners gonna whine

[mostpost]

I don't know about that. Reagan cracked the unions and liberated the masses from the shackles of union tyranny. That has done more for the average worker than the Great Society, which has brought institutionalized poverty to us. Any time a new social program is initiated, it has to be paid for on the back of the common man. That common man is thus thrust closer to needing social programs himself to survive. What a wonderful downward spiral you liberals have created. Tax the common man into poverty so that the govt can dole out that tax as a benefit and get credit for helping the poor man. Only in your world is that good.
I'm not supposed to say that someone is stupid, but it is hard not to when I read something like that.

Unions were probably at their strongest between 1950 and 1970. (In 1960 union membership was around 33%.) From 1950 to 1970 the Median wage in the United States increased by 60%. Then, Reagan liberated us from the shackles of union tyranny. In the twenty years after that the median wage increased 13.5%. Those figures use adjusted 2000 dollars, so don't try to tell me that the cost of living is less now.

In addition to the median wage increasing at a four times greater rate, uemployment was much lower back then. In the twenty years between 1950 and 1970, there were nine months in which the unemployment rate went to 7% or higher. It never went to 8%. In the twenty years after Reagan took office, the rate went over 7% in 97 months and over 10% ten times, And that doesn't even include the Great Recession.

[mostpost]

Any time a new social program is initiated, it has to be paid for on the back of the common man. That common man is thus thrust closer to needing social programs himself to survive. What a wonderful downward spiral you liberals have created. Tax the common man into poverty so that the govt can dole out that tax as a benefit and get credit for helping the poor man. Only in your world is that good.
There is none so blind as he who will not see. And you can't see that the reason so many people are forced onto those social programs is because they are not being paid a just wage. There have been many stories referenced here about the large number of WalMart workers who are forced to be on some type of government assistance. In the meantime, members of the inbred Walton Family are worth billions.

If those people were paid what they should be, they would not need food stamps.

[mostpost]

It would fit better if he was winning, not whining. :ThmbDown:
I am winning. It's not that I am so great; it's that the competition is so weak.

[ElKabong]

I'm not supposed to say that someone is stupid, but it is hard not to when I read something like that.

Unions were probably at their strongest between 1950 and 1970. (In 1960 union membership was around 33%.) From 1950 to 1970 the Median wage in the United States increased by 60%. Then, Reagan liberated us from the shackles of union tyranny. In the twenty years after that the median wage increased 13.5%. Those figures use adjusted 2000 dollars, so don't try to tell me that the cost of living is less now.

In addition to the median wage increasing at a four times greater rate, uemployment was much lower back then. In the twenty years between 1950 and 1970, there were nine months in which the unemployment rate went to 7% or higher. It never went to 8%. In the twenty years after Reagan took office, the rate went over 7% in 97 months and over 10% ten times, And that doesn't even include the Great Recession.

Your post wasn't directed at me, but I can reply to this in one paragraph (not a mini book like some are inclined to). The timeframe you gave , the US had a ridiculously great advantage to other industrialized nations. Europe was reduced to rubble, Japan was picking itself off the floor. I visited Germany, France and Belgium in the early 60s, to think they could compete w/ the US in a global economy at that time is outright stupidity

[Tom]

I am winning. It's not that I am so great; it's that the competition is so weak.

What, pray tell, do you think you have won?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I grew up in a very blue collar, union family in a very blue collar town in New York. I spent four years in Buffalo, and what I remember is that union jobs allowed that city to thrive. People who worked in steel mills, auto parts plants, and granaries were able to afford a decent middle class living with modest suburban houses and two (usually American) cars. They put kids through college and kept an economy humming.

There is no doubt the greed of the unions led to their demise. If employers couldn't get a good deal, they had an alternative evolving - moving the jobs to places where there weren't unions to deal with. At first that meant the American south. Dozens of small towns that depended on textile and other manufacturing. Amsterdam, NY, once known as the carpet capital of the world, lost its one horse economy entirely to Dalton, GA and never recovered. It exists today only to continue dying. And in an ironic case of what goes around comes around, 50 years later they gave Dalton the finger and slipped away to Mexico. Anyone from New England has similar stories of similar towns with factories that made gloves, shoes, clothing and had a thriving middle class that kept those towns viable.

This was not Obama's fault. It was 50 years in the making after the end of the war. What changed was simple. Whatever loyalty companies had to towns and their workers became secondary to maximizing profits. At some point the only thing that mattered was making as much money for shareholders as possible, and when you had to share profits with workers that became harder. Whatever loyalty companies had to towns and their workers also got lost in the shift to a world economy. GM or Ford or a thousand other manufacturing plants sealed the fate of workers when they decided they needed to compete in new markets outside the U.S. At that point priority one became selling their products as cheaply as possible.

Union tyranny. Yeah, places like Detroit or Buffalo were tyrannical cities in the 30's, 40's and 50's, not to mention places with thriving middle classes instead of burned out neighborhoods and boarded up stores. What kind of selective memory says years when there was a real middle class was only a result of union tyranny. Well, the poor set upon businesses showed us by leaving town. Perhaps if they had been willing to pay their CEO's less than $25 million a year and passed some of the profit to workers instead of just shareholders we'd still have a middle class capable of driving the economy. The biggest five companies in the U.S. have half a trillion dollars in cash reserves. I hope no one is crying for them.

While the unions thought they were holding a gun to the head of manufacturing firms, they were just as much holding a gun to their own heads. The world changed, and unions never contemplated that they would have to give up a benefit and wage package that was pretty much over the top. But don't kid yourself. The unions could have renegotiated contracts sooner, and they were still going to lose jobs to Mexico or China.

Trump can threaten and cajole all he wants, but the traincarryingn the world economy has long since left the station. American companies will keep jobs in America or move them back only as long as they can pay the shareholders the returns they have come to expect. Use your head and understand the reason they left in the first place. Even America's minimum wage is seven times the hourly wage on foreign countries they would still compete with us. We can never match what they pay their workers and we shouldn't. We need to live like middle class Americans not peones.

Use your head. If you pay Americans crap wages they won't be able to afford to buy goods that would become even more expensive if labor prices were higher, and the economy would tank even worse. Or we would turn into Mexico with the Carlos Slim class and a generally absent middle class. You don't have to guess - just look at the standard of living for the working class in countries that pay low wages. They can hardly afford the goods they make.

When I read something that says we've been released from union tyranny and it is the Great Society that has led us to the downward spiral I have to shake my head. Wages have essentially stagnated since our release from union tyranny which makes any thinking person wonder if the two things could be connected. Clinton and the Congress reformed welfare. One of the first things Obama did was cut taxes for the middle class (conveniently forgot that, didn't we). Reality does a much better job of explaining why we are where we are than the ridiculous fantasies some concoct. A lot easier to figure out the chicken and the egg when you understand biology.

[davew]

There is no doubt the greed of the unions led to their demise. If employers couldn't get a good deal, they had an alternative evolving - moving the jobs to places where there weren't unions to deal with.

The government unions are still doing well. Some retirement programs are basically going to break the bank of some cities/states...

You can only increase the property taxes so much until no one can afford to live there..

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

I just find it very amusing that mostpost has posted 'the most posts' in a thread titled Wack-a-doodle liberals

Very fitting

...and not the least bit surprising. It proves what we all know. They cannot get over the humiliating disembowelment of the Democratic Party by the American people.

[Grits]

And this, gentlemen, is our U.S.History....lest we forget it. Thank you, Halv!! This was nice to see in print, to read once again.

If we had back all the jobs that left Carolina, for overseas, in the furniture and in the textile industries, alone.....

I grew up in a very blue collar, union family in a very blue collar town in New York. I spent four years in Buffalo, and what I remember is that union jobs allowed that city to thrive. People who worked in steel mills, auto parts plants, and granaries were able to afford a decent middle class living with modest suburban houses and two (usually American) cars. They put kids through college and kept an economy humming.

There is no doubt the greed of the unions led to their demise. If employers couldn't get a good deal, they had an alternative evolving - moving the jobs to places where there weren't unions to deal with. At first that meant the American south. Dozens of small towns that depended on textile and other manufacturing. Amsterdam, NY, once known as the carpet capital of the world, lost its one horse economy entirely to Dalton, GA and never recovered. It exists today only to continue dying. And in an ironic case of what goes around comes around, 50 years later they gave Dalton the finger and slipped away to Mexico. Anyone from New England has similar stories of similar towns with factories that made gloves, shoes, clothing and had a thriving middle class that kept those towns viable.

This was not Obama's fault. It was 50 years in the making after the end of the war. What changed was simple. Whatever loyalty companies had to towns and their workers became secondary to maximizing profits. At some point the only thing that mattered was making as much money for shareholders as possible, and when you had to share profits with workers that became harder. Whatever loyalty companies had to towns and their workers also got lost in the shift to a world economy. GM or Ford or a thousand other manufacturing plants sealed the fate of workers when they decided they needed to compete in new markets outside the U.S. At that point priority one became selling their products as cheaply as possible.

Union tyranny. Yeah, places like Detroit or Buffalo were tyrannical cities in the 30's, 40's and 50's, not to mention places with thriving middle classes instead of burned out neighborhoods and boarded up stores. What kind of selective memory says years when there was a real middle class was only a result of union tyranny. Well, the poor set upon businesses showed us by leaving town. Perhaps if they had been willing to pay their CEO's less than $25 million a year and passed some of the profit to workers instead of just shareholders we'd still have a middle class capable of driving the economy. The biggest five companies in the U.S. have half a trillion dollars in cash reserves. I hope no one is crying for them.

While the unions thought they were holding a gun to the head of manufacturing firms, they were just as much holding a gun to their own heads. The world changed, and unions never contemplated that they would have to give up a benefit and wage package that was pretty much over the top. But don't kid yourself. The unions could have renegotiated contracts sooner, and they were still going to lose jobs to Mexico or China.

Trump can threaten and cajole all he wants, but the traincarryingn the world economy has long since left the station. American companies will keep jobs in America or move them back only as long as they can pay the shareholders the returns they have come to expect. Use your head and understand the reason they left in the first place. Even America's minimum wage is seven times the hourly wage on foreign countries they would still compete with us. We can never match what they pay their workers and we shouldn't. We need to live like middle class Americans not peones.

Use your head. If you pay Americans crap wages they won't be able to afford to buy goods that would become even more expensive if labor prices were higher, and the economy would tank even worse. Or we would turn into Mexico with the Carlos Slim class and a generally absent middle class. You don't have to guess - just look at the standard of living for the working class in countries that pay low wages. They can hardly afford the goods they make.

When I read something that says we've been released from union tyranny and it is the Great Society that has led us to the downward spiral I have to shake my head. Wages have essentially stagnated since our release from union tyranny which makes any thinking person wonder if the two things could be connected. Clinton and the Congress reformed welfare. One of the first things Obama did was cut taxes for the middle class (conveniently forgot that, didn't we). Reality does a much better job of explaining why we are where we are than the ridiculous fantasies some concoct. A lot easier to figure out the chicken and the egg when you understand biology.

[OntheRail]

The government unions are still doing well. Some retirement programs are basically going to break the bank of some cities/states...

You can only increase the property taxes so much until no one can afford to live there..
Was going to make the same statement...

[tucker6]

When I read something that says we've been released from union tyranny and it is the Great Society that has led us to the downward spiral I have to shake my head. Wages have essentially stagnated since our release from union tyranny which makes any thinking person wonder if the two things could be connected. Clinton and the Congress reformed welfare. One of the first things Obama did was cut taxes for the middle class (conveniently forgot that, didn't we). Reality does a much better job of explaining why we are where we are than the ridiculous fantasies some concoct. A lot easier to figure out the chicken and the egg when you understand biology.
In your own words, what did the Great Society actually do for the American people in the long run?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

In your own words, what did the Great Society actually do for the American people in the long run?
Gave you something to whine incessantly about.

First, why don't you tell me what you think the Great Society was and how it was the key to some downward spiral we've been on since then. Try to remember it was 1964 and we are fifty years down that road.

And don't forget to give me specifics on how the last 50 years have been a living hell for you because of the great society.

Seriously. I can't wait to see you connect Medicare (I gave you one for free) to Apple moving to China.

[thaskalos]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage. At one time trump said $7.25 was too high.

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The government unions are still doing well. Some retirement programs are basically going to break the bank of some cities/states...

You can only increase the property taxes so much until no one can afford to live there..
The number of people in public employee unions is a very small percentage of all workers. But many of them make my point eloquently. Cops and firemen very often are able to retire at relatively young ages with disabilities, and yes, they are able to afford comfortable middle class lives.

If you want to divert the conversation to pensions we can talk about that. But you know who you can't blame? The workers who accepted the deal the government made with them.

I'll bet you didn't know that in many states career public employees are not eligible for social security. Their pension is their retirement.

I'll bet you didn't know states like New Jersey failed to fund their share of the employee pension program for many years, and then whined about not having enough money. You make a deal and then renege, you can't just blame greedy employees.

[Clocker]

Wack-a-doodle liberals are.... the reason we have a minimum wage.

Also known as a legal prohibition of the creation of any jobs that are not worth $15 an hour or whatever, and a legal prohibition of young and untrained workers getting any jobs if their present labor is not worth $15 an hour.

[tucker6]

Gave you something to whine incessantly about.

First, why don't you tell me what you think the Great Society was and how it was the key to some downward spiral we've been on since then. Try to remember it was 1964 and we are fifty years down that road.

And don't forget to give me specifics on how the last 50 years have been a living hell for you because of the great society.

Seriously. I can't wait to see you connect Medicare (I gave you one for free) to Apple moving to China.
Soooo, you have nothing but deflection and strawmen. Thanks for playing.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Soooo, you have nothing but deflection and strawmen. Thanks for playing.
I know we aren't supposed to call out the dunces, but my post was about how the severe loss in union jobs has eroded the middle class. Any mention I made about the Great Society was simply being perplexed how anyone could blame the Great Society for whatever it was you were blaming the Great Society for. Your flippant response confirmed what I thought. You don't understand what has happened in the last 50 years so you make an unsubstantiated connection to a program 50 years and eight presidents ago. Read my post again. At no point did I defend the great society - I simply expressed astonishment than anyone could come to that conclusion. And you still haven't explained either what the spiral is you are talking about and how it relates to the Great Society.

Your question to me - what did the Great Society do for the American people in the long run would have been a good question if my post was like yours - an off the cuff, unsubstantiated defense of a 50 year old program. But I didn't. I simply said your rant about unions was off because you didn't understand the connection between unions and a robust middle class.

You're the one who dissed the Great Society. As I expected, you were either unwilling or unable to explain yourself. This is the general approach of the whack-a-doodle conservatives - make unsubstantiated, off the cuff statements that are supposed to be self-evident. Obamacare bad. Muslims bad. Immigration bad. No analysis. No nuance. And if someone asks you to defend the off the cuff remark, you turn around and say, no you explain why I'm not right. You got caught being a blowhard and didn't have the balls (or the brains) to defend your position. You want to debate me on the Great Society, you tell me exactly how the elements of the Great Society - The Civil Rights Act, Volunteers in Service to America, Head Start, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Medicare among others - lead to this downward spiral. I gave you my analysis - the demise of unions and the demise of the middle class were coincidental, and I don't think unrelated.

So you have nothing but deflection and strawmen.

[Tom]

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

Still is for some jobs.
Seriously, people need o get their heads out of their arsses about min wages.
Stock boys after school, retired people looking to get out of house a few hours, pizza delivery college kids - none of them neither needs or deserves a living wage.

[ElKabong]

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

That was what, 36 years ago?

What did FDR consider a fair minimum wage in 1945? Just curious... Going back yet another 36 years here...

[maddog42]

That's an improvement. Ronald Reagan had said that $3.25 an hour was too high.

After perusing the Consumer Price Index which has went up almost 3 times since 1980.... I would say that it really isn't an improvement.

[maddog42]

Still is for some jobs.
Seriously, people need o get their heads out of their arsses about min wages.
Stock boys after school, retired people looking to get out of house a few hours, pizza delivery college kids - none of them neither needs or deserves a living wage.

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

[zico20]

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

Who decides what a living wage is? A living wage is most definitely different in California compared to Alabama. If that is the case, then should it not be left up to the states to decide what it should be. The federal government needs to stay out of the minimum wage business.

Also, would not two 40 hour jobs at 7.50 apiece be then considered a livable wage. Why do people only have to work 40 hours to live on? If you need more money, work more hours. That has been the way for decades, has it not.

[davew]

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

What about the people who drink, are on drugs, show up to work when/if they feel like it? Who would want them as an employee?

[Tom]

Maybe you need to get your head out of your ass? These People don't DESERVE a LIVING wage?!?! What are they supposed to do? Starve? Many of these people are.

Maybe you should learn how to read before you shoot off your mouth.

A stock boy in high school needs a living wage?

You are going to sit there and tell me any part time stock boy CONTRIBUTES anything remotely close to the value of a living wage?

You can't possibly be that ignorant.
Can you? :rolleyes:

[Tom]

What about the people who drink, are on drugs, show up to work when/if they feel like it? Who would want them as an employee?

Of course not, but like all libs, he has no problem saddling you or me with the burden and the cost.

[elysiantraveller]

When women received the right to vote in 1920, both houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans.

Republicans were the Liberal party in the 20's.

[maddog42]

Maybe you should learn how to read before you shoot off your mouth.

A stock boy in high school needs a living wage?

You are going to sit there and tell me any part time stock boy CONTRIBUTES anything remotely close to the value of a living wage?

You can't possibly be that ignorant.
Can you? :rolleyes:

A part time employee deserves the same hourly wage as a full time employee doing the same job. You can't possibly be that stupid can you?

[JustRalph]

A part time employee deserves the same hourly wage as a full time employee doing the same job. You can't possibly be that stupid can you?

You're an idiot. Part timers are normally much less adept at their jobs.

They normally have less "time in position" years of service etc. there are exceptions, but rare.

You have the usual employer vs employee mindset. You can't see the big picture.

[chrisl]

Most post. What a pipe. Never has any thing to say about real hard working people. Except his tax payer payed life.

[Tom]

You're an idiot. Part timers are normally much less adept at their jobs.

They normally have less "time in position" years of service etc. there are exceptions, but rare.

You have the usual employer vs employee mindset. You can't see the big picture.


Big picture?
He can't even see the thumbnail! :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is shy his party is no longer a national party - they have lived in la la land far too long and hurt far too many people with their asinine beliefs. And lied through their teeth about the real results.

He is, Ralph, insignificant to the real world.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Big picture?
He can't even see the thumbnail! :lol: :lol: :lol:

This is shy his party is no longer a national party - they have lived in la la land far too long and hurt far too many people with their asinine beliefs. And lied through their teeth about the real results.

He is, Ralph, insignificant to the real world.

kcsNbQRU5TI

[davew]

You're an idiot. Part timers are normally much less adept at their jobs.

They normally have less "time in position" years of service etc. there are exceptions, but rare.

You have the usual employer vs employee mindset. You can't see the big picture.

I disagree with this - it depends much on why this is a part time job, and why the employee is part time. To make a blanket statement that they are less adept is biased in some way.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

I disagree with this - it depends much on why this is a part time job, and why the employee is part time. To make a blanket statement that they are less adept is biased in some way.

I AGREE with your DISAGREEMENT. It really depends on the specificity of the job. It relates to the cliche, "Out of the mouths of babes..." because frequently part-timers are 'babes' who offer fresh perspectives on issues.

[ElKabong]

That was what, 36 years ago?

What did FDR consider a fair minimum wage in 1945? Just curious... Going back yet another 36 years here...

Thask,
Since you didn't reply, the answer is 30 cents an hour.
Makes 3.25 per hour pretty high

So I guess FDR was stepping on the necks of working men in 1945, eh.

[Tom]

I AGREE with your DISAGREEMENT. It really depends on the specificity of the job. It relates to the cliche, "Out of the mouths of babes..." because frequently part-timers are 'babes' who offer fresh perspectives on issues.

How many part timers are part of the decision making process?
The decide which floors to mop, maybe, but, come on.

"Johnny, mop up the spill on aisle 4, then come and tell me what you think of our advertising budget proposal."

[Dahoss9698]

Only on a message board does a loser like Tom think he's someone special.

Guy hasn't had a date in 40 years but on a message board he talks down to people. And all you other losers wait on his stupidity.

It's a pretty funny thing to watch.

[ElKabong]

Only on a message board does a loser like Tom think he's someone special.

Guy hasn't had a date in 40 years but on a message board he talks down to people. And all you other losers wait on his stupidity.

It's a pretty funny thing to watch.

Seems to have you on his leash... On a Saturday night, no less.

[ReplayRandall]

Only on a message board does a loser like Tom think he's someone special.

Guy hasn't had a date in 40 years but on a message board he talks down to people. And all you other losers wait on his stupidity.

It's a pretty funny thing to watch.

What would PA do without you keeping everybody in line with your pithy comments??...:rolleyes:

[Norm Gold]

What would PA do without you keeping everybody in line with your pithy comments??...:rolleyes:
I don't know what you guys did to the kid. I use to be a fan but his last 50 posts are crying about our future president, or picking a fight. I miss the good old speed horses he used to bet with his last $20 to his name.

[Norm Gold]

Seems to have you on his leash... On a Saturday night, no less.
Saturday nights Cmon we all know the truth.

[Parkview_Pirate]

The reason for the ever increasing discrepancy between the ultra rich and everyone else has nothing to do with the Gold Standard. It has to do with the decreasing power of unions and the lax enforcement of anti trust laws. All of which are policies espoused by conservatives.

When it comes to failure of enforcement of anti-trust laws, nothing - NOTHING - in U.S. history comes close to the calamity of the ACA, a horrific piece of legislation which you've described as "basically, a good law." Promoted and brought to us by the sociopathic liberals, not conservatives.

Written by the Health Care monopolies of the insurance, health care, and Big Pharma, and then promoted by the slackass Obummer who wouldn't know how to enforce (or appoint someone to enforce) the law if it was handed to him, and is so bad that the new administration can point to rising health care costs as one of the main reasons they won the election. Of course Obama couldn't help himself, he was just being a good puppet and a good old "boy" - in the way Kunte Kinte was a boy.

You can prattle on about unions using losing power, but as usual you focus on the symptom and not the cause, since connecting the dots is not your strong suite. The reason we're seeing a decline in the middle class is because the era of cheap energy is over, and there's no longer the surplus wealth to support the parasitic unions or parasitic government bureaucracies on top of what passes as a middle class living. Since the elitists don't want to give up their turf without a fight, they're more than ready to allow dimwits like you to carry on the work of enabling their cause, and allow them to stay in power while "conservatives" are blamed.

Until November 9th, 2016.

Now the era of the precious snowflake and nonsensical liberal views has been cut short by an equally short-sighted conservative "make America great again" crowd, that's going to be in for an equal level of disappointment within four years. But with the polarized finger-pointing that's going on, we're about 99% sure to end up with a police state by 2020.

And for someone like you Mostie, who hates traditional American values, the U.S. Constitution, and is simply a 2017 gutless version of Lee Harvey Oswald, you'll consider it "mission accomplished..."

[Dahoss9698]

Seems to have you on his leash... On a Saturday night, no less.
More like I've got you bitches on my leash, no?

I comment about a shut in whose life revolves around a message board and people can't wait to disagree.

It's okay. I'm sure you're probably a big time loser like Baby Huey also. You shut ins need to stick together

[Dahoss9698]

What would PA do without you keeping everybody in line with your pithy comments??...:rolleyes:
A better question would be what would you do without me? You've been following me around for weeks trying to keep me in line.

How's that been working for you?

[Dahoss9698]

Hopefully Tom has some witty response after his second feeding

[woodtoo]

Ringling Bros. Circus has closed. They just couldn't compete with the
Democrats since the election. @ Ann Coulter

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Ringling Bros. Circus has closed. They just couldn't compete with the
Democrats since the election. @ Ann Coulter

Mostly, it was PETA.

[woodtoo]

Mostly, it was PETA.
Clowns are not animals. :D

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The reason we're seeing a decline in the middle class is because the era of cheap energy is over, and there's no longer the surplus wealth to support the parasitic unions or parasitic government bureaucracies on top of what passes as a middle class living.
You seemed to be on a roll with that one so I hate to interject, but I'm not sure what you think the era of cheap energy looks like. Sure, gas is no longer 30 cents a gallon, and the penny candy has gone the way of the Dodo, but I'm not sure you'd get too many experts to opine about the outrageous price of oil, gas or electricity. You think these things are a lot less expensive everywhere else in the world?

I've noticed that the "conservatives" blame workers (and of course the government) for all our problems, and liberals blame greedy corporations and see government as the only thing standing between us and oligarchy. It certainly takes away a lot of brain damaging thinking to reduce it to a simple maxim.

I'm not sure how many economists you could get to agree with you that the decline of the middle class is due to expensive energy (my word meaning the opposite of cheap). Do you think electricity is a lot cheaper at the maquiladora factories in Juarez and that's why they proliferated? Do you think the reason some of them have started moving to Pacific Rim countries is that energy costs jumped?

First thing they teach you in Econ 101. The primary factors of production cost are land and labor. So John Kenneth Badbreath, your "opinion" is that it was the cost of energy that drove businesses from the North to the South, and then from the South offshore? Things like textiles and furniture manufacture were going broke paying for energy so they had to move to Viet Nam and ship their stuff 8,000 miles to markets in the U.S.? All the "surplus" cash businesses had to pay labor came from cheap energy? I wouldn't even waste time shredding that one.

Ask a hundred companies who moved offshore. They'll mention labor cost. They might mention taxes. Unless you're talking about turning bauxite into aluminum, you're not likely to hear that it was energy cost that drove a company offshore.

Considering how few unions representing manufacturing businesses still thrive in America, the parasitic union comment seems more applicable to the 50's than 2017. In fact, the major "parasitic" public unions you might be referencing are police, fire, and teachers. You figure those unions are overpaid and only interested in sucking as much out of taxpayers as possible?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.

[Tom]

You figure those unions are overpaid and only interested in sucking as much out of taxpayers as possible?

They are unions, right?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

They are unions, right?
You know what the difference is? You can't send cop jobs to India, or fireman jobs to China. But believe me, if they could figure out a way to do it, you'd have to learn Hindi and Mandarin to call 911.

And that's why they still thrive. You can't just pick up and move to Guanajuato.

[ReplayRandall]

You know what the difference is? You can't send cop jobs to India, or fireman jobs to China. But believe me, if they could figure out a way to do it, you'd have to learn Hindi and Mandarin to call 911.

And that's why they still thrive. You can't just pick up and move to Guanajuato.

We're having a discussion of WHO exactly is defining our country, our ways and our future.....I don't like what I've seen or heard from anyone for quite a while now, thus we have Trump as POTUS.....I wonder why...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Tom]

You know what the difference is? You can't send cop jobs to India, or fireman jobs to China. But believe me, if they could figure out a way to do it, you'd have to learn Hindi and Mandarin to call 911.

And that's why they still thrive. You can't just pick up and move to Guanajuato.

What the heck are you talking about????

[HalvOnHorseracing]

We're having a discussion of WHO exactly is defining our country, our ways and our future.....I don't like what I've seen or heard from anyone for quite a while now, thus we have Trump as POTUS.....I wonder why...:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Actually, I was saying that the demise of the middle class is a result of companies moving offshore and that yes, this was in part due to high compensation demanded by blue collar unions. I also said if you think back, in the heyday of the unions there was a strong middle class that drove the economy. However, the unions have been successfully diminished in the last 50 years. Companies managed to pull the rug out without anybody either noticing or caring enough to stop it when they actually could have stopped it. Trump pushed the right buttons with his rhetoric, but that is only step one. The proof will be in whether he actually can pull any of it off.

I also mentioned in passing that the places where jobs can't get moved offshore (police, fire, teachers) or fire them all and bring in lower paid replacements, the unions still proliferate. But we now have this world economy where companies are no longer attached to their traditional American towns. Mexico, China, America...all that matters is where you get the most return for the stockholders.

Just to be clear, Trump won, he gets the chance to "make America great again." I just think the wall he really needs to worry about is the one business has constructed in the way of bring high paying, skilled jobs back to America.

[fast4522]

Stuck n the past.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Stuck n the past.
I suppose the clipped one liner get to take the place of thinking. Seems to be epidemic among the whack-a-doodle conservatives.

[Mlnolan00]

I like being a liberal. So much so that I deign to attach my name to this post. I have a BS in Economics as well as my MBA and my grandmother (an unapologetic environmentalist first generation Czech immigrant to Chicago) not only taught me to watch the stock she bought for me when I was about 5yo because she thought it was important for me to value money (ORI because it pays dividends and which shares I still own to this day) via The Tribune Business section but also that fossil fuels are finite and our lust for them has repercussions.

Her son, my Father, went on to graduate Yale in 72 with a degree in Chemistry and Columbia University in 76 with his MD. Meanwhile he paid for all his education on an ROTC scholarship. Dad went on to serve close to 30 years, the majority Active Duty, in the Army as an Opthalmologist who also performed general surgery (including a cat during one of his four tours in Iraq going back to Desert Storm). Same with my Mom, Col. Concilio, a Pediatric Dentist from Stamford who entered the Army to be with my Father.

My family could not be more patriotic, deeply Catholic, and driven towards civil service where we can actually affect lives for the better. In fact, my brother just started Officer Training School with the Marines a week ago Saturday, leaving a highly paid job in Private Banking at Bank of America in Richmond, VA to do so. Steve will probably end up working at the CIA given his fluency not only in finance but in Spanish and English.

Myself, while highly educated I have chosen the very non-sexy life of non-profit work at organizations like the USPC and KHRC to apply my skills because I love animals and I like kids.

It's OK to be benevolent towards others and our planet while having ambitions for oneself at the same time. It's OK to have compassion for your neighbor and to be kind to people you don't really like but you know being a jerk probably isn't the best way to live. It's OK to love these Thoroughbreds and hope they find gentle homes after racing just as much as it is OK to bet on them if it gives you enjoyment.

If liberal means loving my neighbor as myself, I will never be ashamed to say I am one. Meanwhile, send one up for my bro who is probably on his 1364th pull-up as we speak :)

[zico20]

I like being a liberal. So much so that I deign to attach my name to this post. I have a BS in Economics as well as my MBA and my grandmother (an unapologetic environmentalist first generation Czech immigrant to Chicago) not only taught me to watch the stock she bought for me when I was about 5yo because she thought it was important for me to value money (ORI because it pays dividends and which shares I still own to this day) via The Tribune Business section but also that fossil fuels are finite and our lust for them has repercussions.

Her son, my Father, went on to graduate Yale in 72 with a degree in Chemistry and Columbia University in 76 with his MD. Meanwhile he paid for all his education on an ROTC scholarship. Dad went on to serve close to 30 years, the majority Active Duty, in the Army as an Opthalmologist who also performed general surgery (including a cat during one of his four tours in Iraq going back to Desert Storm). Same with my Mom, Col. Concilio, a Pediatric Dentist from Stamford who entered the Army to be with my Father.

My family could not be more patriotic, deeply Catholic, and driven towards civil service where we can actually affect lives for the better. In fact, my brother just started Officer Training School with the Marines a week ago Saturday, leaving a highly paid job in Private Banking at Bank of America in Richmond, VA to do so. Steve will probably end up working at the CIA given his fluency not only in finance but in Spanish and English.

Myself, while highly educated I have chosen the very non-sexy life of non-profit work at organizations like the USPC and KHRC to apply my skills because I love animals and I like kids.

It's OK to be benevolent towards others and our planet while having ambitions for oneself at the same time. It's OK to have compassion for your neighbor and to be kind to people you don't really like but you know being a jerk probably isn't the best way to live. It's OK to love these Thoroughbreds and hope they find gentle homes after racing just as much as it is OK to bet on them if it gives you enjoyment.

If liberal means loving my neighbor as myself, I will never be ashamed to say I am one. Meanwhile, send one up for my bro who is probably on his 1364th pull-up as we speak :)

I see you are pacing yourself with your posts spread out every few months. Some on here would love to see Tom do that. :lol:

If being conservative means protecting my neighbor as myself, I will never be ashamed to say I was one. ;)

[thaskalos]

I like being a liberal. So much so that I deign to attach my name to this post. I have a BS in Economics as well as my MBA and my grandmother (an unapologetic environmentalist first generation Czech immigrant to Chicago) not only taught me to watch the stock she bought for me when I was about 5yo because she thought it was important for me to value money (ORI because it pays dividends and which shares I still own to this day) via The Tribune Business section but also that fossil fuels are finite and our lust for them has repercussions.

Her son, my Father, went on to graduate Yale in 72 with a degree in Chemistry and Columbia University in 76 with his MD. Meanwhile he paid for all his education on an ROTC scholarship. Dad went on to serve close to 30 years, the majority Active Duty, in the Army as an Opthalmologist who also performed general surgery (including a cat during one of his four tours in Iraq going back to Desert Storm). Same with my Mom, Col. Concilio, a Pediatric Dentist from Stamford who entered the Army to be with my Father.

My family could not be more patriotic, deeply Catholic, and driven towards civil service where we can actually affect lives for the better. In fact, my brother just started Officer Training School with the Marines a week ago Saturday, leaving a highly paid job in Private Banking at Bank of America in Richmond, VA to do so. Steve will probably end up working at the CIA given his fluency not only in finance but in Spanish and English.

Myself, while highly educated I have chosen the very non-sexy life of non-profit work at organizations like the USPC and KHRC to apply my skills because I love animals and I like kids.

It's OK to be benevolent towards others and our planet while having ambitions for oneself at the same time. It's OK to have compassion for your neighbor and to be kind to people you don't really like but you know being a jerk probably isn't the best way to live. It's OK to love these Thoroughbreds and hope they find gentle homes after racing just as much as it is OK to bet on them if it gives you enjoyment.

If liberal means loving my neighbor as myself, I will never be ashamed to say I am one. Meanwhile, send one up for my bro who is probably on his 1364th pull-up as we speak :)

And, if YOU dare call yourself a "liberal"...then I shan't hesitate to call MYSELF one, as well.

And my best wishes go out to your brother. :ThmbUp:

[Parkview_Pirate]

...Ask a hundred companies who moved offshore. They'll mention labor cost. They might mention taxes. Unless you're talking about turning bauxite into aluminum, you're not likely to hear that it was energy cost that drove a company offshore.

Considering how few unions representing manufacturing businesses still thrive in America, the parasitic union comment seems more applicable to the 50's than 2017. In fact, the major "parasitic" public unions you might be referencing are police, fire, and teachers. You figure those unions are overpaid and only interested in sucking as much out of taxpayers as possible?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.

Energy and labor costs are closely linked - and my comment was related to the decline of the middle class. The U.S. has roughly six percent of the world's population, and consumes 1/3 of the world's energy. So naturally, labor costs associated with U.S. workers is much higher than many other parts of the world. In the 1950s, the U.S. enjoyed a fully-functional post-WW2 industrial complex, enjoying the fact that many competitors elsewhere had their manufacturing capabilities destroyed. This, among other factors, allowed for unions to grow more powerful - because there was excess wealth in the system, and companies could still be profitable while paying their workers far above "world equivalent" wages.

This model was not sustainable, and both liberals and conservatives are mistaken if they think a return to that standard of living (or more correctly, the potential for that standard of living) is in the cards. Unfortunately, beginning in the 1970s when the first shocks of higher energy costs rippled through the system, the response of our political leaders was to maintain the status quo, at all costs. For a time, newly discovered oil fields in Alaska and North Sea along with "financial innovation" of infinite credit allowed the U.S. to essentially export inflation (and jobs), and the standard of living for many did remain stable. But the decline of real wages for the working/middle class is becoming apparent, as more people who lose their jobs do not return to the workforce, or have to take a job paying less. Since the 70s and 80s, the paper-pushing field of finance and monopolized field of health care have grown each of those areas into huge portions of GDP, when their true and more efficient portions should be far less. The upper 10-15% of workers still do well, but again the model that supports their lifestyles is not sustainable, and more of them are in for a shock sooner rather than later.

There's nothing that unions can do to help this - as their "success" was a one-time occurrence of the U.S. taking advantage of the cards the country was dealt. It's also quite likely that Trumpenomics, or protectionism, is also going to have limited effectiveness in making America Great Again. The Great Financial Swindle, which the U.S. benefited most from, is coming to an end, and will unwind with a vengeance.

Liberals will need to get better at math, and understand there's a cost to social programs that destroy individual responsibility and remove motivation to work hard and become efficient. Supporting mandated health care, free education, and "affordable" housing all sounds good - except that the current model means supporting banksters and oligarchs in getting richer, and the long-term effect of creating and supporting a welfare class is going to become an even bigger problem.

Conservatives will need to understand that the pot at the end of the rainbow is long gone, and a lower standard of living is coming down the pike for most of us. Restoring the rule of law and eliminating government bureaucracies would be a great start, but there will not be an "easy" solution. Banning unions for public workers would be a nice start. Because yes, they are parasitic, and only want to get as big a piece of the pie as possible. Hence, the practice of bumping up a member's wages the last year or two before retirement to maximize the retirement payments.

We as a country will really need strong and honest leadership, with no-spin and a less politically motivated response to the issues - but since we're humans, we won't get this. History paints a rather dark picture of what happens with empires in decline, and an intelligent approach to problems is not what happens.

[maddog42]

You're an idiot. Part timers are normally much less adept at their jobs.

They normally have less "time in position" years of service etc. there are exceptions, but rare.

You have the usual employer vs employee mindset. You can't see the big picture.

I work for the largest Hotel chain in the world. My hotel pays part-timers the same as full time for most jobs in Food and Beverage and Housekeeping. My experience is that the productivity for these jobs is about the same. Many of these employees are single moms and the elderly and I sent one divorced mom of 3 down to the food bank to make it through the holidays when hours were cut.

[Tom]

Hopefully Tom has some witty response after his second feeding

You are hardly worthy a witty reply.
Run along, Skippy, you mommy needs to wipe your butt....again.
You gotta remember to keep your head out of it.

[Tom]

A better question would be what would you do without me? You've been following me around for weeks trying to keep me in line.

How's that been working for you?

Let's be clear here, it is YOU who follows people around here.
Like a pedophile with a bag of candy.

Run along, Skippy.

[Dahoss9698]

Let's be clear here, it is YOU who follows people around here.
Like a pedophile with a bag of candy.

Run along, Skippy.
Let's be clear here, I'm 100% right.

You are a LOSER. Only on here do you think you are something. In real life you know you are a nothing.

Tom, the message board hero and real life ZERO.

Now go eat your 4th breakfast pig.

[Dahoss9698]

You are hardly worthy a witty reply.
Run along, Skippy, you mommy needs to wipe your butt....again.
You gotta remember to keep your head out of it.
My mommy?

Are we cool to talk about moms because I've got a bunch of jokes about yours since the Circus is closing. Let me know :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Too much month left at the end of your meds, huh?
You got a week or two of Obama Care left, go get that dead brain tissue removed while it is still cheap.

[Dahoss9698]

That's what I thought.

[Tom]

You had a thought?
Someone call Ripley.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Energy and labor costs are closely linked - and my comment was related to the decline of the middle class. The U.S. has roughly six percent of the world's population, and consumes 1/3 of the world's energy. So naturally, labor costs associated with U.S. workers is much higher than many other parts of the world. In the 1950s, the U.S. enjoyed a fully-functional post-WW2 industrial complex, enjoying the fact that many competitors elsewhere had their manufacturing capabilities destroyed. This, among other factors, allowed for unions to grow more powerful - because there was excess wealth in the system, and companies could still be profitable while paying their workers far above "world equivalent" wages.

This model was not sustainable, and both liberals and conservatives are mistaken if they think a return to that standard of living (or more correctly, the potential for that standard of living) is in the cards. Unfortunately, beginning in the 1970s when the first shocks of higher energy costs rippled through the system, the response of our political leaders was to maintain the status quo, at all costs. For a time, newly discovered oil fields in Alaska and North Sea along with "financial innovation" of infinite credit allowed the U.S. to essentially export inflation (and jobs), and the standard of living for many did remain stable. But the decline of real wages for the working/middle class is becoming apparent, as more people who lose their jobs do not return to the workforce, or have to take a job paying less. Since the 70s and 80s, the paper-pushing field of finance and monopolized field of health care have grown each of those areas into huge portions of GDP, when their true and more efficient portions should be far less. The upper 10-15% of workers still do well, but again the model that supports their lifestyles is not sustainable, and more of them are in for a shock sooner rather than later.

There's nothing that unions can do to help this - as their "success" was a one-time occurrence of the U.S. taking advantage of the cards the country was dealt. It's also quite likely that Trumpenomics, or protectionism, is also going to have limited effectiveness in making America Great Again. The Great Financial Swindle, which the U.S. benefited most from, is coming to an end, and will unwind with a vengeance.

Liberals will need to get better at math, and understand there's a cost to social programs that destroy individual responsibility and remove motivation to work hard and become efficient. Supporting mandated health care, free education, and "affordable" housing all sounds good - except that the current model means supporting banksters and oligarchs in getting richer, and the long-term effect of creating and supporting a welfare class is going to become an even bigger problem.

Conservatives will need to understand that the pot at the end of the rainbow is long gone, and a lower standard of living is coming down the pike for most of us. Restoring the rule of law and eliminating government bureaucracies would be a great start, but there will not be an "easy" solution. Banning unions for public workers would be a nice start. Because yes, they are parasitic, and only want to get as big a piece of the pie as possible. Hence, the practice of bumping up a member's wages the last year or two before retirement to maximize the retirement payments.

We as a country will really need strong and honest leadership, with no-spin and a less politically motivated response to the issues - but since we're humans, we won't get this. History paints a rather dark picture of what happens with empires in decline, and an intelligent approach to problems is not what happens.
That was an good reply. I still wouldn't agree with the treatise, but I understand your case.

While you are correct that labor and energy are connected, wages didn't reach the levels they did because of energy consumption. Labor and energy are connected at the costs of production. The more you produce, the more energy and labor you will need, up to a point. Labor costs were higher because of both wages and the level of production. Energy cost could be considered a faux measure of labor cost but the level of production drives both. The fact that we consumed 1/3 of the worlds energy was due to two things. The enormous amount of production in the country, and the standard of living. If you have a society living in homes with heat and electricity and a great number of people own cell phones, appliances, TVs, cars, etc, per capita consumption goes up. But the amount of energy we consumed in America was not the relevant statistic - the cost of production of an individual good was, and we became non-competitive due to labor costs. You don't have to believe me - ask another economist.

When you increase one or more of the production costs, the cost of the goods rises, and vice versa. In our case as labor cost rose domestically, and companies moved offshore. Given that energy is a world commodity, energy costs would only vary based on add-ons, like taxes, or subsidies from the government. The cost of energy was only a secondary consideration in moving offshore. Electricity production doesn't cost significantly less in Mexico or China except as it is subsidized by the government because the input fuels don't cost significantly less. I mean, China is using our coal and middle eastern oil where prices are set on the world market. With favorable trade agreements, there was no reason to stay domestically. And even given energy costs are relatively low, they won't come back as long as labor cost is 10% of what they would pay here.

The rest of the post was basically philosophical and opinions will vary. I find it interesting that conservatives find unions parasitic, but find corporate greed good, and liberals the exact opposite. Frankly, when you look at what we pay cops, firemen and teachers, I think they hardly are getting what they are worth to us. I don't begrudge them anything.

But don't kid yourself. Companies have more cash on hand than they ever did. They could pay higher wages - they just wouldn't be competitive in world markets.

We're never going to have a manufacturing economy again. The economy has to evolve. That's the change Americans need to adjust to.

[Grits]

But the amount of energy we consumed in America was not the relevant statistic - the cost of production of an individual good was, and we became non-competitive due to labor costs. You don't have to believe me - ask another economist.

It doesn't take an economist to understand or believe what you've written. It simply doesn't.

The rest of the post was basically philosophical and opinions will vary. I find it interesting that conservatives find unions parasitic, but find corporate greed good, and liberals the exact opposite. Frankly, when you look at what we pay cops, firemen and teachers, I think they hardly are getting what they are worth to us. I don't begrudge them anything.

But don't kid yourself. Companies have more cash on hand than they ever did. They could pay higher wages - they just wouldn't be competitive in world markets.

We're never going to have a manufacturing economy again. The economy has to evolve. That's the change Americans need to adjust to.

It has been far too one sided here for a very long time. Most of these ultra conservative gentlemen are content to provide 4 line summations of their view except for Classhandicapper, who goes into depth when making his points. Others comments are not as inclusive of decades of facts. They don't think one day prior to or beyond the past 8 years--this is when the big bang occurred--if you will. :lol: Except for Woodtoo, who spoke this a.m. of "4 more sleeps." Sadly, they're still stuck on Hillary Clinton, like an old worn out, scratched 45LP. .... Thank you, I hope you'll keep writing.

[PaceAdvantage]

Let's be clear here, I'm 100% right.

You are a LOSER. Only on here do you think you are something. In real life you know you are a nothing.

Tom, the message board hero and real life ZERO.

Now go eat your 4th breakfast pig.Look in the mirror DB.

You're nothing more than an Internet Tough Guy, but in real life, you'd likely shit your pants before you dare say some of the shit you've said to people on here while hiding behind your keyboard.

Dahoss...Internet Gun For Hire... :lol:

[EasyGoer89]

Look in the mirror DB.

You're nothing more than an Internet Tough Guy, but in real life, you'd likely shit your pants before you dare say some of the shit you've said to people on here while hiding behind your keyboard.

Dahoss...Internet Gun For Hire... :lol:

Sharp post! :ThmbUp:

[Dahoss9698]

Look in the mirror DB.

You're nothing more than an Internet Tough Guy, but in real life, you'd likely shit your pants before you dare say some of the shit you've said to people on here while hiding behind your keyboard.

Dahoss...Internet Gun For Hire... :lol:
Hey look who woke up! And just in time to rush to Toms defense. He needed it. He sure can dish it but not so good at taking it.

I know the truth hurts for Baby Huey and more importantly you, but I notice you didn't disagree. How could you? I'm right. Sucks when I'm right, doesn't it?

Im going to make it a point to reach out to you next time I'm in the city. Then we can see whose full of it and who isn't.

At least SRU agreed, so you've got that. :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

I wasn't limiting it to Tom. There are a lot of other people on here whom you enjoy attacking personally...something Tom doesn't do. You don't go around attacking people personally with falsehoods.

I'd love to see you do it to some of these folks in person.

Hurry up and buy that bus ticket to NYC...

[PaceAdvantage]

Dahoss, the internet TOUGH GUY who sits behind his keyboard and lies through his teeth...good job Dahoss...makes for a satisfying life.

[Dahoss9698]

I wasn't limiting it to Tom. There are a lot of other people on here whom you enjoy attacking personally...something Tom doesn't do. You don't go around attacking people personally with falsehoods.

I'd love to see you do it to some of these folks in person.

Hurry up and buy that bus ticket to NYC...
He doesn't attack people personally?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The denial here is strong.

[Dahoss9698]

Dahoss, the internet TOUGH GUY who sits behind his keyboard and lies through his teeth...good job Dahoss...makes for a satisfying life.
What did I lie about? Do you read people's PRIVATE messages?

[PaceAdvantage]

Give me one post where he attacked someone in such a false, disgusting manner as you have done to him here...unprovoked (attacking you doesn't count, for instance), and I'll take it all back.

[Dahoss9698]

Do you read people's private messages? It's a very simple question.

[PaceAdvantage]

What did I lie about? Do you read people's PRIVATE messages?No, I don't go around reading everyone's private messages, as you have stated.

I have the ability to read private messages, which I have posted here publicly MORE THAN A FEW TIMES. One should naturally assume that the person that owns, operates and has access to the database WOULD have the ability to read private messages.

That fact has never been denied.

But I do not sit here reading everyone's private messages, as you falsely wrote.

I don't even have time to read the non-private messages on this board, which is why it sometimes takes a few days to delete posts where people use words like "retard" or "libtard" or the N word...but take that delay to mean that I endorse stuff like that, and prove to the world that you are indeed intellectually stunted.

[Dahoss9698]

Try again Dahoss...you'll get it eventually

[Dahoss9698]

Not as classy as creating fiction about other people's lives on here. Now that's classy Dahoss.

[Tom]

Hey look who woke up! And just in time to rush to Toms defense. He needed it. He sure can dish it but not so good at taking it.

You are delusional.
Not good at taking it? :lol::lol::lol:

I'm not the one usually runs away with his tail tucked between his legs like YOU do.

You are the one having a breakdown here, thread after thread.
Save your breath, dude, you'll need it to blow up your girlfriend tonight.


Try again, Skippy, you are a joke. A lying joke.
I'd explain it to you, but I don't have the time or the crayons to make you understand.

[Dahoss9698]

PA was doing a much better job fighting your battle Tom. Especially since he's altering my posts.

[Tom]

Probably has to clean them up.

Battle?
Don't make me laugh - you are living out some kind perverted fantasy that you are somehow Sir Lancelot riding in here on you white horsey and slaying all of us peons. Guess it makes you feel like a man.

The only battle going on here is you vs reality.
Reality is winning hands down.

Run along, Skippy.
It's past your bedtime.

[Dahoss9698]

Probably has to clean them up.

Battle?
Don't make me laugh - you are living out some kind perverted fantasy that you are somehow Sir Lancelot riding in here on you white horsey and slaying all of us peons. Guess it makes you feel like a man.

The only battle going on here is you vs reality.
Reality is winning hands down.

Run along, Skippy.
It's past your bedtime.
Nah, that's not it at all.

I did to you what you do to anyone here who disagrees. I just did it better.

PA got mad because he likes to protect his most prolific losers, I mean posters because its good for business.

Hes also mad that I posted in off topic. He wants it to be a conservative safe zone and I disrupted that. Bitches.

[PaceAdvantage]

The boy has no clue.

Obviously.

Conservative-safe zone. :lol:

Can I help it if there aren't many liberals into horse racing?

I'd say bring as many liberals as you can find here, but if they're like you, then no thanks.

[PaceAdvantage]

A lot of you miscreants act as if I don't allow liberals on here.

There are plenty of vocal liberals on here (not so much anymore after Trump won...sorry fellas...can't help who the people want as Prez, and that you scurried off to your safe spaces because of it...don't blame me).

Hcap and mostpost have been two of the more vocal and VERY liberal people here. Have I banned them? Have I given them any shit really? Other than arguing with them on political matters, who here can say that I've made their life difficult here AS AN ADMIN because of their political beliefs? In fact, I've defended mostpost more than once when some people got personal with him.

There are plenty of other liberals on here...maddog and Teach come to mind as two that have been posting plenty lately and I haven't said a word.

I don't have a problem with people posting here with views opposite of mine. I welcome it.

As GWB once said...BRING 'EM ON

Just don't be a ****ing asshole (ok, Bush didn't say this last part, that's me)

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

We never want to silence the liberals. America cannot know how ignorant they are unless we let them speak as often and as freely as they want.

[ElKabong]

It doesn't take an economist to understand or believe what you've written. It simply doesn't.



It has been far too one sided here for a very long time. Most of these ultra conservative gentlemen are content to provide 4 line summations of their view except for Classhandicapper, who goes into depth when making his points. Others comments are not as inclusive of decades of facts. They don't think one day prior to or beyond the past 8 years--this is when the big bang occurred--if you will. :lol: Except for Woodtoo, who spoke this a.m. of "4 more sleeps." Sadly, they're still stuck on Hillary Clinton, like an old worn out, scratched 45LP. .... Thank you, I hope you'll keep writing.

Exceptionally poor synopsis

Two major reasons why most people (including conservatives) don't write mini books on the same subject, over and over again...

*We have full time jobs. Full time jobs nowadays equate to 50 hours or more per week, not 40 hours. Look at the two most windy posters here (posters that go on...and on...and on..). They're retired.

*The Internet is NOT the proper vehicle for a lengthy serial monologue on political subjects. Face to face discussions are the best way to get points across in a calm and friendly manner. The Internet (forums and such) are best used for brief comments or linking news items. This forum and others are best served as such. Again, the Internet simply isn't the best vehicle to carry on lengthy posts.

[Clocker]

*The Internet is NOT the proper vehicle for a lengthy serial monologue on political subjects. Face to face discussions are the best way to get points across in a calm and friendly manner. The Internet (forums and such) are best used for brief comments or linking news items. This forum and others are best served as such. Again, the Internet simply isn't the best vehicle to carry on lengthy posts.

tl/dr

[ElKabong]

tl/dr


Word

[Tom]

Nah, that's not it at all.

I did to you what you do to anyone here who disagrees. I just did it better.

PA got mad because he likes to protect his most prolific losers, I mean posters because its good for business.

Hes also mad that I posted in off topic. He wants it to be a conservative safe zone and I disrupted that. Bitches.

Delusional, I say, the boy is de-lusional.
A legend in his own mind.
Go for it dude, at least YOU believe you. :ThmbUp:

[Dahoss9698]

Delusional, I say, the boy is de-lusional.
A legend in his own mind.
Go for it dude, at least YOU believe you. :ThmbUp:
He literally told me he was mad I was being mean to you and mad I was posting in off topic. Do you really think he doesn't protect you? Come on man. That's delusional.

He actually brought your age into it and said I was picking on an old man. :lol:

[Dahoss9698]

Just don't be a ****ing asshole (ok, Bush didn't say this last part, that's me)
Of course you're being dishonest here. Being an asshole is okay as long as you agree with the person being an asshole.

Thats why more liberals don't post here. It's a waste of time. Plus we're too busy actually living our lives and contributing to society and not playing Internet patty cake with a bunch of other similar minded old farts.

[Dahoss9698]

A poster here has created 18 threads since December all with the same theme, "Liberals suck."

Nary a word from PA about it. But like he said, just don't disagree, I mean be an asshole.

[Dahoss9698]

After modifying my posts to fit his agenda, PA has now disabled my private messages.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Good idea PA....delete the evidence of all you were saying yesterday to me privately.

[thaskalos]

A poster here has created 18 threads since December all with the same theme, "Liberals suck."

Nary a word from PA about it. But like he said, just don't disagree, I mean be an asshole.
You noticed that too? I thought I was imagining things...

[Tom]

He literally told me he was mad I was being mean to you and mad I was posting in off topic. Do you really think he doesn't protect you? Come on man. That's delusional.

He actually brought your age into it and said I was picking on an old man. :lol:

Protect me from what, exactly?
YOU? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Yeah, man, I am shaking in my boots every time I see your name.
I view you as a source of entertainment. I could put you on ignore, but frankly, yo like a car wreck. I just have see how stupid you get day by day.
So far, you are amazing me! :eek:

[Tom]

Of course you're being dishonest here. Being an asshole is okay as long as you agree with the person being an asshole.

Thats why more liberals don't post here. It's a waste of time. Plus we're too busy actually living our lives and contributing to society and not playing Internet patty cake with a bunch of other similar minded old farts.

This, from Post #2 in series of 5 in a row all bitching about us old farts. :lol::lol::lol: Priceless!

Oh, when the polls were rigged to favor Hillary, we had plenty of libs posting here. Funny, after Trump! pulled down their pants, most disappeared.

[Tom]

You noticed that too? I thought I was imagining things...

After the inauguration, you will be required to read every thread started and sign off that you read it all and understand the points being made.

Sorry, out of our hands......Washington is mandating this.

[Dahoss9698]

Protect me from what, exactly?
YOU? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Yeah, man, I am shaking in my boots every time I see your name.
I view you as a source of entertainment. I could put you on ignore, but frankly, yo like a car wreck. I just have see how stupid you get day by day.
So far, you are amazing me! :eek:
I actually agree with you. I'm not sure why he feels the need to protect you...but he clearly was yesterday, no?

In fact, he seemed more upset about it all than you did. Weird...

[Dahoss9698]

This, from Post #2 in series of 5 in a row all bitching about us old farts. :lol::lol::lol: Priceless!

Oh, when the polls were rigged to favor Hillary, we had plenty of libs posting here. Funny, after Trump! pulled down their pants, most disappeared.
We will see who is laughing in about a year when you all realize you got sold a lemon.

[thaskalos]

After the inauguration, you will be required to read every thread started and sign off that you read it all and understand the points being made.

Sorry, out of our hands......Washington is mandating this.
Naw...I think I might be able to come up with something that will suit me a little better. :)

[PaceAdvantage]

After modifying my posts to fit his agenda, PA has now disabled my private messages.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Good idea PA....delete the evidence of all you were saying yesterday to me privately.I didn't delete a thing. I just banned your access to PM. Anything you have to say, you can say out in the open. Wouldn't want you spreading more lies.

And speaking of PMs, you told me after your last PM to me to not bother responding, since you won't be back to read it.

Didn't take long for you to backtrack on that promise. Good boy. I need the hits to keep cashing those monster checks. :ThmbUp:

[PaceAdvantage]

Come on Dahoss...admit just one thing...you're absolutely stunned that you haven't been banned yet (again), right? :lol:

[delayjf]

We will see who is laughing in about a year when you all realize you got sold a lemon.

Trump kept Hillary out of office, as far as I'm concerned
Mission Accomplished.

[Dahoss9698]

Come on Dahoss...admit just one thing...you're absolutely stunned that you haven't been banned yet (again), right? :lol:
You altered my posts to fit your agenda and protect your lies and disabled my pm's. Yeah that sure is fair :ThmbUp:

People know the truth, which is all that matters to me.

[Dahoss9698]

Trump kept Hillary out of office, as far as I'm concerned
Mission Accomplished.
I know, I know, you won. I get it.

But if your life does not improve. If things become worse. If he doesn't fulfill his promises will that be worth it?

Are you guys that far gone?

[Tom]

We will see who is laughing in about a year when you all realize you got sold a lemon.

I said that up front - expect nothing, just keep Hillary out.
Anything else is gravy.
Worst case, nothing changes.
That is still better than Hillary.

[PaceAdvantage]

You altered my posts to fit your agenda and protect your lies and disabled my pm's. Yeah that sure is fair :ThmbUp:

People know the truth, which is all that matters to me.I altered your post to troll you, like you are trolling me, which you admitted to doing in one of our various PMs to each other yesterday.

You're a self-described troll.

That's the only truth to come out of you lately.

[Grits]

We don't agree on this and that will always be ok. We have some excellent writers here at Pace Advantage. Class, as I mentioned is one, Thask's fine writing skill was established long, long ago and Rich Halvey is every bit equal to the aforementioned two, as is Boxie. These four, along with others that don't just write, with every reply, a three sentence "drive by" with little to nothing to support their points? They are valuable. Rich and Boxie may be retired, I'm not sure; though, I'm pretty sure Class and Thask are not.

I understand what you're saying about full work loads of 40 to 50 hours a week. I get that. Too, this can be easily seen as another place solely for entertainment. Yet, even in the realm of entertaining ourselves, we usually take time for what matters to us. Some of us do a better job than others, some of us can commit more time than others.

I don't want to term anyone as going on and on and on. Not when I've gleaned something from their efforts, and the majority of the time, I do.

There is one other thing worth noting. I pay attention to the number of posters/guests online here. And, as well, to what they are reading, where they are reading. It is rare that the numbers in Off Topic stand at 130 to 150 as it has in recent weeks. .... There's a reason for this, Elka. Much of what is being written is more than worthwhile. And I thank each one who shares their thoughts. If they were on debate teams in school, they had to have fared well.

The internet, whether here or on social media, is what we're stuck with today. It ain't like we're all gonna gather at a symposium. So, we do the best we can at our favorite hotspots. ;)

Edit to add: How could I forget JohnHannibal !!! Another great writer.

Exceptionally poor synopsis

Two major reasons why most people (including conservatives) don't write mini books on the same subject, over and over again...

*We have full time jobs. Full time jobs nowadays equate to 50 hours or more per week, not 40 hours. Look at the two most windy posters here (posters that go on...and on...and on..). They're retired.

*The Internet is NOT the proper vehicle for a lengthy serial monologue on political subjects. Face to face discussions are the best way to get points across in a calm and friendly manner. The Internet (forums and such) are best used for brief comments or linking news items. This forum and others are best served as such. Again, the Internet simply isn't the best vehicle to carry on lengthy posts.

[ElKabong]

We don't agree on this and that will always be ok. We have some excellent writers here at Pace Advantage. Class, as I mentioned is one, Thask's fine writing skill was established long, long ago and Rich Halvey is every bit equal to the aforementioned two, as is Boxie. These four, along with others that don't just write, with every reply, a three sentence "drive by" with little to nothing to support their points? They are valuable. Rich and Boxie may be retired, I'm not sure; though, I'm pretty sure Class and Thask are not.

I understand what you're saying about full work loads of 40 to 50 hours a week. I get that. Too, this can be easily seen as another place solely for entertainment. Yet, even in the realm of entertaining ourselves, we usually take time for what matters to us. Some of us do a better job than others, some of us can commit more time than others.

I don't want to term anyone as going on and on and on. Not when I've gleaned something from their efforts, and the majority of the time, I do.

There is one other thing worth noting. I pay attention to the number of posters/guests online here. And, as well, to what they are reading, where they are reading. It is rare that the numbers in Off Topic stand at 130 to 150 as it has in recent weeks. .... There's a reason for this, Elka. Much of what is being written is more than worthwhile. And I thank each one who shares their thoughts. If they were on debate teams in school, they had to have fared well.

The internet, whether here or on social media, is what we're stuck with today. It ain't like we're all gonna gather at a symposium. So, we do the best we can at our favorite hotspots. ;)

Edit to add: How could I forget JohnHannibal !!! Another great writer.

You and SoCalFan (Diane) are pure gold. I couldn't get mad at either of you even if I tried. Only woman I respect more than the two of you is my wife.

We'll agree to disagree on lengthy posts, for sure. A PA poster here locally that I met at lone star is as liberal as it gets here. We used to spar online over politics during the week, then see each other at the track. Talk politics for maybe two minutes max, our positions were covered in a civil manner... Then we'd go about betting and talking horses.

My experience (just my experience) has been nothing gets resolved in online forums, be it politics or football... But once a real conversation begins, people begin to see the other side of things.

But I do love this forum. JR's links, NJ Stinks non emotional comments about the left side of things..., it all makes for a great board.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

People know the truth, which is all that matters to me.

And they proved it at the election. Right on.

[kingfin66]

Look in the mirror DB.

You're nothing more than an Internet Tough Guy, but in real life, you'd likely shit your pants before you dare say some of the shit you've said to people on here while hiding behind your keyboard.

Dahoss...Internet Gun For Hire... :lol:

There are several people on this site that you could say that to. Why are you singling one particular person out?

[PaceAdvantage]

There are several people on this site that you could say that to. Why are you singling one particular person out?Oh gee, I don't know...I guess you haven't read his posts...or the fact he's been banned before...or the fact that he's not very well liked here in general.

In fact, I am one of the few people who actually likes him...and that's telling you something when I write that to someone I like.

[kingfin66]

A lot of you miscreants act as if I don't allow liberals on here.

There are plenty of vocal liberals on here (not so much anymore after Trump won...sorry fellas...can't help who the people want as Prez, and that you scurried off to your safe spaces because of it...don't blame me).

Hcap and mostpost have been two of the more vocal and VERY liberal people here. Have I banned them? Have I given them any shit really? Other than arguing with them on political matters, who here can say that I've made their life difficult here AS AN ADMIN because of their political beliefs? In fact, I've defended mostpost more than once when some people got personal with him.

There are plenty of other liberals on here...maddog and Teach come to mind as two that have been posting plenty lately and I haven't said a word.

I don't have a problem with people posting here with views opposite of mine. I welcome it.

As GWB once said...BRING 'EM ON

Just don't be a ****ing asshole (ok, Bush didn't say this last part, that's me)

I have been asked by cj to not try to moderate the board, and I have done well (IMO) to honor that request. Instead of trying to be a voice of reason, I have tried to report posts. Nothing happens. This entire thread has got me to wondering; what is it that gets your attention versus what you let pass? If you look at posts 63 and 64 of this same thread, maddog and justralph call each other names. Is that okay for them to do? If so, how is dahoss crossing the line? There is a lot of vitriol spewed on this site. Ultimately, that is the responsibility of those who make those types of posts, but it seems like some stuff is okay and some stuff isn't. Now I see that you are actually frustrated and are now hurling a lot of insults. Is this how you want to represent yourself on your own site? This is a great site for the most part, but Off Topic has really become a cesspool. Is it time to take control of the board back and enact some standards of behavior that are then enforced?

Just wondering. I really used to enjoy posting here which is how I racked up my 2,938 posts over several years. Now I am not so sure...

[kingfin66]

Oh gee, I don't know...I guess you haven't read his posts...or the fact he's been banned before...or the fact that he's not very well liked here in general.

In fact, I am one of the few people who actually likes him...and that's telling you something when I write that to someone I like.

Of course I have seen the posts. I don't know dahoss. I don't have a problem with dahoss like so many seem to. Others have been banned and been allowed to come back (not suggesting that anybody be banned). My point is that I see lots of posts that, in my opinion, are much less than civil, but it is only certain people that are called on it.

I really am not trying to be critical of you; you have your hands full here. I was just really wondering. dahoss says that you have edited his posts and taken away his ability to send PMs. I have never heard of that happening to others, but perhaps they are less vocal when/if it happens.

P.S. - Glad to hear that you don't read PMs. It would not affect me if you did as I never receive any. :)

[PaceAdvantage]

All of your reported posts are looked over, I can tell you that. I get an email every time a post is reported. You claiming nothing ever happens is patently untrue. Maybe not for the ones you reported, for whatever reason, but I look at all reported posts and take action when required (in my opinion).

As for all your other complaints, duly noted.

I can't please everyone...I learned that a long time ago. It's a total waste of time.

So, I just run this place the way I've been running it for 17+ years and let the chips fall where they may.

If someone else wants to go out and create a free forum for horseplayers, be my guest. Others have tried, but PaceAdvantage.com is still the top link on google when it comes to horse racing talk/forum/forums whatever.

So I must be doing something right.

[PaceAdvantage]

Of course I have seen the posts. I don't know dahoss. I don't have a problem with dahoss like so many seem to. Others have been banned and been allowed to come back (not suggesting that anybody be banned). My point is that I see lots of posts that, in my opinion, are much less than civil, but it is only certain people that are called on it.

I really am not trying to be critical of you; you have your hands full here. I was just really wondering. dahoss says that you have edited his posts and taken away his ability to send PMs. I have never heard of that happening to others, but perhaps they are less vocal when/if it happens.

P.S. - Glad to hear that you don't read PMs. It would not affect me if you did as I never receive any. :)Dahoss' personal attack on Tom is one of the two most vicious I have ever witnessed on here. The other was the attack on mostpost a few years ago, and I stepped in and defended him when that happened, and I think you would say that mostpost and I do NOT see eye to eye on off-topic.

I'm sorry you don't see things my way, but what Dahoss did was inexcusable, no matter how many celebrities or politicians that Tom has insulted in his time here.

Insulting public figures is NOT the same as insulting a fellow board member in a highly personal and vicious manner...and might I add, Tom did not provoke Dahoss initially or say anything to him that would justify Dahoss' initial salvos.

[kingfin66]

All of your reported posts are looked over, I can tell you that. I get an email every time a post is reported. You claiming nothing ever happens is patently untrue. Maybe not for the ones you reported, for whatever reason, but I look at all reported posts and take action when required (in my opinion).

As for all your other complaints, duly noted.

I can't please everyone...I learned that a long time ago. It's a total waste of time.

So, I just run this place the way I've been running it for 17+ years and let the chips fall where they may.

If someone else wants to go out and create a free forum for horseplayers, be my guest. Others have tried, but PaceAdvantage.com is still the top link on google when it comes to horse racing talk/forum/forums whatever.

So I must be doing something right.

I'm not sure that there were all that many complaints, but I do appreciate the response. I just thought I would ask what I believe to be a fair question, that's all. Although it was done in the context of what has happened in this thread, it could have been many threads that prompted the inquiry.

I am in no way condoning any personal attacks. I will also be the first to admit that I have not been perfect in this regard in my 13+ years as a member of this board. I am also not saying that you doing everything wrong. I was simply trying to get a better understanding. Personally, I think your response is pretty strong, but I can understand that my question probably put you on the defensive.

[Tom]

Hmmmmmm.
Can I sue someone?:D

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm not sure that there were all that many complaints, but I do appreciate the response. I just thought I would ask what I believe to be a fair question, that's all. Although it was done in the context of what has happened in this thread, it could have been many threads that prompted the inquiry.

I am in no way condoning any personal attacks. I will also be the first to admit that I have not been perfect in this regard in my 13+ years as a member of this board. I am also not saying that you doing everything wrong. I was simply trying to get a better understanding. Personally, I think your response is pretty strong, but I can understand that my question probably put you on the defensive.I've been getting questioned a lot lately...

People think I favor Tom because he's conservative...people think I favor Dahoss because he hates EMD...people think I hate Dahoss because he reveals a huge "secret" that I can read private messages if I want to (NEWS FLASH, I've posted on this board multiple times that as owner, operator and possessor of the database, of course I have the ability to read private messages if I want to go through the trouble of doing that...it's not all that easy as opening a thread, but I would think a halfway intelligent person would assume I have access to private messages since this is my website)...

In short, there has been a lot of questioning of me lately, and it's getting a bit ponderous...sorry if I came off a little over the top.

I do the best I can...I try and remain consistent...am I perfect? Hell no. Are there some good months, bad months...good years, bad years around here? Hell yes... :lol:

As they say in NY, it is what it is... :ThmbUp:

[kingfin66]

They actually say that everywhere, but it probably started in NY. Same deal with the "the bottom line." I appreciate the response and am finished with this line of questioning.

[pondman]

Never in the history of the US has a President brought a cadre of such HOT chicks to office than D T-- keep on wacking the doodle.

[burnsy]

Liberals:

Wear a helmet, we are all going to die.
The Govt should buy everyone birth control.
We gotta worry about, well, every other country out there. Give them money!
Someone had the nerve to put a Christmas tree in the city square and there's a Santa Clause out there.
Johnny can't have that, its not gluten free.
He hates women. Gee, half of his most powerful people are women he hired though.
The terrorist! we have to track everyone to protect you from yourself!

Conservatives:
He's going to start Sharia Law.
He's a Muslim.
We gotta worry about every other country out there. Give them money! (oh, just like the other Jack o Moles)
He is going to declare Marshall Law and stay President.
They are after your gun....somehow that ones worked for about 40 years now.
The terrorist! we have to track you to protect you from yourself. (Both sides want to scare people to rule them)

It just goes on and on....freaking moronic whack jobs on either side......too dumb, with way, way to much spare time to be allowed to think out loud.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

We need more guns in school.......to protect us from grizzly bears!... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[EasyGoer89]

Sometimes a turd needs polishing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deYaFmqpdFE

[burnsy]

Dahoss' personal attack on Tom is one of the two most vicious I have ever witnessed on here. The other was the attack on mostpost a few years ago, and I stepped in and defended him when that happened, and I think you would say that mostpost and I do NOT see eye to eye on off-topic.

I'm sorry you don't see things my way, but what Dahoss did was inexcusable, no matter how many celebrities or politicians that Tom has insulted in his time here.

Insulting public figures is NOT the same as insulting a fellow board member in a highly personal and vicious manner...and might I add, Tom did not provoke Dahoss initially or say anything to him that would justify Dahoss' initial salvos.

What do you expect? When you let people start a thread called "wack a doodle liberals"? Gee, that's going to go well! As if the other side is not a bunch of nut jobs themselves. I posted the short list of ridiculousness here. Its hilarious that there's always a "side" to blame when both sides are so full of it. You are a liberal, you idiot..........Hey, you dumb conservative. How about this one? Both of these sides are a box of rocks that's been taken advantage of for like 50 years. Which is 100% more accurate than both sides put together. More accurate than anything I can read here. If one thinks that any of this matters, they are a Rube. Don't stop betting though, please, we need these kind of geniuses in the wagering pool....... :lol:

I tried to force this thread to close
but you insisted.

Now, the Romper Room crowd is flinging feces at each other......again! :lol:

This is the best Horse Racing forum but when you let the "politicians" pontificate. You are just asking for trouble, and more than half of it doesn't make sense because both sides are corrupt and corrupt with morons that can't see it. But by all means, to the ones that actually do play the horses, please keep doing so.....Rube=someone that does not cash often. :cool:

I can't even watch TV today, why? It will be the same garbage all day. Finger pointing, crying, bitching, complaining, but, of course nothing positive will come from it, as the country slides further down the heap of shit holes. Yeah, those liberals and conservatives.........they have all the answers...... :bang: :lol:

"Change we can believe in! Yes we can!" :lol:

"Make America great again!" :lol:

"Santa saves the world!" :lol: Gee, should I vote for that? I don't know is Santa liberal or conservative?............. :D

Half of them never have an opinion about a game or a horse race but somehow they know everything about politics and policy......real experts.......go figure.

[ElKabong]

What do you expect? When you let people start a thread called "wack a doodle liberals"? Gee, that's going to go well! .....

I tried to force this thread to close
but you insisted.

This is the best Horse Racing forum but when you let the "politicians" pontificate. You are just asking for trouble, and more than half of it doesn't make sense because both sides are corrupt and corrupt with morons that can't see it. But by all means, to the ones that actually do play the horses, please keep doing so.....Rube=someone that does not cash often. :cool:

I can't even watch TV today, why? It will be the same garbage all day. Finger pointing, crying, bitching, complaining, but, of course nothing positive will come from it, as the country slides further down the heap of shit holes. Yeah, those liberals and conservatives.........they have all the answers...... :bang: :lol:

"Change we can believe in! Yes we can!" :lol:

"Make America great again!" :lol:

"Santa saves the world!" :lol: Gee, should I vote for that? I don't know is Santa liberal or conservative?............. :D

Half of them never have an opinion about a game or a horse race but somehow they know everything about politics and policy......real experts.......go figure.

Dude, it's called free speech. Here's another freedom for you and anyone else, you can choose not to read posts. Same for the tv you complain about. 40 years ago the mantra was "turn the channel, or don't turn on the tv" if you don't like what's on

How hard is that? I mean, really?

The beauty of this board is, and always has been, there's something for everyone. Including YOU. You post in the OT sports... You don't see politics being spoken. Just sports. Go for it, we all love posting there...Racing board? You won't find a better board anywhere.

maddog posted a Trump is collapsing thread theother day. Guess what? You can read it and reply, or pass it over. It's a choice. It's still America here, relax

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

I tried to force this thread to close
but you insisted.



There you go -- right there in black and white. The true definition of a TODAY'S hate-America liberal. As Americans with American values already knew, liberals believe in free speech as long as you agree with them.

I have seen tons of anti-Trump rhetoric here and in many other places, but real Americans know that we all have the right to free speech.

I'm glad to offer you the same rights so the rest of us can see what liberals believe in.

[Tom]

Easy solution.
Stop being a wack a doodle.

[EMD4ME]

I've been getting questioned a lot lately...

People think I favor Tom because he's conservative...people think I favor Dahoss because he hates EMD...people think I hate Dahoss because he reveals a huge "secret" that I can read private messages if I want to (NEWS FLASH, I've posted on this board multiple times that as owner, operator and possessor of the database, of course I have the ability to read private messages if I want to go through the trouble of doing that...it's not all that easy as opening a thread, but I would think a halfway intelligent person would assume I have access to private messages since this is my website)...

In short, there has been a lot of questioning of me lately, and it's getting a bit ponderous...sorry if I came off a little over the top.

I do the best I can...I try and remain consistent...am I perfect? Hell no. Are there some good months, bad months...good years, bad years around here? Hell yes... :lol:

As they say in NY, it is what it is... :ThmbUp:

Wait...


Dahoss doesn't like me?? :confused:








:pound::lol::lol: (I miss you Dahoss, sincerely.) I hope you're detention, sabatical, ban ends soon. I miss our "debates".

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I don't know how long it will last, but I'm on such an incredible high, I'm not sure even boxcar and Spalding teaming up would get me irritated.

[jimmyb]

This Boston Herald writer sums them up pretty fair...

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/howie_carr/2017/03/carr_introductory_class_on_extreme_liberals?utm_so urce=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

[mostpost]

This Boston Herald writer sums them up pretty fair...

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/howie_carr/2017/03/carr_introductory_class_on_extreme_liberals?utm_so urce=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
What a moronic article. This "fair" writer thinks that because Leo DiCaprio has a private plane, there is no global warming. He thinks because there is bigotry against gays in Muslim countries, it is okay for Christian bakers to discriminate against gays in the United States. He thinks Muslims are admitted to the US without vetting, when there is an intensive vetting process in place.

He thinks that we are as obsessed as he is over whether Elizabeth Warren has Cherokee blood.

After thirty years, he is still too dumb to see the dangers of smoking.

He has an irrational fear/hatred of Chelsea Clinton.

He thinks anyone cares what Sean Spicer says, much less when he says it.

He thinks Benedict was the greatest pope ever.

He thinks Breitbart, Hot Air, and Infowars are on the level.

He thinks abortion and school vouchers are equivalent. (here's a clue-abortion affects only the person having the abortion. School vouchers take money away from public schools and give it to private schools. Therefore they affect all the students attending those public schools-in a negative way. School vouchers are a public subsidy of private schools.)

He does not understand that climate change could cause both higher temperatures and storms in the Arctic and at the same time.

He does not understand gender identity issues, thinks that normal hetero sexual males will want to change in a ladies locker room or restroom, and believes that sex offenders will be allowed in those same rooms without question. In other words, he is an idiot.

[PaceAdvantage]

That's not what the writer was writing or thinking at all...you should re-read the piece again...someone such as yourself, who prides himself in his reading comprehension abilities, really blew this one.

[woodtoo]

I feel bad for arguing with Mostie, I never knew he had a comprehension disability.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Interesting story on Here and Now. One National Security Professor Alarmed By 'The Death Of Expertise'

You can listen to it here.

http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow

I'm not sure how many people on the board will recognize themselves, but I'll bet they will recognize the "other guys" who fit the story.

"I fear we are moving beyond a natural skepticism regarding expert claims to the death of the ideal of expertise itself: a Google-fueled, Wikipedia-based, blog-sodden collapse of any division between professionals and laypeople, teachers and students, knowers and wonderers — in other words, between those with achievement in an area and those with none."

While I hesitate to bring it up, I thought it was pertinent to the discussion, although clearly not pertinent to anyone here.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which low-ability individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability as much higher than it really is. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a metacognitive incapacity, on the part of those with low ability, to recognize their ineptitude and evaluate their competence accurately. Their research also suggests corollaries: high-ability individuals may underestimate their relative competence and may erroneously assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.

I believe the ultimate point is that whack-a-doodle applies to liberals, conservatives - pretty much everyone, although most of them don't recognize it.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

That's not what the writer was writing or thinking at all...you should re-read the piece again...someone such as yourself, who prides himself in his reading comprehension abilities, really blew this one.

More likely confirmation bias than comprehension issues.

[mostpost]

That's not what the writer was writing or thinking at all...you should re-read the piece again...someone such as yourself, who prides himself in his reading comprehension abilities, really blew this one.
Enlighten me, because I just reread it and I have the same impression I had before. Perhaps it is you who is not understanding my response.

While I have your attention; what happened to the photo gallery? Am I missing it or is it just gone?

[mostpost]

More likely confirmation bias than comprehension issues.
I am confused by your response. In fact I really have no idea what you are talking about. Can you clarify?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I am confused by your response. In fact I really have no idea what you are talking about. Can you clarify?

I assume you googled confirmation bias. What you read from the Boston Herald guy you interpreted through the prism of what you believe about conservatives.

Conversely, what the guy from the Boston Herald wrote confirmed how he sees liberals. What he was saying not only pissed you off, it was clear he was calling liberals stupid, mostly unfairly. However, there are a cadre of people here who read the the story and nodded their heads fast enough to give themselves whiplash. It confirmed what they believe as well.

You are wondering how someone can be so completely off base.

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

There I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Do you have an idea what I am talking about now?

[davew]

I feel bad for arguing with Mostie, I never knew he had a comprehension disability.

It I only a matter of time until his own illogic overcomes him and he breaks down.

[Clocker]

Reading comprehension is apparently greatly over-rated.

New York schools are about to drop a current requirement to pass a reading comprehension test. That's for teachers, not students. :faint:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/12/new-york-to-scrap-literacy-test-for-teachers-guess-why/ (http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/12/new-york-to-scrap-literacy-test-for-teachers-guess-why/)

[davew]

Reading comprehension is apparently greatly over-rated.

New York schools are about to drop a current requirement to pass a reading comprehension test. That's for teachers, not students. :faint:

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/12/new-york-to-scrap-literacy-test-for-teachers-guess-why/ (http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/12/new-york-to-scrap-literacy-test-for-teachers-guess-why/)

As long as their reading comprehension is above the grade level they are baby-sitting, that should be good enough.

[PaceAdvantage]

While I have your attention; what happened to the photo gallery? Am I missing it or is it just gone?It's not linked in the menu at the moment...I'm deciding what to do with it...I don't want to keep it as it was...that was a very dated gallery app and I need to figure out another way to put up the pictures.

I'll probably use the pictures and albums function included here in vBulletin, but I haven't gotten around to seeing if that's the way to go, or if I should look to install a third party add-on that would be better.

Bottom line, it's not gone...I just don't have a link up for it at the moment.

[mostpost]

It's not linked in the menu at the moment...I'm deciding what to do with it...I don't want to keep it as it was...that was a very dated gallery app and I need to figure out another way to put up the pictures.

I'll probably use the pictures and albums function included here in vBulletin, but I haven't gotten around to seeing if that's the way to go, or if I should look to install a third party add-on that would be better.

Bottom line, it's not gone...I just don't have a link up for it at the moment.
OK, thanks for that information. I'm sure that Tom. Boxcar, JustRalph, etc are very distressed about being unable to see my picture. :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Video evidence of crazy liberals. Russia, Russia, Russia!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yZHveWFvqM