Keeping what you earned is not a subsidy; i.e. it isn't "Obama money."
|
Keeping what you earned is not a subsidy; i.e. it isn't "Obama money."
Some great headlines from that newspaper you get your info from: Weekly World News|Archive|HEADLINESQuote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
You don't use search engines? Dude, I don't believe that for a minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I do but I always consider the source.
So if you don't approve of the source then it didn't actually happen? The only reality is yours? Nice.
I never said that. But in this case I absolutely doubt that the story is true.
You never learn.
People line up for pre-paid debit cards that don't work
Even The Goracle's Current website reported it on their page.
Wait a minute, someone sets up a scam and you think it's Obama's fault? That's a reach LOL.
You have a weird sense of humor Speech.
Who should pay for the bridges that are no longer as safe?
I'll be more than happy to allow you to note where I said the scam was "Obama's fault." But you can't, all you have are red herrings.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
What, you don't think it's the least bit funny, sad or telling that some idiots not once, but twice lined up for some "Obama money?"Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Now that was a question out of left field. I haven't got the foggiest idea what the relevance of that question is to what I've said, but if you must know if the Democrats would stop wasting our tax dollars on speculating in the green energy market, high speed rails and spa tubs in fancy hotels that the 99 percent could never enjoy, we might be able to fix our bridges and potholes.Quote:
Who should pay for the bridges that are no longer as safe?
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politic...0416_wblog.jpg
And this has to do with oil prices, or the president how?Quote:
QUOTE by speechlesstx;
What, you don't think it's the least bit funny, sad or telling that some idiots not once, but twice lined up for some "Obama money?"
Or we could eliminate corporate welfare, and loopholes to oil companies that are making profits at a record pace.Quote:
Now that was a question out of left field. I haven't got the foggiest idea what the relevance of that question is to what I've said, but if you must know if the Democrats would stop wasting our tax dollars on speculating in the green energy market, high speed rails and spa tubs in fancy hotels that the 99 percent could never enjoy, we might be able to fix our bridges and potholes.
We could use his favorite expression: "red herring". Just like the propensity to show a half-naked man in a bathtub.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
That photo is of a top level official from the "Obama GSA " having a great time on the taxpayer's dime. I believe the last word we heard from him is "I plea the 5th amendment" .
Because he's in a hotel room? Have you never travelled on business? I have. Lots, as a civil servant. Stayed in some nice places too because they were the only convenient hotels in the city centre I was at. It's jealous and petty to be outraged at that. Obviously that administration is doing quite well if you have to stoop that low to find fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
No ,in fact it is well documented that the GSA did a whole lot of partying on the taxpayer's dime. That is why he is invoking his 5th amendment protections in testimony.
I take it from your response that you are OK with such abuses ?
Follow the posts, Tal, had to do the subject of subsidies which was raised by someone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I'm not exactly sure me pointing out how government waste could be better used to fix the bridges Tal referred to is a red herring, but I'm sure you'll think of something irrelevant to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
By the way, this is receiving bipartisan criticism. Do you not follow anything outside of your reality?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Bipartisan anger burns over officials’ parties, trips
Wait for it, The Durango Herald is bound to be an unapproved news source.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Nobody like their government to waste their money. But, to blame Obama for it STRETCHES reality.
excon
Actually I said Democrats. I believe they were in charge of the House, the Senate and the White House in 2010 were they not? But I will blame Obama specifically for the green speculation blunders. Any reason I shouldn't?
You take from my response that the picture of a guy in a hotel room isn't damning to mean I'm OK with spending abuses? How did you infer that?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Geez Speech, some of those scandals are about long term civil servants going off the path, and we are all a bit outraged at the waste of money, but as far as the green speculations you better look deeper as I told Tom in another thread, because its not speculation, its manipulation largely by the Chinese government.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...e-imports.html
I mean is it too much to ask to get all the facts before you hand out the criticism??
If you're going to keep changing the subject please let us know. The red herring is that weird "Obama money" post. I'm pretty sure you knew that but avoided it altogether.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Speculation is agame not like baseball or football but more like a fixed boxing match. Large players can and as a rule of thumb do on every occasion possible play the speculation market to create sharp shifts in price to either sell for large profits or short for profits. In the general scheme of things this would not rise or lower prices much in the end because the speculator generally prayed on the novice and just took their money and in the end the commodity was sold at a point of or near to it's actual value. However with more and more people speculating in anything bubbles form and governments interfere to protect the investors that the real speculator saw as the rube.
The speculation market was a loan to producers with their future product to serve as collateral for a fee you could be granted the opportunity to buy a product at a given time in the future for a set price. The producer got money when they needed it the consumer of the product had their materials at a known price usually lower than the spot market price.
All the prophet going to the speculator does not get reinvested by the producer and it hurts the end user by setting a higher established price. Unregulated speculation is dangerous in that it raises prices to the end user and thus cuts demand to the producer as prices rise and people are forces to consume less of a product. A sensable approach to speculation could be to allow speculation as long as the speculator was the user of the product, say I speculated in corn and I am a distiller of corn whiskey. Another approach is to set high taxes on speculators prophets for those not using the commodity for their business in this case I speculated in corn and my business is a computer networking company so I would be forced to pay all gains above a certain point in taxes. Theses systems would preserve the needed benefits of speculation.
Without drastic reforms in our speculative capital system we are in for a real disaster in the near future
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:07 PM. |