Obama Supporter Speaks Out !!!

[Jim Casto Jr]

I've just about had it with all this Obama bashing. I'm a fervent supporter and think I should tell you why:


I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.

I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my horse.

I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.

I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

Freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

When we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.

I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.

I'm not concerned about the slaughter of millions of babies, so long as we keep all death row inmates alive.

I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.

I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.

[Dartwick]

You make a good point about the gas taxes.

[Seven Arrows]

Thanks Jim, I heard this morning that we're going to have to cut back on food production too, all that farming is contributing heavily to global warming. I'm cutting back to 1 1/2 meals a day, I've seen the light. I'm going to start walking slower too. Need to cut back on respiration, EPA will be monitoring carbon dioxide and I feel constrained to do my small part. Also took Cheryl's advice on the TP, it works, sort of....

[billhuntz]

I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.

You are aware that West Virgina is the 3rd most socialist state in the nation? West Virginia gets a redistribution of wealth of $1.74 for every dollar paid in taxes. What do you guys do with all that socilaism???

That redistribution of wealth thing has been going on for as long as we've been a nation, what's taken us so long to get mad about it?

Funny post!!

[falconpro]

I have become increasingly concerned about me own oversized carbon footprint. The root cause of this rather disproportionately large footprint would seam to be from an over abundance of personal methane gas!
Add this to the full size truck I drive, and well, there you have it. I am so far unable to control this over production of methane, and I ain't ready to give up my truck.
Does anyone have any spare carbon credits, that I could purchase?
I need em right now!!

[Flatbow1]

Do you reckon all the limousine liberals and neo-cons will pitch in and quit using all that jet fuel and gas for their limo's?

" The bad thing about socialism is that you eventually run out of othr peoples money".

[Sam Dunham]

OK Falcon I will hold mine today! Let it rip<<<<,:)

[tuffshot]

If they are beer farts, then you are offsetting your carbon credits by paying the alcohol tax.:)

[Dave Holquist]

Whoa, there, Jim! Who in the heck could have possibly been bashing Comrade Obama? Not to worry, they're now on the DHS terrorist watch list. (no suitable smilie available to express my disdain)

[Hardhead]

"You are aware that West Virgina is the 3rd most socialist state in the nation? West Virginia gets a redistribution of wealth of $1.74 for every dollar paid in taxes. What do you guys do with all that socilaism???"

I'd sure like to see a cogent response to this point. Crickets chirping right now.

Funny how the states that get more in federal benefits than they pay in taxes always seem to be "conservative" states.

[raisins]

"You are aware that West Virgina is the 3rd most socialist state in the nation? West Virginia gets a redistribution of wealth of $1.74 for every dollar paid in taxes. What do you guys do with all that socilaism???"

I'd sure like to see a cogent response to this point. Crickets chirping right now.

Funny how the states that get more in federal benefits than they pay in taxes always seem to be "conservative" states.

A further irony, WV was the site of many battles to unionize coal mines. What a bunch of commies!

"don't kill the company mule"

[Dartwick]

In more than a few respects I think the old timers in WV had a bit more perspective on who takes advantage of who, than some of the modern conservatives down there. Capitalism has some good points, buts its often used as cover when greed leverages capitol to manipulate the poor.

I say this as someone who lived in WV for 2 years recently and who had my great grandfather die in the Appalachian coals mines long long ago.

[raisins]

Without unions we'd still have people dying from dust inhalation in their 30's from working in unsafe textile mills.

[Free Range]

Without unions we'd still have people dying from dust inhalation in their 30's from working in unsafe textile mills.

You are correct, but IMO most of the unions have run their course and are more of a hindrance then a help now days.

Buy American.

[raisins]

You are correct, but IMO most of the unions have run their course and are more of a hindrance then a help now days.

Buy American.

There are excesses on both sides, to be sure.

[Dartwick]

Im personally no fan of unions. Our family business is an electrical contractor and we have been prevented from bidding plenty of jobs because we are not union.

But I can see that if unions ceased to exist big businesses would still stomp all over their employees in blue collar jobs.

[Free Range]

Im personally no fan of unions. Our family business is an electrical contractor and we have been prevented from bidding plenty of jobs because we are not union.

But I can see that if unions ceased to exist big businesses would still stomp all over their employees in blue collar jobs.

I agree and disagree, some may that is for sure, or should I say they would try. But others would not. Just take a look at the top one hundred companies to work for in the USA, I think I read it in Fordes or some other business mag while in a waiting room someplace. Any how I’m sure you could find it on line, most if not all of these companies are non-union, the employs are well treated, get paid a fair wage and have great benefits. I worked for a construction company that was non-union, we paid our people above prevailing union wages, and their benefits were better, and the workers didn’t have to pay union dues.

[Dartwick]

Well I think your actually making my point.

1 In the top 100 companies in the US most of their employees are not blue collar. The companies among the top 100 that do have significant blue collor jobs often have Unions - or they keep wages high because they are afraid of Unions.
(and Wal*Mart is a whole other discussion.).

2 Prevailing wages. If it wasnt for Unions the prevailing wage rate would be much lower.

[lastmanout]

I have belong to a Union 35 years now. The benefits/ work oppportunities of belonging shrink each year while they up my dues. The newer the leadership, the more Socailist they are. Kinda locked in now since they hold my pension. If I was starting out in out today, I wouldn't bother joining a union. I totally agree with your view, Dartwick.

[raisins]

Well I think your actually making my point.

1 In the top 100 companies in the US most of their employees are not blue collar. The companies among the top 100 that do have significant blue collor jobs often have Unions - or they keep wages high because they are afraid of Unions.
(and Wal*Mart is a whole other discussion.).

2 Prevailing wages. If it wasnt for Unions the prevailing wage rate would be much lower.

Without unions, being paid above prevailing wage would mean $1.10/hour, instead of $1/hour?

[CJ5]

If you don't pay your employees well enough, you risk losing them to the competition.....

I'm not so sure I buy the assumption that employers would stomp on workers without unions. With all the workplace regs we have (wage/hour laws, OSHA, FMLA, etc), there aren't many ways left to do it. Unions have definitely been needed at times in the past and they probably deserve credit for many workplace laws, but some of the crap they pull nowadays is ridiculous.

[Dartwick]

Without unions, being paid above prevailing wage would mean $1.10/hour, instead of $1/hour?


I have no idea what that means.
I cant tell if you dont know what prevailing wages is and and are trying to ask a serious question about it or if think you know what it is(but dont actually) and are attempting to be sarcastic.

[raisins]

I have no idea what that means.
I cant tell if you dont know what prevailing wages is and and are trying to ask a serious question about it or if think you know what it is(but dont actually) and are attempting to be sarcastic.

I assume it means local wage conditions. I might be wrong. I'm wrong sometimes, ya know, unlike you, who seems to have every right to take himself VERY seriously.

[raisins]

If you don't pay your employees well enough, you risk losing them to the competition.....



Seems less true in times of lower employment.

[tuffshot]

Seems less true in times of lower employment.

Missassumption, raisins

In todays market there are companies underbidding others for certain jobs. They are paying better as well so the employees from the loosing company are getting rehired by the takeover company.

The whole union thing has been going on for a long time. In brief, a company who thought they were paying their employees too much closed down and moved to a lower standard of living environment (local wage conditions) and opened up again. Now the next move is to a foreign country for cheaper labor.


If there never was a union, there would not be a prevailing wage! Except for maybe minimum wage.

[raisins]

Missassumption, raisins

In todays market there are companies underbidding others for certain jobs. They are paying better as well so the employees from the loosing company are getting rehired by the takeover company.

The whole union thing has been going on for a long time. In brief, a company who thought they were paying their employees too much closed down and moved to a lower standard of living environment (local wage conditions) and opened up again. Now the next move is to a foreign country for cheaper labor.


If there never was a union, there would not be a prevailing wage! Except for maybe minimum wage.

So, the average wage doesn't tend to go down if the supply of labor rises in relation to demand?

[Dartwick]

Id say Raisins is right on that with respect to blue collar work. I know in our family business we are bidding jobs at a rates that earn us less money because its better to get some money and and pay for insurance etc than to get no money. If we wanted to hire help(which would be silly with the minimal amount of work going on) we could easily pay less than we would have 2 years ago.

Raisens
As for me being right or serious. When I discuss things I usually do it from the perspective of what I believe and I try not to have my beliefs based on guesses. If its on what I suspect I usually put in a caveat. I could be wrong, but I have a rational behind my thoughts. My feeling is that we only learn by sorting conflicting rationals.

I think someone spoke the other day about your seemingly random perspective. It appears you like to be in a conversation just for the sake of being in it rather than to present a considered opinion or to ask questions. You make indirect challenges, but you apparently expecting others to figure out for you if there is a substantive rational behind your comment. Im not saying you cant do that - but expect to be called on it.

[raisins]

Id say Raisins is right on that with respect to blue collar work. I know in our family business we are bidding jobs at a rates that earn us less money because its better to get some money and and pay for insurance etc than to get no money. If we wanted to hire help(which would be silly with the minimal amount of work going on) we could easily pay less than we would have 2 years ago.

Raisens
As for me being right or serious. When I discuss things I usually do it from the perspective of what I believe and I try not to have my beliefs based on guesses. If its on what I suspect I usually put in a caveat. I could be wrong, but I have a rational behind my thoughts. My feeling is that we only learn by sorting conflicting rationals.

I think someone spoke the other day about your seemingly random perspective. It appears you like to be in a conversation just for the sake of being in it rather than to present a considered opinion or to ask questions. You make indirect challenges, but you apparently expecting others to figure out for you if there is a substantive rational behind your comment. Im not saying you cant do that - but expect to be called on it.

Fair enough, sometimes I'm just joking around a bit though.

[Sam Dunham]

Unions? Only if you are a member.

[Heathen]

Unions? Only if you are a member.
Sam,
One question, is the FOP considered a union?

[Free Range]

So, the average wage doesn't tend to go down if the supply of labor rises in relation to demand?

Yes it does, or should I say it should, why shouldn’t it. Should someone guarantee you a constant wage? Or should you be paid what you are worth and what the market for your skills will bear? Unlike other Nations the great thing about America, is if you don’t like what you are doing or what you are getting paid you can change jobs, careers, or start your own business, with relatively little interference from the government.

[raisins]

Yes it does, or should I say it should, why shouldn’t it. Should someone guarantee you a constant wage? Or should you be paid what you are worth and what the market for your skills will bear? Unlike other Nations the great thing about America, is if you don’t like what you are doing or what you are getting paid you can change jobs, careers, or start your own business, with relatively little interference from the government.

Makes sense if you consider people's time and energy an input to production similar to wood or concrete.

[tuffshot]

Makes sense if you consider people's time and energy an input to production similar to wood or concrete.

That is a pretty narrow point of view comment. IMO

Tell that to your teacher, police dept, fire dept, local and state workers, prison guards etc. Then tell that to all of the other private sector union workers in your area.

[Free Range]

Makes sense if you consider people's time and energy an input to production similar to wood or concrete.

If your time and energy isn’t an input of production then what is it?

[raisins]

That is a pretty narrow point of view comment. IMO

Tell that to your teacher, police dept, fire dept, local and state workers, prison guards etc. Then tell that to all of the other private sector union workers in your area.

I wasn't saying that I believe that, I don't, and that is what I was implying. I was commenting on Free Ranges assertion that labor is worth merely what the intersection of supply and demand indicates.

[raisins]

If your time and energy isn’t an input of production then what is it?

Part of a human's life. I suppose the work around to this in a totally free market is for consumers to begin seeing the way the 'labor' in the good they produce is treated as part of the value of the good. If this is done, manufacturer would begin treating their employees more fairly because they can make money off it.

[Sam Dunham]

Kind of, and I do not belong because Dewey Stokes the president of FOP went Gun Control.

[Free Range]

Part of a human's life. I suppose the work around to this in a totally free market is for consumers to begin seeing the way the 'labor' in the good they produce is treated as part of the value of the good. If this is done, manufacturer would begin treating their employees more fairly because they can make money off it.

And that is exactly why there is a market for hand crafted bows (or any widget) It’s not because they are “better” then a machined crafted bow, it’s because people appreciate the “value” the person puts into it. If not then there wouldn’t be a market for them. In our society goods and services are only worth what you can get for them, not what the government or a union says they are worth. We have a glaring example of that right now with the big 3 auto makers. The market will not stand for cars made by workers making 100+ grand a year putting tires on a car in an assembly line. Has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the person doing the work. If you can convince the public that it does, then that job will be worth 100+ a year, if not then, it’s not.

[Heathen]

Kind of, and I do not belong because Dewey Stokes the president of FOP went Gun Control.

Sam,

Thanks, I didn't know for sure what their status is.

[Sam Dunham]

Amen to that Freerange. I like metal but wood is really beutiful when done right it never died.

[billhuntz]

And that is exactly why there is a market for hand crafted bows (or any widget) It’s not because they are “better” then a machined crafted bow, it’s because people appreciate the “value” the person puts into it. If not then there wouldn’t be a market for them. In our society goods and services are only worth what you can get for them, not what the government or a union says they are worth. We have a glaring example of that right now with the big 3 auto makers. The market will not stand for cars made by workers making 100+ grand a year putting tires on a car in an assembly line. Has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the person doing the work. If you can convince the public that it does, then that job will be worth 100+ a year, if not then, it’s not.

Where does that ridiculous number of 100,000 dollars a year come from, Fox News? The guys on an assembly line make maybe 50 to 60 a year at tops. The average guy makes 40 or less as a starting salary. I did it for a while as a younger man and it can be back breaking.

What is killing the auto industry is competing with car makers from other countries that don't pay for health care for their employees, and insurance. We are the ONLY industrial nation that doesn't have universal health care. We are also near the top as far as health care costs go. The auto industry has been screaming about health care costs for years. How can an American comapny compete with a company that doesn't have to pay for health care for 80% of their employees, the only ones they have to cover are the ones working here.

[Free Range]

Where does that ridiculous number of 100,000 dollars a year come from, Fox News? The guys on an assembly line make maybe 50 to 60 a year at tops. The average guy makes 40 or less as a starting salary. I did it for a while as a younger man and it can be back breaking.

What is killing the auto industry is competing with car makers from other countries that don't pay for health care for their employees, and insurance. We are the ONLY industrial nation that doesn't have universal health care. We are also near the top as far as health care costs go. The auto industry has been screaming about health care costs for years. How can an American comapny compete with a company that doesn't have to pay for health care for 80% of their employees, the only ones they have to cover are the ones working here.

Try this Bill. You must have worked there MANY years ago.

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html

[raisins]

Where does that ridiculous number of 100,000 dollars a year come from, Fox News? The guys on an assembly line make maybe 50 to 60 a year at tops. The average guy makes 40 or less as a starting salary. I did it for a while as a younger man and it can be back breaking.

What is killing the auto industry is competing with car makers from other countries that don't pay for health care for their employees, and insurance. We are the ONLY industrial nation that doesn't have universal health care. We are also near the top as far as health care costs go. The auto industry has been screaming about health care costs for years. How can an American comapny compete with a company that doesn't have to pay for health care for 80% of their employees, the only ones they have to cover are the ones working here.

The high dollar per hour figure for autoworkers tossed around has been debunked. To get the inflated hourly wage they included salary, all benefits, AND (most importantly in the inflation) all benefits paid to retirees. The actual hourly wage is only slightly higher than at Toyota plants in the US.

[CJ5]

The guys sitting in those UAW "job banks" sure have it rough too........:rolleyes:

[billhuntz]

Try this Bill. You must have worked there MANY years ago.

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html

The chart itself is labeled wages BENEFITS and COMPENSATION. It means nothing unless you get the break out of what the percentage is of each cost.

The dollar figures in the chart reflect the auto makers cost to pay wages, health care and retirement pay for all of the living employees who are either working or collecting pensions. Foreign auto makers do not have to pay health care costs and can pay less in retirement pay because health care is free in those countries.

Raisins is right they do pay slightly more at American owned plants but just slightly.

[Free Range]

you guys are amazing, I work for a living and know next to nothing about business, but I do know that it doesn’t matter if it’s the actual per hour wage or the total benefits it all goes into the cost of making an automobile. And as for free health insurance, are you kidding me, there is no such thing as free health care

[Bowcephalus]

The great expense is delayed in the healthcare and pension plans in the years of retirement. Much like our own social security program, the time comes to pay the bill and one realizes that all that money that was promised was never there or was a mere figment of speculation to win agreement on a union contract.Corporate America, like government makes promises they can't keep to the masses all too eager to buy into the mirage. There are economic lessons here but much like other histories, politicians and constituents keep repeating the same old mistakes in violation of simple proven principles.

[billhuntz]

you guys are amazing, I work for a living and know next to nothing about business, but I do know that it doesn’t matter if it’s the actual per hour wage or the total benefits it all goes into the cost of making an automobile. And as for free health insurance, are you kidding me, there is no such thing as free health care

You are right there is no free anything. However unless you live in any industrialized country besides the US, your employer doesn't have to pay for your health care.

The bottom line is that foreign companies don't have to pay health care for their employees, unless they work in America, thereby keeping actual wages per hour and the cost of making an automobile cheaper than their competitor who has to pay those costs. I work for a living too but understand that.

[raisins]

you guys are amazing, I work for a living and know next to nothing about business, but I do know that it doesn’t matter if it’s the actual per hour wage or the total benefits it all goes into the cost of making an automobile. And as for free health insurance, are you kidding me, there is no such thing as free health care

BUT to make a fair comparison, you would have to do the same calculus for the toyota workers as well. We are pointing out that how they calculated the figures were intentionally misleading.

[Dartwick]

Actually It seems like your "pointing out" is the misleading part. All that stuff should count.

[Redbow]

Free range
If I was the Ford motor company and I was going to build a new plant,
would I build it in the U.S. or Canada?

Seems like Ford OF AMREICA WOULD SOONER BUILD CAR PLANTS IN CANADA THAN RIGHT HERE IN THE U.S.

Guess why freerange ???????????????????

It is an outrage that America does not have a universal health care system.

But I GUESS WHATS OK FOR ALL THOSES SENETORS ARE REPS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE REST OF THE NATION.

Give me a break FREE RANGE.

[Dartwick]

Politicians get a lot of money from insurance companies.

[raisins]

Actually It seems like your "pointing out" is the misleading part. All that stuff should count.

How can pointing out how something is done be misleading? Count it the same across the board. Also, it is a bit of a gray area to count your benefits and also those of retirees. You would have to be careful not to be guilty of double counting. I mean, that you would need to subtract out what current and past workers paid into the pension system (correcting for inflation). I would need to go line by line over the thing, but it wouldn't surprise me if they counted all current workers FUTURE pensions as well as current pension payments, an obvious double count.

[tuffshot]

Free range
If I was the Ford motor company and I was going to build a new plant,
would I build it in the U.S. or Canada?

Seems like Ford OF AMREICA WOULD SOONER BUILD CAR PLANTS IN CANADA THAN RIGHT HERE IN THE U.S.

Guess why freerange ???????????????????

It is an outrage that America does not have a universal health care system.

But I GUESS WHATS OK FOR ALL THOSES SENETORS ARE REPS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE REST OF THE NATION.

Give me a break FREE RANGE.

Actually the government and the EPA are the main reasons they do not build new plants in the US, Even the paint booths are under such strick EPA guide lines the cost takes forever to recover. Land and building restrictions will overpower any heath care plan. Even a universal one

[vermonster13]

It's amazing how many of these folks who live in places with "Universal Healthcare" come to America to be treated.

Used to be a time when folks wanted to work harder and be more creative than the next person to build a better life, now so many want the government to do it or feel entitled.

Time to brush up on my Cantonese and Mandarin I fear.

[Free Range]

Free range
If I was the Ford motor company and I was going to build a new plant,
would I build it in the U.S. or Canada?

Seems like Ford OF AMREICA WOULD SOONER BUILD CAR PLANTS IN CANADA THAN RIGHT HERE IN THE U.S.

Guess why freerange ???????????????????

It is an outrage that America does not have a universal health care system.

But I GUESS WHATS OK FOR ALL THOSES SENETORS ARE REPS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE REST OF THE NATION.

Give me a break FREE RANGE.

No need to guess, it’s cheaper to do business in Canada then here in the USA, am I close?????? Here’s and idea for you guys that want “free” health care, move to a country that provides it. And in five years report back to us and let us know how that is working for ya.

A friend of mine that is here legally from Canada said he would rather pay for health care here in the USA then use the “free” health care provided in Canada. Guess why Redbow??????

Our health care system isn’t perfect but putting the idiots in Washington in charge isn’t going to solve the problems. How about we start by cutting off the free health care for illegal aliens that cost us BILLIONS of dollars a year? All of which goes to increase the cost of health care here. How about some tort reform so that a person that burns themselves with a HOT cup of coffee can’t sue for MILLIONS? How about we start there and try to fix the real problems in our health care system before we jump into a system that can’t succeed?

Here’s a glimpse into the future of universal health care for you.

Man goes into the hospital and takes a number, (just like the number at the DMV) waits to be called. Finally his number is called.

Doc: what seems to be the problem.
Man: I have chest pains.
Doc: well you’re over weight.
Man: I know, but I’m still having chest pains
Doc: do you eat red meat?
Man: yes
Doc: well you brought this on yourself.
Man: ok, but I still have chest pains
Doc: sorry, you are not a high priority, you will have to wait until we can fit you in, after we work on this guy that is within the proper weight and lives a healthy life style. Now you go sit over there with the meat eaters while I check on the vegetarians.

[Dartwick]

The misleading part is that your saying it shouldnt count.

Its like saying "The precipitation count is not accurate because it includes snowfall."

[raisins]

The misleading part is that your saying it shouldnt count.

Its like saying "The precipitation count is not accurate because it includes snowfall."

I can see why you would count it. But, when this value was circulated, no one was told how it was calculated. They were led to believe that this was the hourly wage, in the sense they are used to thinking of it. Calculate the stats how you want, but be clear how it is done, and when making comparisons, be consistent so you are comparing 'apples to apples'.

[Free Range]

I can see why you would count it. But, when this value was circulated, no one was told how it was calculated. They were led to believe that this was the hourly wage, in the sense they are used to thinking of it. Calculate the stats how you want, but be clear how it is done, and when making comparisons, be consistent so you are comparing 'apples to apples'.

Are you saying someone said, union workers are making 100k+ a year and the Toyota workers are making only 50k a year. Counting the total compensation into the union workers pay and not for the others?

[raisins]

Are you saying someone said, union workers are making 100k+ a year and the Toyota workers are making only 50k a year. Counting the total compensation into the union workers pay and not for the others?

Fox news et al were saying that "UAW workers make over $70 an hour" with no clarification, in order to mislead on purpose, and then I heard many a ditto head making claims equivalent to "did you know that the weekly paycheck of UAW workers is hours worked X 70 plus dollars?" It was all BS.

[vermonster13]

The burden of the retirees greatly increases the production costs of the older American Companies.

Here is an interesting document on how worldwide tax rates rank.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff89.pdf

[vermonster13]

The actual average wage as people who don't think total cost for a big three auto worker is $29.49 an hour or $61,300.00 a year. This number includes no benefits.

[NJWoodsman]

"Legacy costs", blaming the UAW, and threats of bankruptcy is a huge deception to screw the American worker and taxpayer. GM is a multi-national corporation that has been been building plants around the world at the same time as they cry poor and close plants here.

My father in law is a Ford UAW retiree, worked over 30 years until poor health forced him to retire. Now he's in his 80's, with hear failure, diabetes, on lots of drugs. He did his part. A contract was made so that he would have benefits now, and he worked for them and needs them. Some of you think people like him don't deserve these benefits. Some of you think having the government provide them would be even worse. Each of you, if you make it that far, will one day be sick or elderly or both. When you need help, Do you want the answer to be Drop Dead! ? Our society, whether it's private industry or government, must find a workable solution. The auto industry is a bellweather that shows the employment/retiree based solution no longer works.

[Free Range]

Fox news et al were saying that "UAW workers make over $70 an hour" with no clarification, in order to mislead on purpose, and then I heard many a ditto head making claims equivalent to "did you know that the weekly paycheck of UAW workers is hours worked X 70 plus dollars?" It was all BS.

Did Fox go on to say the non-UAW worker only makes $20 an hour as a comparison? If they did so then they should be called on it, if however they said that, insinuating that $70 an hour is higher then the non-UAW worker then they are right. I’m not blaming the fall of GM totally on the UAW, there are many reasons for their demise. I was only pointing out that in this one area they are not competitive.

[Free Range]

"Legacy costs", blaming the UAW, and threats of bankruptcy is a huge deception to screw the American worker and taxpayer. GM is a multi-national corporation that has been been building plants around the world at the same time as they cry poor and close plants here.

My father in law is a Ford UAW retiree, worked over 30 years until poor health forced him to retire. Now he's in his 80's, with hear failure, diabetes, on lots of drugs. He did his part. A contract was made so that he would have benefits now, and he worked for them and needs them. Some of you think people like him don't deserve these benefits. Some of you think having the government provide them would be even worse. Each of you, if you make it that far, will one day be sick or elderly or both. When you need help, Do you want the answer to be Drop Dead! ? Our society, whether it's private industry or government, must find a workable solution. The auto industry is a bellweather that shows the employment/retiree based solution no longer works.

And your Father-in-law should receive all the benefits he is due. He made a contract with Ford or the UAW or whomever, and it should be honored. But what he didn’t make was a contract with me to pay for his health care.

[tuffshot]

What I find the most disheartning is that there were those who walked away with millions and are forgotten. And there are those who would rather lower everyones standard of living to 3rd world countries instead of trying to increase their own.

It is pretty shrewed how the news media and the government has the workers of America fighting among themselves instead of demanding a higher standard.

[vermonster13]

What I find the most disheartning is that there were those who walked away with millions and are forgotten. And there are those who would rather lower everyones standard of living to 3rd world countries instead of trying to increase their own.

It is pretty shrewed how the news media and the government has the workers of America fighting among themselves instead of demanding a higher standard.

A long time political ploy that all politicians have used. The media also tends to like to focus on what is happening in other countries than to truly hold ours under the microscope.

[Redbow]

FreeRange

Millions of Americans over 40 million have zero Health care.
Millions of Americans loose their homes every year because of crippling health care cost.

You simplistic view into the feature is ill informed beyond belief.
Any story that starts with "A friend of mine" is not worth the web it is written on.

I grew up in Europe and universal health care works just fine, and that is not a story it is a fact that I have lived.
When people get sick they get treated with out going to the poor house.

It is amazing that a country that spends more on military products than the entire world combined cannot trim that gigantic budget by 10% which would give us all HEALTH CARE.

Free Range the reason why Ford builds car plants in Canada rather than the U.S. is because of health care no other reason!
How could you get such a simple question so wrong?

Tuffshot you are also wrong
Your spray booth argument is laughable.
Just how dose it work, "lets see, Ford spends millions to develop a ford GT 40, but they cannot get their heads around building a spray booth?
Like I said ,,,,,,,,,laughable.

[Dartwick]

Many Americans who think they are safely insured have a false sense of security.

If a major illness does strike many end up losing there insurance a year later because its tied to their job or they have a extremely hard time maintaining it.
Additionally if your employer fails you are out of luck. And if you are over 40 and have to go find private insurance you are really going to pay.

Most people defending our system are either under 35 or ignorant of how perilous their coverage is.

Half of all bankruptcies are due to health care issues. In 3/4s of those cases the individual had health insurance at the onset of the illness.

[Free Range]

FreeRange

Millions of Americans over 40 million have zero Health care.
Millions of Americans loose their homes every year because of crippling health care cost.

You simplistic view into the feature is ill informed beyond belief.
Any story that starts with "A friend of mine" is not worth the web it is written on.

I grew up in Europe and universal health care works just fine, and that is not a story it is a fact that I have lived.
When people get sick they get treated with out going to the poor house.

It is amazing that a country that spends more on military products than the entire world combined cannot trim that gigantic budget by 10% which would give us all HEALTH CARE.

Free Range the reason why Ford builds car plants in Canada rather than the U.S. is because of health care no other reason!
How could you get such a simple question so wrong?

Tuffshot you are also wrong
Your spray booth argument is laughable.
Just how dose it work, "lets see, Ford spends millions to develop a ford GT 40, but they cannot get their heads around building a spray booth?
Like I said ,,,,,,,,,laughable.

First off, my story didn’t start with “a friend of mine” unless you are talking about the guy frome Canada that grew up in Canada and that is a fact, would you like his name and e-mail address?

Secondly, your 40 million Americans without health care is a BS number and you know it. There may be 40 million without formal health insurance but they all have access to the welfare states health “care” hell there are 40 million illegals in this country that have access to health “care”.

Thirdly: my simplistic view of the feature is spot on, all you have to do is look it up yourself this is already happening, I maybe exaggerated it a bit but this is what we have to look forward to. The government deciding who is worthy of a liver transplant, or heart surgery, based on their criteria.

You grew up in Europe, where at, are your parents American, are you a Naturalized American or just working here on a green card?

Trimming the defense budget gave us 9/11, health care doesn’t do you much good if your dead.

They build cars in Canada because of health care, does that mean it cost more to do business in Canada, or less because of health care?

[Dartwick]

If we dont want national health care then America should mandate that companies are not allowed to provide it - instead they could just pay you more and you buy it yourself. That would force insurances companies to treat everyone more fairly and it would make it more easy for companies to do equitable compensation in America compared to Canada, Europe etc.

Althoguh theres no way to compete with Mexico.

[Redbow]

Datwick
you said
"That would force insurances companies to treat everyone more fairly "
lol please tell me when has the above ever happened lol.

[Free Range]

Datwick
you said
"That would force insurances companies to treat everyone more fairly "
lol please tell me when has the above ever happened lol.

I have to agree with you on that one Red.

My question is, has there been anyone that has done/published a study of the real cost of health care, in regards to what the insurance companies charge? How much are we paying for government red tape, fraud, poor management, lawyers, and frivolous law suites?

[NJWoodsman]

I have to agree with you on that one Red.

My question is, has there been anyone that has done/published a study of the real cost of health care, in regards to what the insurance companies charge? How much are we paying for government red tape, fraud, poor management, lawyers, and frivolous law suites?

Those are 2 different questions. I don't think you'll find an answer on that, because if the truth came out about how insurance companies, in collusion with hospitals and doctors, are screwing sick Americans, there would finally be the outrage to stop the gravy train.

Doctors charge inflated prices, then settle with insurance companies for a lesser amount. Even for little things like X-rays. If you don't have insurance- you pay more. Unless you're broke, then when you end up in the hospital they treat you as a charity case and write it off. They make up for it by forcing people to get meds from their pharmacy, so they can charge the insurance company (or you) $40 bucks for 2 Tylenol. Oh, and if your insurance won't pay enough to cover that hospital bed, they'll try to boot you out to get another profitable body in there.

If you work for a big company, or some other large group, rates are less. Small business? Too bad. My company's rate went up 40% last year, we ended up with less coverage and my wife took a job just to get medical benefits I couldn't afford anymore. I could tell you lots more stories about family and friends who had to fight with insurance companies and hospitals to get the care they needed and paid for.

Regulating the system so it is fair to the patient, the consumer, and allowing people to participate in a large group plan (let's call them "Americans") doesn't mean "socialized medicine" and that the government is going to pick your doctor and tell them what to do.

[Redbow]

Freerange if you think that the 40 million wthout health care is B.S.
WHAT MILLION FIGURE WOULD BE OK WITH YOU HOW ABOUT 20 MILLION?
Would that be ok in your world?

[raisins]

If we dont want national health care then America should mandate that companies are not allowed to provide it - instead they could just pay you more and you buy it yourself. That would force insurances companies to treat everyone more fairly and it would make it more easy for companies to do equitable compensation in America compared to Canada, Europe etc.

Althoguh theres no way to compete with Mexico.

Hard to see how markets work efficiently when it is an item that everyone wants/needs, there are a relatively few number of providers (compared to number of customers (economic theories usually assume a near infinite supply of both)), and they all know what is in each others best interest (a trust that is unspoken?). I'm thinking an example is when gas prices were through the roof and simultaneously all the gas providers were making record profits. You didn't see them bidding each other down in order to draw customers. I saw almost the same prices everywhere, prices climbing, and record profits.

There's a body literature about when markets do and do not allocate resources efficiently. From what I've gathered, the results are accepted by everyone except really hardcore friedmanite types (just too obvious for anyone to reject, unless they are doing it based upon ideology).

[Redbow]

Free range I have to say that American health care is fantastic if one can afford it.
I can

But insurance led health care is a rape of sick people, it is a over priced insurnace feeding frenzy.

Our Insurance based system is a big fat cat which needs to be put on a diet.

Why do Americans have to suffer the worlds highest durg cost?
When per capita we should have one of the world's lowest?

[raisins]

Regulating the system so it is fair to the patient, the consumer, and allowing people to participate in a large group plan (let's call them "Americans") doesn't mean "socialized medicine" and that the government is going to pick your doctor and tell them what to do.

Amen brother. We need to get out of this 'it's laissez faire capitalism or socialism' falsity.

[Free Range]

Freerange if you think that the 40 million wthout health care is B.S.
WHAT MILLION FIGURE WOULD BE OK WITH YOU HOW ABOUT 20 MILLION?
Would that be ok in your world?


What I meant was saying anybody is without health “care” is BS. If you read past that part you would have understood that. You might be right that 40 million are without health “insurance”, but that hardly means they are without health “care”.

[Free Range]

Those are 2 different questions. I don't think you'll find an answer on that, because if the truth came out about how insurance companies, in collusion with hospitals and doctors, are screwing sick Americans, there would finally be the outrage to stop the gravy train.

Doctors charge inflated prices, then settle with insurance companies for a lesser amount. Even for little things like X-rays. If you don't have insurance- you pay more. Unless you're broke, then when you end up in the hospital they treat you as a charity case and write it off. They make up for it by forcing people to get meds from their pharmacy, so they can charge the insurance company (or you) $40 bucks for 2 Tylenol. Oh, and if your insurance won't pay enough to cover that hospital bed, they'll try to boot you out to get another profitable body in there.

If you work for a big company, or some other large group, rates are less. Small business? Too bad. My company's rate went up 40% last year, we ended up with less coverage and my wife took a job just to get medical benefits I couldn't afford anymore. I could tell you lots more stories about family and friends who had to fight with insurance companies and hospitals to get the care they needed and paid for.

Regulating the system so it is fair to the patient, the consumer, and allowing people to participate in a large group plan (let's call them "Americans") doesn't mean "socialized medicine" and that the government is going to pick your doctor and tell them what to do.

You’ll find no argument from me there. The system is broke, the reason for my question(s) above. If someone truly wanted to solve the health “insurance” problem they would start with an investigation of why the cost is so high. They would do all they could to get the government out of the way, allow real competition with the drug companies, kick the FDA in the ass, kick the lawyers in the ass, stop the flood of illegals into the emergency rooms for routine headaches, and allow member owned insurance companies. Where the insured all have stock in the company and decide how the company is run.

Your last paragraph I do find issue with, just a bit. Allowing people to participate in a large group plan is fine, see member owned above, but as soon as you let the government run it, you run the risk of it getting completely out of control. Look at SS for example, now how easy should that be. You take money from a person, you invest it in a no risk investment, it grows, and after 30 years you give it back to them in monthly payments. The government can’t even handle that, you expect them to suddenly become competent taking over something as complex as health insurance?

[Free Range]

Free range I have to say that American health care is fantastic if one can afford it.
I can

But insurance led health care is a rape of sick people, it is a over priced insurnace feeding frenzy.

Our Insurance based system is a big fat cat which needs to be put on a diet.

Why do Americans have to suffer the worlds highest durg cost?
When per capita we should have one of the world's lowest?

Because the government protects the drug companies, competition is the answer, not more government control. Let Canada drug companies sell drugs here in the USA, you will see the cost drop over night.

[Redbow]

We agree on that point

[NJWoodsman]

Free range I have to say that American health care is fantastic if one can afford it.
I can

But insurance led health care is a rape of sick people, it is a over priced insurnace feeding frenzy.

Our Insurance based system is a big fat cat which needs to be put on a diet.

Why do Americans have to suffer the worlds highest durg cost?
When per capita we should have one of the world's lowest?

Because the government protects the drug companies, competition is the answer, not more government control. Let Canada drug companies sell drugs here in the USA, you will see the cost drop over night.

I've worked in the pharmaceutical industry for many years, and you don't know what you're talking about, FreeRange.

What Canadian drug companies? Most production is here in the US (and in my neighborhood in NJ) or in Europe. They sell the same stuff to Canada and overseas for much less money because of negotiated pricing. Drugs from Canada are simply being re-imported. A side effect of this has been counterfeit drugs.

You also don't seem to realize that drug companies patent their drugs, after investing huge amounts in development and clinical trials, so that there ISN'T competition.

The FDA regulates the manufacture and distribution of drugs for good reason. Just like a "Bad bank", oversight prevents abuses ranging from poor quality control, manufacturing mistakes, improper labeling, all the way to ineffective or dangerous drugs. Any company that manufactures drugs in the US is subject to FDA inspection, and if a company does not have adequate Quality Control and Good Manufacturing Practice systems in place, they can be shut down or taken over.

[Free Range]

[QUOTE=Free Range;169884]

I've worked in the pharmaceutical industry for many years, and you don't know what you're talking about, FreeRange.

What Canadian drug companies? Most production is here in the US (and in my neighborhood in NJ) or in Europe. They sell the same stuff to Canada and overseas for much less money because of negotiated pricing. Drugs from Canada are simply being re-imported. A side effect of this has been counterfeit drugs.

You also don't seem to realize that drug companies patent their drugs, after investing huge amounts in development and clinical trials, so that there ISN'T competition.

The FDA regulates the manufacture and distribution of drugs for good reason. Just like a "Bad bank", oversight prevents abuses ranging from poor quality control, manufacturing mistakes, improper labeling, all the way to ineffective or dangerous drugs. Any company that manufactures drugs in the US is subject to FDA inspection, and if a company does not have adequate Quality Control and Good Manufacturing Practice systems in place, they can be shut down or taken over.


You’re right I don’t know what I’m talking about. But, if we can get the same drug from another country for less cost that would be a good thing, right? I don’t have the answers, just questions that may lead to some good answers. It sounds like you are sticking up for the FDA? I have heard many complaints about how long it takes, to get a new drug approved, could this be streamed lined and still provide the consumer protection? Yes the drug companies deserve to be compensated for their efforts, but is it fair to charge one amount here and another elsewhere? Could they still make money if the competition was stiffer? If a insurance company wanted to contract with another drug provider to keep cost down, as long as the drug was safe and effective wouldn’t that help?

Like I said I’m not against fixing the problem, I just don’t think the government is the answer. We all have heard the story of 1000 dollar hammers, do you think the cost of drugs will come down if the government is the one handing out medicine? Why is it when Democrats talk about health care they jump on the universal health care band wagon? Why doesn’t someone there talk about truly finding out where the problem is and attacking that? Why is it the Republicans don’t seem to have any plan to fix the problem?

So I don’t get accused of crying about a problem without offering a solution here is health care according to Garp (Free Range). Stop illegal immigration, now. Close down access to hospitals by illegals. The savings will be in the Billions, use that money to uncover the real cost of health care, take each cost as a separate issue and find ways to streamline them and cut cost. Reward companies that work with the government to reduce cost and provide companies, large and small, with effective health care coverage. Reward them with lower taxes. That is where I would start. Then I would hold a summit and bring in all the stake holders, insurance companies, hospitals, doctors, small business, big business. Find out where there is common ground, find out their thoughts on an effective system, one where there is an opportunity to make a profit and still provide a needed service at a cost everybody can afford.

[Dartwick]

The whole system of commercially marketed drugs is a joke. It encourages the use of expensive drugs that off barely significant improvements over current drugs. A huge amount of money is spent creating minor changes to existing drugs mainly so pharmaceutical companies can continue to advertise and sell a patented version over time.

As a country we would save money if we rebuilt our university research program and put an end to advertising prescription drugs.

[NJWoodsman]

[QUOTE=NJWoodsman;169891]


You’re right I don’t know what I’m talking about. But, if we can get the same drug from another country for less cost that would be a good thing, right? That would only work for generics I don’t have the answers, just questions that may lead to some good answers. It sounds like you are sticking up for the FDA? Actually, as an engineer, regulatory compliance made my job a lot more difficult and less funI have heard many complaints about how long it takes, to get a new drug approved, could this be streamed lined and still provide the consumer protection? Remember Merck and Vioxx? The clinical trial and approval process has been shortened for critical drugs, but in other cases risks have been downplayed and benefits exageratedYes the drug companies deserve to be compensated for their efforts, but is it fair to charge one amount here and another elsewhere?No, but they get away with it. That's why drugs from Canada are cheaper Could they still make money if the competition was stiffer? You mean like Viagra?If a insurance company wanted to contract with another drug provider to keep cost down, as long as the drug was safe and effective wouldn’t that help? Insurance companies typically only pay for generics unless there isn't one or Dr. requires name brand

Like I said I’m not against fixing the problem, I just don’t think the government is the answer. We all have heard the story of 1000 dollar hammers, do you think the cost of drugs will come down if the government is the one handing out medicine? Government doesn't hand it out, they would only negotiate price (like Canada) When the Medicaid pharma bill was written a few years ago the industry lobbied heavily to make sure the price WOULDN"T come downWhy is it when Democrats talk about health care they jump on the universal health care band wagon? Larger group=lower cost= happy votersWhy doesn’t someone there talk about truly finding out where the problem is and attacking that? Why is it the Republicans don’t seem to have any plan to fix the problem? Too hard, too much money being made

So I don’t get accused of crying about a problem without offering a solution here is health care according to Garp (Free Range). Stop illegal immigration, now. Close down access to hospitals by illegals. The savings will be in the Billions, use that money to uncover the real cost of health care, take each cost as a separate issue and find ways to streamline them and cut cost. Reward companies that work with the government to reduce cost and provide companies, large and small, with effective health care coverage. Reward them with lower taxes. That is where I would start. Then I would hold a summit and bring in all the stake holders, insurance companies, hospitals, doctors, small business, big business. Find out where there is common ground, find out their thoughts on an effective system, one where there is an opportunity to make a profit and still provide a needed service at a cost everybody Maybe you ARE an Obama supporter- they just had a summit last month!

Some good questions

[tuffshot]

FreeRange

Millions of Americans over 40 million have zero Health care.
Millions of Americans loose their homes every year because of crippling health care cost.

You simplistic view into the feature is ill informed beyond belief.
Any story that starts with "A friend of mine" is not worth the web it is written on.

I grew up in Europe and universal health care works just fine, and that is not a story it is a fact that I have lived.
When people get sick they get treated with out going to the poor house.

It is amazing that a country that spends more on military products than the entire world combined cannot trim that gigantic budget by 10% which would give us all HEALTH CARE.

Free Range the reason why Ford builds car plants in Canada rather than the U.S. is because of health care no other reason!
How could you get such a simple question so wrong?

Tuffshot you are also wrong
Your spray booth argument is laughable.
Just how dose it work, "lets see, Ford spends millions to develop a ford GT 40, but they cannot get their heads around building a spray booth?
Like I said ,,,,,,,,,laughable.

Redbow,

Get out your yellow pages and sit on it that way you can reach the key board and see the screen closer. Then use your google button and check out the restrictions for auto paint booth. The paint booth was a minor example for EPA restrictions. Some paints have been eliminated by the EPA also other chemicals in the industry. But they still use them in other countries.

The GT 40 was developed back in the 60's. The new one was a retrofit, which is called the Ford GT because they didn't want to pay the owner of the "GT40 name" the money he was asking just for the name.

Millions of people are without health care because their employers can't afford it either.

[Redbow]

Tuffshot
A fine gentleman by the Len Busby has a Ford GT, he has invited me to take a ride in that said super car which I will do at some point as we are both in Florida.

I used the term GT 40 so as not to confuse it with the Ford Rustang gt.

Tuffshot I am old enough to know what a Le mans gt 40 is;
I even had the pleasure of pole carp fishing with the owner of the Pepsi bar on the Le man race track (I worked with the owners daughter)
I have only been to le Mans once in my life and I was lucky enough to see the Gt 40s in vintage racing.

Not sure what you mean by the new one been a retro fit, can you explain that please?


I take it Tuffshot that you believe that spay booth restrictions are the reason why multi million dollar companies just give up and go to other countries?????
I re direct you to may original question.

"lets see, Ford spends millions to develop a ford GT 40, but they cannot get their heads around building a spray booth?

Tuffshot with all due respect the spray booth is not the down fall of an industrialized America

P.s the computer I use has voice command and it is linked to a 32inch flat screen
I never have to touch a keybaord, or get up close to a screen.
Nice computer advice Tuffshot but rather pointless. You really must try voice command it is very cool! lol.

[vermonster13]

The costs of meeting EPA, OSHA and all the other myriad of regulations on American businesses are a major reason why so many move manufacturing to less restrictive countries. It's a miracle anything can be manufactured in this country that is done completely legally. Staff attorneys can make a real good living here just in keeping track of compliance issues.

[Papabull]

The costs of meeting EPA, OSHA and all the other myriad of regulations on American businesses are a major reason why so many move manufacturing to less restrictive countries. It's a miracle anything can be manufactured in this country that is done completely legally. Staff attorneys can make a real good living here just in keeping track of compliance issues.

That is something that never gets enough discussion and many people never realize what a problem the intense and constantly changing regulations are. Just keeping up with them is onerous and complying with all of them all the time is almost impossible. Very small companies can't afford the resources required to keep up with it and very large companies can afford to move to a place where they don't have this onerous burden. Mid sized companies just try to struggle along through it and often end up being bought up by the larger companies. Over-regulation has been a problem for a long time, now, and it gets worse with every passing year.

[raisins]

That is something that never gets enough discussion and many people never realize what a problem the intense and constantly changing regulations are. Just keeping up with them is onerous and complying with all of them all the time is almost impossible. Very small companies can't afford the resources required to keep up with it and very large companies can afford to move to a place where they don't have this onerous burden. Mid sized companies just try to struggle along through it and often end up being bought up by the larger companies. Over-regulation has been a problem for a long time, now, and it gets worse with every passing year.

One 'remedy' is for all manufacturers to have documented somewhere the amount of pollution they release, the amount of resources they consume, key factors of the work environment, etc (of course this will be called too burdensome by business as well (talk is the cheapest thing going)). That way consumers can decide. If you don't like it, then don't spend your money there. An example, after the EPA's toxic release inventory was established, pollution began to decrease at a quicker rate. The reason, partially, is that no manufacturer wanted to be the worst in their area. So, in this rare instance, there was a race to the top instead of the bottom.

[Dartwick]

That is something that never gets enough discussion and many people never realize what a problem the intense and constantly changing regulations are. Just keeping up with them is onerous and complying with all of them all the time is almost impossible. Very small companies can't afford the resources required to keep up with it and very large companies can afford to move to a place where they don't have this onerous burden. Mid sized companies just try to struggle along through it and often end up being bought up by the larger companies. Over-regulation has been a problem for a long time, now, and it gets worse with every passing year.

Living in western PA you can see what happened with about 70-100 years of under regulation.

First the coals mines ruined half our streams - and continued this from from the 1900s till the 1970s(many small streams still run red). Then we spent 50 years breathing coal soot from iron plants. And lastly strip mines from the 50s through the 70s left un-reclaimed deserts dotting the land scape.

Regulation is a head ache - but the truth is you cant trust people to do the right thing. The answer is tariffs on imports from where they dont regulate.

EDIT: And I forgot to mention before regulation working mines was a deadly experience.

[raisins]

There are pictures of mountain ranges in WV where every tree in sight was cut. The piled brush would catch on fire and burn so hot and long that the organic material in the soil would burn off.

[vermonster13]

You can see what the lack of regulation has done to the air quality in China, there was a lot of talk about it at the Olympics. Problem is folks don't care here so long as the pollution isn't in their back yards and they can get something cheaper. When they can't find work then they make lots of noise. Our government needs to find a balance, something they are not good at at all.

[Free Range]

You can see what the lack of regulation has done to the air quality in China, there was a lot of talk about it at the Olympics. Problem is folks don't care here so long as the pollution isn't in their back yards and they can get something cheaper. When they can't find work then they make lots of noise. Our government needs to find a balance, something they are not good at at all.


Right on vermonster, the trouble with the libs is when a Conservative says the D word (deregulation for those in Reolinda) they think we are talking about returning to the days of un-restricted pollution. There can be a happy middle ground, except the fringe left makes so much noise that it’s almost impossible to make any head way. And when will people learn that incentives work much better then punitive measures. Lets try rewarding those that are productive AND environmentally aware. By giving them tax breaks and other rewards for being good stewards they will have an economic advantage over those that don’t, weeding out the companies that won’t conform.

Putting a “carbon” tariff on goods coming from countries that do not conform to these environmental practices is another good idea. We need a Government that thinks America first, and understands the meaning of fair trade, not free trade.

An excerpt from the Constitution Parties platform:

We favor the abolition of the Office of Special Trade Representative, and insist on the withdrawal of these United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and all other agreements wherein agencies other than the Congress of these United States improperly assume responsibility for establishing American trade policies.
Article I, Section 8 provides that duties, imposts, and excises are legitimate revenue-raising measures on which the United States government may properly rely. We support a tariff based revenue system, as did the Founding Fathers, which was the policy of these United States during most of the nation's history. In no event will the U.S. tariff on any foreign import be less than the difference between the foreign item's cost of production and the cost of production of a similar item produced in these United States. The cost of production of a U.S. product shall include, but not be limited to, all compensation, including fringe benefits, paid to American workers, and environmental costs of doing business imposed on business by federal, state, and local governments.

One reason I like these guys.

[tuffshot]

Red bow,

I didn't say the paint booth or dip tank or any one system as a whole was the down fal only that it is part of what is being controlled by the government ie EPA controls. Along with the indutries other restraints or controls of any kind of release is so much more extencive here in the states it has become economically infeasable to start up a new manufacturing plant.

Here is another point to ponder. What do you guys think the clean up of all of the auto makers plants that closed down will be?
Parts will need to be sold to auto parts stores or redisributed.
Clean-up of the plant sites themselves will be on going for quite some time.

[tuffshot]

One 'remedy' is for all manufacturers to have documented somewhere the amount of pollution they release, the amount of resources they consume, key factors of the work environment, etc (of course this will be called too burdensome by business as well (talk is the cheapest thing going)). That way consumers can decide. If you don't like it, then don't spend your money there. An example, after the EPA's toxic release inventory was established, pollution began to decrease at a quicker rate. The reason, partially, is that no manufacturer wanted to be the worst in their area. So, in this rare instance, there was a race to the top instead of the bottom.


Your remedy is already in position and has been for a long time. Every year the restrictions get tighter and tighter until once a plant can't comply they close.

[raisins]

Your remedy is already in position and has been for a long time. Every year the restrictions get tighter and tighter until once a plant can't comply they close.

Really, I can pick any product I might buy, and find for it consequences of its production, etc in one easy, central location? If so, where? This information should be compiled by the manufacturer, just like ingredients are on food labels. If this was done, the market would correct many problems, and a fewer number of regulations could take care of the remaining pressing problems.

[Redbow]

Tuffshot I agree.
Now what did you mean by retrofit gt40?

[NJWoodsman]

Really, I can pick any product I might buy, and find for it consequences of its production, etc in one easy, central location? If so, where? This information should be compiled by the manufacturer, just like ingredients are on food labels. If this was done, the market would correct many problems, and a fewer number of regulations could take care of the remaining pressing problems.

If I understand you correctly, this practice is already done, it's called a MSDS, Material Safety Data Sheet. When chemicals are used in a workplace, this information has to be available. Also, chemicals, paint, etc. anyone can buy at the hardware store are labeled with contents, precautions, disposal info, etc.

[Dartwick]

Thats really not the same. MSDs are catch all lists everything that a worker could possibly be exposed to. It has very little if any relation to what ever sorts of pollution are being released.

Im not exactly agreeing with Raisens idea. Buts MSDs are not an alternative in any way.

[tuffshot]

Tuffshot I agree.
Now what did you mean by retrofit gt40?

The Ford GT is a retrofit, There was some R/D but most of the components were available just redesigned. The GT40 and the Pantera of the 70's were both mid engine vehicles. The foundation was already layed the Ford GT and was just refined. As few of the Ford GT's that they planned to make did seem like a waste of time and money. But concidered its targeted customer it may have paid for itself. But that was a different day before gas hit 4 dollars a gallon.

[tuffshot]

Really, I can pick any product I might buy, and find for it consequences of its production, etc in one easy, central location? If so, where? This information should be compiled by the manufacturer, just like ingredients are on food labels. If this was done, the market would correct many problems, and a fewer number of regulations could take care of the remaining pressing problems.

The MSDS sheet is only one tool. I work at a Paper mill, all of our chemicals are listed and monitored for sewer loss. Coal fired boilers are also governed by the EPA and stack emmisions such as NOX, SO2, TRS and any other particulate is under constant monitoring, which is checked by the EPA on a yearly basis. Water discharge quaility is also monitored as well as treated. As far as putting the manufacturing process on a lable a product seems a little far fetched. But if one looks in the right places you might be able to find out the process impact but I'm sure some of the information may not be public knowledge. If it was it may put some lawyers out of a job.:)

Getting rid of freon and asbestos was a major impact on safety for mankind and air quaility. Freon is still used but under stricter controls. Asbestos is still made and used in other countries. The Black Market has some impact here and abroad.

[raisins]

If I understand you correctly, this practice is already done, it's called a MSDS, Material Safety Data Sheet. When chemicals are used in a workplace, this information has to be available. Also, chemicals, paint, etc. anyone can buy at the hardware store are labeled with contents, precautions, disposal info, etc.

I'm interested in what was depleted (ex. how much iron ore was mined to make my golf club and what other chemicals were used in extraction) and released in total during entire items life cycle, that way I would know what my dollar really 'buys'.

[tuffshot]

I'm interested in what was depleted (ex. how much iron ore was mined to make my golf club and what other chemicals were used in extraction) and released in total during entire items life cycle, that way I would know what my dollar really 'buys'.

You would be amazed! I bet if you knew the paper process you would have never made a spitball.:)

[Dartwick]

[QUOTE=tuffshot;169976

Getting rid of freon and asbestos was a major impact on safety for mankind and air quaility. Freon is still used but under stricter controls. Asbestos is still made and used in other countries. The Black Market has some impact here and abroad.[/QUOTE]

The "safety of mankind" is kind of broad and indeed limiting freon discharge has helped the ozone layer.

But air quality?
R12 and R22 are essentially inert in conditions where people can live. They are as safe to breath as nitrogen iin any kind of concentration you could be exposed to outside of a compressor room. The refrigerants they have been replaced with are probably less healthy to breath since they can react better with normal chemicals in your body.

And asbestos - its terrible stuff to breath. But its not a pollutant. It pretty much only hurts people in buildings where it is being disturbed. Outside it falls to the ground and is washed back into the soil it came from and becomes as harmless as other dirt.
Although all for outlawing asbestos - it was murder on construction and maintenance workers.

But my point is air quality is ruined by coal power plants and cars. Beyond saving the ozone(which is good) the rules on those 2 had little if any impact on the envirment.

[Papabull]

The Earth is a terrarium where, for all intents and purposes, nothing is added or taken out. Without going into tangential minutia of exceptions like satellites going out or meteors coming in, what's here is here and always has been here and always will be here. Nothing is really "depleted". It is moved. It changes form. Matter gets converted to energy and energy to matter. But there's really no need to worry about the iron in our golf clubs because it's just a matter of moving around the stuff that's already here. It will be redeposited in due time. We only ever borrow and rearrange stuff. It will always be here even after the only trace of humans on this planet will be in fossil remains.

[raisins]

The Earth is a terrarium where, for all intents and purposes, nothing is added or taken out. Without going into tangential minutia of exceptions like satellites going out or meteors coming in, what's here is here and always has been here and always will be here. Nothing is really "depleted". It is moved. It changes form. Matter gets converted to energy and energy to matter. But there's really no need to worry about the iron in our golf clubs because it's just a matter of moving around the stuff that's already here. It will be redeposited in due time. We only ever borrow and rearrange stuff. It will always be here even after the only trace of humans on this planet will be in fossil remains.

I agree in a sense, I know you were being philosophic about the whole thing, but I would like to state a few things from the standpoint of human needs. USEFUL energy is definitely depleted (2nd law of thermodynamics). True we are bathed in low entropy energy daily, but this is dilute and hard to concentrate. We are rapidly going through the solar energy that was concentrated and stored for us over millenia by mother nature (fossil fuels). Also, we rearrange elements to produce compounds that are not found in any real quantity in nature. We concentrate minerals that are naturally dilute, and we dilute things that were concentrated when we found them. As we make, use, and dispose of things made of minerals, the molecules are dispersed. We have to find (good luck) and reconstitute these things using useful energy (which itself cannot be recycled).

[Papabull]

I agree in a sense, I know you were being philosophic about the whole thing, but I would like to state a few things from the standpoint of human needs. USEFUL energy is definitely depleted (2nd law of thermodynamics). True we are bathed in low entropy energy daily, but this is dilute and hard to concentrate. We are rapidly going through the solar energy that was concentrated and stored for us over millenia by mother nature (fossil fuels). Also, we rearrange elements to produce compounds that are not found in any real quantity in nature. We concentrate minerals that are naturally dilute, and we dilute things that were concentrated when we found them. As we make, use, and dispose of things made of minerals, the molecules are dispersed. We have to find (good luck) and reconstitute these things using useful energy (which itself cannot be recycled).

All that is true and still of relative unimportance to anything or anyone but us. New compounds are made all the time - and broken down all the time. We've managed to put together things that nature probably wouldn't be able to put together without us, but since we're nature, too, we can't really say that everything that happens isn't truly a natural act. We have control over what we do, of course, but for the sake of the Earth, it doesn't matter. What matters is what we want. If you think smelting iron into steel is bad, then it's bad. If someone else thinks it's good, then it's good. It is what it is and the only "good" or "bad" about it is in our own eyes. That might be a purely philosophical perspective but it's also basic reality.

Is dumping plastic bottles in the ocean a bad thing? Well, that depends. The crap floats and forms a funky floating raft of nastiness that looks like hell but fish use it for shelter and don't care how it looks. So is it bad? Not so much to the fish, but to us, yes. Because it's ugly. As long as we realize that all this "save the Earth" crap is really about our own selfish desires, then we can accept the truth that will help us make better choices. We want green areas. We want color TV's. We want wild forests and we want nice houses with nice lawns. We have to balance business and human enterprise with our desire to preserve wild spaces and biodiversity. The biodiversity isn't really all that important in and of itself because nature's going to work with whatever there is. It matters to us, though, because we like all the critters and many of us would feel a great sense of loss if they were gone.

But that's exactly the point. It's about what WE want that really drives us. It doesn't sound very altruistic because it's not. But it's the truth and if we deal with that and accept that we're a bunch of selfish creatures - just like every other creature, maybe we can come to terms with all this stuff a little easier. The reason most of the greenie arguments sound so stupid is because they're rationalizations and really ARE b.s.

I've found out most people feel very uncomfortable when presented with this in a blunt fashion like I just laid it out. Accepting it as truth means that we must accept that we aren't really the angels of goodness that we want to believe we are. But you'd think people would figure that out when they blow up animal testing facilities or logging trucks. Humans have a lot of interesting characteristics and one of the most pronounced is our willingness to b.s. ourselves for the sake of protecting our fragile egos.

[Sam Dunham]

Thanks Papa, I needed that.

[Seven Arrows]

Good stuff Robert!

[raisins]

All that is true and still of relative unimportance to anything or anyone but us. New compounds are made all the time - and broken down all the time. We've managed to put together things that nature probably wouldn't be able to put together without us, but since we're nature, too, we can't really say that everything that happens isn't truly a natural act. We have control over what we do, of course, but for the sake of the Earth, it doesn't matter. What matters is what we want. If you think smelting iron into steel is bad, then it's bad. If someone else thinks it's good, then it's good. It is what it is and the only "good" or "bad" about it is in our own eyes. That might be a purely philosophical perspective but it's also basic reality.

Is dumping plastic bottles in the ocean a bad thing? Well, that depends. The crap floats and forms a funky floating raft of nastiness that looks like hell but fish use it for shelter and don't care how it looks. So is it bad? Not so much to the fish, but to us, yes. Because it's ugly. As long as we realize that all this "save the Earth" crap is really about our own selfish desires, then we can accept the truth that will help us make better choices. We want green areas. We want color TV's. We want wild forests and we want nice houses with nice lawns. We have to balance business and human enterprise with our desire to preserve wild spaces and biodiversity. The biodiversity isn't really all that important in and of itself because nature's going to work with whatever there is. It matters to us, though, because we like all the critters and many of us would feel a great sense of loss if they were gone.

But that's exactly the point. It's about what WE want that really drives us. It doesn't sound very altruistic because it's not. But it's the truth and if we deal with that and accept that we're a bunch of selfish creatures - just like every other creature, maybe we can come to terms with all this stuff a little easier. The reason most of the greenie arguments sound so stupid is because they're rationalizations and really ARE b.s.

I've found out most people feel very uncomfortable when presented with this in a blunt fashion like I just laid it out. Accepting it as truth means that we must accept that we aren't really the angels of goodness that we want to believe we are. But you'd think people would figure that out when they blow up animal testing facilities or logging trucks. Humans have a lot of interesting characteristics and one of the most pronounced is our willingness to b.s. ourselves for the sake of protecting our fragile egos.

I agree that values are a human conception. Funny to hear a theist say that though. I would say that humans being selfish does not mean that is all we are, we can have multiple motivations. And that values being a human conception (e.g. if all humans were gone the 'intrinsic' value of forests is gone too) does not necessarily entail an inability for altruism (you seem to blend these two). There are many economic theories that presuppose pure self-seeking as rational behavior and are often in conflict with observation though. Some derive that we are entirely selfish from the theory of evolution by natural selection. Many disagree with this including, one of evolution's most vocal advocates, Richard Dawkins. Inner motivations are just that, I have no idea if anyone else feels empathy or altruism or anything else. These are human emotions, and human conceptions to be sure, but I don't feel I have a right to decide what others do or do not feel.

[Dartwick]

All that is true and still of relative unimportance to anything or anyone but us.


Im pretty big on "us" both in the sense of humanity and life on earth.

You can diminish all value judgments if you like.
Im fairly comfortable about inflicting a couple of judgments on humanity -
1 protect humanity,
2 keep earth viable
3 protect populations of flora and fauna beyond humans.

Im not going argue that everything has to be pretty.
On the the other hand Ill argue strongly putting poison in the air is bad.
Ill Ill argue that driving animals extinct is bad.
Ill argue that genocide is bad.

You can be a nihilist is you want or a hedonist. If you are one of those then your opinion is pretty much worthless to society and Im cool with saying that.

[raisins]

Im pretty big on "us" both in the sense of humanity and life on earth.

You can diminish all value judgments if you like.
Im fairly comfortable about inflicting a couple of judgments on humanity -
1 protect humanity,
2 keep earth viable
3 protect populations of flora and fauna beyond humans.

Im not going argue that everything has to be pretty.
On the the other hand Ill argue strongly putting poison in the air is bad.
Ill Ill argue that driving animals extinct is bad.
Ill argue that genocide is bad.

You can be a nihilist is you want or a hedonist. If you are one of those then your opinion is pretty much worthless to society and Im cool with saying that.

Me likie. Human values are just that, but they are all we got! I do not believe that values are objective, but they are partly universal. So I do not believe that 'push-pin is as good as poetry' (Bentham quotation given by JS Mills).

[Redbow]

Tuffshot
The Ford gt is not in anyway a retro fit.
The current GT40 replicas owe much to the Lola racing company in the uk.
The GT40 name was sold to an American company.
The asking price to use the GT40 monica was to high and Ford refused to pay for it.

The Ford GT was built in a stand alone production site including the spray booths.
Saleene of America supply's some components to the GT's.

The current GT is longer wider and taller that its name sake.

Tuff you may have been confused by the GT 40 replicas that are still in production???

http://traditionalarcherysales.com"
You can ask Len Busbee yourself, he TRADED A Ferrari for the GT.
I am sure when you tell him that his 200mph car is just a retro fit, he will put you straight.

[Papabull]

Im pretty big on "us" both in the sense of humanity and life on earth.

You can diminish all value judgments if you like.
Im fairly comfortable about inflicting a couple of judgments on humanity -
1 protect humanity,
2 keep earth viable
3 protect populations of flora and fauna beyond humans.

Im not going argue that everything has to be pretty.
On the the other hand Ill argue strongly putting poison in the air is bad.
Ill Ill argue that driving animals extinct is bad.
Ill argue that genocide is bad.

You can be a nihilist is you want or a hedonist. If you are one of those then your opinion is pretty much worthless to society and Im cool with saying that.

Everyone's opinion is pretty much worthless to everyone except themselves and I'm OK with that, too.

[raisins]

Everyone's opinion is pretty much worthless to everyone except themselves and I'm OK with that, too.

Oh come on, people value the opinion of others, I ask for them all the time.

[Bowcephalus]

If you are one of those then your opinion is pretty much worthless to society and Im cool with saying that.

It's good to see such high personal standards on display. Not only having an opinion about opinions but also applying the ultimate litmus of personal integrity to one's opinion:
Beingcool with it.

LMAO!

[Sam Dunham]

I've never had an opinion! Does that taste anything like an onion?

[raisins]

I've never had an opinion! Does that taste anything like an onion?

It tastes like a ramp (do you have those down there?) dipped in the tartar sauce from long john silvers.

[raisins]

If you are one of those then your opinion is pretty much worthless to society and Im cool with saying that.

It's good to see such high personal standards on display. Not only having an opinion about opinions but also applying the ultimate litmus of personal integrity to one's opinion:
Beingcool with it.

LMAO!

Saw a funny comedian talking about how people think they can say whatever as long as they tack onto it "no offense" or "I'm just saying".

[Dartwick]

I think maybe some of you are reading that as a personal attack. It really wasnt. I think its valid philosophy to be a nihilist or a hedonist.
But the obvious logical response of of a society is to not value such a persons opinions and desires.

[Papabull]

Oh come on, people value the opinion of others, I ask for them all the time.

Yes, but I've noticed that you very often ask for an opinion just so someone can offer up something you can argue. I guess that's one sort of "value" but seriously, opinions aren't worth much. You either agree with them, disagree with them or couldn't care less and which choice you make invariably depends on your personal bias. People don't have opinions about what is the sum of 2+2. People have opinions about wha the prettiest color or the best tasting food or the lousiest job or the meaning of life; subjective stuff. So we "value" opinions that are similar to ours or that support ours. We reject opinions that challenge ours or oppose ours. Opinions that don't have a bearing on our own beliefs, we ignore.

And we usually give much, much, too much weight to the value of our opinions. People can mistakenly assume that because their opinion is very important to themselves, it must be important to others, as well. But that's just the ego beating it's own drum. It's not reality.

[raisins]

Yes, but I've noticed that you very often ask for an opinion just so someone can offer up something you can argue.

Good move, make this about me :) I was speaking more about my day-to-day life, that I value people's opinions in general. Surprise, people behave differently here than when they are with family/friends.

People have opinions on things that aren't just matters of taste, but matters of understanding given uncertainty and ignorance. In these cases, it is important to be open to the opinions of others and allow them to potentially influence you.

[Sam Dunham]

Hey Raisin I'm calling Uncle Ted to come and spend some time with you:) When you eat his wifes cooking you will be swayed to the right!

[Papabull]

Good move, make this about me :) I was speaking more about my day-to-day life, that I value people's opinions in general. Surprise, people behave differently here than when they are with family/friends.

People have opinions on things that aren't just matters of taste, but matters of understanding given uncertainty and ignorance. In these cases, it is important to be open to the opinions of others and allow them to potentially influence you.

I consider an opinion to be either subjective or, in the sense I think you're speaking of, a conclusion drawn from facts. I prefer to draw my own conclusions and, although I don't mind hearing the opinions of others, it's the facts from which they drew their opinions that are of the most interest to me. Even if it's a professional opinion, I want to know why they hold the opinion and will either accept or reject that opinion based on whether or not I can draw the same conclusion from the same facts.

If you don't know the facts, you don't have a valid opinion (in my opinion). Opinions require thought and borrowing someone else's circumvents that thought process.

I guess this discussion has taken on a life of it's own and has now morphed into a philosophical discussion about the nature of opinions. But back to your first sentence. I wasn't making this about you. You stated that you value other peoples' opinions and I remarked that according to my observation, when you're asking others for their opinions HERE, you're doing it primarily to secure debate fodder and not so much because you "value" those opinions. I'm also not implying that there's anything wrong with that. It's just an observation and a minor challenge to your insinuation that asking for others opinions is tantamount to valuing them.

But I digress... we've wandered so far off the topic that it's a completely different discussion.

[Dartwick]

I think there are 2 basic types of opinions - as opposed to logical conclusions.

One type is axiomatic(this includes moral and ethical positions as well as physical laws).
The other is type is a complex syntheses of observations(or mutually accepted axioms for the purpose of a particular discussion) which can can not not be reliably demonstrated but seems to be suggested.

[Bowcephalus]

............Or the most prevalent being the personal views held by many who develope them from popular culture, fad, or peer pressure........Many will agree with a view but have no idea how to relate "why" when pressed.

[Dartwick]

............Or the most prevalent being the personal views held by many who develope them from popular culture, fad, or peer pressure........Many will agree with a view but have no idea how to relate "why" when pressed.

That would actually be under the second group I mentioned, but would be worst case examples, I would think.
There is a question of, is believing something due to peer pressure actually believing?
And perhaps if one starts to believe simply on the basis of repeated explosure it has become axiomatic.

[raisins]

Hey Raisin I'm calling Uncle Ted to come and spend some time with you:) When you eat his wifes cooking you will be swayed to the right!

Ted Nugent? Oh man, I better stock up on hair products, ear plugs, and guitar strings :)

[raisins]

I think there are 2 basic types of opinions - as opposed to logical conclusions.

One type is axiomatic(this includes moral and ethical positions as well as physical laws).
The other is type is a complex syntheses of observations(or mutually accepted axioms for the purpose of a particular discussion) which can can not not be reliably demonstrated but seems to be suggested.

Where do personal reactions fit in here? (ie I prefer lobster to crab legs.) Is this a simple preference or under the umbrella of opinion? I could see it under either of your types, I suppose. I could describe why I prefer lobster, this description would rely upon the axioms you wrote of first, but be of the second type.

[Dartwick]

Preference is not an an opinion - its a fact.

Its sort of like picking a path through the woods. You opinions may guild your decision on which path to choose, and all of the paths are still there after your walk. But where you walk is a fact.

[Papabull]

Preference is not an an opinion - its a fact.

Its sort of like picking a path through the woods. You opinions may guild your decision on which path to choose, and all of the paths are still there after your walk. But where you walk is a fact.

OK, let's do semantics then. :)

I would argue that preference is, in fact, an opinion. The path you are on is not necessarily the path of your preference, even though it is a fact that you are on it. Preference is actually your opinion regarding which path you would rather be on. In fact, many people seem to prefer paths they are not walking, hence the "grass is always greener" axiom.

[Dartwick]

OK, let's do semantics then. :)

I would argue that preference is, in fact, an opinion. The path you are on is not necessarily the path of your preference, even though it is a fact that you are on it. Preference is actually your opinion regarding which path you would rather be on. In fact, many people seem to prefer paths they are not walking, hence the "grass is always greener" axiom.


You seem to have mistaken my metaphor for an example.

Allow me to try and make this simpler.

If I say "Vanilla ice cream is the best." that is an opinion.

If I say "I like vanilla ice cream best." thats is a statement of fact not opinion.


Im not trying to argue semantics. You guys are playing sematics games however trying to make the world seem more open ended than it is by blurring definitions.

[Papabull]

You seem to have mistaken my metaphor for an example.

Allow me to try and make this simpler.

If I say "Vanilla ice cream is the best." that is an opinion.

If I say "I like vanilla ice cream best." thats is a statement of fact not opinion.


Im not trying to argue semantics. You guys are playing sematics games however trying to make the world seem more open ended than it is by blurring definitions.

It is a fact that vanilla is your preference. Your preference, however, remains an opinion.

[Dartwick]

It is a fact that vanilla is your preference. Your preference, however, remains an opinion.

Those 2 lines contradict one another.

[Bowcephalus]

No they do not.

[Bowcephalus]

If they do, as you suggest, which is false?

[Dartwick]

Im not going to argue this anymore because I have won.

I can not explain subject clearer and there is no need to because the most recent issue is not with the subject but a failure on some peoples parts to understand either logic or grammar.

You can tell me a duck is a duck but its not a duck - but wouldnt be a discussion or argument. It would be nonsense.

[Bowcephalus]

"Im not going to argue this anymore because I have won."

ROTFLMAO! "I have won."

That may work in your head, but not on this forum as a reasoned rebuttal or defense of your own absurdity. In fact it adds to that absurdity.

I callB.S. Dart.

Simple question....Which of the "contradictions" is true and which is false.

You made the statement.

Back it up.Or shrink away.

[raisins]

Take the phrase 'your preference' and trace it through both sentences.

[Dartwick]

At this point "backing it up" would simply be diagramming sentences as you should have learned to do in jr high.

But please go on. Its funny to watch the intersection of bad schooling and pride.

[rusty craine]

at one time it was said that pigs would fly when there was a black president. 100 days later swine flu :)

rusty

[Bowcephalus]

It is a very simple question. Which statement is false? Still no answer.

Both can't be true and contradict.

Both can't be false and contradict.

Simple logic.

Show me the way Raisins and Dart.

Educate me.

[Bowcephalus]

Dart you'd do well to review some of your own posts.
How about you diagram your own sentence.....

"You can tell me a duck is a duck but its not a duck - but wouldnt be a discussion or argument."



Lemme make it simple for you two.

It is a fact that your preference for vanilla is an opinion.

[Dartwick]

"Both can't be false and contradict.

Simple logic."

I mean this as no comment on the actual contridiction but you are an endless fountain of humor.

[Bowcephalus]

"Preference is not an opinion."

Now that is laughable....


But what pray tell is a "contridiction"?

[Bowcephalus]

And again, though you can't spell it, try to explain it........Your "contridiction "or your sentence.

"It is a fact that vanilla is your preference. Your preference, however, remains an opinion."

"Those 2 lines contradict one another."


Humor me. Show me how the lines are contradictory.

Here's a hint:contradictories...Logic "Either of two propositions related in such a way that it is impossible for both to be true or both to be false."

I suggest you consult a dictionary.....

Or go here.....http://www.wwnorton.com/COLLEGE/PHIL/LOGIC3/ch8/contradi.htm

Or here....http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/contradictories

"Its funny to watch the intersection of bad schooling and pride."
...I gotta admit Dart, you're right about that one! LMAO

[Bowcephalus]

Perhaps the greater comedy is the intersection here of good schooling and waste....;)

On second thought no, that is a tragedy....:(

...which is a contradiction.....

[raisins]

It is a very simple question. Which statement is false? Still no answer.

Both can't be true and contradict.

Both can't be false and contradict.

Simple logic.

Show me the way Raisins and Dart.

Educate me.

I've got no dog in this fight.

[Bowcephalus]

:0

:)

;)

[Dartwick]

The more I explain the more more you clain to be ignorant of.
Read a box or something on on basic logic and read a book on grammar.

And please cry some more about misspelling and typos. Its an extremely convincing position.

[Bowcephalus]

LMAO....Read the links Dart. The more you struggle with this the more foolish you look. The evidence is laid out against you for all to see.


The more I explain the more more you clain to be ignorant of.
Read a box or something on on basic logic and read a book on grammar.

And please cry some more about misspelling and typos. Its an extremely convincing position.

Nhot az convinsing ass your your own own postes postes in spyte uf whut you clain.
When you get flustered your posts become nearly unreadable as is the case in most efforts you've put forth today here and elsewhere.

You fail the test Dart.

[raisins]

LMAO....Read the links Dart. The more you struggle with this the more foolish you look. The evidence is laid out against you for all to see.


The more I explain the more more you clain to be ignorant of.
Read a box or something on on basic logic and read a book on grammar.

And please cry some more about misspelling and typos. Its an extremely convincing position.

Nhot az convinsing ass your your own own postes postes in spyte uf whut you clain.
When you get flustered your posts become nearly unreadable as is the case in most efforts you've put forth today here and elsewhere.

You fail the test Dart.

In a past post Dartwick explained that he posts using a voice command system. I think that explains an occasional misspelling.

[Bowcephalus]

O.K. Raisins. You're dog's back in.

He never gave that explanation to me. Post the details.

Handicap?

Faulty software?

Faulty mike?

Still doesn't explain the faulty logic.

Cards on the table, dog in the pit. Make yo play......

[raisins]

He said it in a previous post on another thread. And your string of questions is so callow. You just love a fight, and I'm just not there. Go to a bar and beat up some 'hippies', you'll feel better.

[Dartwick]

Im just a poor speller and an even worse typist. I also occasionally use colloquial grammar specific to where I was raised. None of that is good, but it is what it is. If any of that leads any one to be confused over something I say I apologize. By all means tell me to clarify.

If you simply cant bear to see spelling mistakes, well thats life.

[Sam Dunham]

I can't Spell either Dart.

[LostHawg]

I couldn't even say that jokingly...