-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Miers Withdraws Nomination
- Thread starter munk
- Start date
- Status
I just keep seeing this slide toward almost a medieval society where we have royal families and we are all serfs and peasants Hollow
"you think you're so clever, and classless and free,
but you're all @3$%SS!! peasents, as far as I can see."
John Lennon
munk
"you think you're so clever, and classless and free,
but you're all @3$%SS!! peasents, as far as I can see."
John Lennon
munk
The constitution does not mention privacy.>>> Dave K
No, it doesn't. If we really want it there, we should pass an amendment rather than allow the judiciary to add it because we 'want it'.
But this is one crazy world, and by hook or crook....
Sometimes you gotta laugh.
munk
No, it doesn't. If we really want it there, we should pass an amendment rather than allow the judiciary to add it because we 'want it'.
But this is one crazy world, and by hook or crook....
Sometimes you gotta laugh.
munk
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
I'm considering the Bill of Rights as part of the Constitution :thumbup: 
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,207
Pardon me for the editing, but think about it.
FYI, a provision hidden in NAFTA reduced the amount of money the big corporations had to keep in reserve to cover pensions -- by $$billions. Now, when they plead poverty, it's the PBGC (tax-payers) that foot the bill. Thank you -- again -- Bill. And I voted for the bum the first time around.
hollowdweller said:. . .
Look at history. The [Democrat] . . . party has used the . . . [African Americans] to gain votes in every election. The most important issue to these people is . . . [equality of economic and political results -- jobs for $$ and public office for recongition of equality]. We . . . [had] a president and a majority of both houses in congress for whom the margin of victory was gained by courting the . . . [African Americans]. Yet after . . . [6 Democrat] presidents and . . . [36] Years of the . . . [Democrats] controlling the presidency and both houses of congress . . .[, poverty in the African American community is as bad] as ever. This tells me the . . . [African-Americans] are getting USED.
These people went out and worked hard, raised money and voted for these politicians, every day they see the . . . [Democrats vote for measures to help the rich, like NAFTA and the China Trade Pact, that exported 1,000,000+ jobs]. They have waited patiently for their turn at the table . . . [and it's the Republicans in Congress who provided more votes than the Democrats for the three great civil rights acts and Bush 1 and 2, of all people, who appoint African-Americans to high office.] While I disagree with . . . [judging policy by results rather than opportunity] I totally understand why these folks are pissed.
FYI, a provision hidden in NAFTA reduced the amount of money the big corporations had to keep in reserve to cover pensions -- by $$billions. Now, when they plead poverty, it's the PBGC (tax-payers) that foot the bill. Thank you -- again -- Bill. And I voted for the bum the first time around.
So do I. Do we want 'good things' regardless how they arrive, even if we have to .....stretch...reality a bit? Dont know. Seems life does work that way.
Hollow, I've come to appreciate our conversations over the years. We've had our ups downs and all arounds, but I'd hate anyone to take the chance for all the fun and yes, communication, and even personal growth away from us.
munk
Hollow, I've come to appreciate our conversations over the years. We've had our ups downs and all arounds, but I'd hate anyone to take the chance for all the fun and yes, communication, and even personal growth away from us.
munk
FYI, a provision hidden in NAFTA reduced the amount of money the big corporations had to keep in reserve to cover pensions -- by $$billions. Now, when they plead poverty, it's the PBGC (tax-payers) that foot the bill. Thank you -- again -- Bill. And I voted for the bum the first time around. >>>> Thomas Linton
There are some personal confessions almost too painful to hear.
Thomas, under what justification were the reserve monies dropped from the Corporations? How was this sold?
munk
There are some personal confessions almost too painful to hear.
Thomas, under what justification were the reserve monies dropped from the Corporations? How was this sold?
munk
"the Constitution doesn't mention privacy."
A reasonable surety that one is not being spied upon is implicit in the very concept of liberty. Granted, it seems not to have occured to the Founders that so basic a truth needed explanation. That it does need it... says more about us than about them.
Without privacy, our masters can feel safe leaving plenty of slack on our leashes, while still being ready to yank them tight when it suits them. Meantime we can walk around easily, yes; but to call such a condition 'liberty' is an obscene mockery.
A reasonable surety that one is not being spied upon is implicit in the very concept of liberty. Granted, it seems not to have occured to the Founders that so basic a truth needed explanation. That it does need it... says more about us than about them.
Without privacy, our masters can feel safe leaving plenty of slack on our leashes, while still being ready to yank them tight when it suits them. Meantime we can walk around easily, yes; but to call such a condition 'liberty' is an obscene mockery.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
Thomas Linton said:Pardon me for the editing, but think about it.
FYI, a provision hidden in NAFTA reduced the amount of money the big corporations had to keep in reserve to cover pensions -- by $$billions. Now, when they plead poverty, it's the PBGC (tax-payers) that foot the bill. Thank you -- again -- Bill. And I voted for the bum the first time around.
I did NOT know that Tom! But for sure Clinton was not a liberal, and his wife is to the right of him!
I see the pension thing as a real national problem. SS is being sucked dry and now people can't even count on their pensions. Meanwhile the solution is being touted as the stock market but with most people barely paying the bills and companies basically being able to lie about their earnings and not really be prosecuted for it it's hard even to know what to invest in. All the poor Enron investors thought they were in good shape and turns out they were left with very little.
Why are the little guys the only one held accountable for anything?
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2004
- Messages
- 1,499
What is the problem here? The form of government? Is a constitutional, federal republic a poor choice for America? I don't think so. I believe that it can and should work exceptionally well. I can't imagine any system that I would rather have.
So what's the recourse for the public here? If you don't like a representative of your state, vote them out. I know that's overly simplistic, but that is how our government and constitution are devised.
I don't like most of our politicians, but they are there because they recieved votes from their constituents. While that may sound naive, it is fact. Given, those constituents were doubtless influenced by pork, or chose the lesser of a few evils, but that's no excuse. If our representation is poor, it's because we allowed it.
But what if the problem is with the candidates themselves? What if only the underhanded and decietful are running for office? A solution might be term limits. If power corrupts, limit the duration of the power. In so doing, one might limit the corruption and self-serving. Perhaps then, politicians would be more concerned about their issues than their reelection.
I guess what it boils down to is this: I wouldn't sacrifice our system for another. I feel that it has the potential to be, for us, a superior choice to any other system of government. And thus, if we have a problem (and I think we do), the solution will need to be found within the system. With the vote. The system gives the people a higher degree of efficacy than we realize.
Nam
So what's the recourse for the public here? If you don't like a representative of your state, vote them out. I know that's overly simplistic, but that is how our government and constitution are devised.
I don't like most of our politicians, but they are there because they recieved votes from their constituents. While that may sound naive, it is fact. Given, those constituents were doubtless influenced by pork, or chose the lesser of a few evils, but that's no excuse. If our representation is poor, it's because we allowed it.
But what if the problem is with the candidates themselves? What if only the underhanded and decietful are running for office? A solution might be term limits. If power corrupts, limit the duration of the power. In so doing, one might limit the corruption and self-serving. Perhaps then, politicians would be more concerned about their issues than their reelection.
I guess what it boils down to is this: I wouldn't sacrifice our system for another. I feel that it has the potential to be, for us, a superior choice to any other system of government. And thus, if we have a problem (and I think we do), the solution will need to be found within the system. With the vote. The system gives the people a higher degree of efficacy than we realize.
Nam
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
Back to Clinton and Corporations. He could have also vetoed this but he didn't:
PrivateSecurities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA) made it substantially more difficult for investors to sue to recover losses due to fraud. Moreover, evidence is now emerging indicating that the act, ostensibly aimed at so-called frivolous lawsuits, is having the effect that critics feared: Barring meritorious lawsuits in which investors are legitimately entitled to recover damages.
PrivateSecurities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA) made it substantially more difficult for investors to sue to recover losses due to fraud. Moreover, evidence is now emerging indicating that the act, ostensibly aimed at so-called frivolous lawsuits, is having the effect that critics feared: Barring meritorious lawsuits in which investors are legitimately entitled to recover damages.
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 13,182
namaarie said:
I think the problem is that we have come to equate democracy with unregulated capitalisim and while capitalisim and democracy go hand in hand, when no regulation is in place we see a slide back to what we had at the beginning of the 20th century when we had the Rockefellers and other wealthy people and the rest of the people worked themselves to an early grave.
It was only throught social initiatives such as increased funding of public education, the GI bill, and the rise of the labor movement that raised the boat of all americans and created an educated middle class. Basically I feel we are seeing a slide back to the beginning of the 20th century and the large levels of immigration rather than fueling our economic rise is contributing to a slide to the bottom due to the gutting of labor laws in the last 25 years. As the level and quality of education declines voters will be more guided by emotion rather than really looking into the issues.
Of course that's just my own biased opinion
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 20,207
munk said:
There was no justification. The provision was not even discussed in hearings or debate or in PR statements. It was hidden in the 700+ pages. Under the law in most states, it would have been illegal to have a provision totally unrelated to the subject of the legislation hidden away like that.
The actual device was to increase the discount rate by which monthly pension payments are reduced to a "present" "lump-sum" value. This means you get far less when you take the lump-sum that all the experts say is preferable to the monthly payment. This allowed employers to significantly reduce the money tied up in pension accounts under ERISA. A few years later, the word got out that you had better retire at the end of 1999 because the change would result in such a hit that you would have to work five+ extra years to be back to where you were on 12/31/99.
As a result, MANY "retired" on 12/31/99 and then went back to work as "contractors" doing the same jobs -- but with no employee benefits.
HD, being on the ball, beat me by seconds on some of the points I was tryin' to make. Both parties are parties of big interests. It's just that one party pretends to be for the working class more than the other does. In the U.S., the "working class" -- government employees aside -- is 95% non-union. No party - none - speaks for the population's general interests.
We get the govenment "we the people" deserve. The prototypical voter -- of the one in four who routinely bothers to vote -- is usually clueless and that way by virtue of their own laziness and the behavior of the information industry of this nation. Half the population doesn't bother to register -- and do you want THEM voting?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2002
- Messages
- 7,269
I disagree with this "mod" on the introduction of this topic to this forum. ?Whine and Cheese is/used to be where such topics were introduced, once upon a time.
Linus: I've learned there are three things you don't discuss with people: religion, politics and the Great Pumpkin.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2004
- Messages
- 1,499
Hollow, I totally agree about the necessity of education. I think the issue of indstry regulation, however, is tougher. It's an interesting balancing act, when you juggle the need for socially responsible labor laws with an ailing economy, especially where industry is concerned. With our high standard of living is an expensive work force. Companies export jobs to save money, because other nations' workers work for much less. Perhaps the decline, to an extent, of our economic prowess is an inevitablity. Even if not, our present economy is surely not, and perhaps cannot be geared to help the working class. At times it seems that, in modern times, a dynamic economy and working class welfare are becoming increasingly mutually exclusive.
Nam
PS: I'm glad this topic came up. I like that we cover the full gambit of discussion here!
Nam
PS: I'm glad this topic came up. I like that we cover the full gambit of discussion here!
Kismet;
This forum has always allowed diverse discussion of many topics, politics included. Whine and Cheese also has pictures of pretty girls in short clothing; should we not allow that in HI forum because it's not about Khuks? Where do you stop this process of 'not allowed?'
Many in this forum do not appreciate controversial topics. They do not have to read or write in those threads.
munk
This forum has always allowed diverse discussion of many topics, politics included. Whine and Cheese also has pictures of pretty girls in short clothing; should we not allow that in HI forum because it's not about Khuks? Where do you stop this process of 'not allowed?'
Many in this forum do not appreciate controversial topics. They do not have to read or write in those threads.
munk
Semper Fi said:
Uh---Dittos ---But what the hey ---lets get the cantina in a RED MAD fury and create maximum conflict and while we're at it lets bring in our butt-gnat
rants against :::niggers,jews,christians,guns,gas prices,murdering the unborn,the elites,jesse jackson,al sharpton,all race hustlers,luis farakan,chuckie schumer,hurricanes,fema,louisana politicians,men marrying men,men screwing pony's,and the bird flu,and how the clinton's singlehandly destroyed america's immunization labs. OR MAYBE,-- just maybe--- we could post this kind of crap in the "whine and cheese" foruminstead of polluting
the HI forum.
The people who object to this thread have put in more 'bad energy' than those who are participating. Those who are participating in this thread have enjoyed it. Ask Hollow. We do not have a problem on this thread; those who do not want this thread on the forum have a problem.
munk
munk
- Status