Previous 31 - 40 Next
This is where Romney's call for expanded domestic energy production has a HUGE advantage. The USA has huge reserves of coal and lot more oil and natural gas than originally estimated--exploiting them means way better trade balance of payments and WAY more jobs in the USA. And with new reactor technology, we can also exploit the huge reserves of thorium also found in the USA.
That's it. Mr. Schultz has "gone off his meds," as the old saying goes.... :-/
In response to:

Explaining Romney's Surge

rchuang1654 Wrote: Oct 14, 2012 7:32 AM
In the end, Romney has one gigantic advantage over Obama: Romney will expand energy production in the USA, one that will have hugely positive effect on the US economy because by relying less on foreign oil imports, it has the advantage of 1) weakening the political clout of the unstable Middle Eastern countries with large oil reserves and 2) it adds potentially many millions of jobs to American industry as new gas fields and oilfields are opened for production, pipelines built and refineries expanded.
"When a wise person debates with a fool, the fool rages and laughs, and there is no peace and quiet." -Proverbs 29:9 No points on who the fool is. ;-)
More like using tactics appropriate for Goebbels or Alinsky. Still really uncomfortable to watch, though.
In the end, Biden's loud and rude attitude proved to be a MAJOR turnoff--I felt really uncomfortable watching it.
The Communist Chinese tried this once: the "Great Leap Forward" of 1958-1961. The result? An estimated 38 million dead from famine because the "Great Leap Forward" ended up destroying agriculture in China.
This is a SERIOUS problem because it means the Russians, Chinese and various Muslim countries could use a "roboprogram" system to put in _millions_ of under US$53 campaign contributions. In short, not only possible large-scale funding fraud, but a possible violation of terms of service for Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Discover, and so on!
In response to:

Obama's Misery Index

rchuang1654 Wrote: Sep 21, 2012 8:25 AM
In the end, the easiest solution we can do right now is to ditch the current income tax code and start all over again with the flat-rate income tax Steve Forbes proposed in 1996. Since that proposal no longer taxes bank account interest, capital gains and stock dividends, the result will be WAY more savings and capital investment staying in the USA, which would means a way stronger economy overall and a way lower unemployment rate.
In response to:

The Fallacy of Redistribution

rchuang1654 Wrote: Sep 21, 2012 1:02 AM
We already have seen what "redistribution" can do to a country: ask any Chinese old enough to remember what happened during the "Great Leap Forward" when that policy resulted in (by some estimates) 34 million Chinese starving to death between 1958 and 1961. That's almost three and a half times the number of people killed by the Nazi government between 1933 and 1945.
In response to:

The Great Tax Divide

rchuang1654 Wrote: Sep 21, 2012 12:36 AM
In fact, this is why we need to have a 18.5% no-loophole flat tax based on what Steve Forbes proposed in 1996. If such a tax system was in place now, our economy would be booming on a huge scale, and it would actually help other economies around the world because a strong US economy means more trade with eastern Asia and Europe, good for everyone around.
Previous 31 - 40 Next