Previous 11 - 20 Next
"Wage mandates improve no one's standard of living." Very false, because it leaves technology out of the picture. Example: Local McD's employs 20 minimum-wage workers. Minimum wage is raised to $15/hour. Local McD's can't make a profit paying those 20 $15.hour, not can they raise the price of a Big Mac enough to pay for it without losing their business. So they put in an Automated BigMacker, lay off 19 of the 20 nerds, and keep the least incompetent to run the BigMacker at $15/hour. In other words, increases in the mandated minimum wage CAN help the one, at the expense of the 19 who lose their jobs. You see how this can happen every time you go through a self-checkout at the local store.
In response to:

What If Chevy Volts Were Mortgages?

tgwWhale Wrote: Sep 07, 2014 12:04 PM
Oldguy: Yes, Obozo's voters ARE getting exactly what they wanted. They are getting a lot of "free" stuff. The are getting gay marriage and legalized dope. They are getting (if they can somehow get the system to work) health insurance at someone else's expense. They are getting greenie bullc rap proclaimed as dogma, so coal power plants shut down, no Keystone pipeline, etc. They are getting Christians stepped on and illegal aliens protected. They are getting the gov't supporting the unions wherever possible. They are getting an anti-US foreign policy... Actually, they have been well-rewarded for their votes for the evil and corrupt Obozo. They are getting just hat they wanted.
The British, far more than the U.S., defeated the Nazi U-boats to winthe Battle of the Atlantic. To a great extent, Nazi Germany was defeated by the British Navy, the Soviet Army and the American Air Corps. The Brits were the main actors in the U-boat fight, the Soviets crunched them far more than we did on land (the Eastern Front was simply far larger than the Western), and the U.S., far more than the other two, broke the power of the Luftwaffe.
Geraldo isn't blind.
Geraldo isn't blind.
Correction, third paragraph: since WHAT they believe in... Gosh, I wish that TH would allow us to modify our posts.
Obozo was wrong from the beginning and now has nowhere to turn. As a doctrinaire leftist he interprets everything according to a single paradigm, that of oppressor vs. oppressed (I prefer big guy vs. little guy). And the little guy is ALWAYS the good guy. So in the Middle East he always supported revolutionary groups -- as the "little guy" they must be good! But of course he was wrong, and now the Islamists have proven that they are far worse than the thugs they replaced, in every single country. Yet if he opposes the Islamists as the "bad guys," Obozo has to admit that he was wrong all along about EVERYTHING -- that it is NOT always about the big guy oppressing the little guy, or that the little guy is always the good guy. So he and his gang cannot formulate any strategy, since the they believe in would require that we support ISIS. It would have been the same if in WWII our government had been composed of Nazis and yet had to formulate a strategy against Germany: it can't be done.
In response to:

The Dead-End Road Called Pre-K

tgwWhale Wrote: Aug 26, 2014 11:13 AM
Where in the sam-hades does Schlafly get the idea that the purpose of pre-K is to help the kids? THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF PRE-K IS TO EMPLOY MEMBERS OF THE TEACHERS' UNIONS in daycare jobs that would otherwise be filled by minimum-wage types in the private sector. The secondary purpose of pre-K is to get the lying leftist social propaganda going even earlier. Where did she ever get the idea that the purpose of pre-K -- or public schools in general -- was to help the kids? Sheesh....
Stephens is not totally accurate in his analysis of just what is behind the "meltdown" of the Zero's foreign policy. While it is true that he wants to diminish the US influence and power worldwide, Stephens does not understand the reason. Like the progs in general, Comrade Zero sees every issue -- foreign and domestic -- through a single lens, according to a single template: if there is a problem, it is due to oppressors oppressing the oppressed. In other words, there are Big Guys and Little Guys, and the Big Guy is always the bad guy, and the Little Guy is always the good guy. Since for decades the US has been the biggest guy, we must be the bad guy -- and so our power must be diminished. If all he wanted to do is diminish the US, he would have had no reason to support all the revolutions throughout the Middle East. He supported revolutions in Egypt, Lybia, Syria -- all wrong positions. He supports Hamas a lot more than Israel -- wrong again. He simply supports the "little guy" in all cases and thus is generally wrong -- because the problems of the world usually do NOT boil down to simply having oppressors oppressing the oppressed. Similarly, his domestic policies work the same way -- favor unions over management, blacks over whites, the poor over those who actually work for a living, illegal immigrants over the law-abiding.. Because his template is wrong domestically as well, the poor remain poor, the economy is stagnant, and on and on and on. The reality is that for the great majority of poor people in the US, it is their own fault that they are poor: poverty in the US is almost exclusively the product of single-parent families, where children are bred out of wedlock to get that welfare check. But to Zero and his ilk, the poor are the good guys by definition, so it cannot be their fault -- it must be that they are being oppressed. All the Zero's failures, and nearly all the failures of the progs in general, come from that same source: the false template or vision that they hold.
In response to:

The Most Pro-American Movie of 2014?

tgwWhale Wrote: Aug 17, 2014 11:08 PM
"No establishment of religion" means that the government cannot choose an official state religion and support it through taxation. It has nothing whatsoever to do with "codifying into law" the beliefs of any one religion, unless those beliefs are that the religion in question must be a state-sponsored and supported religion. "Establishment of religion" is in fact a very narrow concept. "The free exercise thereof" is a very broad concept. And by the way, George Washington was very much a Christian, Jefferson and Franklin less so. Paine was a very bad man -- he supported the French Revolution. If he was "inspired," it was not from heaven.
Previous 11 - 20 Next