Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?

User: Mr_Snuffalluffagus


Click through to message forum for reply and admin options.
Posted in Minimum wage on 2007-01-22 18:49:24

This begs to be commented upon.

Also, when government employees recieve a cola (cost of living adjustment) as a result from inflation, the minimum wage should benefit in the same fashion.

Now, let's see what this will do.......if every time government employees get a COLA, the minimum wage should benefit....ie be raised......since most poll takers believe that prices will increase with a raise in the minimum wage, then this would cause inflation to to rival that of the late 70's......think about it......if you happen to be working in a minimum wage job......I would hope you are doing things to make sure you don't stay there for the rest of your life......

Posted in Minimum wage on 2007-01-22 14:47:13

This is exactly the kind of discussion I was trying to get going. I would like to see more.
I could have asked one more question as to how the increase would affect the economy, both in the US, and worldwide, but I chose not to.

Posted in When Democrats take over in November on 2006-08-16 21:25:08

Hey, Free Your Mind.....what do you think? Someone tries to come in between our civil discussion here by spouting off so many words without actually saying anything.

It would be so refreshing if someone who wants to take and issue do just that....take up an issue, or multiple issues, and write their opinion based on actual facts and not using slogans, catchphrases or talking points they heard on the news.

I don't know about you, but I'm willing to ignore the post above. Take an issue from this poll and compare it to America's founding documents to see first if it's even constitutional, and then describe how it should be discontinued or corrected to make it constitutional. And if there is a program in effect that is indeed constitutional, research when it was enacted into law and who was in control of the two houses of Congress and the presidency. There are some things that Americans complain about our government that have been in effect for not just the 5 previous administrations, but the six administrations prior to that.

Tell you what...I'll start.....

In what American document is it found that the Government is to act as a charity of any kind? Please don't say, "The Preamble of the Constitution" with the words, "promote the general welfare". There is nothing about the Preamble that is enforceable, it just introduces readers to the document as a whole.

No, I will not go to some corner, many issues are important to me, as are my friend Free Your Mind. We have different opinions about them but we both come to the table in a civil manner, which is much better than coming to the table, verbally swinging.

Posted in When Democrats take over in November on 2006-08-13 19:02:50

Regardless of the outcome of the election, I will continue to work in the one branch of government that has had its budget truly cut over and over, while every other branch has had an increase.

Since I wrote this a few weeks ago, the primary in Connecticut has occured with mixed implications. I honestly believe that Senator Lieberman has a slightly greater than 50% chance to win reelection as an independant. I say this because so many people in that state were inelegible to vote in the primary because they are either Republican, or non-committed. With all eligible voters voting in November, the outcome will be interesting at least, and it could have an impact on three house seats the Democrats have their eyes on. Since incumbants have a decided advantage due to simple name recognition, I believe their chances of being reelected will be elevated than had Senetor Lieberman won the primary. That was a very close primary in terms of vote count and percentage. Should he win election and the Republicans retain control, what would his allegiance belong to? This will be a very interesting race to watch, and it's results could have an impact through the 2008 presidential election.

Taking control of congress may not be a good thing for the Democrats and here is my reasoning. If they do take control, then it will be their policies that will set the tone for the presidential election in 2008. If they change a lot of things that have been in place for a long time, it may hurt them if the public doesn't see them as a positive move. It actually could be easier for Republicans to run the 2008 election in a similar way to the way the Democrats do now. Democrats could actually get themselves into a catch-22 situation because they could be forced to play their hand in what their real outlook is for the United States. This could allow the Republicans to run a campaign using a "We can fix what the Democrats Screwed up" program. Actually, if the Democrats win just enough seats for the Republicans to maintain the slightest majority, the chances of winning the House, Senate and Presidency all in 2008 would be the most feasible.

So, regardless of the outcome, I don't believe the policies of the Democrats will be put forward very strongly, at least for the first two year period. They need to win and take at least a 10 seat majority, or wait until a second consecutive election with them gaining seats for them to be able to work with a mandate.

Posted in Do you trust politicians on 2006-07-18 14:34:09

It's clear that you do not understand. Re-read the question....the government cannot give any money to "anyone" as in a person. It has nothing to do with eligibility or whether or not a "person" deserves to get something for free. Of course there are things like paved roads, water, sewer, etc. The government does not own all the money and let us use it from time to time.

There are so many levels of government at the federal level that any money coming from them to a "person", for every dollar "given" to a person, a good chunk goes to pay so many people who determine all the qualifications and eligibilities and writing the rules etc etc etc....it's such a waste.....the average charitable organization has such a better record of lover "overhead" money that goes to the administration of a charitable program.