Change.gov [Archive] - ChinaRiders Forums

IronFist

01-19-2009, 06:14 PM

Our current top dog takes all his cues from Bush admin.

I wish you would stop posting garbage like this.

Sorry I meant to say, only on.
crime and punnishment
taxation
privatization of services
overseeing food production. as in Maple Leaf foods and cheeze in Quebec
Gun laws
Not seeing a global monitary crisis a week before talking bailouts
Both putting billions into American Car Industry
Taking over and proguing Parliment
The use of Military
Environmental issues.
access to information
The press's access to Government
Land destruction for oil.
thirst for power, the will to keep it

Yet you are correct, many more ways that they are not alike. Our guy is taller, he speaks well, got good grades in school, didn't own a ball team, the list goes on and on. I didn't intend to stereotype anyone, especially a lawyer. I should have said that there are many ways that the two men are alike, which I believe to be true.

It is also true that our government doesn't know what to expect yet from our largest trading partner. We might have to adapt Kyoto, because we don't want to be the only country not to adopt it. It's not Harper's first choice. But we might get shamed into it. We won't shape those policies until USA has answered them for themselves and the western hemisphere.

Then I should have said we adopt some of our policies from what ever admin. is currently in power down south. Which is so true that I won't give examples. But since the Bush admin is still in power till tomorrow; we make policies (some) based on the Bush admin. Since both Bush and Harper are "C"onservative, it stands to reason that they see eye to eye. Therefore Harper, (our top dog) takes many (but not all) his cues from the Bush admin. when it's in his intrest to do so.

I believe I've been clear and fair. But I type slow. I was too brief originally, but I did add a laughing face to make the point that I was obviously not being as serious as I should have been. I'm sorry to whom ever I angered I'll remove it, though I believe it to be 95% truthfull, it's not likely to be 100% true.

IronFist

01-19-2009, 06:35 PM

Well if wasting an hour doesn't teach me to not post, I don't know what will. I'm sorry for trying to be flippant and funny. It happens to me once in a while reading. I'm still learning. Have a great day and enjoy the site.

IronFist

01-19-2009, 09:45 PM

I'm reporting myself to the moderator forum. Gave myself a warning. I said sorry privately and publicly, so I'm not starting a petition to ban myself, yet. But I am going to keep an eye on Iron Fist for a while. :?

VinceDrake

01-19-2009, 09:49 PM

You have violated the Voice Morality Code!

You will be fined one and one half credits!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go use the 3 sea shells...

--Vince

IronFist

01-19-2009, 09:58 PM

You have violated the Voice Morality Code!

You will be fined one and one half credits!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go use the 3 sea shells...

--Vince

I've been judged. 8O

VinceDrake

01-19-2009, 10:04 PM

Could be worse, you could have been Demolished... :D

--Vince

IronFist

01-19-2009, 10:18 PM

Dread had a nice bike, but to big for me, I would get demolished :lol:

suprf1y

01-20-2009, 09:43 AM

I have no interest in starting a political fight, but I will address the list you posted.
I will not respond further

crime and punnishment - getting tougher on crime is a bad thing?

taxation - lowering our taxes is a bad thing? ( you don't think we already pay FAR too much)

privatization of services - Example, and also the list of privatized businesses from the liberal era?

overseeing food production. as in Maple Leaf foods and cheeze in Quebec - he was responsible how? (you're not serious, here, are you?)

Gun laws - Have not changed. The liberal registration scheme was nothing but a mishandled, money wasting joke. Remind me, was it $1 billion, and it achieved what?

Not seeing a global monitary crisis a week before talking bailouts - everybody saw it coming, he just didn't overreact until the band of idiots forced his hand. One might suggest (correctly) that Canadian policies have prevented us from being in as serious trouble as some countries.

Both putting billions into American Car Industry - I don't agree with the bailouts, but it was, infact, the liberals, and NDP that were pushing for this.
Harper was against it.

Taking over and proguing Parliment - He is the PM, thats what hes supposed to do. He has the support of the majority of the country.

The use of Military - I don't agree with their policies here.

Environmental issues - no different than any leader before, nor after him.

access to information - explanation?

The press's access to Government - This is my favourite part of the Harper strategy. Absolutely brilliant. IMO, there is no more dangerous force today to any party than the media. They are omnipresent, and self important.
They can destroy a person in a single day, with no regard for the truth.
I stopped listening/watching/reading the news 25yrs ago, and it was the smartest thing I've ever done. You can believe NONE of it. The reporting on the liberal/NDP coalition is a beautiful example of just how bad it is.

Land destruction for oil - Different from any of our previous leaders, how?

thirst for power, the will to keep it - no politician before him was like this, right? They're all power hungry, thats why they're there.

Pay attention.
He is a CONSERVATIVE. These are typical conservative policies. What do you expect? Suggesting that hes taking 'cues' from bush is just nonsense.
Sure, I'm conservative, but I defy you to suggest a better leader for our country. Dion is a bumbling idiot. Layton, nice guy, but NDP.
Ignattief? A rookie politician whos more American than Harper will ever be. You want to talk about power hungry, I hope this guy never manages to get voted in.
[/i]

frostbite

01-20-2009, 10:27 AM

Sorry Fist, but I'm with supf1y on this one. Harper's biggest drawback is his personality, aking to a dead fish. Fortunately that doesn't make him a bad PM. Too often we've voted for politicians who had better PR than substance. I'm not saying he' s the 2nd coming, but he's arguably the best we've got at present.

He did lower the GST after all and he did suspend the practically useless Gun Registry (Yay $60 rebate). BTW, gang bangers in TO aren't registering their 9mm.

Harper is a career economist. Ignatief is a career academic who spent the majority of his life outside Canada. Who would you rather have running the show when the economy is in the tank?

katoranger

01-20-2009, 11:58 AM

I don't know the Canadian Politicians, but I liked Bush. He kept the us from entering this recession in 2001. I don' like all the money he has spent during his terms and so of his decision's, but he has kept us from more terrorist attacks in this country and lowered the taxes on millions of Americans.

I too don't watch TV news or read anything in a newspaper. I have seen firsthand the information distorted by TV/paper reporters. (The place I work is in the news alot, please don't ask.)

Obama is most likely going to be bad for America, but it is unfair to judge him before he starts.

My ancestors did not come to America so that government could control there lives and support there every need. They came here to get away from the religious persecution and the chance to succeed on there own.

I better stop babbling now.

Allen

olddude

01-20-2009, 12:13 PM

You folks in Canada are the same as us down here.
the folks that don`t read or watch the news no the most.
PS. Don`t say any thing bad about bush,only say the good things
about him that way Canada will be a much quiter place. :roll: :roll:

IronFist

01-20-2009, 12:28 PM

Yer right. I'll go away now.

katoranger

01-20-2009, 12:53 PM

We are all entitled to our opinions.

I should clarify. I don't watch TV to get my news. I may see something, but I usually go to find another source to verify the information before forming an opinion.

If we all listened to the media and the people at TT none of us would be riding a chinabike.

We went and found true objective unbiased information before making a decision.

Allen

SpeedSouth

01-20-2009, 02:32 PM

And yet another marijuana law reform discussion is swept under the carpet and out the door... :lol:

Kawazacky

01-20-2009, 03:50 PM

HAHAHAH! So true.

Personally, I don't know why alcohol consumption is legalized but marijuana isn't. (I don't use either, and have no interest in it). I suspect alcohol causes far more problems than marijuana could.

On the Harper/Bush/Obama topic....

I find it interesting to hear thousands of Canadians moaning for a young. charismatic leader like Obama when they had the opportunity to elect one a few years back and soundly rejected him. Stockwell Day (remember him) was running for change too (remember the Reform Party?) but the media jumped on his back (especially Rick Mercer, partly, I suspect, because of his own personal interests in the election - I'm not trying to bash Rick here, but I think that's why he started that Doris Day vote).

Stockwell was deemed "too scary" because he wanted Canadians to become more self-sufficient and stop sucking the government teat.

Now, (and I don't mean this offensively to anyone) I had no use for Bush because he wasted soldier's lives on a war he couldn't finish. Plus, while he ran under a veneer of conservatism, the government got bigger and bigger when he was in. I think Bush is very socialist. Too bad the only other options were Kerry and Gore.

Harper.......well, he's done some stupid stuff and some smart stuff. If he can survive his current problems, he may stay in power long enough to change this country. Like frostbite, I appreciate his stance on gun control/hunting, but he has made some bad choices (screwing the East coast on election promises, cozying up to seperatism). I still haven't figured out what to think of him. I do like him better than the other options available.

I'm not trying to offend anyone on here. This is just how I see it. You are entitled to your own opinions.

Alaskan-Dad

01-20-2009, 03:58 PM

We could use a new $40 billion dollar industry about now! And California could use the $13+ billion dollar crop to tax. And money saved in law enforcement and our court system would be a plus!

We will see if we get Change.............
.........or if its ......................
.................. Just the same old song and dance
.................................................. ..............................my friends!

I don't really think the multi national corporate's would really allow people to have a say about the laws we live under :lol:

warrior91

01-20-2009, 09:24 PM

We could use a new $40 billion dollar industry about now! And California could use the $13+ billion dollar crop to tax. And money saved in law enforcement and our court system would be a plus! :!: :wink:

We will see if we get Change.............
.........or if its ......................
.................. Just the same old song and dance
.................................................. ..............................my friends!

I don't really think the multi national corporate's would really allow people to have a say about the laws we live under :lol:

You said a real sad but true mouthful !!!!!
I could not agree more.

kmoore

01-21-2009, 11:16 PM

IronFist

01-21-2009, 11:46 PM

1. making it illegal to talk on a cell phone while in your car.
2. making it illegal to smoke in your own car.

Those are laws here. Not trying to stir the pot.

kmoore

01-22-2009, 12:09 AM

its all good i just dont think i need big brother telling me whats best for me. i work i pay my bills and pay my taxes. if the government is going to start telling me what i can and can not do with my own personal property and what i can and cant do in my car i WILL be sending my payment book addressed to MR. Obama at 1600 pensylvania ave.

what we need in this country is less government control. i dont need someone telling me when its time to go to the bathroom and how many sheets of tp i need to use when im through. thats all im saying.

Jim

01-22-2009, 12:21 AM

That cell phone one is bogus... It is already the law in some states, and in some Canadian provinces... They make completely ridiculous claims like driving while talking on a cell phone is the same as driving drunk (yes they said this, which I guess means it's no big deal since our Premiere and Police do it), or that you are 400% more likely to crash if you are using your cell phone. How is it that talking on a cell phone is more distracting then talking to the passenger of the vehicle? The reason they are coming up with these ridiculous stats are that there are more people on the road, and there are more people with cell phones, who may be using them on the road. Just because someone crashed while they were on the cell phone does not make the cell phone the cause, but that is what these people would have you believe. We should blame the cell phone for all our problems and take no personal responsibility. And for the record I would like to state that I am not a big cell phone fan, I simply use a cell phone for communication when needed. I drive all day every day, and I talk on the phone while driving, I also talk on the radio, drink bottled water, and occasionally snack on some crackers or a sandwich. I wonder why I haven't crashed, maybe I should try my hand a DUI, if it is really the same as driving while talking on the phone I would be a pro. :roll:

Disclaimer: I am not encouraging driving while intoxicated, I am simply being sarcastic.

suprf1y

01-22-2009, 01:01 AM

I spend a lot of time on the road, and drive a lot more than most. I DO NOT like the gov to interfere with my life, but... I support the ban on cell phone use in cars 100%.
I don't think anyone will disagree that there are a lot of drivers on the road that struggle to drive well under ideal conditions (know where I'm going here?).
Sorry guys, but I've seen far too many people driving 20 km/h under the limit, in the wrong lane, with a cell phone stuck to their heads.
They are a danger to themselves, and me.

kmoore

01-22-2009, 01:25 AM

ok you support the ban on all cell phone use in a car. so in the case of an emergency and your away from home and something happens to one of your loved ones you would rather wait till you get to your end destination then power up your cell phone to find out that something bad happened. if

you want to ban something that is pointless and a severe distraction you should go after all the gps units i see people messing with at 70+ mph trying to figgure out where there going.

my cell phone is my only phone it is used for business and personal calls not answering it or missing a call could cost me lots of money.

***edit to add insted of new post***

ok if they ban cell phones i have another list of things to ban from cars
1. that cup of coffee between your legs
2. food of any nature
3. your spouse (we all know what a distraction that can be)
4. your kids (enough said)
5. any and all dash or window mounted bobbles
6. no radios allowed in any vehicles
7. pets
8. passengers

oh well enough of my babbling

suprf1y

01-22-2009, 01:55 AM

ok you support the ban on all cell phone use in a car. so in the case of an emergency and your away from home and something happens to one of your loved ones you would rather wait till you get to your end destination then power up your cell phone to find out that something bad happened. if

you want to ban something that is pointless and a severe distraction you should go after all the gps units i see people messing with at 70+ mph trying to figgure out where there going.

my cell phone is my only phone it is used for business and personal calls not answering it or missing a call could cost me lots of money.

Then ***PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE****, and make your call.
Infact, these GPS units with video display (are there any other kind?) are not legal in most places, but routinely ignored.
Nothing you have to do is so important that you must be able to talk on your phone while you drive down the road.
This option did not exist until recently, and we all managed.

Jim

01-22-2009, 02:44 AM

Cars haven't really existed all that long either and we used to manage... You want people pulling over wherever they are when they need to talk on the phone? That is often a dangerous thing... You cannot just pull over on the high way. You can not pull over on narrow roads, or roads with cars parked along both sides.

Why is it you think talking on a cell phone is worse then talking to a passenger? All I am is saying is you should not be blaming the phone. You should be blaming the driver. It is not the cell phones fault that there are bad drivers, if it was, then there would have been no accidents prior to the invention of cell phones...

I also spend a lot of time on the road. And quite often the worst drivers I see do not have a cell phone. They have poor driving skills, anger issues, a bad attitude, or are generally incompetent behind the wheel.

Edit: I am sorry if I am being argumentative, I am only posting my thoughts on the cell phone issue. This topic has gotten awfully sidetracked from it's original topic and I am partly to blame for that.

IronFist

01-22-2009, 08:53 AM

Hands free phones are legal here.
On star is legal.
Hands free GPS is legal.
Phone to the ear is not.
Texting is not.
Spitting, peeing, swearing, and painting a wooded ladder, is not.
Your bag of pot, might be taken away with no charge, or you may go to jail, loose your job and your kids. Officers discression if charges are laid.
$250 for smoking in your car with your kid is the law.

Police have stated that it might be some time before the first charge is laid. They are giving it very low priority. Those are facts and not my opinions on the matter. Sorry to those offended by my writing this, especially Mr. fly.
I'm trying very hard not to state my opinions, only the facts, which are verifiable with media reports.

Mr. Fly. "Infact, these GPS units with video display (are there any other kind?) are not legal in most places, but routinely ignored. "

At least "GPS units with video display" is legal still in Ontario. :roll:
but not if you hold it in your hand.

frostbite

01-22-2009, 09:48 AM

Yes, I would prefer people pulling over. That way that aren't sitting at green lights yakking on the phone. :lol:

Evidence? Here you go:

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

Cars haven't really existed all that long either and we used to manage... You want people pulling over wherever they are when they need to talk on the phone?

Like my wife pointed out to me yesterday. When you're talking to a person in the car, they notice things your are missing because you are distracted (Don't ask how that came up :oops: ).

Why is it you think talking on a cell phone is worse then talking to a passenger?

suprf1y

01-22-2009, 10:50 AM

As far as I know, no video display is legal in the front seat of a passenger vehicle, in Ontario.

am is saying is you should not be blaming the phone. You should be blaming the driver
If you read my post, thats exactly what I did.
You won't offend, or even bother me with your comments.
You are surely entitled to them, as I am.
Typically, I am against gov interfering in my life (You people that voted liberal, and you know who you are, are to blame for the worst gov. ever to lead Ontario), and generally do not feel that strongly on a lot of issues. Based on my experiences, this one issue is an exception.
Do I think you should pull over on the highway to talk on the phone?
No, that would be illegal. I think you should use a little discretion, and common sense. Nothing you have to do on the cellphone is so important that you need to do it while driving down the road. If it truly is an emergency, then you are 100% justified.
I own a successful small business.
I spend a great deal of time on the road, 65,000+ km/yr.
I do not now, nor have I ever owned a cellphone.
I just don't need it, and have never been in a situation where I wished I had one.
Suggesting that its necessary, and that you absolutely need to use one while driving, with rare exception, just doesn't fly with me.

Alaskan-Dad

01-22-2009, 02:31 PM

I got one for you, here in my little town we have one person who is so cell phone addicted that I have seen her driving and talking on two cell phones at once!
One in hand and trying to cradle one between neck and shoulder! I don't think that means we need a law against using cells while driving here in Thorne Bay but I wish they would give her about a $500 ticket for stupidity. :wink:

Back to the legalize pot part of the thread,
Is pot a drug or is it a Herb, most drugs are derived from plants (concentrated) or made synthetically.
Pot falls more into the group of coffee, tea, and tobacco as you use it in its natural form.

One thing that really irked me was on TV I saw Spokane police complaining about the fact that they did not make big money off busting crank labs. The police stated unlike pot growers meth manufactorers seldom own their houses and often have very little of value to confiscate, also mentioned was clean up cost. After hearing what was said it left me to believe that law enforcement put meth (crank) below pot in importance because police could make more money raiding pot growers as they were more responsible citizens.

But mostly I started this thread and posted the Link as I was amazed to see it was the peoples choice of laws that need Obama's attention and I noticed the press was ignoring it, when I googled it there are almost no hits.

As far as off topic we are in the misc so say what ever :wink:

AZ200cc

01-22-2009, 03:42 PM

Pot is the least of this nations worries, Legailze it and move on I say. Heck they process cigarettes with chemicles which would make them more of a drug so why are they still legal? They can tax the snot out of pot and make up some more revenue.....less money spent on police enforcing a lame law and boom it's a win win....And no I do not smoke pot :lol:

suprf1y

01-22-2009, 04:10 PM

On this, we are on the same page.

chinariderinthesky

01-22-2009, 04:43 PM

I DID INHALE! i believe that IF pot is decriminalized, the GOV should TAX the heck out of it and make all the money that george W spent back! LEGALIZE!... or at least decriminalize.

SpeedSouth

01-22-2009, 06:38 PM

ok just from my take on this people seriously think that obama is going to be the great green hope and leaglize dope.

now i neither commend nor condone pot useage but i think there are bigger issues that need to be addressed long before pot is even thought about..

how bout the new laws that are going to be passed that takes away your civil freedoms

1. making it illegal to talk on a cell phone while in your car.
2. making it illegal to smoke in your own car.

and by making pot legal you will be opening the door to other arguments to legalize other drugs and it will send this country into a spiraling decent into darkness from which we will never return..... but wait were halfway there anyway.

Great green hope? lol...hardly.
Perhaps you're unaware that Joe Biden was largely responsible for the obscene mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Perhaps you're unaware that Obama has already ignored the idea of marijuana law reform. Perhaps you're unaware that, while he does not encourage the use of federal time and money being used to persue medical marijuana patients, he has NEVER stated any support for it's recreational use.

Yes, great green hope, indeed. 8O

On the other hand, perhaps some people recognize this as one of the few times in this country's history when our leader is actually asking for input from regular citizens and that perhaps this is a rare opportunity to simply have a RATIONAL discussion on the idea of legalization.

Your "spiraling decent into darkness" statement is precisely why this discussion is needed. The statement is not only false, but it's laughable. And sadly, too many people have bought into the ignorant notion that pot is somehow "the devil's weed".

I know people who have smoked pot for more than 30 years. They work, have families, contribute to their communites and generally live life like everyone else, aside from the fact that they have hide in their homes to have their own choice of "cold beer" or "glass of wine". They have to fear losing their jobs or being charged w/ DUI for up to 30 days after consumption because the THC remains in their system MUCH longer than it has any effect on their actions or ability.

If you want to pull out the "slippery slope" argument...you'll need to explain alcohol first. It's legal, it is taxed, and it IS a drug. If the slope is truely that slippery, then alcohol must also be criminalized.

Either they are both legal, or they are both illegal. You can't have it both ways and remain on the rational/logical side of the argument.

And while you're worried about laws that haven't yet gone into effect, we continue to deal with the laws that are already in effect. Like the Patriot Act. Warrantless wiretapping is NOT constitutional. You worry about the rights of people to smoke cigs in their car, yet you condem those who wish to smoke pot in their own home?

You can't claim to support a less invasive government whilst also supporting invasive laws like those against marijuana.

Obviously this country has a lot of issues to deal with currently, and obviously this issue is not at the top of the list...however, more people were arrested for marijuana in 2007 than were arrested for violent crimes. To me, this screams of poor priorities and laws that place an unfair burden on everyday citizens.

While your local cops are out busting pot smokers...the violent criminals are running rampant.

Read this for the reality of the situation - http://blog.norml.org/2008/09/15/872721-marijuana-arrests-in-2007-up-52-from-2006/

â€œOver the past ten years, arrests for just about every crime have declined. Arrests for all violent crimes have dropped by 8.9% and property crime arrests declined 12.5%. Many other miscellaneous crime arrests have seen double-digit percentage declines, like fraud (-30.8%), prostitution (-22%), and offenses against family and children (-16.9%). Meanwhile, in that ten years, the only crimes for which arrests have gone up are robbery (+5.9%), drug law violations (+17.6%), and embezzlement (+26.5%).â€

Hope is welcome, no matter what the color.

Alaskan-Dad

01-22-2009, 08:21 PM

Speed South I followed your link to NORML, very sad indeed are the arrest statistics!
I also found this interesting, I'm not able to watch but someone else might.

SHOW TIMES
Premieres Thursday, January 22nd 9p | 1a ET

from:NORML Blog

Marijuana, Inc: Tonight on CNBC!

A major, strongly promoted news special on marijuana prohibition will air this evening at 9 PM and 1AM (eastern) on CNBC.

CNBC is running an online poll in relation with their documentary â€˜Marijuana, Inc.â€™ and the results so far, not at all surprisingâ€”98% of voters have voted â€˜yesâ€™ to decriminalize marijuana! The positive tone of CNBCâ€™s poll suggests that â€˜Marijuana, Inc.â€™ will indeed be a well-watched news piece on marijuana, and likely another small step towards legalization and regulation of cannabis in the United States.

link to NORML Blog (http://blog.norml.org/)

Jim

01-22-2009, 08:50 PM

Typically, I am against gov interfering in my life (You people that voted liberal, and you know who you are, are to blame for the worst gov. ever to lead Ontario), and generally do not feel that strongly on a lot of issues. Based on my experiences, this one issue is an exception.
I agree about the interfering, and I didn't vote for anyone in Ontario.

I do not now, nor have I ever owned a cellphone.
That is your case, other people have different cases... I don't have a house phone, I only have my "work" cell phone.

I just don't need it, and have never been in a situation where I wished I had one.
Again, this is your specific case.

Suggesting that its necessary, and that you absolutely need to use one while driving, with rare exception, just doesn't fly with me.
I drive for work. I don't drive occasionally for my job, my job is driving. Local. Many short hauls per day. These jobs change or come in during the day and need to be dispatched to the trucks. It would not be possible for me to do my job with out the cell phone (unless we were to get a business radio, but that is impractical compared to the cell phone). Dispatch needs to be able to contact me whenever. I need to be able to contact them...

Above is my case, what I am trying to show is that different people have different cases, and some people do need them.

That article about the study, though titled saying that talking on the phone is the same as being drunk actually explains the results below and they are not the same. That is a simulator anyways. If I did my job drunk all the time I am sure I would more dangerous then when I talk on my cell phone.

kmoore

01-22-2009, 10:31 PM

ok im just going to shut up and bow out gracefully yall have a nice day

chinariderinthesky

01-23-2009, 12:16 PM

speedsouth, you are my hero...

Alaskan-Dad

01-23-2009, 12:33 PM

More sad news

WHITE ROCK, B.C. â€” A B.C. man probably wishes he had given his 11-month-old son a set of keys to play with instead of a phone, after the infant accidentally dialled 911 and brought police to dad's marijuana grow operation.
link (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090121.wbabycall0121/BNStory/National/)

warrior91

01-23-2009, 12:50 PM

My question on stupid laws and enforcment is...How can an extremely wealthy busnessman spend his incarceration in his own luxury New york appartment...after being found guilty of bilking his customers out of MILLIONS of hard earned dollars....while Joe Average gets thrown in jail for a quarter of pot...removing that person from the workforce, family...taxpaying... :?:
:roll: How is it that a millionaire CEO can serve a suspended sentence after his company ROBS everyday citizens of their savings and retirment funds...but you can't smoke one of GODs creations without fearing Jackboots at your door???
I think before worrying about changing any laws...mabey the powers that be should levy the existing laws evenly wether you are poor white trash, or an rich business Tycoon.
Justice can't be blind if the guy with the most expensive lawyer always wins!

Or could it be that if you throw rich business types in jail "You" (the Gov't)
won't recieve a substantial campain donation next election??? :wink:

edit: atrocious spelling

culcune

01-23-2009, 01:20 PM

edit: attrocious spelling

What are you smoking? :wink: :lol:

chinariderinthesky

01-23-2009, 02:12 PM

"Justice can't be blind if the guy with the most expensive lawyer always wins"

-AMEN

warrior91

01-23-2009, 02:21 PM

edit: attrocious spelling

What are you smoking? :wink: :lol:

Too much T

SpeedSouth

01-23-2009, 06:16 PM

ok im just going to shut up and bow out gracefully yall have a nice day

For the record, I wasn't trying to remove you from the discussion. :)

I just want to see a better argument against decriminalization, if one exists.

And I'm surely no hero...hehe...but thanks for the vote! :P

kmoore

01-24-2009, 08:21 AM

i have never once said i was against decriminalization or legalization. all im saying we need to keep the new stupid laws from becoming laws then worry about the old laws easier to fight it before it becomes law than after.

as for knowing biden nope not really i think he was the wrong choice for vp in the first place

and didnt vote for obama too young and no expirence

as for macain and palin they never stood a chance since the past 8 years of bush made it impossible for a republican to win any way

and the slippery slope comment was reguarding this country in general.. this country is going to piss fast. unemployment is way up due to outsourcing... all the polititions want to take care of everyone else and piss on us... the ones who elected them, the ones who pay their salarys..

yes i ride a forigen made bike because it was cheap, cheap made cheap quality, and overall a pos. why because i cant afford to buy american made products... why because all the good paying jobs are now in india, mexico, and other countries that will work for 1/8 th of what the american will.. so now im stuck neglecting my family workin 3rds in a -10 degree freezer stocking frozen foods at sams club for 9.00 an hour.

but ill stop rambling and shut up now

IronFist

01-24-2009, 10:42 AM

kmoore: "yes i ride a forigen made bike because it was cheap, cheap made cheap quality, and overall a pos."

:roll: Ouch. Sorry to hear about the freezer. $9 is what I made as a painter, 40 feet up, baking in the sun, on the side of a building. Or when the wind picks up and your ladder starts moving sideways, I start thinking that my work is worth more than 9$ an hour.

Especially when the guy I'm working for went to play golf and made $9000 talking on the phone while drinking beers at the club house. Then takes his BMW for detailing and cleaning at $149/H.

The guy who cleans the bmw makes 140$/h, detailing his $80,000 car.
I get 9$/h, painting his $4,000,000 home. :?

Now as soon as I say that there is something wrong with the price of labor, everyone will scream Socialism. So I won't.

But I don't think $9 / hour is worth risking my life for. I have taken a 16-20 foot fall for that kind of pay. If I'm gonna hit the pavement at terminal velocity, I'd rather have it happen when I'm doing something I love, and that's not Socialism.
My chinabike was cheap, but not a POS. :wink:

AZ200cc

01-24-2009, 11:54 AM

America only offers one dirtbike anyways and they are overpriced and heavy :lol:
I make Ten an hour plus bonus...And right now I am happy to get it. PLenty of people who used to make a lot more who are homeless now.
The same one who treated me like a lesser human being because of my China bike or my job or my home are now wishing they have what I have because they lost it all. Never forget to be thankfull for the little favors in life. I had a China bike...and anyone who is bikeless was happy to ride her and came back smiling, And she still is running around....Honda quality? Hell no but not a POS by any means. :wink:

chinariderinthesky

01-24-2009, 12:19 PM

SpeedSouth

01-24-2009, 12:38 PM

in less than a week, 2/3 of out potato processing plant will be closing and im out of a job along with 64 other hard working americans... outsourcing is a b---h and the problem is not going to CHANGE. pot will be decriminalized when the "younger"generation gets older and elects someone that will make a CHANGE... or they will conform to society's standards and nothing will ever CHANGE.

IMO, that's part of the problem.

The younger generation is continuously lied to about the effects of pot, and unless they see firsthand that they have been lied to, and are willing to accept that they've been lied to (not too common these days, IMO) then they will simply repeat the same lies to their kids...and so on.

Our generation is the children of last generation, and we should be the ones electing a leader who is willing to challenge the status quo, yet we still have the discussion swept under the carpet. Our government is not eager to admit to it's citizens that they've been full of shit for the last 70 years. :(

I agree that our country has gone down hill in recent years, but it has nothing to do with the "slippery slope" agrument against pot. Freeing up recources that are currently spent finding and prosecuting non-violent pot smokers would help stop the slide of this country, IMO....not make it worse.

And I generally agree that stopping new laws is easier than changing old law, but I do not think that's a good excuse for leaving older, irrational laws on the books. It would be one thing if the older laws were not enforced....like some of the older, silly laws someone posted here a few months ago.

Yes, leave those laws alone because they don't hurt anyone....but the stupid pot laws RUIN people's lives, and I find that unacceptable.

Edit - Here's a quote from the link I posted earlier...and a part of why I think these laws can't just be ignored much longer.

"Now a marijuana smoker is arrested at the rate of 1 every 37 seconds and almost 100 marijuana arrests per hour."

Think about that.

Alaskan-Dad

01-24-2009, 01:02 PM

I would like to take a moment ant thank DuPont for the Marijuana laws that we have today!
Thanks to the DuPont family for the legacy you have created and for the good people your laws have imprisoned!
Thanks DuPont!

IronFist

01-24-2009, 01:46 PM

More listeria at Maple Leaf. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/01/23/listeria-investigation.html?ref=rss

You gotta like this line, "We have the most stringent protocol now, so of course we're getting positive tests," Smith said

U.S. officials were concerned the plant was not properly monitoring food temperatures and also noted that an employee's work boots were found coated with "residues of product from the previous day's production," according to audit documents.

What we need is less taxes, less government oversight, smaller government. Big business obviously has our best interests covered. It's just a few bad apples trying to get richer. It's not their fault. These guys are trying hard to keep as much meat flowing through that plant as they safely can. Maybe even a little more. :D

chinariderinthesky

01-24-2009, 02:25 PM

thats why we need to start getting more "product" to the kids!!!! haha, i think a tobacco company exec said something like that too! hahahahaha. i believe that there are enough "users" (at least in "pro pot" states) under 30 that COULD make a difference IF they put the BONG down and voted for somone who is not aan @$$HAT.... but then again, WE ARE BEING LIED TO... im starting to believe as i type this that things might never change.

i would be willing to buy my "product" with a 100%tax on it.
i would be willing to pay for a "pot license" yearly.
i would be willing to buy my "product" through a government-regulated facility...
that right there would make my "hobby" a verry expensive one... but one that wouldn't get me put behind bars for smokin a bowl after work at home.

oh, and everyone that knows me, knows that I HAVE HORRIBLE GRAMMAR. don't let my typing ability affect your position on this subject by sayin "that pothed is so hi that he can't even type!"

im not high, im at work waiting to be laid off "due to the economy"

Tminus 6 days...

warrior91

01-24-2009, 04:44 PM

I quit my job on the 15 of Dec./08...Boss was an arshole.
Start new job this coming monday ...$5 hr more....but I must commute/hotel....but get paid milage one way,+ $100 day sub, and knock off work @ 3pm fridays... have welder ,will travel... Saskatchewan...sucking hind teat for SO long...now we are the Canadian Powerhouse of employment. Come to Sask for some work...$9 is about min wage here.

As for Marijuana laws and young people affecting change...I did vote for the Green party in the last Provincial and Federal election.
I also take it upon myself to re-educate ignorant people...even if it is as simple as telling them about the book "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Dr. Grinspoon.

SpeedSouth

01-24-2009, 05:02 PM

I have to say....I think one of the biggest problems I have with the laws against marijuana is that NOBODY really belives they are effective.

It's like everyone is sitting on a bus, stuck in the mud....tires just a spinning...and everyone looking at everyone else and saying "we're on the way now...should arrive at our destination soon!". Yea, okay.

It is as useless as prohibition was in the 1930's...yet everyone (in a position to make changes) pretends this is somehow different.

Insanity - repeating the same steps, expecting different results. :roll:

Sorry for the somewhat random little rant, but that bugs me to no end.

suprf1y

01-24-2009, 06:48 PM

warrior91

01-24-2009, 07:16 PM

Alaskan-Dad

01-24-2009, 07:20 PM

suprf1y

01-24-2009, 07:22 PM

Ditto for Canada

And I thought Ontario was in Canada...

warrior91

01-24-2009, 07:45 PM

LOL technically....Ont and Que are the source of our problems...the rest of us are just along for the ride...

IronFist

01-24-2009, 08:50 PM

What we need is less taxes, less government oversight, smaller government.

I could not have said it better myself.
You must be as disappointed as I am, paying as much as we do, supporting such a huge bureaucracy, and still getting nothing for our money. The best thing for this country would be a huge reduction in both gov, and taxes.

I was being facetious :x

I think you missed this part.
Big business obviously has our best interests covered.
Less tax and more tainted meat. :D
But don't go to the hospital, unless you're rich. :D (fat chance)
Or get well and bankrupt your family. :D

How about no government and no tax. We can eat our nice fresh neighbors. No refrigeration required. No government, no rules, no society, no gas or bikes, no electricity, no flushing or fresh water. Mass murder and anarchy. Wooooo Hoooooo Maybe it's time to hit Canadian Tire Ammo dept. AM Gunna go eat me a neighbor!

Maybe I'm the only one who wouldn't want that kind of society. I signed a social contract. Tommas Hobbs. Pre declaration of independance. "The right for me to swing my fist stops at your nose." That's not only the law presently, that's the moral code, that people who live in society, give up certain rights, in order to gain other freedoms. Do I care if my neighbor smokes pot, or drinks a beer in his home, NO. Because his right to do what he wants, doesn't effect my rights and freedoms.

Democracy does not work. Just that it works better than any other form of government tried so far. Yes, living under Ontario's jack boot is terrible. But it ain't North Korea. I have the right to post that I don't like my leader, and I'm reasonably sure I'll wake up safe in my bed tomorrow morning. And since I don't have kids, I can go sit in the car and smoke. I don't have to prey 5 time a day, and I won't be shot for not attending Canada Day. It's a clean, fresh new city, with comparitively low crime, high prosperity. It's not a bad place to live and raise kids if you're a office worker. The taxes are high, and so is the standard of living. We only have 2 real slum parts in the city, where most people own a house and a car and a garden. Most cities would love to have our slums. I've walk through both of them at 3 in the morning with a $1000 guitar and never had a problem. I'm in no hurry to leave Toronto or Ontario.

frostbite

01-24-2009, 10:10 PM

Just my 2 cents, but I also think we pay too many taxes and have too much government. However, I'm willing to live with fewer services to compensate. You have to 'pay to play', so to speak.

I see people constantly pushing for University and Day Care on the government dime; kids living 1-2km from a school and being bussed; endless government committees that get little to nothing accomplished (Air India anyone?); official bilingualism; government departments in Quebec fining businesses for having too much English on their signs;

In Canada, there is too little personal responsibility and too many hands out to the government (i.e. the taxpayer) to take care of business. I've never drawn unemployment in my life (neither has my father, or grandfathers...) but know individuals who draw it annually like clockwork (here's a hint, if you're career only allows you to draw income 3 months a year and you can't survive on that, find another one).

The Conservatives have a saying, "A dollar in the taxpayers hand is better than a dollar in the hand of government". I firmly believe that.

warrior91

01-24-2009, 10:21 PM

I am all for a gov't and services, but it seems to me there are more and more gov't jobs and less and less money for the actual programs as more money is spent on administration than service!

IronFist

01-24-2009, 11:04 PM

Well Bozz I gots no problems wit dat.
Canadians are over taxed. I won't explain all of it to our brothers down south, they'd shoot me for living here. Safely said, we pay way more taxes than they do, agreed?

That being said, I don't think our bailout dollars should go to reducing taxes, at this time. Though taxes should be reduced, our 12-20 billion bailout is being shelled out to protect the economy. Yes reducing taxes will help the economy, I'm not saying it won't. I'm saying that people smarter than I have stated that spending that money on infrastructure will create more jobs and bring us through the ressession faster, and in a better situation than if the money was spent on reducing taxes.

When a rich oil barron says trickle down ecconomics works, I don't beleve him, but I understand where he's coming from. When a factory worker says trickledown ecconimics works, it make me want to yell at him.

The Dragons were asked how to spend the bailout money. The Zero business and corperate tax idea got 1/4 of the money. I can really see cutting small business taxes. That makes sence and cents, and starts new jobs. Tripple wammy. The rest of the money went to infrastructure in a way. Green infrastructure. Doesn't mean building total tree hugging buildings. But why not use cold Lake Ontario water to cool the building instead of refridgeration. Lots of buildings downtown already do this. It's cheaper!

If people are building the bridges, roads, and buildings with the bailout money then people have jobs. If they have jobs then they are buying food and paying rent and are able to pay taxes. No jobs=No taxes. Fine if you're a Saudi Prince, but you still gotta prey 5 times a day.

Warrior "more money is spent on administration than service!"
Man you said it brother. On that I fully agree. If they want to save money, they could work a heck of a lot smarter. It all would cost half as much. I don't want to give up the services I get, I want to pay less for them.

Then legalize pot and tax it like only a Canadian Government can. To the enth degree.

Alaskan-Dad

01-25-2009, 02:43 AM

Perspective by Tim King Salem-News.com

Does Obama Have Control of the DEA?

The group Americans for Safe Access reports that on Thursday, the Drug Enforcement Administration, still mostly comprised of officials from the Bush Administration, raided a medical cannabis dispensary in South Lake Tahoe, California.

"They did so knowing full well that President Obama has repeatedly pledged to end federal threats, arrests, and prosecutions of patients and their providers in medical cannabis states," the ASA's George Pappas said.
he DEA is defying President Barack Obama's word that the Department of Justice would no longer be used to harrass and arrest owners and operators of medical marijuana dispensaries.

"I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana dispensaries; it is not a good use of our resources," then Presidential Contender Obama said, on August 21st 2007.
Salem-News Link (http://www.salem-news.com/articles/january232009/obama_dea_1-23-09.php)

IronFist

01-25-2009, 10:22 AM

Interesting article Dad.

It's likely that Obama didn't know about the raid and it was done with very little oversight. The interesting part will be what happens to the arrested persons. Also, I'd wonder when/if the next raid happens. He has stated his intentions and the directon he's choosing. Will he lift a presidential finger?

warrior91

01-25-2009, 03:36 PM

I wonder how much bailout money will go to prop up multi million dollar wages of CEO's...
If you are paying one man( or a suite full of suits and yes men) Multi millions of dollars and he actually isn't producing any products...how smart of business plan is that...and do these people "companies" need bailed out?

If the gov't is going to give millions to each big company...then mabey they should check on how many million that company paid in legal fees, ceo wages, and trips, perks, benefits that only reach .01% of company "employees".

:wink:

IronFist

01-25-2009, 05:08 PM

Well the word is that Canada is putting 2 billion from next budjet into SOCIAL housing. Not what I hoped. The building jobs will be good for the economy, but social housing is light years from"for profit low rent housing." Social housing usually has long term negitive results. Oh well, they didn't ask me what I thought anyway. :?

chinariderinthesky

01-26-2009, 12:32 PM

in my hometown of barstow, california, a good majority of the rental housing is govt' housing. its just a cheap slum and i don't believe that "fixed income housing" is a good way to "fix" the poverty-stricken's money woes. how about raising the minimum wage to more than 7.75/hr? here in idaho, i think its something like $6/hr! i can't imagine being a single parent with a min wage job trying to feed/clothe/medicate/ transport/pay rent/utilities/etc on a $700/a month budget. and lowering the inflation rate would be nice. maybe a little delfation....

ironfist, thanks for letting a brother smoke a bowl in peace without dropping a dime for smelling something "skunky" :wink:

IronFist

01-26-2009, 01:44 PM

Here, the rental housing is for profit, and works pretty well. Wealthy people buy a few homes and rent them out. They are so spread out over the city that the lower income tenants become a part of various communities.

Social housing is usually put in 1 spot, grouping 1000's of low income tennants together. Social, housing is run at a loss, in rundown highrises. I've painted welfare housing, it aint pretty.

A while ago co op housing was all but shutdown. (Mike Harris.) At the co ops you pay 1/3 of your pay to the building. Regardless of amount, and all tenants must be working. These co ops are right downtown. They are clean, safe, well maintained and still run a surplus. These buildings work better than any system I've seen.

Toronto has lots of addresses for $4000 a month to rent or own. But at under $1000 a month there is very little. All new highrise buildings are built with multi room and multi floor suites. Small 1 bedroom starter apartments under $1000 a month are very rare. Toronto could fill 20,000 low end apartments very quickly.

ironfist, thanks for letting a brother smoke a bowl in peace without dropping a dime for smelling something "skunky"

I'm not a drop a dime kind a guy :lol:
I'm with Tommas Hobbs. He was from England. The Americans used his ideas to draft the declaration of independance. I believe he was ahead of his time. "The right for you to swing your fist stops at my nose."

Or Our Ex Prime minister,
"The government has no right in the bedrooms of the people. What consenting adults do behind locked doors is no conscern of this government."

But then again he had to say that. It was well known at the time that his wife and Mick Jagger were partying pretty hard behind closed doors at the time. :lol:

chinariderinthesky

01-26-2009, 02:22 PM

olddude

01-26-2009, 03:03 PM

I want to know were this slippry slope is so I can quit smoking weed
before I go over the edge.I been smoking for over fifty years so i got to be close to the edge.I raised my family and now a have two lovely great grand children. I would to stick around long enough to take them for a ride on my motorcycle and enjoy there company :P

IronFist

01-26-2009, 04:33 PM

if i were the PM of "canukida" and my wife was bangin a superstar... man, that would be embarassing.

so, "social housing" is a politically correct way of saying GHETTO!!!! stuff all of the poor, tired and hungry all in a 4-block radius in the most run down parts of town. now, thats giving somone a chance! i have never heard of co-op housing and it still doesn't make sence. elaborate a little for me please.

:lol:
Our Slum is Regent's Park. Not much of a slum I'm afraid. Ya it gets rundown because the gov. built it then forgot about it, but it's nothing like what I saw when I was in New York or at the bus station in L.A. 8O I mean nothing like that at all. Flower boxes and out door BBQs, cars with hub caps, and people wearing shoes. A nice clean and safe slum :lol: .

Co op's are nice! It took( I don't know about now) years to get to the top of the list to get in. Limited spots. I know they had so much money in reserve that if any work had to be done to the building, the money was available. True mixed housing. Town houses and high rise. Rich people and poor. 1/3 of your wage, regardless of total, paid each month. Most people live pretty good on 2/3 of a paycheque. Some people stay forever. Others save up their 2/3 and leave to buy houses elsewhere. Some buildings are very old but all are well taken care of. It was a wacky tree hugging hippie idea a long time ago. It turned out to be a great place to live long term.

I was hoping for clean safe low rental spaces. Co op or private it doesn't matter. Something, somehow less than $1000 for the people making $700 a month. If working people can't afford housing and food, and have to turn to crime to survive, they will.

olddude:
I know people that have been on the slope even longer than you still asking that same question. :wink:

katoranger

01-28-2009, 04:01 PM

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=calculator

Put your numbers in and see how you would fair under the proposed fairtax. If you have never heard of the fairtax it is a national 23% sales tax on all new goods that replaces the federal income tax. Everyone would get a prebate based on the number of members of your househeld to cover the tax on basic necessities. I can explain it, but it would be better to just read the website.

I am a supporter due to fact that the person making the money decides how much tax to pay. If you buy mostly used goods you don't pay tax.

suprf1y

01-28-2009, 05:34 PM

I was being facetious

I think you missed this part.

No, I got it.
I was just funnin' with ya.

Now get back to reading your Toronto Star :wink:

olddude

01-29-2009, 10:51 AM

Katoranger, I don`t think you thought that through. It looks to me like the people living hand to mouth earning no bankable income will be the ones
supporting the goverment.The people earning millions will pay less then
1% of there income? Don`t sound so fair to me. :roll:

maf119l

01-29-2009, 11:10 AM

suprf1y

01-29-2009, 11:15 AM

Fair is different things to different people. Its a sales tax, and people with more money buy more stuff.
Its a fact.
Basic necessities would also be addressed under the plan, so if you're really hand to mouth, it actually looks biased toward you.
I like the idea of a flat tax, no exceptons, regardless of income. Everybody pays a percentage.
Is it fair that some people don't have to pay because they're lazy, or made bad choices, yet some pay a lot because they're ambitious, or maybe even caught some breaks?
I think not.

katoranger

01-29-2009, 11:17 AM

The one's making no income will come out ahead. They get a prebate check that would cover all the sale's tax they "might" pay. A family of 5 will get a check for $600 every month and also get to keep their full pay check.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#3

The ones with the millions are the ones more likey to spend on new goods. Also the price of new goods will come down because the imbedded taxes currently there will be removed.

Also the ones with the millions are more likely to employ people if they get to keep there millions to spend as they see fit.

It really is not a difficult system.

Those who pay no taxes now will pay no taxes under the fairtax also.

This should qualify as a stimulus bill.

Barack's 819 billion spending bill will not help create jobs, just burden us and our kids for the rest of there lives with more debt.

Allen

chinariderinthesky

01-29-2009, 08:31 PM

does anyone else feel doomed?

SpeedSouth

01-29-2009, 08:55 PM

does anyone else feel doomed?

Not any more than usual. 8O :(

katoranger

01-30-2009, 06:56 PM

does anyone else feel doomed?

Not any more than usual. 8O :(

Hoping that congress will wake up and just say no to Barack.

chinariderinthesky

01-30-2009, 08:20 PM

culcune

01-30-2009, 09:26 PM

does anyone else feel doomed?

No, but I feel like "they" are watching me... 8O :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

chinariderinthesky

01-30-2009, 10:16 PM

careful what you say! BIG BROTHER IS LISTENING TO YOUR CALLS TOO! haha, no, i have always felt that "they" are watching me too. but if "they" want to bust me for WAY less than an ounce, i will be home at 4pm tomorrow... haha. please don't bust me, i like what little bit of a life i have left. i promise i wont make fun of you anymore BIG BROTHER! :wink:

suprf1y

01-31-2009, 10:53 AM

well, some people feel that this "recession" is a small hiccup in our economy. i saw this coming LONG before the ARM crisis and long before all these banks started using their golden umbrellas. to be honest, im going to go buy a gun so i can hunt my food here soon.

Don't forget the tinfoil hat, too :P

The recession is exactly that.
In the big picture, its a hiccup in the economy, like every other recession. Trying to paint it as something its not, is a favourite pastime of the mainstream media.

katoranger

01-31-2009, 11:00 AM

Compare the real numbers today to what it was in the late seventies. This is nothing.

Allen

chinariderinthesky

01-31-2009, 06:02 PM

im still wearing my tin-helmet! i don't trust "uncle tom" anymore...

olddude

01-31-2009, 07:24 PM

Katoranger I don`t were you get your facts but you need to find another
sorce Im 66 yaers old im retired in 1978 I told my boss to stick his job were the sun don`t shine walked out 11am I had 3 offers for a job by 4pm I drove
a truck for a living inflation was bad all over the world at the time
because the opec oil embargo but the job market was good at the time
in march of 1979 i changed jobs again I went to work for ABF fright systems they could not hire enough drivers Ilive in central pennsylvania
the company had to advertise from new england th mississipi to arkansas
the economy was that good until 81 or 82 that was the first time the company
laid any body off in it`s history quit watching fox news go to the libray
and get a world almanac and check the facts.

SpeedSouth

01-31-2009, 07:59 PM

Don't forget the tinfoil hat, too :P

The recession is exactly that.
In the big picture, its a hiccup in the economy, like every other recession. Trying to paint it as something its not, is a favourite pastime of the mainstream media.

I understand, and for the most part agree with, what you're saying about the media. They do love to sensationalize a story, and they are quick to focus attention in places that aren't deserving (ANS, anyone?)

Unfortunately, we can't just blow off everything they report as over-hyped. Sure, the boy cried wolf and tricked people until they failed to believe him when a wolf really arrived. So what about us? Do we ignore the wolf because of the media hype in the past? I think not. The wolf is real. This isn't something exclusive to the US. Markets all over the world are in trouble. Banks all over the world are in trouble.

I surely don't remember (reading or hearing about) that in the 70's.

I don't trust any single source of information. When the same information is provided pretty much the world over...I tend to belive it's fairly accurate.

Take the original subject of this thread as an example. The media hype is that marijuana is one of the worst drugs in the world...but if you look elsewhere in the world, it's easy to see that THAT is hype. Global warming, on the other hand...not so much.

It's one thing to be skeptical and desire proof. It's something else to ignore the obvious. Crying wolf is the job of the media. Our job is to filter the truth from the hype, but not ignore them entirely and dismiss everything they report.

Well, unless it's Fox News...lol...it's pretty safe to ignore them entirely IMO. 8O :lol:

VinceDrake

01-31-2009, 10:03 PM

You know, the quickest way to start a recession is to talk about one.

--Vince

warrior91

01-31-2009, 10:37 PM

I thought the 70's were awsome...it wasn't till the early 80's that the interest rates went retarded and bankrupted a lot of folks...if memory serves me correct. :cry:

suprf1y

02-01-2009, 10:06 AM

Unfortunately, we can't just blow off everything they report as over-hyped.

You're right, but its getting harder, and harder all the time to tell whats real, and whats hyperbole.
I try hard to avoid hearing/seeing any of it, but when I do, I tend to default toward not believing much of it.
Its working for me so far :P

Alaskan-Dad

02-01-2009, 04:14 PM

You have to understand the Fed !

The Federal Reserve was created in 1913-1914 in order to bring stability to the economy and yet almost every major crash, including the great depression, can be attributed to the Federal Reserve.

We are going to take a look at the history of the Fed and what prominent historical figures have said about the organisation.

Firstly, from 1837-1862 there was a system of national banks in the USA but then in 1913-1914 a consortium of 12 privately held banks got together and formed the Federal Reserve Bank, an entity that is not part of the US government. These banks then purchased notes from the US Mint for printing costs and lent them out through member banks charging interest.

The Federal Reserve came into being after its supporters paid for the Presidential campaign of US President Woodrow Wilson. Wilson signed the bill that transferred the US currency to twelve regional private banks Wilson regretted his decision later saying:

â€œI am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.â€

In 1933 President Roosevelt confiscated citizens gold and handed it to the Federal Reserve. At the very moment when Americans have needed to protect their wealth the most, the best store of wealth ever created, gold, was confiscated from American citizens and given to a un-elected conglomerate of private banks.

Read more (http://www.gold-prices.biz/the-federal-reserve-the-greatest-scam-in-history-revisited/#comments)

katoranger

02-02-2009, 09:05 AM

The fairtax may not work for everyone, but the fast majority would benefit and especially those who spend wisely.

Also it seems that the interest rates were the highest at the end of the carter years. 1978-1980 Started rising when he was in office. After Reagan took office they remained high for a couple years (1981-1982) then started dropping after his recovery strategies took effect.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/PRIME.txt

The trucking industry along with some others don't tend be affected as much with recessions. Oil prices do hurt truckers, but also every one as we can't operate without oil.

Media sensation has everyone uptight. I am not disagreeing to an economic slowdown, but this is not the great depression. I also don't follow Fox News. They still sensationalized too.

The proven way to bring back the economy is with tax cuts to the people and the business.

This has worked in Ireland and Great Britain. The proved the Socialized everything does not work. Eventually the money runs out.

Allen