measure 66-67 pass in Oregon

[slideglider]

Here's what has happened with my business since 2008. A major bank that solicited us to apply for a credit line, cut it back by 75% less than six months after they approved it. Interest on the small amount we used was hiked. Fees were hiked and became very inflexible, despite the fact that we run hundreds of thousands of dollars through this bank and have a good credit rating. Business insurance, which used to be an incidental expense, went up twenty percent, after going up about 100% between 2005-2007. Our health insurance, which has steadily risen each year, along with providing bigger co-pays and less benefits, rose 25% in 2 years. Their explanation? People are dropping coverage because of the recession so they are raising rates on the remaining customers.Every product or service that we purchase from a big corporation has gone up, despite being in a recession, which should be deflationary.
The only thing that has gone down is business revenue - 30%.
I regard this exactly as it is - taxation on small business by corporations of the FIRE economy (Finance-Insurance-RealEstate). Most of these corporate expropriations happened under the reign of that most pro-business anti-regulation administration of GW Bush. IMHO to the extent that government is responsible for the crash/corporate coup, it is by doing the bidding of Banks, Insurance, Real Estate corporations, and by encouraging people to go into debt to replace wages that are being stepped on by anti-worker policies of all types.
I have always thought that there was a big difference between Free Enterprise and Capitalism. Free enterprise means the right to start a new business venture if you can do it. Capitalism means Rule by Big Capital. Those who control huge chunks of Capital (obtained by manipulating and subverting constitutional government) Rule with an Iron Fist. We should have governments that help Free Enterprise and restrict Rule by Capital

We are coming out of a collapsed credit bubble. Caused by easy credit to everyone across all asset classes. Is the solution giving more credit? No. The bank, actually did the right thing. Of course, they did it on their concerns not yours. They need all that money stored with the FED to pay off the collapse in CRE this year; and next.

Insurance and medical is run by cartels which is backed by government. It's fascism. So are many of the other big industries.

GWB is but a drop in the bucket of something that has been gaining ground in this country since it's inception. As well as other countries.

"Free enterprise means the right to start a new business venture if you can do it. Capitalism means Rule by Big Capital. " That is not the definitions. Regardless. None of us have ever lived in a Free Market system. It's impossible in a fiat based economy. Until people can use money of their own choosing, you cannot have a Free Market.

 

[slideglider]

In the interest of keeping this "gun-centric"...

The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all.

I am not ready to take that risk. I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive.

- Ronald Reagan, September, 1975

" Now Henry, and Oli, what are we doing again with the weapons, and the coke, and the Contras, and the Iranians and the... the... uh uh.. Naaaannnnncccyy! "

 

[Partsproduction]

You're very sure your right, and preach your politics like it is religion

Oh! The irony!

 

[bugeye]

Oh! The irony!

+1 I agree with you 100%, lol.

 

[mudnducs]

...

The term progressive has been hijacked by the right, Progressive are moderates that came from an alliance between liberals and conservatives who came togehter to protect the rights of individuals against the interests of wealth and power. You are emotionally expressing a comic book delusion you have about progressives. Heck turn to the front page of that rant and see if it says 'Marvel' on it. Actually, I suspect Stan Lee (who I have admired from the time I was 10) would have written something more complex and subtle than that. Hey, SpiderProg and new hero or villian, way cool.

Obama's first budget started on September of 2009, so you have a lot of Bush in your budget figures. Bush's last term was one of well over 1 trillion in debt, after running close to continous 500 billion deficts in the other years. I guess that makes him a socialist too?

The gov took over some private outfits to keep them alive, and not for some melodramatic (cue the organ) socialistic takeover.
Is that all you got?

As to being in essence a Moderate Republican, Obama has not sought to take away from private enterprise anything at all. Lets do a specific, the first parties brought into the health care reform plan were the insurance companies, drug comapnies, and the providers, and he made some deals with them that assured them that they would not be put out of business, or overregulated by the gov. That is not socialism, a socialist would have told the insurance companies to go find another way to make money because the gov is going to provide single payer insurance, period. Some socialist, he isn't even willing to have the gov take over an adminstrative function even though it would save over 10% of the cost of providing health care in our system (insurance company overhead is about 24% and the fed can do the same job for less than 10% based on the costs of medicare and medicade).

Seems like a classic case of strong opinons backed by very weak facts.

In the interest of being measured...in not ‘running full speed toward another future'. I'll complete this reply...as time permits I'll comment further on your other posts/reply.




The term progressive has been hijacked by the right, Progressive are moderates that came from an alliance between liberals and conservatives who came togehter to protect the rights of individuals against the interests of wealth and power. You are emotionally expressing a comic book delusion you have about progressives. Heck turn to the front page of that rant and see if it says 'Marvel' on it. Actually, I suspect Stan Lee (who I have admired from the time I was 10) would have written something more complex and subtle than that. Hey, SpiderProg and new hero or villian, way cool.


The term ‘progressive' is a term progs use to describe themselves. Much as they used to use the word liberal until people realized that that mean anything but liberal....it meant "agree with me, you idiot". It's evidence is everywhere.
Conservatism didn't hijack the term..we simply use it to mock your sensibilities; your patronage to ideals that are anything but progreeesive...they are ultimately, totalitarian. The big government/strong central authority you seek demands it.
We will return at some point to your comic book allusion there superman.


Obama's first budget started on September of 2009, so you have a lot of Bush in your budget figures. Bush's last term was one of well over 1 trillion in debt, after running close to continous 500 billion deficts in the other years. I guess that makes him a socialist too?

I think I covered this yesterday. Bush Bad. Bush make huge deficit. Obama good. Obama increase deficit by factor of four.




The gov took over some private outfits to keep them alive, and not for some melodramatic (cue the organ) socialistic takeover.
Is that all you got?

Ditto. (a gimme for low hanging fruit <g>) We covered this nonsense yesterday. It's never enough for progs until they run everything.




As to being in essence a Moderate Republican, Obama has not sought to take away from private enterprise anything at all.

As opposed to your admission above? "...about taking them over to keep them alive'?
You're consistent . <G>...funny too!





Lets do a specific, the first parties brought into the health care reform plan were the insurance companies, drug comapnies, and the providers, and he made some deals with them that assured them that they would not be put out of business, or overregulated by the gov.

Is this the part where Obama has not 'sought to take away from private enterprise'?
What about my enterprise? You're apparently just fine with taking that away my private enterprise, my private property, gained by my honest labor so Obama can implement your views.

Huh? Weird!

You clearly don't understand the intent of a free enterprise system...you will never see any sense of impropriety by government intrusion because you have no sense of balance. In essence, you run around like a fretting woman because the world is neither perfect, nor fair. You're first reaction is to reach for government...demand that they do something!





That is not socialism, a socialist would have told the insurance companies to go find another way to make money because the gov is going to provide single payer insurance, period. Some socialist, he isn't even willing to have the gov take over an adminstrative function even though it would save over 10% of the cost of providing health care in our system (insurance company overhead is about 24% and the fed can do the same job for less than 10% based on the costs of medicare and medicade).

Not socialism? You're a freaking riot dude.




Government control over the means of production, no matter how you try to smoke screen, redirect, or redfine, it...is still AT LEAST socialism. Call it what you like. I call it something else.




Seems like a classic case of strong opinons backed by very weak facts.

Indeed.



.

 

[mudnducs]

+1 I agree with you 100%, lol.

This is just delicious.

 

[Stomper]

" Now Henry, and Oli, what are we doing again with the weapons, and the coke, and the Contras, and the Iranians and the... the... uh uh.. Naaaannnnncccyy! "

LOL... That is funnier to me than it might be to most, you see, I was there in the mid-late 80's... on the ground, helping to contain the Sandinistas... for all the good it did, I hear Ortega is BACK IN POWER!!

 

[bugeye]

In the interest of being measured…in not ‘running full speed toward another future’. I’ll complete this reply…as time permits I’ll comment further on your other posts/reply.

.

Well I tried to take you on point by point, but I failed to understand any of your points due to them being subjective, vague and poorly defined.

For example you might elaborate on how Obama is after your own enterprise, or could have actualy made some response to my Health Care specific other than the equivalent of 'yeah sure'.

If you just know something to be true, and that it requires no proof or argument, just that sort of assured gut feeling, then just say that, because that has more value than pretending to present arguments. I had that gut feeling about Dubya, and it turned out my gut wasn't even close to the revulsion that I had for him after I had some 'events' to look at.

However, if my gut knows so darn much how do I explain its endless craving for food so bad it should come packaged with a defribulator?

 

[mudnducs]

Well I tried to take you on point by point, but I failed to understand any of your points due to them being subjective, vague and poorly defined.

For example you might elaborate on how Obama is after your own enterprise, or could have actualy made some response to my Health Care specific other than the equivalent of 'yeah sure'.

If you just know something to be true, and that it requires no proof or argument, just that sort of assured gut feeling, then just say that, because that has more value than pretending to present arguments. I had that gut feeling about Dubya, and it turned out my gut wasn't even close to the revulsion that I had for him after I had some 'events' to look at.

However, if my gut knows so darn much how do I explain its endless craving for food so bad it should come packaged with a defribulator?

It is pointless to argue with a progressive. A prog will tell you over and over again about the conservative minds inability to digest the intricacies of their "this or that...fill in the argument".
I ask. What's the point? They can't even get the basics right! They claim to not even understand what socialism is but, somehow, we are the simpletons who don't want to follow their enlightened path. You show no understanding of what our Founders left us. Your aspirations spit on their graves.

Arguing with a prog is, by it's nature, futile. They would argue whether a car should run on premium or regular.....while driving the car off a cliff.

So, I'll tell you what. You run toward your new future with all due haste...just know that I am going to be standing in front of you ready to trip you or punch your political lights out at every single opportunity.

I have had it with progs/libs/socialists/commies. You can't have my country. You can't wipe your butt with my Constitution one day longer with impunity. Your day in the sun is done and my goal is to see progeeeesive doctrine be kicked back under the rocks it oozed out from under. I simply don't care what your agruments are any longer.

It's time for socialists/progreeeesives/radical libs,...whatever they want to call themselves these days (they are recognized by their deeds not by their words) to worry about conservatism, cause it's coming like a runaway train.

 

[Stomper]

+1

Now you know what I have gone through with this dope, and more or less made the same final post (telling him to go pound sand) as you have... it's what happens when you deal with those who ascribe to moral relativism... the "what is truth?", crowd. They ALWAYS move the goal post, they ALWAYS pervert/twist things into a lie to suit their purposes (the ends justify the means; Saul Alinsky - Rules For Radicals).... black is white, up is down, light is dark, left is right, progressives are moderates/conservatives (LMAO), etc.


Having a true and meaningful dialogue with a progressive isn't possible, because it always comes down to them saying saying a conservative is crazy, deluded, stupid, ignorant, etc.... I suspect that eventually they will have to be dealt with like the Nazis had to be; utter physical defeat, because ultimately... that's all they'll understand.

 

[mudnducs]

+1

Now you know what I have gone through with this dope, and more or less made the same final post (telling him to go pound sand) as you have... it's what happens when you deal with those who ascribe to moral relativism... the "what is truth?", crowd. They ALWAYS move the goal post, they ALWAYS pervert/twist things into a lie to suit their purposes (the ends justify the means; Saul Alinsky - Rules For Radicals).... black is white, up is down, light is dark, left is right, progressives are moderates/conservatives (LMAO), etc.


Having a true and meaningful dialogue with a progressive isn't possible, because it always comes down to them saying saying a conservative is crazy, deluded, stupid, ignorant, etc.... I suspect that eventually they will have to be dealt with like the Nazis had to be; utter physical defeat, because ultimately... that's all they'll understand.

Yes. Turn Alinsky back on their creepy selves....use their methods against them. There is no excess in freedom.

The pressure conservatives are dispensing is working....you can see it everywhere....except in Oregon maybe. You see signs of The Obamessiah scrambling to move to the "middle" while trying not to offend his radical socialist base by not appearing to move to the middle (wink wink). Lying slug.

Pelosi is in trouble, Reid is politically dead and progreeeesives (both Type D and Type R) on Capitol Hill are getting the message...You're Friggin Fired!

Progs don't have the balls to come straight at you...their true policy is unpalatable to Americans unless it's shrouded in terms like "spreading the wealth" or "commuuunity" or "for the chiiildren"...so I'm not worried about armed confrontation directly with them.
Their danger comes from their influence in the halls of power where they can direct real military/police powers over us by instituted policy.

There is no shortage of the Wesley Mouch's of the world.

 

[bugeye]

It is pointless to argue with a progressive. A prog will tell you over and over again about the conservative minds inability to digest the intricacies of their "this or that...fill in the argument".
I ask. What's the point? They can't even get the basics right! They claim to not even understand what socialism is but, somehow, we are the simpletons who don't want to follow their enlightened path. You show no understanding of what our Founders left us. Your aspirations spit on their graves.

Arguing with a prog is, by it's nature, futile. They would argue whether a car should run on premium or regular.....while driving the car off a cliff.

So, I'll tell you what. You run toward your new future with all due haste...just know that I am going to be standing in front of you ready to trip you or punch your political lights out at every single opportunity.

I have had it with progs/libs/socialists/commies. You can't have my country. You can't wipe your butt with my Constitution one day longer with impunity. Your day in the sun is done and my goal is to see progeeeesive doctrine be kicked back under the rocks it oozed out from under. I simply don't care what your agruments are any longer.

It's time for socialists/progreeeesives/radical libs,...whatever they want to call themselves these days (they are recognized by their deeds not by their words) to worry about conservatism, cause it's coming like a runaway train.

Nuts!

 

[mudnducs]

Nuts!

yes yes

 

[komodo_dragon]

It is pointless to argue with a progressive. A prog will tell you over and over again about the conservative minds inability to digest the intricacies of their "this or that...fill in the argument".
I ask. What's the point? They can't even get the basics right! They claim to not even understand what socialism is but, somehow, we are the simpletons who don't want to follow their enlightened path. You show no understanding of what our Founders left us. Your aspirations spit on their graves.

Arguing with a prog is, by it's nature, futile. They would argue whether a car should run on premium or regular.....while driving the car off a cliff.

So, I'll tell you what. You run toward your new future with all due haste...just know that I am going to be standing in front of you ready to trip you or punch your political lights out at every single opportunity.

I have had it with progs/libs/socialists/commies. You can't have my country. You can't wipe your butt with my Constitution one day longer with impunity. Your day in the sun is done and my goal is to see progeeeesive doctrine be kicked back under the rocks it oozed out from under. I simply don't care what your agruments are any longer.

It's time for socialists/progreeeesives/radical libs,...whatever they want to call themselves these days (they are recognized by their deeds not by their words) to worry about conservatism, cause it's coming like a runaway train.

Another favorite tactic of progressives/whatever is to accuse you or your "side" of doing a particular thing. Then when you point out the fact that they or their "side" does the exact same thing, rendering them a hypocrite, they just ignore the facts and blithely continue to tell you how wrong you are for doing the very thing they do.

"Do as I say, not as I do" is one of their mantras.

 

[MrsAndy]

That's funny, the term progressives as it has been used by the rest of the english speaking world for the last hundred years never applied to socialists, communists, or fascists, progressives are moderates. So your list is simply wrong. Of course, I'm still waiting for one of you brilliant remakers of this term you so love to define it.

Hello, this is a long thread, but I was interested in responding. This is your warning that it is possible someone posted something similar and I haven't read it yet.

First, the argument on how much this is going to cost is irrelevent, but continue to fight about it if you like. The truth is, if it's generating revenue that's what it will cost. They expect this to make a lot of money, so it's costing us that amount of money. During a period of time that is truly (and not arguably) economically difficult, get your hand out of our pockets. For goodness sake, learn how to control your spending the way ALL of us have had to do. You can't continue to give yourself a pay increase when the business is sinking. That includes the government business. The point really here is this: Oregonians scream rape if you try to pass a sales tax, right? ANY tax that is going to be applied to gross receipts is a sales tax. No matter what! That's not the hard to grasp is it? And, the tax will be felt as double, at least for the first year (2010). This isn't difficult to comprehend either. IF you retro a tax back from the year it was passed, then the only way for the company to recoup that loss, is to assess the tax that will be paid for 2009 in 2010. Hense, the doubling. Is it a lot of money? Not so much per person. You are correct about that. But, we are already assessed an extreme property tax, income tax, etc. I am DONE. Control yourselves. And quite frankly I thought everyone else was really done as well. I was really surprised to see this pass. Honestly, in economic problems with jobs leaving rather quickly or business just going under, how can you pass this?

Imagine the car industry--a great example of a corporation that is just hanging on. What is this going to do to the few left here? Gross receipts on vehicles is a lot. They already make minimal on new car sales. Anyway, it doesn't matter the price. The point is we can't afford anymore. Even 1&#37; more.

So, I was wondering if my right wing idiocy was misinformed about progressives. So here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era (this is a factoid about the US) so you who think that progressiveness not socialism will be surprised to find at the bottom of the page a huge number of self proclaimed socialists. Communism is the progression of socialism. The term "progressive" comes from this fact. There are a number of arguments providing interesting connections suggesting that the progressive movement (note the dates) helped to cause the Great Depression. So, maybe you left commies should check YOUR facts, and educate yourselves. Don't worry, once you do get educated, we welcome reformed commies with open arms.

I hope we can keep our heads above water, because my family is seriously thinking about bailing on you guys. We are very blessed with jobs (both of us) and are doing quite well, but it's only by the grace of God. Take the time to thank Him for your blessings as well.

Treading water with the rest of the great NW.

 

[bugeye]

Another favorite tactic of progressives/whatever is to accuse you or your "side" of doing a particular thing. Then when you point out the fact that they or their "side" does the exact same thing, rendering them a hypocrite, they just ignore the facts and blithely continue to tell you how wrong you are for doing the very thing they do.

"Do as I say, not as I do" is one of their mantras.

Another really horrible tactic they have to present facts and make logical arguments. That Bugeye guy is the worst too, he really would make sense to sane people, lucky the whole darn tag team is immune to his nasty tricks!

 

[bugeye]

Hello, this is a long thread, but I was interested in responding. This is your warning that it is possible someone posted something similar and I haven't read it yet.

First, the argument on how much this is going to cost is irrelevent, but continue to fight about it if you like. The truth is, if it's generating revenue that's what it will cost. They expect this to make a lot of money, so it's costing us that amount of money. During a period of time that is truly (and not arguably) economically difficult, get your hand out of our pockets. For goodness sake, learn how to control your spending the way ALL of us have had to do. You can't continue to give yourself a pay increase when the business is sinking. That includes the government business. The point really here is this: Oregonians scream rape if you try to pass a sales tax, right? ANY tax that is going to be applied to gross receipts is a sales tax. No matter what! That's not the hard to grasp is it? And, the tax will be felt as double, at least for the first year (2010). This isn't difficult to comprehend either. IF you retro a tax back from the year it was passed, then the only way for the company to recoup that loss, is to assess the tax that will be paid for 2009 in 2010. Hense, the doubling. Is it a lot of money? Not so much per person. You are correct about that. But, we are already assessed an extreme property tax, income tax, etc. I am DONE. Control yourselves. And quite frankly I thought everyone else was really done as well. I was really surprised to see this pass. Honestly, in economic problems with jobs leaving rather quickly or business just going under, how can you pass this?

Imagine the car industry--a great example of a corporation that is just hanging on. What is this going to do to the few left here? Gross receipts on vehicles is a lot. They already make minimal on new car sales. Anyway, it doesn't matter the price. The point is we can't afford anymore. Even 1&#37; more.

So, I was wondering if my right wing idiocy was misinformed about progressives. So here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era (this is a factoid about the US) so you who think that progressiveness not socialism will be surprised to find at the bottom of the page a huge number of self proclaimed socialists. Communism is the progression of socialism. The term "progressive" comes from this fact. There are a number of arguments providing interesting connections suggesting that the progressive movement (note the dates) helped to cause the Great Depression. So, maybe you left commies should check YOUR facts, and educate yourselves. Don't worry, once you do get educated, we welcome reformed commies with open arms.

I hope we can keep our heads above water, because my family is seriously thinking about bailing on you guys. We are very blessed with jobs (both of us) and are doing quite well, but it's only by the grace of God. Take the time to thank Him for your blessings as well.

Treading water with the rest of the great NW.

I looked at that list of names and found these on there too!

Charles Beard, historian and political scientist
Louis Brandeis, lawyer and Supreme Court justice
William Jennings Bryan, Democratic presidential nominee
Andrew Carnegie, steel and philanthropy
Thomas Edison, inventor
Henry Ford, automaker
William James, philosopher
Robert M. La Follette, Sr., Wisconsin politician
Walter Lippmann, journalist
Theodore Roosevelt, president

So, you are pesenting a half sided argument for what reason?
Do you even consider the other half of the argument, the one you don't say?
You must have never met a commie if you think I'm one, I've met plenty of them, they are the lefites as crazy as most of your righties, they also need no facts, and also butcher any you are foolish enough to toss into their cages.

 

[komodo_dragon]

Another really horrible tactic they have to present facts and make logical arguments. That Bugeye guy is the worst too, he really would make sense to sane people, lucky the whole darn tag team is immune to his nasty tricks!

It would be a breath of fresh air if that bugeye guy would actually make a factual argument, instead of parroting the leftwing meme.

 

[Stomper]

You must have never met a commie if you think I'm one, I've met plenty of them, they are the lefites as crazy as most of your righties, they also need no facts, and also butcher any you are foolish enough to toss into their cages.

Yeah, I've met a few commies in my time... in the Central American Jungles (for real), I relieved them of their AK's and RPG's... and I made DAMNED sure THOSE particular commies didn't need them any longer.

 

[MrsAndy]

I looked at that list of names and found these on there too!

Charles Beard, historian and political scientist
Louis Brandeis, lawyer and Supreme Court justice
William Jennings Bryan, Democratic presidential nominee
Andrew Carnegie, steel and philanthropy
Thomas Edison, inventor
Henry Ford, automaker
William James, philosopher
Robert M. La Follette, Sr., Wisconsin politician
Walter Lippmann, journalist
Theodore Roosevelt, president

So, you are pesenting a half sided argument for what reason?
Do you even consider the other half of the argument, the one you don't say?
You must have never met a commie if you think I'm one, I've met plenty of them, they are the lefites as crazy as most of your righties, they also need no facts, and also butcher any you are foolish enough to toss into their cages.

WOW! Ok, sorry I need to explain this! I thought everyone was teachable, but I have been wrong before and it appears that I am wrong again.

See the quote attached to the original message. It's at the top (of my message--the original one I posted). Do you see where some ignorant person stated that.....here let me post it....again....

"That's funny, the term progressives as it has been used by the rest of the english speaking world for the last hundred years never applied to socialists, communists, or fascists, progressives are moderates."

I thought I was speaking English (should be capped, btw) but maybe what I refer to English, you don't??!! So, I was NOT giving a half sided argument. The entire link was posted, not half posted. And the point of giving that to you was to let people look and see. Self proclaimed socialists are not moderates. Now, I will concur that some people on that list are moderates, but not that all you have listed would be deemed so. I would also argue that those moderates were not an integral part of the movement itself but associated with it.

I tend to side with doing everything within our power to protect the environment and not to openly destroy land. I am very far from being a nola, however. I could be associated with doing things for the environment but not an Environmentalist. This was NOT to start an argument about the environment, it was an example. You will probably get side tracked though.

So, in conclusion. I really don't waste my time long with people that are a waste of organic material. I have much more important things to spend my time doing. I need to read more about survival skills because if this is the thought process of enough people, they will be running our country into the ground faster than I imagined.

Have a nice night!