quote:

1 green jobs: jobs supporting the solar, wind, biomass, hydro, hydrogen and fuel cell industries

quote:

answer 2 refer to answer 1

quote:

3 The less we use the more we have

quote:

4 Earnings of an unexpected nature and generally not due to the efforts and expenditures of the entity that benefits.

quote:

5 Over Engagement in risky business transactions on the chance of quick or considerable profit and in the case of crude oil taking advantage of the knowledge of the American publics need for gasoline.

quote:

Answer to # 6 in the long term it will not, and I am sure it is a transient issue and stand based on need and price. Not a long term solution and not even Obama thinks it is.

quote:

7 Investing tax credits into the American automakers is to level the playing field that the Japanese have control over through the American's automakers inefficacies and lack of quality. That being said The country cannot allow them to fail...not pleasant but, truthful.

quote:

8.The wealthy as I would understand from the proposals involved would be those with $250,000.00 in adjusted gross income.

quote:

9. Ours has never been entirely a free market economy...Our government either Republican or Democrat has subsidized a number of industries from farms to bailing out industries in need.

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

3 The less we use the more we have

Untrue.  The less we use the more we have left.  If we use at any rate, necessarily we have less.  An energy source needs to leave us with more.

quote:

However, i'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence. Are you suggesting that an energy source has to be infinite?

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

However, i'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence. Are you suggesting that an energy source has to be infinite?

Hardly.  Merely that an "energy source" should increase the raw supply of potential energy resources. 

Energy efficiency, while quite laudable on its own merits, does not meet that requirement.  Slowing the rate of emptying the tank does not cause the level of the tank to rise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


This also does not include the Obama World Poverty Act, which requires an addtional $845 BILLION in spending to go to the UN.  It is S.2433 and mandates 0.7% of the US GNP, along with a bunch of other fun stuff.  Take a look if you get a chance.

My simple question is, how are these things going to be paid for, as it is obvious that taxing the "wealthy" is not going to cover it?

The Obama World Poverty Act?
He wants to give the "U.N." $845 Billion "MORE" of *our money?*
The "poor" are getting very little of the "foreign aid" money now, it's eaten up by corporations, lobbyists and lawyers.
What about "The Poor" in this country?
And, many Americans want OUT of the "U.N." not to give them another dime of our money!
See? I've been saying that Obama is a *Global Socialist* and this proves it!
But what do people expect from the most Leftist senator in Washington?
It's not the job description of U.S. Taxpayers to "decrease poverty" in "the world!"
We need to END all this "foreign aid" nonsense once and for all!
The NY Times in 1999 I believe said that ,"under the Clinton Administration the "U.N." has ammassed a $30B "pension fund."
Does that mean that U.S. Taxpayers are paying for the PENSIONS of foreign "diplomats?
"Cum-bay-ah,.....Cum-bay-ah!"

quote:

"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child," he wrote.

quote:

You think that just because someone disagrees with your Neo-Con philosophy that you can just say "that's not an answer" come now,we both know better.

quote:

I do not know who's definition of "excessive" profits would be used but, if you think that Exxon as an a example should be able to make 100's of billions off the backs of the American public I certainly hope you own a bike.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark

The common business definition of "small business" is one with revenues of 6.5 million dollars and is an accepted definition. the 5% of working families issue I am not sure of as of yet the 250k to me doesn't seem to be working class. Undoubtedly I will not qualify I never seem to qualify for tax cuts from Democrats or Republican.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NumberSix

The five percent comprises the top two tax brackets in the individual tax code.

6.5 or less is small business, he aint gonna just kick 6.6 in the nuts, drop a couple layers, and then kick 250 to 500k in the nuts.

And think about it.   If Exxon, or Chrysler, or Bear Stearns or the Drug companies left the US who would give a fuck? They aint dumping large shit back into the economy, and we gotta bail them out alla time, or pay for them. Not me.

Small business is where the jobs and innovation are.  Always was, always will be.

Ron 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius: I simply ask that it doesn't turn into the typical name calling flame fest,  if that is the only thing you are going to include in your post, you might as well keep it to yourself.  .

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverMark
I do not know who's definition of "excessive" profits would be used but, if you think that Exxon as an a example should be able to make 100's of billions off the backs of the American public I certainly hope you own a bike.