RE: SCOTT WALKER for President

RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:25:34 AM)
Those 'facts' are not consistent with numerous other 'facts' presented. The average compensation (however it is calculated which you have presented with no facts) is nowhere near what the average compensation of a wisconsin legislator is.

tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:30:19 AM)
quote: Sooner or later, MN. Sooner or later. Are you aware 0bama0 uses a Ct SSAN? First, its Taitz who is bringing suit... as expected. http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=261033 Second, Mine, according to the list, my son, who was born in SC, and who I filed for his SSN in NC, was issued a PA SSN... 187. My own, 244, was issued in NJ, but according to this site... http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/stateweb.htm ....It should have been issued to someone in NC. Now they are all given out randomly. This will hold no more water than the birthers birth certificate cries. Is there an explanation? In 1975, Obama was too young to work legally, Carole Bengele Gilbert at Associated Content points out. She speculates he might have been paid "under the table" for his Baskin Robbins labors. In this scenario, he might not have been given a Social Security number until he was 16 or 17. What about the Connecticut number? Numbers are assigned based on the return address on the request envelope, not residency. And Gilbert notes that Obama's father, also named Barack Hussein Obama, lived in Connecticut for several years. "Dr. Conspiracy" at the site Obama Conspiracy Theories hazards the guess that -- assuming the 042-xx-xxxx number really is Obama's -- the president "got his SSN as a child living in Indonesia and the application was just processed in Connecticut." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/11/obama-social-security-num_n_609299.html Interesting how this story has been around for a year before it popped up on these boards.

Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:40:44 AM)
If no one served "evil" businesses (which in reality Republicans are standing up for all taxpayers), then most businesses which wished to survive would leave Wisconsin altogether. Then what would your precious union goons do for funding? And heres a news flash, raising taxes in a deep recession is an incredibly bad idea. Businesses are already going under and families are already hurting. Why is it such a crime to ask public employees to give up just a little bit of that taxpayer teat theyve become so addicted to quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: "A bill that would abolish most of public employees' collective bargaining rights was "incredibly fair" [by Gov. Scott Walker] and would help the state avoid sweeping job cuts..." Source Yes, a REPUBLICAN, feels the bill is 'incredibly fair' towards Unions. Who do Republicans serve? Big Business, duh. Now why would Big Business want to remove the Union's ability to represent the middle and lower class of our nation: PROFIT. One of these days, conservatives are going to realize that the Republican party really doesn't represent them. They never really have. It is funny to watch conservative be completely lied to, THEN, vote the liars back into office. quote: From same source... "We're broke. Like nearly every other state across the country, we have a major deficit," he told Todd on The Daily Rundown program, saying they were going toward a $3.6 billion deficit. Gosh, you might just have to.....GASP.....raise taxes. Why is this so incredibly hard for conservatives to figure out? NOBODY, wants to raise taxes, but moderaters and liberals seem to agree it'll actually do alot of good. $10 Billion buys alot of jobs. $100 Billion buys more then a 100 times the $10 Billion. By removing billions, all Republicans are doing, is adding more people to the unemployment line.....during a high unemployment recession (can you say 'retarded thought process'?). quote: From the same source... "Overall what we're talking about is something that's incredibly fair — it applies to me and my family, to my cabinet, the legislature as well as all the other workers at the state and local government level," Walker added. REALLY? His family uses collective bargaining to decide things? So daddy play's 'Evil Management' while the kids play 'The Union' and the wife is 'The Goverment' that mediates the whole thing? Poor choice of words on his part.... And I dont think the legislature decides things using collective bargaining. Call it a hunch.... While we are on the topic of Gov. Scott Walker.... Is he forgoing 100% of his pay, benefits, and perks, as a show of 'good faith' that he is doing EVERYTHING to keep the taxpayer from having to be burden by financial problem he's helped create? How about every Republican member of the legislature (who have helped engineer many of the current financial problems)? After all, how much did it cost Gov. Walker to get in to office in the first place? A few million? Wouldn't that imply the guy is loaded enough to weather not picking up a penny from the state?

Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:48:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Why would I or anyone pay attention to your and mnots mindless trollishness? The facts as I presented them are direct, obvious, and to the point. The best you poor mindless pathetic libtard trolls can hope for is to muddy the waters and encourage your sycophants to play along as you ignore reality. Sadly for you leftists one can only ignore reality for so long before doing so becomes unbearably painful, which is exactly why things are swinging so hard to the right these days. quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I expected much. You seem to turn a blind eye to anything that doesn't conform your tiny-minded idea of what the world is. Once again, you just don't fucking pay attention. Remember previous posts where I have come out in favor of Cap punishment. blaming unions for ruining the US auto industry, Advocating harsher punishments for criminals, saying that people who arent going to work at being parents shouldn't breed, recalling voting for McCain and why? Does that sound like a liberal? The more you type, the more you sound like the kind of person that gives REAL conservatives a bad name. Folks that are politically on the fence look at you the same way some of us look at pedophile priests. Intellectually, we know that folks like you (and they) are a HUGE minority and not representative of the group as a whole but since you get (DEMAND) all the attention you are actually seen as the norm and, as a result, are actually a liability to your cause. Maybe, someday, you will get it through your skull that your attention whorishness and deliberate ignorance actually drive others TO the Dems instead of pulling them away. Until then, you and your ilk are Obama's best allies.

mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:48:57 AM)
Except that reality does not jibe with rushfelching weltanschauung. Minnesota ( a much higher taxed wisconsin border state) is the home of the most fortune 500 companies in the United States. If the republicans in wisconsin don't want their cracker kraut cheesheads to get an education, who am I to give a fuck?

tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:48:57 AM)
quote: And heres a news flash, raising taxes in a deep recession is an incredibly bad idea. Businesses are already going under and families are already hurting. Why is it such a crime to ask public employees to give up just a little bit of that taxpayer teat theyve become so addicted to Of course not. So when are the politicians going to start? I think its a wonderful idea!

Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:54:13 AM)
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/stateweb.htm Interesting. According to this, I have an Indiana SSN which was issued in the mid 70's and I have neither lived nor have I or any member of My immediate family ever lived or worked there.

Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:57:16 AM)
This nonsense of demanding Conservative politicians go without pay is just another way of obfuscating the real issues. The bottom line is, I doubt liberals will be happy with all the "evil" businesses theyve forced under until unemployment goes from our current 10% (or so) unemployment rate up to around 25% or 30%. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: And heres a news flash, raising taxes in a deep recession is an incredibly bad idea. Businesses are already going under and families are already hurting. Why is it such a crime to ask public employees to give up just a little bit of that taxpayer teat theyve become so addicted to Of course not. So when are the politicians going to start? I think its a wonderful idea!

tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:58:43 AM)
Its been common knowledge that the numbers arent issued as they are "supposed" to be. Why this is an issue now, I have no clue, other than a few racists who want the "white house" to remain "white". The Area Number, the first three digits, is assigned by the geographical region. Prior to 1972, cards were issued in local Social Security offices around the country and the Area Number represented the office code in which the card was issued. This did not necessarily have to be in the area where the applicant lived, since a person could apply for their card in any Social Security office. Since 1972, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant's mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, either prior to 1972, nor since. Generally, numbers were assigned beginning in the northeast and moving westward, so that people on the east coast had the lowest numbers and those on the west coast had the highest numbers. As the areas assigned to a locality are exhausted, new areas from the pool are assigned, so some states have noncontiguous groups of numbers. Read more: How does the government come up with somebodys social security numbers..is it just random numbers given out? \| Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/340722#ixzz1EcaOGGyf

Musicmystery -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 10:59:25 AM)
quote: In many districts the total compensation (or taxpayer expense per teacher) is well over 100k / year. No, not at all, as your own link shows. Look--either Wisconsin and the teachers come to an agreement, or they don't. If Wisconsin doesn't want to honor agreements, then it shouldn't enter in to them. If no agreement is possible, then both parties will move on. Have you ever been part of any business negotiation?

Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:00:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity This nonsense of demanding Conservative politicians go without pay is just another way of obfuscating the real issues. The bottom line is, I doubt liberals will be happy with all the "evil" businesses theyve forced under until unemployment goes from our current 10% (or so) unemployment rate up to around 25% or 30%. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: And heres a news flash, raising taxes in a deep recession is an incredibly bad idea. Businesses are already going under and families are already hurting. Why is it such a crime to ask public employees to give up just a little bit of that taxpayer teat theyve become so addicted to Of course not. So when are the politicians going to start? I think its a wonderful idea! Actually, the new Republican Governor of TN has agreed to keep up the practice that his Democrat predecessor started by not accepting any salary for his position. His predecessor was there for 8 years and Haslem's 4 years (I hope 8 if he does a good job) will put several Million $ back into the state's coffers.

mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:02:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity This nonsense of demanding Conservative politicians go without pay is just another way of obfuscating the real issues. The bottom line is, I doubt liberals will be happy with all the "evil" businesses theyve forced under until unemployment goes from our current 10% (or so) unemployment rate up to around 25% or 30%. Nobody is demanding that politicians go without pay, but they are for all intents and purposes government employees, and they are asking government employees (themselves excepted) to take deep cuts to balance the budget. And isn't teaching a big business? I see you are definitely a socialistmarxist/communist in your application of evil.

tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:03:32 AM)
quote: This nonsense of demanding Conservative politicians go without pay is just another way of obfuscating the real issues. The bottom line is, I doubt liberals will be happy with all the "evil" businesses theyve forced under until unemployment goes from our current 10% (or so) unemployment rate up to around 25% or 30%. Current unemployment is 9%, according to the U3 numbers. 16.1 for the U6. And why is it obfuscating the real issue when its been politicians who have granted themselves a pay raise. And I am speaking across party lines here. Want the american people who work for the public to take cost cutting measures in their paychecks? Lead by example.

Musicmystery -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:03:46 AM)
Exactly. If "we all have to give a little," then instead of going after selected segments, just raise taxes on everyone, all democratic like. Or if you can't, then decide what you can't afford and go without.

Sanity -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:06:04 AM)
Depends on who you ask http://www.gallup.com/poll/127538/Workforce-Weekly.aspx

mnottertail -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:08:15 AM)
What is absolutely mystifying to me is that supposedly the will of the people was smaller government, and with Walker saying either you have to vote every year for your union or I will have to lay people off to balance the budget, now these nutsuckers want bigger intrusions of government into every facet of society. If I could somehow nail down what the nutsuckers want, perhaps those of us with reasonable rational facts could address these issues.

tazzygirl -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:23:19 AM)
Results for each 30-day rolling average are based on telephone interviews with approximately 30,000 adults. Because results are not seasonally adjusted, they are not directly comparable to numbers reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which are based on workers 16 and older. Margin of error is ± 0.7 percentage points. http://www.gallup.com/poll/127538/Workforce-Weekly.aspx You dont ask. You get the real numbers. http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate.jsp Btw, U6 includes the underemployed as well as those who have stopped looking.

Aylee -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:31:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/stateweb.htm Interesting. According to this, I have an Indiana SSN which was issued in the mid 70's and I have neither lived nor have I or any member of My immediate family ever lived or worked there. Mine is correct. I wonder if everyone is reading the table correctly.

Hillwilliam -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:42:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam http://www.socialsecurity.gov/employer/stateweb.htm Interesting. According to this, I have an Indiana SSN which was issued in the mid 70's and I have neither lived nor have I or any member of My immediate family ever lived or worked there. Mine is correct. I wonder if everyone is reading the table correctly. Indiana 486-500 I'm a 494 Am I reading it correctly?

luckydawg -> RE: SCOTT WALKER for President (2/21/2011 11:46:39 AM)
494 is Missouri

Page: << < prev 26 27 [28] 29 30 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625