Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34124 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
Well, I HAVE seen the grade inflation for children in private schools whose parents were significant donors to the administrators of the private school. I HAVE seen private school administrators pressure teachers to inflate grades of certain students. So I know it happens, frequently. Perhaps your daughter is intelligent enought to not need help,as evidenced by her subsequent achievements, and that is a good thing.
Do not lecture me about hard work. I also worked two jobs to pay for my OWN education WHILE I was in college. I was taught to work at an early age and learned to take pride in my work and my ability to do a good job.
No, republikans are not completely responsible for failures in education. But their anti education attitude is one of the biggest contributing factors.
<quoted text>
I don't know how you were privy to information about students' grades and I don't know why you would want to know about children and their grades if they weren't your children. I would have to question the private school you got such information from and why they would give out such information.
Since you apparently know so much about children with inflated grades, during your snooping did you find out how they did on the SAT and what colleges if any they attended? I don't think there's a way to inflate SAT scores and right there is where the proof is in the pudding. I didn't contribute a penny more than the cost of my daughter's tuition because a private school, college, etc should be run like a business and if a business has to pressure people to be donors in order to keep their business afloat, they shouldn't be in business. I would hate to think my business depended upon "donors", instead we go old school and charge people for the service provided. It may sound simple, but it works for us, it should work for every other business. We're not running a charity, we're running a business therefore "donations" while the concept would be great, just isn't our way.
Speaking of my daughter, UNC Chapel Hill is not in the habit of accepting or teaching students in the medical field based off "inflated" private school grades. Have you heard of MCAT? Well that pretty much weeds out the "inflated grades of any students" and they go on from there and my daughter after testing proved she was "perhaps intelligent enough". Let me guess, you know someone who had inflated MCAT grades?

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34125 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
<quoted text>Well, I HAVE seen the grade inflation for children in private schools whose parents were significant donors to the administrators of the private school. I HAVE seen private school administrators pressure teachers to inflate grades of certain students. So I know it happens, frequently. Perhaps your daughter is intelligent enought to not need help,as evidenced by her subsequent achievements, and that is a good thing.
Do not lecture me about hard work. I also worked two jobs to pay for my OWN education WHILE I was in college. I was taught to work at an early age and learned to take pride in my work and my ability to do a good job.
No, republikans are not completely responsible for failures in education. But their anti education attitude is one of the biggest contributing factors.
2 jobs and college? When did you have time for union meetings?

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34126 Jan 31, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>I don't know how you were privy to information about students' grades and I don't know why you would want to know about children and their grades if they weren't your children. I would have to question the private school you got such information from and why they would give out such information.
Since you apparently know so much about children with inflated grades, during your snooping did you find out how they did on the SAT and what colleges if any they attended? I don't think there's a way to inflate SAT scores and right there is where the proof is in the pudding. I didn't contribute a penny more than the cost of my daughter's tuition because a private school, college, etc should be run like a business and if a business has to pressure people to be donors in order to keep their business afloat, they shouldn't be in business. I would hate to think my business depended upon "donors", instead we go old school and charge people for the service provided. It may sound simple, but it works for us, it should work for every other business. We're not running a charity, we're running a business therefore "donations" while the concept would be great, just isn't our way.
Speaking of my daughter, UNC Chapel Hill is not in the habit of accepting or teaching students in the medical field based off "inflated" private school grades. Have you heard of MCAT? Well that pretty much weeds out the "inflated grades of any students" and they go on from there and my daughter after testing proved she was "perhaps intelligent enough". Let me guess, you know someone who had inflated MCAT grades?
Nope... Just stayed in a holiday inn express.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34127 Jan 31, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope... Just stayed in a holiday inn express.
That was funny Silver.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#34128 Jan 31, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>That was funny Silver.
Have good day dear

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34129 Jan 31, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Have good day dear
Right back at you Silver :)

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34130 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
Tax all income equally. That means capital gains taxes .
I don't like the idea either, but if we get serious about payig off debt, that is what is will really take.
<quoted text>
You obviously don't understand how the economy works. If you taxed capital gains at 94% who do you think would invest their money...nobody! The average annual return is only about 9.6% and if the govt takes 9.02%(94%) of that 9.6%, leaving a profit of .58%, who in their right mind would take the risk? With nobody investing their would be no retirement/pension plans. Since most businesses only make a small profit margin, without investors the cost of goods and services would skyrocket, making most everything either unaffordable or would cause companies to go bankrupt. 94% may have worked in 1954 because it was a different time and era, we didn't have all of the leftist social programs that are draining the govt of every penny! Studies show if you taxed EVERYONE 100% on EVERYTHING, the revenue wouldn't even run our govt for 6 months! WE DON'T HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM!!!!!

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#34131 Jan 31, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are a law abiding citizen, wouldn't that mean you are not a criminal and that you obey the law? If you are law abiding then you will have no background. So what is the worry?
The thing is the "mental health" issue. You can obey the law and be a person who loses control. The "criminal" thing is usually a result of other activity, drug dealing etc. The "mass" shootings, attempts on politicians are of a different nature. That is where Congress is missing it. Trying to lump everything into one issue. It's a tough situation.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34132 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
Blame is different from the truth. The majority of that 16 trillion debt that concerns you so much, as it does me also, was already present ($10 trillion) in 2009. Another almost $2 trillion of the 16 went for INTEREST on the origional $10 trillion.
Remember when Cheany said "debt does't matter"? Turns out that it does matter. At this point , it does not matter WHO is to blame.
What matters is how we can still fix it. The only way is to RAISE taxes and SLASH spending. It will be unpleasant for all of us. The alternative is to just continue the party like there is no future and there won't be.
Pro-American--Commucrats = blame someone else party
Therein lies the problem, we continue to raise and create new taxes but your party has consistently refused to cut spending! I'm beginning to believe that your party, the Commucrats, are/have implemented the Cloward-Pivens strategy, there is no other explanation for your actions!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2%80%...

“Anasasis Xenophontis.”

Since: Dec 08

over there.

#34134 Jan 31, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Being a world of Warcraft beta tester is not a job kiddo
Dont you put that evil on me. lol. no i got some good connects in the construction field from all the leadership opportunities i was in with all the service learning projects that i helped in. i actually still have to do a 400 hr internship with a heavy industrial project manager but from what my dept. head is tellin me with my profile outlook is that im headin into some big money. problem is i love it in the mountains, especially in cullowhee and i really dont want to move. i will, without regret, take a paycut to stay around the area and i really want to get into the residential and/or landscape architectural field. thing is with a degree in construction management i wont have the resume for a landscaping architect, i might have to further my education and weigh down my pocket again. college finances have been lookin good so far with loans already getting repaid, plus i turned down 1 or 2. in summary, im looking at making more money than most licensed accountants, and i believe my job will be far more fulfilling than sitting at a desk all day. all in all, im going to be making more money than you so you better leave the country lol.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#34135 Jan 31, 2013
You are so wrong !!! You are also in denial of reality.
WE DEFINITELY HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM, A REVENUE PROBLEM and A DEBT PROBLEM. If republikans are not serious about addressing those problems, they should stop whining about them .
Yes, democrats are advocating a continuation of expensive spending on social programs. If we ever get out of debt, they will have to give that up. Republikans will also have to give up the historically low taxes on income and capital gains.
There will be whining, wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth on both sides if this problem is REALLY addressed. If you support more spending or resist raising taxes, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
Pro-American wrote:
<quoted text>You obviously don't understand how the economy works. If you taxed capital gains at 94% who do you think would invest their money...nobody! The average annual return is only about 9.6% and if the govt takes 9.02%(94%) of that 9.6%, leaving a profit of .58%, who in their right mind would take the risk? With nobody investing their would be no retirement/pension plans. Since most businesses only make a small profit margin, without investors the cost of goods and services would skyrocket, making most everything either unaffordable or would cause companies to go bankrupt. 94% may have worked in 1954 because it was a different time and era, we didn't have all of the leftist social programs that are draining the govt of every penny! Studies show if you taxed EVERYONE 100% on EVERYTHING, the revenue wouldn't even run our govt for 6 months! WE DON'T HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM!!!!!
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#34136 Jan 31, 2013
With a debt of 16 trillion now and annual receipts held constnt at 2.3 trillion, suppose we STOP ALL spnding on anything other than tax collections. Imagine (unrealistically) that tax colletions could be accomplished on .3 trillion per year , leaving 2 trillion to be applied annually to the principal 16 trillion. It would take over 11 years to pay off the debt if ALL spending stopped today. Without tax increases , that would mean no military, no government,no police, no firemen, no regulation on anything, no nothing. What do you think would happen?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34137 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
With a debt of 16 trillion now and annual receipts held constnt at 2.3 trillion, suppose we STOP ALL spnding on anything other than tax collections. Imagine (unrealistically) that tax colletions could be accomplished on .3 trillion per year , leaving 2 trillion to be applied annually to the principal 16 trillion. It would take over 11 years to pay off the debt if ALL spending stopped today. Without tax increases , that would mean no military, no government,no police, no firemen, no regulation on anything, no nothing. What do you think would happen?
Here's my thoughts:

No military: most people are against the military, so if the country is attacked, you better hope not all the guns have been taken and you stand and fight together or you fall.
No police: if you live where I do, it's pretty much every man for himself and God for us all, again you better hope you were able to keep a gun or two.
No regulation: back in the day, people pretty much regulated themselves. They grew their own food, slaughtered it, sold it and knew how to feed themselves safely, otherwise there wouldn't be any of us today. Didn't need banks back then either. Keep your money to yourself and you can regulate it anyway to want to. If you need a home, build it. Might not be one that will grace the pages of Architectural Digest, but it's roof over your head and place to keep you warm. Better know how to keep a car running or else have saved up the money to buy one, you'll be ok. Since funding for schools will be cut, hey, there's always home schooling!! If you need a doctor, better hope you know one or at least know how to use the land and utilize the healing properties provided from plant life and a working knowledge in chemistry wouldn't be the worst knowledge to have. If there's an outbreak of something like the flu, even today people are dying from it, so again, it's every man for himself and God for us all. There will be no welfare for the young or the old, so the young having one kid after another will have to learn to work to feed them and the seniors will have to learn to live on a really "fixed income" that means their kids take care of them or hope they've saved enough to see them through 11 years.
No government: don't have much of one now on either side of the aisle, so stop paying people for doing nothing and keep the money for yourself. We basically have an absentee president, congress and senate and when they do meet all they do is argue. You can argue at home for free.

Eleven years isn't that long of a time, but I bet if all I mentioned were to happen, we'd all be thankful for what we have and stop the abuse of the citizens of this country by government. Just maybe WE all would learn from the mistakes made and not repeat them.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34138 Jan 31, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's my thoughts:
No military: most people are against the military, so if the country is attacked, you better hope not all the guns have been taken and you stand and fight together or you fall.
No police: if you live where I do, it's pretty much every man for himself and God for us all, again you better hope you were able to keep a gun or two.
No regulation: back in the day, people pretty much regulated themselves. They grew their own food, slaughtered it, sold it and knew how to feed themselves safely, otherwise there wouldn't be any of us today. Didn't need banks back then either. Keep your money to yourself and you can regulate it anyway to want to. If you need a home, build it. Might not be one that will grace the pages of Architectural Digest, but it's roof over your head and place to keep you warm. Better know how to keep a car running or else have saved up the money to buy one, you'll be ok. Since funding for schools will be cut, hey, there's always home schooling!! If you need a doctor, better hope you know one or at least know how to use the land and utilize the healing properties provided from plant life and a working knowledge in chemistry wouldn't be the worst knowledge to have. If there's an outbreak of something like the flu, even today people are dying from it, so again, it's every man for himself and God for us all. There will be no welfare for the young or the old, so the young having one kid after another will have to learn to work to feed them and the seniors will have to learn to live on a really "fixed income" that means their kids take care of them or hope they've saved enough to see them through 11 years.
No government: don't have much of one now on either side of the aisle, so stop paying people for doing nothing and keep the money for yourself. We basically have an absentee president, congress and senate and when they do meet all they do is argue. You can argue at home for free.
Eleven years isn't that long of a time, but I bet if all I mentioned were to happen, we'd all be thankful for what we have and stop the abuse of the citizens of this country by government. Just maybe WE all would learn from the mistakes made and not repeat them.
Hasn't this happened before already...The Revelutionary War, which started because of taxation without representation? I'd say history is already repeating itself.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#34139 Jan 31, 2013
Nostalgic but unrealistic because with no military , we would quickly be invaded by other countries who need farm land and other natural resources that we posses in abundance. Shotguns and deer rifles just will not play well against guided missiles, airplanes, drones, napalm, chemicals , biologicals and neutron bombs.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's my thoughts:
No military: most people are against the military, so if the country is attacked, you better hope not all the guns have been taken and you stand and fight together or you fall.
No police: if you live where I do, it's pretty much every man for himself and God for us all, again you better hope you were able to keep a gun or two.
No regulation: back in the day, people pretty much regulated themselves. They grew their own food, slaughtered it, sold it and knew how to feed themselves safely, otherwise there wouldn't be any of us today. Didn't need banks back then either. Keep your money to yourself and you can regulate it anyway to want to. If you need a home, build it. Might not be one that will grace the pages of Architectural Digest, but it's roof over your head and place to keep you warm. Better know how to keep a car running or else have saved up the money to buy one, you'll be ok. Since funding for schools will be cut, hey, there's always home schooling!! If you need a doctor, better hope you know one or at least know how to use the land and utilize the healing properties provided from plant life and a working knowledge in chemistry wouldn't be the worst knowledge to have. If there's an outbreak of something like the flu, even today people are dying from it, so again, it's every man for himself and God for us all. There will be no welfare for the young or the old, so the young having one kid after another will have to learn to work to feed them and the seniors will have to learn to live on a really "fixed income" that means their kids take care of them or hope they've saved enough to see them through 11 years.
No government: don't have much of one now on either side of the aisle, so stop paying people for doing nothing and keep the money for yourself. We basically have an absentee president, congress and senate and when they do meet all they do is argue. You can argue at home for free.
Eleven years isn't that long of a time, but I bet if all I mentioned were to happen, we'd all be thankful for what we have and stop the abuse of the citizens of this country by government. Just maybe WE all would learn from the mistakes made and not repeat them.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34140 Jan 31, 2013
TSF wrote:
Nostalgic but unrealistic because with no military , we would quickly be invaded by other countries who need farm land and other natural resources that we posses in abundance. Shotguns and deer rifles just will not play well against guided missiles, airplanes, drones, napalm, chemicals , biologicals and neutron bombs.
<quoted text>
Not unrealistic. The military didn't stop the attacks on the WTC or the Twin Towers. I'd say we'd still have a stockpile of weapons to put a decent fight. Take the video you sent me the other night about the IAF. A few men in the air with those on the ground came out victorious. They were ex-military men and not even in their own country, but were willing to fight. We still have more than a few good men in this country, ex-military and the common man that would give whomever a pretty good run for their money. You think Taxpayer, Waco or even Seven would stand by without a fight? It's people like this that feel there's something worth fighting for, so one should never underestimate the common man, that's what's wrong with our country now.

If we're only armed with deer rifles, who's to blame?

Again, never underestimate the enemy even today with a health military, our ports are our weakest point of entry.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34141 Jan 31, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Couldn't the same argument be used for voter registration? I don't understand how showing an ID, not even having a background check is considered discrimination; however, if you want to buy a gun, you have to give information, even your medical information and just maybe you can own a gun. I'm not talking about an assault weapon or whatever everybody is up in arms about. I'm talking about a gun, one for protection because criminals can get their guns illegally and some people do like to feel like they have at least some way to level the playing ground.
You give that identifying information when you register to vote. Criminals CAN buy weapons legally. Just go to a local Gun show where no background information is required, and buy the gun, or all the guns that you want. Could it be any easier than this for criminals? You can also purchase a gun from a private individual without a background check. Why do you not want this to change, and criminals have easy access to any gun they want? The criminal having to buy a gun "illegally" doesn't hold water the way the current laws are set up now. How does every person purchasing a gun by any source with a required backgroung check infringe on your 2nd Amendment rights?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#34142 Jan 31, 2013
last sentence "background"

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#34143 Jan 31, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
You give that identifying information when you register to vote. Criminals CAN buy weapons legally. Just go to a local Gun show where no background information is required, and buy the gun, or all the guns that you want. Could it be any easier than this for criminals? You can also purchase a gun from a private individual without a background check. Why do you not want this to change, and criminals have easy access to any gun they want? The criminal having to buy a gun "illegally" doesn't hold water the way the current laws are set up now. How does every person purchasing a gun by any source with a required backgroung check infringe on your 2nd Amendment rights?
AZ, if you purchase from a dealer IN the show, you must do the same paperwork as anywhere else. The problem is first, it's NOT illegal to sell your own firearm to a private person. I wish that were one "loophole" that would change. People selling out of the "trunk of their cars" I do not agree with.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#34144 Jan 31, 2013
The IAF had a GOVERNMENT that had purchased (with tax money) the antiquated ME 109 s that the Americans flew for the IAF. The ME 109 fired 50 mm cannons and rockets which far outclassed the tanks , cannons and automatic small arms of the advancing Egyptian army. Modern helicopter gunships, drones, guided missiles, aircraft, etc make the ME 109 look like a childs toy.
Besides that, only a few American civilians own ME 109s, Mustangs and a few old military jets. I have no doubt there would be a fight and maybe even a good standing. The chances of a favorable outcome of civilians against a modern military is not impossible but is very doubtful.
The use of neutron bombs would be the weapon probably most favored by invaders. It kills everything, even the chiggers and flies without damaging the infrastructure. Around two weeks later , when the radiation has dissipated (very short half lives for activated substances) you just move in , dispose of the carcasses and live happy ever after using the existing equipment
and cleared fields. The reason things cannot be like they used to be is because technology isn't what it used to be.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Not unrealistic. The military didn't stop the attacks on the WTC or the Twin Towers. I'd say we'd still have a stockpile of weapons to put a decent fight. Take the video you sent me the other night about the IAF. A few men in the air with those on the ground came out victorious. They were ex-military men and not even in their own country, but were willing to fight. We still have more than a few good men in this country, ex-military and the common man that would give whomever a pretty good run for their money. You think Taxpayer, Waco or even Seven would stand by without a fight? It's people like this that feel there's something worth fighting for, so one should never underestimate the common man, that's what's wrong with our country now.
If we're only armed with deer rifles, who's to blame?
Again, never underestimate the enemy even today with a health military, our ports are our weakest point of entry.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Concord Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Did Rick Hendrick Ever Really Have Leukemia? (May '09) 10 hr Kmo87_nemco 82
guitar center sucks 16 hr Psalm 69 5
Balfour beatty rail 19 hr wtf 2
News Four arrested in uptown protests after Keith Sc... Thu ThomasA 4
Where the boy at in Charlotte ? (Dec '15) Thu Fred Herbert 68
Get ready Charlotte Thu Native 10
News School choice tops Trump's education agenda Nov 12 Party Hard In Lin... 1

Concord Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Concord Mortgages