Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,407 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29413 Feb 19, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I do agree with the report and the report agrees with me. Remember when I said that an increase in minimum wage actually makes those that receive it more poor? Also in this report is this little nugget:
"For business owners, family income (including income for shareholders) falls to the extent that firms’ profits are reduced. In addition, real family income for many people tends to fall a bit, because the increase in prices of goods and services reduces families’ purchasing power."
Now having said that I still stick by my original stance that you can make any report say anything and that reports like this one are simply opinions that have no bearing on reality. The CBO has been wrong much more than they have been right. It's why they have to continually adjust their predictions. Remember, anytime I reference any report on anything from the CBO or anyone else you should take it as a grain of salt and not the gospel truth even if the report fully supports my point of view. You would do well to do the same though I doubt you will.
I would not argue the reports projections agrees with yours some what, however the Devil is in the details, don't you think?

I would discount the report as well if I were you.

“Frankly my dear...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#29414 Feb 19, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I would not argue the reports projections agrees with yours some what, however the Devil is in the details, don't you think?
I would discount the report as well if I were you.
The contradictions and discrepancies from you, post to post, are so blatant to everyone except for you.
You change your own words so often that you can't even keep up with what you've said and how you have said it.
And your poor old mind has played so many tricks on you, that your reasoning skills failed you long ago...as well as short term memory...and long term memory....and common sense, if you ever really had it...
And then you demand to be shown where you said something...actually denying your own words...did Woodstock play a part in this, or is your feeble mind 100% liberally impaired?
OlPapaw

United States

#29415 Feb 19, 2014
Only Woodstock I remember was on an AK and an M14
Lol

Conway, AR

#29416 Feb 19, 2014
Now that's funny, olPapaw!'
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29417 Feb 19, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Please show me where I said any thing close to the "1%" in regards to this conversation.
Yes that is what I said, and WTF does that have to do with the 1%?
Ok, your going to get off on a technicality here. The people that move their investments overseas are the 1% and you know it. That's exactly what you were talking about. Sad thing is you will consider it a victory because I technically misrepresented what you said. It's just like a liberal to throw away the rest of the argument and make a declaration of victory on a technicality. Where you choose to make your stands, like this technicality, shows just how shaky the ground liberalism is built on.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29418 Feb 19, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I would not argue the reports projections agrees with yours some what, however the Devil is in the details, don't you think?
I would discount the report as well if I were you.
As should you.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29419 Feb 19, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, your going to get off on a technicality here. The people that move their investments overseas are the 1% and you know it. That's exactly what you were talking about. Sad thing is you will consider it a victory because I technically misrepresented what you said. It's just like a liberal to throw away the rest of the argument and make a declaration of victory on a technicality. Where you choose to make your stands, like this technicality, shows just how shaky the ground liberalism is built on
With all due respect Sir/Mam, I can find no victory in your ignorance.
guest

Lowell, AR

#29420 Feb 19, 2014
“Through the phony two party systems, the Elite, as you call them, select, hire and nominate both candidates so that either vote is a vote for the candidate of their choice, not the choice of the people. Moreover, the issues placed on the ballot only further their agenda. Any other candidates and issues will never see the light of day. But let’s say the people did get enough signatures to place a candidate or an issue on the ballot, then the electronic voting machines will be programed to make sure they never make it. And if a candidate slipped through, which in these times is highly unlikely, they’d be rendered impotent from the gate or just a voice in the wind; and if an issue slipped through, why the Federal Courts would just overturn it.

“Without a shot fired, the United States of America was conquered by a band of criminal bankers almost seventy-five years ago. No, son, I’d never hand over my allegiance to another man to represent me. My loyalty is to God and His son, Jesus Christ, not a man. King Jesus, and Him only, will get my vote in every time.”

http://www.newswithviews.com/Duncan/al117.htm

© 2013 Al Duncan - All Rights Reserved
Cooter Brown

Mountain Home, AR

#29421 Feb 19, 2014
OlPapaw wrote:
Only Woodstock I remember was on an AK and an M14
And your first gun was a musket
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#29422 Feb 20, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
With all due respect Sir/Mam, I can find no victory in your ignorance.
Nice attempt at the high road. That doesn't change the fact of what you were saying. You know it and so does everyone else. The 1% are the only investors with enough connections to be able to invest overseas. BTW, I'm not looking for victory, I'm just looking for you to own up to what you say.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29423 Feb 20, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice attempt at the high road. That doesn't change the fact of what you were saying. You know it and so does everyone else. The 1% are the only investors with enough connections to be able to invest overseas. BTW, I'm not looking for victory, I'm just looking for you to own up to what you say.

It takes about as many connections as a stock broker to invest in foreign markets.

International investing used to be something that was all but impossible for small investors to do without the help of a professional. In recent years, there has been an explosion of investment products that help small investors tap into foreign markets. Whether you choose to do your own stock picking, or invest in a professionally-managed fund, there are more choices at your fingertips than ever before.

Mutual Funds
One of the easiest ways to get started investing in foreign markets is with mutual funds. These allow small investors to buy a slice of a professionally-managed, diversified international portfolio at a low cost. International funds come in a wide variety of flavors, and the menu offers something for just about everyone, from the most aggressive investor to the most conservative.

http://internationalinvest.about.com/od/getti...
DalRod

Mountain Home, AR

#29424 Feb 20, 2014
We wus post to vote today? I thought it was in a frew days?
I knew I should have not started drinking at 4 am!
Only if we lived in a dry county!
They runined my vote!
I think I am going ta have to gets me some more beerz iced down and calm my nerves.side effects is I can`t poo solids.
Barney Is My Hero

Jonesboro, AR

#29425 Feb 20, 2014
Barney, yesterday you agreed with the CBO
There’s no difference between the disincentives to work found in the Affordable Care Act and welfare payments, says the former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
“It’s exactly the same thing,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, now president of the American Action Forum (AAF), told CNSNews.com .

“Many low income workers will figure out that if they work more, they’ll have to give up their tax credits and some Obamacare subsidies. They’ll add up the benefits and conclude it’s not worth it to work another day or another shift,” the economist said.

Earlier this month, the current CBO director, Douglas Elmendorf, told members of Congress that Obamcare subsidies will make working less attractive for people on the lower end of the income scale "relative to what would have been the case in the absence of that Act."

“As a result, some people will choose not to work or will work less – thus substituting other activities for work,” a CBO report noted.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended the health care law, which provides federal subsidies up to $7,000 to purchase taxpayer-funded health insurance, noting that one of its goals was to “give people life, a healthy life, liberty to pursue their happiness. And that liberty is to not be job-locked, but to follow their passion.”

“That’s crazy,” Holtz-Eakin said in response.“Honestly, it’s one thing if you choose to pursue your interests at your own expense, but that has nothing to do with this.” The loss of some 2.5 million people from the U.S. labor force will have "a straightforward effect,” he said.“It will mean less productivity, a smaller national economy, and a smaller tax base.”

“The biggest impact will be on young people who cannot find work. This takes one more thing off the list of reasons why they should be out there looking for jobs,” Holtz-Eakin added.

In a 2013 study, researchers at the Cato Institute found that despite the 1996 welfare reform legislation,“welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job…The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states.”

However, even though welfare recipients may be better off financially in the short term, they become dependent on government and tend to fall far behind their working peers in the long run. Will Obamacare continue this trend? CNSNews.com asked the former CBO chief.

“It’s a concern,” Holtz-Eakin replied.“There’s a lot of evidence, through several recessions, that some of those who are out of work don’t recover. Obamacare subsidies make it easier for them to never get back into the labor force.”

And that certainly “doesn’t help” the problem of income inequality, he added, because “the dividing line between the poor and not poor is a job. The poverty level of people with jobs is about 7 percent; it’s three times that for the unemployed. A job is the best anti-poor policy, but this goes the other way.”

CNSNews.com asked the former CBO chief if he was surprised that President Obama is attempting to reduce “income inequality” at the same time his signature domestic health care policy and his efforts to raise the minimum wage are increasing the disincentives to work.

“Not a bit,” he replied.“It’s clear they did not think about the economic implications when they passed [Obamacare]. The health sector is one sixth of the U.S. economy, and health insurance is a big part
Barney Is My Hero

Memphis, TN

#29426 Feb 21, 2014
The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.

The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29427 Feb 21, 2014
Barney Is My Hero wrote:
The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.
The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.
If you asked Obama about that he would probably say something to the effect of "Congress didn't make that law, I did"
guest

Marion, AR

#29428 Feb 21, 2014
I cant afford insurance and I cant afford to pay for the ones who get it free. Im in trouble.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29429 Feb 21, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you asked Obama about that he would probably say something to the effect of "Congress didn't make that law, I did"
Or he just might tell you that, "the CIN Study" is a pilot study, and by law the FCC is required to conduct feasibility test.

That any participation in this test is voluntary.

Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.

Then attempt to make political hay out of it!

They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
Sand

United States

#29430 Feb 21, 2014
And you got your information from where, Barney?
Show us your source.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29431 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Or he just might tell you that, "the CIN Study" is a pilot study, and by law the FCC is required to conduct feasibility test.
That any participation in this test is voluntary.
Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.
Then attempt to make political hay out of it!
They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
That study has no place in a country where freedom of speech is one of it's foundational rights. This study has no place in America. The only reason for this study is to control information coming out of media outlets. It's dangerous.
OlPapaw

United States

#29432 Feb 21, 2014
Ar senate approves "Private Option"
House has voted no three times

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.

El Dorado Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
city of el dorado (Apr '12) 27 min Loving life 29
Ed Modica 1 hr Sheila 8
The Poor Eppinettes, looks like they all split ... 2 hr Deplorable me 6
MCSA Brad's Wife 2 hr creep 16
Murphy Arts District open house 2 hr to Fail 41
Helluva time 3 hr well 2
Ucaps Letter to Editor 3 hr Dear Abby 5

El Dorado Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

El Dorado Mortgages