Candidate Discusses Economy, Downtown
#1 May 16, 2012
Lil' Timmy came to Hopewell and was shown around by our winner mayor. He proceeded to garner votes inthe drug and alcohol park in front of Social Services. The only thing he and C.L-B. can get is the welfare crowd from "beautiful down-town Hopewell". Just a couple of jokes!
#3 Aug 7, 2012
You are perhaps the dumbest person I have ever seen post on this site.
You are convinced something there are all these conspiracy theories going on in the city. It is because of people like you that the city will never move forward.
The people you hate so much are trying to move the city forward and to make the community a better place to live.
Maybe if you listened to both sides of the story instead of just two people on council, maybe you would understand the truth.
The only truth you seek is the truth that is suitable for you. That is is not how the world works.
I feel sorry for people like you and your group in Hopewell. You spend so much time and energy coming up with what is wrong in Hopewell that you are missing all the good things.
#4 Aug 8, 2012
You funny, you stupid.
#6 Aug 27, 2012
The resident is right. You need to look in the mirror, slap yourself, and realize that you are what holds Hopewell back. Just plain negativity, good for nothing rants, and inaccurate information. You are so focused on your one and only theory that no matter what kinds of facts or info is presented to you, you will dismiss it without merit and make some absurd judgement about how your point of view is the right one. The problem with this is that you will never grow up.
#7 Aug 29, 2012
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Hell, I bet you were for that wonderful ethanol plant that these jerks rammed down our throats. WOW, look at all the jobs,and taxes it has given the city. Wake up nimrod, these clowns are killing this town,state,and country. Think before you vote, do your research, get educated.
#8 Sep 7, 2012
You elected them, then they did what you allowed them to do. Due to the style of government, we have, one side has to be declared the loser. Why should anyone be obligated to think, when you don't? You killed Hopewell. How did you do it, because the same ideals which destroyed these great lands are still the ones you believe can be reimplemented.
I ask you, " How does it feel to work and receive enough just to spend it all, before the next payday? " or " To work just to have someone else enjoy the profits of your labor? " or " To not be capable of running to a store, in the middle of the night, for fear of a group of meeting a group of thugs? " or " To work, then have good ole master hand your earnings to his children to buy big wheels and flat screen tvs? " Roll back the clock 50 years, since that's where most of you'd like to return to.
Back in the days, when there wasn't any AIDS, only afros and fades and it was okay to get your whole face kicked in but not anymore; now, niccas done twisted up their fros, let it lock and grow and are extremely quick to grab a gun. Simply ain't no fun, when the rabbit got the gun.
If my thoughts were similar to yours, I'd be terrified to trust Obama as well. People don't have to imagine what life would be like, if a "I'm better than you are and for that reason, I deserve to be treated better" was in control of the world. Look at what it got the JEWS, wandering around for the past 2500 years. But for some odd reason, a group of Europeans thought it would be a good idea to grab ahold of the same principles as if it could be reasonably exercised. Go figure or is your calculator's battery dead?
I'm not talking selling points, because I don't want you to buy a thing. I need you to hold onto your idiocracies, it's how I've made enough money to just sit around and talk trash, 24 hours a day. The dumbest idiots, I know of, are teachers whom call themselves Republicans. Let's say that No New Taxes or Tax Reduction was a reasonable premise. Where in the hell does their salaries come from? Maybe, student's parents should start sending them groceries or a few slabs of boards or building materials, like back in the day. Give what you can, when you can and when there's nothing to give, the schoolhouse closes.
Welcome to America, modern times, it was reasonable for millions of Blacks to work for free, eating the unwanted portions of animals. Now, Whites complain about eating those same portions in hotdogs, hamburgers and chicken ( Pink Slime ); while, some Black person puts a steak in the basket with an food stamp card in hand. HILARIOUS
#9 Sep 7, 2012
This way of life has to be considered reasonable, as we sit by, watching families lose everything their ancestors strived so hard to accomplish, the White ones. Blacks never worked hard for anything, it was always handed to them and sometimes, they had to ask for that. Once something is earned, it already belongs to them; so where does the idea come from that a person has to be grateful to someone else , for handing them what's theirs?
First premise, they're not intelligent enough to control this type of money. We have to educate them, first. Then, we'll just hold onto their earnings, until they prove that they can manage their money. Oops, I invested the money, paid myself a decent income but I lost the initial investment. LMAO. Does this sound familiar? It should, that's what the Virginia Retirement Systems financial management of state employees' futures adds up to.
They say, " After 2021, the VRS will have unfunded liabilities. " But we're still going to let teachers teach as long as they can, until they earn 100% of their pay, not hire new teachers, because the annuity scheme runs out, before they'll collect. Perhaps, we'll privatize the system and not guarantee any returns or charge an outrageous premium for medicaid, the state employees grand health care insurer (THE CITIZENS AND EVEN THE DUMBASS STATE WORKER, HIMSELF).
Of course, medicaid is driving states in the hole, it's not because of the poor's usage. It's the state employee's deteriorating arses. Then, the state allows these employees to drink and smoke, without making them buy supplemental health coverage for their self inflicted injuries. NAW, the rest of us have to foot the bill. People whom work for governments shouldn't be allowed to vote.
They shouldn't get to have a say, in how my earnings will potentially be spent, on their behalf. To provide their non-productive arses with an income.
But here we have, VN VET and others, crying foul about a system of welfare, when they have been the welfare recipients, all of their lives. A klan of do nothing arse niccas. Really believing that they have earned more than just to be kept alive, suffer, bitch and gripe. I've sort of become immune to their whining but knowing that these blights on society will be doing it for another four years, after Nov. 6, 2012, is too damn funny.
People don't read what I am saying, so I tend to say just about any damn thing that I have rolling around in my mind.Unlike VN VET and his friends, whom still think with their brains. This is the main reason, why we'll never be capable of seeing eye to all seeing eye. They perceive with their eyes, it's white, so it must be okay. For me, it's a person whom has lived in America, they might be screwed the frack up. But I will give them a chance.
Imagine if Africans owned every diamond mine, diamonds would no longer be a desired commodity. Obama became POTUS, half of the Whites lost their country but somehow, they all retained their rights to bear arms, speak freely and vote Nov. 6, 2012.
#10 Sep 7, 2012
I didn't vote for "them". We can't vote for anyone but the councilor for one ward. We can't even vote for the mayor. We need to go back to "at large" system to have a say in the morons who get elected to run the city. At least let us vote for mayor!!!!!!
#11 Sep 9, 2012
Go back? Laughs. Always attempting to find ways to defeat the Black vote. The system had to become what it is, due to an at large vote electing people whom wouldn't properly represent the Black constituents, once they were elected. That suggestion doesn't pass the I need more help because I'm White but I promise to be fair, if you allow me to rule unopposed, again test.
When you vote for one, you vote for all. They will be working together in a democratic process. Unless, you send people to the council, state or fed with instruction not to work democratically.
The biggest error was the American people, in 2010, decided to implement a TEA Party act on our own country. Your proposal is very shortsighted as well as counter-American. Everyone, every locality and every state deserves to have a voice, since their earnings are contributed to making the system what it is. We can't undo progressiveness.
To some White citizenry, progress is anti-white; simply because American was inducted as a for White institution. Also, a very very shortsighted agenda, considering the true diversity of the demographics of the world; which America is supposed to represent. A place for all.
#12 Sep 9, 2012
I don't disagree with why Whites side with Republicans. Republicans represent the business class of America and those owners happen to be 85-90% White. Who doesn't want to own a business, enjoy all of the profits and live what is considered to be the American Dream? It's a great selling point but it's not reality nor possible.
When a business person needs the government to take from the people what they people won't give voluntarily in solicition of those businesses, those businesses shouldn't exist. Are there times when a business' purpose isn't quite understood and the government needs to invest, on behalf of the people, to ensure the costs will be reasonable, once the item comes to market? Yes. Will every venture be successful? No, of course not. Look at slavery, marketed in America and once outlawed, bankrupted many whom heavily invested.
Did abolishing slavery put a downward force on what Whites were earning? Yes. So much that a war needed to be fought? Yes. The same thing most Americans cry about, as we do business with countries without labor laws, the Southen States wanted to inflict those deficits on other States within the UNION.
Once again, I ask you, " Is it more reasonable for us to make life better for all or to unfairly allow the top percentage to grow, exponentially at an unsustainable rate? " They're not getting wealthier because they're earning it, Americans are giving away their futures in the form of spending their unearned futures (credit).
#13 Sep 9, 2012
The theory, now, by republicans, is to reduce the homeowners' mortgage deduction, since that's where the most money seems to be. The thing is, it's someone else's money and profits. It's taxed, once it rolls into their accounts.
Visualize a mortgage payment, during the first half of the loan. 85% of that payment is interest or more plainly, money that's going to belong to someone else, banking and financial institutions are utilizing it to sell people on investing for whatever reasons. For many of us, we pay for our own retirements; because we have to borrow our own futures from the same institutions whom hold our contributions. Everyone isn't supposed to understand how the system works, that's how it works.
Under the Obama administration, the government purchased $600 trillion dollars worth of homes, which were sold under the sub-prime lending scheme for $2 trillion dollars, turning them back over to Freddie and Fannie. That $600 trillion dollars which would have been paid off, in 30 years, directly accounts for $600 trillion dollars worth of every homeowner whom participated by losing their homes. Bankruptcy settles the immediate obligation to the borrower but the debt still exists.
#14 Sep 9, 2012
Hamilton's theory was magnificent. The government buys a person filing bankrupt's debts from the creditors at an extremely reduced rate. Say a $150,000.00 debt purchased for $10,000.00. The $140,000.00 is then used to obtain credit or the selling of bonds at par value. These are extensions of credit are 30-50 years in length.
A balanced budget is a mythical creature, because the I.O.Us aren't counted in their entirety. Just because a household is current on it's bills, doesn't make it out of debt; the same goes for a government. But with a government, unfunded liabilities don't just go away; whereas, an individual could purchase life or disability insurance to insure future unfunded liabilities don't injure familiy, left behind.
The person or persons which loan you your advance on future earnings are the same persons whom offer you insurance policies to cover your supposedly secured debts or debts that can be collected, if you don't fulfill your obligations. Term life is the best scheme for collecting earnings, it guarantees a payout and accumulates no value, unless the person dies. People rarely die within the life of the policy.
Home ownership is the second best scheme. A person sees a house for $100,000.00 and instantly gives away a percentage of his future earnings, over the course of 30 years which adds up to paying for the house twice. In return, the government adjusts the value of the dollar, by a smaller percentage to reflect growth in the held property. In my uneducated opinion, sub-prime lending's consequences were a desired outcome, created and implemented in a partisan effort. If it weren't, the government wouldn't have hired firms to sue banking institutions, which discriminately disbursed those loans.
Once the homeowners declared bankruptcy, the money from those law suits went directly into the government's pockets. You'll find a lot of animosity in the States, due to those judgements being declared as capital losses and effecting the state's revenues.
#15 Sep 9, 2012
There's just so much to understanding how America really and truly works that a person has to prerequisite himself into a corner, leaving the balance to be made by someone else. If the people desire the balance of America to be money, then money has to be distributed evenly, in order for a uniformed sense of happiness to be established.
Imagine a pyramid with a bar streched across the top. That bar represents America or any country. There is no solid ground to be had nor built upon, it's just not an option, when it comes to creating a government; not in a political, religious nor social sense of forming a group. Every decision has an impact. The trick is making 330 million decisions that don't necessarily satisfy 330 million people, at any given time; if your intentions are to make them without considering the other 7 or 8 billion people whom also have a direct effect on how well your decisions will mature.
It's fun to think of America as an independent country with it's greatness tied only to what the president decides. It's more fun to watch politicians sell another politician based upon premises they know aren't true. Global Economy!!!!!!!!!!
But let's examine Mitt the great business guy. His words, " What I did in Massachusetts might not work for the entire US. " Growing the American economy has more to do with the stability of it's trade partners than any policy that will be implemented in the next 30 years. In order to stabilize those foreign economies, America would have to double or triple taxes, in order to repay a few outstanding supposed to be longterm debts. Further destabilizing our own standards of living.
The budget cannot be balanced but the values of what America is leveraging as collateral for the loans is worth 93% more than the outstanding debts.$48,000.00 is what each individual would be obligated to repay, if, in fact, we all earned the same amount. Now, divide that debt obligation by 30 years.$1600.00 per year per person. In a year, how much tax do you pay? Not just personal property but all the way across the board?
As Republicans want to restrict freedom, in order to reduce the debt. I would have to say, " THIS IS NOT THE ANSWER." For anyone whom feels that it is, they are truly constitutionalists. It's the manner in which this country achieved it's short lived greatness, more than 200 years ago.
#16 Sep 9, 2012
In case you missed it or got lazy, near the end. Republicans want to restrict freedom, in order to reduce the debt. I would have to say, " THIS IS NOT THE ANSWER." Constitutionally, it is how this country became great, over 200 years ago. The problem anyone whom decides to pursue elected office faces is how to make America operate, where everyone involved can have the opportunty to embark on a journey of pursuing one's own selfishly oriented happiness.
As of now, who can handle doing without a little bit is the only debate, on the table. Republicans say, " Not the Business Class. They need more. " Obama says, " If the people keep more, then businesses will get the revenue they need through the people's spending. But we cannot allow businesses to grow at an unsustainable rate. "
One percent growth doesn't seem like much but at what rate does your household's accumulation of wealth grow, anyways? How much less than 1%? If your house is valued at %150k, you put down $30k, your mortgage payment is $850/month and $100/month goes to principle; $1200/yr minus the costs of homeowners insurance and utilities leaves your rate of growth at negative what percent?
Mr. Clinton was wrong to invoke the principle of arithmetic against the American citizenry. Just as wrong as it was for Mr. Eastwood to disclose what the elderly in America are left to deal with by their children; talking to empty chairs. " I can't tell Mr. Romney to do that to himself. " He's already doing it is how the sentence should have ended.
I'm not asking you to openly support Mr. Obama, the voting booths are like they are for a very good reason. Hopewell, Virginia, to some, isn't very significant. About like what those some think of Topix as being a suitable place to have this discussion. The president can't specifically address every person, there's just too much diversity and some people are stuck in their ways. Some of those ways are very counterproductive to ensuring that America meets the requirements of being a working part of the global economy.
I've never given it a thought, in business practice, to exclude anyone's method of desired burial or funeral process. Could I have settled for marketing only to Whites? Yes. Or to Jews? Yes. Being America is a very negative place, I put my dollars in the appropriately colored or non-colored hands and catered to everyone's wishes. Discrimination was based on what an area could afford to pay, not primarily because of the demographics; eventhough, businesses do set-up in areas, where they like the demographics and some owners still practice bigotry. I don't mind but I excluded myself from participating in their chambers of commerce, as a result.
Add your comments below
|Gang stalking and psychological harassment in R...||12 hr||Sup||8|
|Donna Howlett||Fri||bo bo||16|
|One Dead, One in Custody after Broad Street Sta... (Oct '09)||Dec 19||melody colombus||23|
|Review: Lava Smoke Tobacco & Gift Inc (Feb '13)||Dec 18||lavasmoke||4|
|'Just Let People Have Their Beliefs': Blaze Rea...||Dec 17||Phyllis Schlafly ...||13|
|Child's Privacy at Extreme Risk if Common Core ...||Dec 16||The Commentator||1|
|Review: Speedy Cars Inc (Apr '14)||Dec 16||happywithspeedy||3|
Find what you want!
Search Hopewell Forum Now
Copyright © 2014 Topix LLC