Liberal phobia and the cause….

[countryboy]

You need three employees besides yourself to run a hot dog stand? That means you are a lousy entrepreneur, you won’t stay in business for long anyway. A hot dog stand should not need more than one employee at most.

If four people are trying to live off one hot dog stand, how much money do you think any of them are going to make? Your example is clearly unrealistic. Your hot dog stand is probably already in trouble, before giving anybody any pay raises.

My advice to that stand owner would be, lay off at least two employees, get off your ass and work hard to make your hot dog stand a success. Oh, and grant the one remaining employee a living wage, don’t give him starvation wage.

Holy sh!t, remind me not to call on you for business advice! You've made a pile of assumptions here, just like you do when you're discussing politics. With one big sweeping generalization, you came up with a business strategy (of sorts) that has no basis in fact whatsoever. Is this how you form your political opinions too?

Jeez, my Liberal phobia is getting worse, and for good reason.

 

[countryboy]

Ha ha ha.. I will gracefully refuse to comment at this time.. ;-)

Probably the safest thing to do around here!

 

[Francis2004]

You need three employees besides yourself to run a hot dog stand? That means you are a lousy entrepreneur, you won’t stay in business for long anyway. A hot dog stand should not need more than one employee at most.

If four people are trying to live off one hot dog stand, how much money do you think any of them are going to make? Your example is clearly unrealistic. Your hot dog stand is probably already in trouble, before giving anybody any pay raises.

My advice to that stand owner would be, lay off at least two employees, get off your ass and work hard to make your hot dog stand a success. Oh, and grant the one remaining employee a living wage, don’t give him starvation wage.

Holy sh!t, remind me not to call on you for business advice! You've made a pile of assumptions here, just like you do when you're discussing politics. With one big sweeping generalization, you came up with a business strategy (of sorts) that has no basis in fact whatsoever. Is this how you form your political opinions too?

Jeez, my Liberal phobia is getting worse, and for good reason.

Well CB, I sorta agree with you here.. My statement earlier about an owner / operator usually can apply to a sidewalk stand or a Orange Julius type of place that can have 4 staff members if need be.. :idea:

But I would not limit any type of phobia on this basis alone.. :lol:

 

[countryboy]

Well CB, I sorta agree with you here.. My statement earlier about an owner / operator usually can apply to a sidewalk stand or a Orange Julius type of place that can have 4 staff members if need be.. :idea:

But I would not limit any type of phobia on this basis alone.. :lol:

Francis, you said the magic words, "...if need be."

Yes, I'm trying not be too narrow-minded when I search for the underlying causes of the phobia...there seem to be many.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

SJP, sorry but borrow and spend started way before and only got worse during Reagan / Bush.. Look at history ( American ) and it is basically accepted that FDR started the ball rolling..



United States public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Look at the graph given in the link.

Debt may have risen during FDR days; he was really in the same boat as Obama. He had inherited a depression; he had to stimulate the economy.

However, after that, the debt was going down steadily, through Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter. Now watch it take off in 1980, when Reagan embarked on borrow and spend economics. From 1980 to mid 90, it went on increasing. Then after Clinton started running surplus, it started going down, only to rise after Bush started running huge deficits again.

The link provided by you actually tells us that borrow and spend started with Reagan.

 

[Francis2004]

Exactly what am I fabricating here?

It's in your post #247. You said, "No doubt that is what you conservatives believe , countryboy. You really believe that borrow and spend is the correct way."

Anyone that knows me knows full well that I am extremely opposed to "borrow and spend." So, your statement is a fabrication. That's it, plain and simple. Just wanted to set the record straight there.

Do you need some Valium... ha ha ha :lol::lol:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Holy sh!t, remind me not to call on you for business advice! You've made a pile of assumptions here, just like you do when you're discussing politics. With one big sweeping generalization, you came up with a business strategy (of sorts) that has no basis in fact whatsoever. Is this how you form your political opinions too?

Jeez, my Liberal phobia is getting worse, and for good reason.

Sorry countryboy, but I fail to understand why a hot dog stand would need four persons to run it, three employees and the owner. Clearly the owner is being lazy. No wonder his hot dog stand is in trouble.

I think my advice to lay off two of the three employees is quite sound.

 

[Francis2004]

Look at the graph given in the link.

Debt may have risen during FDR days; he was really in the same boat as Obama. He had inherited a depression; he had to stimulate the economy.

However, after that, the debt was going down steadily, through Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter. Now watch it take off in 1980, when Reagan embarked on borrow and spend economics. From 1980 to mid 90, it went on increasing. Then after Clinton started running surplus, it started going down, only to rise after Bush started running huge deficits again.

The link provided by you actually tells us that borrow and spend started with Reagan.

True to form, can't admit defeat..

OK you are must be almighty right and everyone else in the world is wrong.. 8O

I guess you will re-write history to suit you're debating needs.. So be it..

 

[JLM]

What in the world is L.C.D.? Is that some kind of magic bullet to keep inflation perpetually at zero? I thought L.C.D. is a kind of television screen.

When I was in grade 3 it stood for lowest common denominator.

 

[JLM]

Really? Show me even a single post by me praising any of the Liberal leaders (except Trudeau, of course). I have never ever praised any of the Liberal leaders. I have said it many times here, I support ideas, not personalities.



So what is your point?



I also consider myself more of a liberal than a Liberal, I am not a member of the Liberal Party (my son is). However, Liberal party is the only party which supports the same issues, same causes as I support. So I end up voting for Liberal Party.

Just the umpteen times that you praised Martin (and rightfully so) for reducing the debt. I think that was the one time when you and I were in agreement............:lol::lol::lol:

 

[TenPenny]

When I was in grade 3 it stood for lowest common denominator.

My father used to use the term 'lowest common denominator' to refer to the concept that our society is aiming to bring everybody down to the lowest level, nobody is supposed to be better/smarter/faster/happier/whatever than anybody else.

 

[Cliffy]

My father used to use the term 'lowest common denominator' to refer to the concept that our society is aiming to bring everybody down to the lowest level, nobody is supposed to be better/smarter/faster/happier/whatever than anybody else.

I refer to it as the level TV programming is aimed at, particularly the SNEWS, sports and sitcoms.

 

[JLM]

Sorry JLM, you have said the following things here.

1. Conservative way is the right way.
2. You love Harper.

That makes you a conservative in my opinion, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.



I see, and having sky high deficits is good for the economy, I suppose? Your idol, Harper has ran more deficit that anybody else.

So you seem to be claiming that wage rises for the poor cause inflation, but sky high deficits are OK, they don't cause any harm. And you claim that you are not a conservative?

Two things if you are prepared to listen to some common sense
1. Before anyone even attacks the debt (and deficit) they should figure out what was done (by them and predecessors) that got them into the mess.
2. I AM NOT Conservative- I am common sense while Martin was head honcho I fully supported him- Ignatieff is not Martin & I much prefer Harper to Ignatieff, so at the moment I would likely vote Conservative, but of course the final decision would rest with who the candidate is in my riding. (Is that plain enough language for you to understand? )

 

[JLM]

Sorry JLM, you have said the following things here.

1. Conservative way is the right way.
2. You love Harper.

That makes you a conservative in my opinion, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.



I see, and having sky high deficits is good for the economy, I suppose? Your idol, Harper has ran more deficit that anybody else.

So you seem to be claiming that wage rises for the poor cause inflation, but sky high deficits are OK, they don't cause any harm. And you claim that you are not a conservative?

And you stated in your profile that you have "no party affiliation" which is in direct conflict with everything you've stated here.

 

[Cliffy]

Sir Joe,
I hate to say it but you are to the Liberals, what eanassir is to Islam.

 

[JLM]

I see, so let me get this straight. Raising the wages for the poor is bad for economy, will lead to increased inflation, will lead to a recession, depression, end of the world, whatever.

However, having sky high deficits is good for you? It must be, since one conservative leader after another practices borrow and spend economic.

I've said this 50 times, maybe on 51 you'll catch on. There is no such thing as raising wages for the poor per se.

Okay you raise the guy at $8 up to $10, What is the guy at $9 going to do?, What is the guy at $10 going to do? What is the guy at $15 going to do? What is the guy at $25 going to do? What is the guy at $50 going to do? What is the C.E.O. going to do? You can bet he's not going to be happy with a $2 raise.

 

[JLM]

Um, you forgot to mention that the hotdog vendor would cut the throat of his neighbor's cow/pig in order to make the hotdogs he would make the profits from. AND he'd immediately add a handling cost every time he had to butcher a neighbor's animal to pay for the party he'd throw giving his rich pals free hotdogs. And when he got bored, he'd rob seniors, start a loanshark biz for students to rack up wads of debt to him, register his hotdog business in another town so he wouldn't have to pay the higher taxes of the town he was raping, and sabotage the clinic that was treating his customers for the bad health his hotdogs were causing. But he also showed everyone he could balance his budget and show he can make profits (while swindling his investors out of their profit margins).

Yeah, and one other thing you haven't considered when he's giving all his rich friends free hot dogs, it wouldn't just be normal hotdogs, it would be those foot long bastards. :smile:

 

[countryboy]

Sorry countryboy, but I fail to understand why a hot dog stand would need four persons to run it, three employees and the owner. Clearly the owner is being lazy. No wonder his hot dog stand is in trouble.

I think my advice to lay off two of the three employees is quite sound.

OK, I see where you're coming from. I won't bother to explain the shortcomings of that approach...it would be like me trying to learn what a particle accelerator is all about. :lol:

 

[countryboy]

My father used to use the term 'lowest common denominator' to refer to the concept that our society is aiming to bring everybody down to the lowest level, nobody is supposed to be better/smarter/faster/happier/whatever than anybody else.

Quite so. Of course, there might be at least one exception to that rule...

 

[countryboy]

Do you need some Valium... ha ha ha :lol::lol:

Oops, my finger slipped on the key there and made the words too big! Ha, ha...
(Darn new-fangled tecknoludgee...these heer ur-go-nomm-ick keeboards confuze me!)

Valium? Hmm...tried it once but it made my mind a bit fuzzy...until I came out of it, I got thinking I knew everything! Fortunately, after that little buzz, reality set in and I realized i was only human. Whew! :lol: