No Class!!!

BushPilot

New member
Apr 23, 2004
389
0
0
The US economy was fucking brutal during most of the Reagan presidency. Remember, this was the period that Bruce Springsteen felt compelled to write his 'Born in the USA' album for. It railed at what was happening in the US, particularly to the economy and general treatment of Vietnam War veterans. But the fucking balloon heads that ran Reagan's reelection campaign actually thought the title track was a patriotic anthem and tried to get Springsteen's permission to use it as his campaign theme song. That was too rich.
 

David in Van

New member
Oct 16, 2004
204
0
0
Reagonomics

HankQuinlan said:
Huh? Reagan was president from 82-88 -- nearly twenty years ago since he retired. Clinton was president during 8 years of the past 15.
My point exactly. Reagonomics (and Thatcheromics) was vindicated so well that even a Democrat President and Labour Prime Minister didn't dare screw with it - we have basically the same policies today. Compare the US and Britain vs Germany and France in the last 15 years (and if you want to go back 25, I suppose that would be fair too and I believe that my arguement stands).
 

BushPilot

New member
Apr 23, 2004
389
0
0
HankQuinlan said:
Huh? Reagan was president from 82-88 -- nearly twenty years ago since he retired. Clinton was president during 8 years of the past 15.
and for accuracy's sake, Reagan was president from 1980-88.
 

David in Van

New member
Oct 16, 2004
204
0
0
BushPilot said:
The US economy was fucking brutal during most of the Reagan presidency. Remember, this was the period that Bruce Springsteen felt compelled to write his 'Born in the USA' album for. It railed at what was happening in the US, particularly to the economy and general treatment of Vietnam War veterans. But the fucking balloon heads that ran Reagan's reelection campaign actually thought the title track was a patriotic anthem and tried to get Springsteen's permission to use it as his campaign theme song. That was too rich.
First - the US economy was good in the last half with a strong recovery.

Second - what, his album was released in 84, at the tail end of a brutal recession that immediately followed Carter's Presidency.

Third - Bruce Springsteen will always find something to rail against in any economy.

Fourth - if we stipulate that the people that ran Reagan's re-election campaign were balloon heads (a dubious assertion since they did get him re-elected in a walk), what does that got to do with Reaganomics. (Or more colloquially - Your Point?)

Fifth - One of Reaganomic's greatest chearleaders (Greenspan) is still the Chairman of the Fed and even almost all but the most far left Democrats admire his performance.
 

David in Van

New member
Oct 16, 2004
204
0
0
Accuracy's Sake

BushPilot said:
and for accuracy's sake, Reagan was president from 1980-88.
Details. His basic point was valid and deserved a proper response.
 

Jonesy

Guest
Apr 4, 2005
250
0
0
Ironhead said:
In his acceptence speech Mr. (No Class) Campbell said nothing of the NDP at all. That reflects very badly on him.
He got his butt kicked, they lost 30 seats!!!!
Just shows what kind of a person he is.

54% of the people who voted did not vote for him!!!!!!

Pretty sad.
He won. Deal with it. He won with a bigger %vote than the NDP has EVER had in BC in any of their horrible governments which each time set us back to paleolithic economics with less money for the very things that the NDP insist we have.

The Liberals are a party, not Gordon Campbell. If that whiny tub of a NDP leader was not permitted to say the words "Gordon Campbell's Liberals" during the debate or during the campaign, she would had nothing to say (oh, that's right, she didn't have anything to say - my mistake). :D
 

Jonesy

Guest
Apr 4, 2005
250
0
0
LonelyGhost said:
I agree, but why does this government have to pick on the poor, the sick, the elderly, the disabled? Is their hatred of the NDP so great that they have to hurt those who already hurts? Doesn't one Liberal supporter have one bit of compassion for anyone else?
The Liberals were trying to find the money to help. They havefound it now and it will be better. Can't help people when the N D Pees all the money away.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,933
1
0
Jonesy said:
The Liberals were trying to find the money to help. They havefound it now and it will be better. Can't help people when the N D Pees all the money away.
they were quick to find tax breaks for the rich and quick to find the money to richen doctor's salaries by off-loading the costs on those least likely to afford to continue supporting the rich ...

maybe they should spend more time finding a conscience than ways to take money from the poor.
 

hugedman

Guest
Aug 25, 2004
2,140
4
0
Mars
Aeiyah said:
Spoken like a true unbiased media reporter.

The last I heard, Campbell is going to be the Premier for the next four years. If that's having your butt kicked, I hate to see how you would describe James' or Carr's evening.
ditto............
 

hugedman

Guest
Aug 25, 2004
2,140
4
0
Mars
mustangjoe said:
.......... These factors have encouraged business to return to BC and in turn helped to lower unemployent #'s( yes, I'll admit the housing boom also contributed to lower unemployment)
All they got to do now is kicked more crack heads off welfare, and I'm a happy camper.
mustangjoe,
IMHO, housing booming is also a sign of increasing in employment/more business; therefore, more people move to BC from other provinces, as a result, more housing is required... :)
 

hugedman

Guest
Aug 25, 2004
2,140
4
0
Mars
sexygirl said:
In Alberta, it was the same story and i was directly affected but i also knew it was shortterm pain for longterm gain. And the strategy worked. They paid off the debt and then put money back into the very programs they cut. I think we will see good things in the next four years. Personally if Stephen Harper Ever becomes Prime Minister i will become an American for those terms. Good on ya Belinda Stronach! lol
hi, girl, you are taking all I wanted to say.... :D
 

massageseeker

Member
Sep 3, 2003
959
0
16
I dont think you can convince Lonely Ghost, that is a strong following that the NDP has targeted.

It is publicly easy to show those numbers of people being "targeted" .. a person the other day said they were targeted b/c they now had to fill out forms to collect money - reason b/c many people were cheating the system .. and they critized Liberals for screwing them , yet they were requested to fill out a log for reciepts for reimbursement during medical trips as they were on social assistance...

If you dont create tax breaks for big companies, no one will be able to work for them. That is why many business were and some still moving away.

When the NDP was in power less and less people decided to open up business.. why b/c they got jack for breaks while employees had the power.. if these people decide that the risk is not worth it the economy falls and social services will be cut big TIME!..

NDP admitted they went over board on social services and made a mistake, yet supporters use that as there platform ????
 

massageseeker

Member
Sep 3, 2003
959
0
16
Lonley Ghost:

Last post you said we made no comment to there stats.. we'll urgently waiting for a comment .. and to add to it lets see what the boys did best last time around..

NDP fiscal boondoggles

$463 million wasted on “fast” ferries
$1 billion in business subsidies
$310 million for the NDP’s “fixed wage” policy
$1.2 billion in Forrest Renewal B.C. spending, without a business plan
$73 million for a Convention Centre study, again, without a business plan
$125 million in foregone federal revenue from the Nanoose Bay lease fiasco
$65 million on a photo radar program that failed miserably
$11.4 million for Hydrogate losses.
$25 million loan for a private company that planned to turn Burns Bog into a theme park
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,933
1
0
massageseeker said:
Lonley Ghost:

Last post you said we made no comment to there stats.. we'll urgently waiting for a comment .. and to add to it lets see what the boys did best last time around..

NDP fiscal boondoggles

$463 million wasted on “fast” ferries
$1 billion in business subsidies
$310 million for the NDP’s “fixed wage” policy
$1.2 billion in Forrest Renewal B.C. spending, without a business plan
$73 million for a Convention Centre study, again, without a business plan
$125 million in foregone federal revenue from the Nanoose Bay lease fiasco
$65 million on a photo radar program that failed miserably
$11.4 million for Hydrogate losses.
$25 million loan for a private company that planned to turn Burns Bog into a theme park

don't disagree with that BUT my POINT is WHY are the Liberals ONLY targetting the poor, the sick, the disabled, the elderly in their pursuit of fixing it???
 

David in Van

New member
Oct 16, 2004
204
0
0
Why

LonelyGhost said:
don't disagree with that BUT my POINT is WHY are the Liberals ONLY targetting the poor, the sick, the disabled, the elderly in their pursuit of fixing it???
Because that is where the tax money that was sucking the life out of our economy was being wasted.

Once the sucking stops and the economy recovers, then we can spend more money there.

The government never produces anything. It only transfers and wastes (hopefully only a little).

Therefore, anything the government does is a luxery, only to be spent when the private economy is healthy enough to support the luxery.

How many pooners have no place to live or nothing to eat. You won't be pooning for long if you don't take care of the basic necessity.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,933
1
0
David in Van said:
Because that is where the tax money that was sucking the life out of our economy was being wasted.
so you consider helping the poor, the sick, the disabled, the elderly to be nothing but a 'sucking waste'?

That's the attitude that the Liberal gov't has had for four years and is abhorrent to anyone with a conscience or a soul.
 

massageseeker

Member
Sep 3, 2003
959
0
16
that is an easy saying the poor, disabled etc etc.. the saying tries to make people for them.. and I do and most people do ..but if you dnt create an economy with high tax payers who pays for these service ?

NDP invested your money illegally in the stock market out of ICBC and pretty much lost 80% does that not make you upset. Could you not give that money to the poor, disabled etc etc

and of course bingogate scandal, if anyone hurt the the poor, the sick, the disabled, the elderly ....it would have been the NDP they stole from them!

FRBC they gave free money to laid off forest workest workers that most were very well off.. just laid off for the season why did that money not go to social services ?
 

massageseeker

Member
Sep 3, 2003
959
0
16
You have people on social assistance not announcing common law status so 1 person can get assistance ? yet spouse has a 60,000 job .

You have people collecting EI travelling the world, I wish I could do that but I need to work to support many of them. If everyone had that attitude what would happen to BC ?

Those people wont vote Liberal b/c they requested all EI assistance people to stay in BC during that time unless they need to go ... they said they should be looking for work when on EI ... what is wrong with that ?

NDP decided to give huge grants to students with little money. Yet student with the same summber job saved his/her money while other spent it on whatever.. beer, pooning etc.. what is the incentive ? to save.. yet you hate liberals for making system fair ?
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,933
1
0
massageseeker,

the stuff you mention has been going on long before the ndp ever got elected as a government ...

i knew people going to University on the old 'grant' program who bought cars using the grant money ... and most of them didn't need the grant money but they burnt the program for people who did need it.

if someone defrauds as you claim then i would seize their assets or their putative spouse's assets.

there is now a program in place that customs can cross-check your name and send it to the EI program ... boot em and sue when they get back.

but why oh why oh why is it so difficult for people who are better off in terms of health and wealth to show one bit of compassion for those who are not? and to step up and pay their fair share?

and why do companies need to be paid to hire someone ... wouldn't it be cheaper to just pay the guy who needs the job to stay home instead of spending millions and millions to create a few lousy low paying, no benefit jobs?

I am just constantly amazed at the lack of compassion you guys have for other human beings ... it is disgusting.
 

LonelyGhost

Telefunkin
Apr 26, 2004
3,933
1
0
... and while on the subject of rip-offs ...

ENRON
BRE-X


that's the noble business model we should aspire to?
 
Vancouver Escorts