Still Hating America.

[LessinSF]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I just want to be able to fly to Canada without a passport. Do you remember when you could do that?

But don´t have a DUI, or a 1975 conviction for the possession of marijuana - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../23/NEVIUS.TMP .

[LessinSF]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is Tyra's body, isn't it?

I think it is only part of her body, but that depends if Gwinky used the 1997 cover or the 2007 cover.

Lessinabus station onmyway to Iguazu

[LessinSF]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is Tyra's body, isn't it?

I think it is only part of her body, but that depends if Gwinky used the 1997 cover or the 2007 cover.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Spanky
That is Tyra's body, isn't it?

first name basis.....hmmmm. is Tyra the model you used to bang?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Spanky
Can you top that GGG?

I agree on all his answers except income taxation - so, Sebby, how the hell do you raise the money?

And, how do you feel about opening borders, repealing the Patriot Act and similar legislation, and elminating most of the military (I think I know you're on board with free speech)?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I agree on all his answers except income taxation - so, Sebby, how the hell do you raise the money?

And, how do you feel about opening borders, repealing the Patriot Act and similar legislation, and elminating most of the military (I think I know you're on board with free speech)?

How'd we do it before the income tax?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
How'd we do it before the income tax?

We (i.e. the federal government) really didn't do much before we had a federal income tax.

Compared to today -- and any time since 1932, the feds were tiny. No benefits programs to speak of, very little government regulation, and also a small military with very little force projection capability. Not a workable model for the US in the 21st Century.

S_A_M

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
How'd we do it before the income tax?

1. Lots and lots of tariffs and custom duties
2. Excise taxes on things like writing checks



3. Poll taxes
4. Property taxes
5. Occupational taxes and corporate excise taxes
6. Selling off most of the country west of the Appalachains

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
We (i.e. the federal government) really didn't do much before we had a federal income tax.

Compared to today -- and any time since 1932, the feds were tiny. No benefits programs to speak of, very little government regulation, and also a small military with very little force projection capability. Not a workable model for the US in the 21st Century.

S_A_M

With the exception of the military thing, my response would be, "And the problem is?"

The Fed Govt should enforce laws and levy enough taxes to maintain the status quo. It has instead become the piggy bank for the social engineers.

We should pay everyone enough to avoid having revolutions. We've screwed up the ratio and created expectations far beyond our capacity to pay.

I recognize it's no help to engage in wars of choice, or subsidize the dead farming industry, but compared to Medicare and SS, those costs are pocket change.

The damage over the long term of allowing people to believe Uncle Sam will be or should be there to save them from the adverse consequences of their own decisions will sink this country over time. There is no way a nation as big as ours can succeed where we are creating millions of bodies every day who are being indoctrinated into the notion that they can get from the public sector what people had traditionally believed comes from work in the private. We're not the size of Sweden. We can't pull that act off.

I view the terrible potholes in the roads I drive as good signs. The beast is coughing. Were it that costs would drive my state - Pennsylvania - into bankruptcy. That's the only way we'll ever make this place palatable for business growth. So it'll cost me more in tires and shocks. Fine.

[Adder]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The damage over the long term of allowing people to believe Uncle Sam will be or should be there to save them from the adverse consequences of their own decisions will sink this country over time. There is no way a nation as big as ours can succeed where we are creating millions of bodies every day who are being indoctrinated into the notion that they can get from the public sector what people had traditionally believed comes from work in the private.

Actually, traditionally, people just died.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Good news for Silicon Valley, but bad news for Spanky's fundraising?

• Apparently, without many folks noticing, Nancy Pelosi switched the chairmanship of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law from Texas's Sheila Jackson-Lee to California's Zoe Lofgren. The importance of the move is geographic: Lofgren is a Silicon Valley Democrat, and thus exquisitely attuned to the tech industry's desire for more work visas for highly skilled immigrants. As a Post editorial points out today, the current cap of 65,000, down from 195,000 just a few years ago, is laughably inadequate, and every one of those immigrants we don't admit goes to give a European or Asian firm a competitive advantage against us. Lofgren, whose district includes many of those most worried about the issue, will certainly try and use her chairmanship of the relevant committee to ease their minds. And Pelosi's decision to put her in the top spot suggests that the Democratic leadership will be receptive to the effort.

link

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Good news for Silicon Valley, but bad news for Spanky's fundraising?

• Apparently, without many folks noticing, Nancy Pelosi switched the chairmanship of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law from Texas's Sheila Jackson-Lee to California's Zoe Lofgren. The importance of the move is geographic: Lofgren is a Silicon Valley Democrat, and thus exquisitely attuned to the tech industry's desire for more work visas for highly skilled immigrants. As a Post editorial points out today, the current cap of 65,000, down from 195,000 just a few years ago, is laughably inadequate, and every one of those immigrants we don't admit goes to give a European or Asian firm a competitive advantage against us. Lofgren, whose district includes many of those most worried about the issue, will certainly try and use her chairmanship of the relevant committee to ease their minds. And Pelosi's decision to put her in the top spot suggests that the Democratic leadership will be receptive to the effort.

link

This is shameful. She is removing people from their position solely because their politics do not accord with hers? And putting in their place people who agree with those those views? Quelle scandale?

Any word on Sheila Jackson-Lee's job performance?

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
This is shameful. She is removing people from their position solely because their politics do not accord with hers? And putting in their place people who agree with those those views? Quelle scandale?

Any word on Sheila Jackson-Lee's job performance?

To her credit, though, I don't think Pelosi has bothered to argue that Jackson-Lee was getting replaced because of legislative incompetence.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Any word on Sheila Jackson-Lee's job performance?

If there's a camera, she's in front of it.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
This is shameful. She is removing people from their position solely because their politics do not accord with hers? And putting in their place people who agree with those those views? Quelle scandale?

Any word on Sheila Jackson-Lee's job performance?

Since when does a USA's "job performance" mean "not doing the political hatchet jobs we need before the election?"