Which Political Party Is Better For Business?

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Given a choice between the two wings of the Statist Party, and the LP (and not just in regards to business but also all our rights), it's no contest.



Easy. Whenever the government has kept itself to its strict and narrow Constitutionally-granted powers, everyone has benefitted. When its power has been allowed to expand beyond those limits (and today, far beyond those limits), all suffer. I give you the War on Drugs, the "War" on Terror, the USA PATRIOT Act, and so on, as examples of the latter.

Suffice to say your socialist ideology is a dead end. Literally.

I think what LABF was asking for is to have you cite examples of Libertarian
presidents of the United States which did a better job for business than
some of the better Republican and Democratic presidents.
Without real examples it is just speculation.

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Spider

Class warfare doesnt have dick to do with it , what it all boils down to is the bottom line , you would gladly take a 10% in taxes , and have fuel drop below 2.00 per gallon ...Or electric , natural gas etc .......

I only wish it were 10%. Just give me and our company a flat tax, 10%-15% across the board, and I would be fine paying that.

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Spider

you dont know why ? I will tell you , My operating cost was a fraction of what it is now ,Under Clinton or in 2000 ..... you really thing that those tax cut you got was enough to offset my fuel prices ? ,I wouldnt mind higher taxes for a more bustling economy , in the long run we all make more money ..... Now most of the lower class wont see a tax increase ...

yeah, you take a harder hit with fuel than I do, but it does affect us bigtime. Just me alone I go 40,000 miles a year at 15 miles a gallon...doesnt compare to you, I know that, but how are they gonna lower the fuel prices? Only way is to increase supply, which you people won't allow us to do.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by spdirty

I only wish it were 10%. Just give me and our company a flat tax, 10%-15% across the board, and I would be fine paying that.

'10% over what you pay now .......

[Spider]

Originally Posted by spdirty

yeah, you take a harder hit with fuel than I do, but it does affect us bigtime. Just me alone I go 40,000 miles a year at 15 miles a gallon...doesnt compare to you, I know that, but how are they gonna lower the fuel prices? Only way is to increase supply, which you people won't allow us to do.

I get 4.7 miles to the gallon , but more then that , here is the problem , I charge more to cover fuel cost , in turn the customer charges more for his products , it is a never ending circle , my stance is lowering fuel prices is a chain reaction ....... and it is complete bull**** that the left wont allow more production , they just wont allow new refineries built ............but they are building on to refineries all over in wyoming .....

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Spider

I get 4.7 miles to the gallon , but more then that , here is the problem , I charge more to cover fuel cost , in turn the customer charges more for his products , it is a never ending circle , my stance is lowering fuel prices is a chain reaction ....... and it is complete bull**** that the left wont allow more production , they just wont allow new refineries built ............but they are building on to refineries all over in wyoming .....

yep...wish we could build more refineries and drill for our own oil.

I would just love it if we could announce that we are drilling off the gulf coast and ANWR, then watch OPEC increase production instantly.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by spdirty

yep...wish we could build more refineries and drill for our own oil.

I would just love it if we could announce that we are drilling off the gulf coast and ANWR, then watch OPEC increase production instantly.

drilling anwar and off shore is a joke .......Colorado is bigger then Saudia Arabia ..... Biggest obsitcal in drilling in Colorado isnt the hippies .. It is the hunters

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Spider

drilling anwar and off shore is a joke .......Colorado is bigger then Saudia Arabia ..... Biggest obsitcal in drilling in Colorado isnt the hippies .. It is the hunters

drill wherever the hell theres oil...and tell the hunters and hippies to go to hell.

do it in my backyard too, I don't give a shlt.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by spdirty

yep...wish we could build more refineries and drill for our own oil.

I would just love it if we could announce that we are drilling off the gulf coast and ANWR, then watch OPEC increase production instantly.

Wasn't it Jeb Bush that was blocking drilling for oil off the coast of Florida?
Unless you consider the Bush's to be a part of the left.
The oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a drop in the
bucket. You destroy an irreplaceable wildlife sanctuary for a
few months worth of oil, a few years worth at most.
Then after that the oil is gone, and so it the wildlife habitat.
It's like burning the Mona Lisa in a fireplace for a few minutes warmth.
I doubt OPEC is sweating us resorting to drilling in the ANWR.
They'll still have us when it is gone.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by spdirty

drill wherever the hell theres oil...and tell the hunters and hippies to go to hell.

do it in my backyard too, I don't give a shlt.

I dont know if you are aware of it , But Colorado , Utah , Wyoming , are part of a major battle , Anwar is a joke compared to these states , problem is it just isnt oil , the Natural Gas production would make the heating prices fall through the basement ......... this area is loaded .....

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Spider

I dont know if you are aware of it , But Colorado , Utah , Wyoming , are part of a major battle , Anwar is a joke compared to these states , problem is it just isnt oil , the Natural Gas production would make the heating prices fall through the basement ......... this area is loaded .....

yeah I remember you going on about it a couple years ago.

[spdirty]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

Wasn't it Jeb Bush that was blocking drilling for oil off the coast of Florida?
Unless you consider the Bush's to be a part of the left.
The oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a drop in the
bucket. You destroy an irreplaceable wildlife sanctuary for a
few months worth of oil, a few years worth at most.
Then after that the oil is gone, and so it the wildlife habitat.
It's like burning the Mona Lisa in a fireplace for a few minutes warmth.
I doubt OPEC is sweating us resorting to drilling in the ANWR.
They'll still have us when it is gone.

drill where there is oil, build more refineries, and oil prices go down. which helps business.

And you are correct about Jeb.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by spdirty

yeah I remember you going on about it a couple years ago.

nothing has changed ..... I got dealt a hellva blow over that new law in Colorado , Come to find out some oil companies are behind it , I thought it was all that b**** from California that took over Colorado DOT ....... I can go off on some wild ass conspiracy theory about the oil companies sabotaging their own business ........

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

I think what LABF was asking for is to have you cite examples of Libertarian presidents of the United States which did a better job for business than some of the better Republican and Democratic presidents. Without real examples it is just speculation.

We've never had a genuinely libertarian president. We do know, without speculating, that by turns, Democrats and Republicans have not been the protectors of our rights, civil and otherwise, that they ought to be. I'm not of the opinion, either, that if by some sort of incredible intervention, Ron Paul becomes President, all will be hunky-dory.

I'd just be happy if the President actually fulfilled the oath of the office. None of recent decades have even tried.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

I think what LABF was asking for is to have you cite examples of Libertarian
presidents of the United States which did a better job for business than
some of the better Republican and Democratic presidents.
Without real examples it is just speculation.

Yep.

That's exactly what I was getting at.

[Bronco Jamus]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

The erroneous assumption here is that giant, multinational corporations like ExxonMobil wouldn't be able to make huge profits if we stopped giving them tax cuts, subsidies, loopholes through which to avoid paying taxes, etc.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Exxon would just pass the tax on to the consumer.

[baja]

There is an ebook I would like to post. It's sitting on my desk top in a PDF file. Is there a way to post it?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco Jamus

Exxon would just pass the tax on to the consumer.

But the price of gas was lower before they were given all the tax breaks I mentioned.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by baja

There is an ebook I would like to post. It's sitting on my desk top in a PDF file. Is there a way to post it?

You need to upload it to a host server and then link it here.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Here are the recessions and their Republican presidents:

August 1957 to April 1958 (Eisenhower),
April 1960 to February 1961 (Eisenhower),
December 1969 to November 1970 (Nixon),
November 1973 to March 1975 (Nixon and Ford),
July 1981 to November 1982 (Reagan),
July 1990 to March 1991 (Reagan), and M
arch 2001 to November 2001 (Bush II).

It's not an accident!

Cutting taxes for the super-rich kills the economy - every time.

Then the super-rich can take their giant windfall and buy bankrupt companies.

[Rohirrim]

http://www.amazon.com/Conservatives-...1621213&sr=8-4



Conservatives bring nothing to the table other than an expression of the negative, which is why their governments are always a failure. They only come to tear down. As we can now clearly see from the Raygun years forward, the plan of conservatives has been to tear down the government and starve it, making it impossible to operate efficiently, while at the same time using its power to further enrich themselves and their cronies.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

http://www.amazon.com/Conservatives-...1621213&sr=8-4



Conservatives bring nothing to the table other than an expression of the negative, which is why their governments are always a failure. They only come to tear down. As we can now clearly see from the Raygun years forward, the plan of conservatives has been to tear down the government and starve it, making it impossible to operate efficiently, while at the same time using its power to further enrich themselves and their cronies.

The GOP has 1 thing in its favor .......... About half this country is ****ing stupid

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Spider

The GOP has 1 thing in its favor .......... About half this country is ****ing stupid

The repugs have two things going for them:

1) What you just said.

2) The Democrats are a bunch of weak, spineless, ineffectual, go-along/get-along p*ssies who are masters at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[W*GS]

Also take a look at

http://www.nber.org/cycles

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Conservatives bring nothing to the table other than an expression of the negative, which is why their governments are always a failure. They only come to tear down. As we can now clearly see from the Raygun years forward, the plan of conservatives has been to tear down the government and starve it, making it impossible to operate efficiently, while at the same time using its power to further enrich themselves and their cronies.

Expression of the negative? How is it a negative to want people to take care of their own and their family affairs without Mommy government dictating how it should be? A trimming of the welfare rolls was one of the few things I loved about the Clinton years. We need a smaller EFFICIENT government and cut waste where possible. Unfortunately, that requires a top-to-bottom review of government activities to identify that waste and where people are abusing the system. As of yet, nobody has stepped forward with a willingness to defy lobbyists and have a smaller government which is also efficient.