marks2065

silly man - If poverty is DEFINED as the bottom 15% of income earners, then all we need to do is pull up everybody in the bottom 15% up above 16%...... . . . . Just like know, we have nearly 95% of students are above average. we should just use that logic and methods and all will be fixed. I guess you did not understand what was wrote. reread and get back to me.

Personally, the one I have the most trouble with is the idea that higher wages lead to increased unemployment. It all sounds logical, especially with regard to the to uneducated, less efficient workers, but there are so many variables and things aren't always as the seem. There are so many studies, and they all draw different conclusions...which leads us back to the other idea expressed in this thread that people are just going to align themselves with whatever studies that support their personal ideologies best... SC has once again failed to solve the worlds problems...I award us no points, and may God have mercy on our souls. The raising of minimum wage may or may not increase unemployment, but it will increase poverty. Poverty is based on a figure from the government. When the impact of the increase labor costs raise the prices of goods, all the people above the poverty level now (those making above min wage up to $15 hr) will now be moved into poverty. You can not reduce poverty by making more people become part of poverty.

Thinking the way many on here think the company should raise pay when profit is higher never seem to want fairness. Under that thinking the pay should go down when profits go down, try selling that to the "Fairness" group of entitled crybabies.

I see that Rep. J. Chaffetz, R-Utah, admits that the House GOP voted to cut funding for embassy security in 2012. Oh the hypocrisy. Cutting some funding to save the tax payers money and letting 4 Americans die with help minutes away are 2 completely different things. The help was withheld and the Americans were left to die. A couple more security persons would not have stopped the attack, but a well armed, well trained military unit could have.

you do realize that the helmet is a big cause of many accidents right? the safest states for least # of accidents per motorcycles have no helmet laws. Iowa Illinois & Colorado. Proven fact that riders drive faster when wearing a helmet making the impact harder when crashing. also as of 5 years ago there was not a single dot approved helmet that could withstand an impact over 15 mph.

I'll give you this if you will call discrimination for the government making me pay for female thing on my insurance policy. otherwise there is no discrimination because they are canceling the drugs for both sexes And why the hell am I paying for mens Stiffy pills????? Sounds like discrimination against women to me. see we do agree, being made to pay for something we could never use is wrong.

I'll give you this if you will call discrimination for the government making me pay for female thing on my insurance policy. otherwise there is no discrimination because they are canceling the drugs for both sexes

yep, no one will get the 4 or 5 drugs they list

they did not pick out one race or gender, since all insurance policies have to have all coverage (mean have to carry maternity and birth control) and they deny it to all then they did not discriminate. so tell me again who they are discriminating against?

Your argument is pathetic I will not debate your strawman the is nothing to rebut You start from a stupid premise So you still haven't figured out the correct use of "strawman", and you still can't rebut my statement. And you STILL haven't figured out how to use the quote function in this forum. Still grading the paper instead of debating the issue. I guess when you don't have a good argument you need something to fall back on.

How are they discriminating? they did not deny anyone any treatment, all they said was that all people that wanted the treatments listed would have to pay for it themselves. they did not single out any one or group. the only one being discriminated against is Hobby Lobby for their religious beliefs which are protected in our bill of rights.

***Republitard Are you freaking 12 years old? I cant read your posts, please try harder to be a grown up around here We need a like button here! Hey mods can you work on this for us?

IMO, the ACT of using $millions to sway an election in your favor is subverting the very idea of democracy. The concept that a corporation is a person is subverting the very idea of democracy. The Roberts Doctrine is, IMO, totally contrary to the principles that the USA is supposed to represent. We very clearly are in the era of government of the people, by the wealthy, for the very wealthy. And the evidence of this is as clear as the nose on your face I would think your words had merit if you actually used them equally. It seams it is bad for the Koch's to dump money into they political arena but it is ok for GE, George Soros, and other big money to dump money to the left. be fair and dump on them all.

That is not entirely factually correct. Employers are already paying for it through insurance plans, or contributions to insurance plans howsoever structured within each company. And even if the '4' that they claim are removed, they will still be paying for it and I bet $100 that the premiums that the companies pay will not actually be reduced by one nickel over these four forms of birth control. So this is an ethical/moral, not a financial argument - I get that. So stop bringing up the issue of 'companies do not want to pay for it - I will argue that paying for it is not relevant to the case. Your (their) religious objections to it are relevant to the case, and exactly why they will lose this one. Your religious beliefs end where they impose on my rights. rights for birth control are not constitutional, but they are well established case law. This case, while divisive to the country, much like the pro-slavery arguments will die in favor of women having the right to control their reproductive systems. You can turn this argument against yourself as well Employees are forcing their beliefs on the comany here So, there religious rights end where they attempt to impose their beliefs on the company owner It is NOT like the slavery issue in any way The women can still get any product or procedure they want At any time The issue is who is being FORCED to pay for it Tell us, Marc, how will you feel when a company owned by Muslims decides to enforce Sharia Law on its employees under the guise of "religious freedom"? What religious beliefs are they imposing on the employees? they have not forced any employee to believe as they do. They have not imposed any religious beliefs on the employees, the employees are free to get any treatment they want.

Read the article... there are administrators who take care of that.. I know EXACTLY where I am invested. Edited to add In their Supreme Court complaint, Hobby Lobby's owners chronicle the many ways in which they avoid entanglements with objectionable companies. Hobby Lobby stores do not sell shot glasses, for example, and the Greens decline requests from beer distributors to back-haul beer on Hobby Lobby trucks. Similar options exist for companies that want to practice what's sometimes called faith-based investing. To avoid supporting companies that manufacture abortion drugs—or products such as alcohol or pornography—religious investors can turn to a cottage industry of mutual funds that screen out stocks that religious people might consider morally objectionable. The Timothy Plan and the Ave Maria Fund, for example, screen for companies that manufacture abortion drugs, support Planned Parenthood, or engage in embryonic stem cell research. Dan Hardt, a Kentucky financial planner who specializes in faith-based investing, says the performances of these funds are about the same as if they had not been screened. But Hobby Lobby's managers either were not aware of these options or chose not to invest in them. If they gonna be stoopid... they gotta have asbestos big boy panties. And Michael Moore was heavily invested in the stock market including Haliburton and other companies when he bad mouthed capitalism and Haliburtan. So this means that everything Michael Moore's said is now wrong in your eyes.

And I would agree that these should not be covered either, but how do these cause abortions? it is abortions that Hobby Lobby is against. So you are using something completely not relevant to try to prove a point. beside the catholic religion does not condem making babies, only abortions and blocking the babies from being conceived because sex is for creation not pleasure. Whether you believe this or not is your right just like it is their right to believe how they do. You do not have the right to tell them how to believe and they are not stopping anyone from believing how they want.

The supreme court has already ruled on this. They said corporations can donate to and influence politics and elections based on the beliefs of the board or owners, therefore that allows the beliefs of the board or owners in regards to religion to be expressed in how they handle the purchases of the business based on religious freedom.

I think the hate is from being told lies from the people that profit from class warfare. When the issue with Romney only paying 15% on investments was compared to the average Joe they were misled. If you look at the average Joe making less than 100k, after their tax return is filed, they pay about the same percentage or less. They definitely pay less in total $s than Romney. Class warfare is staged to keep people from working together and solving problems while keeping power hungry people in power. The left would loose greatly if it were not for class warfare and racism. I think you should use the rich as examples of what is possible, to promote the American dream and drive people to work harder to obtain their goals and desires. Yes the Rich do... I agree that they who hold all the real power are actually PRACTICING class warfare. It is the perfect application of the Golden Rule... He who has the GOLD has made all the rules to benefit his class. Murica And the ones that pay for most of our infrastructure, defense, and charity that make this nation great deserve our thanks and appreciation.

so x 50 states is 1.5%, which is incredibly small, but also completely inaccurate, becuase if they reviewed 101 M voter records, why did they only find the 35000 that pertained to one state? Studies like this I get a chuckle out of. delve into them for 5 minutes and shoot it full of holes. And if one voter fraud is too many and must be stopped, then one gun death is too much and must also be stopped. oh that's right, you would claim that the gun owners have rights.....hmmmm.... I think gun buyers should have an ID I think voters should have an ID That is the jist of all of this Nothing wrong with proving citizenship either A possible 35,000 votes to be illegal is not just one And I do not think you have shot holes in anything here If they found this in one state, I bet there are other states that have fraud. Like the New Yorkers that vote in new York and Florida, or the county in Ohio (I think?) that voted 120% for Obama and 0% for Romney, or the dead voting in Florida or Chicago. Voter fraud has been around for many years and needs to be greatly reduced. Voting is probably the most important thing a citizen can do, and anything that important needs to watched and verified. Citizenship, picture ID, and yearly registration for proof of address should be the minimum requirements to vote. If the people were serious about having a great country they would want to make sure their vote counted and not cancelled by fraud. To have an election change because dead people, illegals, inmates, double voting or any other fraud only hurts our country and the people that live here.

so you're ok with what has happened to these "poor newspapers"? You could always try reading the QUESTION in the OP instead of inventing strawmen to whack. It would be nice to hear if you support or denounce what happened.

I think the hate is from being told lies from the people that profit from class warfare. When the issue with Romney only paying 15% on investments was compared to the average Joe they were misled. If you look at the average Joe making less than 100k, after their tax return is filed, they pay about the same percentage or less. They definitely pay less in total $s than Romney. Class warfare is staged to keep people from working together and solving problems while keeping power hungry people in power. The left would loose greatly if it were not for class warfare and racism. I think you should use the rich as examples of what is possible, to promote the American dream and drive people to work harder to obtain their goals and desires.

A large part of Obama's debt is Polosi's fault also. I am not letting the president off because he signed it. You guys blame everything on the right, but you fail to see the source. you need to read and learn, hey isn't that what you say? I guess you need to listen to yourself.

That was being done.. till W came to power. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html We would have no debt now if W and his buddies were not allowed to set in motion the largest transfer of wealth from MAIN Street( think middle class America) to WALL Street ( think our lords and masters.. aka the Oligarchs) The American people lost out.. then the GOP has done everything to block and obfuscate any chance of a real recovery for the middle class. The 1% did quite well as did the corporations since this economic recovery began under the black guy... in SPITE of the GOP... if they had been on board with any kind of jobs bill... anything millions more people would be back at work. Who wrote and passed the bills in the house? posting that is like you being arrested because you where outside the bankduring a robery. I know you want to place blame but lets really find out who is responsible not just through granades in the area. Unless you are not interested in the truth.

It is bad no matter who overspent, If it is always bad, and the US has been doing it every year for the last 179 years, (and for decades prior to 1835) how come the US became the world's richest country and the only superpower? Over spending is not always bad Indeed it seems to be OK just so long as a Republican is in the White House. You are as bad as those in the news that can't tell the truth. You make fun of Fox news for not telling the full story then you do the same by chopping most of what was wrote to make your statements look good. you are worse then the news stations you slam. you took the entire piece I wrote and dropped the important part. First you write: "It is bad no matter who overspent", then you write "Over spending is not always bad". Seems you change your tune according to the needs of your "Hate Obama" attack of the moment. As long as you pay it off, these guys are not paying it off. if you need a loan that is fine, but just like the people Washington needs to pay off the loan. The debt we have is not being treated as a loan it is treated as a never ending personal bank account.

It is bad no matter who overspent, If it is always bad, and the US has been doing it every year for the last 179 years, (and for decades prior to 1835) how come the US became the world's richest country and the only superpower? Over spending is not always bad Indeed it seems to be OK just so long as a Republican is in the White House. You are as bad as those in the news that can't tell the truth. You make fun of Fox news for not telling the full story then you do the same by chopping most of what was wrote to make your statements look good. you are worse then the news stations you slam. you took the entire piece I wrote and dropped the important part.