Sorry to disagree with all your comments, but I agree with the foundation of this Ruling.

Majority European/Canadian Thought: Someone, or Agency, in Government knows what is best.

Majority American Thought: No They Don't.

Majority European Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, and therefore...

Majority American Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, but Government control is worse.

I can see MAJOR problems with this Ruling. But it is far superior to those who believe in the Controlling Power (Government), under Force of Law, saying how much Political Speech will be allowed.

Please let's not get into a discussion a Government can enact Wonderful, Perfect, and Brilliant Laws regarding Who, and How Much Free Political Speech will be allowed. They never have, and never will.

Repeating: Prefer 100 Mega Wealthy People, with Different Politics, Flooding the airways, than One Controlling Power (Government) deciding Who, and How Much.

The Randian ideal of one dollar, one vote eh?

No.

Please don't try to 'Package' people's ideas, as Europe does.

a standard conversational ploy to let you expand if you so choose.
why don't you put down your 'don't tread on me' flag for a minute?

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

Sorry to disagree with all your comments, but I agree with the foundation of this Ruling.

Majority European/Canadian Thought: Someone, or Agency, in Government knows what is best.

Majority American Thought: No They Don't.

Majority European Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, and therefore...

Majority American Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, but Government control is worse.

I can see MAJOR problems with this Ruling. But it is far superior to those who believe in the Controlling Power (Government), under Force of Law, saying how much Political Speech will be allowed.

Please let's not get into a discussion a Government can enact Wonderful, Perfect, and Brilliant Laws regarding Who, and How Much Free Political Speech will be allowed. They never have, and never will.

Repeating: Prefer 100 Mega Wealthy People, with Different Politics, Flooding the airways, than One Controlling Power (Government) deciding Who, and How Much.

The Randian ideal of one dollar, one vote eh?

No.

Please don't try to 'Package' people's ideas, as Europe does.

a standard conversational ploy to let you expand if you so choose.
why don't you put down your 'don't tread on me' flag for a minute?

The "don't tread on me" comment, is again 'Packaging'.

I know. I had to see if I could slip it by. call it a character flaw.

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

Sorry to disagree with all your comments, but I agree with the foundation of this Ruling.

Majority European/Canadian Thought: Someone, or Agency, in Government knows what is best.

Majority American Thought: No They Don't.

Majority European Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, and therefore...

Majority American Thought: The People are..., can't be trusted, but Government control is worse.

I can see MAJOR problems with this Ruling. But it is far superior to those who believe in the Controlling Power (Government), under Force of Law, saying how much Political Speech will be allowed.

Please let's not get into a discussion a Government can enact Wonderful, Perfect, and Brilliant Laws regarding Who, and How Much Free Political Speech will be allowed. They never have, and never will.

Repeating: Prefer 100 Mega Wealthy People, with Different Politics, Flooding the airways, than One Controlling Power (Government) deciding Who, and How Much.

The Randian ideal of one dollar, one vote eh?

No.

Please don't try to 'Package' people's ideas, as Europe does.

a standard conversational ploy to let you expand if you so choose.
why don't you put down your 'don't tread on me' flag for a minute?

The "don't tread on me" comment, is again 'Packaging'.

I know. I had to see if I could slip it by. call it a character flaw.

I know too! You are good.

May not agree with you on many issues. But I do admire your arguments.

why thank you. that's very kind.

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

Es, I don't care what anybody else says, your view of the political spectrum is skewed way, way over to one side.

Edit: and so is yours KWSN-GMC-Peeper of the Castle Anthrax.

At the founding of this nation, only land owners could vote.

Today, I would support preventing anybody who receives any government assistance from voting.

And anybody who is allowed to vote, I would support weighing their vote based on how much they paid in taxes last year.

But that'll never happen. So, I've given up. Come and take my guns.

Wouldn't that be 99.999% of the population.

Es, I don't care what anybody else says, your view of the political spectrum is skewed way, way over to one side.

Edit: and so is yours KWSN-GMC-Peeper of the Castle Anthrax.

At the founding of this nation, only land owners could vote.

Today, I would support preventing anybody who receives any government assistance from voting.

And anybody who is allowed to vote, I would support weighing their vote based on how much they paid in taxes last year.

But that'll never happen. So, I've given up. Come and take my guns.

That wasn't me.. but I'm here to play.

if you have the time to be here you're not rich enough to survive what would happen if you got your wish. LOL
Once the first game's over the ..um.. 'creative ones' will start eating each other. The population of ruling class will stabilize far smaller than you assume and you won't be in it.

---

If you don't touch it, you can't break it.
;

Es, I don't care what anybody else says, your view of the political spectrum is skewed way, way over to one side.

Everyone knows America is skewed way over to the right.

Edit: and so is yours KWSN-GMC-Peeper of the Castle Anthrax.

At the founding of this nation, only land owners could vote.

..and that was bad right? Or do you miss the days when people could own slaves and women couldn't vote?

Today, I would support preventing anybody who receives any government assistance from voting.

This is actually an evil thing to want. I don't even know what else to say about this. Its so shortsighted that its actually insane.

And anybody who is allowed to vote, I would support weighing their vote based on how much they paid in taxes last year.

This is weird. All you'd have to do to take people's vote and destroy democracy would be to change the tax code. Its like handing American a self destruct button and shouting "push"

But that'll never happen. So, I've given up. Come and take my guns.

Guns and money. Is that all America has become?

---

Reality Internet Personality

It's only fair that those who PAY for this country have a say in how THEIR money is spent. It's only FAIR that the leaches of society should be thankful for the generosity of those who feed them.

So how many do you "feed" ??

And, did you ever stop to think that if you showed a bit of "Noblesse Oblige" rather than referring to the underpriviledged as "leaches". you might even be shown some gratitude.

You and your ilk are the ones creating the "Us and Them" mentality.

The only answer is a decent minimum wage. A person working 40 hours per week at the minimum wage should be earning enough to take them off benefits.

Then while you're at it, we can get you to twitch your magic nose and create 23 million jobs so the unemployed can find work....

T.A.

....Better this, than ONE POWER (Government) controlling Speech (Political or otherwise).

Clyde. You miss the point. The ONE(%) POWER is what's controlling the government.

As I asked Guy above. Would you rather live in a Democracy or a Plutocracy ?

Even though I'm with him on this matter, I can't help wondering how many congressmen George Soros currently owns ?

T.A.

It's not me who created this "Us vs. Them" mentality, it's "Them" who created this "Us vs. Them" mentality.

Oh man are you for real? You can't be, no one lacks self awareness to this degree.

Please tell me you are trolling before I lose all hope in humanity.

....Better this, than ONE POWER (Government) controlling Speech (Political or otherwise).

Clyde. You miss the point. The ONE(%) POWER is what's controlling the government.

As I asked Guy above. Would you rather live in a Democracy or a Plutocracy ?

Even though I'm with him on this matter, I can't help wondering how many congressmen George Soros currently owns ?

T.A.

Is it the one% or is it those ~6,000 individuals who G.W. identified as the Power Elite.

Hello everyone :) How are you all? Well I hope?

I'm a little curious as to how American tax payers feel about the more than $7 billion paid out yearly in welfare assistance and food stamps to Walmart and Mcdonalds' employees?

Is it because it helps the 1% stay the 1%?

Hello everyone :) How are you all? Well I hope?

I'm a little curious as to how American tax payers feel about the more than $7 billion paid out yearly in welfare assistance and food stamps to Walmart and Mcdonalds' employees?

Is it because it helps the 1% stay the 1%?

Great way to subsidize successful businesses.

So the Left Wing is helping out the Right Wing.

Still trying to figure out if this is Socialism or Fascism?

How about exploititism? (Not a word? It is now :))

Hello everyone :) How are you all? Well I hope?

I'm a little curious as to how American tax payers feel about the more than $7 billion paid out yearly in welfare assistance and food stamps to Walmart and Mcdonalds' employees?

Is it because it helps the 1% stay the 1%?

Why the fascination with the '1 percent'? Just being in the top 1% doesn't mean squat. Now then, if you wanna talk about the top 0.002%, then you are getting up into the REAL Power Elite (Soros, Buffet, the Koch Brothers, Gates, Etc.) The Bulk of the '1 percent' are degreed professionals such as Medical Doctors and Lawyers. Also, although it has been a couple of years since I checked it, people like professional athletes. A couple of years ago, I checked into the players in the NBA (National Basketball Association). The contractual MINIMUM salary for an NBA player at the time put them into the 'top 1%'. I repeat, the LOWEST PAID players in the NBA were in the 'one percent'.

As to the WalMart and McDonalds employees getting things like SNAP and TANF... That is caused by many factors, only one of which could be called (mistakenly, by the way) corporate greed. But, who owns the corporations? About 25% of all US stocks are owned by pension plans (both private and public). Then you have the life insurance companies. Peoples life insurance premiums are invested so that they will grow so that the peoples premiums would be lower than otherwise. They own a good chunk of the stocks. Then you have the small investors, either directly owning stocks or owning the stocks through an institutional entity such as a mutual fund. Yes, the Power Elite (the 0.002%-ers) own a sizable chunk, but then so do a great many other people. Corporate profits benefit almost everyone, a fact that is often ignored by much of the news media.

There are a several other factors at work here over WHY that so many of the US employees of two of the biggest corporations in the world get US Government Assistance. Instead of directly mentioning them, thereby provoking a huge flame-fest on me because so many disagree with them, I will just mention two broad categories... Politics and Economics. Economics: a business that pays its employees more than the employees are worth (profit-wise) won't stay in business for very long. Politics: Instead of helping to solve the problem, current Government policies (both the Democrats and the Republicans are guilty here) strive to perpetuate the problem for reasons of political power.

That is about as neutral as I can say it. I hope that not too many people get all upset over it.

Byron, thank you for all of your kind wishes of goodwill.

I must say I have to second that:)

Good morning everyone!

Good morning ... or night ... or afternoon ... as the case maybe .... to all in our SETI@home community,

where ever you happen ... to be on our only home .....

tiny little planet Earth ..... _ :)

be kind and gentle to one another

and ... God Bless, all you all :)

I hope you all had or will have a wonderful Day

Best Wishes
Byron
Vancouver
Canada
:)

For 2013 I successfully lowered my annual income,........Or, I paid on average, about 2/3rds the welfare (which is currently more than "minimum wage") paid to a single recipient for the entire year. Take away about 50% in "administrative costs" (that's money the politicians keep and pay their minions) and about the other half is sprinkled around the "useful idiots." That's how many I feed.

Your figures are a bit unclear. As I read them, you paid 2/3rds the money for a single welfare recipient = gross tax paid.

50% of that went to "administration"

Then you state "and about the other half is sprinkled around the "useful idiots."

Do you mean that 50% of what's left after the administration is deducted "goes to the 'useful idiots'", or the remaining 50% of your gross tax paid ?

Either way the picture is not as bleak as you try to paint it. The final outcome is that either 25% of your tax goes to Welfare. (Which BTW only equals 1/6th of a single person's annual welfare.) Or nothing at all.

I think the minimum wage should be $100/hour. You liberals only want to pay the poor a measly $10/hour. See, I care more for the poor than you.

Now you are just being silly.

No-one here has suggested a minimum wage that high. The criteria for the minimum wage rate here in Oz is that a family of 4 should be able to put nourishing food on the table, afford their utility bills and afford a few low end luxuries such as a TV and second hand car.

In other words they pay tax, are not welfare dependent, and buy consumer goods, thus contributing to the economy and the profits of the businesses they patronise. Certainly, they have their universal health care, but they pay for that with a 2% levy on their gross salary.

What's your problem with that ?

So I'm the bad guy for wanting a peaceful, prosperous, *sustainable* society.

Don't we all. However, you seem to lack the perception that one of the secrets of a *sustainable* society is that it looks after those on the bottom rungs. If it doesn't, chaos ensues (and isn't that what's happening in the US now).

Actually, just about everyone in the US seem to be a bit p*ssed off right now.

Ok, fine. Come and take my guns.

If you study history, you will find that the worst riots are caused by either food shortages or high food prices, then comes oppression of the lower classes. Even in the USA's case, wasn't it something about "No taxation without representation" that started the American revolution ?

Have your guns, I don't care, but if welfare is cut and 23 million unemployed start taking matters into their own hands. I hope you can change clips quickly, because they'll be shooting back.

T.A.

For 2013 I successfully lowered my annual income,........Or, I paid on average, about 2/3rds the welfare (which is currently more than "minimum wage") paid to a single recipient for the entire year. Take away about 50% in "administrative costs" (that's money the politicians keep and pay their minions) and about the other half is sprinkled around the "useful idiots." That's how many I feed.

Your figures are a bit unclear. As I read them, you paid 2/3rds the money for a single welfare recipient = gross tax paid.

50% of that went to "administration"

Then you state "and about the other half is sprinkled around the "useful idiots."

Do you mean that 50% of what's left after the administration is deducted "goes to the 'useful idiots'", or the remaining 50% of your gross tax paid ?

Either way the picture is not as bleak as you try to paint it. The final outcome is that either 25% of your tax goes to Welfare. (Which BTW only equals 1/6th of a single person's annual welfare.) Or nothing at all.

I think the minimum wage should be $100/hour. You liberals only want to pay the poor a measly $10/hour. See, I care more for the poor than you.

Now you are just being silly.

No-one here has suggested a minimum wage that high. The criteria for the minimum wage rate here in Oz is that a family of 4 should be able to put nourishing food on the table, afford their utility bills and afford a few low end luxuries such as a TV and second hand car.

In other words they pay tax, are not welfare dependent, and buy consumer goods, thus contributing to the economy and the profits of the businesses they patronise. Certainly, they have their universal health care, but they pay for that with a 2% levy on their gross salary.

What's your problem with that ?

So I'm the bad guy for wanting a peaceful, prosperous, *sustainable* society.

Don't we all. However, you seem to lack the perception that one of the secrets of a *sustainable* society is that it looks after those on the bottom rungs. If it doesn't, chaos ensues (and isn't that what's happening in the US now).

Actually, just about everyone in the US seem to be a bit p*ssed off right now.

Ok, fine. Come and take my guns.

If you study history, you will find that the worst riots are caused by either food shortages or high food prices, then comes oppression of the lower classes. Even in the USA's case, wasn't it something about "No taxation without representation" that started the American revolution ?

Have your guns, I don't care, but if welfare is cut and 23 million unemployed start taking matters into their own hands. I hope you can change clips quickly, because they'll be shooting back.

T.A.

lol. +1

---

Reality Internet Personality

What you folks from canada and australia don't see is that we *do* take care of our folks on the bottom rungs of the ladder. The folks on the bottom rungs of our ladder live better than most of the world.

What you folks from canada and australia don't see is that the bottom rungs of our ladder include everybody from the very first rung all the way up to more than half way up the ladder now. And there are folks at the very top of the ladder who are taking advantage of very special treatment also from the tax payer.

What you folks from canada and australia don't see is that we now have a class of people who have grown accustomed to living on welfare. They are not only accustomed to living on welfare, it has become a way of life for them and they have now grown to *expect* it to always be there. They see no reason to every try to get off it. They see no reason to ever try anything, other than vote (as many times as they can each election) to make sure they always get their welfare check. And they have a majority of politicians in our executive branch doing everything they can to increase their welfare checks, a judicial branch that is teetering on making sure they always have their welfare checks, and half our legislative branch who are currently making sure they get their welfare checks.

What you folks *not only from canada and australia* but what all you liberals will never recognized is that there seems to be no limit to the amount of generosity you have with **other people's** money.

I say let's go ahead and kill the goose and get *all* the gold out of it right now.

Is the the point you are trying to make? America's Misguided Approach to Social Welfare

Just trying to get a handle on what you see as the problem with the way the US hands out benefits to people.

---

Reality Internet Personality