Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Stupid Government Regulations

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stupid Government Regulations

    We have discussed how government regulations hurt our economy but I thought I would start a thread on it since Obama is issuing so many nanny state regulations that are costing our economy billions.

    Here's one that is particularly aggravating to me.

    Amidst Obamacare’s 3,000 pages lies a regulation that may squeeze craft beer brewers out of business. Why would federal healthcare bureaucrats want to meddle in this thriving industry? Well, regulators claim that American consumers are not healthy because they are blissfully unaware of the amount of calories in beer.

    As of December 2016, Obamacare dictates that all brewers must include a detailed calorie count on every type of beer they produce. Failure to comply with the new regulations means craft brewers will not be able to sell their beer in any restaurant chain with over 20 locations. Because this is a major market for selling beer, it hamstrings smaller craft brewers if they do not comply.

    The Cato Institute estimates the Obamacare calorie labeling requirements will cost a business as much as $77,000 to implement. For larger beer companies, this is a drop in the bucket, but for small, local craft brewers it represents a substantial cost that they must pay. As a result, it creates a significant disadvantage compared to larger beer companies who can better absorb the cost of this new regulation.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-beer-n2171764

  • #2
    And the morons in government said....

    "Look what I can do !"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyvbFMGmImg

    ... this is what happens when we get idiotic do-gooders, with nothing better to do than dream up ways to "help us."

    What did we think they were going to come up with ?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BnY...=RDWyvbFMGmImg

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      but I have a plan .... stop voting for morons !

      .... yeah, sorry, I know,.. that's all we get to choose from.

      ... well, morons and criminals.

      Maybe the Crips and the Bloods ? They'd probably run the country better than the milk-toast fignuts we currently have in D.C.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
        We have discussed how government regulations hurt our economy but I thought I would start a thread on it since Obama is issuing so many nanny state regulations that are costing our economy billions.

        Here's one that is particularly aggravating to me.



        http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-beer-n2171764
        Ah, this is a case of big business wanting regulations, in order to crush their competition. If you like beer, as my brother does, he will pay more for craft beer from small companies, because it is just better beer. So, the craft industry has cut into beer sales, and for much of my life, if you wanted a beer, it was from one of the 3 major brewers, who made ginger ale and called it beer.

        How many regulations are actually big business, using regulations to limit their competition? I think there is probably a slew of them. Of course the reason for new regs cannot be given, for that would tell the people what was going on. Big business taking out competition with the help of the gov't.

        We need regulations. Just as we need speed limits that are enforced. But you need intelligent regulations based upon the common good of the people in this nation. Here right now in my state there is a big deal going on in that particular business interests, those that offshore, want to get rid of the inspection of foreign produced catfish, that comes from the cess pools in the far east. What drives this? There are already clause in TPP that would take away the origin of food brought in from Vietnam, so that caveat emptor is no longer in use. This is done for big business, not small business. It is just more of rigging the system. Americans have no right of knowing where their food comes from, nor any right for that food to be inspected, if left up to the interests of certain businesses who help put these politicians into office.

        How many of new regs are designed to take away competition. Now here in the south, catfish is a fish of choice for so many people. American raised catfish, in ponds where they are fed like hogs is some of the best freshwater fish when it comes to taste. A very white and mild fish, and it help our local economy. Then with free trade we started getting in questionable catfish from the far east. Of course they are cheaper for eateries to buy and they make more profits on them. This put one of my old friends out of business who had gone into farm raising catfish, for he refused to hire illegal Mexicans like his competitors had to do here in order just to try to compete with slave labor in the far east, where the people are literally slaves and worked 16 hours a day, and abused, many of them children.

        We are circling the drain, as a working people, and regulations bought by big business interests plays a key role in that. And they keep adding thousands of these regs, to rig the system, in favor of the big boys. Neoliberalism.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

          Ah, this is a case of big business wanting regulations, in order to crush their competition. If you like beer, as my brother does, he will pay more for craft beer from small companies, because it is just better beer. So, the craft industry has cut into beer sales, and for much of my life, if you wanted a beer, it was from one of the 3 major brewers, who made ginger ale and called it beer.

          How many regulations are actually big business, using regulations to limit their competition? I think there is probably a slew of them. Of course the reason for new regs cannot be given, for that would tell the people what was going on. Big business taking out competition with the help of the gov't.

          We need regulations. Just as we need speed limits that are enforced. But you need intelligent regulations based upon the common good of the people in this nation. Here right now in my state there is a big deal going on in that particular business interests, those that offshore, want to get rid of the inspection of foreign produced catfish, that comes from the cess pools in the far east. What drives this? There are already clause in TPP that would take away the origin of food brought in from Vietnam, so that caveat emptor is no longer in use. This is done for big business, not small business. It is just more of rigging the system. Americans have no right of knowing where their food comes from, nor any right for that food to be inspected, if left up to the interests of certain businesses who help put these politicians into office.

          How many of new regs are designed to take away competition. Now here in the south, catfish is a fish of choice for so many people. American raised catfish, in ponds where they are fed like hogs is some of the best freshwater fish when it comes to taste. A very white and mild fish, and it help our local economy. Then with free trade we started getting in questionable catfish from the far east. Of course they are cheaper for eateries to buy and they make more profits on them. This put one of my old friends out of business who had gone into farm raising catfish, for he refused to hire illegal Mexicans like his competitors had to do here in order just to try to compete with slave labor in the far east, where the people are literally slaves and worked 16 hours a day, and abused, many of them children.

          We are circling the drain, as a working people, and regulations bought by big business interests plays a key role in that. And they keep adding thousands of these regs, to rig the system, in favor of the big boys. Neoliberalism.
          The big beer companies didn't plug this into Obamacare, it was put in by nanny state leftists. The Michael Bloomberg type who want to limit the size of a soft drink you can buy or what type of bag you bring home your groceries in.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

            The big beer companies didn't plug this into Obamacare, it was put in by nanny state leftists. The Michael Bloomberg type who want to limit the size of a soft drink you can buy or what type of bag you bring home your groceries in.
            We do not know that for sure. Do the people who are the major stockholders in big insurance, own stock in big beer? Who owns the major stock in big beer? Who owns major stock in all big corporations? Who benefits if small craft breweries have a hard time staying in business? This world we live in is ruled over by big money from big elites. If one does not follow the money, and who benefits economically from regulations, then one may be misdirected in what drives so many regulations. For you can bet your arse, if some elite is making more money, or safeguarding their investments when it comes to a regulation, that indeed they were involved in putting such a regulation in place. To not think this is how the world works is nonsense. Follow the money in these free trade agreements. Follow the money in the refusal of both parties to control illegal immigration. Follow the money in the perpetual war for perpetual peace, and look to see which special interests get richer or protect their investments. Just follow the money. No longer are decisions, policy, regulations, guided by the common good, at least many of them. Who benefitted from the deregulation of capitalism, of banking? Small business? The American working people? This crap is very transparent as long as you understand what drove open borders and free trade in the first place. PROFITS, more profits. For this is all that matters today. And that is supposed to trickle down, to make the middle even larger, more prosperous. Show me where it did that. LOL.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
              We do not know that for sure. Do the people who are the major stockholders in big insurance, own stock in big beer? Who owns the major stock in big beer? Who owns major stock in all big corporations? Who benefits if small craft breweries have a hard time staying in business?
              Unions, local and state pension funds, and anyone with any form of retirement investment, totaling to slightly more than half the people in this country.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Originally posted by Commodore View Post

                Unions, local and state pension funds, and anyone with any form of retirement investment, totaling to slightly more than half the people in this country.
                You are talking about stock that people that have 401 Ks are invested in. And you know very well I am talking about the major stockholders that actually own the corporaton. Workers were better off when they had something called a pension. Instead of a savings account that was invested in stocks, that are constantly being rolled over into other stocks. These people do not own the company. Do you know the difference between Common stock, and Preferred stock?

                There is a short list of men who own corporations, and banks, and it aint't the guy with a 20 grand in stock via his 401 K that is spread out. So, don't play the dunce Commodore, for it is contrived, which is a clever attempt at right wing spin. OR, you may simply not know? I will assume the latter, to be kind.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

                  You are talking about stock that people that have 401 Ks are invested in. And you know very well I am talking about the major stockholders that actually own the corporaton. Workers were better off when they had something called a pension. Instead of a savings account that was invested in stocks, that are constantly being rolled over into other stocks. These people do not own the company. Do you know the difference between Common stock, and Preferred stock?

                  There is a short list of men who own corporations, and banks, and it aint't the guy with a 20 grand in stock via his 401 K that is spread out. So, don't play the dunce Commodore, for it is contrived, which is a clever attempt at right wing spin. OR, you may simply not know? I will assume the latter, to be kind.
                  Yeah, all those folks who owned preferred stock in GM and Chrysler lost all they had when the government took it away from them and gave it to the unions. 30% of Walmart stock is owned by investment companies. That's the 401K's As far as private pensions, that has always been iffy. Here's a list of ten big pension funds that failed with the company. I would much rather have diverse investments.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

                    Yeah, all those folks who owned preferred stock in GM and Chrysler lost all they had when the government took it away from them and gave it to the unions. 30% of Walmart stock is owned by investment companies. That's the 401K's As far as private pensions, that has always been iffy. Here's a list of ten big pension funds that failed with the company. I would much rather have diverse investments.
                    Again, the point was, the stocks that yield a return for 401 Ks do not own the corporation. That was my point. No more than getting a return on a savings account at a bank makes a savings account holder, OWN the bank.

                    Pensions, many of them went belly up when neoliberalism came back, and corporations were taken over, stripped of their assets which made some big boys richer. This really took off in the 80s by a change in rules, driven by neoliberalism. People who had pensions were much better off, over 401 Ks. This 401 K for retirement, over a pension was a step backward not forward, unless you were the corporation. It benefitted them, and wall street more than the workers. Which of course it was designed to do. At first the corporation would match what the worker contributed, from his paycheck. NOW, that is going away with many businesses, and its just the worker having a deduction from his income that is saved. If the economy crashes, they can lose much of it. My brother has still not got back what his 401 was worth. So he went backward. My wife's pension didn't lose a dime, and what she would draw was never reduced. If you were needing to cash in your 401 right after the crash, all of those years of saving sometimes up to 60 percent, just vanished. And so working people have less security now not more. Not even the same security my parents had. And all of this combined, what neoliberalism has created is why this is such a crazy election cycle. I think we can expect more of them, for things are not improving for working America, they are continuing to worsen. To think this is not intentional, that the growth in income disparity is not intentional is nonsense. It's what happened, the result of neoliberalism returning from the first gilded age, compliments of the party who ruled during that age, the GOP, with great assistance from the dems, who sold out the people.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                      You are talking about stock that people that have 401 Ks are invested in. And you know very well I am talking about the major stockholders that actually own the corporaton. Workers were better off when they had something called a pension. Instead of a savings account that was invested in stocks, that are constantly being rolled over into other stocks. These people do not own the company. Do you know the difference between Common stock, and Preferred stock?

                      There is a short list of men who own corporations, and banks, and it aint't the guy with a 20 grand in stock via his 401 K that is spread out. So, don't play the dunce Commodore, for it is contrived, which is a clever attempt at right wing spin. OR, you may simply not know? I will assume the latter, to be kind.
                      Yeah, thats what you tell yourself, that "no one of importance was harmed" as you pillage those "evil corporations" assets until grandma's investments provide just enough cat food to sustain her until just before the end of the year when Medicare runs out of aforementioned pillaged funds, and they decide she is no longer worth the investment.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                        We have discussed how government regulations hurt our economy but I thought I would start a thread on it since Obama is issuing so many nanny state regulations that are costing our economy billions.

                        Here's one that is particularly aggravating to me.



                        http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-beer-n2171764
                        How much does that cost translate, per label? More than $1.00? I doubt it; likely it's much less. People are going to drink microbrews because they tend to taste better, while they tend to not care much about the calorie count. "It's got more calories than the Big Brew, I'll bet. Bartender! Gimme another craft." If I were a micro brewer, I'd add to the label the extra nutrients my product has, compared to the Big Competition. People might factor that in at restaurants as part of their nutrition. If they are at a bar or at home, they will likely not care or drink more of my product because of the details on the label.

                        Is it a waste of gov't regulation funds? Probably, when a general calorie/carb statement would do the trick. Is it going to put micro breweries out of business? I doubt it. The one thing that might put a lot of micros out of business would be the major breweries making a great product at a lower price than the micros.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by radcentr View Post

                          How much does that cost translate, per label? More than $1.00? I doubt it; likely it's much less. People are going to drink microbrews because they tend to taste better, while they tend to not care much about the calorie count. "It's got more calories than the Big Brew, I'll bet. Bartender! Gimme another craft." If I were a micro brewer, I'd add to the label the extra nutrients my product has, compared to the Big Competition. People might factor that in at restaurants as part of their nutrition. If they are at a bar or at home, they will likely not care or drink more of my product because of the details on the label.

                          Is it a waste of gov't regulation funds? Probably, when a general calorie/carb statement would do the trick. Is it going to put micro breweries out of business? I doubt it. The one thing that might put a lot of micros out of business would be the major breweries making a great product at a lower price than the micros.
                          As the article says, it will cost $77,000 to implement. That is big bucks to small craft breweries.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

                            As the article says, it will cost $77,000 to implement. That is big bucks to small craft breweries.
                            And it will keep other small breweries launching their products. This is the way the big boys keep down competition, and they love it when regulations do exactly that. This has gone on for years, keeping competition down. How in the world did we ever make it, before this nonsense. We increase the cost to get into the beer business, while at the same time we are taking off the origin of food products that is much more important. Why take off country of origin? Because americans might want to buy American grown food, and that would hurt the business who offshored, created corporate farms, putting the local farmers in that nation out of business. Who then flood across our borders to find work, illegally, and American business then pays them less, because they are illegal. This is how the rich stick it to the poor. A rigged game, which hurts working and poor people. And it gets worse and worse and worse. It's a back door to create monopolies. Clever. Neoliberalism.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                              And it will keep other small breweries launching their products. This is the way the big boys keep down competition, and they love it when regulations do exactly that. This has gone on for years, keeping competition down. How in the world did we ever make it, before this nonsense. We increase the cost to get into the beer business, while at the same time we are taking off the origin of food products that is much more important. Why take off country of origin? Because americans might want to buy American grown food, and that would hurt the business who offshored, created corporate farms, putting the local farmers in that nation out of business. Who then flood across our borders to find work, illegally, and American business then pays them less, because they are illegal. This is how the rich stick it to the poor. A rigged game, which hurts working and poor people. And it gets worse and worse and worse. It's a back door to create monopolies. Clever. Neoliberalism.
                              If people want cheap beer, they have to pay the price. Or they can pay the price of local beer. Or they can brew their own. They don't even have to be carded for that last one.

                              Are you going to tell them what they can and can not buy? In the name of freedom*?
                              Last edited by Commodore; 06-08-2016, 12:44 PM. Reason: * Setting aside for a moment the inherent contradiction of intoxicants and freedom.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X