GOP revives rule allowing $1 salaries for government employees

[Pumpkin Row]

I don't know where to go with that. It does appear that you support some type of social payment for those who flat out refuse to even make an attempt at finding employment. In other words we the productive should be burdened with the lazy and disinterested. Just because....

...we subscribe to the rule of law, Individual Liberty, and Capitalism. Why not ask for a tax preference for it.

I'm having trouble figuring out if you're a troll or totally brain dead. The second isn't as much of a long shot as some may think, because Socialists are just that outright stupid.

Are you against public schools and police? You socialist!

The Police are infrastructure. For something to be Socialist, it has to include Social control of a means of production.

I am against Public schools, though. Worthless, propaganda spewing, tax dollar black holes.

I have no kids and my brother sends his 2 kids to the most expensive private school in Michigan. I would love to see everyone with kids have to pay for their school.

They already do. So does everyone without kids. It's called "paying taxes", and you do it from the day you get your first paycheck, to the moment you breath your last. You pay for that 'service' whether you use it or not, with a part of every single paycheck, and said service is sub par because of that, since it means there's no incentive to provide a quality service.

Hence private schoolers and home schoolers consistently being far more intelligent... because there's the incentive of providing a quality service so people will actually choose to pay for it instead of dumping the kid off on the government to be fed propaganda, schooling the kid yourself, or sending them to a different private school, and the incentive of it being your own kid, and therefor wanting them to be properly educated.

 

[sealybobo]

Define "rich".

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

its like a talking point magic 8 ball, ask it a question then wait for the generic answer to appear.
The guy is either a total idiot or he is in maybe the 10th grade. Either way, he has no clue about anything he claims, is unable to back anything up that he says and basically has proven that he has no idea at all how money flows in this country.

Just because he's not a right wing nut job like you doesn't mean he's stupid. I'm reading your back and forth and seems he's schooling your ass but you just don't get what he's saying because you are a right wing tool.

He has not schooled anyone? he has not been able to provide any proof that corporate welfare is a real thing.
until he does he will just have to stay on the total idiot list.

Its like having to start over again from 2000 or 2008. I'm not about to start arguing the shit we argued 16 years ago, we debunk, you deflect, papageorge denies and spin spin spin.

 

[sealybobo]

Define "rich".

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

There's this one guy I agree with but it annoys me when he always calls people dupes. Con dupes. Over and over. Lol

If you pay attention I'm actually a moderate lefty. I get along with all moderates and understand neither the left or right are correct. It's not just the rich screwing us it's also welfare lifers. I get it. But con dupes can't admit the rich are who are really rigging this system for themselves.

 

[sealybobo]

...we subscribe to the rule of law, Individual Liberty, and Capitalism. Why not ask for a tax preference for it.

I'm having trouble figuring out if you're a troll or totally brain dead. The second isn't as much of a long shot as some may think, because Socialists are just that outright stupid.

Are you against public schools and police? You socialist!

The Police are infrastructure. For something to be Socialist, it has to include Social control of a means of production.

I am against Public schools, though. Worthless, propaganda spewing, tax dollar black holes.

I have no kids and my brother sends his 2 kids to the most expensive private school in Michigan. I would love to see everyone with kids have to pay for their school.

They already do. So does everyone without kids. It's called "paying taxes", and you do it from the day you get your first paycheck, to the moment you breath your last. You pay for that 'service' whether you use it or not, with a part of every single paycheck, and said service is sub par because of that, since it means there's no incentive to provide a quality service.

Hence private schoolers and home schoolers consistently being far more intelligent... because there's the incentive of providing a quality service so people will actually choose to pay for it instead of dumping the kid off on the government to be fed propaganda, schooling the kid yourself, or sending them to a different private school, and the incentive of it being your own kid, and therefor wanting them to be properly educated.

I agree now people who pay for private shouldn't have to pay for public.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Unemployment about to go up to 20%.....You think your pay isn't going to go down? PFT!

GOP revives rule allowing $1 salaries for government employees

They would STILL be over paying you, drunkard.

 

[Papageorgio]

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

There's this one guy I agree with but it annoys me when he always calls people dupes. Con dupes. Over and over. Lol

If you pay attention I'm actually a moderate lefty. I get along with all moderates and understand neither the left or right are correct. It's not just the rich screwing us it's also welfare lifers. I get it. But con dupes can't admit the rich are who are really rigging this system for themselves.

I said long ago the rich write laws for the rich, not for the middle class.

 

[danielpalos]

Define "rich".

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

its like a talking point magic 8 ball, ask it a question then wait for the generic answer to appear.
The guy is either a total idiot or he is in maybe the 10th grade. Either way, he has no clue about anything he claims, is unable to back anything up that he says and basically has proven that he has no idea at all how money flows in this country.

Just because he's not a right wing nut job like you doesn't mean he's stupid. I'm reading your back and forth and seems he's schooling your ass but you just don't get what he's saying because you are a right wing tool.

He has not schooled anyone? he has not been able to provide any proof that corporate welfare is a real thing.
until he does he will just have to stay on the total idiot list.

i have no problem with the wikipedia definition until the wikileak comes out.

 

[danielpalos]

Define "rich".

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

 

[Papageorgio]

the one percent.

Well, that certainly nails it down.

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

Wasn't commenting on your cliche, I was replying to NOLA.

 

[danielpalos]

Well, that certainly nails it down.

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

Wasn't commenting on your cliche, I was replying to NOLA.

yes, you did. only nuts don't have valid arguments.

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

 

[rightwinger]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

Here's the other thing happening people don't realize is happening. Companies are subcontracting jobs to 3rd party companies.

In the past 35% workers were unions. In the future 35% will be temps.

This coming from a person that doesn't belong to a union and won't form one at his place of employment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I work for a surprisingly liberal place. Even the president defends unions. We knock them too but he understands their importance. Do you?

I've worked for places I would have love to unionize. But they would just fire you and would the sheep sign up or be told their job will go to Texas? One place actually did cut half our staff then opened up a competitor in Texas we would compete against. Sad. Too many bad places to work.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

 

[Papageorgio]

Where do these nutters come from? Are they comedians?

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

Wasn't commenting on your cliche, I was replying to NOLA.

yes, you did. only nuts don't have valid arguments.

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

I was commenting to NOLA not you. If you don't like it too bad, not my problem.

 

[Papageorgio]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

This coming from a person that doesn't belong to a union and won't form one at his place of employment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I work for a surprisingly liberal place. Even the president defends unions. We knock them too but he understands their importance. Do you?

I've worked for places I would have love to unionize. But they would just fire you and would the sheep sign up or be told their job will go to Texas? One place actually did cut half our staff then opened up a competitor in Texas we would compete against. Sad. Too many bad places to work.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

That is your opinion, thank you for sharing. Sharing is caring.

 

[danielpalos]

Soggy is a nut huh?

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

Wasn't commenting on your cliche, I was replying to NOLA.

yes, you did. only nuts don't have valid arguments.

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

I was commenting to NOLA not you. If you don't like it too bad, not my problem.

no valid argument for rebuttal; i got it.

 

[Papageorgio]

NOLA is fine, Daniel is a nut. he has nothing to say and then says it over and over and thinks the more he posts his stupidity the better his argument is. At least you think.

anything more than diversion?

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

Wasn't commenting on your cliche, I was replying to NOLA.

yes, you did. only nuts don't have valid arguments.

How about a rule that rich guys have to live on their public servant salary while in public office?

I was commenting to NOLA not you. If you don't like it too bad, not my problem.

no valid argument for rebuttal; i got it.

If that is what you need to believe to feel better. I wasn't engaging you. I was sharing a thought with NOLA. Sharing is caring.

Besides I have no idea what your argument is, you make a one line statement. Nothing but a vague statement.

 

[sealybobo]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

This coming from a person that doesn't belong to a union and won't form one at his place of employment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I work for a surprisingly liberal place. Even the president defends unions. We knock them too but he understands their importance. Do you?

I've worked for places I would have love to unionize. But they would just fire you and would the sheep sign up or be told their job will go to Texas? One place actually did cut half our staff then opened up a competitor in Texas we would compete against. Sad. Too many bad places to work.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

And they could point out where the article is wrong if they believe it to be. Sorry papa but you are going to see truth on Huffpo that you won't see on the MSM sites. It's true.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I said long ago the rich write laws for the rich, not for the middle class.

I disagree. Laws are written to rule the underclasses. The rich are immune from the laws that are imposed on the masses, otherwise Obama, Hillary, Holder, and Lerner would be in prison.

 

[Papageorgio]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

I work for a surprisingly liberal place. Even the president defends unions. We knock them too but he understands their importance. Do you?

I've worked for places I would have love to unionize. But they would just fire you and would the sheep sign up or be told their job will go to Texas? One place actually did cut half our staff then opened up a competitor in Texas we would compete against. Sad. Too many bad places to work.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

And they could point out where the article is wrong if they believe it to be. Sorry papa but you are going to see truth on Huffpo that you won't see on the MSM sites. It's true.

Huffpo is a left wing propaganda site. It leans as far left as MSNBC. Not a great site for truth.

 

[rightwinger]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

And they could point out where the article is wrong if they believe it to be. Sorry papa but you are going to see truth on Huffpo that you won't see on the MSM sites. It's true.

Huffpo is a left wing propaganda site. It leans as far left as MSNBC. Not a great site for truth.

Depends what they say

If they are directly quoting other sources, you have to accept it as credible

 

[sealybobo]

I cited wikipedia. you have nothing but appeals to your authority. you have nothing but fallacy; whom do you think, i should believe.

Wikipedia? LOL!! Why not use Mother Earth News, just as reliable.

Man you don't remember anything I post do you? If you want to unionize so be, I really don't care either way. Collective bargaining is fine unless you are a public employee. I agree with FDR Truman and Kennedy, public sector unions should not be allowed to have collective bargaining.

I'll give you that. But don't think that's going to help the middle class. Don't think that's going to help unemployment. I don't mind the idea of cutting the government in half but not overnight.

And I don't think teachers should make as much as they do.

But don't you dare try to say "but only the police get to have a union". Why them and not teachers? Because that would be going too far. If you are ok with unions for police you are a hypocrite.

I am okay with all unions, where did I claim otherwise?

Wikipedia is as good as any other source on the interweb

It is possible to change an article to include partisan opinions as fact. But those changes are quickly identified and challenged within the article. Wikipedia also has extensive footnoting of sources and poorly written or researched articles are identified as such

And they could point out where the article is wrong if they believe it to be. Sorry papa but you are going to see truth on Huffpo that you won't see on the MSM sites. It's true.

Huffpo is a left wing propaganda site. It leans as far left as MSNBC. Not a great site for truth.

MSNBC doesn't lean left enough for me.

And these are great sources for truth when the GOP are lying. They're the only ones who will tell you.

Where do you get your news?