| ||||||
| Branches of Government Debate topics of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of Government. |
| View Poll Results: Who Was the best President of the 20th Century? | |||
| McKinley, William 1897-1901 |     | 0 | 0% |
| Roosevelt, Theodore 1901-09 |    | 2 | 5.41% |
| Taft, William H. 1909-13 |    | 0 | 0% |
| Wilson, Woodrow 1913-21 |    | 1 | 2.70% |
| Harding, Warren 1921-23 |    | 1 | 2.70% |
| Coolidge, Calvin 1923-29 |    | 0 | 0% |
| Hoover, Herbert 1929-33 | | 0 | 0% |
| Roosevelt, Franklin D. 1933-45 | | 8 | 21.62% |
| Truman, Harry 1945-53 | | 2 | 5.41% |
| Eisenhower, Dwight 1953-61 | | 3 | 8.11% |
| Kennedy, John F. 1961-63 | | 3 | 8.11% |
| Johnson, Lyndon 1963-69 | | 1 | 2.70% |
| Nixon, Richard 1969-74 | | 0 | 0% |
| Ford, Gerald 1974-77 | | 0 | 0% |
| Carter, Jimmy 1977-81 | | 2 | 5.41% |
| Reagan, Ronald 1981-89 | | 11 | 29.73% |
| Bush, George H.W. 1989-93 | | 2 | 5.41% |
| Clinton, William J. 1993-2001 | | 1 | 2.70% |
| Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
06-09-2005, 10:11 PM
| #41 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Super Moderator   Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.) Gender:  Posts: 7,880 Country: 
 |  Quote:
Haha. Well, I'm just saying: how anti-corporation could I really be! They are small family businesses. Nothing to brag about. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
|
06-10-2005, 07:29 AM
| #42 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Head of Security  Join Date: May 2005 Location: The Cradle of Liberty Gender: Posts: 10,352 Country: 
  | Quote:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
06-10-2005, 12:33 PM
| #43 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Super Moderator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.) Gender: Posts: 7,880 Country:
| Quote:
Right on. I do the same whenever I can. The internet has really levelled the playing field for small businesses, giving them more power than ever before! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
06-10-2005, 02:16 PM
| #44 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Head of Security Join Date: May 2005 Location: The Cradle of Liberty Gender: Posts: 10,352 Country:
| Quote:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
06-10-2005, 04:04 PM
| #45 (permalink) | ||
| Website Owner   Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Gender: Posts: 5,504 Country: Thanks: 12
Thanked 70 Times in 62 Posts
| Quote:
| ||
|
06-10-2005, 10:06 PM
| #46 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Super Moderator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.) Gender: Posts: 7,880 Country:
| Quote:
Where the hell do you think that money is going to be invested?? Bush doesn't care about the people... he cares about getting the money that people are due back into his interests hands. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
06-10-2005, 11:49 PM
| #47 (permalink) | |
| Website Owner Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Gender: Posts: 5,504 Country: Thanks: 12
Thanked 70 Times in 62 Posts
| I was expecting a response like this. I still don't see any problem with giving the American people a choice. Secondly, if you diversify your money into many different types of accounts that have had years of progress, surely it makes more sense than IOU's. I know, the rich would be getting more money because...um...they invest more. Anyone can become wealthy in this country if they go to school, work hard, and balance a checkbook. It just makes sense. | |
|
06-10-2005, 11:59 PM
| #48 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Super Moderator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.) Gender: Posts: 7,880 Country:
| Quote:
No, you aren't understanding my point. It isn't people with more money getting more back that I have a problem with. It is the fact that money will go back into corporate interests. That is how a higher interest rate is accomplished via investments. More money to rich corporate buddies. Fuck that! More money for corporations = more corporate power in our government = average joe gets screwed even more. The extra few percentage points aren't worth it! Dirtier air, less democracy, and more monopoly within business. NO THANKS BUSH! | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
06-11-2005, 12:04 AM
| #49 (permalink) | |
| Website Owner Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Gender: Posts: 5,504 Country: Thanks: 12
Thanked 70 Times in 62 Posts
| More money into corporations means more money to spend, more jobs, etc. When corporations have more money...this is the outcome. Look at the results from the tax-cuts. Unemployment is wayyy low now. The point is, i'd rather invest and manage my money instead of letting the goverment "hold" my money until I retire. | |
|
06-11-2005, 12:11 AM
| #50 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Super Moderator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Seattle (grew up around D.C.) Gender: Posts: 7,880 Country:
| Quote:
The Bush plan would only take money from the bottom of the pyramid (average joe's) and place it back towards the top (top 1%). Just cut back on military spending and create a plan where all our citizens are taken care of in old age and leave corporations out of the loop. They shouldn't be there in the first place. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:54 PM.
