Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.atheism > #2114633 > unrolled thread
| Started by | viva padrepio <vivapadrepio@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-27 13:24 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-06 17:13 +1000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 101 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.atheism
Air America! viva padrepio <vivapadrepio@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 13:24 -0700
Re: Air America! hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-05-27 19:51 -0700
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-05-27 22:06 -0500
Re: Air America! Cloud Hobbit <youngblood2949@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 21:13 -0700
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-03 15:54 +1000
Re: Air America! rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com - 2016-06-07 15:28 -0700
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 11:35 +1000
Re: Air America! rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com - 2016-06-08 11:23 -0700
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-09 09:58 +1000
Re: Air America! Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-03 05:16 -0700
Re: Air America! Kurt Kurt <passerby31416@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 19:41 -0700
Re: Air America! rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com - 2016-06-07 15:38 -0700
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 07:32 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-01 05:35 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-01 20:30 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-01 06:38 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-01 20:42 +1000
Re: Air America! hhyapster@gmail.com - 2016-06-01 05:51 -0700
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-01 09:17 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:39 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-01 18:10 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 19:00 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-01 20:05 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-02 10:54 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 01:39 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 07:23 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 08:40 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 08:44 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 11:05 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 14:55 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 16:44 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 18:04 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-03 04:50 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 07:42 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-03 10:40 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 15:37 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-03 17:53 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-04 10:59 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 03:49 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-03 20:55 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 03:54 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 06:53 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 09:11 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-04 12:38 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 14:31 -0400
Re: Air America! John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2016-06-04 21:41 +0100
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-05 11:56 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-05 04:09 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-05 19:12 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-05 10:18 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 10:15 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 02:01 -0400
Re: Air America! rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com - 2016-06-07 15:42 -0700
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 11:38 +1000
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-05 21:28 -0500
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 14:19 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 02:08 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 17:21 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 04:32 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 09:44 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 23:08 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-06 08:02 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 14:14 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-06 21:10 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 23:11 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-07 17:13 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-07 18:22 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-03 10:28 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-03 04:55 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-04 10:52 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 04:00 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-05 11:54 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-05 04:13 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 20:58 -0500
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-02 12:25 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 01:43 -0400
Re: Air America! rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com - 2016-06-07 15:23 -0700
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 01:41 -0400
Re: Air America! Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2016-06-02 07:20 -0500
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 08:42 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-02 10:36 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-02 01:48 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-03 10:49 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-03 04:57 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-04 10:44 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-04 04:02 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-05 11:46 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-05 04:15 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-05 19:17 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-05 10:23 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +1000
Re: Air America! Attila <<prochoice@here.now> - 2016-06-06 02:13 -0400
Re: Air America! John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 10:32 +0100
Re: Air America! Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> - 2016-06-06 04:00 -0700
Re: Air America! John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 15:53 +0100
Re: Air America! Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 00:04 -0400
Re: Air America! Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2016-06-05 23:56 -0500
Re: Air America! Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 01:00 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 15:17 +1000
Re: Air America! Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 01:45 -0400
Re: Air America! "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-06-06 17:13 +1000
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 10:36 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dr9dbeF2d4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2117645 |
On 02/06/2016 08:10, Attila wrote: > On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 15:39:06 -0500, Mitchell Holman > <noemail@comcast.net> in alt.atheism with message-id > <XnsA61A9F6AB680noemailattnet@216.166.97.131> wrote: > >> Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote in >> news:p1otkbh8iu6qchoebbujqdkv9np5lsobmi@4ax.com: >> >>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 05:51:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>> alt.atheism with message-id >>> <4e901c5b-d10f-45ad-99b3-75ac0e5257af@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 6:42:48 PM UTC+8, Alex W. wrote: >>>>> On 01/06/2016 20:38, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 20:30:04 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> >>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <dr7rpaFkj9rU2@mid.individual.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 01/06/2016 19:35, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:51:45 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>>> <8b9ed5aa-8f79-49c7-bd3b-e155d481a0b6@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 4:24:49 AM UTC+8, viva padrepio >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Feds spent millions flying illegals around the country!!! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Distribution of workforce where they are wanted...it is >>>>>>>>> logical. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Only if the taxpayer doesn't pay for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That depends whether the taxpayer saves overall. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It's hard to see how the taxpayer can benefit from paying the >>>>>> transportation distribution expenses for unskilled workers. >>>> >>>> No one wants to see his garbage uncollected, drains clogged and >>>> streets uncleaned. >>>>> >>>>> The moment transport costs are lower than the cost to social >>>>> security programmes, it's a net gain to the taxpayer. If I can save >>>>> $1,000 in food stamps and unemployment benefits by spending $500 on >>>>> a plane ticket, I'll take that deal. >>>> >>>> Right. >>> >>> A better solution is to tighten up on the government giveaway >>> programs. >> >> >> Starting with handouts to corporations. >> >> > Handouts to individuals far exceed any tax breaks corporations get. Sorry, but that's rubbish. Tax loopholes for corporations are worth trillions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-02 01:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <91ivkb19ld9rgehpjgbp4iiq0mehkrvaom@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2117735 |
On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:36:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <dr9dbeF2d4U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 02/06/2016 08:10, Attila wrote: >> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 15:39:06 -0500, Mitchell Holman >> <noemail@comcast.net> in alt.atheism with message-id >> <XnsA61A9F6AB680noemailattnet@216.166.97.131> wrote: >> >>> Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote in >>> news:p1otkbh8iu6qchoebbujqdkv9np5lsobmi@4ax.com: >>> >>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 05:51:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>> <4e901c5b-d10f-45ad-99b3-75ac0e5257af@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 6:42:48 PM UTC+8, Alex W. wrote: >>>>>> On 01/06/2016 20:38, Attila wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 20:30:04 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> >>>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <dr7rpaFkj9rU2@mid.individual.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 01/06/2016 19:35, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:51:45 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>>>> <8b9ed5aa-8f79-49c7-bd3b-e155d481a0b6@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 4:24:49 AM UTC+8, viva padrepio >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Feds spent millions flying illegals around the country!!! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Distribution of workforce where they are wanted...it is >>>>>>>>>> logical. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Only if the taxpayer doesn't pay for it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That depends whether the taxpayer saves overall. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's hard to see how the taxpayer can benefit from paying the >>>>>>> transportation distribution expenses for unskilled workers. >>>>> >>>>> No one wants to see his garbage uncollected, drains clogged and >>>>> streets uncleaned. >>>>>> >>>>>> The moment transport costs are lower than the cost to social >>>>>> security programmes, it's a net gain to the taxpayer. If I can save >>>>>> $1,000 in food stamps and unemployment benefits by spending $500 on >>>>>> a plane ticket, I'll take that deal. >>>>> >>>>> Right. >>>> >>>> A better solution is to tighten up on the government giveaway >>>> programs. >>> >>> >>> Starting with handouts to corporations. >>> >>> >> Handouts to individuals far exceed any tax breaks corporations get. > >Sorry, but that's rubbish. >Tax loopholes for corporations are worth trillions. I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by the companies involved and at least the companies are generating revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the economy gains nothing. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 10:49 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2117898 |
On 02/06/2016 15:48, Attila wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 10:36:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <dr9dbeF2d4U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 02/06/2016 08:10, Attila wrote: >>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2016 15:39:06 -0500, Mitchell Holman >>> <noemail@comcast.net> in alt.atheism with message-id >>> <XnsA61A9F6AB680noemailattnet@216.166.97.131> wrote: >>> >>>> Attila <<prochoice@here.now> wrote in >>>> news:p1otkbh8iu6qchoebbujqdkv9np5lsobmi@4ax.com: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 05:51:08 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>> <4e901c5b-d10f-45ad-99b3-75ac0e5257af@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 6:42:48 PM UTC+8, Alex W. wrote: >>>>>>> On 01/06/2016 20:38, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 20:30:04 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> >>>>>>>> in alt.atheism with message-id <dr7rpaFkj9rU2@mid.individual.net> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 01/06/2016 19:35, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:51:45 -0700 (PDT), hhyapster@gmail.com in >>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id >>>>>>>>>> <8b9ed5aa-8f79-49c7-bd3b-e155d481a0b6@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 4:24:49 AM UTC+8, viva padrepio >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Feds spent millions flying illegals around the country!!! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Distribution of workforce where they are wanted...it is >>>>>>>>>>> logical. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Only if the taxpayer doesn't pay for it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That depends whether the taxpayer saves overall. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's hard to see how the taxpayer can benefit from paying the >>>>>>>> transportation distribution expenses for unskilled workers. >>>>>> >>>>>> No one wants to see his garbage uncollected, drains clogged and >>>>>> streets uncleaned. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The moment transport costs are lower than the cost to social >>>>>>> security programmes, it's a net gain to the taxpayer. If I can save >>>>>>> $1,000 in food stamps and unemployment benefits by spending $500 on >>>>>>> a plane ticket, I'll take that deal. >>>>>> >>>>>> Right. >>>>> >>>>> A better solution is to tighten up on the government giveaway >>>>> programs. >>>> >>>> >>>> Starting with handouts to corporations. >>>> >>>> >>> Handouts to individuals far exceed any tax breaks corporations get. >> >> Sorry, but that's rubbish. >> Tax loopholes for corporations are worth trillions. > > I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by > the companies involved and at least the companies are generating > revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the > economy gains nothing. There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy altogether ....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 04:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2gh2lb92t8sehhbbrj51o2uq9cqqkd9kj5@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2118472 |
On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >> economy gains nothing. > >There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal activity. > >As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >altogether .... Not really. Just send it somewhere else. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 10:44 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2118672 |
On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>> economy gains nothing. >> >> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. > > There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, > including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal > activity. Welfare is illegal? Since when? > >> >> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >> altogether .... > > Not really. Just send it somewhere else. Which does not remove it from the economic cycle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 04:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sl25lbhin95tfsu2oqlbcuino06pq057ue@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2119112 |
On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>> economy gains nothing. >>> >>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >> >> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >> activity. > >Welfare is illegal? Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >Since when? > > >> >>> >>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >>> altogether .... >> >> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. > >Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument to justify illegal drug activity? -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 11:46 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2119271 |
On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: > On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>> >>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>> >>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>> activity. >> >> Welfare is illegal? > > Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. Cut back to what? You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the developed world. > > >> Since when? >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >>>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >>>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >>>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >>>> altogether .... >>> >>> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. >> >> Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. > > It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument > to justify illegal drug activity? It does not. The economic cycle is global these days. As for drugs, I would legalise, regulate and tax them. This would raise revenue, reduce crime and allow for cutbacks in government expenditure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 04:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5pn7lbdneb8ik8gp8fuq7jeghjq1th1qpq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2119854 |
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>> >>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>> >>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>> activity. >>> >>> Welfare is illegal? >> >> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. > >Cut back to what? Close to zero. > >You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >developed world. So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. >> >>> Since when? >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >>>>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >>>>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >>>>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >>>>> altogether .... >>>> >>>> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. >>> >>> Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. >> >> It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument >> to justify illegal drug activity? > >It does not. The economic cycle is global these days. Not cash sent to some small town in some other country. > >As for drugs, I would legalise, regulate and tax them. This would raise >revenue, reduce crime and allow for cutbacks in government expenditure. I would not. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 19:17 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2119978 |
On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>> >>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>> activity. >>>> >>>> Welfare is illegal? >>> >>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >> >> Cut back to what? > > Close to zero. In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have a chance to succeed. Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. > >> >> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >> developed world. > > So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! > >>> >>>> Since when? >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >>>>>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >>>>>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >>>>>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >>>>>> altogether .... >>>>> >>>>> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. >>>> >>>> Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. >>> >>> It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument >>> to justify illegal drug activity? >> >> It does not. The economic cycle is global these days. > > Not cash sent to some small town in some other country. Remittances to Mexico alone amount to far more than the size of the Mexican oil industry. That makes "cash sent to some small town" a major economic factor, and every single American company that does business south of the border ensures that it remains a part of the economic cycle even back home in the US.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 10:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <a6d8lbh63h4mmofrat30ocdkcold4rtn4r@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2120000 |
On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>>> activity. >>>>> >>>>> Welfare is illegal? >>>> >>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >>> >>> Cut back to what? >> >> Close to zero. > >In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have >a chance to succeed. > >Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the >American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. Then let him emigrate. > > >> >>> >>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >>> developed world. >> >> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. > >I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just >the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their social policies. > > > > >> >>>> >>>>> Since when? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining nothing, that >>>>>>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in circulation. >>>>>>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it does not >>>>>>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the economy >>>>>>> altogether .... >>>>>> >>>>>> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. >>>>> >>>>> Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. >>>> >>>> It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument >>>> to justify illegal drug activity? >>> >>> It does not. The economic cycle is global these days. >> >> Not cash sent to some small town in some other country. > >Remittances to Mexico alone amount to far more than the size of the >Mexican oil industry. That makes "cash sent to some small town" a major >economic factor, and every single American company that does business >south of the border ensures that it remains a part of the economic cycle >even back home in the US. If the money was kept here it would be more of a benefit. Not to mention it is an illegal activity since those sending the money got it illegally. Since they are here illegally everything they do is illegal. You will never move me on this. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 10:20 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <drjtthF33stU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2120184 |
On 06/06/2016 00:23, Attila wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >> On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>>>> activity. >>>>>> >>>>>> Welfare is illegal? >>>>> >>>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >>>> >>>> Cut back to what? >>> >>> Close to zero. >> >> In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have >> a chance to succeed. >> >> Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the >> American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. > > Then let him emigrate. > >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >>>> developed world. >>> >>> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. >> >> I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just >> the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! > > How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And > there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their > social policies. Social policies had little to nothing to do with the Greek meltdown or the severe problems experienced by most of Southern Europe. Their issues were caused by years and decades of bad fiscal and taxation policies, compounded by a political system that was a particularly pernicious form of democracy known as "clientelism".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Attila <<prochoice@here.now> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 02:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <gu4albhv04d09hle87c1jkegcdgbvs496l@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2120547 |
On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:20:07 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in alt.atheism with message-id <drjtthF33stU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >On 06/06/2016 00:23, Attila wrote: >> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >>>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>>>>> activity. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Welfare is illegal? >>>>>> >>>>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >>>>> >>>>> Cut back to what? >>>> >>>> Close to zero. >>> >>> In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have >>> a chance to succeed. >>> >>> Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the >>> American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. >> >> Then let him emigrate. >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >>>>> developed world. >>>> >>>> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. >>> >>> I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just >>> the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! >> >> How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And >> there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their >> social policies. > >Social policies had little to nothing to do with the Greek meltdown or >the severe problems experienced by most of Southern Europe. Their >issues were caused by years and decades of bad fiscal and taxation >policies, compounded by a political system that was a particularly >pernicious form of democracy known as "clientelism". > Social policies such as extended paid vacation and excessive minimum wages plus paid for medical care had a lot to do with it. Just what do you think "bad fiscal and taxation policies" are? The nanny state is melting down everywhere. -- Some of the Republican positions I find disgusting and abhorrent. Most of the Democratic positions I find terrifying, especially those proposed by His Imperial Majesty Emperor Ass. Any day now I expect some liberal to demand a government guaranteed above average income for every person. Every illegal alien is a criminal. No amnesty or work permit under any name or for any reason. Deportation upon identification as the only option. If you must text and drive please kill yourself quickly before you run into me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 10:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <MShcxONoMUVXFwPi@hotmail.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2120695 |
In article <gu4albhv04d09hle87c1jkegcdgbvs496l@4ax.com>, Attila <?@here.now> writes >On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:20:07 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >alt.atheism with message-id <drjtthF33stU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>On 06/06/2016 00:23, Attila wrote: >>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>> alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned by >>>>>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and the >>>>>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in catering to >>>>>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>>>>>> activity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Welfare is illegal? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cut back to what? >>>>> >>>>> Close to zero. >>>> >>>> In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have >>>> a chance to succeed. >>>> >>>> Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the >>>> American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. >>> >>> Then let him emigrate. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >>>>>> developed world. >>>>> >>>>> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. >>>> >>>> I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just >>>> the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! >>> >>> How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And >>> there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their >>> social policies. >> >>Social policies had little to nothing to do with the Greek meltdown or >>the severe problems experienced by most of Southern Europe. Their >>issues were caused by years and decades of bad fiscal and taxation >>policies, compounded by a political system that was a particularly >>pernicious form of democracy known as "clientelism". >> > >Social policies such as extended paid vacation and excessive minimum >wages plus paid for medical care had a lot to do with it. Not forgetting the fact that Greece was spending more and more on arms. It spent 58% of its military expenditure on weaponry from Germany, being Germany's largest arms customer. Greece also spent a fortune on arms from France and the US. And strangely, while insisting on 'austerity' in every other area of Greek public spending, Germany and France were silent about military spending. -- John Ritson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 04:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <hlwdjsd2-09A82C.04001506062016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #2120729 |
In article <MShcxONoMUVXFwPi@hotmail.co.uk>, John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > In article <gu4albhv04d09hle87c1jkegcdgbvs496l@4ax.com>, Attila > <?@here.now> writes > >On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:20:07 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > >alt.atheism with message-id <drjtthF33stU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > > > >>On 06/06/2016 00:23, Attila wrote: > >>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > >>> alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: > >>>>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: > >>>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in > >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned > >>>>>>>>>>> by > >>>>>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating > >>>>>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and > >>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in > >>>>>>>>>> catering to > >>>>>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of > >>>>>>>>> money, > >>>>>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal > >>>>>>>>> activity. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Welfare is illegal? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cut back to what? > >>>>> > >>>>> Close to zero. > >>>> > >>>> In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have > >>>> a chance to succeed. > >>>> > >>>> Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the > >>>> American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. > >>> > >>> Then let him emigrate. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the > >>>>>> developed world. > >>>>> > >>>>> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. > >>>> > >>>> I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just > >>>> the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! > >>> > >>> How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And > >>> there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their > >>> social policies. > >> > >>Social policies had little to nothing to do with the Greek meltdown or > >>the severe problems experienced by most of Southern Europe. Their > >>issues were caused by years and decades of bad fiscal and taxation > >>policies, compounded by a political system that was a particularly > >>pernicious form of democracy known as "clientelism". > >> > > > >Social policies such as extended paid vacation and excessive minimum > >wages plus paid for medical care had a lot to do with it. Which would have caused fewer problems had Greece had a functional tax collection system and had the national pastime of the country not been tax evasion. > Not forgetting the fact that Greece was spending more and more on arms. > It spent 58% of its military expenditure on weaponry from Germany, being > Germany's largest arms customer. Greece also spent a fortune on arms > from France and the US. > And strangely, while insisting on 'austerity' in every other area of > Greek public spending, Germany and France were silent about military > spending. Who do they need all those weapons to protect themselves from? Turkey? Nah, unless Turkey tries to reunite Cyprus under them. -- JD Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 15:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <$+bQaYNC6YVXFwKQ@hotmail.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #2120741 |
In article <hlwdjsd2-09A82C.04001506062016@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdjsd2@NOSPAMgmail.com> writes >In article <MShcxONoMUVXFwPi@hotmail.co.uk>, > John Ritson <j.ritson@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >> In article <gu4albhv04d09hle87c1jkegcdgbvs496l@4ax.com>, Attila >> <?@here.now> writes >> >On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 10:20:07 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> >alt.atheism with message-id <drjtthF33stU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> > >> >>On 06/06/2016 00:23, Attila wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 19:17:45 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> >>> alt.atheism with message-id <dri91jFn6ukU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >> >>>>> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> >>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> >>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> >> >>>>>>>>> in >> >>>>>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be earned >> >>>>>>>>>>> by >> >>>>>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >> >>>>>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and >> >>>>>>>>>>> the >> >>>>>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in >> >>>>>>>>>> catering to >> >>>>>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of >> >>>>>>>>> money, >> >>>>>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >> >>>>>>>>> activity. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Welfare is illegal? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Cut back to what? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Close to zero. >> >>>> >> >>>> In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have >> >>>> a chance to succeed. >> >>>> >> >>>> Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the >> >>>> American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. >> >>> >> >>> Then let him emigrate. >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >> >>>>>> developed world. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. >> >>>> >> >>>> I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just >> >>>> the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! >> >>> >> >>> How about Greece? They aren't all paragons of economic virtue. And >> >>> there are many others just one step away from a meltdown due to their >> >>> social policies. >> >> >> >>Social policies had little to nothing to do with the Greek meltdown or >> >>the severe problems experienced by most of Southern Europe. Their >> >>issues were caused by years and decades of bad fiscal and taxation >> >>policies, compounded by a political system that was a particularly >> >>pernicious form of democracy known as "clientelism". >> >> >> > >> >Social policies such as extended paid vacation and excessive minimum >> >wages plus paid for medical care had a lot to do with it. > >Which would have caused fewer problems had Greece had a functional tax >collection system and had the national pastime of the country not been >tax evasion. > > > >> Not forgetting the fact that Greece was spending more and more on arms. >> It spent 58% of its military expenditure on weaponry from Germany, being >> Germany's largest arms customer. Greece also spent a fortune on arms >> from France and the US. >> And strangely, while insisting on 'austerity' in every other area of >> Greek public spending, Germany and France were silent about military >> spending. > >Who do they need all those weapons to protect themselves from? Turkey? >Nah, unless Turkey tries to reunite Cyprus under them. > Greece is Europe's largest arms importer. Greece spent 7 billion Euro on 4 submarines from ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems that were still not seaworthy 15 years after being ordered. Turkey is not known as a naval power, though it is now spending billions on submarines from ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (who else?) The programme is suffering major delays. -- John Ritson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 00:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nj2sob$kr8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2120000 |
Le 2016-06-05 à 05:17, Alex W. a écrit : > On 05/06/2016 18:15, Attila wrote: >> On Sun, 5 Jun 2016 11:46:50 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >> alt.atheism with message-id <drhek5FigrfU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >> >>> On 04/06/2016 18:02, Attila wrote: >>>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 10:44:46 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>> alt.atheism with message-id <dremjoF1u1hU1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 03/06/2016 18:57, Attila wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:49:00 +1000, "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> in >>>>>> alt.atheism with message-id <drc2fsFgdo3U1@mid.individual.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree many of them should be eliminated but they must be >>>>>>>> earned by >>>>>>>> the companies involved and at least the companies are generating >>>>>>>> revenue and providing jobs. Welfare payments just disappear and >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> economy gains nothing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is a whole sector of the economy that specialises in >>>>>>> catering to >>>>>>> welfare recipients ... businesses that create jobs and pay taxes. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are sectors the cater to anything that has any amount of money, >>>>>> including drugs. That does not justify supporting an illegal >>>>>> activity. >>>>> >>>>> Welfare is illegal? >>>> >>>> Drugs are. Welfare should just be heavily cut back. >>> >>> Cut back to what? >> >> Close to zero. > > In order to make that workable, you'd have to ensure that people do have > a chance to succeed. > > Right now, an American would have a better chance of fulfilling the > American Dream for himself and his family by emigrating to Europe. > > >> >>> >>> You already have one of the stingiest, meanest welfare systems in the >>> developed world. >> >> So what? Look at the economies of those welfare states. > > I'm looking ... and hot damn, aren't Switzerland, Norway or Germany just > the worst hellholes! Failed states, one and all! And Canada! Everyone always forget abooot Canada! >> >>>> >>>>> Since when? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for payments just disappearing and the economy gaining >>>>>>> nothing, that >>>>>>> is simply untrue. Money disbursed is being spent, kept in >>>>>>> circulation. >>>>>>> It may be tax money and it may be spent inefficiently, but it >>>>>>> does not >>>>>>> disappear. It's actually quite hard to take money out of the >>>>>>> economy >>>>>>> altogether .... >>>>>> >>>>>> Not really. Just send it somewhere else. >>>>> >>>>> Which does not remove it from the economic cycle. >>>> >>>> It does if it is out of the country. Would you use the same argument >>>> to justify illegal drug activity? >>> >>> It does not. The economic cycle is global these days. >> >> Not cash sent to some small town in some other country. > > Remittances to Mexico alone amount to far more than the size of the > Mexican oil industry. That makes "cash sent to some small town" a major > economic factor, and every single American company that does business > south of the border ensures that it remains a part of the economic cycle > even back home in the US. > > -- Olrik aa #1981 EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 23:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0h0albtej4f4fk2ucon78opp5fmu8km52n@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #2120648 |
On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 00:04:20 -0400, Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote: >And Canada! Everyone always forget abooot Canada! Canada, spelled "CND". "C, eh, n, eh, d, eh"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 01:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nj3017$s4l$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2120670 |
Le 2016-06-06 à 00:56, Christopher A. Lee a écrit : > On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 00:04:20 -0400, Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> And Canada! Everyone always forget abooot Canada! > > Canada, spelled "CND". > > "C, eh, n, eh, d, eh" > Fuck yeah! -- Olrik aa #1981 EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 15:17 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <drkfafF6itkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #2120675 |
On 06/06/2016 15:00, Olrik wrote: > Le 2016-06-06 à 00:56, Christopher A. Lee a écrit : >> On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 00:04:20 -0400, Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> And Canada! Everyone always forget abooot Canada! >> >> Canada, spelled "CND". >> >> "C, eh, n, eh, d, eh" >> > > Fuck yeah! > What's that in French?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-06 01:45 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nj32m3$2lu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #2120682 |
Le 2016-06-06 à 01:17, Alex W. a écrit : > On 06/06/2016 15:00, Olrik wrote: >> Le 2016-06-06 à 00:56, Christopher A. Lee a écrit : >>> On Mon, 6 Jun 2016 00:04:20 -0400, Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> And Canada! Everyone always forget abooot Canada! >>> >>> Canada, spelled "CND". >>> >>> "C, eh, n, eh, d, eh" >>> >> >> Fuck yeah! >> > > What's that in French? Vive le Québec libre! -- Olrik aa #1981 EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.atheism
csiph-web