or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › on Bush and his crashes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

on Bush and his crashes - Page 3

post #31 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

In article <arp1h05htl84k328onof2qou7l1gp1660u@4ax.com>,
Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote:
>
> >ObBike: I could out-ride either of these guys. This does not make me a
> >good candidate for US President. Mainly because I am too young, have the
> >wrong passport, and was born in the wrong country.

>
> Hmmmm. Imagine if the presidential race was on the bike. I guess
> Lance would be president (or maybe not - he's not 35 yet).


Heaven help us all. Can you imagine a world where the nation's most
insufferable fattie master racer was our leader? Just imagine what
Gaggioli (to choose someone at random) would do....

> >Well, there may be other reasons,

>
> I can think of a few.... ;-)


(Let sleeping dogs lie, Ryan...)

--
Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.
post #32 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Mark Hickey wrote:
>
> gwhite <gwhite@TaxesInstitutes.com> wrote:
>
> >Mark Hickey wrote:

>
> >> What does it take to truly believe that a truly dumb person could
> >> actually rise to the most powerful position on earth?

> >
> >One must only register as a democrat. That's all. In fact, for how
> >foolish George Bush does appear at times, it is an absolute miracle he's
> >not a democrat. Of course, he can't compete with Edwards, who seems
> >hell-bent to set new standards.

>
> You may have something there... Theresa Heinz-Kerry seems to have
> switched off the common sense circuits fairly often since converting
> to Democrat (she was a registered Republican until John's candidacy -
> oops). Maybe a lot of people at the convention were smoking weed and
> it got to her... ;-) ,<---- note



That's it. If Bush is so stupid, why isn't he a democrat?
post #33 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Raoul Duke wrote:
>
> "Tom Sherman" <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote in message
> news:2nb2i4Fujjk2U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
> > It should be easy for Shrub to keep in shape, since he has never worked
> > a real job in his life.

>
> What a dip****. If being Governor of Texas and * PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
> STATES * doesn't qualify as a "Real Job", I don't know what does.
>
> Are you really that stupid?


He (and Jobst Brandt) thinks that the reason 62 million died in the
Soviet Union was because of "bad leaders" rather than bad ideology. So
yes, he really is that stupid.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*Peacetime* body count:

Location (Regime) Deaths Era

Soviet Union (Communist) 61,900,000 1917-1990
China (Communist) 35,200,000 1949-present
Germany (Nazi-Fascist) 20,900,000 1933-1945
China (Kuomintang) 10,400,000 1928-1949
Japan (Imperial-Fascist) 6,000,000 1936-1945
China (Communist Guerrillas) 3,500,000 1923-1948
Cambodia (Communist) 2,000,000 1975-1979
Turkey ("Young Turks") 1,900,000 1909-1917
Vietnam (Communist) 1,700,000 1945-present
Korea (Communist) 1,700,000 1948-present
Poland (Communist) 1,600,000 1945-1948
Pakistan (Yahya Khan) 1,500,000 1971
Mexico (Porfiriato) 1,400,000 1900-1920
Yugoslavia (Communist) 1,100,000 1944-1990
Russia (Czarist) 1,100,000 1900-1917
Turkey ("Ataturk") 900,000 1918-1923
United Kingdom (Democratic) 800,000 1900-present
Portugal (Fascist) 700,000 1926-1975
Croatia (Fascist) 700,000 1941-1945
Indonesia (Suharto) 600,000 1965-present

http://econ161.berkeley.edu/TCEH/199..._5genocide.pdf



"Once we remember the possibility of the existence of such a system, the
differences between
socialism and fascism become trivial, superficial and, above all,
non-essential. Differentiation of
socialism and fascism from capitalism permits the recognition of their
similarity. They do differ
from each other, but only in the way in which the scalene and the
isosceles differ from each other:
in degree, but not in kind. Socialism and fascism are each forms of
statism, forms of government in
which the government is given complete or extensive control over the
lives of its citizens."
http://www.lawrence.edu/sorg/objectivism/socfasc.html
post #34 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:

>Shrub has had plenty of advisors and handlers to do all the real work,
>including telling him what to say and think during his political career.


Hmmmm, which is at odds with "he never listens to anyone" schtick
that's also trotted out as gospel. Heh. Would you guys make up your
mind - it's so confusing... ;-)

>Not at all the same thing as being handed several hours of work in the
>late afternoon that is due the morning (or similar situations).
>
>Additionally, Shrub has never had any real job pressure on him during
>his life, since whatever mistakes he would make were taken care of by
>"daddy's friends".


I'll wager GWB has more pressure in a given week than 99% of us will
face in the course of a tough year. I know I wouldn't want the job,
especially with the acid environment in Washington DC right now
(neither candidate can do anything that's not going to get ripped
apart by the other side).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
post #35 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote in message news:<10grh85js0rdj3a@corp.supernews.com>...
> >>On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:56:14 GMT, "mark"

> <mark@mousepotato.com> wrote:
> >>>In their subtle way, I think they're trying to say GWB's not real smart,
> >>>period.

>
> Werehatrack <rault00@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote:
> >>It takes subtlety to *not* say it. It takes blindness to not see it.

>
> Mark Hickey wrote:
> > What does it take to truly believe that a truly dumb person could
> > actually rise to the most powerful position on earth?

>
> He was underestimated in the election for his first term, too.


You mean "misunderestimated".
post #36 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

< :< >
I know I wouldn't want the job,
< :< >

And most of us wouldn't want you to have the job either.

App
post #37 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Todd Kuzma wrote:
>


> I guess that the US doesn't make the list as the Native
> American genocide was only in the thousands.



Exactly -- that is the point. For as horrendopus and dispicable as the
treatment of the Indians was, the US doesn't make the list. One
especially keen example of mistreatment was Andrew Jackson (founder of
the Democrat party) ignoring the Supreme Court and sending the
Cherokee's out on the The Trail of Tears. The Cherokees had adopted
some of the euro culture in accepting the concept of property rights,
only to have it violated by Jackson (hah hah, what's new with
democrats).

No, the US was/is no utopia. But *comparatively*, it is better than any
place else. People still immigrate here. Few ever leave, although I
can think of a few that should.

There was a utopia, or so it was promised to be. Here's what happened
there:

*Peacetime* body count
Location (Regime) Deaths Era

Soviet Union (Communist) 61,900,000 1917-1990
China (Communist) 35,200,000 1949-present


> We're hard to beat when it comes to slavery though!


What! You prop up straw men? The only way a USA could come into being
was to accept slavery initially. This much cannot be argued against by
anyone with at least a rudimentary study of history. You could argue
that the USA should then have *not* come into being. Okay, you can say
that. What does it mean in a comparative sense since utopia is a pipe
dream for doofuses that smoke but don't inhale (meaning they'ed think
more clearly if they were stoned -- that's how cracked they are)?

It means slavery might *still* exist in the South. It means separate
states might have warred constantly with each other instead of just once
(and that one time terminated the slavery issue forever). You would
have at least some difficulty saying the USA should never have been
*and* that non-existance would be a better comparative result than what
we in fact ended up with. Slavery was a political compromise of the
time, not the bad dream of a 21st century couch potato.

> By the way, I think that the numbers for Indonesia are a bit
> low. I've read figures over 2 million. The CIA helped a
> bit there because the Suharto regime was supposedly going
> after the communists.


"...helped a bit...?" I already posted the data. So okay, give the bad
ole US *all* the credit. We don't bust 1 million.

>> Indonesia (Suharto) 600,000 1965-present


"A regime whose hands are as bloody as those of the Suharto regime in
Indonesia-with the blood on its hands of perhaps 450,000 communists,
suspected communists, and others who simply were in the wrong place at
the wrong time at its creation in 1965, and perhaps 150,000 inhabitants
of East Timor since the Indonesian takeover in the mid-1970s--such a
regime barely makes the twentieth century's top twenty list as far as
the massacre of civilians is concerned."
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/TCE...ch_power4.html

But since you have decided to go ahead and play the body count game, you
might want to count people saved to. There again we are not perfect,
just better (by a lot).

> Plus, remember that China is our biggest trading partner.
> Go WalMart!


Ah yes, evil Wal-mart. There is nothing worse than convenience, low
prices, and liberal return policies. OUTRAGEOUS!!!

> If I understand our government's position,
> trade with China and Vietnam is very good, but trade with
> Cuba is very bad.


Would that be the Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton,
or Bush administrations whose Cuba policies you find inconsistant? I
guess it must be Bush 43,... right?

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/TCE...vergence5.html
post #38 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

The outsourcing of certain high tech jobs, like customer support,
software testing and some software development, shows that some wages
in America are much higher than can be obtained elsewhere for
equivalent work from an educated, skilled, hard-working, and eager
workforce.

Some Americans expect a standard of living higher than their wages or
productivity warrant, while others such as in India or Eastern Europe
are overjoyed to use their education and skills to advance
economically.

A large number of high-tech startups today, even US based ones, have
some portion of their effort come from offshore sources. Not because
it's their preference, but because US labor in some cases has priced
itself out of the market.
post #39 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

In article <2nkn48F1sb8jU1@uni-berlin.de>,
Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:

> Todd Kuzma wrote:
>
> > ...
> > So, if what's good for WalMart is good for America, then communism is
> > good for America. We are a country of people who demand fair wages for
> > ourselves but refuse to pay them for others....

>
> Do people in the US really demand fair wages for themselves? The minimum
> wage has fallen well behind inflation over the last three decades to the
> point where it is not a living wage, and only the bloated salaries of
> top executives have kept overall real wages from falling over the same
> period. Every year, lower and middle class people in the US work for
> longer hours for the same or lesser compensation.
>
> There is a class war between the holders of capital and labor in the US,
> and capital has been winning for the last 25 years. Of course, the
> "liberal" media (owned by capital) denies this is occurring, and manages
> to fool most of the US population into believing they are better off
> than the Europeans and Japanese in quality of life when this is not the
> case.


I've been to Europe (have in-laws in Greece) and have read a fair bit
about Japan.

European visitors are typically amazed at the land-holdings and houses
that normal middle-class people (like my normal, hourly-wage,
non-management parents) on this continent have.

There is much to like about Europe, and I would happily live there (and
intend to at some point). But pretending the US is some sort of hellhole
held together by collective illusions is to miss a pretty key point:
most people in the US like their lives, and would probably point to
things you dislike (expansive suburban housing, roomy cars, big portion
sizes) as what they like. De gustibus et cetera.

Japan...at the recommendation of an acquaintance who spends considerable
time in Tokyo and the US, I read a book called "Dogs and Demons" which
details some of the strange problems Japan has. I don't entirely agree
with the book, which verges from some of the amazing (and
resource-draining) weirdness associated with, oddly enough, Japan's
concrete industry and its public-works bureaucracies, to some rather
petty irritations about minor details of Japanese life and culture (I
don't think Manga are as big a symbol of Japanese infantilization as the
author, for example). Japan is sufficiently prosperous that it doesn't
have to deal with its problems at the moment, but the problems are
sufficiently serious that they're a major drag on the life of the
average Japanese.

--
Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.
post #40 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

In article <c6996826.0408071722.6a0f0847@posting.google.com>,
eaglejackson@hotmail.com (Eagle Jackson) wrote:

> The outsourcing of certain high tech jobs, like customer support,
> software testing and some software development, shows that some wages
> in America are much higher than can be obtained elsewhere for
> equivalent work from an educated, skilled, hard-working, and eager
> workforce.
>
> Some Americans expect a standard of living higher than their wages or
> productivity warrant, while others such as in India or Eastern Europe
> are overjoyed to use their education and skills to advance
> economically.
>
> A large number of high-tech startups today, even US based ones, have
> some portion of their effort come from offshore sources. Not because
> it's their preference, but because US labor in some cases has priced
> itself out of the market.


First-world labour is in the continuous process of pricing itself out of
the market. Cheaper labour has been available elsewhere pretty much
since the Japanese started their post-war reconstruction ("made in
Japan" used to mean what "made in Taiwan" meant 10 years ago and what
"made in China" means today: cheap, and probably not well-made). Despite
this, American (and Canadian; the economies are relatively similar)
productivity and specialized knowledge is such that there are still a
lot of very high-paying jobs which don't get outsourced.

Ironically, certain services and retail operations look the most
resilient in the face of off-shoring: you can't hire a plumber from
India to come to your house, and it's still easier to buy shoes in
person than to check fit and comfort via UPS and the WWW.

--
Ryan Cousineau, rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.
post #41 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Todd Kuzma <tullio@TheRamp.net> wrote in message news:<4114FD10.9000506@TheRamp.net>...
> gwhite wrote:
>
> > Would that be the Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton,
> > or Bush administrations whose Cuba policies you find inconsistant? I
> > guess it must be Bush 43,... right?

>
> Well, our trade with China and Vietnam were pretty much nil
> under Johnson and Nixon and haven't reached any significant
> levels until the 1980s at the earliest. I don't claim that
> any party or president is better in this regard.
>
> The fact is, whether we trade with a communist country or
> not has little to do with the fact that they are communist.
> It has to do with various political and economic
> realities. For Cuba, the political benefits of refusing to
> trade are greater that the economic benefits of opening trade.
>
> China's communist government ensures that wages will remain
> obscenely low compared to the West. That means that WalMart
> can offer the lowest priced goods. You cannot get those
> wages in a free market economy.


Wal-Mart can offer lower priced goods because they subsidize low
wages with taxpayer money. Wal-Mart claims that 70% of their workforce
is fulltime. Wal-Mart defines fulltime employment as "28 or more hours
per week."
post #42 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:

>Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
>> ...
>> European visitors are typically amazed at the land-holdings and houses
>> that normal middle-class people (like my normal, hourly-wage,
>> non-management parents) on this continent have....

>
>The reason that many people in the US have these houses and property is
>that they or their parents purchased them in the three decades following
>WW2 when real wages were increasing, the tax burden was much more
>progressive, and much of the workforce was unionized.


Errrr, Tom... the size of the average house has grown dramatically
since the post WWII boom and the 70's (if you don't believe it do some
checking on realtor.com). Look at the size of the bedrooms. Look at
how large the garages were (try to find a new house with a ONE car
garage).

You're probably right about one thing though - many large, luxurious
houses were built by union leadership.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
post #43 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:
> But how many of the purchasers of these new, larger houses had capital
> in the form of a smaller, older residence that they could sell to
> partially finance the new residence?


my folks didn't (bought their first home in their late 60s). none of my
friends did. i can't believe that my world is the exception. everyone's
been buying houses for the past 7 years.

> If one has no inherited wealth (including financial support from living
> relatives) but comes from the lower classes, it will take a long time
> for even a person of above average ability and determination to achieve
> middle class status, as the barriers are considerable.


the primary fiscal barrier is funding college. i dunno about being from the
lower classes (you'll need to define that) but i received no inheritance nor
support from my family after 18, yet was able to put myself through college
and grad school and eke out a living that's easily at least middle class
without too much trouble (slightly understated .. it was trouble). well,
except for the $35,000 in student loans i just paid off. but there are enuf
people in similiar situations for me to believe it's fairly common. the big
predictor seems to be priorities often conveyed from your parents, the means
at least were there when i was 18.

> This is not
> something the upper classes want people to understand, as they benefit
> from the erroneous belief that all that holds people back is government.
> Therefore, they still promote "America as the land of opportunity", even
> though that place ceased to exist several decades ago.


now if you'd said upper ruling class ..
--
david reuteler
reuteler@visi.com
post #44 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Raoul Duke <dogfish@phlegm.com> wrote:
>
>"Tom Sherman" <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote in message
>news:2nb2i4Fujjk2U1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>> It should be easy for Shrub to keep in shape, since he has never worked
>> a real job in his life.

>
>What a dip****. If being Governor of Texas and * PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
>STATES * doesn't qualify as a "Real Job", I don't know what does.


No, it doesn't.

A real job involves actual effort or creation of valuable
intellectual property.

Bush's only "effort" is not drinking on camera.

--Blair
"And I'm not sure he's not going to
**** that up."
post #45 of 1226

Re: on Bush and his crashes

Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:

>David Reuteler wrote:
>
>> Tom Sherman <tsherman@qconline.com> wrote:
>>
>>>But how many of the purchasers of these new, larger houses had capital
>>>in the form of a smaller, older residence that they could sell to
>>>partially finance the new residence?

>>
>>
>> my folks didn't (bought their first home in their late 60s).

>
>Compared to wages, housing was more affordable then. I was referring to
>the present, in particular the changes in income and wealth distribution
>over the last 30 years.


Housing was a lot simpler then too - two bedrooms, no or maybe a one
car garage, very basic appliances. While the median cost of housing
has gone up relative to the average wage, I'm not at all sure the cost
of a similar house has.

>Student loan burdens are much greater now than they were 30 years ago.


Graduate earning potential is much greater now that it was 30 years
ago too.

>Tuition has risen greatly at public universities as government funding
>has been cut, while non-loan student aid has been cut back severely.


There are still plenty of progams for those who want to go to college.
Very low cost student loans make perfect sense - I actually prefer
that to a handout since you're enabling the student to make a lot more
money after graduation (so he/she can pay it back with the increase in
income they EARN).

>Having to put off the purchase of a house (paying rent instead) means
>that a person from the lower class will always be significantly behind
>someone from the middle class economically, given similar job
>achievements. This (among other factors) puts the lie to the claim of a
>"level playing field" that "conservatives" love to claim would exist
>were it not for "big, bad government".


Uhhhh, I doubt you'll get much argument that someone with more money
is ahead of someone with less money. But to claim that it's
impossible (or even all that difficult) for a motivated person to
achieve home ownership in the US is just wrong. It may also disgust
you, but home ownership has hit new highs under the GWB
administration. That doesn't mean that everyone will have their own
home - and as often as not it's not just an "income problem" but a
"spending problem".

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling Equipment
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Cycling Equipment › on Bush and his crashes