Eliot Spitzer, antismoking leader, self-destructs

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:49:25 -0500, "HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote:

>SkippyPB wrote: 
>
>Gas is $5.20/gallon in some parts of California. Still, that's not the most
>its ever been nor is that price anywhere NEAR the historical maximum in
>terms of hours worked per gallong. As for the middle and lower classes
>getting a tax break, well, they ought to get the same break as everyone
>else.
>

It's higher in California because the state taxes are higher as are
the anti-pollution standards.  With crude oil selling today at over
$110 a barrel and with the summer blends about to be refined, I can
see $4.50 or more a gallon in states other than California or Hawaii
which generally have the highest rates per gallon.

And I'm not talking about tax breaks.  There are other areas that need
to be addressed that would help the middle and lower classes.  Getting
the deficit under control would help everyone, e.g.
 
>
>Downward slide? Surely you jest. The unemployment rate is NOT based on the
>number of people who file for unemployment - that's a completely separate
>figure, as is the Household Unemployment rate.
>

That is just not true.  The insured unemployment rate or jobless rate
is calculated by dividing the number of insured unemployed by the
number of employees that are considered covered or eligible for
unemployment insurance. Covered employees represent those working as
well as those receiving unemployment benefits.

Once you quit receiving benefits, you are not part of this rate.  This
is acutally entitled the insured unemployment rate, aka jobless rate.

The unemployment rate that is reported monthly by the US Labor
Department is calculated by doing two surveys.

First, you have the the establishment survey which is based on a
sample of 400,000 business establishments. Notable statistics include
nonfarm payrolls, hours, and earnings.

Secondly, you have the household survey which covers nearly 60,000
households, and is mostly known for producing the unemployment rate
and other data related to the labor force.

Neither will give you the actual unemployment rate which is, in
reality, higher than what is reported.

The two surveys independently tally the number employed. While the
surveys tend to track each other over time, they can vary widely from
month to month. According to the BLS, the establishment survey's
nonfarm payroll results carry more weight. Yet the BLS also maintains
that both surveys are needed to obtain a more complete picture of the
overall labor market.

Each survey attempts to mend the other's shortfalls. While the
establishment survey can be more comprehensive because it covers a
larger sample, it doesn't include agricultural, private-household and
self-employed workers. These are counted in the household survey. Soft
employment conditions tend to increase the number of self-employed,
because many people who were laid off eventually start their own
businesses. Since the household survey includes the self-employed and
has a better chance of counting new hires at newly formed small
businesses, it can be the more useful survey when the economy is
exiting a period of soft conditions.

In addition to watching nonfarm payrolls, economists and analysts use
the labor report to gauge disposable income, wage inflation and
employment by industry.

>The very first thing the Democrats started muttering about when they took
>over the legislative branch was not extending the Bush tax cuts. Businesses
,
>faced with the prospect of a significant tax increase in two or three years
>started making plans to address it. They cut back on planned expansions,
>enlarging their facilities, hiring and training workers. They started
>off-shore entities and incorporated subsidiaries in more tax-friendly
>jurisdictions.
>
>Just this past w, the Democrats passed a budget authorization bill which
,
>for the first time, included repeal of the Bush tax cuts in two years.
>Expect more businesses and individuals to take protective steps.
>
>

That is just ridiculous.  The main thrust behind the Bush tax cuts was
to spur economic growth.  Well it just didn't happen.  The draining of
resources to overseas workers was going on before Bush gave the tax
cuts.  It was supposed to stem the tide.  It didn't.

Besides, that budget bill you are talking about hasn't been passed
yet, so it, therefore, has had no effect and it probably won't pass in
its present form.
 
>
>Jesus! Adam Smith put this notion to rest over 200 years ago. It is GOOD
>that the U.S. lose manufacturing jobs that can be done better elsewhere. Yo
u
>really should keep up.
>

Adam Smith's economics were great for the 1700's not the 2000's.  Tell
Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania among others that losing those
manufacturing jobs was a good thing.  I would argue that, in some
respects, losing those jobs was a good thing if it had forced
companies to retrain their work force to provide more technically
advanced jobs and services.  But it didn't because there was no
incentive to do so.  The only people who benefited from this loss were
the CEO's and Board Members, the mainstay of the Republican party. The
workers who were left out in the cold, the mainstay of the Democratic
party, have not benefited.

 
>
>Right. Democrats are on the side of the terrorists (and the trial lawyers -
>which is pretty much the same thing).
>
>
>

And The Republicans think the constitution is just a suggestion.

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"I wan' all dem kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I wan' all the kids 
to
copulate me."
--  ex-Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:03:58 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:42:39 -0500, "Judson McClendon"
><judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote:
> 
>
>I didn't know about Truman's affairs, if he had them.    But I'd
>rather have a president who abused his power for sex than one who
>abused his power for money.

Or control like Nixon.

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"I wan' all dem kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I wan' all the kids 
to
copulate me."
--  ex-Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:41:44 -0500, "HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote:

 
<snip>
>Secular progressives, atheists, and Democrats are convinced that morality i
s
>situational. Depending on the desired outcome, it is moral to murder, steal
,
>lie, or watch re-runs of Gilligan's Island.
>
But Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew were Republicans!

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"I wan' all dem kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I wan' all the kids 
to
copulate me."
--  ex-Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 11:13:56 -0500, "Judson McClendon"
<judmc@sunvaley0.com> wrote:

>"Cobol_Blues" <ranking.groin@gmail.com> wrote: 
>
>Anyone who doubts, or is unsure, about media bias should read the book
>"Bias" by Bernard Goldberg, long time CBS newsman, who claims never to
>have voted for a republican president in his life. Himself a liberal,
>Goldberg insists that liberal bias runs deep in the media, which is
>obvious to anyone not already leaning seriously to the left. Note that
>Goldbers tends to agree with the media's political opinion, he just
>objects to their extremely biased reporting, and clearly documents it.
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Bias-Insider-...t/dp/0895261901
>
>The surveys I've seen show the media is about 98% liberal, whereas the
>population as a whole is somewhat more conservative than than liberal,
>and has been growing more so for decades.

And why do you think that is Judson?  Do you think it might have
something to do with the way Nixon and other Republican
administrations, including Bush's - both of them, tried to supress the
news?

Regards,
////
(o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"I wan' all dem kids to do what I do, to look up to me. I wan' all the kids 
to
copulate me."
--  ex-Chicago Cubs outfielder Andre Dawson on being a role model
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve

HeyBub <heybub@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13tst8n5rmnia62@corp.supernews.com...
> tlmfru wrote:
>
> Secular progressives, atheists, and Democrats are convinced that morality
is
> situational. Depending on the desired outcome, it is moral to murder,
steal,
> lie, or watch re-runs of Gilligan's Island.
>
>

Without prejudice to the other points - I concede the immorality of watching
re-runs of Gilligan's Island!

PL

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:41:44 -0500, "HeyBub" <heybub@gmail.com> wrote:

>Republicans, conservatives, and religious folk tend to believe that moralit
y
>is absolute.

Such as "Thou Shalt Not Kill" except when the state tells us to.   (Or
when we decide that the Bible really means what my copy says except in
this case).

Or "You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of
anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
that is in the water under the earth.", unless, unless, ...  I suppose
this one gets ignored completely.

Or "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." unless my job requires
me working.

Or even "Abortion should be illegal - except in the case of rape or
incest (or to save the Mother's life)".

Or "Borrowing from the next generation is bad - unless we are in power
and want to spend the money".

Or "The Constitution is absolute - except when we decide people might
be dangerous".

>Secular progressives, atheists, and Democrats are convinced that morality i
s
>situational. Depending on the desired outcome, it is moral to murder, steal
,
>lie, or watch re-runs of Gilligan's Island.

Give me an example of situational stealing that the Democrats believe
is moral but which the Republicans eschew.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:09:23 -0400, SkippyPB
<swiegand@nospam.neo.rr.com> wrote:

>That is just ridiculous.  The main thrust behind the Bush tax cuts was
>to spur economic growth.  Well it just didn't happen.  The draining of
>resources to overseas workers was going on before Bush gave the tax
>cuts.  It was supposed to stem the tide.  It didn't.

A deficit budget is a tax.   That tax is much greater than the tax
cuts, meaning the nation had a tax increase.

And spending money overseas does not help the domestic economy.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:15:53 -0400, SkippyPB
<swiegand@nospam.neo.rr.com> wrote:

>And why do you think that is Judson?  Do you think it might have
>something to do with the way Nixon and other Republican
>administrations, including Bush's - both of them, tried to supress the
>news?

Myself, I doubt it.   In general, newsmen and educators do better when
open to new ideas.   Conservatives prefer old ideas.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:55:27 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 12:15:53 -0400, SkippyPB
><swiegand@nospam.neo.rr.com> wrote:
> 
>
>Myself, I doubt it.   In general, newsmen and educators do better when
>open to new ideas.   Conservatives prefer old ideas.

Conservatives have new ideas and are open to them within a context
that makes the new ideas they accept readily different from the new
ideas accepted or rejected by liberals.  In both cases some good ideas
are rejected and bad ones accepted.  Of course there is overlap of
ideas acceptable (or not) common to both groups.

Clark Morris

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:15:12 -0300, Clark F Morris
<cfmpublic@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
 
>
>Conservatives have new ideas and are open to them within a context
>that makes the new ideas they accept readily different from the new
>ideas accepted or rejected by liberals.  In both cases some good ideas
>are rejected and bad ones accepted.  Of course there is overlap of
>ideas acceptable (or not) common to both groups.

Sounds like an oxymoron - but words change in meaning.   What are
examples of New Idea conservatism?