America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 8 years ago by banderl. 186 replies replies.
4 Pages<1234>
Democratic Debates
Brewha Offline
#101 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
Kawak wrote:
After each liberal santa spoke one could only conclude,

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


Kawak, I wanted to respond in kind, the the same level of observation, evidence and intellect as you have proudly brought:

DOUBLE DUMB AZZ ON YOU!!!

I feel sure your knowledge and research on the issue will allow you to adiquatly respond.
Brewha Offline
#102 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
teddyballgame wrote:
wJust watched the Dem Debate..

Booooring.

No big topics discussed, why don't they just hand it to Hillary as nobody will go agin' her.

Man, that was a very WHITE stage.

...well, it is the party of slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, so par for the course

(that Obama is probably playing on- what is that 300 rounds now?)

Teddy,
At 45 posts, you have now lasted more than four hours. You should seek medical attention.
tonygraz Offline
#103 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
^+2
tailgater Offline
#104 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
We the people passed the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1938. FLSA was a comprehensive federal scheme which provided for minimum wages, overtime pay, record keeping requirements, and child labor regulations. The purpose of the minimum wage was to stabilize the economy and protect the workers in the labor force. The minimum wage was designed to create a minimum standard of living to protect the health and well-being of employees. Others have argued that the primary purpose was to aid the lowest paid of the nation's working to protect them from predatory business practices.

In short, history shows that laws are needed to protect labor.

Now, the devil is in the details. And perhaps the minimum standard of living should be adjusted regionally. But the need remains.


There already is a minimum wage.
Raising it to an arbitrary point in order to predict if someone could "live" on it serves no purpose other than to harm business, reduce man power, and disincentivize learning a skill.
Oh, almost forgot: it would also make bleeding hearts feel good all over.


teddyballgame Offline
#105 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
Brewha,

You are clever by half.

The thing that steams you, is that I am not wrong.
Yours is the party responsible for all those things listed.

Bull Connor and his fire hose was a Democrat
AlGore's father filibustered against the civil rights act in '64, voted against it and proposed a bill to keep schools segregated -Democrat


frankj1 Offline
#106 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
white guys fighting about which party is better for Blacks in America.

Get over yourselves.
Brewha Offline
#107 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
tailgater wrote:
There already is a minimum wage.
Raising it to an arbitrary point in order to predict if someone could "live" on it serves no purpose other than to harm business, reduce man power, and disincentivize learning a skill.
Oh, almost forgot: it would also make bleeding hearts feel good all over.



Of course there is a minimum wage. And if I follow you line of logic, we would all be better off by doing away with it and letting large companies squeeze labor costs ever lower. Fortunately others disagree. If you are believing the buisness "do the right thing" because the markets drive them to, you need to look at history. That's why we have price fixing and monopoly laws.

They don't actually have a wage dart board for selecting wage hikes. They look at inflation, cost of living, standards of living etc. In fact there is by no emotion involved compared to conservative who cry about "big government" and the impending apocalypse caused by wage control for the lowest earners.

Sorry, but I don't see any validity in the negative effects you have sited. In fact since business take profit by a percentage of their costs, as costs uniforms rise they actually see more profit dollars by passing along the costs. They are doing more gross business.
Brewha Offline
#108 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
teddyballgame wrote:
Brewha,

You are clever by half.

The thing that steams you, is that I am not wrong.
Yours is the party responsible for all those things listed.

Bull Connor and his fire hose was a Democrat
AlGore's father filibustered against the civil rights act in '64, voted against it and proposed a bill to keep schools segregated -Democrat



Right, that's it! You are just never wrong, it causes me to writhe and stew in my liberal angst.....curse you TebbyBall!!!


Oh but, are you forgetting that Al Gore invented out internets?
And remember, Nixon played on your team......
Brewha Offline
#109 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
frankj1 wrote:
white guys fighting about which party is better for Blacks in America.

Get over yourselves.

Who said I was white?
Are you profiling?
teddyballgame Offline
#110 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
Brewha wrote:
Right, that's it! You are just never wrong, it causes me to writhe and stew in my liberal angst.....curse you TebbyBall!!!


Oh but, are you forgetting that Al Gore invented out internets?
And remember, Nixon played on your team......



Ahhh the gypsy curse.

Nixon played on my team? that is what you got?

Your party is still the party of slavery and add to it, now they are the party of anti semites.

Nixon was a great ally to Isreal..look what you have now.

Bunch of Palestinian apologists.

frankj1 Offline
#111 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
Brewha wrote:
Who said I was white?
Are you profiling?

why yes, yes I am.
Covfireman Offline
#112 Posted:
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
teddyballgame wrote:
Ahhh the gypsy curse.

Nixon played on my team? that is what you got?

Your party is still the party of slavery and add to it, now they are the party of anti semites.

Nixon was a great ally to Isreal..look what you have now.

Bunch of Palestinian apologists.



The anti semites party with a Jewish cantidate in the top 2 .

Your party started the income tax system.

The only trickle-down was the wealthy pissing down the back of the working class.

Hillary actually is a Republican she's lying about her policies and has been and still is bought by Wall street. If she wins the nomination all the Republicans need to do is not run a complete idiot to win . So far Donald Trump would be the Republicans choice kind of shows how smart the Republicans are .
frankj1 Offline
#113 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
Covfireman wrote:
The anti semites party with a Jewish cantidate in the top 2 .

Your party started the income tax system.

The only trickle-down was the wealthy pissing down the back of the working class.

Hillary actually is a Republican she's lying about her policies and has been and still is bought by Wall street. If she wins the nomination all the Republicans need to do is not run a complete idiot to win . So far Donald Trump would be the Republicans choice kind of shows how smart the Republicans are .

a lot of people mix up stances on Israel with stances on antisemitism.

Understandable, but incorrect.
tonygraz Offline
#114 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
Nixon was antisemitic among his many faults. I thought Bewha was white, but he looked a bit dark on Cape Cod.
frankj1 Offline
#115 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
tonygraz wrote:
Nixon was antisemitic among his many faults. I thought Bewha was white, but he looked a bit dark on Cape Cod.

and at the same time had Kissinger and supported Israel.
Brewha Offline
#116 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
tonygraz wrote:
Nixon was antisemitic among his many faults. I thought Bewha was white, but he looked a bit dark on Cape Cod.

Ok, so I do have red hair.
It's still profiling......
frankj1 Offline
#117 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
Brewha wrote:
Ok, so I do have red hair.
It's still profiling......

I was going with golf and fruit for breakfast
gummy jones Offline
#118 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
I taped the debate but haven't watched yet

I hear it was a contest to see who could give away more "free" stuff

tailgater Offline
#119 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
Of course there is a minimum wage. And if I follow you line of logic, we would all be better off by doing away with it and letting large companies squeeze labor costs ever lower. Fortunately others disagree. If you are believing the buisness "do the right thing" because the markets drive them to, you need to look at history. That's why we have price fixing and monopoly laws.

They don't actually have a wage dart board for selecting wage hikes. They look at inflation, cost of living, standards of living etc. In fact there is by no emotion involved compared to conservative who cry about "big government" and the impending apocalypse caused by wage control for the lowest earners.

Sorry, but I don't see any validity in the negative effects you have sited. In fact since business take profit by a percentage of their costs, as costs uniforms rise they actually see more profit dollars by passing along the costs. They are doing more gross business.


I have never advocated to remove the minimum wage.
And you can deny the dart board, but the $15 suggestion is absolutely arbitrary. It sounds good to the bleeding hearts and to the slouches who might want to rely on forced pay hike rather than an earned one.

But your most alarming words are your last paragraph.
Businesses don't "take a profit by percentage of their costs".
If that were true, companies wouldn't spend money to streamline costs. They'd simply raise prices. Hell, they'd want to increase costs so their profits could go up.
Repeat that last sentence out loud.
Sounds stupid, right? Well it's exactly what you said.

Brewha Offline
#120 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
frankj1 wrote:
I was going with golf and fruit for breakfast

I could just be acting white.
In my spare time.

Would you like me to post a tuna casserole recipe?
Brewha Offline
#121 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
tailgater wrote:
I have never advocated to remove the minimum wage.
And you can deny the dart board, but the $15 suggestion is absolutely arbitrary. It sounds good to the bleeding hearts and to the slouches who might want to rely on forced pay hike rather than an earned one.

But your most alarming words are your last paragraph.
Businesses don't "take a profit by percentage of their costs".
If that were true, companies wouldn't spend money to streamline costs. They'd simply raise prices. Hell, they'd want to increase costs so their profits could go up.
Repeat that last sentence out loud.
Sounds stupid, right? Well it's exactly what you said.


Well I'm in the industrial equipment business (but nessisarily white). And when the price of steel goes up we pass along the cost increase, by percentage, to customers. It's in our standard contract. So we make more $$$.

We spend tons of efficencey and cost savings. But that almost all goes to profits......
teddyballgame Offline
#122 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
So, in your "world of economics".. you hike the min wage to $15, causing those with lower skills to either not be hired, or be replaced with automation and on top of that, the bad companies raise prices on their goods and wack the consumer again.

So the lower tier of our economic system gets nailed twice with your method. ( I am not using "class" as that is a Marxist term and there is not a caste system in the U.S.)


Your are a perfect mouthpiece for the left.
Covfireman Offline
#123 Posted:
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
So, in your world of economics you cut wages to workers ,increase CEO pay , causing the workers to have to work longer hours,increasing their time away from the family, then let their kids go out and buy one of the guns you made sure are available causing a mass shooting the blame it on religion? So every tier of the economy gets nailed multiple times while you have part of society brainwashed into thinking you're doing it for them ?




By the way the only gun control I believe in is a 1/4 " group at least 300 meters .

99cobra2881 Offline
#124 Posted:
Joined: 11-19-2013
Posts: 2,472
Covfireman wrote:
So, in your world of economics you cut wages to workers ,increase CEO pay , causing the workers to have to work longer hours,increasing their time away from the family, then let their kids go out and buy one of the guns you made sure are available causing a mass shooting the blame it on religion? So every tier of the economy gets nailed multiple times while you have part of society brainwashed into thinking you're doing it for them ?




By the way the only gun control I believe in is a 1/4 " group at least 300 meters .




Typical lib call for gun control but not for yourself. Can't have it both ways.

Reminds me of the $15 per hour groups in Seattle that were looking for temp employees but were only offering to pay them minimum wage.

teddyballgame Offline
#125 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
By the way, what was with the question in the debate,
"Do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?"

What the hell is with that flavor of the month question?

Clinton dodged it, Commie boy declared "black lives matter" (of course they do, but asian lives don't?), Omalley. the same thing.

All lives matter, you idiots. Black, white, brown, etc.

Jim Webb is the only one who answered like a "normal' person.
tonygraz Offline
#126 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
Of course all lives matter, but the question was about black lives and he answered the question specifically. You seem to be just looking for something to complain about.
borndead1 Offline
#127 Posted:
Joined: 11-07-2006
Posts: 5,216
Brewha wrote:
Well I'm in the industrial equipment business (but nessisarily white). And when the price of steel goes up we pass along the cost increase, by percentage, to customers. It's in our standard contract. So we make more $$$.

We spend tons of efficencey and cost savings. But that almost all goes to profits......



And when the price of labor goes up, companies will pass the cost increase along to consumers. Or they may cut workers. Or they may implement more automation. Or a combination of all three.

frankj1 Offline
#128 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
automation creates jobs.

recycling has created tons of jobs.

changes can be opportunities...especially in our land of entrepreneurs.
Covfireman Offline
#129 Posted:
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
99cobra2881 wrote:
Typical lib call for gun control but not for yourself. Can't have it both ways.

Reminds me of the $15 per hour groups in Seattle that were looking for temp employees but were only offering to pay them minimum wage.




LOL no 99cobra2881 I'm not for gun control unless I'm shooting at something . I think we need to enforce the existing laws in some states and in other states we need their laws rolled back because they infring on the second amendment.
gummy jones Offline
#130 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
frankj1 wrote:
automation creates jobs.

recycling has created tons of jobs.

changes can be opportunities...especially in our land of entrepreneurs.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9MJXhMcFSSQ/TbjX0NLZc0I/AAAAAAAAAW4/i_bbtvyLWmc/s1600/sheetz.jpg

Look at all those jobs
frankj1 Offline
#131 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
gummy jones wrote:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9MJXhMcFSSQ/TbjX0NLZc0I/AAAAAAAAAW4/i_bbtvyLWmc/s1600/sheetz.jpg

Look at all those jobs

which does not address my post.

theoretically, and historically pure capitalism works when businesses get breaks, and I am all for that type of stimuli. But the reality in recent years has been that they have made tremendous record profits due to corporate welfare and bailouts and not created meaningful jobs that pay well. Many of the new returns to the workforce have not resulted in increased wages for American workers. It has created working poor. This has resulted in the shrinking middle class.

Perhaps corporate tax breaks and free stuff should have requirements attached...? Just asking cuz I am not a genius.
tonygraz Offline
#132 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
borndead1 wrote:
And when the price of labor goes up, companies will pass the cost increase along to consumers. Or they may cut workers. Or they may implement more automation. Or a combination of all three.




And when workers make more money they have more money to spend, creating demand for more products leading to a growing economy.
tailgater Offline
#133 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
Well I'm in the industrial equipment business (but nessisarily white). And when the price of steel goes up we pass along the cost increase, by percentage, to customers. It's in our standard contract. So we make more $$$.

We spend tons of efficencey and cost savings. But that almost all goes to profits......


Please don't confuse a Pricing Index with costs.

Your prices wouldn't be raised simply because your costs went up. Employee wages, Insurance, Electricity, etc.

There are times when the cost of oil has an influence as well, on the price of raw materials and also on transportation. The feedstock can be tied to the index, and the transportation can be handled with predetermined surcharges.

But none of these are a simple matter of raising prices to meet raising costs.



tailgater Offline
#134 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
which does not address my post.

theoretically, and historically pure capitalism works when businesses get breaks, and I am all for that type of stimuli. But the reality in recent years has been that they have made tremendous record profits due to corporate welfare and bailouts and not created meaningful jobs that pay well. Many of the new returns to the workforce have not resulted in increased wages for American workers. It has created working poor. This has resulted in the shrinking middle class.

Perhaps corporate tax breaks and free stuff should have requirements attached...? Just asking cuz I am not a genius.


Nobody wants corporate tax breaks, but we all b*tch and moan when corporation move overseas for the lower tax rates.

The only obvious solution is to move towards higher import tariffs, even at the risk of being viewed as isolationists.
tailgater Offline
#135 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
borndead1 wrote:
And when the price of labor goes up, companies will pass the cost increase along to consumers. Or they may cut workers. Or they may implement more automation. Or a combination of all three.



A combination of all three.
But don't forget Lower Profits.

I think it's amazing that so many people believe that private businesses behave like public bodies who are able to simply meet their budget because it's been approved.
Businesses have to earn it. Government simply raise taxes or steal the money from another entity. Usually the children or the crippled or the veterans, based on the rhetoric we hear.

tailgater Offline
#136 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
tonygraz wrote:
And when workers make more money they have more money to spend, creating demand for more products leading to a growing economy.


You're right!
Let's raise the wages to $75/hour!
Think of the spending they'll do.



teddyballgame Offline
#137 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tonygraz wrote:
And when workers make more money they have more money to spend, creating demand for more products leading to a growing economy.


If you jump the min wage, sure workers make more money, but the cost of almost everything will go up, with inflation. Money is now not worth that much, and I can hear the cries of "raise the min wage again!" already.

And there are those workers who get fired, or have their hours cut back and don't forget about the workers that are not hired because a business cannot afford to take on another employee. This happens in small businesses and little restaurants every time the min wage is hiked.

Liberals only care about intentions, never results.
teddyballgame Offline
#138 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
tailgater wrote:
Nobody wants corporate tax breaks, but we all b*tch and moan when corporation move overseas for the lower tax rates.

The only obvious solution is to move towards higher import tariffs, even at the risk of being viewed as isolationists.



Tailgater, I disagree with you here.

Many economists say we tax our businesses too much. We one of the few, if not the only country that taxes our companies abroad that would bring money into the U.S. They get taxed abroad and then taxed again if they bring that money back- so they don't do it.

If we lower the barriers on companies, they will invest it here, keep businesses here, etc. I am not talking about corporate welfare, where the government gives them money ( hello Solyndra) to do business.
Businesses just don't stuff money under mattresses, they invest, expand, create more jobs when more money is freed up.
Could you imagine the economic boom if we let companies bring that money back with no massive tax penalties?

Tariffs are not the answer. Massive tariffs from the Smoot-Hawley helped catapult the U.S. into the great depression. Other countries retaliated with their own tariffs and world trade plummeted by 60+% 2 yrs after this tariff act, the unemployment rate was 25%.

tonygraz Offline
#139 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
tailgater wrote:
You're right!
Let's raise the wages to $75/hour!
Think of the spending they'll do.


Now you are just being ridiculous. If you think the minimum wage is OK, try living on $ 290 a week.
tailgater Offline
#140 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
TBG,
Companies move their operations overseas for one of two reasons:
1. To support an overseas customer base
2. To save money while supporting North American sales.

It's bad PR to move abroad nowadays. But companies do it because it is the most cost effective solution in a competitive worldwide market.
How many Tens of Billions of dollars is our trade deficit?
We cry about the shrinking middle class, but where will they work when we move all operations abroad?

If we can balance the trade deficit and keep more jobs here it can only help the middle class.

When even our government and military is bidding out jobs overseas (Airbus anyone?) we are creating an economic avalanche that can only get worse.
We've accepted for decades the many countries who tax our goods coming onto their shores at a much higher rate than we tax theirs coming here.

It's time to reshift the balance in our favor.


tailgater Offline
#141 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
tonygraz wrote:
Now you are just being ridiculous. If you think the minimum wage is OK, try living on $ 290 a week.


Why would I do that?
If I needed to start from scratch and survive, I wouldn't expect mindless entry level work to be the solution.

How about you try keeping a business going with forced labor rates that are almost double what the required skill set is.




banderl Offline
#142 Posted:
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
tailgater wrote:
TBG,
Companies move their operations overseas for one of two reasons:
1. To support an overseas customer base
2. To save money while supporting North American sales.

It's bad PR to move abroad nowadays. But companies do it because it is the most cost effective solution in a competitive worldwide market.
How many Tens of Billions of dollars is our trade deficit?
We cry about the shrinking middle class, but where will they work when we move all operations abroad?

If we can balance the trade deficit and keep more jobs here it can only help the middle class.

When even our government and military is bidding out jobs overseas (Airbus anyone?) we are creating an economic avalanche that can only get worse.
We've accepted for decades the many countries who tax our goods coming onto their shores at a much higher rate than we tax theirs coming here.

It's time to reshift the balance in our favor.





Truth.
gummy jones Offline
#143 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
frankj1 wrote:
which does not address my post.

theoretically, and historically pure capitalism works when businesses get breaks, and I am all for that type of stimuli. But the reality in recent years has been that they have made tremendous record profits due to corporate welfare and bailouts and not created meaningful jobs that pay well. Many of the new returns to the workforce have not resulted in increased wages for American workers. It has created working poor. This has resulted in the shrinking middle class.

Perhaps corporate tax breaks and free stuff should have requirements attached...? Just asking cuz I am not a genius.


they have created jobs - just not here

increasing oversight, wage hikes and benefit mandates sound great, especially on paper. but businesses are charged with making a profit and it is hard to mandate ethics. innovation is fantastic and has made our lives easier but the loss of manufacture has left many out of work. make no mistake, manufacture still matters but rather than reaping the benefits through expanding the workforce here, we get to buy plastic stuff made elsewhere at a decreased price. none of this really matters to me or you and definitely not to the super rich but it insures that the poor will continue to get poorer and more complacent.
tonygraz Offline
#144 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
tailgater wrote:
TBG,
Companies move their operations overseas for one of two reasons:
1. To support an overseas customer base
2. To save money while supporting North American sales.

It's bad PR to move abroad nowadays. But companies do it because it is the most cost effective solution in a competitive worldwide market.
How many Tens of Billions of dollars is our trade deficit?
We cry about the shrinking middle class, but where will they work when we move all operations abroad?

If we can balance the trade deficit and keep more jobs here it can only help the middle class.

When even our government and military is bidding out jobs overseas (Airbus anyone?) we are creating an economic avalanche that can only get worse.
We've accepted for decades the many countries who tax our goods coming onto their shores at a much higher rate than we tax theirs coming here.

It's time to reshift the balance in our favor.





I agree. We need to boycott companies that move their operations overseas. Yet the front running republican clown has hats that say "make America great again" that are made in China and his signature suits are made in Mexico.
teddyballgame Offline
#145 Posted:
Joined: 09-16-2015
Posts: 592
boycott.. jeeze.. the reason companies are moving headquarters overseas is that our Fed government makes it very hard to do business in the states and then taxes businesses too much.

Cut the taxes on businesses, let them flourish and create more jobs here. Make it better to remain here, than move abroad.

No subsidies, no bailouts.

If you risk and are rewarded..great. If you risk and ruin your business, too bad, there will be another company that moves in to take up your slack.

There would be a lot less highly leveraged risky ventures if this was the plan.

Massive tariffs don't work and are a recipe for disaster.

tony, I am sure you have so many things made from China/ Mexico/ Hong Kong.. you are not telling us about.. probably your smart phone/ clothes, your grill, refrigerator, but I expect hypocrisy from the left, always.
banderl Offline
#146 Posted:
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
LOL
frankj1 Offline
#147 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
gummy jones wrote:
they have created jobs - just not here

increasing oversight, wage hikes and benefit mandates sound great, especially on paper. but businesses are charged with making a profit and it is hard to mandate ethics. innovation is fantastic and has made our lives easier but the loss of manufacture has left many out of work. make no mistake, manufacture still matters but rather than reaping the benefits through expanding the workforce here, we get to buy plastic stuff made elsewhere at a decreased price. none of this really matters to me or you and definitely not to the super rich but it insures that the poor will continue to get poorer and more complacent.

either you are agreeing with me, or making my point for me...

tailgater Offline
#148 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
either you are agreeing with me, or making my point for me...



Somebody had to do it...
Angel
tonygraz Offline
#149 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,280
teddyballgame wrote:
...

tony, I am sure you have so many things made from China/ Mexico/ Hong Kong.. you are not telling us about.. probably your smart phone/ clothes, your grill, refrigerator, but I expect hypocrisy from the left, always.


What smart phone ? Grill is too old to be an import. Clothes- maybe something, but I did buy sneakers made in USA recently (new balance). And as an old aficionado of the Amana colonies in Iowa (along with Frankj1) you can assume where my fridge with the freezer on the bottom was made.
frankj1 Offline
#150 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
tonygraz wrote:
What smart phone ? Grill is too old to be an import. Clothes- maybe something, but I did buy sneakers made in USA recently (new balance). And as an old aficionado of the Amana colonies in Iowa (along with Frankj1) you can assume where my fridge with the freezer on the bottom was made.

New Balance for me too!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>