Originally Posted by Guest

For starters, adding 11 million low-skilled, n-skilled workers to the labor force which serves to only stagnate the wages of all workers. I'm awaiting your explanation of Obama's participation.

I guess I'm a libtard in your eyes. Please explain your point. Back it up with a resource and website that I can examine.

Originally Posted by Guest

I guess I'm a libtard in your eyes. Please explain your point. Back it up with a resource and website that I can examine.

I'm still awaiting your response regarding Obama's participation.

Originally Posted by Guest

I guess I'm a libtard in your eyes. Please explain your point. Back it up with a resource and website that I can examine.

Why don't you try a google search for: "Labor markets and unskilled workers".


I'm sorry, but I just don't have the time nor inclination to "try" to educate libatards.

Originally Posted by Guest

Scalia was a bigot, you by your posts have made that known, so I can see where you identify with him.

Dear Guest: You do know that Justice Scalia is being touted as the greatest Justice to ever sit on the Supreme Court. You do know that Justice Scalia never let his personal bias interfere with matters of the law/Constitution.

You do know that Justice Scalia is irreplaceable.

But why do I bother? How's that thread on Five Easy Steps to becoming a troll going? Oops four I gave you Step 1 earlier

You may want to know that in my family we were required to debate religion and politics. As such my brother intentionally took the opposite point of view just for discussion sake. I know my brother and you my friend are not my brother. Do you watch "The View per chance"?

Originally Posted by Guest

I guess I'm a libtard in your eyes. Please explain your point. Back it up with a resource and website that I can examine.

Numerous books had been written on this subject and you want someone to provide a resource and website that you can examine. You can't be serious.

Originally Posted by Guest

Numerous books had been written on this subject and you want someone to provide a resource and website that you can examine. You can't be serious.

Liberals are definitely serious when asking you to jump through hoops so that they can laugh at you. They either know the truth and feign ignorance in order to disrupt the conversation, or are too lazy to counter with disputing facts. That's why they belong to the party of slavery, because they are so needy and really depend on the government for their very existence.

I have been out of town for the last couple of days and am saddened that this post has been relegated to childish name calling. It reminds me of years ago when a man, who was very angry with me, threatened physical violence. I said that we could fight if that is what he wanted but all that it would prove is that one of us could beat the other in a fight. It would not change any other part of the equation.

The name calling tells us all more about the name caller than it does about the one being targeted.

My preference, recognizing that we all (at least as of yet) have freedom of speech, is that we return to a more mature discussion.

tq

Originally Posted by Guest

asdfadf

What are you trying to say?

Originally Posted by Guest

Yours definitely would be.

Your response makes no sense to me. I am the OP and I was just asking if I can edit any of my posts. Some of my grammar was not selected as carefully as it could/should have been. We can edit our posts on the "regular" blog. I was just wondering if our political posts can be edited.

Originally Posted by Guest

Liberals are definitely serious when asking you to jump through hoops so that they can laugh at you. They either know the truth and feign ignorance in order to disrupt the conversation, or are too lazy to counter with disputing facts. That's why they belong to the party of slavery, because they are so needy and really depend on the government for their very existence.

You have nothing to support your argument.

Originally Posted by Guest

You have nothing to support your argument.

Can you provide a link or website to support your statement that he has nothing to support his argument?

Originally Posted by Guest

Can you provide a link or website to support your statement that he has nothing to support his argument?

"Make sure that no matter how the conversation goes, you always come out as the correct one. Twist their words, your previous words, and the stream of logic to always prove yourself right."
How to Defend Yourself With Words: 8 Steps (with Pictures)

Originally Posted by Guest

TOTAL BS.

You know nothing about economics,

In fact, you know absolutely nothing about anything!

Please explain your expertise in the field of economics. Do you really believe half this country is entitled to live off the efforts of the other half & expect this country to survive? Get your head out of your a$$.

Originally Posted by Guest

The start of the downfall of the middle class started during the reagan years. He taught the companies how to destroy the unions with the air traffic controllers. The companies kept their unions, chamber of commerce ect., but the commoners lost all theirs. When the unions were strong this country had its best years, check it out.

I worked in a union shop for 40 years, 12 as a union member and 28 as part of management. Union jobs in the private sector killed themselves as they forgot you need a customer willing to pay for that product you are making. Without that oft forgotten piece your high paying job is short lived when there is competition, as you can well see. Now the public sector is a different story as they have no competition so tax payers are on hook for the "good" high middle class wages you speak of.

Originally Posted by Guest

I have been out of town for the last couple of days and am saddened that this post has been relegated to childish name calling. It reminds me of years ago when a man, who was very angry with me, threatened physical violence. I said that we could fight if that is what he wanted but all that it would prove is that one of us could beat the other in a fight. It would not change any other part of the equation.

The name calling tells us all more about the name caller than it does about the one being targeted.

My preference, recognizing that we all (at least as of yet) have freedom of speech, is that we return to a more mature discussion.

tq

Congrats on your letter to the editor in The Daily Sun today. Spot on!