13 Feb 21
@dood111 saidHe truly did not even pick his running mate. He’s only got a few months before the hustle his boney self mumbling out of the Oval. I’d said 18 months, but his backstepping and waffling will cost him credibility, and it may be sooner. He truly is not up for this, the 20 year old ball of energy AOC, Kamala’s demands, the conniving Susan Rice, whom you may never even see on camera. Deep State. Deep . All is never as it seems. Brrrr
Biden will do whatever his handlers in the Democrat party tell him to do.
He takes orders from Pelosi/Kamala Harris/AOC/and whoever else is running the Dems.
14 Feb 21
The post that was quoted here has been removedHe's reducing jobs, Trump created them, more than 7M gone unfilled. Dont get you there, Sonhouse.
You will have to define corruption. Do you know the Biden's are being investigated this very minute for corruption. Dn't get you there , either, son house.
I want all presidents to succeed. You say I DONT want the President of the United States of America (which has been REAL good to me) to succeed?? Dont get you there, either. You make the most un-founded statements on the Forum. ""I do not want the President to succeed."" Sonhouse, get a nice strong scotch.
I want the country to go into a downward spiral? Wipe out my investments? Sonhouse?? Maybe 2 scotches.
I dont want only white people, as legal immigrants are a great source of production in this country, and most are non-white. My organization hires many of them, and I would rather hire them than most white people. Mexicans work very hard, they are solid, they show up.
SOnhouse, what i DO worry about is, their children might not be quite so hard working. You might say that I am saying that I only want them here for employment. No, I want them here to help us grow the USA, we need them. We are having smaller families, so we need outsiders to become citizens. WE will just deal with cultural differences as they assimilate. I do, for the record, think they should leave their culture at home and adopt ours. You are right, business is important to me. I DO get you there, Sonhouse.
14 Feb 21
@kevcvs57 saidI will educate you. A start up driller invests a lot of money to drill wells. He gets a good well the first time, but he is unfortunate the second time and drills a dry well. There are no subsidies anymore because people like you ended subsidies. The start up driller goes out of business.
No they are there at the behest of big oil companies in order to suppress the introduction and development of green energy options at the expense of the tax payer and the planet. It’s a scam with the compliant political parties getting kick backs. Grow up son.
The big oil companies stay in business because they have deep enough pockets to survive dry wells with no subsidies. All of the small businesses go bankrupt. There is less competition as a result.
Who benefits from no subsidies? BIG OIL!
15 Feb 21
@metal-brain saidYour last paragraph seems to be commenting on the success of big business, such as apple, where everyone can communicate by phone with their loved ones, and call 911. They knew how to run their business,,,, they followed a business model so that they would have 'deep pockets to survive dry wells with no subsidies'. Do you think it at ALL possible that they ran their corp correctly, and at the other guys did not? Just how big do you libs want safety nets to be, to catch, support and restart the losing businesses? How many?
I will educate you. A start up driller invests a lot of money to drill wells. He gets a good well the first time, but he is unfortunate the second time and drills a dry well. There are no subsidies anymore because people like you ended subsidies. The start up driller goes out of business.
The big oil companies stay in business because they have deep enough pockets to ...[text shortened]... sses go bankrupt. There is less competition as a result.
Who benefits from no subsidies? BIG OIL!
Don't forget that the oil companies bring us oil, so we can defeat all other countries in the world. Not bad, Mobile. Keep it gushing. Of course, you fellers need to control how much money the corp guys get to earn. Real important to libs, putting their noses into other peoples' business.
So, what are you going to do about the small companies that took a bad risk, got dry wells? Why dont libs close their arguments?. My deli just had a great year, good planning. Herb's deli, down the block, did not have a good year, has to close. Do you, or I , or the govt have any anything to do with Herb?
15 Feb 21
@averagejoe1 saidDrilling wells can be risky. Subsidies reduce that risk so the little guy can compete without going out of business. This is one example of a subsidy being a good thing. I can't comment on every subsidy that exists. There are probably some that should be eliminated, but condemning subsidies in general is stupid. Some serve a practical purpose.
Your last paragraph seems to be commenting on the success of big business, such as apple, where everyone can communicate by phone with their loved ones, and call 911. They knew how to run their business,,,, they followed a business model so that they would have 'deep pockets to survive dry wells with no subsidies'. Do you think it at ALL possible that they ran their co ...[text shortened]... not have a good year, has to close. Do you, or I , or the govt have any anything to do with Herb?
I think people should be specific about which subsidy is good or bad and why.
15 Feb 21
@metal-brain saidWe agree of course. In such discussions, hard-headedness needs to be checked at the door. Your comment points out #1, no two corp situations are alike, and #2, if there were not SOME benefit or need for corp subsidies, they simply would not exist. Longest back I can remember is corn subsidies, the ole ' will pay you not to grow crops'. Funny, it made sense, smart fellows, But,, it can only be applied in special circumstances.
Drilling wells can be risky. Subsidies reduce that risk so the little guy can compete without going out of business. This is one example of a subsidy being a good thing. I can't comment on every subsidy that exists. There are probably some that should be eliminated, but condemning subsidies in general is stupid. Some serve a practical purpose.
I think people should be specific about which subsidy is good or bad and why.
15 Feb 21
@metal-brain saidLook son we know Moscow is heavily invested in fossil fuels but cut the crap, you couldn’t educate a monkey.
I will educate you. A start up driller invests a lot of money to drill wells. He gets a good well the first time, but he is unfortunate the second time and drills a dry well. There are no subsidies anymore because people like you ended subsidies. The start up driller goes out of business.
The big oil companies stay in business because they have deep enough pockets to ...[text shortened]... sses go bankrupt. There is less competition as a result.
Who benefits from no subsidies? BIG OIL!
15 Feb 21
@metal-brain saidAny subsidy to any fossil fuel endeavour apart from carbon capture technology is a bad thing. Simples.
Drilling wells can be risky. Subsidies reduce that risk so the little guy can compete without going out of business. This is one example of a subsidy being a good thing. I can't comment on every subsidy that exists. There are probably some that should be eliminated, but condemning subsidies in general is stupid. Some serve a practical purpose.
I think people should be specific about which subsidy is good or bad and why.
16 Feb 21
@kevcvs57 saidSo you want to end fossil fuels before renewables can replace it and you support subsidies for renewables, right?
Any subsidy to any fossil fuel endeavour apart from carbon capture technology is a bad thing. Simples.
It isn't that you want to end subsidies, you just want them for renewables and not fossil fuels. I'll bet you want an end to the internal combustion engine before electricity is green too. Instead of CO2 coming out of your tailpipe it will come out of the smoke stack to generate the electricity.
What is your plan to eliminate fossil fuel burning to generate electricity? It involves subsidies, right?
16 Feb 21
@AverageJoe1
I can only assume you would be one of those voting to acquit Trump for his criminal activity inciting to riot.
Moscow Mitch even admitted Trump CAUSED the riots but no balls MM voted to acquit, showing he was just showboating when he made his apparent anti Trump statements.
What do you think of THAT?