Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

You’re being ripped off my friend, and don’t even know it. BTW, the rich don’t spend additional money—they don’t need to, and business doesn’t either—business is sitting upon piles of cash, and hoarding it; stockholders get it without creating jobs.

You’ve been had.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

Do you own any Stock?

RAR_man Loc: stow, MA

plenty!

Retired and it pays my way quite handsomely!

you're wrong about piles of dough. None of the companies could afford to bring any of their money back to the US at 35% repatriation tax. Now, at 21% (still high) some of that may flow back. A lot of the money sits off shore, because that's where the money is made. That's where the rising markets are. A lot of the markets in the US are saturated or nearly so. But China, India, etc. are coming up and as they do, they buy goods from US companies. It is cheaper to produce the goods near those markets. That's why a lot of companies move overseas. Now that China is getting more expensive, mfg is moving to other areas (Vietnam, etc.) where the labor rate is lower and the raw materials are cheaper. I'm not opposed to that. Let US corps flourish. Find ways they can get their money back here for R&D, new jobs, etc. I have been in the corp. world for many years and know how it works and know the hindrances. Its sad that so many that are part of that world have such fixed ideas and know little of how money is made, where it goes and how it affects the average American.

I have worked for several global giants and have worked on mfg strategies and helped figure ways that would benefit workers, consumers and Americans.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

That was directed at Twardlow.
Like you I am happily retired with more than enough income to live better than when working. I worked for some of the big ones also, that is how I get a nice pension check. Worked in the same building for 33 years, during that time I worked for the following:
MCA
MATSUS**TA
SEAGRAMS
VIVIENDI
GE
NBC
I am sure you now where I worked.
Management always had the same goals, make money. Notice I did not say earn money, you and I know the difference.

Have a Merry Christmas.

RAR_man Loc: stow, MA

Thanks, LMD. Same to you.

You live in Taipei? I know the city well. I miss Cherry at China Pa. Sweet lady at a great pub. Havent been there since 2010. Have many good friends in Taiwan. Went to Europe with one of them end Sept. I did a lot of work in Tao Yuan.

Been there long? Chinese/Taiwanese heritage?

Funny how some people spout off without knowing what they are talking about. Just following the "narrative."

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

Just currently in Taipei, the wife and I spend 3 months of the year hear helping take care of her Grandchildren. She is the second wife and is Taiwanese. Once the gloomy weather is cleared it will as be long walks with the Camera. We live in the hills just west of and backing up to the Taipei Zoo. A small river runs down from Maokong thur our community on it's way to the main river. The park that it flows thru is home to many birds, butterflys, and d**gon flys, I enjoy photographing nature and walking the river in search of the perfect shot.

Again, A Merry Christmas to you and yours.
John

RAR_man Loc: stow, MA

Beitou area?

We've been up that way and the thermal areas. My interests lie in wildlife photography. Get somewhat bored with landscape photos. With wildlife, I'm always trying to better my shots per species.

Lived in Singapore for 2.5 yrs. Great for wildlife. Know Malaysia very well too. Need to get back to Taiwan to visit friends.

Ciao,

Gary ---*

cwp3420

YOUR quotes, but absolutely nothing official from the Republican party. YOUR quotes are full of s**t. I owned you when we discussed police shootings, and you blocked me. I owned you now when you are unable to back up your simpering lies. Maybe try and block me again, but I'll continue to own your Arkansas hillbilly ass, flabby though it may be. Have a wonderful day, twatty.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

You never owned me, big boy, except in your own mind.

It’s called dilusions of grandeur.

You and Trumpie suffer from the same limitations, but you’ve got the bigger mouth.

cwp3420

And you still haven’t been able to prove the s**t your big mouth spewed. You’re all talk and no substance. You say s**t and can’t back it up with references, which renders your entire litany of arguments null and void. In other words, twat boy, everything you say is suspect. Who would believe anything you spew out if you can’t back it with facts? And, thinking in your mind that it’s true, when only you believe it, doesn’t make it fact. Bottom line, twat, your a fraud and a liar, and always will be. (Bet you wish you could block me again, huh?)

Frosty Loc: Minnesota

I really don't want to get into the mode of this but sometimes a referee is necessary.

Looking back, I saw Tardlow make a neutral statement about trump's guilt, saying something to the effect that we need to wait for the conclusion of the investigation. A position I share and posted later.

You responded with, "You are without a doubt the biggest dumb ass on here, twatty. You listen to every alt left wing kook, repost it, and swear it’s the t***h. You’re as crazy as the other nut job kooks in your alt left winger universe."

I think both of you should go to a neutral corner and take a timeout. This arguing will never resolve anything.

cwp3420

He said the Republican party’s platform supports and encourages the disenfranchisement of B****s. I asked him to prove it, since he says repeatedly if you say something you should be able to substantiate it. I asked for proof and he responds like an ass, so I returned the favor. I’m still waiting for proof from him.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

I am sure he will search for and provide you with some Informed Opinion.

Twardlow Loc: Arkansas

Steven Seward wrote:
The "announced purpose" of v**er ID was to reduce minority v****g????? You are just full of s**t. Show me any piece of documentation that backs that up. You can't just make stuff up and expect people on this forum to believe it. You have to have at least have a kernel of t***h in order to try to fool somebody. Even your Liberal counterparts are not going to believe this one.


V**ER-ID LAWS
Republicans Admit V**er ID Laws Are Aimed at Democratic V**ers

Republicans are confessing the true reasons for the v**er-ID laws they’re pushing, says Jamelle Bouie.

JAMELLE BOUIE
08.28.13 4:45 AM ET

When liberals decry v**er-identification laws as tools for v**er suppression, they aren’t arguing ex nihilo. The evidence is clear: identification requirements for v****g reduce turnout among low-income and minority v**ers. And the particular restrictions imposed by Republican lawmakers—limiting the acceptable forms of identification, ending opportunities for student v****g, reducing hours for early v****g—certainly do appear aimed at Democratic v**ers.

Indeed, in a column for right-wing clearinghouse WorldNetDaily, longtime conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly acknowledged as much with a defense of North Carolina’s new v****g law, which has been criticized for its restrictions on access, among other things. Here’s Schlafly:

“The reduction in the number of days allowed for early v****g is particularly important because early v****g plays a major role in Obama’s ground game. The Democrats carried most states that allow many days of early v****g, and Obama’s national field director admitted, shortly before last year’s e******n, that ‘early v****g is giving us a solid lead in the battleground states that will decide this e******n.’

“The Obama technocrats have developed an efficient system of identifying prospective Obama v**ers and then nagging them (some might say harassing them) until they actually v**e. It may take several days to accomplish this, so early v****g is an essential component of the Democrats’ get-out-the-v**e campaign.”

She later adds that early v****g “violates the spirit of the Constitution” and facilitates “illegal v**es” that “cancel out the v**es of honest Americans.” I’m not sure what she means by “illegal v**es,” but it sounds an awful lot like v****g by Democratic constituencies: students, low-income people, and minorities.

Schlafly, it should be noted, isn’t the first Republican to confess the true reason for v**er-identification laws. Among friendly audiences, they can’t seem to help it.

Last spring, for example, Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai told a gathering of Republicans that their v**er identification law would “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.” That summer, at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation, former Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund conceded that Democrats had a point about the GOP’s focus on v**er ID, as opposed to those measures—such as absentee b****ting—that are vulnerable to tampering. “I think it is a fair argument of some liberals that there are some people who emphasize the v**er ID part more than the absentee b****t part because supposedly Republicans like absentee b****ts more and they don’t want to restrict that,” he said.

After the e******n, former Florida GOP chairman Jim Greer told The Palm Beach Post that the explicit goal of the state’s v**er-ID law was Democratic suppression. “The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early v****g is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told the Post. “It’s done for one reason and one reason only ... ‘We’ve got to cut down on early v****g because early v****g is not good for us,’” he said. Indeed, the Florida Republican Party imposed a host of policies, from longer b****ts to fewer precincts in minority areas, meant to discourage v****g. And it worked. According to one study, as many as 49,000 people were discouraged from v****g in November 2012 as a result of long lines and other obstacles.

One could spend hours going through the abundant evidence that these laws are meant to discourage Democratic v****g with burdens that harm b****s, Latinos, and other disproportionately low-income groups. In 2011 an Associated Press analysis found that South Carolina’s proposed v**er-identification law would hit black precincts the hardest, keeping thousands from casting nonprovisional b****ts. Likewise, if Alabama’s v**er-ID law goes into effect, it will place its largest burden on black v**ers who lack acceptable forms of identification and don’t have immediate access to alternatives. And while most of these laws—which, it’s worth noting, have been passed in most of the states of the former Confederacy—provide for free identification, it’s not an easy reach. To get one in Mississippi, for instance, residents need a birth certificate, which costs $15 and requires the photo identification they don’t have. They’ll also need time to travel to the state office to pay or a computer to do the t***saction online.

For the one in five Mississippians who live below the poverty line, there’s no guarantee of the time to go to an office, a computer to access the website, or a credit card to make the t***saction. After all, more than 10 million American households don’t have bank accounts, and the large majority of them are low income. Most v**ers will know the steps they need to get an ID. They just aren’t easy to complete, and that’s the point.

So we should be thankful for Schlafly’s candor. The more Republicans acknowledge that these laws are designed to suppress the v**es of b****s, Latinos, and others, the easier building a movement to stop them will be.

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

[quote=Twardlow]Steven Seward wrote:
The "announced purpose" of v**er ID was to reduce minority v****g????? You are just full of s**t. Show me any piece of documentation that backs that up. You can't just make stuff up and expect people on this forum to believe it. You have to have at least have a kernel of t***h in order to try to fool somebody. Even your Liberal counterparts are not going to believe this one.


V**ER-ID LAWS
[b]Republicans Admit V**er ID Laws Are Aimed at Democratic V**ers[b]

Republicans are confessing the true reasons for the v**er-ID laws they’re pushing, says Jamelle Bouie.

JAMELLE BOUIE
08.28.13 4:45 AM ET

When liberals decry v**er-identification laws as tools for v**er suppression, they aren’t arguing ex nihilo. The evidence is clear: identification requirements for v****g reduce turnout among low-income and minority v**ers. And the particular restrictions imposed by Republican lawmakers—limiting the acceptable forms of identification, ending opportunities for student v****g, reducing hours for early v****g—certainly do appear aimed at Democratic v**ers.

Indeed, in a column for right-wing clearinghouse WorldNetDaily, longtime conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly acknowledged as much with a defense of North Carolina’s new v****g law, which has been criticized for its restrictions on access, among other things. Here’s Schlafly:

“The reduction in the number of days allowed for early v****g is particularly important because early v****g plays a major role in Obama’s ground game. The Democrats carried most states that allow many days of early v****g, and Obama’s national field director admitted, shortly before last year’s e******n, that ‘early v****g is giving us a solid lead in the battleground states that will decide this e******n.’

“The Obama technocrats have developed an efficient system of identifying prospective Obama v**ers and then nagging them (some might say harassing them) until they actually v**e. It may take several days to accomplish this, so early v****g is an essential component of the Democrats’ get-out-the-v**e campaign.”

She later adds that early v****g “violates the spirit of the Constitution” and facilitates “illegal v**es” that “cancel out the v**es of honest Americans.” I’m not sure what she means by “illegal v**es,” but it sounds an awful lot like v****g by Democratic constituencies: students, low-income people, and minorities.

Schlafly, it should be noted, isn’t the first Republican to confess the true reason for v**er-identification laws. Among friendly audiences, they can’t seem to help it.

Last spring, for example, Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai told a gathering of Republicans that their v**er identification law would “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.” That summer, at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation, former Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund conceded that Democrats had a point about the GOP’s focus on v**er ID, as opposed to those measures—such as absentee b****ting—that are vulnerable to tampering. “I think it is a fair argument of some liberals that there are some people who emphasize the v**er ID part more than the absentee b****t part because supposedly Republicans like absentee b****ts more and they don’t want to restrict that,” he said.

After the e******n, former Florida GOP chairman Jim Greer told The Palm Beach Post that the explicit goal of the state’s v**er-ID law was Democratic suppression. “The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early v****g is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told the Post. “It’s done for one reason and one reason only ... ‘We’ve got to cut down on early v****g because early v****g is not good for us,’” he said. Indeed, the Florida Republican Party imposed a host of policies, from longer b****ts to fewer precincts in minority areas, meant to discourage v****g. And it worked. According to one study, as many as 49,000 people were discouraged from v****g in November 2012 as a result of long lines and other obstacles.

One could spend hours going through the abundant evidence that these laws are meant to discourage Democratic v****g with burdens that harm b****s, Latinos, and other disproportionately low-income groups. In 2011 an Associated Press analysis found that South Carolina’s proposed v**er-identification law would hit black precincts the hardest, keeping thousands from casting nonprovisional b****ts. Likewise, if Alabama’s v**er-ID law goes into effect, it will place its largest burden on black v**ers who lack acceptable forms of identification and don’t have immediate access to alternatives. And while most of these laws—which, it’s worth noting, have been passed in most of the states of the former Confederacy—provide for free identification, it’s not an easy reach. To get one in Mississippi, for instance, residents need a birth certificate, which costs $15 and requires the photo identification they don’t have. They’ll also need time to travel to the state office to pay or a computer to do the t***saction online.

For the one in five Mississippians who live below the poverty line, there’s no guarantee of the time to go to an office, a computer to access the website, or a credit card to make the t***saction. After all, more than 10 million American households don’t have bank accounts, and the large majority of them are low income. Most v**ers will know the steps they need to get an ID. They just aren’t easy to complete, and that’s the point.

So we should be thankful for Schlafly’s candor. The more Republicans acknowledge that these laws are designed to suppress the v**es of b****s, Latinos, and others, the easier building a movement to stop them will be.[/quote]



Thanks for proving me correct.
Merry Christmas Tom.