Your catching on brotha. Welcome to Free trade. How's that workin out for ya?
Your catching on brotha. Welcome to Free trade. How's that workin out for ya?
Lol. Without a worldwide market to sell farm commodities, the price would be even lower. Agriculture is one of the few things left that America exports.
OMG! And I thought you were a smart feller. smh
Speaking of “smart fellas”… let's see if you can (finally) share that you made it past the fifth grade on the first lap. Instead of whining, calling names and running away from your comments; why don't you try to unpack your previous nonsense on this thread? You stated:
"Back in the day when sorporate (sic) taxes were at a record high, they were forced to reinvest proffits (sic) back into the company to avoid the tax. This resulted in huge growth, better wages, benefits, etc. rather than fat CEO bonuses and reduces (sic) labor wages."
How about you apply your best fifth grade prose to back up what you said? While you are at it, since you disagree with Dr. Carson on how Obama and his merry band of incompetents are hurting business, why don’t you share where Dr. Carson got it wrong with his “stupid stuff”? Provide something that shares how an Obama policy has helped business or how Dr. Carson got that wrong.
Lastly, to help me understand you better without having to drink copious amounts of really cheap bourbon, I need to ask if you are trying to correlate the perception of “good times” in the 50’s and 60’s to some misguided belief about “unions” being stronger back then? I ask because that seems to be a typical path for underachieving liberals to take when they reminisce back to “Ozzie and Harriet” and/or the first time they jacked off on a Sears catalog. Or (“comrade”) are you trying to worm your way into some soft socialism and redistribution banter given your comments about “bonuses” and “wages”?
Nice. "misguided belief about unions being stronger back then"?
I think there's ample evidence to back that up.
Good thing your on the "right" side, you'd probably been bant by now if you weren't.
No I am not, I am simply stating the facts of those times. You think I am a liberal and your wrong. I lean a little right of center actually. I'm one to try and see things from both sides and personally, if we had more of those types on the hill, something might actually get done.
(please feel free to check my grammar here)
You are parsing what I said and you are missing the point. Those that are pro-union will typically try to sell that the 50’s or 60’s were “happy days” because of the unions being stronger then than they are today.
“Good thing your (sic) on the ‘right’ side, you'd probably been bant (sic) by now if you weren't.”
I would prefer to say the “correct” side but then again, I don’t understand what “bant” means. Maybe you can translate?
That means you hold a popular, if incorrect belief concerning unions, and other factors influencing the economic picture from the 50s and 60s versus today. Some moderators would caution you, probably even ban you for demeaning other posters that disagree with you, had you used thesame rhetoric to argue the other side.
I can break it down to simpler terms than that, if you need me to.
Similar threads
