Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Redstorm]
    #11180705 -

Redstorm said:
Quote:
Another theory says when the gap between the rich and the working class grows, the working class can't buy many of the things they previously purchased, causing reduced spending on things like automobiles and such.


This assumes that the growing gaps is due to a decrease in working class wages and not upper class wages growing faster than working class wages.


Agreed.

And there is evidence to show this has been happening:

Annual Income Variance Analysis
Family Income Report Sumary Page


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #11180778 -

Prisoner#1 said:
so how exactly did it save 3 million jobs?


Here's an executive summary of one of the reports:

http://www.cargroup.org/documents/CARPressReleaseNovember42008.pdf


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11181030 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Redstorm said:
Quote:
Another theory says when the gap between the rich and the working class grows, the working class can't buy many of the things they previously purchased, causing reduced spending on things like automobiles and such.


This assumes that the growing gaps is due to a decrease in working class wages and not upper class wages growing faster than working class wages.


Agreed.

And there is evidence to show this has been happening:

Annual Income Variance Analysis
Family Income Report Sumary Page


It depends on what time period you're looking at.  In the short term, inflation adjusted household income has been stagnant, but versus twenty years ago, today's household income is almost $10,000 higher.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Redstorm]
    #11182251 -

Both the links I posted show wages have been going down since 2003.  :shrug:


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11182306 -

Everything I've seen from official sources shows stagnation.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h05.html

(In 2007 dollars)

2003  48,835
2004  48,665
2005  49,202
2006  49,568
2007  50,233

I'm sure it's dropped in 2008 and 2009 due to the downturn, but it's not much of a drop pattern.  More like a trickling increase.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Redstorm]
    #11182490 -

Redstorm said:
Everything I've seen from official sources shows stagnation.


If you believe Gov't statistics, then yes, we've had stagnation.  If you adjust for Gov't manipulation, then wages have been dropping.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11183718 -

Yeah o.k.....



Listen.  There are many "theories" about the Great Depression....  There's no reason why we can't take a critical look at them and decide what makes better sense.


The individuals who predicted the present economic problems and their causes years in advance were Austrian scholars.



It doesn't make sense that so many people like to ignore the individuals that are right most of the time and follow schools like Keynesian economics that has proved itself wrong to the present day.



Now seriously listen up.  Look at the recent housing bubble & crash....  What do you surmise caused it?  It was ridiculously low interest rates from the fed combined with a slew of sub-prime loans that banks were forced to give out to people that couldn't afford them because of the Community Reinvestment Act.  It sounds like a failure in central economic planning to me.  Have you ever heard of Hayek's Austrian Business Cycle Theory?  It explains it perfectly you should check it out.


It terms of the stock market crash that was part of the Great Depression, that was caused by masses of investors "buying on the margin"  this created a huge bubble in stock prices.  Now, recall that those margins we all called in pretty much simultaneously...  Any idiot could see that stock market crash was orchestrated so a few assholes could buy out the plummeted stocks for pennies on the dollar. 


We could talk about Hoover fixing wages and precipitating high unemployment (that F.D.R. continued).  That's "free market economics" so maybe you don't want to talk about that.

As far as that Reich moron is concerned, sure a big increase in government spending will increase G.D.P. because government statistics include government spending.  Sure the money (they create the money, tax for it, or borrow from some of our swell friends like China) spent on the government program will leak into the economy and create a false temporary prosperity that is not based on real production but the influx/creation of new money.  Things will be nice until prices in the economy rise in relation to the increased money in circulation.  Then people will be worse of then before.


There you go: a basic introduction into A.B.C. theory which, by itself, destroys most mainstream schools especially the idiocy that spewed from the mouth of John Maynard Keynes.


--------------------
Ludwig von Mises Institute,Campaign for Liberty.,The Oath Keeper's

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Mr.Al]
    #11184477 -

Mr.Al said:
The individuals who predicted the present economic problems and their causes years in advance were Austrian scholars.


Some are, others aren't.  People who saw the crisis were people who knew that there was a housing bubble that was going to burst, that too many derivatives were being traded, etc.  You could certainly argue that the Government and the Fed made poor financial decisions, but both schools would agree.

Mr.Al said:
It doesn't make sense that so many people like to ignore the individuals that are right most of the time and follow schools like Keynesian economics that has proved itself wrong to the present day.


Quite the opposite.  Keynesian economics is now seeing a revival as a result of the current economic crisis:  Keynesian resurgence

Mr.Al said:
Now seriously listen up.  Look at the recent housing bubble & crash....  What do you surmise caused it?  It was ridiculously low interest rates from the fed combined with a slew of sub-prime loans that banks were forced to give out to people that couldn't afford them because of the Community Reinvestment Act.


Yes, interst rates were set too low.  But Banks weren't forced to give out subprime loans to everyone; only low income borrowers.  But they chose to give subprime loans to middle and even upper income people beyond what those people could afford.  It was all to make a quick buck.  Free market in action.

Mr.Al said:
Have you ever heard of Hayek's Austrian Business Cycle Theory?


Yup.

Mr.Al said:
It terms of the stock market crash that was part of the Great Depression, that was caused by masses of investors "buying on the margin"  this created a huge bubble in stock prices.  Now, recall that those margins we all called in pretty much simultaneously...  Any idiot could see that stock market crash was orchestrated so a few assholes could buy out the plummeted stocks for pennies on the dollar.


That sounds reasonable.

Mr.Al said:
We could talk about Hoover fixing wages and precipitating high unemployment (that F.D.R. continued).  That's "free market economics" so maybe you don't want to talk about that.


Feel free to talk about it.

Mr.Al said:
As far as that Reich moron is concerned, sure a big increase in government spending will increase G.D.P. because government statistics include government spending.  Sure the money (they create the money, tax for it, or borrow from some of our swell friends like China) spent on the government program will leak into the economy and create a false temporary prosperity that is not based on real production but the influx/creation of new money.  Things will be nice until prices in the economy rise in relation to the increased money in circulation.  Then people will be worse of then before.


He's not proposing we create money, but that we borrow it.

Mr.Al said:
There you go: a basic introduction into A.B.C. theory which, by itself, destroys most mainstream schools especially the idiocy that spewed from the mouth of John Maynard Keynes.


I've studied both, and both have their merits, but I lean towards Keynesian thought.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: ArmFromTheAbyss]
    #11184499 -

Quote:
He didn't say that.  He said it's important that women and minorities weren't excluded


Really?

REICH: …”I am concerned, as I’m sure many of you are, that these jobs not go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers…"

Yes, I too would like the least skilled, least qualified, workers building roads and bridges that I drive on. Oh yes, please pick those which derive benefits from the stimulus based on skin pigmentation. The strange thing is that from the bottom up, everyone states that the promised increase in job openings hasn't materialized.

Have you ever seen the workers building the roads through the Dept. of transportation? Were they all white? So is he actually a racist himself, by admission stating that women and minorities cannot be trained to perform the duties as a construction worker? If so many of these new jobs were actually created then of course the construction companies would hire just about anyone able to work and willing to learn, regardless of their sex/race. He stated minorities could be trained in green technology jobs, such as installing and repairing solar panels, wind turbines, etc. yet they cant figure out how to place asphalt on a road?

If the first stimulus hasn't delivered on its promises, whats to make you believe the second would help the country fare any better. I'm sure you don't need any reminding of where much of the money went, how it was misspent, much of it unaccounted for, as well as simply being wasted or spent financing pet projects for special interests. And yes WE get to pay it back.

Do you really have to go into the "fuzzy math" of how one could ever possibly prove an abstract concept of how many jobs were "saved"
vs. how many were actually lost. What ever happened to the theory of 8% unemployment maximum as a justification for the stim?

Quote:
That has nothing to do with anything in this thread.  We're talking about increasing the stimulus money so American companies get MORE money.


Then tell me who is going to pay for it? More money for large American companies=more capitol to purchase/upgrade equipment=more jobs for American workers=greater tax base. And yet none of this works. You can keep throwing money at the problem but when does the law of diminishing returns prevail.

Want to see a stop to the hemorrhaging of jobs? Repeal NAFTA, and CAFTA and enact fair vs. free trade agreements.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11185365 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Redstorm said:
Everything I've seen from official sources shows stagnation.


If you believe Gov't statistics, then yes, we've had stagnation.  If you adjust for Gov't manipulation, then wages have been dropping.


So you don't trust them enough to issue meaningful statistics, but do trust them enough to spend truckloads other people's money?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Therian]
    #11186197 -

Therian said:
Quote:
He didn't say that.  He said it's important that women and minorities weren't excluded


Really?

REICH: ??I am concerned, as I?m sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers?"


Fixed that for ya.  Why did you delete the word "simply"???  Did you think you could get away with misrepresenting what was actually said???  His speech is all over the internet.

Therian said:
If the first stimulus hasn't delivered on its promises, whats to make you believe the second would help the country fare any better. I'm sure you don't need any reminding of where much of the money went, how it was misspent, much of it unaccounted for, as well as simply being wasted or spent financing pet projects for special interests. And yes WE get to pay it back.


Actually you may be correct that the first stimulus was misspent.  Since we're not out of the recession yet, it may be time to spend on things the country ACTUALLY NEEDS ANYWAY, which would definitely create jobs at the same time.

Therian said:
Want to see a stop to the hemorrhaging of jobs? Repeal NAFTA, and CAFTA and enact fair vs. free trade agreements.


Sounds like a good idea.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Redstorm]
    #11186217 -

Redstorm said:
So you don't trust them enough to issue meaningful statistics, but do trust them enough to spend truckloads other people's money?


Good question.  It's well known the Government has been using questionable accounting practices for a long time.  Yet we still trust them to do a lot of things.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11186560 -

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Redstorm said:
So you don't trust them enough to issue meaningful statistics, but do trust them enough to spend truckloads other people's money?


Good question.  It's well known the Government has been using questionable accounting practices for a long time.  Yet we still trust them to do a lot of things.


You got a mouse in your pocket?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11188171 -

:shakefist: I call bullshit.

Hey, the housing boom&bust was caused by artificially low interest rates courtesy of the fed.  The C.R.A. was legislation that forced lending to people who couldn't afford it.  THE HOUSING BOOM & BUST WAS NOT A PRODUCT OF A FREE MARKET.

How can you be a proponent of Keynes when central economic planning is such a failure. 

O.K. so you've heard about A.B.C. theory.  We have seen economic bubbles create malinvestment that creates distortions throughout the economy.  I don't see how keynesian bubble economics works to our benefit. 


Do you have any keynesian scholars that you would like me to poke fun at? 

Let's start with Bernanke:



--------------------
Ludwig von Mises Institute,Campaign for Liberty.,The Oath Keeper's

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Mr.Al]
    #11188366 -

Mr.Al said:
:shakefist: I call bullshit.

Hey, the housing boom&bust was caused by artificially low interest rates courtesy of the fed.  The C.R.A. was legislation that forced lending to people who couldn't afford it.  THE HOUSING BOOM & BUST WAS NOT A PRODUCT OF A FREE MARKET.


Let me repost what I said earlier:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Yes, interst rates were set too low.  But Banks weren't forced to give out subprime loans to everyone; only low income borrowers.  But they chose to give subprime loans to middle and even upper income people beyond what those people could afford.  It was all to make a quick buck.  Free market in action.


Are you saying banks were forced to give subprime loans to wealthy people???


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11188604 -

It was not a "free market in action".  We have not had a free market in our lifetimes.  The easy money created the potential for a bubble to occur.  Without artificially low interest rates there is no bubble...

I think it is ridiculous to call the situation as a "free market in action".  Central economic planning and central banking created that mess and it's bullshit when people start with the historical revisionist view of blaming a nonexistent free market.


Nothing to say about Bernanke, huh?

Edited by Mr.Al (10/05/09 05:19 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Mr.Al]
    #11191095 -

I didn't intentionally misrepresent anything he said. Actually I posted what I felt to be the least actively racist of his statements. He also went on to say (not verbatim) something to the effect most construction workers were white, and would therefore get the lions share of the stim. money. This just goes to prove how out of touch and ignorant the hairy midget, gerbil look-alike is.

He went on to say "criterion can be set so the money does go to others" (non-whites). Tell me how in the hell in this country can an adviser to the president go out of his way to intentionally create "criterion" which would keep a certain race of individuals from getting work? How is this not completely racist. Can you imagine if he set criterion to keep homos, Jews, women, etc. from making a living. Much of his bullshit, and apparently yours is based on false premise, and flat out lies.

1. Before any construction company can bid on contracts with the state or federal government, they must meet racial quotas! The money could never just go to the evil white construction workers as they are REQUIRED by law to meet the quotas as set forth by the government. Obviously you've never worked a job in construction, but I would say that next to fast food restaurants there are very few fields that are as integrated as construction.

2. As for wanting women to reap benefits, they too are given preference. Yes female and minority owned businesses are not only given preferences when biding on government contracts, but there are contracts which are set aside, and will only go to such businesses. Thus the prerequisite for preference is only that you ARE NOT WHITE. Whites are kept from getting the work and are immediately put at a disadvantage simply because they are white.

3. Strangely enough these minority owned business don't have to meet the racial quotas as the white businesses do. As the white owned companies must hire individual minorities in proportion to their numbers in the general population, blacks don't have to. Why are black/Latino business not forced to hire a work force comprised of 66% Caucasian workers?

4. In California 67% of construction workers are LATINO! Not only is this far greater than their numbers in the population but there are more Latino construction workers as a whole than there are white construction workers. So where is the white monopoly? Apparently whites are being discriminated against, wouldn't the numbers prove this? Please don't give me the bullshit about how they are only doing the jobs the whites are unwilling to do. 

This is just hypocrisy on the back of hypocrisy. As if all this was not enough to disadvantage whites or give minorities an unfair advantage based not on knowledge, skills or abilities but on melanin content. Then to also come up with what legislation, rules, prerequisites or "criterion" that preclude other races from working? Pure racist, midget, gerbil bullshit. Were it done to any other race/religion/of people that were not as apathetic as the Caucasians, there would be hell to pay.

I believe all Perot had to say was "your people" when speaking to a minority and his political fate was sealed. Yet this asshole is proactively keeping people from working, not getting a handout, but just working, and there is no political fallout.

John McCain is the only one that had the balls to address the issue of how illegal immigrants were putting many legitimate American construction workers out of business. Most of these Mexicans work under the table, pay no taxes or Workman's comp for their employees, hire underage Mexicans to work for them etc. They then send much of this money back home to Mexico, purchasing fewer goods and services from American companies, as well as not paying taxes. There is no wonder legitimate companies can't compete. Why do you think many counties saw negative minority growth during the housing bubble? Many of the illegals took what they could during the construction boom and then left to return to Mexico.

He also stated that he wanted to create low skilled jobs for minorities and women. How is this not racist to them. When it comes to rebuilding the infrastructure obama promised, how much skill does it take to shovel concrete into a form, or put asphalt on a road, or hold a damn sign? If these people cannot or will not  perform even the most rudimentary of tasks at prevailing federal wages then they need to be euthanized. I'm sure if the Soviets can train a monkey to pilot a spacecraft, minorities could be trained to use a shovel.

So I neglected to mention not only repeal NAFTA and CAFTA, but also deport all illegals as a means to keep Americans working. For every illegal working here there is one less job for an American citizen, regardless of their color. This is inherently wrong, must be the whites fault.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Therian]
    #11191207 -

Therian said:
I didn't intentionally misrepresent anything he said.


Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you.  But in your very next paragraph you say:

Therian said:
"Tell me how in the hell in this country can an adviser to the president go out of his way to intentionally create "criterion" which would keep a certain race of individuals from getting work?


Hello, you just made the same misrepresentation again!!!  This time I'm not going to believe it's by accident.  And your next six paragraphs are meaningless, because they rebut something that was never even said!

As for illegals, Reich never said we need to make sure the money goes to illegals, so I don't understand the point you're trying to make.

Therian said:
So I neglected to mention not only repeal NAFTA and CAFTA, but also deport all illegals as a means to keep Americans working. For every illegal working here there is one less job for an American citizen, regardless of their color. This is inherently wrong, must be the whites fault.


If you want to pick tomatoes and/or clean people's toilets, be my guest.  I'm sure you'd have no problem finding such a job.  It's not nearly as easy for illegals to get other types of American jobs as you seem to think.


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Mr.Al]
    #11191232 -

Mr.Al said:
It was not a "free market in action".


Giving risky loans to the middle and upper class was NOT mandated by the Government!  That is something banks chose to do on their own.

Mr.Al said:
Nothing to say about Bernanke, huh?


For the third time, I said
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Yes, interst rates were set too low.


What else do you want me to say?


--------------------
I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them.  I also attack my side if I think they're wrong.  People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Federal Government should be spending even more [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
    #11191510 -

Quote:
Hello, you just made the same misrepresentation again!!!  This time I'm not going to believe it's by accident.  And your next six paragraphs are meaningless, because they rebut something that was never even said!


For saying the speech was all over the internet which you apparently viewed, you seem to have an extremely selective memory. And yes the next six paragraphs were relevant.

Really, all they can do is pick fruit and clean toilets? Who's the fucking racist now? Construction jobs are well paying. If 67% of construction workers are Latino, many illegal, it seems to me they aren't just picking fruit and scrubbing toilets.

There are also a lot of factory and production jobs taken up by illegals. Have you not seen the after effects of the ICE raids. After the illegals were deported there were lines around a business of Americans applying to fill the newly vacant positions. Regardless of whether or not you deem the jobs worthy as I'm sure you're a superior genetic specimen, exhibiting an intellect far beyond the average American, many legal citizens are unemployed and would gladly perform the work that is beneath you're standards.

Here is an excerpt from the speech that in your words never happened. The speech and corresponding commentary can be found at.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/22/video-no-stimulus-money-for-white-males/




Wasn't this supposed the era of post-racialism? Robert Reich apparently didn't get that message. In his appearance before Congress on structuring the stimulus plan on January 7Th, Reich suggested that the package discriminate against white male workers:

I am concerned, as I'm sure many of you are, that these jobs not simply go to high-skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers.    I'm just saying that there are a lot of other people who have needs as well. Criteria can be set so that the money does go to others, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not necessarily construction workers or high-skilled professionals.
Basically, Reich wants Congress to create some means testing that doesn't explicitly keep stimulus funds from paying the salaries of white males.  He suggests that the lawmakers create "criteria"that will have that effect in practice without being crass enough to say, No Whites Need Apply.  Congress has done this in milder form for the last few decades by mandating set-asides for women- and minority-owned businesses in government contracts, but even those don't require the businesses to refuse to hire white male construction workers.
This sounds a lot more like a paternalistic welfare program than a real effort to improve American infrastructure.  We're building roads and bridges for all Americans, using tax money from all Americans.  Everyone should have equal access to the jobs created by this stimulus plan.  What Reich proposes is flat-out official racism by government, refusing to hire people on the basis of their skin color.  Didn't our last election demonstrate a rejection of that kind of thinking?  And note that Reich offers the racist rationalization that he doesn%u2019t have anything against white male construction workers.  Maybe some of his best friends are white male construction workers, too.

Quote:
As for illegals, Reich never said we need to make sure the money goes to illegals, so I don't understand the point you're trying to make.



He attempts to characterize the construction trades being dominated by white males, saying he didn't want to see it going SIMPLY to them. But legally it can't and not all are Caucasians anyway. This is another broad generalization made by an ignorant jackass, just like yours concerning illegals only scrubbing toilets, I guess you two have something in common.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The Government
( 1 2 all )		 DailyPot 4,275 33 01/18/14 11:44 AM
by Echro
* TV Marti: shining example of government wastefullness Anonymous 360 1 06/18/03 08:44 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* paper money as currency?Inflation? stock HOW?? fake economy?
( 1 2 all )		 kaiowas 3,145 22 08/26/03 08:37 AM
by Anonymous
* Do you "like" the US government?
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 trendalM 3,358 63 07/22/04 06:36 PM
by Evolving
* Federal Reserve Questions... RonoS 1,716 16 09/19/02 07:32 AM
by Anonymous
* Must Read: History Of The Federal Reserve FrankieJustTrypt 2,025 17 02/15/04 06:48 AM
by Phred
* Government Hits $6.4 Trillion Debt Limit
( 1 2 all )		 Ellis Dee 2,759 23 02/26/03 09:22 AM
by pattern
* The Alliance and Coalition Sue Government silversoul7 704 3 02/18/04 02:31 PM
by Strumpling

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
16,888 topic views. 3 members, 44 guests and 18 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.