EPTRepublican nominations - Page 141
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
dOofuS
United States342 Posts
| ||
|
Rodimus Prime
182 Posts
If that above paragraph didn't make sense it's 'cos I'm trying to pay attention to the debate whilst typing at the same time. | ||
|
Blix
Netherlands873 Posts
On November 13 2011 22:43 Rodimus Prime wrote: Just watching the November 9 debate on YouTube now. Something interesting Romney mentioned which I think is worth discussing is his comment about where profits go. He said that people are wrong to presume that they go to paying CEOs, as 'profits' are what's left over when CEOs are paid. But how accurate is this statement? Because at the end of the day he is only referring to their incomes. What about bonuses (for reaching profit targets) and golden handshakes? How ignorant would it be to presume that even after paying a CEO their basic salary, no further money goes to them from the profits? If that above paragraph didn't make sense it's 'cos I'm trying to pay attention to the debate whilst typing at the same time. This kind of reasoning leads into a debate about the definition of profit - imho a clever trick to avoid discussing the real issue. "Contributions" and "rewards" need to be divided in some way by the employees, the government and the owners of a company; the question should be if the stakeholders are getting fair compensation for their contributions, or if maybe the CEOs are getting more than their fair share. | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
On November 14 2011 01:12 Blix wrote: This kind of reasoning leads into a debate about the definition of profit - imho a clever trick to avoid discussing the real issue. "Contributions" and "rewards" need to be divided in some way by the employees, the government and the owners of a company; the question should be if the stakeholders are getting fair compensation for their contributions, or if maybe the CEOs are getting more than their fair share. Great first post...deflected!!! Rodimus could never be Optimus. Obama is ying, Romney is yang. Romney is the default windows settings. Only way he get's the nom, is if no one cares enough to change it. Only way he wins, vs Obama is if Obama supporters stop playing. @StealthBlue - the ONLY comment on that story you linked says more than the story itself. Sniff. Isn't it pretty bad that a bunch of Starcraft junkies can tear apart the fluff being peddled as truth, and be in essence, correct. Everyone's reality is different, reality tunnels and related theory.. but seriously.. we live in some epic days, and it's hard to see the sun through the cloud of shit coming down the pipe. I'm liking the fact your chatting more though! Good Read. | ||
|
ryanAnger
United States838 Posts
Paul wants to go back to isolationist foreign policy, first and foremost, and this is something that I think is absolutely necessary. Our "police the world" policy of the last 50-60 years or so, and especially the last 10, has been extremely detrimental to our economy in a variety of ways. On top of that, Paul is completely opposed to the Crony Capitalism that we have been plagued by for a long time, and he wants to dismantle the legal bribery that runs rampant in Washington in the form of lobbying. I couldn't care less about where he stands on Abortion and Religion, etc. None of those things are important when our economy and very idea of democracy is falling apart all around us. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
icemanzdoinwork
447 Posts
On November 14 2011 07:35 ryanAnger wrote: I understand a lot of people have reservations about Ron Paul because some of his issues are a little bit out there, and I disagree with him on a lot of things, but to me, he's right on all of the important issues. Paul wants to go back to isolationist foreign policy, first and foremost, and this is something that I think is absolutely necessary. Our "police the world" policy of the last 50-60 years or so, and especially the last 10, has been extremely detrimental to our economy in a variety of ways. On top of that, Paul is completely opposed to the Crony Capitalism that we have been plagued by for a long time, and he wants to dismantle the legal bribery that runs rampant in Washington in the form of lobbying. I couldn't care less about where he stands on Abortion and Religion, etc. None of those things are important when our economy and very idea of democracy is falling apart all around us. It's not an isolationist foreign policy. I don't know why people keep saying this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolationism Isolationism is separating yourself or a country from everything. Non-interventionism – Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial differences (self-defense). Isolationism = North Korea or Communist Germany | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
Something tells me there will be a last minute swoop in candidate. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On November 14 2011 07:57 xDaunt wrote: Wow, apparently Ron Paul got only 89 seconds of speaking time in a 90 minute debate. What the fuck is the point of inviting him if you're going to ask him questions? He's definitely not on that stage because of his good looks. Naw, I'm pretty sure he got more time than that, if you're talking about the november 9th debate. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 14 2011 10:53 Kiarip wrote: Naw, I'm pretty sure he got more time than that, if you're talking about the november 9th debate. No, I'm talking about last night's debate. http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-gets-89-seconds-to-speak-in-cbs-debate/ | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
I'm watching the debate now (busy last night). First question about Iran's nuclear program has Cain dropping the "the first thing I would do is support the opposition movement in Iran" that wants to overthrow the government ahaha. But then clarifies that doesn't mean military aid....oh Herman. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On November 14 2011 10:54 xDaunt wrote: No, I'm talking about last night's debate. http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-gets-89-seconds-to-speak-in-cbs-debate/ oh my bad... | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
GOP really went full retard for this election. Only Gingrich and Paul, maybe Romney and Huntsman, should be allowed to speak. Cain is a joke, Bachmann is a bimbo, Santorum is a troll, Perry is a hick... "The table is being set for worldwide nuclear war against Israel" the fuck woman, get off the stage. Oh COME ON Gingrich, you had to make the "if the arab spring turns into an anti-Christian spring" comparison? Really? God forbid you say that the State department should do its best to ensure minority groups in those countries are not targeted, but no, you had to play the religion card. I disagree with most of Ron Paul's platform but the man needs more time to speak. Paul does well on torture point ahaha "gets lonely over here in Siberia" when Huntsman gets a question, and Paul's whispered "tell me about it" was great | ||
|
Suvorov
294 Posts
I feel sorry for Ron - he's the only candidate with a working brain and no lobbying leeches in his ass - precisely because of this he will get media blocked all the way to oblivion. When the media purposely blocks the only candidate who's speaking the truth, that's when you gotta start worrying. Best of luck to all my friends in the US =/ | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
ok he saved it somewhat | ||
|
NtroP
United States174 Posts
| ||
|
zachMEISTER
United States625 Posts
I think that eventually, people will finally understand what he's about and come to their senses. We've got another year to see how things play out. | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
I just have a feeling the aid will end up pretty much the same once the dust settles | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 14 2011 11:39 Elegy wrote: Gingrich imploding on the question about the guy killed in Oman (or yemen?) ok he saved it somewhat I thought his answer on that question was perfect. | ||
| ||
