something about this seems....weird

[youngterrier]

Libertarians Libertarians

[YoUDeeMan]

Well, you would do well to avoid national elections as you can effect very little change. However, I would become very active in your local elections as they directly affect you (& your wallet) & you can have a big effect due to the lack of voter turnout.

If he doesn't know what he is doing, he should stay the hell home on election day

Jesus Christ, as this last election has proven, a stupid voter is almost as bad a thief with a gun.

[CID1990]

So, you're voting democrat?

Nope, never voting again, never wasting my breath on one single thing that has to do with politics. I cannot make a difference towards Washington so why bother? Politicians are going to ru(i)n this country as they see fit and there is nothing the populace can do about it. It's best whatever fight that is gonna take place, though it will always fail, is best left to those who are actually wise to the political arena. Alas, another avenue in life where I have failed. I can live with it. Carry on.

Does this mean no more posts where you tangentially suggest that you are going to check out on us?

[ASUMountaineer]

Libertarians Libertarians

YT, you're one of the good ones. Now, just go to Appalachian, and you'll be one of the best.

It's good to see some youngin libertarians.

[catamount man]

Nope, never voting again, never wasting my breath on one single thing that has to do with politics. I cannot make a difference towards Washington so why bother? Politicians are going to ru(i)n this country as they see fit and there is nothing the populace can do about it. It's best whatever fight that is gonna take place, though it will always fail, is best left to those who are actually wise to the political arena. Alas, another avenue in life where I have failed. I can live with it. Carry on.

Does this mean no more posts where you tangentially suggest that you are going to check out on us?

absolutely. I'm not going anywhere. Just not voting anymore. Let me give you an example of my plight: reading the rag this morning and I see where Obama wants to cut taxes for families in South Carolina freeing up millions for our schools and infrastructure projects yet Graham and Demint think these are bad ideas. Now, since I am such a simple minded ogre, I would like to have it explained to me IN FACT how the 2 senators can feel this way when it SEEMS TO ME that the Presidents plans are going to help the citizens here in my state. Again, I am really interested in growing politically. I thought I had a decent pulse on it, but alas, I don't. Thanks.

[kalm]

In 1978, during the height of the Carter administration, minimum wage was $2.65 which adjusted for inflation comes to $6.38. In 2007, minimum wage was $5.85, yet with inflation adjustments, it only comes to $4.41. This is all based on what the dollar was earning in 1996. Is one then led to believe that 30 years of reaganomics hurt the standard for minimum wage? Simply asking, not looking to pick a fight since I am a registered independent. But I just could not believe these figures.

WTF are you talking about?

What does Ronald Reagan have to do with the Federal minimum wage set 19 years after he left office.

Every president since has pretty much embraced the reaganomic policies of low taxes on the rich, deregulation of financial services, deficit spending, and free trade. Basically top down economic stimulus. Meanwhile, for the middle class wages have been stagnant since the 70's, homeowner equity has dropped, and personal debt has risen.

Both sides are culpable.

Catamount is on to something.

[Franks Tanks]

WTF are you talking about?

What does Ronald Reagan have to do with the Federal minimum wage set 19 years after he left office.

Every president since has pretty much embraced the reaganomic policies of low taxes on the rich, deregulation of financial services, deficit spending, and free trade. Basically top down economic stimulus. Meanwhile, for the middle class wages have been stagnant since the 70's, homeowner equity has dropped, and personal debt has risen.

Both sides are culpable.

Catamount is on to something.

You think Obama has worked in thus manner?

Also the minimum wage is set by the govt. and a useless benchmark. Median salary adjusted for inflation is a better mark.

[kalm]

Every president since has pretty much embraced the reaganomic policies of low taxes on the rich, deregulation of financial services, deficit spending, and free trade. Basically top down economic stimulus. Meanwhile, for the middle class wages have been stagnant since the 70's, homeowner equity has dropped, and personal debt has risen.

Both sides are culpable.

Catamount is on to something.

You think Obama has worked in thus manner?

Also the minimum wage is set by the govt. and a useless benchmark. Median salary adjusted for inflation is a better mark.

He has both raised and cut taxes, hasn't really addressed trade, only given lip service to banking reform (actions speak louder than words), increased the debt, orchestrated a corporate solution to healthcare, and provided a top down bail out of Wall Street.

In a perfect world with plenty of good paying jobs and affordable education, there would be no need for a minimum wage or unions as labor and wages would operate as a free market with no advantage for either side. I don't think we're there yet.

Republican/progressive Teddy Roosevelt was one of if not the first president to talk about a living wage.