They are supposed to be the cheer leaders. All they do is dampen the blanket.
My very point. With people climbing on board to use Twitter do the bears really think TWTR can't figure out some money making service? Did they do this for their health?
TWTR beats expectations. What is this "shell game". No comprendo.
they beat earnings and the naysayers say more negative. What will sway opinion?
Planned Parenthood is "planned", killing a defenseless lion in a "protected national park" is not an equal rationalization. Trophy hunting is evil. There is no logic other than "entitlement and greed".
That man should go to prison. He is the epitome of evil
blodgett gave a lot of bad advice on AOL. I don't believe anything he says now.
The point is that if people don't have expendable income they can't stimulate much.
Fact is with outsourcing there are more jobs created...however not in the USA. Also, the high income people may see income growth but the rest are stagnant. Social Security went up a pittance.. Big deal...l while utility and medical bills go up and recipients may go to a higher tax bracket and end up in the minus column. So much for "trickle down".
If someone smokes, and they get lung cancer, and continue to smoke they aren't addicted?
A Centrist government that sees to the needs of most of its' citizens is not a dictatorship!
Trump's father was one of the largest slum lords in N.Y.C. .When Mr, T went bankrupt, in one of his casinos, daddy T bought a million dollars in chips so the Donald wouldn't belly up there.
I'm not saying that taxes should not be graduated. I am saying those making over a million a year should be taxed considerably more. Regressive flat taxes are just what you said they are. I say tax the rich more and give the majority of the people what the native Americans espouse...the water and air and food and societal protection against enemies are the rights of all in this country. Forget the fancy cars, houses I am just talking about basics...a safe place to live, adequate health care and affordable food. The technology of thousands can provide for the rest. Forget the Calvinism!
Your view is totally convoluted. If a product puts people (de facto) into servitude of that product, then that product should offer relief to the user when they find they are no longer in control of their own actions. This includes things like tobacco, alcohol, prescriptions or gambling (for examples). If we find our food has GMOs and decide not to use them we can make that choice. But, when a product is addictive either physically or psychologically then it is the duty of the purveyor to offer relief.