Local Posts #24

2009-7-22 03:37:00

[Compiler's Note: The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog, and were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey on The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group prior to being archived here.]


June 6, 2009


Good letter by Mr. Graham.

California has always been a step or two ahead of the rest of the country in good things as well as bad. If you want to see where the nation, as a whole, will be in a couple years, just look at California.

Unfortunately, this time round we do not see a good portend, but a bad one. The difference here is that California hopes the federal government will bail them out but when the nation gets California-ized who will bail us out?


June 7, 2009 -- Post #1


Slavery comes in many degrees. In ancient Rome many slaves were allowed to have their own businesses as long as they gave a third of their profits to their masters. They could then spend the left over funds on their own needs.

In 2006 a family with a median income of $48,201 paid the following to Uncle Sam:

Total taxes:

No matter how you figure it, even if the figures are off a little, the median family pays much more to their master, the government, than did Roman slaves.


June 7, 2009 -- Post #2


A reference for most of the figures I gave is:


They supply references that you can check.

Most of the figures are easy to verify such as the taxes for Federal and State governments, Payroll, Inflation and Self-employment.

Other figures may be challenged but we know they are still significant.

The one that is most startling is the cost of regulations and I'm not sure if they even consider self-employed people as myself who have to spend significant time (that could be spent in making money) in keeping books. When you think about it 11.33% does sound realistic.

The point is that even if one considers the maximum amount the assessment could be off we still give a lot more to our government than did the Roman slaves to their master. There's a lot of taxpayers who would be happy to be able to do what they will with 66% of their income as did the slaves.


June 8, 2009 -- Post #1


Question:  What's the difference between Guantanamo and a maximum security prison in the USA?

Answer:  Guantanamo is like Disneyland compared to a maximum security prison here.

Question to Mr. Lodal:

Why do you want to see the Muslim prisoners punished a dozen times more they is currently the case? Is it just so the French will like us more or do you just like to see Muslim people suffer?


June 8, 2009 -- Post #2

"Grandjester" wrote:

"In which mainland American Max prison is striking a prisoner allowed? Which one allows guards to slam heads into walls? Which one uses stress positions, 24/7 high intensity lighting and loud music? Which one has the waterboarding? And which ride at Disneyland simulates those effects?"


Only three people were waterboarded in the history of the Bush administration and other incidents you mention is rare. Overall these people are treated very well and live in paradise according to Miss Universe who recently visited there. She didn't want to leave.

Here's a testimony from a Belgium official in 2006:

"Grignard told a news conference that prisoners' right to practice their religion, food, clothes and medical care were better than in Belgian prisons.

"'I know no Belgian prison where each inmate receives its Muslim kit,' Grignard said.

"Grignard said that while Guantanamo was not 'idyllic,' he had noticed dramatic improvements each time he visited the facility over the last two years."

See:  http://www.redorbit.com/news/politics/417174/guantanamo_better_ than_belgian_prisonsosce_expert/index.html [Copy & paste entire address string.]

Over the years I've seen a number of testimonies from visitors and from our military who work there from the guards to generals and all evidence points to the fact that they have it much better there than they would in a U.S. prison. On the average they have all gained significant weight.

You're talking about interrogating techniques where their heads were slammed in to a cardboard wall for psychological effect. Now, that's really bad compared to tyrants who rape your wife while you watch. Most of the interrogation happened at the beginning and Guantanamo is now just a prison in great weather.


June 8, 2009 -- Post #3

"Grandjester" (GJ) wrote:

"Idiot Joe,

"Then why are you righty-tighties wetting your pants over closing GITMO? Since our mainland prisons are so bad-assed, why not bring'em here?"


Listen, I can take a few insults, but you are revealing a low-life character development that is not worthy of being on this forum.

First, we do not have any extra room at our maximum security prisons and the concern is that they will be tried in our courts and released to dwell and plot among us.


June 8, 2009 -- Post #4

"JobeMaha" wrote:

"So I am glad we have experts on prisons here. GJ - you have to remember Joe and Joseph are Fox News junkies. So, they believe whatever they are told about GTB. Tell me guys, how do you know only a few were waterboarded? How do you know there were only rare events. What are your sources?"


And why do you believe otherwise when there is no evidence? You make it sound like you hate your own country and visualize the worst possible hearsay about it.


June 9, 2009 -- Post #1


The waste created by supplying (with nuclear energy) all the electrical needs of a family of four over a period of twenty years would be equal in size to a cigarette lighter. All the plutonium waste from every plant in the U.S. could be stored in my garage. The most dangerous waste has a half-life of 30 years and is not a problem to contain. Plutonium is about as harmful as caffeine if you were to consume it.

The best way to deal with plutonium is to reprocess this through breeder reactors, but Democrats have used their clout to stop this. The next best thing is to store it at Yucca Mountain in over 1000 feet of rock where the chances of getting struck by a meteorite are greater than any damage from storage there.

Unfortunately, Obama has said no this and the billions spent are down the drain and the waste instead is stored at over 100 places in the country near the surface and is much less secure.

How long must we live with such sublime ignorance?


June 9, 2009 -- Post #2

"Grandjester" wrote:

"It is patently obvious, that from Rush down to his ditto head drones right here, that none of you have the slightest idea what Socialism is. Let me give you a tip, Obama ain't it."

And "Idaho Joe" wrote:

"So the fact that our government now owns a car company and AIG [American International Group], that's not socialism? I guess that makes Ceausescu [Secretary General of the Romanian Workers' Party] the greatest Capitalist mind ever born!"


Technically what Obama is doing by running or dictating to large companies is a particular brand of socialism. It's called National Socialism.

Where have we heard that term before?


June 9, 2009 -- Post #3

"Grandjester" wrote:

"Joseph, No, wrong again. Joe, As I said, you don't understand the terms you are using, so it is pointless to try and explain the difference to you, you have been told by Rush and Hannity and Mooselini that it's socialism, so that's good enough for you."


If you can say I am wrong for no other reason than your own divine authority I guess I can too.

You are wrong. Period.

What can I expect from a person whose highest form of reasoning is to call those with whom you disagree idiots? You told me you read some books on German history like William Shirer's works. You must have skimmed through them.


"Fact is, if you consider Obama a socialist, you would have to consider Reagan and Ike socialist too."


If you think Reagan took us toward socialism in a similar way that Obama is doing then I have a park to sell you over at Julia Davis.


June 10, 2009 -- Post #1

This is a crazy time to even consider adopting a universal Health Care Plan. Our tax revenues have dropped by a third or more at the same time our borrowing has skyrocketed.

The first thing we need to do is get our spending under control. Then when this is accomplished instead of just giving the uninsured a blank check for all the healthcare and drugs they want as well as buying healthcare for Bill Gates we need to create a plan that assists the uninsured when they have a life threatening situation. We do not need to pay for visits for people with the sniffles nor for drugs that do more harm than good as most of them do.

If we as a nation want to spend money on healthcare we should concentrate more on prevention and natural remedies which are cheap, less harmful than drugs as well as more effective. They've worked well for me as I haven't needed a regular medical doctor for about thirty years and that was for a broken bone.


June 10, 2009 -- Post #2

There is a universal rule in government. All projections of cost are always wrong. Costs are usually twice as much or more than projected.

Why are they so far off? Because idealists project with rose-colored glasses. Medicare cost over twice the projected amount for the first decade. What did they miss?

For one thing we currently have $60 billion a year loss due to fraud. There would also be a lot of fraud with any version of universal health care that is not factored in.

Secondly, no matter how you look at the costs it will take hundreds of billions of extra tax money to finance such a system and now is not the time to put more stress on our financial and tax system.