womans fitness

EI-GYRO said:
Think, 'potato-face'. If that image fits, you're probably looking at an Irishman.

Just like old Aussies look like boiled Englishmen.
Click to expand...
OK- that makes sense. I come from a part of the US where white potatoes were always called Irish potatoes as distinct from sweet potatoes.

But I always supposed that was because Irish potatoes were such a large part of Irish diets rather than their images.
 
Last edited:
Gman said:
Why is he Horrible? Because he has money? Because he wants to keep America safe? Because he wants America to start producing something again and not just be a "Nation of Consumers"? Because he wants to bring back jobs? Yup, I guess that makes him a Very Bad guy.
Click to expand...

No. All the above are admirable aims, give or take the silly amounts of money some people think they need.

Achieving those aims without trampling on the rights of those who are inconvenient to you is the trick.
'America First' is fine as long as it doesn't also mean '
To Hell with Everyone Else'.

A lot of people appear to have voted for Trump because he was neither Republican NOR Democrat.
I suspect many voted for Bernie Sanders for exactly the same reason.

Regarding the hatred of some for America; Invading other countries, both
militarily and culturally, is not likely to make you friends.
Destabilising almost the entire Easter Mediterranean was not a good idea.
The fact that SOME NATO allies went along with this does not reflect well on
them, either.

Terrorism is not new. A terrorist act kicked off World War I.
By its nature, it cannot be eliminated, only minimised.
The more we squawk like headless chickens, the more successful we make their actions, or threatened actions.

Internationally, Trump is more likely to 'Make America Grate Again'.

It is one thing to 'Drain the Swamp'. You need to have a plan to deal with the Alligators.
So far, Trump seems to have appointed a team of Alligators to the task.

But don't worry, it'll be great. Believe me, he has the BEST alligators.

Now, I have a gyro to re-assemble after its tear-down inspection.
 
The BBC was calling Fidel Castro an “agrarian reformer” even as his firing squads were liquidating the “bourgeoisie”.
 
Steve_UK said:
"Trump presidency: Opponents boosted by 'rage donation'"


A BBC Report on some of the side effects of the Trump presidency to date - more here on BBC


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38909322
Click to expand...

It's really interesting to view the this through the eyes of others in the world. The article quoted gives the impression that Trump some how is somehow against women's reproductive rights and this is some how odd with an "an unprecedented outpouring" of protests. The protest portion is correct, but the article is misleading. The issue is abortion, and the organization "Planned Parenthood" provides them. For the last 20+ years, restricting abortion has been a party goal of Republicans. Trump is actually quite mild compared to all the other Republicans who were trying to get the party nomination. The article fails to go into the abortion concerns the protesters have. This president is likely to appoint a few (at least 1 and maybe 3) Supreme Court Justices. There are only 9 Justices and they decide on the validity of the laws passed by the government. The appointments are for life and they will be there for decades. --Of course the party in power seeks to appoint Justices with their political bent, so they read between the lines to get the party's desired result on any decision that is not crystal clear. --Now I have no idea what the protesters hope to accomplish. The president and congress are set for the next 2 years. They will appoint the Justices of their choice. Marching in the street changes nothing, except getting folks upset. --perhaps that can be leveraged in the next election, or perhaps it burns out.
 
EI-GYRO said:
...

Trickle-down economics = the rich pi$$ing on the poor.

...
Click to expand...
Hi Furgus

Where is the rich mentioned or the source of the money ever mentioned in trickle down theory??? And if not mentioned how then can they be pi$$ing on the poor?

Trickle-down economics is a well known undisputed law in economics and there is NO MENTION of the RICH or who paid the starting wages to start the trickle down only mentions the wages paid and the bills/expenses that single employee has to pay. It's the paying of our bills that is the trickle down and has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RICH! Sorry as an accountant and economist this LIE is a pet peeve!

As Obama correctly said many times a government program to improve the infrastructure WOULD HAVE A trickle down multiplayer and create the need for more jobs than just those that the wages paid by the government to those DIRECTLY working of government improvements.

The problem with government programs are they are a net loss to pay the taxes back to pay for it as all the job die in 4 or 5 years when the project is over because it not like a business that creates a new product or service to sell forever keeping the jobs to make it. When it ends it can cause a economic down turn.

Here all it means notice it has nothing about the rich or government who started it all !!!!

When you receive income of any source you have to pay bills!
When you pay for gas the money trickles down to the gas station owner. When you pay for food it trickles down to that store or restaurant owner.
Add every penny you spend to every person or business...

When the owner of the business pays his employees part of the same money you were paid is being paid (trickles down) to that owners employee and he pay part of the money you were paid and use already once to pay his bills.

The trickle down is only each employee paying the same dollar the 1st person received to pay his bills and the same dollar is used hundreds of thousands of times all in the same month or pay period.

There is not a person on the planet that can say it is not a 100% true economic law and there is no one who can say it's the rich pi$$ing on the poor!
The rich, the government, or charities could all be the source creating a business or employment programs and has NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW MUCH THE SOURCE GETS BACK IN RETURN it may be NOTHING back if the business fails or if its the government or charity!

The left has spun it meaning (to keep pro business ideas from being voted for) and they have now successfully actually changed it's meaning to the ignorant masses by implying the money comes from the rich as they pi$$ on the poor and the rick keep all the money but it has nothing to do with who 1st pays the wages to start the trickle down.

What we clearly need is a test on economics for reporters and politicians so the public will know the real truth. But they count on you being ignorant and being able to sell you the lie and not vote to create more business which is the only way to create jobs and the only way to raise wages is to get near full employment. It has nothing to do with the RICH only WAGES and the same dollar trickling down to all the employees pockets.
 
Last edited:
Google is your friend;

Google is your friend;

From Google;

Definition: Trickle-down economics is a theory that says benefits for the wealthy trickle down to everyone else. These benefits are usually tax cuts on businesses, high-income earners, capital gains, and dividends. ..

No one disputes that there is a trickle-down. Lots of people dispute whether it is a good or civilised way to run an economy.

Pulling rank as an accountant will not work on me.
I worked 32 years for a major multi-national. Just a grunt, more or less, nothing fancy. I'm allergic to suits.
To me, an accountant is someone who knows the price of everything and the
value of nothing. :)
Left to their own devices, they can destroy anything. They have a proper use, of course. i.e accounting.
At least, that was usually my experience with them.

The trickle-down= pi$$ing is a well-known joke.

I should have put a smilie on it.
 
All_In said:
Trickle-down economics is a well known undisputed law in economics and there is NO MENTION of the RICH or who paid the starting wages to start the trickle down only mentions the wages paid and the bills/expenses that single employee has to pay. It's the paying of our bills that is the trickle down and has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RICH! Sorry as an accountant and economist this LIE is a pet peeve!
Click to expand...

I think you have two distinct ideas intertwined here. First, each dollar spent will circulate through other hands, and can easily produce seven or eight bucks of GDP. That's true, but it has very little in the way of policy implications, and it's not what is generally meant when people say "trickle-down". In the political arena it is usually interpreted on all sides as "cut taxes for the top and all will benefit" (sometime re-cast as "be generous to the job creators", or "a rising tide will lift all boats"). That's what George H.W. Bush famously once called "voodoo economics", and since it was first pushed in the Reagan years for tax policy we have seen a steadily growing disparity in wealth distribution. The data certainly appears to indicate that the rich are getting richer while the less fortunate are swimming as hard as they can not to go backwards, while life is clearly worse for the lowest strata. Wealth has definitely not "trickled down" in the U.S. in the last 30 years, and that's what has people upset.
 
Steve UK

Reuters is not as facts as you think. Don't believe 95% of our media.

Almost all of the Small businesses voted Trump. Were tired of being neglected by our government. Were tired of being taxed to the point of no profit. We just need a major change and the lady was not going to change anything. Now we pray things change.

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” ~ Buddha
 
EI-GYRO said:
From Google;

Definition: Trickle-down economics is a theory that says benefits for the wealthy trickle down to everyone else. These benefits are usually tax cuts on businesses, high-income earners, capital gains, and dividends. ..

No one disputes that there is a trickle-down. Lots of people dispute whether it is a good or civilised way to run an economy.

Pulling rank as an accountant will not work on me.
I worked 32 years for a major multi-national.
To me, an accountant is someone who knows the price of everything and the
value of nothing. :)
Left to their own devices, they can destroy anything. They have a proper use, of course. i.e accounting.
At least, that was usually my experience with them.

The trickle-down= pi$$ing is a well-known joke.

I should have put a smilie on it.
Click to expand...
Your quote did not explain the theory at all only some unknown benefit to the rich but not how does it accrues to them.
Over 50% of business fail but jobs and the actual trickle down theory benefit still applies as it does for government programs yet the rich lost money!!!

I told you the actual theory now you show me where the prove the benefit is to the rich? Just them saying it benefits the rich is not any part of the actual theory so what part of the theory benefits the rich.

Here is the way the poor can use the rich persons money that can benefit the middle class directly directly from trickle down theory. There is no other way!!! PERIOD!!!

A rich tourist visiting the area drives through town, stops at the motel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs to pick one for the night.

As soon as he walks upstairs, the motel owner grabs the bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.

The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to retire his debt to the pig farmer.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay his bill to his supplier, the Farmer's Co-op.

The guy at the Farmer's Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer her "services" on credit.

The hooker rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill with the hotel owner.

The hotel proprietor then places the $100 back on the counter so the rich traveler will not suspect anything.

At that moment the traveler comes down the stairs, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, picks up the $100 bill and leaves town.

No one produced anything. No one earned anything... However, the whole town is now out of debt and now looks to the future with a lot more optimism.

----
The above is TRUE Trickle down theory and the rich person ONLY GOT IT STARTED!!!!!
So anyone please explain to me how the rich benefits for trickle down theory??? Please I do not have a clue!
 
Last edited:
Brent- Very well said.

This countries politics...BOTH sides...needs a wrecking ball....and Trump is it.

He does undermine himself a LOT by getting into those name calling rants. He needs to quit that stuff and get on with flipping the tables over.

The left just can't get over how this happened.

Having the media, Hollywood and both parties spewing against him 24/7...I am surprised myself.

Everyone is soon going to have to choose which side of the bank to jump to when she rips.

I for one will be on the opposite bank looking across at the leftist liberals, Hollywood elites as I want nothing to do with their liberal that is a world wide exponentially increasing force.

But it is totally useless for either side of the bank to try to change opposing views. It just ain't going to happen.
 
Last edited:
WaspAir said:
I think you have two distinct ideas intertwined here. First, each dollar spent will circulate through other hands, and can easily produce seven or eight bucks of GDP. That's true, but it has very little in the way of policy implications, and it's not what is generally meant when people say "trickle-down". In the political arena it is usually interpreted on all sides as "cut taxes for the top and all will benefit" (sometime re-cast as "be generous to the job creators", or "a rising tide will lift all boats"). That's what George H.W. Bush famously once called "voodoo economics", and since it was first pushed in the Reagan years for tax policy we have seen a steadily growing disparity in wealth distribution. The data certainly appears to indicate that the rich are getting richer while the less fortunate are swimming as hard as they can not to go backwards, while life is clearly worse for the lowest strata. Wealth has definitely not "trickled down" in the U.S. in the last 30 years, and that's what has people upset.
Click to expand...


Trickle down economics and dollar re-circulation works well in a closed system. Dad gets a bigger pay check. Pays the kid to cut the grass. The kid buys candy at the local store, who bought it from the manufacturer down the street. This model however falls apart when tax robs every transaction by a significant portion. Think about what happens when every transaction gets taxed at 30% to 50% for income, sales, and social security. Then think about what happens when you have a trade deficit. The cash trickles down and out.

So, I would argue trickle down economics did in fact work exceedingly well. The problem is the benefits trickled down to the folks providing goods and products. The Chinese economy has been on fire and living standards are rising there. The folks on the bottom in the US got bypassed.
 
chrisk said:
It's really interesting to view the this through the eyes of others in the world. The issue is abortion, and the organization "Planned Parenthood" provides them. Trump is actually quite mild compared to all the other Republicans who were trying to get the party nomination. The article fails to go into the abortion concerns the protesters have. This president is likely to appoint a few (at least 1 and maybe 3) Supreme Court Justices. There are only 9 Justices and they decide on the validity of the laws passed by the government. The appointments are for life and they will be there for decades. --Of course the party in power seeks to appoint Justices with their political bent, so they read between the lines to get the party's desired result on any decision that is not crystal clear. --Now I have no idea what the protesters hope to accomplish. The president and congress are set for the next 2 years. They will appoint the Justices of their choice. Marching in the street changes nothing, except getting folks upset. --perhaps that can be leveraged in the next election, or perhaps it burns out.
Click to expand...

In this instance, as in many others, the practice of politicians appointing
judges is a serious weakness in the system of checks and balances.
In many countries nowadays, judges are elected/selected by and from the judiciary itself, so political interference/influence in the judgements of the courts is much reduced.

As to the women's demonstrations, they are making their voice heard, as is their democratic right.
 
My small business has already seen an increase due to Trump. Most people has a more positive attitude about our economy. Things are picking up.
 
PS:
If trickle down benefit was to the rich then the same benefit would apply to government employment programs. And if it really benefited the government as much as the does in your mind the rich it would make the government rich too by simply employing everyone in the country.
But government employment programs are ALWAYS a net loss and the tax payer must pay for it to be even break even!
Why doesn't it make the government rich when they spend the same money on jobs as a rich person starting a business that makes the rich even richer????
 
chrisk said:
Trickle down economics and dollar re-circulation works well in a closed system. Dad gets a bigger pay check. Pays the kid to cut the grass. The kid buys candy at the local store, who bought it from the manufacturer down the street. This model however falls apart when tax robs every transaction by a significant portion. Think about what happens when every transaction gets taxed at 30% to 50% for income, sales, and social security. Then think about what happens when you have a trade deficit. The cash trickles down and out.

So, I would argue trickle down economics did in fact work exceedingly well. The problem is the benefits trickled down to the folks providing goods and products. The Chinese economy has been on fire and living standards are rising there. The folks on the bottom in the US got bypassed.
Click to expand...
Wow that's not what happened! 1/2 of our population hates business and thought business can take care of themselves and that America does not have to compete against other countries to get them to come or stay here and that we will somehow keep growing like we did when America was the best place in the world to create wealth.

Larry wrote that about in 1980 things when bad for the employee's. His observations are 100% correct!
Historians now looking at history take the end of 1976 as the start of post-Mao reform and argue that China basically became a market economy by 1980 and fully by the end of the 90s before it joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.

It was in 1976 that China figured our socialism was never going to create the prosperity that capitalism had for the United States and they changed there system to a market economy so did Russia abandon socialism for capitalism as did most of the world.

For the 1st time in 1980 we started losing BUSINESSES and JOBS because China out competed with us as a country and we did NOTHING.

China and the other countries only offered lower tax rates, less regulations, and cheaper labor in a country that could take it all away the next day.

The auto industry solved the labor disparity and others too automated with robots to out compete there labor rates with cheaper robot labor that can work 7 days a week 24 hours a day in the dark and cold so labor is not much of a factor anymore.

The problem is automation lost jobs too and China simply out competed us with lower tax rates and less regulation while the congress did nothing to get the jobs and companies back thinking somehow that America will become the best place in the world to do business paying the highest tax rates in the world! What were you thinking????

As the job's left it reduced the ticket down effect the tax base was reduced from both employees job lose and business income.
As the number of unemployed increased the wages should have gone down according to supply and demand but employers know it hard to live on what most earn now so they have keep the wages artificial high according to the laws of supply and demand.
Last year I was ask to come up with the actually unemployment numbers using the government numbers here is what they actually are.

US population is 303M see(http://www.census.gov/popclock/)
If you add the part time workers of 6.6M to the 118M = 124.6M employed
There are 57M citizens that are under 18, or over 65 plus the students in high-school and college.
So 303M - 57M to young, old, or going to school = 246M labor force.
Subtract 124.6M that are working from the 246M labor force = 121.4M unemployed! Even those who do not know math can see it's almost 1/2 the labor force that are really unemployed!!
Unemployment rate is supposed to be calculated by number of unemployed persons of 121.4M divided by 246M labor force = 49% far cry from the 5% listed by our government here http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Using the same government numbers reported the government math does not match reality for the unemployment rate!!!


Until we create enough new business and jobs to employ another 100 million workers the USA will not see prosperity as we had in our generation when America had a basic monopoly on capitalism.

We have to compete with the other capitalistic countries if with the only thing a country has to compete with lower tax rates and less regulations or just keep watching China become the next country to keep most of your wealth and that is where those who wish to become wealthy will go.

It very simple and so is most of the economic math required to figure all of this out.
 
Last edited:
Can this be true ????

Can this be true ????

My wife, (who has an unhealthy interest in the doings of your

Commander-in-Tweet) tells me he was tweeting his displeasure with Nordstroms

during his security briefing.

All I keep hearing from the other room here is WTF? at frequent intervals.

My wife does not normally swear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

okikuma
Student Pilot Totals Increase, Female Participation Up
Replies
0
Views
265
okikuma
okikuma
okikuma
Merry Christmas
Replies
14
Views
559
okikuma
okikuma
ultracruiser41
Carolina BarnStormers Spring 2024
2 3
Replies
45
Views
6K
ultracruiser41
ultracruiser41
StanFoster
Paxton Water Tower Project
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
okikuma
okikuma
N962GT
USC Instructor??
Replies
4
Views
646
N962GT
N962GT
Top