Bob wrote on April 15, 2008 03:31 PM: to "tim"
I have read all of the comments, and yours stick out to me. Some of your comments are class baiting. So what that there are rich people out there. Perhaps they worked hard or even inheritied it. Why should they provide a better life for you, they already pay way more taxes than you do, with or without the tax cuts. At what point would you declare that a another person paying taxes has paid enough? In your premise, everyone should get paid the same regardless of effort, that way no one would get screwed right? Then what is the incentive for someone to outsmart the next person/company? There would not be one, but we would have equality in income, which ultimatley would go away when there was no competitive difference between people or solutions.
You thinking the issue is with George Bush is flat out wrong. The issue is with spending, not the amount of revenue the federal govt takes in.
So shut you pie hole, and learn what the issues are!

FastTracker wrote on April 10, 2008 07:48 PM: Until we the people get beyond the 'Democrat vs. Republican' and 'Liberal vs. Conservative' subterfuge that clouds the real problem – the elites in media, corporations and government who now dominate our world for their own purposes – expect no solutions.

Start seeking alternative sources of information and opinion, like Alex Jones.

tooth fairy wrote on April 10, 2008 07:13 PM: 1. Treaty would have lost on an up or down vote anyway, BUT

2). I don't think our Founding Fathers looked upon Congress' role in ratifying a treaty as, how did the moron R-J editor describe the Congressional role, oh, "meddling."

You guys are a moving target when it comes to deciding what any branch of government role is......

Don Evans wrote on April 10, 2008 10:33 AM: "tim"

I almost forgot to mention, we then pay for those deficits with our taxes. We also pay to support those who can't be placed in the new labor market, or can't make a reasonable wage due to wage pressures caused by the availability of Chinese labor.

The monetary relationship, if you can imagine it, is the equivalent of taxpayers subsidizing businesses to outsource jobs, which is creating the entire trade imbalance to begin with. All while those running these outsourcing companies demand higher and higher pay and perquisites, which are tied solely to profitability, which promotes further outsourcing (ad infinitum).

We're paying to be in debt, and to lose our independence as a nation.

In business, this type of arrangement is called sub-optimization: Each sub-organization (outsourcing companies) does only what is good for itself, regardless of the effects to the organization itself (our country).

In short, if you wish to know why the middle class is disappearing, we should all look here first.

Don Evans wrote on April 10, 2008 10:07 AM: "tim",

The ownership of a growing number of securities by countries like China SHOULD worry you. The more indebted we become, as a nation, the higher the interest rates on U.S. securities need to be to attract new foreign purchasers...In short, the more debt we have, the more expensive debt becomes in the future...Somewhat like a person that's in debt.

Trade imbalances, especially with China, are one of the causes of our current budget deficits. China has kept their currency artificially low, as a means of affecting one-way trade; their products remain cheap in our country, while ours remain prohibitively expensive in theirs. How's that for "free" trade?

4kobe wrote on April 10, 2008 10:03 AM: Bush is a horrible leader but blaming him for Katrina is idiotic.

timinator wrote on April 10, 2008 09:53 AM: The destruction of U.S. manufacturing and the exportation of decent jobs, followed by the elimination of the middle class, was designed by republicrat globalists, in order to manipulate us into regionalism first (see the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and the North American Union) and later into total world government.

The Bush/Clinton regimes that have promoted "free trade" via NAFTA, GATT, FTAA, etc., are pawns of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Remember this when it all comes tumbling down...

jep wrote on April 10, 2008 08:46 AM: Willard Roker wrote on April 10, 2008 07:48 AM: You mean like Bush did with Kyoto?
===============
Kyoto was Clinton/Gore. The Kyoto treaty was never presented to Bush. Gore spoke against Kyoto when he was VP and presided over the Senate.

Helen Weils wrote on April 10, 2008 08:02 AM: Hmmm, lets see, who brought in Nafta??
Oh yes, it was a CLINTON! The same Clinton who let Osama bin Laden go.
The Democrats are only pandering to the unions which have destroyed the manufacturing in this country with their lazy ways and whining demands.

Willard Roker wrote on April 10, 2008 07:48 AM: You mean like Bush did with Kyoto?

Read All Comments