Iamon lyme: the story is that if your country relied purely on internal stocks you'd run out of cheap oil quickly. Your country consumes more than it can provide itself on a reasonably sustainable level. Everyone knows that I thought.. maybe you are an exception

"So Castro was actually revolting against US companies."

Who were using Cuba as a virtual slave state.. I presume you don't want to face upto that fact by your reply.

"So I guess that means you are for gun control, to limit individual gun ownership so as to insure foreign forces will meet with no significant resistance from the locals."

No..... I was commentating on how much of the 18-19th century land gains were gained through taking lands. Especially in Africa.

"The ordinary man isn't required to pay 40% to 70% of his income in taxes."

wow... you really think people at the top do that... if you do, I'd have to say you are very naive.

"Other than yourself, no one said anything about free enterprise with no rules."

So.. what regulations would you keep? Be clear for once if you can.

"What safeties did you have in mind, or are you asking because you don't know?"

Not being sold products that are underweight, false advertising, knowing that the goods we buy are upto standard... simple things like that.

"I weary of my own ramblings"

ditto, it'd be nice if you dropped some of the ham acting

(V): "...various ways to escape paying taxes. Legal one... that's the joke. It's legal to avoid paying taxes if you are rich.. something a ordinary man does not have the ability to do."

The ordinary man isn't required to pay 40% to 70% of his income in taxes. The ordinary man can escape paying this higher tax rate by simply not being wealthy. So one way to look at this is that NOT being wealthy is in effect a tax break for the ordinary man, because he is soaked at a lower rate than his wealthy counterpart.

"But please tell me how this free enterprise with no rules works?"

Other than yourself, no one said anything about free enterprise with no rules.

"What safeties are there to protect us from fraud, lies, death in your world?"

What safeties did you have in mind, or are you asking because you don't know? As far as safeties to protect you from death... well, don't be a klutz and watch where you are going, avoid fatty foods and don't drink too much alcohol or smoke too much weed or watch too much porno or tell ANY woman those pants make your butt look fat. Also, you should occasionally look up and watch out for falling anvils and pianos, drink plenty of fluids before going to bed at night and throw salt over your shoulder if you spill any and try not to break any mirrors (that one actually falls under the heading of don't be a klutz) and take two aspirin but don't call me in the morning... there are many other precautions you should take, but you are going to die someday anyway, and your chances of being raptured away grow slimmer by the day, so seeing as how I weary of my own ramblings I'll see you tomorrow if you live long enough to get there...

(V): "So why has our nations supported so many in return for ore and crude oil?"

If dependence on foreign oil is so bad then why do liberals want us to remain dependent? We have enough untapped oil here to become independent of any foreign oil. So what's the story here (V), are you for the liberal agenda or against it?

"If the companies exploiting Cuba had not done so with such disregard for the locals... Would Castro have risen to power so dramatically?"

So Castro was actually revolting against US companies... but if aliens from outer space had gotten involved to protect US companies like Hasbro and Pepsi Cola then Castro would have still revolted and taken over the US securities and exchange commission's oversight committee chairmanship and positioned himself to go on from there to rule Cuba.

"... It's recorded in records.. Resources to the civilised world... guns and bullets to keep control in foreign lands."

So I guess that means you are for gun control, to limit individual gun ownership so as to insure foreign forces will meet with no significant resistance from the locals. What do you care if the locals are armed and able to protect themselves? How does that impact you, or in any way create for you an intolerable impaction with no relief in sight?

Iamon lyme: So if a company through lack of regulation supplied you with contaminated water you'd be ok with it? It's happened in the past in the USA!!!

"The only reason our nation (as well as yours) was able to become very prosperous as quickly as it did was because there were enough people acting on solid moral principles."

Not really.. alot was at the end of a gun and/or bayonet. Taking lands and resources that did not belong to our nations based on the principle that it was their for the taking. Millions of natives died through the march of God fearing Christians out to make as much profit for as little cost as they could.

... It's recorded in records.. Resources to the civilised world... guns and bullets to keep control in foreign lands.

eg.. If the companies exploiting Cuba had not done so with such disregard for the locals... Would Castro have risen to power so dramatically?

"and it's usually not anything good, except maybe for the petty dictator."

So why has our nations supported so many in return for ore and crude oil?

Artful Dodger: 45 people? Did they have to bus people in from other states?

(V): You are moralizing, and not really saying anything about the legality of business practices. Technically, it's illegal to have an underground economy that avoids regulations paperwork and taxation, but when government makes it impractical to do business legally then underground economies will thrive, according to the same principles of supply and demand that have proven to work in sanctioned business practices.

When government limits it's mandate to ONLY governing, and keeps it's hands off business except when laws are violated, then those underground economies shrink to accomodate already established illegal activities such as prostitution and drugs and illegal gun running (Fast and Furious)... in other words, the "thou shalt not steal" sort of laws designed to protect people. But if government gets itself involved in truely illegal activities as we've seen in petty dictatorships, then it's anyones guess what can happen next... and it's usually not anything good, except maybe for the petty dictator.

The only reason our nation (as well as yours) was able to become very prosperous as quickly as it did was because there were enough people acting on solid moral principles. You might want to believe it was for other reasons, but the connection between moral values and a nations safety and prosperity has been proven by history time after time after time... which to my mind means after several years of letting ourselves go, so to speak, we have put ourselves in the position of losing more ground than we have gained.

The last four years has been like a doctor treating a guy with an cut on his finger by breaking his legs and cracking open his skull. I think Obama has easily broken all past records of how much damage one president can do in four short years... and he couldn't have done it without the help of our major news organizations and the Democratic party machine... a puppet cannot stand up and walk around and mouth words all by itself.

Iamon lyme: If you're not a liberal when you're young you have no heart and if you're not a conservative when you're older, you have no brains.

I grew up and got brains.

Apple paid $713m (£445m) in the year to 29 September on foreign pre-tax profits of $36.8bn (£23.0bn), a rate of 1.9%. It is the latest company to be identified as paying low rate of overseas tax, following Starbucks, Facebook and Google in recent weeks. It has not been suggested that any of their tax avoidance schemes are illegal.

All of the companies do pay considerable amounts of other taxes in the UK such as National Insurance and raise large sums of VAT. Apple's figures for foreign tax appear on page 61 of its form 10k filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

It had paid a rate of 2.5% the previous year.

Apple channels much of its business in Europe through a subsidiary in the Republic of Ireland, which has lower corporation tax than Britain.But even Ireland charges 12.5%, compared with Britain's 24%.

Many multinational companies manage to pay substantially below the official corporation tax rates by using tax havens such as Caribbean islands.

So.. there we have it. It's not so much the rates are too high. Just companies want to do as much as possible, to avoid paying set rates .... as low as 12%.

If an individual who was self employed tried that.... They'd be facing fines and charges for defrauding HMRC.

If companies (as Romney says) are people.... Then they should be treated as such.

But I'm told (here) that such an attitude is wrong and that these 'people' are above the law of the land.

Iamon lyme: Oh no.. they might pay an extra few %... far less though than they use to pay. But it's ok.. cause businesses are people The country's balance sheet can goto pot. Schools, healthcare, infrastructure. Meaningless.

That since Raygun cut taxes dramatically the US has gotten deeper and deeper into debt is in no way relevant. One wonders if the cuts (ordered by the puppet masters) were to high.

"A free market benefits everyone, especially the consumer."

Really. When price fixing is part of your free market scenerio.

"since your knickers seem to permantly be in a twist over off shore accounts and people trying to avoid getting screwed by unfair tax laws..."

They are unfair? ....... how?

(V): Have you ever asked yourself why any big business would contribute heavily to a candidate who vows to raise taxes on big business? How can any business benefit from supporting higher taxes on their own business? Are they drunk on the koolaid and now believe giving it all away is the key to more profits? Actually, IMO if you look past the surface it appears to be a smart move and strictly a business calculation... it's not really a sacrafice if it gains you more profits in the long run.

It's because big business knows that in spite of the rhetoric leading peons like you and me to believe ONLY big business will be impacted, in reality all businesses are impacted by higher taxes. Bigger business can absorb the impact while smaller competitors are severly hamstrung or forced out of business, and can be bought out by their larger competitors. The key word here is "competitors". Raising taxes on the rich in effect causes less competition from rivals, which in turn allows prices to remain fixed (not go down). Competition is what leads to greater efficiency, which in turn allows for lower prices... prices become lower because you have various businesses competing in the same markets. Consumers usually don't have a problem with paying lower prices for the same things... only a moron would choose to pay more, but fortunately reasonable people still outnumber the morons. (I hope so)

In the long run a big business can benefit by elimation of competition, but everyone knows (or should) that competition is what causes prices to go down over time. A free market benefits everyone, especially the consumer.

This is basic economics that anyone can understand. Places like your London School of Economics is a great place to go if you want to become proficient in the esoteric art of forcasting, but for gubbers like me (and most other people) it's unnecessary overkill.

I have to say though, when the government can legally take over a business and force it to make bad investments, that is not good for anyone. Our housing crises can be blamed on large part because Democrats in congress put pressure on our banks to make bad loans. The idea was that anyone should be able to own their own home, even if they couldn't afford a down payment or the risk of default was high. Politicians who "feel our pain" and get what they want because of appeals to emotion end up being the biggest pains in our butts. They are long on promises and short on delivery.

By the way, since your knickers seem to permantly be in a twist over off shore accounts and people trying to avoid getting screwed by unfair tax laws, then maybe the government should step in and take over any and all businesses. That would go a long way to solving the unfairness problem. What do you think?

Iamon lyme: Yeah right.. that's what they do all the time. They don't pay any shareholders, or use various ways to escape paying taxes. Legal one... that's the joke. It's legal to avoid paying taxes if you are rich.. something a ordinary man does not have the ability to do.

"More people are out of work, and have stopped drinking the koolaid because now they'd rather know (instead of being told) how our economy actually works."

....??? a tasteless reference to the Jones town massacre??

"They've seen first hand what can happen when someone starts playing around and screwing with the economy, adding obstacles to free market growth rather than removing them."

Yes.. the banking system worldwide nearly collapsed. Trillions is pension funds screwed through people taking risks with normal peoples money they ought not to be doing... actually there was regulation but they choose to ignore it.

"There is plenty of money right now just sitting on the sidelines, ready to be pumped in as soon as investors know they will not be simply throwing their money down an endless tax and spend rat hole."

There was before hand.. in tax havens.

"or watch it go away in higher taxes and more restrictions on how they are allowed to run their business."

If people can't be trusted to be honourable and they are by trade supposed to be honourable.. we are supposed to just let them be cads and get away with it?

"So tell me, does your government over there tell you how to spend your monthly stipend?"

Cos I'm not clergy.. no.

"Why should you enjoy MORE freedom in deciding what to do with YOUR money than someone who works long hours hoping to stratch out a living"

We all enjoy the same rights. But businesses are bound by health and safety.. as I am to a degree. They pay VAT.. so do I. Certain contract rules apply to all.. unless you claim sovereignty... but that is a complicated. Everyone is expected to pay local taxes, and or any corporation tax.. unless you are a multinational cheating every country out of it's fair due by lying... Or like revealed today avoiding paying NI through shell corporations and because of the law... putting various schools, colleges and universities at risk of having to pay what they already thought they had paid.

But please tell me how this free enterprise with no rules works? What safeties are there to protect us from fraud, lies, death in your world?

rod03801: I agree as it seems the majority do. But, a significant proportion of people don't.

"And I'll NEVER understand why it isn't logical that it should be guaranteed that only people who legally can vote, do vote."

We have an electoral roll register system. Everyone has to register... no ID though, just a statement on who is living at a property of who can vote. Voting time... a card is sent out that must be presented before being able to vote.

So we have a very high registered voter base.. over 90%.

"Plus, most of those unregistered voters probably already have ID's. Sadly, many people just don't get involved because they don't think their vote matters."

A percentage, yes. But not all.

Artful Dodger: You were a liberal? When did you change your mind, and what changed your mind?

Iamon lyme: and what's even more surprising is that I got myself to the polling place my first time to vote-all by myself! I mean, I was even poor back then! I defied the odds. I was poor, white, a liberal, but knew how to take care of myself!

Our new and improved progressive economy is the future of "free" trade... light on the supply side and heavy on the demand.

Artful Dodger: "I'm just a white guy with an ID (since I was 16). And here I thought I was stupid back then!"

I was a 16 year old white guy too! We really do have a lot in common, I mean, what are the odds? I'm not 16 anymore, but I'm still white... and still a guy. I suppose that isn't going to change anytime soon. Actually, the liver spots on my hands say otherwise... if I was a horse I'd be a palomino.

At 16 you're not really stupid, just naive. Even smart people are naive at 16. Though after 30 not being any brighter than you were at 16 is... well, it's no longer naivety. Then it really can be called stupid. And the older someone gets after that (without gaining any wisdom) the stupider they become... until one day it can be said "There's no fool like an old fool."

rod03801: Well, you're not black or poor or both. You see, black people have trouble getting ID's (except for those blacks that know how to make fake IDs - but real ones, not so much). And the poor can't possibly get IDs (except if they drink, then they can get IDs easily cuz they love to use their government checks to drink).

Now most white people, even if they are poor, know how to get IDs (unless they are from heavily populated Democratic areas. Then those whites are as stupid as the liberal blacks.

Oddly enough, those blacks who are conservatives have absolutely NO problem getting an ID. But that's because they are conservatives. If they were liberal blacks, they wouldn't understand how to get a TOTALLY FREE government issued ID.

And finally, it helps to be dead. It seems that blacks and poor folk can't get easily attainable IDs but dead people manage to vote in each election. And many of these dead people were/are black! or poor! or both!

But what do I know? I'm just a white guy with an ID (since I was 16). And here I thought I was stupid back then!

(V): "4 more years?? Either way, the GOP is facing having to appeal to a more wider voting base."

The GOP is already appealing to a wider base, including Independents and many people who voted for Obama 4 years ago. And there also are more people who have decided class envy and raising taxes on the rich does nothing to free up money for growth and investment. More people are out of work, and have stopped drinking the koolaid because now they'd rather know (instead of being told) how our economy actually works. They've seen first hand what can happen when someone starts playing around and screwing with the economy, adding obstacles to free market growth rather than removing them. This so called "taxing the rich" ploy ends up raises taxes on all businesses and costs are passed along to consumers... because inevitably that is what happens when "only the rich" are taxed.

There is plenty of money right now just sitting on the sidelines, ready to be pumped in as soon as investors know they will not be simply throwing their money down an endless tax and spend rat hole. 4 more years of Obama means the choices are to continue sitting on their money, or watch it go away in higher taxes and more restrictions on how they are allowed to run their business. So tell me, does your government over there tell you how to spend your monthly stipend? If not, why? Why should you enjoy MORE freedom in deciding what to do with YOUR money than someone who works long hours hoping to stratch out a living?

It's Obama's base that has been dwindling, but he is still trying to appeal to them hoping there are more of them than anyone else can see. Who knows, maybe he really is the magical man. Maybe he can see things the rest of us can't see.

(V): Get with reality. It doesn't make it harder. Most people have ID anyway. ID's ar necessary for so many other things already. And I'll NEVER understand why it isn't logical that it should be guaranteed that only people who legally can vote, do vote. Nothing will EVER explain why that isn't logical. NOTHING.
Maybe OVER THERE people don't need ID's. But over, here, yes. This is not OVER THERE.
*cough*

Plus, most of those unregistered voters probably already have ID's. Sadly, many people just don't get involved because they don't think their vote matters. I went like that many years. (and have had an ID since 16 like MOST people)

.. It be interesting if the 60 million unregistered voters registered in the USA. But it's gotten harder thanks to Republican *cough* paranoia ((aka we don't want these poor people voting as they'll vote democrat)) over voter fraud.

4 more years?? Either way, the GOP is facing having to appeal to a more wider voting base.

This is where American politics changes? The campaign system of saying what Obama 'hasn't' done will have to be replaced with actual real policies. Including the recognition that the majority of Americans do not want more tax cuts for the rich, as they know if such cuts were enacted the US debt would spiral out of control.

Artful Dodger: On November 11, 2008, Barone said journalists trashed Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the Republicans' vice presidential nominee, because "she did not abort her Down syndrome baby." Barone was speaking at the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago to the 121st annual meeting of the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges

By Bernie Woodall

DETROIT, Nov 1 (Reuters) - A Chrysler executive told Donald Trump in a Tweet on Thursday that the real estate executive and television personality was "full of ****" for repeating a notion that Chrysler is shipping U.S. Jeep production to China, which the automaker refutes.

Ralph Gilles, the head of product design for Chrysler, became the second top Chrysler executive in three days to strongly deny the claim, which was first made by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney last week to a crowd in Ohio.

Trump, from his Twitter account, said, "Obama is a terrible negotiator. He bails out Chrysler and now Chrysler wants to send all Jeep manufacturing to China--and will!"

To which Gilles, from his Twitter account, responded to Trump: "You are full of ****!"

In a second Tweet, Gilles added: "I apologize for my language, but lies are just that, lies."

On Tuesday, Chrysler Group LLC Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne, in an e-mail to employees, also flatly denied Romney's claim.

"I feel obliged to unambiguously restate our position: Jeep production will not be moved from the United States to China," Marchionne wrote.

Romney, speaking a week ago to a crowd in Defiance, Ohio, said that he had read a news article that said Chrysler's Jeep brand is considering moving "all production to China."

Jeep, Chrysler's global brand, has three U.S. assembly plants, including one in Toledo, Ohio. The others are in Illinois and in Detroit.

The Col: .... baby kissing style.

Thank God us Brits don't fall for that bs anymore!

As the East Coast and parts of Ohio struggled to regroup in the devastating wake of “Superstorm” Sandy, the Romney campaign hastily transformed a scheduled victory rally in Dayton, Ohio into a non-political “storm relief event” on Tuesday. According to BuzzFeed, the campaign encouraged supporters to bring hurricane relief supplies and “deliver the bags of canned goods, packages of diapers, and cases of water bottles to the candidate, who would be perched behind a table along with a slew of volunteers and his Ohio right-hand man, Senator Rob Portman.”
Just to be safe, campaign aides reportedly spent $5,000 at a local Wal-Mart on supplies that could be put on display. When supporters arrived at the rally-turned-relief event, they were treated to the 10-minute video about Romney’s life, which was first unveiled at the RNC. The event ended with supporters lined up to hand over supplies and meet Romney. But according to BuzzFeed, this donation process was also staged:
Empty-handed supporters pled for entrance, with one woman asking, “What if we dropped off our donations up front?”
The volunteer gestured toward a pile of groceries conveniently stacked near the candidate. “Just grab something,” he said.
Two teenage boys retrieved a jar of peanut butter each, and got in line. When it was their turn, they handed their “donations” to Romney. He took them, smiled, and offered an earnest “Thank you.”
The Red Cross, meanwhile, said they were grateful for the supplies but encouraged people to donate money or blood as a more efficient way to help the relief effort

What we know now about the Benghazi attack is astonishing. We know at least three requests for help were denied. Hillary was the first to make such a request... it was based on what she knew about Al Qaeda amassing forces and getting ready to attack the embassay.

Everyone at the highest levels knew this was coming. Then after it was over a video story is concocted to make it look like no one saw this coming, and we are expected to believe nothing could have been done about it... a protest mob spontaniously erupts into violence, so there was no time to respond. We now know this was a lie, a fabricated story to replace the true account of what really happened. But I still can't understand why the president did nothing to help. If he had said yes go help them, get them out there immediately, then when the story got out he would look like a hero... granted, an armchair hero, but it certainly wouldn't hurt his standing with the voters THIS close to the election. Instead, all he does is watch the 7 hour assault and murder of four people from a surveillance drone.

Until we find out exactly why the president rejected at least three urgent requests for help, then none of this makes any sense. Even after the attack started we had fighter jets stationed in Italy waiting for the order to go, and two groups of operatives stationed near the embassay waiting for a go order... but again, nothing.

All Obama had to do was say go for it, get our people out of there. There must be something he is afraid of more than doing the right thing and looking like a hero. This is something I know I'll have to wait to find out, after what I'm sure will be a lengthly investigation. Even the Democrats in congress want to know what the hell was going on, why did he just simply sit and watch 7 hours of battle taking place without doing one thing to stop it? Did he think he watching a movie, or that it was only a video game?

The Col: Indeed.. flipping since this .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJG75FJkjr8 ... has never been performed so well.

Both candidates seem to miss any mention of gun control. Guess saying people should be limited to buying under 1000 rounds at a time is just too much!!

(V): i don't see how the term "flip flopper" can ever be used again after he transformed it into an artistic form of expression.I don't know who is going to win the election, but the precedent he has set for changing his positions will change how future candidates run in the future.Clearly he has little respect for the intelligence of the voters

The Col: That remind me of Mitten when a journalist asked him about the corporate support he gets and what influence it exerts on him.

... He said he didn't get influenced and that was it!! Really, that was it. That it was it had to be made clear several times, and that was it.

It was also made clear by his staff that Mitt did not appreciate such questions, and that was it.

Artful Dodger:

“Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the tactics, the constitutional rights of citizens who work in these businesses, yet have nothing to do with the financial transactions of the owners, have been undeserved victims of these frightening raids… unlawfully detained for hours, intimidated, interrogated without the presence of a lawyer and their personal property confiscated.”

... so in the end through lack of evidence, yet another fraudster who's put the jobs of the staff in jeopardy will go onto another company and do the same. Yeah.. we've seen it done here. Staff screwed, creditors not paid and the directors just set up the business under a different name.

... but it's ok to water board.. sorry interrogate a non American? I don't see them being quite in the same ball park some how.. Are the staff being water boarded???

(V): "I'm not familiar precisely with what I said, but I'll stand by what I said, whatever it was." —Mitt Romney (May 17, 2012)

America under Obama and Eric Holder

Will a SWAT Team Invade Your Business?<span>

The Col: One wonders if it's gonna be another Bush job if he gets elected.. or worse... RaYgUn.

My fav Romney quotes at the mo...

"I believe in an America where millions of Americans believe in an America that’s the America millions of Americans believe in. That’s the America I love"

"My dad, as you probably know, was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico... and had he been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I'd have a better shot at winning this. But he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. He lived there for a number of years. I mean, I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino." -Mitt Romney, in leaked comments from a Florida fundraiser, May 17 2012

Artful Dodger:<span><span> Shame your party wouldn't approve the funds wanted by those in Obama's admin.

By <me> and lots of others.

(V): It backfired on him, the car companies are calling him out, he would have been better off keeping his mouth shut

The Col: Mitt's relying on Chinese whispers!!??!!

(V): The Toledo Blade reports on the latest turn of the screw in the auto-related debate that has overshadowed the final week of the race in Ohio:

Chrysler Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne circulated an email to Chrysler Group LLC employees today strongly restating the automaker's promise that it will not move existing U.S. production of Jeeps to China.

In the email, Mr. Marchionne said he felt obligated to again address the company's production plans over continuing "public debate."

The note did not directly reference politics or the presidential election, but Chrysler's plans for Jeep have become a major political talking point over the past week, especially in Ohio. Speaking in Defiance last week, Republican candidate Mitt Romney seized on a misrepresentation of a Bloomberg story, suggesting that Chrysler was considering moving existing Jeep production to China.

Romney has stuck with the Jeep-related line of attack against Obama, though in a modified form that only implies — rather than stating explicitly — that Chrysler might move jobs from Ohio to China. It's a decision that has puzzled Republicans both in and outside Ohio: after letting Obama dominate the auto-bailout debate on the airwaves for months, Romney has re-engaged the auto fight at the last minute on less-than-firm footing, with an attack that now has Chrysler weighing in against him.

Iamon lyme: Or in Mittens' case... 10.

Less than a week to go, but there is still time for the president to pull one more boneheaded stunt before the election.

The Benghazi story is not likely to go away or fizzle out like Fast and Furious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t82D8QT4TPs&feature=relmfu

The Col: I hope it's old style shambling zombies.. But the questions leads to where... China, who is screwing up their eco system. Or India, where kids recycle e waste in conditions that the word toxic is an understatement.

If an American was told to work in the same way.. they'd be able to retire from the proceeds of the court case.