Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I would agree, most progressives probably do look down on infidelity.. but come on man, look at that smile.. How you gonna turn that down?
You Can't Afford A One-Bedroom Apartment On Minimum Wage
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Of course they should, that's a very big part of how we grow our economy
I'm simply saying that business owners shouldn't be able to live in the US if they offshore their workforce to places like southeast Asia for the sole fact of lowering labor costs, and if they do, they should be heavily taxed for it (more than the actual costs of paying an American workforce as an incentive to stay domestic)
see4
Well-Known Member
Of course you can. You won't yield much, but it will be good smokable bud.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Maybe, but it has Clinton's signature on it, not HW Bush's.
see4
Well-Known Member
I've done several LED + CFL only grows, the yield was low, like 0.3g/watt - but the smoke was insane. Arguably the better smoke I've grown.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I would agree, most progressives probably do look down on infidelity.. but come on man, look at that smile.. How you gonna turn that down?
No argument. Monica is a beautiful young woman, and Hillary is a shrew. Unfortunately, Bill married the shrew. If you can't honor that commitment, then the honorable thing to do would be to divorce the shrew. Of course, nobody expects the Clintons, any of them, to be honorable people.
The scary thing is that lots of people might actually vote for Hillary. Colonel Sanders is infinitely better.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
So would you agree NAFTA was not a "liberal idea", but a bipartisan initiative?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
In countries with lower tax rates.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
The best thing you can do, especially as a conservative, is spread that message. Like GW said, I'd rather see a Sanders v. Paul general ticket than a Clinton v. Bush, wouldn't you?
WeedFreak78
Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Corporations don't ship jobs overseas because of high corporate tax rates, they ship jobs overseas because of low labor costs
The corporate tax rate was twice as high as it is now in America in the 1950's, so why didn't the auto manufacturers ship the jobs to China, where the top marginal tax rates didn't exist and labor costs were low?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
They are heavily taxed. They pay the foreign tax rate, plus the US tax rate when they bring the money to the US. That's why there's billions of dollars sitting in foreign banks.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
If nothing else, he makes great chicken.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Of course..because fried chicken...I'd vote for this man..
I love fried chicken, but I would vote for Rand.
I think a Sanders V Paul election would be awesome!
see4
Well-Known Member
I would prepare for doomsday if that happened. No bullshit.
WeedFreak78
Well-Known Member
Because Asia/India didn't have the manufacturing capabilities that we did..it's taken them 20+years to catch up..now they do..and they are cheaper.
I use the higher tax rates of the past sometimes as an argument, but your reasoning doesn't stack up. If China/Malaysia/ Vietnam had the infrastructure back in the 40's/50's/60's to do the manufacturing, companies would have went. Maybe not, history wants us to believe corporations had better morals back then..but it was still people running them, and people suck.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Because China's industrial base had been bombed into oblivian, the average Chinese had never even seen a school, and tranportation cost were higher than production costs. But you'll keep pretending it was nothing but taxes.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
If they were taxed more moving abroad than they are staying domestic, they wouldn't move abroad
That's why they offshore manufacturing
All I'm saying is we should change that, to make it more expensive for American corporations to send their workforce to China. This isn't a progressive stance, I'm sure even you must agree with that, am I right?
WeedFreak78
Well-Known Member
In some instances they don't have to report overseas earning but CAN use overseas losses against their tax burden..how nice is that?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I'm not at all saying it was nothing but taxes
You both have a valid argument about manufacturing capabilities, and I can appreciate that, but that isn't the sole variable in this equation, can you appreciate that?
Similar threads
