cavanami Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 Ca. is pretty much a desert that when water is available, it is OK but with no water, it will revert to a desert again. I lived/worked in San Diego at Nassco for over three years. Great city! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 19, 2015 Report Share Posted May 19, 2015 California's population has exploded. There are simply more people than the state's resources can support. 1950 population - 10,586,223 2010 population - 37,253,956 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unit731 Posted May 21, 2015 Report Share Posted May 21, 2015 California's population has exploded. There are simply more people than the state's resources can support. 1950 population - 10,586,223 2010 population - 37,253,956 Water table down dramatically. BUT: Let's change the subject to WELFARE. I was in Arizona awhile back. The "Valley" in and around Phoenix Arizona. All of the rivers are completely dry in the southern half of Arizona. Except some of the Colorado river. There are still bridges that go across the waterless rivers. And I see hundreds and hundreds of square miles of man made aqueducts. Man made nice concrete aqueducts full of water for the farmers. Water, water, everywhere in these aqueducts. And who paid for these hundreds and hundreds or square miles of aqueducts? Thanks to Barry Goldwater and his brother. The US taxpayer paid for all of these aqueducts. Talk about WELFARE. Don't read much or view the tele - and any mentions of "corporate" welfare. That WELFARE is fine. It's that old sick grandmother living in a trailer collecting a few dollars on food stamps. She is a "cheat". Corporate welfare is just fine and dandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 22, 2015 Report Share Posted May 22, 2015 One of my professors long ago said that America has socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unit731 Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Now - I have to worry about this . . . too ! TUESDAY, May 19, 2015 (HealthDay News) -- "More than one-third of U.S. adults have a combination of health problems collectively known as metabolic syndrome that increase the risk of heart disease and diabetes, according to new research. What's worse, the researchers found the rate of metabolic syndrome increases dramatically with age. Almost half of people 60 or older in the United States have metabolic syndrome, the study found." LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 1.We spend way, way more 2 or 3 times depending on what you deem corporate welfare on corporate welfare than social welfare. 2. Its much harder to get on and stay on it now due to law changes back in the '90s from the Clinton administration. 3. Social welfare is recycled almost 100 percent back in the economy and their local economies. Even if some are buying Nikes with it, its used at the local Foot Locker, supporting the jobs at those stores as well as the investor in the stock, etc. However, almost all the monies are spent at the market, etc. recycled almost 100 percent back into the economy, while corporations set up overseas subsidiaries and send the profits overseas. This may include overseas jobs. For example. Dole the fruit/food giant gets millions in subsidies and that money is used for central American fruit estates growing all kinds of fruits. The US government gets zero return on this subsidy. Its used overseas. 4. Its proven that states that lowers taxes for the rich and corporations offset it with cuts to education. The state universities as well as the public schools. Pennsylvania and Kansas being recent states that do that. Wisconsin did it as well. 5. The political/public face of welfare is black, by design so its easier for the general public to demonize it. The fact is the number of whites on welfare has been growing steadily and there are whole communities in poor states like Kentucky, Mississippi, mostly white on public aid and shockingly (but not to me) vote to end it. http://aattp.org/ts-official-white-folks-in-red-states-are-the-biggest-food-stamp-moochers-in-the-country/ Lastly, the powers that be are perfect at playing class and race against each other. Its an old trick that has been working well for almost 300 years. The first indentured servants were all ethnic groups. One were made slaves, the others weren't but kept poor with the carrot of one day possibly being one of the elite. That was the big lie and it still works. The 'they aren't like you so they are bad' meme. Works like a charm...unfortunately. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unit731 Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Some folks just can't comprehend what you state. Some folks don't wish to comprehend what you state. 1.We spend way, way more 2 or 3 times depending on what you deem corporate welfare on corporate welfare than social welfare. 2. Its much harder to get on and stay on it now due to law changes back in the '90s from the Clinton administration. 3. Social welfare is recycled almost 100 percent back in the economy and their local economies. Even if some are buying Nikes with it, its used at the local Foot Locker, supporting the jobs at those stores as well as the investor in the stock, etc. However, almost all the monies are spent at the market, etc. recycled almost 100 percent back into the economy, while corporations set up overseas subsidiaries and send the profits overseas. This may include overseas jobs. For example. Dole the fruit/food giant gets millions in subsidies and that money is used for central American fruit estates growing all kinds of fruits. The US government gets zero return on this subsidy. Its used overseas. 4. Its proven that states that lowers taxes for the rich and corporations offset it with cuts to education. The state universities as well as the public schools. Pennsylvania and Kansas being recent states that do that. Wisconsin did it as well. 5. The political/public face of welfare is black, by design so its easier for the general public to demonize it. The fact is the number of whites on welfare has been growing steadily and there are whole communities in poor states like Kentucky, Mississippi, mostly white on public aid and shockingly (but not to me) vote to end it. http://aattp.org/ts-...in-the-country/ Lastly, the powers that be are perfect at playing class and race against each other. Its an old trick that has been working well for almost 300 years. The first indentured servants were all ethnic groups. One were made slaves, the others weren't but kept poor with the carrot of one day possibly being one of the elite. That was the big lie and it still works. The 'they aren't like you so they are bad' meme. Works like a charm...unfortunately. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 << According to the latest polling, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign has more support than the campaign of media favorites Scott Walker, Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and every other Republican candidate. The latest Quinnapiac Poll revealed that five Republicans are tied at the top of the Republican field. Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, and Mike Huckabee each were at 10%. Do you know who is more popular than even the most popular 2016 Republicans? Sen. Bernie Sanders. In the same poll, Sanders was supported by 15% of Democrats for their party’s nomination. Sen. Sanders trailed Hillary Clinton 57%-15%, but his fifteen percent made him the second most popular presidential candidate in the country. The media treats Republicans like Carly Fiorina (2%), Ted Cruz (6%), and Rand Paul (7%) like they are serious candidates, but Bernie Sanders has two to seven times more support than these three Republicans. Why does the media treat Sen. Sanders like he is token opposition to former Sec. of State Clinton instead of as the legitimately popular stand alone figure that he is? >> http://www.politicususa.com/2015/05/29/bernie-sanders-support-2016-republican-presidential-candidate-poll.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unit731 Posted May 31, 2015 Report Share Posted May 31, 2015 It's going to be Bush vs Clinton. The rest is just hoopla. Maybe the others are seeking the VP position. Caveat: Unless some major scandal appears. A new one. The first Bush. His crucial primary was New Hampshire. He went to then NH governor Sununu and made a promise. Deliver me the NH Republican primary and you (Sununu) can have any government job he wanted in Washington. The first Bush won New Hampshire. Sununu picked Chief of Staff. Probably the most important appointed job in any presidency. Although Sununu is a Washington insider now. He still has all of his contacts in New Hampshire. Granted, the 2d Bush did not win NH - as McCain was on a roll. But the insider Republican machine crucified McCain in South Carolina and after. It's the Bush machine and ability to obtain money that will make him the Repubican nominee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now