Why all these new guns laws and no economy cares? (Republic: home, to buy)

[MassVt]

Originally Posted by Flyover_Country

The aging population as the Baby Boomers are retiring is a *small* part of the lower labor participation rate. The real reason is that businesses are sitting on cash rather than expanding as they are trying to ride out the reign of socialist Democrats. Obama and the Democrats are heavily anti-capitalist, as evidenced by their actions over the past 4+ years. Obamacare and the unelected EPA are major drivers as businesses are hoarding cash to pay penalties from Obama telling certain industries that "we will bankrupt you" as well as the massive cost increases/penalties from Obamacare. That leads to lower employment as companies keep paring off all but the absolute most essential employees and divisions in order to preserve their margins and reduce their fine cross-section. The 50 employee/30 hour limit in Obamacare is a big factor here if you look at the latest job numbers. Twice as many people were involuntarily forced from full time to part time jobs than "new" jobs were created. We have about as many people employed today as we did in the early 1980s...when we had FAR fewer people in the country.

So in summary, there was a small recession in 2005-2006 when the housing market bubble burst, which was really due being massively bid-up due to cheap government-persuaded loans being offered. That bubble would have been a little dip in the road except we had Obama get elected. He did the same crap F***ing Dumb*ss Roosevelt did and lo and behold we had the same outcome- a prolonged depression. Ditto with the Supreme Court shredding the Constitution- the "Switch in Time that Saved Nine" was an embarrassment just as was "Obamacare is a tax on a lack of activity." At least FDR's lifetime reign of ruin led us to have term limits and Obama has to go in 2016. Hopefully saner minds will prevail and we'll start the slow process of pulling out of Obama's disastrous reign with a series of conservative adults in office cleaning up the mess the infantile Democrats left behind. I am hoping that will happen, otherwise we'll simply get to the same point later and with much more misery in between. I am floored that the supposedly pro-scientific liberals are willing to completely ignore the evidence of literally the entire field of psychology and economics during about the past 90 years. Keynes was wrong, Marx was wrong, and Pavlov was right. Give people free stuff and they won't work. Tax income and people won't work. You can't borrow your way out of debt. Disarming people will embolden criminals, including the government. It's that simple but they can't get out of the way of their own corruption to see it.

Oh, look---a modern-day Hoover fan boy.

You should be in a wax museum , along with Maria Antoinette.

[Flyover_Country]

Judging by the fact that I have gotten a lot of negative replies without any refutation of the material I wrote, I guess I must be pretty close to the truth, huh?

And to bring it back to MO and firearms, let me direct you to Article 23 of the Missouri Constitution:

Section 23. That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned.

The state politicians can't pass much for gun control because it's against the state Constitution. So they rely on the feds to pass laws for them and have it apply in MO due to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution allowing federal law to trump anything the states come up with. Just ask Arizona's Jan Brewer about that one.

And to bring it back all the way to the original topic, some Missouri Democrats tow the same line as the national Democrats. The national Democrats want gun control and they want the eyes of the country off the economy. They want gun control because guns aren't conducive to a socialist society- armed people are more likely to be individualist rather than collectivist (bad) or try to forcefully retake power from a corrupt, overbearing socialist state (worse.) They don't want the general public to pay much attention to the poor economy, lest they realize that this is at least the third major time period when Keynesian and socialist economic policy has failed miserably and vote Democrats out of office. The Democrats are using anything they can to distract people from their failings, and using a "crisis" that allows them to push something they want as that distraction is a win-win in their books and why they are doing what they are doing.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by Flyover_Country

Judging by the fact that I have gotten a lot of negative replies without any refutation of the material I wrote, I guess I must be pretty close to the truth, huh?

And to bring it back to MO and firearms, let me direct you to Article 23 of the Missouri Constitution:



The state politicians can't pass much for gun control because it's against the state Constitution. So they rely on the feds to pass laws for them and have it apply in MO due to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution allowing federal law to trump anything the states come up with. Just ask Arizona's Jan Brewer about that one.

And to bring it back all the way to the original topic, some Missouri Democrats tow the same line as the national Democrats. The national Democrats want gun control and they want the eyes of the country off the economy. They want gun control because guns aren't conducive to a socialist society- armed people are more likely to be individualist rather than collectivist (bad) or try to forcefully retake power from a corrupt, overbearing socialist state (worse.) They don't want the general public to pay much attention to the poor economy, lest they realize that this is at least the third major time period when Keynesian and socialist economic policy has failed miserably and vote Democrats out of office. The Democrats are using anything they can to distract people from their failings, and using a "crisis" that allows them to push something they want as that distraction is a win-win in their books and why they are doing what they are doing.

Ding ding ding. Speaking truth to power. Say it brother.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

You get a rep point because you actually cited a source. I would definitely agree with the fact that we need stronger job growth numbers on a monthly basis, but I am confident things continue to improve. Some people might have to move to where job growth is occurring instead of continuously complaining that no jobs exist in their small city or town. I have had to move several times due to job related concerns, but I always made sure to do a good bit of research to see how the overall economy was performing in the city and surrounding county before I moved. Lots of variability can exist on the micro level when it pertains to job growth or decline.

Granitestater-you and I disagree a lot but I enjoy your posts and you usually back up your opnions, so I enjoy the give and take.

You've almost got me sold on Minnesota if it wasn't so freakin' cold. That, and I like my Missouri.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by Versatile

I haven't said close anything at all.

Not you, but others.

[GraniteStater]

US Treasury reports $113B surplus in April

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

Granitestater-you and I disagree a lot but I enjoy your posts and you usually back up your opnions, so I enjoy the give and take.

You've almost got me sold on Minnesota if it wasn't so freakin' cold. That, and I like my Missouri.

Minneapolis St. Paul region just has a better economy across the board compared to STL and KC. What is more impressive is that they have invested in the human capital that they have, and immigrants there have assimilated at a faster rate compared to other areas of the US. Part of that is the emphasis on education and high quality schools. Also, property taxes in Minnesota are generally among the lowest of any state in the northern tier of the US. The higher income tax is a bummer, but median household incomes are the highest in the Midwest. Based on the numbers I have seen so far this decade, the Twin Cities have also seen a faster overall rate of population growth of any large metro in the Midwest- growing much faster than Chicagoland region. In strict percentage terms, the oil patch of North Dakota has been the fastest growth area in the US for a number of years, but I consider that region of the state to be much more alligned with the West than the Midwest.

[Wanderer0101]

Originally Posted by STLviaMSP

When Republican districts learn how to build real cities, great universities, top notch public park systems, dynamic arts scenes, and tech startups, and part ways with the SBC, birthers, science denyers, tea partiers, and the nativists, I'll start giving consideration and respect to GOP policy and policymakers. Till then, not so much. They are, quite literally, the party of the bad parts of yesterday.

Yeah, places like Detroit really show what Democrats can do when they put their "minds" to it.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Wanderer0101

Yeah, places like Detroit really show what Democrats can do when they put their "minds" to it.

Well, it takes them union folk atellin' 'em what ta do, dontcha know.

[Vols44]

Originally Posted by Wanderer0101

Yeah, places like Detroit really show what Democrats can do when they put their "minds" to it.

Rust belt voters were harassed during the last general election swung the tide Obama's way and re balanced the country for four more years. I challenge you to come up with specific examples how Democrats were the sole contributors to Motor City's demise. Anything less will render your board credit zero. I'll counter with facts surrounding the city's downfall while you put down your right wings long enough to come with a plausible answer or be a failure.