Only in California...

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
Politics aside, the economy under Clinton was passed and orchrastrated from Bush senior. I do give Clinton credit with not tampering with a good economic plan until the end.
When looking at numbers, we did the best under Reagan/Bush senior. When looking at the highest rate of truckers that went bancrupt, that was under Clinton during the end of his last term. 2000-2001 was the worst recorded year for all sectors of transportation.
Again, politics aside, you can't argue the facts.







Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Well T-hawk I know what you are saying but still say we let this happen, complacency man just plain complacency.

OK TallCal, lets see – best 8 years? I do agree it was good times but not as good as it should have been. I think you made one point how elections are won, by the pocket book.

You can make fun of Reagan all you want but remember one important thing if nothing else, your boy Clinton did not seek out advice when he was elected by going to Carter but if I remember correctly he went to his mentor, Ronald Reagan. Carter was so p****d off by this that he had his press office call Clinton's transistion team and beg for a photo op. AND got to say that your boy Clinton counted Reagan (the great communicator)as the leader he choose to follow, not carter and he learned by watching and listening to his interaction with the people during his campaigns, especially 1980. Oh yea if you think that Clinton and his administration were the reason for all the success, you need to read some of his writings about his administration and his need to continue the reagan policies and correct Bush 1 policies to ensure a stong economy.

But with that said, I got to tell you environmentally speaking Clinton/Gore failed. I could go into a whole bunch of things but it is rather worthless. Clinton/Gore had 8 years, 2 years with democratic control and they did nothing for the environment. EVEN AFTER the republicans had congress, did you notice they passed a lot of stuff Clinton proposed? Yep the congress worked with Clinton, the party of hate and big business worked with the leader of the party (allegedly) of the people. So before you blame the republicans on environmental issues, think about the 6 years of congressional rule they had with a democratic president which gave us what environmentally? N O T H I N G We could have all this solved but instead it was a dog and pony show of Clinton/Gore, Sad so Sad!

I also have to add this, it don’t matter to me what you pay in taxes – it only matters to me what I pay. Who cares if bush gave the ‘rich’ tax breaks, I got one too and it helped me. I still hate this idea that we must hate success or be jealous of successful people, why? It seems it has been all started to undermine our ability to get a long and started by the people of that most twisted era, the 60’s.
 

tallcal101

Veteran Expediter
Escuse me Dave,but I was managing 45 road vans running for United Van Lines during the Clinton years,and they all prospered beyond thier wildest dreams.Our fleet grew by 40%., the average driver(owner operator)was making six figures after expences!!
Most went out of business between 2002 and 2003.
Just the facts mam?
I don't believe you guys,Bush 1,give me a break!!He's the guy who gave us James Watt!!!Not to mention Dan Quail!!!You guys are amazing!!!
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
I attempted to keep the political side out. I will make another attempt. You may have prospered as I did through that period, but the Clinton years for trucking were a disaster.
Again, I am referring to the whole industry, not a select few.
If you want facts, they are readily known.
Here is one for starters and there is another hundred available.
I am not beating up on you, but I think you are a little selective on what you want to hear. Clinton/Bush.....who cares?...they are best of buddies.
For you reading enjoyment.
http://fleetowner.com/news/fleet_finance_co_sees/index.html










Davekc
owner
21 years
PantherII
EO moderator
 

pelicn

Veteran Expediter
Saw this little tidbit a while back.....

How Long Do We Have?

About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage ."


Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000
Presidential election:

Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million;

Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000

States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
 

tallcal101

Veteran Expediter
Sounds amazingly like an editorial I heard on Foxed news network recently.
Speaking of Foxed,they are already doing their spin on the slaughter of innocent women and children in Iraq by Marines.Seems as though Foxed feels the Iraqi civilians are just a bunch of ungrateful,pityful and confused souls.There is always civilian casualties,why don't they just get over it?We are not invaders,we are liberators!!
And the beat goes on.......
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
You know I told you I don't like FOX, I listed all what I listen and watch.

I am not justifying the actions of anyone but there is more to the situation than what the BBC and AP has reported that need to be taken in account.

With that said, I got to tell you, you need to learn the culture over there. These people need to take things into their own hands. They are not stupid or ignorant but rather wait and take advantage of all the things going on. Some are afraid; they are in the same position that the Vietnamese were in wanting to support the SV government but knowing if they do they die by the VC. I bet you that you have may have talked to one or two Iraqis about their country if that. I have to deal with them daily and they all say the same thing – they and their families are happy that we are there. I worked with a lot of them who went to Israel (yes Arabs in Israel go figure?) when the war started so they can help out. These are people who are very smart and most are medical professionals made a decision to go in a war zone and give up their mid and upper 6 digit figure salary.

I strongly feel being a service person over there is hard because of all the constraints that they are under while being shot at. We politically corrected the military and added more UN c**p that they have to deal with. I heard from one returning vet that she can not even return fire and have to have their weapons unloaded while on patrol unless directed by someone sitting in the command center in the green zone.

I am going with the assumption that you do not support liberation of an oppressed people because people (civilians) get killed during the process. Again I am not justifying the recent reports, only understand it can happen. So using this assumption, I have to ask a few questions;

If Germany didn't declare war against us, should we have gone to war to liberate Europe? I ask this because of the thousands of civilians who were killed during the war; Berlin, Dresden, Hamburg, Saint-Lô, Falaise, Lisieux, and many more cities - all bombed by the US.

If you were around back then, would you demand (march, protest, etc..) that General Patton to be tried for the Biscari airfield massacre and the murder of Italian civilians at a Canicatti soap factory of which Bradley also had a part of? Not to mention the British who had a hand in a few hundred German/Italian civilians who were put into the POW camps in Africa and died there because of a lack of water.

Would you fight for the thousands of DPs who were herded into open camps for months without proper housing? And would you fight for the thousands of former German military personal who were also placed in camps when a lot of them were systematically staved to death. Did you know that the DP problem was not solved until 1950 – 5 years that some were in limbo because of the problems that they presented?

Would you have protested the Korean War and the use of troops that killed the poor North Koreans? I bet you if we went to war with North Korea today, you would be protesting that war too and making fun of the president who made the decision. Here is a URL so you can read all about the nice North Koreans;

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50382
 

highway star

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Back to global warming for a moment...

There was an interesting article in the Life section of Thursday's McPaper. It seems that 55 million years ago, the Arctic was sub-tropical, complete with palm trees and the ancestors of alligators. Smokestacks and tailpipes? I don't think, and PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, they were around then. This was caused by "run-amok greenhouse gases that came about naturally." Imagine that...
It also got quite hot over much of the country this past holiday weekend. In Alpena, Mi. the temperature broke a record set about a hundred years ago by a degree or two. Looks to me like it was getting awfully hot a hundred years ago, just like it is now.

T-Hawk says "...the best thing Clinton did was nothing." I was saying that before he even left office, but, of course, the Libs don't want to hear that. He ran his first campaign on "It's the economy, stupid" when, in reality, the economy was already recovering from the minor recession during Bushes presidency. It was a vibrant economic period set in motion by President Reagan. His opposition to the opression of communism and his faith in the ability of Americans made him a great President. Why is it so hard for the Libs to appreciate the prosperity he gave us? A common Lib responce is, "Reaganomics did'nt trickle down on me." Most of the common working folks I know, myself included, what from struggling in the early 80's to very steady work. I guess some people are'nt happy unless there are baskets of free money being dumped in their living rooms.
 

tallcal101

Veteran Expediter
Not baskets,just 1/10th of the money the rich are saving in tax breaks.Are you aware that $52 billion dollars is how much those making over 1 million a year are currently saving(2005 alone)?Thats TAX money my conservative friends,TAX money,do you capice???This was dubya's gift to those among us who least need it!!!
Guess who's filling in the gaps for that $52 bill?You guessed it,those making under 1 mill a year,or,you and me boys and girls.
Why is it so hard for my conservative working friends to understand dubya,raygun ,and bush 1 are all about the RICH?I know,because they vote in BIG MLITARY BUDGETS(so their rich contractor friends can get richer)but,you all think it's to defend our country,with invations of two bit countries,etc,etc etc.
We can't even defend ourselves against a Hurricane for God sake("doin' a good job brownie")
rayguns little exercize in diplomacy (Iran Contra)was certainly a huge success,perhaps some of thoses dollars and weapons will kill Americans in the near future?Wonder how many lives were destroyed by the heroin that was being sold on American streets(flown in on Military contractor planes)in the name of Freddom for another 2 bit central American country?Where's oleever "i'm an american military man,proud and true"north when we need him?
Look up,the sky is falling again,better call Homeland Security(the lines busy)
Oh well,..................
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Tallcal

Honestly worrying about what you or someone else has does not put money in my pocket. I mean clearly that the idea that I should care about what some one who has already achieve wealth in life in comparison of what I have is just down right despicable.

I have no control over who pays taxes and neither do the rich. Assaulting a class of people because of their station in life does no one any good and this is more class warfare from the talking points of the fringe left. The sad thing is that most of the people who are doing the talking and assaulting the rich are the ones who can afford to do so because they are part of the same class. They insist on telling us the people who actually work for a living that we must hate some of the rich in this country because they achived wealth. I read a really interesting piece about Stalin and Propaganda and for some reason they cited Stalin’s own notes (he wrote notes in the margins of the books he read) about the emotion of jealousy and how it is used to socially condition people to effect change. Put it into the context of today’s press (the press run by very rich people, isn’t that odd?) with this hate the rich c**p and think about it for a while.

As I said to my father today and may have here – if this country is run by the rich/lobbyist/big business, wouldn’t you think with all this power concentrated in one man (President Bush) that they allegedly selected, they would have an outcome that they would pay no taxes, could tell the congress how to vote at the same time they are on the floor or don’t have to deal with safety/pollution regulations respectively? I would think so but none of this has actually happened, has it? Before you say a word, tax breaks and reduction in taxes are not the same as paying no taxes.

But before I go on, I got to add that I read Daryl Hannah plea to save the south central farm. Yes LA has a farm some where. It really isn’t a farm but rather a bunch of people who plant things. I got to side with the people here (even the invaders who live there) that the LA should not off sold the property to a developer but what I find really insulting is that here is a group of people taking up the cause, Joan Biaz, Daryl Hannah, Ben Harper, Tom Morello and Leonardo DiCaprio among a lot of others. So I have to ask this, the amount of money needed to purchase the land form the developer is $16M, with the combined wealth of these people, this is one house in the Hollywood hills – why don’t they just pay for it themselves? Because they are rich and feel that their money is just that THEIRS. Let the poor working people pay for it, we need to get a new Ferrari this month. Oh I am not jealous of them, I just want them to pay for things that they feel we should.

As for the military budgets, I got to tell you I thought that they were unrealistic but when I was taught about line item accounting, the federal budget and the procurement support system of the US military – it began to make sense.

If you want to see a change in this, there are a few simple things I strongly suggest.

The first is getting an administration in place who will not allow former military officers from being able to work for military suppliers and to become lobbyist. There you eliminated half of the problem. For that matter, make it a law that military supplies can’t lobby at all.

The second is to stop funding R&D projects from concept to demo but instead force proof of concept demonstrations with the suppliers and than fund some of the rest.

The third is force the places of higher learning to get involved, they should be doing most of the R&D anyway. Government dollar for government dollar they are the least effective means of research in the country.

So Ira-contra, who cares? The entire thing could have been prevented if we just went into Iran in the first place but your peanut farmer idiot decided to follow the diplomatic/UN path instead and this has lead us to where we are today. Talk about killing our credibility in the middle east, nothing did more damage to it than the ‘hostage’ situation under the carter administration.

I am with you with the drug thing, it is a shame that the 60’s people demanded the drugs that the US government was forced to sell to fund the war. Talking to someone who was one of the Air America pilots who was over there for a long time (yes I did ask him about the drug connection and he did not admit to flying drugs) he mentioned a few things that were forgotten about the funding of the war, the war protestors and how they were hurting things over there. He also mentioned some of the aide flights they did in Laos - rice drops I think he called them, flying Bob Hope around (which I understand was rather a pain in the a**) and even picking up an elephant that needed to go state side for dental work (got to love the military with all that waste in trying to win the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese).
 
Top