hugo

If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. Milton Friedman (1912 - 2006)

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -- George Washington

Yes, they would. I would have huge balls if I walked up to the heavyweight champ and called him a ing pussy.

Plus we can offset global warming with nuclear winter. We can nuke Iran to the point where we reach global cooling. A win/win situation.

Strange, my family lives on one income. I live in a modest size home that is completely paid for. I drive a 10 year old Toyota Tacoma. I save 20% of my modest income. I paid may own way through college while working a blue collar job. No aid, no college loan. Most people with children need to seriously consider if it is economically and family wise to send your kids to childcare instead of one spouse staying home. Two incomes are needed because people spend more than they used to. The average home was 1200 square feet in the 50's and people had more kids. Now, it is nearly twice that size. Everyone has a cell phone, a big screen TV, sattelite or cable and that computer in front of you. The basics,; food, clothing and shelter; can be easily met on one modest income. I think you know that. I see "poor" people having $3 coffees every day. If you want to live like grandpa and grandma did you can live quite cheaply. Inflation will continue to be low due to the expansion of liberalized trade. There are ways to hedge your investments if inflation is a great concern; it should not be. The only real concern is the health care crisis which will effect the entire Western world, Japan and China as the population ages. The retiring baby boomers will mean more jobs for the young, but higher taxes. INFLATION HAS BEEN LESS THAN 5% FOR MANY YEARS, WEZ.

A giant polar bear, enraged by global warming, will eat everyone by 5-20-2021.

Let me explain some basic economics. A falling dollar is good for the American worker. It makes American products cheaper in comparison to foreign products. It also means we are paying foreign debtors less in real dollars. The only fear is inflation which ain't too likely during a recession. The Fed learned a few things from the stagflation of the late 70's. http://www.epinet.org/issueguides/minwage/figure5.pdf Real wages are higher than they were thirty years ago. Sorry, to place a ray of sunshine amaong the naggling nabobs of negativism.

Yes, let us let the chinks take more of our jobs.

Never, in world history, has an economy been as stable and affluent as the US economy has been for the last quarter of a century. I ain't worried about my job.

Environmental factors strongly influence gender preference selection. You might be born predisposed to being a fag but environment is a stronger factor. Living in a society that condemns homosexuality decreases the odds of someone being a fag. Don't regurgitate fag talking points. A little info: The Importance of Twin Studies N. E. Whitehead, Ph.D. A constant stream of media articles--several per year--assures us that there is a link between homosexuality and biological features. These articles mention genes, brain structure, hormone levels in the womb, ear characteristics, fingerprint styles, finger lengths, verbal skills...... and by the time you read this, some others may have appeared. The headlines imply that people are born with tendencies which infallibly will make them gay or lesbian, and that change of sexual orientation will be impossible. Individually some of these pieces are not very convincing, but the sheer volume of them suggests that they must amount to an overwhelming influence--or if not, further research will add to them and make it so. This is not true either, and we see shortly that twin studies refute it. Twin Studies Twin studies in their modern form investigate both identical and fraternal twins, but this article emphasizes studies of identical twins, which are sufficient for our purposes. Studies of non-identical twins are detailed elsewhere (1). Earlier studies mostly used informal or "snowball" samples of twins recruited from gay and lesbian associations, and by advertisements (e.g. 2,3). Such studies are possibly biased by the nature of twins who volunteer, but even so, if one identical twin was homosexual, only about half the time was the co-twin concordant (i.e. also homosexual). Better research, however, was based on twins who were recruited for other reasons, and only subsequently asked about their sexual orientation. These are known as "registry" studies, and they similarly gave a concordance rate between identical twins of less than 50%. There have been two major published registry studies (4,5), one based on the Minnesota Registry, the other on the Australian Registry. The larger of the two registry studies is the Australian one, done by Bailey, Martin and others at the University of Queensland. Using the 14,000+ Australian twin collection, they found that if one twin was homosexual, 38% of the time his identical brother was too. For lesbianism the concordance was 30%. Whether 30% or 50% concordance (snowball samples), all the studies agree it is clearly not 100%. The critical factor is that if one identical twin is homosexual, only sometimes is the co-twin homosexual. There is no argument about this in the scientific community. Interpretation Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too. But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual. Genes are responsible for an indirect influence, but on average, they do not force people into homosexuality. This conclusion has been well known in the scientific community for a few decades (e.g. 6) but has not reached the general public. Indeed, the public increasingly believes the opposite. Identical twins had essentially the same upbringing. Suppose homosexuality resulted from some interaction with parents that infallibly made children homosexual. Then if one twin was homosexual, the other would also always be homosexual. But as we saw above, if one is homosexual, the other is usually not. Family factors may be an influence, but on average do not compel people to be homosexual. Twin studies suggest that as a class, events unique to each twin--neither genetic nor family influences--are more frequent than genetic influences or family influences. But many individual family factors (such as the distant father) are commoner than the individual unique factors. Unique events would include seduction, sexual abuse, chance sexual encounters, or particular reactions to sensitive events, when young. Everyone has their own unique path which only partly follows that of the theoreticians! A fascinating sidelight on all this comes from the work of Bailey (7). His team asked non-concordant identical twins (one was homosexual, one not) about their early family environment, and found that the same family environment was experienced or perceived by the twins in quite different ways. These differences led later to homosexuality in one twin, but not in the other. Strength of Influences At this point, some of you will be asking--what about the concordant identical twins who were both homosexual? Could their genes have "made them do it"? No. It can be a strong influence for a few, but even for those few, it is never overwhelming. The record strengths for genetic influence on behaviors are 79% in a group of highly addicted women cocaine addicts (8) and about the same or somewhat higher, for ADHD (9). Because those figures are not 100%, even among addicts or those strongly pushed towards some other behavior, there is room for outside intervention and change. Hence even if homosexuality is as addictive as cocaine for a few individuals, their genes didn't "make them do it." For perspective, it is valuable to compare genetic contributions to homosexuality with the question - is a girl genetically compelled to become pregnant at 15? Her genes might give her physical characteristics that make her attractive to boys - but whether she gets pregnant will depend greatly on whether her community is Amish or urban, conservative or liberal, whether they use contraceptives, and whether the parents are away for the evening. So the influence of the genes is very indirect. We can see this by thinking further - if she was in solitary confinement all her life, would her genes make her become pregnant? Of course not! Some influence from the environment (in this case a boy) is essential! The effects of genes on behaviors are very indirect because genes make proteins, not preferences. So the results of identical-twin studies are critical in understanding the biological influences on homosexuality. Only for physical traits like skin color are identical twins 100% concordant; otherwise they don't necessarily follow either their parents' genes...or their parents' admonitions! In this, homosexuality proves to be no different from such unrelated behaviors as violence, being extroverted, or getting divorced. All may be influenced by genes, but not overwhelmingly determined by them. Future Psychological Research The complementary finding is just as true. There are many influences from upbringing, and probably many we have not yet discovered--but however many we find, it will always remain true (because the twin studies tell us so) that family influences will never overwhelmingly compel children to be homosexual. Childhood Gender non-conformity (essentially strong sissiness, rather than a diagnosis of GID) is the strongest single influence ever found associated with adult homosexuality, but even this factor is not overwhelmingly compelling. 75% of a sample of extremely "sissy" boys became homosexual when followed through to adulthood (10). But we must remember they were so sissy that parents were extremely concerned and referred them to the research clinic for help. Only a small percentage of sissy boys from the general population become homosexual as adults (11). This is even more true of other factors which have been researched and publicized in the media, and leads to a another important rule of thumb: "Only a small minority of those exposed to any predisposing factor become homosexual." This may be a surprise to some clinicians, who may have found high percentages of sissiness, tomboyishness or same-sex parent deficits in their clients. But that is a clinical sample - out in the extra-clinical world, surveys show that only a small percentage of those with poor same-sex parent relationships become homosexual. For whatever reason those factors have often become extremely influential in such clients' lives and must be taken very seriously; but because they are minor factors in the whole population, clinicians must not force everyone into the same box, which may be uncomfortable, or simply not fit. They must be open to any unusual factor which has been important for the specific client. The scientific truth is - our genes don't force us into anything. But we can support or suppress our genetic tendencies. We can foster them or foil them. If we reinforce our genetic tendencies thousands of times (even if only through homoerotic fantasy), is it surprising that it is hard to change? Similarly, we have a genetic tendency to eat, but it is possible to foster this tendency and overeat for the pleasure it brings. If we repeat that often enough, we will not only reinforce a genetic tendency to become overweight, but find that "starving" the habit takes a long time! In summary: 1. No scientist believes genes by themselves infallibly make us behave in specified ways. Genes create a tendency, not a tyranny. 2. Identical twin studies show that neither genetic nor family factors are overwhelming. 3. Conclusion 2 will not be altered by any research in the future. 4. We can foster or foil genetic or family influences. 5. Change is possible.

Less religion equals more queers. It is a simple deduction. The Abrahamic religions are definitely anti-gay as those religions decline homosexuality is certain to increase. Your grandsons could end up taking it up the ass. Standard atheist opinion: http://atheism.about.com/od/gaymarriage/p/ProGayMarriage.htm

The fact is men will seek power. They will use ideologies, secular and sacred, and abuse them. Through much of human history governmant and religion have been intertwined thus many crimes have been committed under the guise of religion. Secular humanism has really come into power since Darwin. The century following the publication of the Origin of Species turned out to be the bloodiest 100 years in human history.The root of almost all wars is competition for scarce resources, men will twist any ideology to benefit themselves. A less religious world produced more mayhem. Nature abhors a vacuum. When the godless gained power the result was an epidemic of human misery unmatched in human history. Sain Paul was born a Jew and therefore is not a Christian.

We really need school vouchers so parents can once again raise their children as they see fit.

It would take me about 2 seconds to fire her.

Stakin also ate bread. That makes breadeaters responsible. But you were wrong anyhow. The 100 million includes only about 20 million from Stalin. Mao. Pot, Castro and others account for the rest. Try learning some history . The murders we speak of had no more to do about Christianity than they had about bread. They were all spawned from godless philosophies. Atheist ideology at its worst. Even atheist websites will admit Stalin, Pot and Mao were all atheists during the time they were in power. More importantly, Marx was an atheist, and the crimes of Pot, Stalin and Mao sprung directly from the godless philosophy of Marxism. Atheists are overwhelmingly liberal. That is convincing evidence they do not tend to be the logical beings they claim to be. The religion of secular humanism is the most foolish religion of all, and the only one that forces me to donate to their "church" (big government) A little info:

A bit of info: Then we have Karl Marx: "Religion is the opiate of the masses." An estimated 80 to a 100 million people died as a result of godless communism in the 20th Century. That is a fact. A dictator, whose favorite philosopher is most noted for his "God is dead" quote killed another 10 million plus. There is a reason that the enlightenment first arose in Protestant Christian nations and it is still those nations where the concept of individual liberty still thrives despite the attack on individual liberty by the irreligious left.

Actually the price is set by the law of supply and demand. Both the customer and the supplier influence prices. If profit margins are excessive new suppliers will enter the market. If profits are too low suppliers will leave the market. Each individual consumer has his own demand curve for a product. The price will tend to be equal to average costs plus a fair profit margin which depends upon risk factors.

We have also had conflicts in the ME with basically secular leaders such as Hussein and Khadaffi. Oil is the only reason we stir up passions against us in the Middle East. The Shiite and Sunnis are killing each other in Iraq because they know the winner will control economic assets and opportunities. If not for religion they would divide themselves into other groups such as communists and fascists.

False, wars are almost always the result of competition for scarce resources. Appeals to religious faith or nationalism makes recruiting easier. There would have been no 9/11 had there been no oil in the ME.

You need to get a life.

I'm like Jhonny , give me a spot on a river. Substitute a six pack for the weed.

Keeping a dog is just like keeping a gun. You have a responsibility to protect children from harm. Negligent homicide is definitely a proper charge hear.

She also had two bottles of wine and she is most likely stupid even when sober.

It is hard to beat Bubba's Beer and Boobie Bar.

You are gettin' perty old.