Roger H

Why would he want to and why, with so many accomplices, hasn't one blown the whistle on the plot? Where's the "smoking gun"?

In America, whites have 26 times the wealth of African-Americans. So says census data.

Not 26% more. Not twice as much. Twenty six times as much. Specifically, the median household wealth (net worth) for white, non-hispanic housholds in 2009 was $149,900, and the median household wealth for African-Americans was $5,677.

These numbers confirm just how hard the Great Recession has whacked minority households.

But there is a deeper issue. Can someone please explain to me how, in a country where we are told again and again that we are “all created equal,” after 150 years, one group ends up with 26 times more capital resources than the other?

MLK’s dream was that his four young children would “one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” What are we supposed to think – that one group has twenty six times as much character as another?

Have we really achieved racial equality?

When answering, please identify the state where you were born.

In America, whites have 26 times the wealth of African-Americans. So says census data.

Not 26% more. Not twice as much. Twenty six times as much. Specifically, the median household wealth (net worth) for white, non-hispanic housholds in 2009 was $149,900, and the median household wealth for African-Americans was $5,677.

These numbers confirm just how hard the Great Recession has whacked minority households.

But there is a deeper issue. Can someone please explain to me how, in a country where we are told again and again that we are “all created equal,” after 150 years, one group ends up with 26 times more capital resources than the other?

MLK’s dream was that his four young children would “one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” What are we supposed to think – that one group has twenty six times as much character as another?

Have we really achieved racial equality?

When answering, please identify the state where you were born.

In America, whites have 26 times the wealth of African-Americans. So says census data.

Not 26% more. Not twice as much. Twenty six times as much. Specifically, the median household wealth (net worth) for white, non-hispanic housholds in 2009 was $149,900, and the median household wealth for African-Americans was $5,677.

These numbers confirm just how hard the Great Recession has whacked minority households.

But there is a deeper issue. Can someone please explain to me how, in a country where we are told again and again that we are “all created equal,” after 150 years, one group ends up with 26 times more capital resources than the other?

MLK’s dream was that his four young children would “one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” What are we supposed to think – that one group has twenty six times as much character as another?

Have we really achieved racial equality?

When answering, please identify the state where you were born.

I've heard it was an economic theory from the 70's. True?

Then why do all other Republican presidential candidates and most other Republican congressmen and women oppose getting our troops out of Iraq?

If it's actually the Democratic Party, why do I see so many conservatives on YA refer to it otherwise? Conversely, why do the liberals call it the Democratic Party.

"Extremism is so easy. You've got your position, and that's it. It doesn't take much thought. And when you go far enough to the right you meet the same idiots coming around from the left." — Clint Eastwoo

Moral hazard occurs when a party insulated from risk behaves differently than it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk.

Moral hazard arises because an individual or institution does not take the full consequences and responsibilities of its actions, and therefore has a tendency to act less carefully than it otherwise would, leaving another party to hold some responsibility for the consequences of those actions.

For example, a person with insurance against automobile theft may be less cautious about locking his or her car, because the negative consequences of vehicle theft are (partially) the responsibility of the insurance company.

Is today's woman less cautious concerning pregnancy because of contraceptives, and ultimately, child support payments?

From the Assange case, we learn that in Sweden, not wearing a condom after a woman consented to sex with a condom is, apparently, a sex offense.  If that is so, shouldn't it also be a sex offense when a woman lies about taking birth control? Doesn't it have to cut both ways? And why aren't men, saddled with 18 years of child support after a woman "forgot" to take the pill she said she'd taken, lodging criminal complaints on that basis?

Husband Store

A store that sells new husbands has opened in New York City , where a woman may go to choose a husband. Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates:

You may visit this store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the value of the products increase as the shopper ascends the flights. The shopper may choose any item from a particular floor, or may choose to go up to the next floor, but you cannot go back down except to exit the building!

So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband. On the first floor the sign on the door reads:

Floor 1 - These men Have Jobs

She is intrigued, but continues to the second floor, where the sign reads:

Floor 2 - These men Have Jobs and Love Kids.

'That's nice,' she thinks, 'but I want more.'

So she continues upward. The third floor sign reads:

Floor 3 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, and are Extremely Good Looking.

'Wow,' she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going.

She goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads:

Floor 4 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Good Looking and Help WithHousework.

'Oh, mercy me!' she exclaims, 'I can hardly stand

it!'

Still, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads:

Floor 5 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Gorgeous, Help with Housework, and Have a Strong Romantic Streak.

She is so tempted to stay, but she goes to the sixth floor, where the sign reads:

Floor 6 - You are visitor 31,456,012 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store.

PLEASE NOTE:

To avoid gender bias charges, the store's owner opened a New Wives store just across the street.

The first floor has wives that love sex.

The second floor has wives that love sex and have money and like beer.

The third, fourth, fifth and sixth floors have never been visited.

Husband Store

A store that sells new husbands has opened inNew York City , where a woman may go to choose a husband. Among the instructions at the entrance is a description of how the store operates:

You may visit this store ONLY ONCE! There are six floors and the value of the products increase as the shopper ascends the flights. The shopper may choose any item from a particular floor, or may choose to go up to the next floor, but you cannot go back down except to exit the building!

So, a woman goes to the Husband Store to find a husband. On the first floor the sign on the door reads:

Floor 1 - These men Have Jobs

She is intrigued, but continues to the second floor, where the sign reads:

Floor 2 - These men Have Jobs and Love Kids.

'That's nice,' she thinks, 'but I want more.'

So she continues upward. The third floor sign reads:

Floor 3 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, and are Extremely Good Looking.

'Wow,' she thinks, but feels compelled to keep going.

She goes to the fourth floor and the sign reads:

Floor 4 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Good Looking and Help WithHousework.

'Oh, mercy me!' she exclaims, 'I can hardly stand

it!'

Still, she goes to the fifth floor and the sign reads:

Floor 5 - These men Have Jobs, Love Kids, are Drop-dead Gorgeous, Help with Housework, and Have a Strong Romantic Streak.

She is so tempted to stay, but she goes to the sixth floor, where the sign reads:

Floor 6 - You are visitor 31,456,012 to this floor. There are no men on this floor. This floor exists solely as proof that women are impossible to please. Thank you for shopping at the Husband Store.

PLEASE NOTE:

To avoid gender bias charges, the store's owner opened a New Wives store just across the street.

The first floor has wives that love sex.

The second floor has wives that love sex and have money and like beer.

The third, fourth, fifth and sixth floors have never been visited.

I recently read an article in the local newspaper that a lawsuit against our town was being dropped because the man who sued, moved away, making the suit moot. The man had sued because he was on the national sex offenders registry and was prevented from moving in with either of his sisters here because both of their houses were within 4,000 feet of a school (local ordinance). Later in the article it was revealed that the man was 42 and unmarried, had a menial job, and GET THIS, he had been convicted of statutory rape at age 16 because he had consensual intercourse with his girlfriend who was 13 at the time.

Being somewhat taken aback, I asked a local police chief about this sort of thing and he just shook his head and told me that the sex offenders registry creates a huge problem because those men who are on it are absolute social outcasts. They must register with the local law enforcement agency, inform prospective employers, and inform neighbors. Thus, they are pariahs to their neighbors, rarely marry, are rejected for higher education, have little chance of meaningful employment, and are relegated to outlying areas of their communities. Their lives being ruined, they sometimes turn to crime as the only way to "get ahead", if you can call it that.

However, just being falsely accused can ruin a man's life also, even though he may not be convicted. Many lose their jobs, businesses, and even families. But worse, they lose their good reputations within their communities regardless. We know the awful devastation caused to victims of rape, but which is worse?

I recently read an article in the local newspaper that a lawsuit against our town was being dropped because the man who sued, moved away, making the suit moot. The man had sued because he was on the national sex offenders registry and was prevented from moving in with either of his sisters here because both of their houses were within 4,000 feet of a school (local ordinance). Later in the article it was revealed that the man was 42 and unmarried, had a menial job, and GET THIS, he had been convicted of statutory rape at age 16 because he had consensual intercourse with his girlfriend who was 13 at the time.

Being somewhat taken aback, I asked a local police chief about this sort of thing and he just shook his head and told me that the sex offenders registry creates a huge problem because those men who are on it are absolute social outcasts. They must register with the local law enforcement agency, inform prospective employers, and inform neighbors. Thus, they are pariahs to their neighbors, rarely marry, are rejected for higher education, have little chance of meaningful employment, and are relegated to outlying areas of their communities. Their lives being ruined, they sometimes turn to crime as the only way to "get ahead", if you can call it that.

However, just being falsely accused can ruin a man's life also, even though he may not be convicted. Many lose their jobs, businesses, and even families. But worse, they lose their good reputations within their communities regardless. We know the awful devastation caused to victims of rape, but which is worse?

Has this area been studied or are the figures cited in feminist literature just opinions?

Has this area been studied or are the "facts" given by police just opinions?

Sometime between now and December 31, Congress will vote to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich, or Obama tax cuts for the middle class. In the case of the Bush tax cuts, this money will go to the high and mighty. The top 1% of taxpayers -- people with more than $1.3 million a year -- will receive an average of $83,347 in tax breaks.

Here are some possibilities of what those masters of the universe can buy, with their new government welfare:

- A brand-new Mercedes Benz E-Class car, $83,000. Every single year. And each year, they can give the "old" one to a spouse, a girlfriend, whoever.

- A Hermes "Birkin" handbag, $64,800. (Actually, though, if you need to know how much it costs, then you can't afford it.)

- Chateau d'Yquem wine from 1787, $56,588. That will leave each one with around $25,000 of loose change in their pockets. Enough for a nice lunch, maybe.

- 20,000 jars of Grey Poupon. So when people ask, "excuse me, sir, but do you have any Grey Poupon," the answer is "Yes!"

- 800 luxury cigars. One for the morning, and one for the evening, every single day. But how will they light them? Each one, with a $100 bill. That costs only $73,000 a year. Ah.

Thank you, Congress. You're letting the rich in this country enjoy two cigars a day, each lit by a $100 bill.

Now I have a question for you. What do you suggest that the wealthy purchase with their Welfare? What new toys for the idle rich? A Mercedes? A Hermes bag? Cigars? They need your ideas, because they will all have so much more of our money.

How do we judge a president's ability to balance the many considerations of the immediate needs of business and citizens, with the long term welfare of the country. So what is Fiscal Responsibility? Does the definition differ between the major political parties?

It's estimated that in Obama's first term of office, the National Debt will increase 28%. If he extends the Bush tax cuts, it will total much more. Yet economists advocate deficit spending, whether tax cuts or increased budgets to ease the effects of recessions and this is a big one. His detractors, however, accuse him of irresponsibly driving up the National Debt to unmanageable levels. So, is it he, or is another president in our recent past the most fiscally irresponsible?

For comparison, here are the debt increases of other presidents by term: Carter -7.6%, Reagan1 57%, Reagan2 41%, Bush 38%, Cilnton1 16%, Clinton2 -2.3%, W1 22%, 2 41%