[sd_matt]

[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]

California is the home to Apple, the biggest, most successful company in the world. That fact blows a pretty massive hole in your theory that California regulations are stifling business.

If you are having trouble succeeding in California, why not move to a state or country where you can be successful? For instance, perhaps you would be more successful in the Gulf Coast region. Not everyone can make it here. There’s no shame in admitting that you can’t succeed in a regulatory environment that produced the largest, most successful company in the world.[/quote]
You are citing one example and applying it to the aggregate. I listen to NPR, Fox, Rush ect do this all day. What has been the aggregate effect on on CA?

[sd_matt]

[quote=BigGovernmentIsGood][quote=luchabee]perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
[/quote]

California is the home to Apple, the biggest, most successful company in the world. That fact blows a pretty massive hole in your theory that California regulations are stifling business.

If you are having trouble succeeding in California, why not move to a state or country where you can be successful? For instance, perhaps you would be more successful in the Gulf Coast region. Not everyone can make it here. There’s no shame in admitting that you can’t succeed in a regulatory environment that produced the largest, most successful company in the world.[/quote]
You are citing one example and applying it to the aggregate. I listen to NPR, Fox, Rush ect do this all day. What has been the aggregate effect on on CA?

[sd_matt]

If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).

I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.

LOL

[sd_matt]

If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).

I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.

LOL

[sd_matt]

If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).

I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.

LOL

[sd_matt]

If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).

I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.

LOL

[sd_matt]

If you are gonna quote Huffington Post about green energy then I’m gonna quote Rush Limbaugh about the ability of gays and women to serve in the military (While ignoring the experience of the Israeli Military).

I’ll bet you still haven’t watched the “Should Google go nuclear” video. Now I know why. The person who gives that presentation, Dr. Bussard, used to run Los Alamos. He is an actual scientist. You would rather listen to Ariana Huffington.

LOL

[sd_matt]

What I was saying about the third party earlier is that it is a good investment of sorts. In the short run you cause one party to lose but hopefully in the long run you cause that party to learn it’s lesson.

Love em or hate em this appears to be what the Tea Party threatens to do to the Republicans.

When you argue that you “cause the other side to win” you are thinking short term.

[sd_matt]

What I was saying about the third party earlier is that it is a good investment of sorts. In the short run you cause one party to lose but hopefully in the long run you cause that party to learn it’s lesson.

Love em or hate em this appears to be what the Tea Party threatens to do to the Republicans.

When you argue that you “cause the other side to win” you are thinking short term.

[sd_matt]

What I was saying about the third party earlier is that it is a good investment of sorts. In the short run you cause one party to lose but hopefully in the long run you cause that party to learn it’s lesson.

Love em or hate em this appears to be what the Tea Party threatens to do to the Republicans.

When you argue that you “cause the other side to win” you are thinking short term.

[sd_matt]

What I was saying about the third party earlier is that it is a good investment of sorts. In the short run you cause one party to lose but hopefully in the long run you cause that party to learn it’s lesson.

Love em or hate em this appears to be what the Tea Party threatens to do to the Republicans.

When you argue that you “cause the other side to win” you are thinking short term.

[sd_matt]

What I was saying about the third party earlier is that it is a good investment of sorts. In the short run you cause one party to lose but hopefully in the long run you cause that party to learn it’s lesson.

Love em or hate em this appears to be what the Tea Party threatens to do to the Republicans.

When you argue that you “cause the other side to win” you are thinking short term.

[sd_matt]

The side that loses is the side that learns. It’s a long-term investment. Of course I’m talking long term to Americans….never mind.

[sd_matt]

The side that loses is the side that learns. It’s a long-term investment. Of course I’m talking long term to Americans….never mind.

[sd_matt]

The side that loses is the side that learns. It’s a long-term investment. Of course I’m talking long term to Americans….never mind.

[Author]

Posts