bob13579

7 ms·

31.
by bob13579 13y ago
It should be considered a "special rule" because an exception would be made for Tesla, and no one else (including other small car manufacturers). Either let every car manufacturer sell directly or don't.
32.
by bob13579 13y ago
I'm responding directly to his "large corporate interests" talking point, when those large corporate interests are barred from selling directly.
33.
by bob13579 13y ago
Funny how you single out Texas for doing this. How is this different from other states?
34.
by bob13579 13y ago
Other car manufacturers can't sell directly. Why should Tesla get special rules?
35.
by bob13579 13y ago
Stock halted. Bracing for a crash. This will be bad.
36.
by bob13579 13y ago
You mean they're tearing down trees for new homes and jobs? The horror!
37.
by bob13579 13y ago
Are you implying that pharmaceutical companies would happily invest billions into a drug without patent protection?
38.
by bob13579 13y ago
Generic Lipitor is available at Walmart for $4.
39.
by bob13579 13y ago
It's quite unnerving that you're concluding things based on hearsay and innuendo. If you have actual evidence of that, please bring it.
40.
by bob13579 13y ago
Why? Because you don't agree with his conservative positions? The democracy voted for him. Is that not good enough for a "leadership position"?
41.
by bob13579 13y ago
You're already convicting him for murder based on contradicted conjecture?
42.
by bob13579 13y ago
Seems like a bait-and-switch. Horrible.
43.
by bob13579 13y ago
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120614184781756105.html
44.
by bob13579 13y ago
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124147831175584985.html
45.
by bob13579 13y ago
Sorry, but I don't feel like spending $7K+ in taxpayer subsidies to help a rich person get richer is wise fiscal policy for our nation. I know this might sound completely shocking to you.
46.
by bob13579 13y ago
The difference is that not one company is blatantly favored over another in those industries.
47.
by bob13579 13y ago
"But those people would be the same ones moaning about how much money we're wasting on NASA in 1964." http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias It's quite telling that you're ignoring the billions/trillions we've wasted on useless
48.
by bob13579 13y ago
What? The burden of proof is on you. What examples of non mainstream economics are you citing with the WSJ? Links to actual articles that prove your point, please.
49.
by bob13579 13y ago
You seriously have to be kidding about the non mainstream stuff. When have they advocated for a gold standard? Several prominent mainstream economists write for their op-eds, including Nobel laureates. I can't recall one Austrian.
50.
by bob13579 13y ago
What exact constitutional right is violated?
51.
by bob13579 13y ago
When has a Republican senator or representative been kicked out for voicing a differing opinion? I'm assuming, according to your logic, John McCain will be kicked out sometime soon for his vote yesterday? What about the Republican senator w
52.
by bob13579 13y ago
With the computation, they still find 0-30 debt/GDP, 4.2% growth; 30-60, 3.1 %; 60-90, 3.2%,; 90-120, 2.4% and over 120, 1.6% I wonder what you'll conclude with that data.
53.
by bob13579 13y ago
You're setting up a straw man. That's not my argument. The argument is that the data bolsters the claim that more debt correlates with slower growth.
54.
by bob13579 13y ago
The correction actually bolsters the claim that more debt leads to lower growth. 0-30 debt/GDP, 4.2% growth; 30-60, 3.1 %; 60-90, 3.2%,; 90-120, 2.4% and over 120, 1.6%
55.
by bob13579 13y ago
"acceptance and welcoming of diverse lifestyles" Does that include views of social conservatives or rich people?
56.
by bob13579 13y ago
How do you explain government rent-seeking, where there is no competition? Take government pensions or teacher unions for example.
57.
by bob13579 13y ago
Sorry, but law firms operate for-profit. Partners are the owners of those firms and don't give away their profits to charities at the end of every fiscal year. This is quite a ludicrous assertion. Several partners at top law firms pocket se