Results 41 to 80 of 95
Thread: Presidential Debates
-
10-04-2012, 09:45 PM #41Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Location
- south Florida
- Posts
- 3,869
-
10-04-2012, 09:51 PM #42
-
10-04-2012, 10:49 PM #43Banned
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Californication
- Posts
- 5,656
-
10-04-2012, 10:51 PM #44
Man......politics are definitely not some members strong suits here...Glad to see some of you have well informed opinions though.
1) Pushing for a more secular society and religious neutral terms in government is not, in any way shape or form, advancing the Muslim faith. For one to make such an illogical jump honestly makes me question everything else that leaves that persons mouth hence forth. It simply means, that we are a country of many faiths, religions, and ideological beliefs, and to include statements about God in our official texts, songs, and on government buildings and print, in some ways ignores the diversity that is America. We are not a Christian nation, we are a representative Republic (likened to Democracy), with a strong capitolist model. I am a Christian, but I do not believe in legislating morality, that is a personal decision, whether or not someone wants to be 'moral'. People must follow the laws of the land, they must respect the rights of others and not cause harm, but other then that, people are free to be as immoral as they wish.
2) Yes, we would like to eliminate most government funded entitlements and welfare programs if possible. The reason? Charities are much better at providing those services than government, it is the idea of giving a hand up, rather then a hand out. Teaching people how to catch fish, not giving the the fish. There is a small minority of people in our country who are disabled in some shape or form, and a small safety net may be necessary, but the vast majority of those on entitlements are simply abusing the system. We want to end this abuse.
3) We have no choice but to shrink the size of the FEDERAL government. It has grown wildly out of control. Do you want to stimulate the economy? The best way to stimulate the economy, is to eliminate the Federal income tax completely, 0%. It is a FACT that if we could bring spending down to year 2000 levels, we would not need an income tax. This is a very achievable goal, but we have to put things on the table for cuts which would not ordinarily be. The Dept of Education must go, it has done nothing to better education in our country. The military budget does NOT need to be increased, in fact, we need to shutdown nearly half of the bases around the world, we simply cannot afford to have a military empire and maintain it, it is too costly, it leads to resentment around the world, it galvanizes the forces against us. I assure you, closing bases in obscure countries will not detract from our status as the most powerful military in the entire world.
I am a conservative Republican (a Ron Paul Republican), Im fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We need to spend less, tax less, and regulate less. We need to end the war on drugs, get the government out of peoples bedrooms, and leave the institution of marriage up to religious organizations, not the state. Right wing Christian fundamentalism hurts our cause more then any other single issue in the entire conservative Republican platform. We can still be staunch conservatives, without trying to legislate the minutiae of peoples personal lives and legislate personal responsibility.
The Federal government was designed under the 'framework' model. The Federal governments role is to provide for a strong national defense, to enforce contracts, and develop infrastructue. Aside from those three functions, all other powers should be reserved for the States respectively.
-
10-04-2012, 11:04 PM #45
......
Last edited by Rwy; 10-05-2012 at 12:38 PM.
-
10-04-2012, 11:05 PM #46
-
10-05-2012, 02:59 AM #47
I agree on the basis that we shouldn't legislate morality. My view is if liberty is to be maintained we are all free to exercise the actions we desire so as long as they do not infringe on the liberty of others. However, this does not mean we are required to sanction immorality...there is a difference.
Also, more importantly, on the basis of religion every man basis his decisions and actions on how he perceives all things in the world. Religious beliefs as well as the absence of religious beliefs shape how we see things and how we will react in most situations. The idea behind our government in regards to religion was simply to ensure no religions belief was deemed as the national religion, that no one was forced to participate in any religious activity they do not desire. It was not designed to force government officials to take their religious beliefs or the lack thereof and lay them aside as this is impossible based on what was mentioned above.
Last note, congress opens each session with a prayer and has since the first congress took office. To say this isn't part of our nations natural action is a bit off base.
Exactly, well said. One of my favorite examples of limiting entitlements is President Cleveland's veto of the TX Seed Bill that would have granted federal aid to a town in TX. They were in a drought and all the crops were ruined. People who opposed the president on this said it would ruin the TX farm town, people would die and starve. Cleveland stated that the people of TX should take care of TX, let them take care of each other. The proposed bill would have granted the state $10k of relief, a large amount at that time...the people of that town after the veto would then raise an enormous amount of money on their own far surpassing what the legislation asked for.
"I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and the duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit." Grover Cleveland
I don't really care if our military presence or size causes resentment any more than I care if people resent me for my own personal actions or statements. Do we need a powerful military? Absolutely...I'd rather have that and people hate us than the alternative. How much we need to actually spend on that I don't know. I do agree though the the Dept. of EDU needs to go....education should be taken care of at the state level. As for taxes, I'd love to see a flat tax rate across the board but we're still aways away from that happening.
Can't disagree with any of this.
-
10-05-2012, 08:35 AM #48
-
10-05-2012, 09:55 AM #49
I dont believe anything in the bold. And i def agree with both sides fear monger.I honestly believe on the right is more of the actual politicians doing it, as where on the left its more pundits. Not saying left politicians dont do it.
I agree welfare needs to be reformed. I think there is a ton of abuse in the system.
We both know Romney isnt letting molesters run day cares. That's the church
The debt doubled for lots of reasons. Yes part of it was Obama but not solely.
Why doesnt Romney get more specific on his plans?
To be honest i would have rather ed Hilary 4 years ago.
I would rather Chris Christy this year.If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-05-2012, 09:56 AM #50If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-05-2012, 10:11 AM #51
Please state opinions but no flaming. Stay within the rules
Thanks
-
10-05-2012, 11:08 AM #52
As a small business owner, it is that kind of thinking that scares the hell out of me. No way I could afford to cover health insurance for my employees. A few years ago, when things were better? Maybe. Now? We are barely keeping the doors open. I take money out of my savings to cover payroll sometimes. My story is anecdotal, but I know there are a lot of small business owners out there having the same problems I am. Business are closing their doors and bankruptcy is sky high. If money is tight with your employer, people will be laid off when he/she has to start paying for health insurance.
-
10-05-2012, 11:45 AM #53
-
10-05-2012, 11:51 AM #54
Think were missing the point if when health care use to be affordable but not its not. Way to many ppl want free healthcare costing ppl who pay for it a lot more each month.
I don't see what's so hard about no job no health care
-
10-05-2012, 11:56 AM #55
I think your insurance being tied to your job is a bad idea. If you leave your job you loose your insurance. So even if you quit to goto a better career you get dropped. And most new jobs dont offer insurance until your there 90 days. So you have to go 3 months with out insurance. Now if you get laid off and loose your insurance its even worse. So if it takes you 2 months to find a job then the 3 month wait your uninsured for 5 months. Also if you have a longer then 90 day gap in insurance you get a pre existing wait time.
If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-05-2012, 12:02 PM #56
Now that the unemployment finally fell below 8% do you think it will make a difference?
If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-05-2012, 12:05 PM #57
why are health care costs so high?
easily 80% of healthcare costs are spent on a patients last few weeks of life...............
........DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO ANYONE BESIDES MYSELF??????????????
-
10-05-2012, 12:06 PM #58
You have great points gixxer as always.I was just trying to make the point that healthcare is expensive now cause we are paying for illegals and jobless ppl.
I am not against helping but our country has way to many "what's the government going to give me" attitude.
I never thought mitt had a chance to win even with employment rate.
I am voting for mitt or not at all
-
10-05-2012, 12:10 PM #59Originally Posted by Times Roman
-
10-05-2012, 12:15 PM #60
I agree thats a huge part of it
I think a large part of the medical cost is that uninsured people use the emergency room as a primary doctor. And they never end up paying the bills. The hospital cost more to goto the a reg doctor and since the bills go unpaid we all have to pay more.
Here is a story about my wife. I was happy it happened to us but it is bullshit. When we were dating she had to goto the emergency room. She had some allergic reaction and her lips started to swell and we worried so we went. So the little triage and then waited. We waited so long the swelling went down and she felt fine. So we told them we were leaving and didnt need to see a doctor. She got a bill for over $700. all they did was take her temp and blood pressure and ask her why she was there. I called about the bill and they asked if she worked and had a green card. I said no she didnt have a green card and i supported her. They said if i write a letter stating that they will drop the bill to $75.00If people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-05-2012, 12:15 PM #61
My understanding is that starting in 2014 the tax credit will cover 50% of premiums.
My problem is that I have laid off lower income office workers (delivery person, receptionist) and now have only designers. This is a problem because in order to qualify for the benefit our employees must have annual wages below $50k a year.
-
10-05-2012, 01:08 PM #62
Pay some % under the table so they stay below 50k
-
10-05-2012, 03:16 PM #63
-
10-05-2012, 04:10 PM #64
Some very good points in this thread......my belief is that we need healthcare reform, the problem is that we are trying to give that control to Govt alone.....what a disaster....what is the answer.....free stuff ALWAYS costs someone. Maybe if Gov't regulated what the pharmas are doing that would be a start to lowering costs....there has got to be a happy medium somewhere......Like Gix mentioned, he would be happy to have a chance to pay for his healthcare if he could just GET it at all for a pre-existing......that's the sole reason most people line up behind Obamas plan with total disregard for the other 2000 unexplained pages of the reform. I'm not willing to crash an entire system and possibly economy to "find out later" what is in the reform bill.
I'm not concerned about Romney legislating morality on anyone, again this is more blather and BS from BOTH sides.
JV.....I feel your pain bro.....people think we're full of shit when they hear that a small business can't support that debt load on top of all the other requirements......keep your chin up and do your best. I used to support several families with my business now I support my own, but it WILL come back around if we can keep Washington from punishing us for being successful.
-
10-05-2012, 05:31 PM #65
Businesses have less money these days. We are working harder for fewer dollars. We are taking on projects that we previously would have turned away because of their tight margins. I have laid off half my employees in the past couple of years. Luckily that allowed us to also move into smaller office space. Cut, cut, cut.
I have cut 2/3 of my overhead since the downturn started. That is huge, and it is money that is no longer in the economy. I am spending less money on employees, health insurance (which I used to pay for), phone lines, rent, courier services, electricity, equipment, software, janitorial services, supplies, cell phone plans, office furniture...you name it and I am spending less money on it.
So, not only have I laid off employees, but the people I do business with like the health insurance company, phone company, landlord, couriers, computer and software companies, office cleaners, office supply workers, cell phone companies etc. are taking a hit as we all spend less.
People with secure jobs don't see how ugly it is out there.
-
10-05-2012, 05:33 PM #66
Well it will if it is combined with a renewed vigor in his next debate with Romney. The last time I saw a president during a presidential debate worry more about time on his watch, IE kept looking at it while in the debate, was George Bush 1 and he lost out to Clinton. So Obama needs to bring his A game with him next debate and anything is possible. I do honestly believe that if Republicans cannot regain the white house this election year, that they will no longer be able to get a Republican elected president ever again. As the sheer numbers are just no longer there. And with the naturalizing of all illegal mexicans now in the US, they overwhelmingly will vote democrat. So the masses in the US will be mostly democrat, unless the republicans start including the middle class within their hallowed grounds and stop ignoring and condemning them. Now if they decide to be inclusive then they still have a great shot at getting elected in the future elections. Otherwise it's over basically for them. The sooner Romney stops slamming American Auto industry and blue collar workers as he has been for some time, and include them and give them credit, then he may sway more over to his camp. But it didn't help for him to run around saying let the American Auto industry fail we don't need them. Besides we have China to build everything we need for us at a cheaper cost. And as we all know that has come back to bite us as America has lost Most of it's manufacturing base to China as well as a massive job loss that is historical in American History. Funny how these politicians fail to look at the bigger picture. Take away all American Jobs and who is left to buy the finished product when they reach our shores. If that wasn't a stupid move I don't know what is. Anyways no matter who gets elected, all we can do is hope they will truly help us all out and put America back on track to it's former glory days.
-
10-05-2012, 07:16 PM #67
Most people do not know enough about our healthcare system to really understand and make an informed decision.
Our healthcare system is ALREADY a psuedo-socialist system. Medicare, Medicaid, Tricare, etc. Some of the most destructive things to happen to healthcare was the HMO Act, ERISA, and EMTALA. Having government run insurance companies is detrimental to healthcare because it artifically drives reimbursements down, it does not allow for competition. It seems that everyone in this thread wants to point to finger "somewhere," its the insurance companies, or its the pharmaceutical companies who should get punished, its the hospitals and their outrageous costs, its the doctors salaries, etc, and so on.
I'll bullet my points so as to make them understandable. But let me make clear, it is absolutely false and disingenious when someone says that the "free market has failed healthcare." This is a fallacy, because we have not had a free market in American healthcare in over 50 years.
1.) Insurance, is supposed to cover catastrophic instances and accidents. It is not designed to cover every oil change, wiper blade change, tune up, and flat tire. In no other "insurance" arena, is this sort of thing possible or accepted. Americans need to fundamentally change what they EXPECT from health insurance. If health insurance behaved like all other types of insurance, covering only accidents and catastrophic illness, then premiums would go down drastically, and healthcare would be universally affordable to the large majority of society (excluding the working poor). To cover the gap between catastrophic illness and routine checkups, a tax free health savings account could be set up in order to cover doctors visits, etc. Of course, as always, those in poverty would still have a safety net of some sort. But a much better way to cover these people is via charitable organizations. It is a multi-faceted problem, if the cost of healthcare goes down, the number of insureds goes up, and the number of uninsured's goes down, then charities can once again afford to cover the small minority of people across the country who cannot afford even the cheapest insurance plans, as they did in times long past.
2.) We need to deregulate to allow for free market competition in healthcare. It is illegal for hospitals and doctors to advertise the prices of their procedures. PRICE TRANSPARENCY, is a key element to having a free market, and for having competition. Competition among healthcare providers is the only force that can truely drive prices down, whilst keeping quality up. It works in all other aspects of our society. You would not for instance, go to your grocery store, and have to pay for a consultation before being given an approximation of what the cost of your groceries would be, correct? It would be difficult for you to goto 4-5 grocery stores, and pay a consultation fee for each of them, just to find out the cost of a procedure.
3.) The profit motive. Many people want to demonize companies in one or more arenas of the healthcare system. Unfortunately, it is the profit motive which drives innovation and breakthroughs in healthcare. This is why a private company was able to map the human genome almost 2X faster than the government run entity. There are few things that the government does better than private enterprise, and I am hard pressed to even think of one. You can talk about punishing pharmaceutical companies, but who then will want to spend 800 million dollars in order to develop a drug which might not even work? Who will want to spend 12+ years in school&training to become a doctor if we reduce the amount that doctors can make? We have an enormous shortage of primary healthcare physicians, and why is this? Because reimbursements for routine checkups are at such lows, that most doctors can only make $90,000-$120,000/per year. Sure, this sounds like a lot, but not when you consider the amount of student loan debt these people are shouldering, hence why so many physicians choose lucrative specialties and sub-specialties, and why we import more and more of our PCP's. The ability to make profit, is the driving force behind all elements of our society (aside from charities), to think somehow that the healthcare market as a whole is divorced from this, is illogical and trite.
-
10-05-2012, 07:23 PM #68
^^^^ I say this all the time: health insurance is not the same thing as free health care. Also agree on price transparency and profit motive.
Of course, I agreed with your previous post as well, so no surprise.
-
10-05-2012, 08:02 PM #69
[QUOTE=JohnnyVegas;6197057]As a small business owner, it is that kind of thinking that scares the hell out of me. No way I could afford to cover health insurance for my employees. A few years ago, when things were better? Maybe. Now? We are barely keeping the doors open. I take money out of my savings to cover payroll sometimes. My story is anecdotal, but I know there are a lot of small business owners out there having the same problems I am. Business are closing their doors and bankruptcy is sky high. If money is tight with your employer, people will be laid off when he/she has to start paying for health insurance.[/QUOTE
i put blood sweat and tears into the company i work for i work long hours i dont take lunch when i get to work i don't stop working until I'm done I'm there number one guy and i bring in the most money and repeat customers because of my high quality of work and god forbid i have healthcare i could buy my own but the deductibles are so high its not worth it to also pay the monthly bill i got hurt last year and even know it was at work and it should have been my employer responsibility i pay the hospital bill of 4,000 out of my own pocket on a payment plan so please give me a break be nicer to your employees they pay your bills
-
10-06-2012, 12:02 AM #70
[QUOTE=frank13;6197769]You clearly do not understand economics. JohnnyVegas cannot afford to provide health insurance to his employees because of its prohibitive cost. He is left with the choice of keeping more people employed, or laying off even more people to provide what employees he might have left with health insurance. "Be nice to your employees," and other such sentiments are left-wing feel good phrases, but they ignore the pragmatical fiscal responsibilities of being a business owner. I am sure he would love to provide health insurance for ALL of his employees, but if he does so, and then in turn is unable to generate a profit because he has done so, the business goes under, and EVERYONE loses their jobs. So, do you think it is better for the economy and for those employees who in one of the worst economic downturns since the 1920s to have a job, or to not have a job? That is really the only two options. You're feel good sentiments are irrelevant compared to the reality of business and economics. I would say he is pretty nice to his employees when he has already mentioned that sometimes he is forced to go into his PERSONAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT, in order to make payroll. JohnnyVegas is a JOB CREATOR, he has responsibilities on his shoulders which you could not even fathom. Not only is his own survival and livelyhood of himself and is family resting squarely on his shoulders, but the livelyhood and survival of however many employees he keeps employed rest on his shoulders. Please, before you make such trite comments, walk a mile in his shoes. Comments like yours are the reason we conservative Republicans find most liberal Democrats to be so disconnected with the realities of economics, business, and entitlements. You feel like your employer "owes" you something, yet they provide you with a job and a paycheck.
If anyone had bothered to read what I wrote on health insurance, they would understand the benefits to lowering health insurance costs by having health insurance COVER LESS, meaning only catastrophic illness&accidents. The two fold benefit of lower premiums is also the ability for health insurance to NOT BE TIED TO EMPLOYMENT/EMPLOYERS. Health insurance should be something that an individual takes out on their own, just like life insurance or any other policy.
-
10-06-2012, 12:59 AM #71Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas
-
10-06-2012, 01:00 AM #72
Back to the debate. Mitts plan for are economy is so much better then obamas. If you don't agree watch the debate again. Mitt on others issues no, but the economy yes
-
10-06-2012, 01:48 AM #73Originally Posted by gearboxIf people can't tell your on steroids then your doing them wrong
-
10-06-2012, 03:15 AM #74Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Location
- south Florida
- Posts
- 3,869
If I had a dollar for every time The Godfather logs onto this forum and cleans house, I could buy all you motherfckers health insurance!
-
10-06-2012, 10:01 AM #75
Precisely. (Btw, I'm a J.D. as well, Godfather.) I tend to describe myself as a philosophical libertarian and vote according my views on economic and fiscal policy. This is because I think that the genesis of our personal liberties are so strongly tied to our individual economic freedoms. It would be deceptive for me to say that I'm socially liberal. I'm more, "Socially Don't Care". In other words, so long as what you're doing in the privacy of your home affects no one else, especially children, and I am not required to pay for such, then I don't care. I don't care if two lesbians get married, or if my neighbor lives his life as a pre-op female named Matilda Deecup, or even if you want to inject superphysiological doses of synthetic hormones into your body.
Thus, when Jim Demint says that conservative fiscal policy cannot be divorced from conservative social policy, the Senator from South Carolina might as well have the vocal cadence of Charlie Brown's teacher.
I'm no great fan of Mitt Romney, but from an objective vantage point, it seems rather unassailable to me that he's better versed in the machinations of economics and economic policy than President Obama.
Also, I can't wait for the Ryan/Biden debate. That carnage will be delicious.
-
10-06-2012, 11:29 AM #76
-
10-06-2012, 11:57 AM #77
-
10-06-2012, 12:45 PM #78
[QUOTE=thegodfather;6197981][QUOTE=frank13;6197769]
You clearly do not understand economics. JohnnyVegas cannot afford to provide health insurance to his employees because of its prohibitive cost. He is left with the choice of keeping more people employed, or laying off even more people to provide what employees he might have left with health insurance. "Be nice to your employees," and other such sentiments are left-wing feel good phrases, but they ignore the pragmatical fiscal responsibilities of being a business owner. I am sure he would love to provide health insurance for ALL of his employees, but if he does so, and then in turn is unable to generate a profit because he has done so, the business goes under, and EVERYONE loses their jobs. So, do you think it is better for the economy and for those employees who in one of the worst economic downturns since the 1920s to have a job, or to not have a job? That is really the only two options. You're feel good sentiments are irrelevant compared to the reality of business and economics. I would say he is pretty nice to his employees when he has already mentioned that sometimes he is forced to go into his PERSONAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT, in order to make payroll. JohnnyVegas is a JOB CREATOR, he has responsibilities on his shoulders which you could not even fathom. Not only is his own survival and livelyhood of himself and is family resting squarely on his shoulders, but the livelyhood and survival of however many employees he keeps employed rest on his shoulders. Please, before you make such trite comments, walk a mile in his shoes. Comments like yours are the reason we conservative Republicans find most liberal Democrats to be so disconnected with the realities of economics, business, and entitlements. You feel like your employer "owes" you something, yet they provide you with a job and a paycheck.
If anyone had bothered to read what I wrote on health insurance, they would understand the benefits to lowering health insurance costs by having health insurance COVER LESS, meaning only catastrophic illness&accidents. The two fold benefit of lower premiums is also the ability for health insurance to NOT BE TIED TO EMPLOYMENT/EMPLOYERS. Health insurance should be something that an individual takes out on their own, just like life insurance or any other policy.[/QUOTE
i understand economics just fine. He is left with the choice of keeping more people employed, or laying off even more people to provide what employees he might have left with health insurance well good get rid of dead weight and give health insurance to the people that deserve it the good workers "Be nice to your employees," ahh yea be nice to your employees they pay your bills right why not be nice to them left-wing who ever said i was left-wing walk a mile in his shoes been there i was a sub contractor for years i know what it like paying 35% in taxes insurance,liability insurance paying workers gas,supplies and so on trust me i know more so then the average man You feel like your employer "owes" you something, yet they provide you with a job and a paycheck what ?? well he doesn't pay me for fun i provide him with repeat customers good work and my expertise never had complaint about me or my work and all are work comes from word of mouth from jobs that i did god were talking tens of thousands of dollars i know there overhead is not that much they can't afford health insurance for me o well i guess they will not be able to go to the Bahamas this year i haven't taken a vacation in yearsLast edited by frank13; 10-06-2012 at 12:48 PM.
-
10-06-2012, 01:14 PM #79
[QUOTE=thegodfather;6196314]
I am a conservative Republican (a Ron Paul Republican), Im fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We need to spend less, tax less, and regulate less. We need to end the war on drugs, get the government out of peoples bedrooms, and leave the institution of marriage up to religious organizations, not the state. Right wing Christian fundamentalism hurts our cause more then any other single issue in the entire conservative Republican platform. We can still be staunch conservatives, without trying to legislate the minutiae of peoples personal lives and legislate personal responsibility.
Boy, you got that right. Were it not for them being so outspoken and completely trying to take over the party, I might have been a Republican myself. But not while they are in there on a tirade to kill all gays and blame all of our ill's on gays. Going so far off the chart as to tell us that even Hurricanes and Tornados are caused by yes Gays as well. Ask Pat Robertson. I have no issue with the Bible, just some people's interpretations of it to justify their hatred towards others. So I agree the religious right does hurt the Republican party more than help it. And it's a slippery slope on that part of Separation Of Church And State...
-
10-06-2012, 01:57 PM #80Originally Posted by frank13
This is not a matter of "being nice" to employees. This is a matter of reality. I have emptied a $100k savings account keeping the doors open and employing people when I couldn't afford them because I was nice and I care.
I don't want to get caught up in a labor/management debate where everyone thinks they are the key to a successful business. This is about economics and the bottom line. I have cut every expense I can (including selling my larger house and downsizing). I have still given raises to show appreciation. My employees make more money than I do at this point because being a business owner (or a good one, anyway) is oftentimes about sacrifice.
When one of my guys had lazic (sp?) I covered some of his expenses even though it was elective surgery. Don't think anyone that owns a business is a selfish dick that is just out to get rich on the backs of others...and I am not saying you DO think that, just giving perspective to anyone reading.
You seem like a good guy it sounds like any team would be lucky to have you. On the flip side, I assure you that there are good business owners out there too.
Sorry if there are typos and such...I am on my phone. Worst keyboard ever.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Zebol 50 - deca?
12-10-2024, 07:18 PM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS