A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cameras at Reagan Funeral



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 15th 04, 11:24 AM
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"Bill Turner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:38:06 +0000 (UTC), Mike Engles
wrote:

For whatever reason the Federal budget was in huge deficit with

Reagan
and Bush1,was in excellent credit with Clinton and is now in

disastrous
deficit again with Bush2. The deficits have been caused by

unjustified
tax cuts and huge defence spending. The poor get poorer and the

rich....

Mike Engles


__________________________________________________ _______

Quite correct. Used to be that huge deficits were a characteristic

of
the Demos, now they're Republicans. A pox on both of them.

--
BT


During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they became more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class. The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and the rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All classes
got richer.


  #2  
Old June 15th 04, 08:48 PM
Rick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message .. .
During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they became more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class. The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and the rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All classes
got richer.


Unqualified bull****. During Reagan's eight years in office,
incomes of the top 5% of Americans rose 27%, while the
poorest 60% either had no rise or a drop in income:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/30471.php

Reagan funneled $3.5 TRILLION to his defense contractor
buddies while declaring ketchup to be a vegetable in school
lunch programs. He was an amoral monster, the likes of
which this country had never seen before.

Rick


  #3  
Old June 15th 04, 10:33 PM
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"Rick" wrote in message
...
"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message

.. .
During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they became

more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class. The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and the

rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All

classes
got richer.


Unqualified bull****. During Reagan's eight years in office,
incomes of the top 5% of Americans rose 27%, while the
poorest 60% either had no rise or a drop in income:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/30471.php

Reagan funneled $3.5 TRILLION to his defense contractor
buddies while declaring ketchup to be a vegetable in school
lunch programs. He was an amoral monster, the likes of
which this country had never seen before.

Rick


Wrong again.


  #4  
Old June 15th 04, 11:38 PM
David J. Littleboy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral


"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Rick" wrote in message
...
"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message

.. .
During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they became

more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class. The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and the

rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All

classes
got richer.


Unqualified bull****. During Reagan's eight years in office,
incomes of the top 5% of Americans rose 27%, while the
poorest 60% either had no rise or a drop in income:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/30471.php

Reagan funneled $3.5 TRILLION to his defense contractor
buddies while declaring ketchup to be a vegetable in school
lunch programs. He was an amoral monster, the likes of
which this country had never seen before.

Rick


Wrong again.


If he's wrong, provide some pointers _proving_ it. Just saying he's wrong
doesn't help. It sure looked as though he bankrupted the country, ran his
foreign policy illegally*, dropped $3.5 trillion into a defense scheme that
sounds completely unworkable to this computer scientist, cancelled the
alternative fuels programs started under Carter, resurrected the useless
bomber projects Carter thought he had killed.

*: I suspect that this is the reason Carter got hit with the oil crises and
Reagan didn't: he paid off various Middle East tyrants and dictators under
the table/off the record. He and Bush I kissed Hussein's ass right up to the
day before he invaded Kuwait.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


  #5  
Old June 16th 04, 03:06 AM
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
...
"Rick" wrote in message
...
"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message

.. .
During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income

households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they

became
more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class.

The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and

the
rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All

classes
got richer.

Unqualified bull****. During Reagan's eight years in office,
incomes of the top 5% of Americans rose 27%, while the
poorest 60% either had no rise or a drop in income:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/30471.php

Reagan funneled $3.5 TRILLION to his defense contractor
buddies while declaring ketchup to be a vegetable in school
lunch programs. He was an amoral monster, the likes of
which this country had never seen before.

Rick


Wrong again.


If he's wrong, provide some pointers _proving_ it. Just saying he's

wrong
doesn't help. It sure looked as though he bankrupted the country,

ran his
foreign policy illegally*, dropped $3.5 trillion into a defense

scheme that
sounds completely unworkable to this computer scientist, cancelled

the
alternative fuels programs started under Carter, resurrected the

useless
bomber projects Carter thought he had killed.

*: I suspect that this is the reason Carter got hit with the oil

crises and
Reagan didn't: he paid off various Middle East tyrants and dictators

under
the table/off the record. He and Bush I kissed Hussein's ass right

up to the
day before he invaded Kuwait.


Strange, you don't question Rick's statements when he disputes my
first post. The link he provided is nothing more than the biased
opinion of a liberal. Perhaps you agree with that opinion so you only
question mine which you don't agree with.

Consider these facts:

From '82 to '89 charitable contributions by corporations grew 10%,
higher than the rate of inflation.

Reagan's tax cuts benefited the lower income earners: the top fifth
of earners saw their taxes decrease by 9%, the middle three-fifths saw
a drop of 10%, the bottom fifth a drop of 275% (many bottom earners
not only had no tax liability but they received government money
through earned income credits.

Income levels for the poorest fifth of the population rose 10.4%,
second lowest fifth saw a rise of 9.5%, the middle fifth saw an
increase of 11.7%, the second wealthiest fifth saw a rise of 12.2 %,
and the top fifth saw an increase of 13.6%.

Poverty decreased by 1.1%

From '82 to '88 there were 16.7 million new jobs created. Of those
new jobs, 32% went to blacks and Hispanics even though those only
comprised 19% of the workforce. In '89 the unemployment rates for
blacks was 11.4%, down from 20.4% from '82. The rate for Hispanics
was 8%, down from 15.3% from '82. Between '82 and '90, the
unemployment rate for blacks dropped 9 percentage points, for
Hispanics the drop was 7.3 percentage points, and for whites the drop
was 4.5 percentage points.

From '82 to '87 there was an increase in black-owned businesses of 38%
while the total increase overall in the US was 14%. Their business
receipts rose 105% while the rate of inflation was 4 percent.

Upper-income tax payers ($40,000+) saw their overall tax burden
increase by approximately 45% while those below that level saw their
burden drop by an equivalent amount.

The choice is yours as to what facts you want to believe.


  #6  
Old June 16th 04, 12:21 PM
William Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

There was a study published in the Wall Street Journal several years ago
that disputed this myth that the "poor got poorer and the rich got richer"

The answer lies in the clustering of people into income groups and comparing
the average income in those clusters, which skews the results.

The WSJ study was a very comprehensive study of a large number of
individuals and tracked them over time (not just the Reagan years, but for
much longer) They broke the population into quintiles and tracked the
incomes of the individuals.

What they found was that there was a tremendous amount of movement of real
individuals between the quintiles, even though one of the quintiles average
income may have risen or dropped, the people who were in that quintile were
very different. Things like students graduating and getting job and
progressing through their careers moved them up. Things like people
changing careers or retiring moved them down. The surprising thing, to me
at least, was that there was nearly as much mobility in/out of the top
quintile as there was into/out of the bottom quintile.

It was a fascinating read, unfortunately I didn't save it.


All in all, the rising tide of the 80s gave a great increase to the incomes
in this country. You can try to deny it but the facts don't support your
claims. Dig a little deeper into the facts and you 'll see that the
assertions that the claim that the "rich got richer and the poor got
poorer" just doesn't fly.


"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...

During the Reagan years, the percentage of low income households
dropped. There was a shrinking of the middle class - they became

more
upwardly mobile and were pushed into the high income class. The
oft-repeated drivel - an lie - that the poor got poorer and the

rich
got richer during the Reagan years is a tired old line. All

classes
got richer.

Unqualified bull****. During Reagan's eight years in office,
incomes of the top 5% of Americans rose 27%, while the
poorest 60% either had no rise or a drop in income:
http://houston.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/30471.php



Wrong again.


If he's wrong, provide some pointers _proving_ it. Just saying he's wrong
doesn't help. It sure looked as though he bankrupted the country, ran his
foreign policy illegally*, dropped $3.5 trillion into a defense scheme

that
sounds completely unworkable to this computer scientist, cancelled the
alternative fuels programs started under Carter, resurrected the useless
bomber projects Carter thought he had killed.

*: I suspect that this is the reason Carter got hit with the oil crises

and
Reagan didn't: he paid off various Middle East tyrants and dictators under
the table/off the record. He and Bush I kissed Hussein's ass right up to

the
day before he invaded Kuwait.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan




  #7  
Old June 16th 04, 06:47 PM
Roman Sionus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

Bill Turner wrote:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:48:42 -0700, "Rick" wrote:

He was an amoral monster, the likes of
which this country had never seen before.


__________________________________________________ _______

Naaaaah... we've seen the like lots of times.

--
BT

Not to mention a first-classed Idiot. He was only a puppet. It's really
funny to watch the video collages various people have put together.
Things like his " Win one for the gipper...",or, " Go ahead, make my
day...". The same tired cliches over and over.
He was a Moron. AND, again, only a puppet.
He fell asleep at CABINET meetings, FuhGawdsSake.
The current guy is just the same. His strings aren't QUITE so obvious,
though.
Again, this has....WHAT, exactly, to do with Digital Photography?
  #8  
Old June 16th 04, 10:10 PM
Peter A. Stavrakoglou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"William Jackson" wrote in message
...
There was a study published in the Wall Street Journal several years

ago
that disputed this myth that the "poor got poorer and the rich got

richer"

The answer lies in the clustering of people into income groups and

comparing
the average income in those clusters, which skews the results.

The WSJ study was a very comprehensive study of a large number of
individuals and tracked them over time (not just the Reagan years,

but for
much longer) They broke the population into quintiles and tracked

the
incomes of the individuals.

What they found was that there was a tremendous amount of movement

of real
individuals between the quintiles, even though one of the quintiles

average
income may have risen or dropped, the people who were in that

quintile were
very different. Things like students graduating and getting job and
progressing through their careers moved them up. Things like people
changing careers or retiring moved them down. The surprising thing,

to me
at least, was that there was nearly as much mobility in/out of the

top
quintile as there was into/out of the bottom quintile.

It was a fascinating read, unfortunately I didn't save it.


All in all, the rising tide of the 80s gave a great increase to the

incomes
in this country. You can try to deny it but the facts don't support

your
claims. Dig a little deeper into the facts and you 'll see that the
assertions that the claim that the "rich got richer and the poor

got
poorer" just doesn't fly.


All the facts in the world won't change some people's minds. They
can't get off the liberal mantra that the Reagan-haters still spew.
They keep repeating the lies hoping someone will eventually believe
it - and it works unfortunately.


  #9  
Old June 16th 04, 11:21 PM
Steve Andrew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
"William Jackson" wrote in message
...


snipped
..
They keep repeating the lies hoping someone will eventually believe
it - and it works unfortunately.


It certainley work for Bush II



  #10  
Old June 17th 04, 01:20 AM
Rick
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cameras at Reagan Funeral

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message ...
All the facts in the world won't change some people's minds. They
can't get off the liberal mantra that the Reagan-haters still spew.
They keep repeating the lies hoping someone will eventually believe
it - and it works unfortunately.


Liberal mantra? When Reagan took office the U.S. was the
world's largest creditor nation. By the time he left office the
U.S. was the world's largest debtor nation, and we remain so
to this day. Ask anyone to refute this fact.

Rick


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
digital cameras and flash = poor image quality?? michaelb Digital Photography 25 July 3rd 04 08:35 AM
W.A.R.N.I.N.G....Digital cameras cause cancer Jorge Prediguez Digital Photography 17 July 2nd 04 04:10 AM
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash elchief In The Darkroom 3 April 7th 04 10:20 AM
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? Michael Weinstein, M.D. In The Darkroom 13 January 24th 04 10:51 PM
Cameras Cameras decisions. [email protected] Film & Labs 2 January 22nd 04 08:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.