whitev70r

Kona Lava Dome modded with MZ Race shocks, front discs, monkey handlebars, stem and headset.

I'm curious but don't have an hour to kill. I got the gist from watching the first few minutes. As for whether government would lie, concoct stories to dupe the public, two names: Jessica Lynch, Pat Tillman.

The new 2008 V70's will have a 285 hp six cylinder option. At least engine wise, a 'stealth' R (short 15 hp) and it looks like they all come with dual exhaust.

So, what did they do with all the ones that they didn't sell? Any chance there would be a fire sale on 2006/07 R's?

I found the article by Robert Rector, written in 1998, "The Myth of Widespread Poverty", the one that you quoted from Heritage Foundation. And it dawned on me that we come from 2 fundamentally different presuppostions, probably best summarized by the sources that we quote, yours - Heritage Foundation, mine - New Economics Foundation. Heritage Foundation - Our Mission: Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institute - a think tank - whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. New Economics Foundation - Mission: NEF is an independent think-and-do tank that inspires and demonstrates real economic well-being. We aim to improve quality of life by promoting innovative solutions that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, environment and social issues. We work in partnership and put people and the planet first. I think we've put enough information out there for people to make their own conclusions. Doesn't look like you or I will change our positions dramatically. Guess we will just have to agree to disagree. ***** This just in, from USA Today, Feb 25, 2007: In US, Record Number ar Plunged into Poverty WASHINGTON (AFP) — The gulf between rich and poor in the United States is yawning wider than ever, and the number of extremely impoverished is at a three-decade high, a report out Saturday found. Based on the latest available U.S. census data from 2005, the McClatchy Newspapers analysis found that almost 16 million Americans live in "deep or severe poverty" defined as a family of four with two children earning less than 9,903 dollars — one half the federal poverty line figure. For individuals the "deep poverty" threshold was an income under 5,080 dollars a year. "The McClatchy analysis found that the number of severely poor Americans grew by 26% from 2000 to 2005," the U.S. newspaper chain reported. "That's 56% faster than the overall poverty population grew in the same period," it noted. The surge in poverty comes alongside an unusual economic expansion.

Is 18% nationally in the US high enough for you? AND in this short summary below, it also addresses your other implied assumptions, the relationship between children in poverty and parenting or 'parental responsibility'. Taken from National Center for Children in Poverty - Article: The New Poor In 2004, approximately 18 percent of all children in the United States lived in poverty. Over the last five years, child poverty has risen substantially, increasing by 12 percent. After hitting a low of 12.1 million children in 2000, more than 1.4 million children have been added to the poverty rolls, becoming members of this country’s “new poor.” Children who grow up in poverty experience significant hardships that can have lasting effects well into adulthood. At the national level, family characteristics have had little relationship with whether children experienced increasing poverty between 2000 and 2004. Overall, increases in U.S. child poverty did not vary by parents’ employment status, parents’ education level, or parents’ nativity. These national statistics mask varying economic realities across regions. This report examines regional differences in the family characteristics of children who have seen the greatest rise in poverty. During the last five years, children living in the Midwest experienced the biggest increases in child poverty, accounting for 43 percent of the national rise in the number of poor children. At the same time, poverty did not increase among children living in the West. 18% is approximatley 13 million children in the US that live in Poverty. I am actually Canadian and our numbers are about the same, hovering 20% or 1 in 5. Another article by the Nat'l Center for Children in Poverty: Article: Who Are the Poor?

Precisely, sometimes I think you have to have some writers/thinkers on the 'extreme' side in order to bring the other perspective to some sort of moderation or balance. It's like a pendulum, they are far left, US is far right ... that's why I proposed some models in the middle.

"There are NO children in America who go to school hungry?" I've met some. In order for you to know that none exist, you would have to know all the children in America. "Homeless because they choose to be so." Again, that is a huge assumption and generality that demonstrate your lack of personal awareness of homeless people. You, on the other hand, are using archaic ways of measuring the overall success of a country, namely only economic indicators. The GNP is not the only indicator of the quality of life. New Economics take into consideration factors like labour, environment, family, leisure, voluntarism, community involvement, education, children's well being, health care, poverty, homelessness, etc. In fact, in almost all cases, the higher the GNP of a country, the worst the rest of the indicators are, including quality of life. I invite you to join the 21st century of economics. New Economics Foundation Link to Information Real World Economics – New Economics Foundation The international economic system creates damaging inequalities between rich and poor, and fuels climate change and environmental degradation. Through Real World Economic Outlook, nef aims to expose the problems with the international finance and economic systems and create appropriate remedies. We are also researching and campaigning on changes to global governance to tackle international issues like climate change, and work by jubilee research continues nef’s pioneering involvement in tackling international debt. transforming markets goes beyond corporate responsibility to set out a new vision for harnessing and channelling enterprise to meet social and environmental need Well Being – New Economics Foundation NEF NEF's leading aim is to create a new economy that serves people and the planet. We want to begin to redefine "wealth" and "progress": to judge our systems and economies on how much they create the world we actually want, rather than how much money they generate. NEF's well-being programme was set up to find ways to promote policies and practical solutions that help people live more fulfilled lives. Our people in public services, timebanks and participation and democracy projects aim to put people back at the centre of their services and communities and decision-making over what affects their lives. Finally, a ranking of 21 different countries on Child Well Being, Sweden - 2nd; US - 18th

No one is suggesting that as an option. What about Sweden, the land of our Volvos. Sweden runs on a socialist government and they consistently outperform US in every category that ranks quality of life. Not looking for a marxist nation, just not the present capitalistic one where there is such high levels of poverty with children going to school hungry in America's, homelessness, such rampant consumerism, and of course crazy stupid foreign policies.

I've come across Chomsky and some of his writings. I think he is a prophet, someone speaking from America who has a critical and intelligent voice whom we should listen to and think about.

'allows for self determination when it is in our best interest, or in the interests of that region' ... wow, that is really kind, generous, and gracious of the US. Thank you. As for 'proactively changing unfriendly hostile regimes to those which better suit our interest', my interpretation is that the change was for the better of the people of that country involved as well, could you name, say three in the last 100 years ... not including Iraq, of course, the one that is going so well presently.

Wow! You are kooky, you said we could call you that if we want. 1. Democracy I thought, meant that people were entitled to their own beliefs, religion, and cultural values. Why does the US, a democratic country, insist on being 'undemocratic' in that other people cannot have whatever worldview/religious/cultural beliefs that they want, including iron-fisted theocracy? Unless democracy has been distorted to mean the imposition of all nations to the Western capitalistic democracy of the US. 2. If the US had better foreign policy, ie. you leave Iran alone, do not provoke them, nor impose American values on them, steal their oil, I highly doubt that they will nuke the US for no reason other than religious extremism. Think about it. Why are there never any talks about Iran wanting to nuke Sweden. Ans: because Sweden doesn't piss people off through their international foreign policy. In other words, there is good reason for Iranian hostility towards the US and other Western countries. I think the majority of Iranians are like you and me, it is not fair to paint Iranians as extremists any more than to paint all Americans like Timothy McVeigh. Even you said that it was an extreme form of Islam. Iranians in general (not extremists) are nice people. They want to provide for their families, they want to put food on the table, they want security and a roof over their heads just like you and me. 3. You can't fault people for wanting to die for their own freedom and religious views. US and Canada were built on the backs of those who were not afraid to die in battle for what they believe in. In the unfortunately reality of war, you would want someone who is not afraid to die ... for their country. Why do we see our soldiers willingness to die as a good thing and the 'other side's' soldier's willingness to die as some sort of evil? ... again extremists aside, cuz extremists whether they are Iraqi, Iranian or American should be dealt with. Violence begets violence.

So what if Iran is supplying Iraq with arms? The other half of Iraq's artillery is probably made in US, they probably supplied it to the Iraqi insurgents years ago when they wanted them to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Kind of like US fighting the Al Quada in Afghanistan, each shooting missiles made in US at each other. What else are you going to do when US military factories are making all these missiles and bombs and they are stocking up ... especially if you, the president and/or vice president have vested interest in these huge military companies/factories. And oh ... for some of you who think the Middle East are 'stupid' ... from the rest of the world's point of view AND a large % of people IN the US, this administration is STUPID. It wouldn't surprise me if Bush did put his Texan cowboy hat on and try something STUPID with Iran ... oh, and Mr. Bush, don't forget North Korea, afterall, we declared you the keeper of peace and democracy of the human race. He got whooped by the Democrats in the last midterm elections he comes up with a brilliant idea ... 'let's increase troops to Iraq'. What will it take for him to get the message? Read Thucydides, history is replaying itself, democracy is a wonderful country but the US definitely losing moral ground internationally.

Dudes, bring back Al Gore, he seems like the most balanced individual with some common sense. He is the sleeper candidate if he chooses to run, defeat Clinton for the nomination and maybe this time he will win what he narrowly 'lost' - the incident that started this stupid Bush era.