Joshua

Actually, some of the items they're putting in the stimulus bill are replicas of ideas I've been proposing to politicians for months, such as capping CEO salaries for bailed out companies, and a 'Buy American' campaign - which by the way I gave up on because I realized it wasn't practical. Obviously, I'm now suggesting the minimum wage-based tariff instead. At any rate, it all turned out for the best, since Congress didn't let that go through, but instead replaced it with a restriction that all public works programs under the new stimulus bill must use goods manufactured in America - which by the way I agree with, and wish I'd thought of it. Point is, Congress is more than willing to help this stuff go through, and even though big business and CEOs are protesting, the concern over the economy is getting this stuff through right now. What's more, there's a huge amount of support from the public for both those measures, so why not even more of my ideas as well? Oh, and by the way, I'm now suggesting a 15% cap on home interest rates as well. I think it could help stop the predatory lending that got us into this housing crisis in the first place. Interest rates really shouldn't get that high anyway, and only hidden clauses in contracts can really explain them getting that high, at least from what I understand.

And as one of those who voted against him in 2004, how much do you think we, the American people, could do about it? There were mass protests in the U.S. against the war. https://www.serve.com/nukeresister/135daybyday.html

Fair enough, and all valid criticisms, but ones I've already thought about - in depth. However, if it is protectionism, who is it protecting? Not just America - but workers worldwide. You see, many of the countries who are trade partners with the U.S. and have drastically lower minimum wages are not European at all - China, Venezuela, the Koreas, Saudi Arabia... In short, countries known for human rights abuses feel few qualms about providing lower minimum wages, since it then attracts more corporations interested in cheap labor, more business. Who does free trade help? The poor workers in China getting 50 cents an hour? What results is lower wages worldwide, so that communist dictatorships who don't protect their people with decent minimum wages are empowered, and the profits go increasingly to companies - not workers. America can defend this policy by pointing out that leaves off 10% of the difference to cover transportation costs between countries, and that those countries with low or no minimum wages ought to be protecting their people better ANYWAY. Who will America anger with such a policy? Its allies? Unlikely. Those few countries with higher minimum wages than America are almost exclusively European. http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ It is the countries who already dislike America, such as China, Russia, and Venezuela who will dislike this move. Those with whom America has the closest ties are almost overwhelmingly the ones with equivalent minimum wages. And it is those countries, China in particular, who have been most benefiting from disproportionate trade balances with the U.S.A. China is one of the two neck-and-neck trade partners with the U.S., Canada being the other, and is the one taking away manufacturing jobs from both the U.S. and Canada - as another poster just pointed out. This bill could create incentive for other countries to follow America's lead, so that China and other communist countries will treat their workers better, provide minimum wages, and thus their workers will not keep getting paid slave wages. Again, I think China, Russia, and North Korea will be the ones angered by this, whereas European countries if anything, will likely follow suit with their own similar tariffs. It might eliminate trade with those communist countries, but hardly disrupt worldwide trade. And I think it could be argued that China and North Korea are ALREADY dangerous, and ALREADY dislike America. Agreed. Many of the soldiers would likely have to be involved in a massive public works program. I'd imagine some could be used as support for the national guard, or even police/border reserves. However, it won't be as difficult to fund as you'd think. You see, we're ALREADY spending 600 billion for the military, and only 130 billion of that is on the actual soldiers. The rest goes to procurement of military services, building equipment, etc. We're ALREADY paying them, we'd just be paying them now to be inside our country, instead of out of iit, and to actually work on our own economy - rather than economies overseas. http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ Actually exiting those countries will mean we spend less, since we don't have to buy the military equipment anymore (and what we have built can be stocked away), don't have to transport soldiers and goods around the world, don't have to quarter soldiers in foreign countries, etc. Plus, the money the soldiers earn and have been earning for their time in those middle eastern countries can now be put into our economy! And, since they'd stay employed, and thus not a drain on the work force, that could prove a huge, and vital, boost to our economy. In short, we'd be paying them what we're paying them already, but to stay in our country and use the money they've already been paid to help get our economy back on track! And as much as the public works stuff might cost, it would most certainly still be cheaper than the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on military non-payroll stuff. In fact, that glut of homes on the market which is driving down home prices? Some of the returning soldiers might even buy some of those homes and help fix that problem...

This is my new list of ideas for fixing the economy. I am contacting elected officials with it.Housing: 1. No extending term limits during refinancing. A 30 year-loan should stay 30 years, and if 15 years have been paid off, it shouldn?t be bumped back up to 30 years.2. Bailout conditions should be imposed, both on those to be bailed out, and who have been bailed out ? particularly on banks. Think about it ? how do you get to the root of predatory lending? By checking what the top dogs can profit from it. If we set as a bailout condition that companies can?t pay their CEOs more than 300 times the salaries of their average workers, how much incentive would those same CEOs have to cheat honest homeowners out of their cash? Nor will this hinder small businesses, for their CEOs aren?t making enough to be impacted by this. Free Trade:1. Eliminate free trade agreements.2. Institute a tariff to tax imports by 90% of the difference in national minimum wages (assuming the other country?s minimum wage is lower). So since Mexico?s minimum wage is $3.50 (but in pesos) while ours is $6.50 their imports would be taxed $2.70. No, this is not protectionism. It is simply leveling the playing field in one area ? worker wages. There are many reasons for this. First of all, if we do not, the countries who care little about their workers will profit ? and are profiting. China, North Korea, etc. Those countries with low minimum wages and few human rights protections are benefiting via much better trade balances because they attract corporations interested in cheap labor costs. And, thanks to free trade agreements, they can just ship goods around for little expense. Leveling the labor costs like this can be explained to other countries. We are only taxing by 90% to allow them that 10% for transportation costs. Our intent is not to prevent trade, but to ensure the better protection of workers and ability of American companies to compete. Nor will we anger our closest allies ? the few countries in the world with higher minimum wages than ours tend to be Western countries ? and most of them European. Right now, who is profiting from these low minimum wages? The workers in China who get paid $1 an hour? No, the vast bulk of profits are going to the corporations. Not only will such a law protect American jobs, allowing American companies to better compete with their foreign counterparts, but it will provide incentive for countries and companies worldwide to pay and treat their workers better. Iraq:1. Withdraw troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan. Parlay with the United Nations, both to make reparations for our rudeness in excluding them from events in the Middle East, but also to invite them to help in the governing of Iraq and Afghanistan should they ever again be willing. 2. Employ troops with service time left on home soil, and provide government employment opportunities to the rest of the soldiers, as well as programs helping them reintegrate back into society (poss. work programs, support groups, etc.). Due to our weakened economy, returning troops with no jobs will be a further stress on the economy ? which is why we can?t afford to provide them no employment opportunities upon return. We could employ some as border protectors, and others as a kind of additional police force, or create the kind of public improvement work force that Franklin D. Roosevelt used during the Great Depression. At any rate, it will be much more cost effective to employ troops within our own borders, rather than outside them. The days are gone when a war could stimulate the economy. Such happened during WWII because the whole economy had to be involved in the war effort ? men working on huge assembly lines, women sewing uniforms, etc. Now, all that is sourced out to a few corporations whose efficient machines do it all. The military is a huge part of our national budget. A single fighter jet can cost over $1 billion to manufacture. Our deficit after going into Afghanistan ballooned from $3 trillion to now over $10 trillion. It will cost less to quarter troops on home soil. We will not have to worry about transportation costs. War equipment (tanks, planes, guns) costs will be cut. Casualties will of course decrease. And furthermore, the money we are paying soldiers, as well as the money they?ve already been paid for all their service time, will now be back within the country to be spent on our own economy ? rather than overseas.

Wow, an awesome story. I'd still like to hear more about what's happened since then. How about some updates? For example, did Google ever get their act together and at least try to remedy their mistakes? You'd think they'd have some kind of way to make sure someone can't just put another out of business like that through dumb clicking. Oh, and I've been recommending you guys for years. Here's my newest creation: Where to Find Free Web Hosting - Helium I know I might've been a bit quiet on the forums lately, but that doesn't mean I'm not recommending Xisto

Thanks for the advice, but I'm still having trouble. I'm not sure how I could remove Fantastico, seeing as I can't even access it. Plus, I'm not sure if Fantastico even can be uninstalled or reinstalled from CPanel. As for file/directory permissions, I set all Gallery main folders to 7/7/7 but there are too many small folders inside those folders to change them all from 7/5/5 permissions. At any rate, the error message given looks to be the same after I changed the main folder permissions.

Alright, the Gallery module from Fantastico always used to work for my site. Now it's suddenly stopped functioning and I can't even access the control panel for it. My Iframe page linking to it gives one long error message: I checked the file manager and all the files I uploaded to the Gallery are still there as well as a lot of the installation and core files. I have no way of knowing what, if any, of the program files for it might be missing - or why they're missing. Early on I tried updating Gallery using Fantastico to the newest version. It gave me an error about not being able to update. Now today all of a sudden, even Fantastico won't work! Trying to access Fantastico gives me the following error message: I'd appreciate help in getting my Gallery back up and running, as it is a major part of my site.

Okay, thanks for the help. I'm glad the site was at least up. Apparently they're now blocking IP addresses after a certain number of failed login attempts. They unblocked the IP address 3 times while I kept not getting the password, before I finally just asked for a reset. I know they're doing this to make the accounts more secure and reduce the chance of hacking, but I don't understand why it has to be such a low number of failed login attempts (must be like 10 or so). I'd think it should be at least 20 or 30.

Well, I had a similar experience recently. As I understand it, they've begun blocking your IP address after a certain number of failed login attempts (5, 10, something like that). So then you have to get them to unblock the IP address at https://support.xisto.com/. If you can't figure out the password at all, you may have to ask them for a reset. Whether that's the case or not, I don't know, but it's a likely explanation, in my opinion.

You missed my key point about Obama... it's NOT A MATTER OF THE UNBORN. Let me say this again. Senator Barack Obama supported a practice where children who survive late-term abortions, in other words are ALREADY BORN, can be left to starve to death in soiled hospital rooms. Nor was this a one-time thing. Obama has consistently opposed numerous partial-birth abortion bills and opposed 2 different versions of this bill. That was my major point. It's one thing to defend the killing of UNBORN children... but it's a whole different story to defend the killing of newly BORN children, which is what Obama did, and what you are doing right now in defending him! Obama has falsely claimed in the past when questioned on this topic that he opposed the Illinois bill because it lacked the wording of the federal bill stating such an act would not encroach on the ruling of Roe v. Wade. However, what he failed to mention is that Senator Richard Winkel sponsored an amendment to make that bill WORD FOR WORD identical to the federal bill, and Obama, who chaired the Health and Human Services Committee, deliberately killed that amendment in his committee. Talk about hypocrisy. When a person's actions kill newly born children like this, then yes, they SHOULD be severely punished. What's wrong with that? I never said I support the death penalty. I do not support it. I think it is hypocritical for either a liberal like Obama or a conservative like George Bush to support abortion and oppose the death penalty, or vice versa. And of course, we're not even putting the right people on death row to begin with, as all those pardoned by DNA evidence can attest. You ought to read my original post better, because you seem to have missed all my major points.

It was working the day before yesterday and then it started giving me error messages about not being able to access the site. I can't access cpanel either. Neither page ever loads. I don't have this problem with any other internet pages, just my site stuff on Xisto. My site's at http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ btw. This is one of the few times I'll need it up for sure so I'd appreciate if the issue can get fixed in the near future.

This is a pretty funny topic. As soon as I started reading the original post, I started thinking 'this guy is spamming to promote another web host he's an administrator for.' Devils in the guise of helpful buffaloes, eh? Chasing out all the 'good posters' huh? Probably spammers of the same ilk as the OP. No wonder he's mad, his fellow brothers in buffalo hating are being bullied around by you. I would also add that free speech should be free only so long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others not to hear vulgar, obscene, or derogatory speech. The U.S. government recognizes the right to 'free speech' but that doesn't include the right to say anything, as you pointed out with the 'fire' comment. People don't have the right to swear on public television, to slander or verbally harass others, and more examples could be given. The inalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The others are privileges that can be taken away if they are used to infringe on the rights of others. I've enjoyed this site enough to now begin paying for it, and have enjoyed my hosting with Xisto after trying many other allegedly 'free' hosts that were much, much worse. Xisto in many ways offers hosting that really is unparalleled on the web, as far as cost, site building tools, lack of ads, and site assistance. Thanks for providing this great service to the web community!

Very true. Rather than focusing on ourselves, we ought to focus on God, on trusting Him, on committing to Him, on putting our idols away to serve Him, on glorifying Him, on letting His will be done rather than our own. And I think the opposite is true of doing good works. We don't try to do them or be good people. We just focus on how much God loves us and on how He shows us goodness and mercy even though we don't deserve it. We then show that mercy to others because doing so pleases God and because He shows it to us, and refuses to forgive us if we won't likewise forgive others. I don't think God is looking so much for us to be good people so much as merciful people, for us to be religious people so much as loving people, or for us to be theological know-it-alls so much as holy (separate from the world's ways) and sincere in our lives. God is the only one good like Jesus said and ultimately it's all about Him.

No degree, but I'm 10 credits away from an Associates in business management - hardly relationship related Lets just say I was once in a situation so close to yours as to be ridiculously identical, and I'm simply giving advice that I hope might help you avoid some of the pitfalls I've learned are out there. Some I avoided, some I didn't. As for the public-private competition, you never know - sometimes one player can make a pretty big impact. I'll admit though that I'm not too personally familiar with hockey beyond knowing the basics of how it's played, and as far as track I sprint for fun but that's about it. Baseball is my main sport with football and basketball secondary ones. But hey, it sounds like you at least know she likes you back now, right? That's good, wasn't that a major question for most of the conversation here? Just because she moves doesn't mean you won't ever be able to go out with her. If you're really serious about her, I'd think you'd be willing to get to know her long distance and maybe in the future would get a chance to see her again. How far away is she moving? I was assuming it's a matter of in-state but the way you make it sound, it's a matter of hundreds if not thousands of miles. At any rate, it sounds like she's a person you'd value as a friend and would be able to enjoy talking to even if you can't have personal contact. Perhaps she'd appreciate the chance to maintain contact with someone during this time in her life when she's leaving everything and everyone (non-family) that she knows, and it would be a chance for you to help her.

Also, I've been thinking further about what you said the situation was like, where she's more popular. I know this isn't the common way of thinking, but I think it's the best way... to try and become the best you can for the person you care about. Not only should you look to talk to her somehow about where everything stands, but in the meantime, also use this time to become the best you can, in sports, in learning, and in character. Social status comes and goes but do what you can to make yourself a person who will succeed in life. Keep your grades up, the depression it sounds like you're going through could make you very prone to flunking right now, and you don't want to also go through losing contact with your original class as well. Over the summer you should stay active in sports but also look into a summer job because these days it's a good idea to get into the work world young. Of course, the thing with sports is it can make you prone to acne and skin problems, so you should avoid touching your face and wash your hair after sports because hands are the dirtiest part of the body and hair gets a lot of oils and stuff in it that can get on the face. Lol, I'm getting naggy, aren't I? Anyway, I want you to succeed here, good luck!