The article was about the poor manner that the center is operates, not the semantical distinction about the type of crime committed by an employee.
What is your point? A crime by an insider was committed. I've been around and worked with the population, he was probably some one's brother/sister/uncle/best friend's friend.
The Bessier SmithCenter is poorly run with no vision or commitment by its board to make into a success. Look at the web site to prove the point (http://www.bessiesmithcc.org).
So, what is your point? it was burglary, theft, robbery, theft by taking, bottom line: It was an inside job allegedly. We ought to know what kind of screening and supervision the staff uses on employees.
KI, I do not understand your point? It was an inside job-robbery.
Morehouse College is acknowledged to be a very good college as is MSU. Harvard, well hard to get into, hard to flunk out, so we ought to give him kudos for the best 2 out of 3. A person who works hard enough to get a PhD can call him/herself Dr. even if it is pretentious.
ole connie can''t understand logical thinking anyway, and thinks poor folk ought to eat cake, or dirt, I don't know why she even asks about it.
Fairmon, though seeks to have a reasonable discourse,
You may feel that you do not want to have children and that is your choice. There is an implicit encouragement in Judeo-Christian theology to "be fruitful and multiply." Does that make Christians who choose not to have children (by using birth control, or by physical incapability, or homosexual relationship, for example) less Christian? Connie may say "yes," but my take is "no." However, good people having more children helps society overall.
The primary question is how does one ensure positive values and ethics propagate over time? A primary way is through the family.
From a practical point of view, having at least two children ensures there will be wage earners in the future to keep the Social Security fund solvent. Having at least two children and raising them in a good home environment requires a decent wage as the numbers show that I mentioned in earlier posts. Having these children educated in highly effective schools by qualified, well paid teachers enhances the chance the children will pursue high-value and productive careers. Such also enhances economic and industrial growth.
Should only parents with children get the only personal deductions? Probably.
My 20% rate for corporations is simply a straw man, the proper number needs to be determined. Nevertheless, it is not necessarily so that higher wages will lead to unacceptable inflation. It may lead to some inflation which most economists think is beneficial.
Unless you choose to argue a capitalist approach cannot work, then paying the true cost of producing goods and selling them appropriately must lead to economic stability.
This is certainly true when you take greed into account. Consider that income beyond a certain point is superfluous as far as essential needs are concerned. The apostle Paul said, "The ones that have much should not have too much and the ones who have little should not have too little."
So yes, there is a theological imperative to ensure the poor are not so poor as to be destitute in order that the wealthy can enjoy largesse at their expense.
An aside: Most people do not think all lawyers are parasites, only the lawyers of others.
Poor Rhonda, she replied in her normal catty and angry way wishing she could be an orthopedist to give a backbone to someone who won't sign their name. Why is she after their name, to get them?
The real irony is that she even suggests she has the capability to be an orthopedic doctor. The only thing she has in common with the medical profession is she is only practicing being learned enough to do her side-line profession of being on the Board of Education. At least doctors have several years education and a long internship working under expert mentors. Look at the verbal abuse she directed at the teachers at the board meeting. No class, no professionalism.
Fred Skillern may have mentored her, but I'll bet he advised her to eschew the write-in campaign as a waste of money. If she won't listen to Fred, she won't listen to anyone.
Only one person has an interest in stinky Chattanooga?
Fairmomn raised only a couple of points worth a response:
Your idealism faints in the face of the corporate track record. You bemoan the lack of engineers but actually the issue is locally a corp will not pay the going rate for a good one. The best way to create more jobs is to create more buying power by paying higher wages. Laissez faire has never worked.
Exactly, Let's hear the screams and cries if we cut programs to match current tax income; however, a necessary tax increase is suspect. If we went to a flat tax with no exemptions except for dependents (to answer your third q: who create future employees and inventors, parents should be favored as fulfilling not only a theological duty but also a social one), it is likely the total tax payment would not be much different, and the more impacted persons would probably be the ones who can easily afford it - the very high income brackets where folks take advantage of all sorts of (currently legal) dodges.
Z-fisdter sez, "The UAW isn't needed there..." I didn't know he worked at the VW plant.
Jackie, old boy, all we hear on these boards are, "I don't like unions", "I like unions," "The UAW are commies," "sign up a psuedo-union," "I don't like liberals," "I don't like Obama," "abolish income tax," "You are going to hell because you don't believe what I believe," "You are one," "No I am not, you are," "Vote Republican because this is big orange country (shades of Cass Walker!)," "Whose your hairdresser?," "If someone is poor and making minimum wage it is their fault not mine," "why should I pay taxes for schools, I send my kid to Baylor/McCallie/GPS/Chattanooga Christian(sic), Notre Dame?," "Why can't they be like Clarence Thomas?,"blah, blah, blah.
What should the minimum wage be, fairmon? 200% of the poverty level for 1 person: $10.50; or for a family of 4: $21.50? Since everyone seems to buy into the premise that both parents should work the former rate would be the one, except if you look at the statistics, in urban Chattanooga about 73% of the families do not have both spouses present, and they probably provide the lion's share of minimum wage jobs in Chattanooga. So lets set the minimum wage at $18.17 (1.73X10.54), slightly over the cutoff for assistance at 200% of poverty level for a family of 3($17.82).
Let's set income tax as a fixed percent of income calculated on what is needed to fund the current National Budget taking into account the ratio of personal and corporate tax payments (ignoring the recent Supreme Court decision that corporations are people), eliminate all deductions except for family dependents, set a minimum corporate tax of 20% and require all industry who have been incorporated in the USA since 1960, and/or who are selling product in the United States to pay on profit from those sales. No deductions.
Whatever happened to Christian charity in this town?
same few people writing the same old stuff...