Coulter is conveniently re-defining “laissez-faire” for her purposes. There is nothing :laissez-faire” with saying that future proportions will be in the same ratio as past proportions. That’s just the opposite of laissez-faire: it’s government regulation of the economy.

Most everything I’ve said has been said better by George Reisman in his book, Capitalism. Check it out here: http://capitalism.net/Capitalism/CAPITALISM_Internet.pdf

Yes, you are now on topic again! I think your frist comment was on topic too.

As for minimum wage increases, who the **** still makes minimum wage anyway? Aren’t the MW-earners abysmally low in number? If the cost of living rose significantly, then naturally the employer would have to raise his wages or suffer at the hands of his employees. The only thing the minimum wage does is raise the bar for the unsightly masses; those that aren’t really worth the $7.25 an hour get paid that much anyway.

And further, what does that say about the earner? That they can only earn the bare minimum from their employer, so basically they’re a loser in a dead-end job. I always thought trade/commerce/employment was about conquering, not settling for $7.25. There’s a McDonald’s commercial running right now about a lady who started as a fry cook, became a manager, then a regional manager, and now runs something like the entire Eastern seaboard of McDonald’s. THAT’s what mankind is meant to be and that’s what work is meant to be; of course not everyone is going to be able to reach dizzying heights of success, but nobody said you wouldn’t be the one to do it.

Long story short: Interfering with private businesses, in any way, shape or form (including those stupid discrimination laws) is collectivist and morally repulsive.

And it only took me to my third comment to be on topic. Kinda.

As for “So what if there is some evidence (what you present is less than credible) for the congresswoman appealing to her constituents, this is how politics works, what are you 12?” That should NOT be how politics work! And I would never vote for a politician that acts that way. They are voted in to office to represent us, NOT themselves.

Also you say that someone needs to step up! Well why couldn’t the people themselves step up? Why do people need to run to government every time something doesn’t agree with them? Take some responsibility and ask for a raise or find a better job.

Apart from abortion, no subject produces so much disingenuousness as America’s immigration policy, both legal and illegal. For nearly 50 years, Americans have been intentionally lied to about our immigration laws.

In 1965, Teddy Kennedy overhauled immigration law with the specific purpose of effecting a dramatic change in the nation’s demographics. Bobby Kennedy had civil rights, so Teddy needed something big: He would preside over a civil rights bill for the entire Third World! My word, but that man could drink in those days.

With his 1965 immigration act, Kennedy embarked on entirely transforming American culture for no good reason. (You know how people always say the same arguments against illegal immigrants today were once made about the Irish to show how silly those arguments are? If only the U.S. Senate had had an “Irish Need Not Apply” sign!)

Until that point, immigration law basically took a laissez-faire approach, with country quotas attempting to replicate the traditional immigration patterns. Most immigrants to America had historically come from Great Britain, Germany and Scandinavian countries. Consequently, immigration quotas roughly reflected that balance, with smaller numbers of immigrants admitted from other countries.

But in an angry, long-awaited payback to WASPs, Kennedy decided he was going to radically transform the racial composition of the country. Instead of taking 15 immigrants from England and three from China, America would henceforth take three from England and 15 from China. Payback’s a bitch, Daughters of the American Revolution!

[taken from http://www.anncoulter.com

What do you think is going to happen to our island once the minimum wage almost triples? Do you really think our current tuna canning industries can handle this? Hopefully our island can find another industry to support our population.

I for one am just a little irked that American Samoa didn’t get a chance to voice it’s opinion. It’s one of the many unfortunate reprocussions from not having a voting Representative or Senator.