Jump to content
Science Forums

Freddy

Members
  • Content Count

    463
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Freddy last won the day on May 14 2007

Freddy had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Freddy

  • Rank
    Understanding
  • Birthday July 6

Converted

  • Biography
    Master of Ed. in History
  • Location
    Worcester, MA
  • Interests
    lap swimmer
  • Occupation
    History Teacher
  1. Here is another article that supports the concrete theory. "Barsoum, a professor of materials engineering, said microscope, X-ray and chemical analysis of scraps of stone from the pyramids "suggest a small but significant percentage of blocks on the higher portions of the pyramids were cast" from concrete. He stressed that he believes that most of the blocks in the Khufu Pyramid were carved in the manner long suggested by archaeologists. "But 10 or 20 percent were probably cast in areas where it would have been highly difficult to position blocks," he said." http://www.nytimes.com/2008/0
  2. I wonder if Phelps himself has ever protested at a funeral? His daughter has come to MA to protest. State and local police keep them out of eyeshot and earshot of the mourners in an enclosed area.
  3. Also, there is a significant amount of farmland formerly planted with wheat which is now planted with corn because planting corn is more profitable. This has contributed to the rise in wheat prices.
  4. No, it is not irrelevant! It clearly shows that by taking and reducing farm land the profit per acre has tippled. Now farmers can make more money by farming than by taking subsidies or other payments. It is the simple economics of supply and demand, when supply is down and demand is up then prices rise. It makes economic sense to grow more crops.
  5. Whether land is used for conservation or any other non-farm use does not matter. The fact is that reduction of arable land means less supply and higher prices. The reference you suggested confirms this no matter how noble the motive. "Even with reduced yields because of a dry year, Grimm made a profit of about $300 an acre after expenses. CRP would have paid just over $100 an acre."
  6. Give me a break! It is called price supports.
  7. I have never seen the fairness, economy, or wisdom in paying someone not to grow food. As a US taxpayer and consumer I urge my congressmen not to vote for farm subsidies. Last week I asked the local baker how much the price of flour jumped since last year. She said it tripled. Yeah farmers need my tax dollars so they can grow less and charge higher prices. What is wrong with this picture?
  8. Article I: The Legislative Branch Section 8: The Powers of Congress Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization Clearly the naturalization laws of 1790, 1795, 1798, and 1802 were allowed by the above power given to Congress by the Constitution.
  9. Are you sure? From the Naturaliztion Act of 1790 Act of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat 103-104) (Excerpts) That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, on application to any common law court of record, in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law, to support
  10. No, you said this. Quote by Clay, "It was indeed the States that ratified their union through their delegates to the United States Constitutional Convention which signed below:" The Founders purposely left the state legislatures out of ratification.
  11. The Constitution was not ratified at the Constitutional Convention. It was simply signed by 39 of the 42 remaining delegates out of the 55 that began the Convention. It was then sent to each state for the people to ratify it. From the link you provided: "On September 17, 1787, the final draft of the Constitution was signed. Of the 55 people who attended the Convention, 39 actually signed. Some, such as Oliver Ellsworth, left as the Convention progressed, others refused to sign in protest, such as Mason and Gerry. The final day was one of relief for all who remained in Philadelphia. Finally
  12. Really, have you read the Preamble of the US Constitution? It says, "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." It does not say, "We the States". It was the people of the US at 13 separate conventions who ratified the Constitution and not 13 state legislatures.
  13. What the Founders intended is not a reason not to amend the Constitution. Even Madison, the father of the Constitution, changed his mind a few years later and wrote to Jefferson stating that he supported expanding suffrage to all white male voters, not just those who owned property. The states eliminated the property requirement. The right to vote did slowly expand with blacks, women, and Indians each getting the right to vote. It was the federal government that granted them that right. The logical continuation of this is to amend the Constitution abolishing the Electoral College and providing
  14. I am of the opinion that all Americans age 18 and who have graduated from high school or passed an equivalent GED test should be allowed to vote. It would be nice if more Americans exercised their right to vote. This would be an unlikely change to our Constitution. Coming from Massachusetts it is doubtful that the legislature would not send two Democrats to Washington as our Senators just as the people have since Senator Edward Brooke, the last Republican and first black senator from my state. I do not foresee the US electorate giving up their power to directly elect senators. In fact I am an
  15. Article 5:..."that no State, without its consent shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate" This last clause in Article 5 indeed was about the small states losing their equal representation in the Senate irregardless of population. See below Records of the Federal Convention and the vote on this last clause in Article 5. "Mr. Govr Morris moved to annex a further proviso--"that no State, without its consent shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate" This motion being dictated by the circulating murmurs of the small States was agreed to without debate, no one opposi
×
×
  • Create New...