You don’t know the difference between the Internet and the World Wide Web. The Internet is the network. The Web is the protocol for transferring and formatting data to be displayed in a browser.

Chuck: the worst times in American economic history were presided over by labor friendly anti-business liberal left wingers…

Ben: How can you say that? What about the economic boom of the Clinton years?

Now, go back and read all the points I made. Mr. Clinton was not a “labor friendly, anti-business, liberal left winger”. Perhaps if this is all a miscommunication, you could have pointed out as much to begin with. Or, more to the point, not listed Mr. Clinton and the economy of the 1990s as a response to Chuck’s assertion, as it is entirely misplaced.

As for Al Gore’s Internet… sheeesh. The World Wide Web, the internet as we know it, was invented by English scientist Tim Berners-Lee in 1989. The ground breaking research into the process began in 1958 with the creation of the ARPA in the United States. The first two connected nodes were in 1969 in California. It exploded in growth in 1996 and 1997 and was followed by the dot-com boom which was largely funded by increased capital investment towards the later part of 1997 and increased in 1998. The growth in use of the web was almost entirely a result of a lack of central administration and open protocols.

No, you just made that up. I didn’t credit any policies for the tech boom.

But now that you mention it, Al Gore did introduce the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991, which led to the development of the National Information Infrastructure and the fiber optic network that became the Internet as we now know it.

Yikes! You honestly believe that?

That’s what libs say when they’re getting schooled. You’re getting schooled, Ben. Sorry, buddy.

But thanks for coming back by.

Ben, thank you for this statement. The end refrain is nothing but a partisan cop-out which was slid in for whatever reason (sadly distancing your argument from a civil conversation). However, the initial sentence discredits any claim you previously laid at the foot of traditional democratic policies being a starter for the economic boom which occurred during Mr. Clinton’s tenure in office, the crux of my point. There is more in Mr. Clinton’s tenure in office to credit free market principles for the economic boom than there would be of a progressive, regulation heavy agenda. And your retort of placing the entire boom as a result of rapid advancement in a free market only supports the position.

I might disagree with Mr. Van Nuys concerning the magnitude of the impact of various instigators for the economic boom of the “Clinton Years” but I am fairly certain we are in agreement that Mr. Clinton’s overall free market policies supported and improved the economy during his tenure.

As far as the Reagan/Bush war on the middle class, let’s start with Reagan.

One thing he did was grant amnesty to four million illegal aliens. It used to be, people could work hard physically and get ahead. Construction workers and other blue collar workers could earn a decent living, purchase a house, raise a family, and basically achieve the American dream. Illegal aliens were more than willing to work for less and drove down wages. Also, Republicans have blocked efforts to crack down on companies that hire illegal aliens.

The fact is Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), also Simpson-Mazzoli Act. The Act made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants and required employers to attest to their employees’ their immigration status.

I didn’t make that up.

You wrote (excuse me for excerpting).

“The wealthy have gotten to where they are because our economic system provides opportunity to advance….

When there is a low income tax on large salaries, CEOs have incentive to milk the company for all they can and shoot for short term gains….

The wealthy have a lot more influence in government policy than the middle class, which is anti-democratic. There should be some cost for all that influence.

At times when there is a large disparity between the wealthiest and the middle class, that’s a good indicator that the economy is unhealthy. That occurred back in the 20s and it occurred before the crash of our economy last year. One way to reduce the disparity is through a progressive tax.

These could be read in summary as, “The current system has made people wealthy let’s change that system and punish the wealthy for their power and influence with more progressive taxes.” Again, you wrote what you wrote. I only inferred what your response would be to the NAFTA regulation from your ideological and emotionally charged class discrimination and your previous definition of “war” on the middle class.

I’m not making anything up your only ignoring yourself as strange as that is…