I could tell those 3,500 people why they shouldn't have their job back, but it is sad and harsh so I wouldn't want to be the one to tell them. Automobile competition is now GLOBAL, not US. So GM has to be able to compete with companies with workers elsewhere, OR with foreign companies that produce cars in the US. The GM benefit package that the union of those 3,500 people has negotiated is no longer sustainable compared to what other auto workers across the US and across the world are getting.
So...they shouldn't have their job back because their union is not willing to take less pay for their job, so instead of having 3,500 jobs of less pay, they have ZERO jobs.
The follow-up complaint to that is that GM is so greedy and makes so much money. While I have no doubt there are corporate greedy people, if you look at the profit number that GM (or Ford, Chrysler, etc.) makes compared to the TOTAL INVESTMENT and the size of their business, their actual PERCENT profit is not very large. It would be a percentage that if you were investing your money somewhere and that was the rate of return you got, you would be highly disappointed.
Now the question for you is can you have the discussion of these highly complex issues within the context of the highly emotional-and rightfully so-loss of 3,500 jobs by 3,500 individuals and the fall out it has on the families of those individuals? It's hard.
Better that 3,500 families starve to death than 200,000 families starve to death.I can see where you're coming from, and that is a good way to look at it.
JazzMan
IP: Logged
11:05 PM
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
Now that I have answered your question, will you actually give me an answer to mine?
Hmm eliminate their ability to import to the US?
If Sony can sell a TV to the American public for 500, and no American company can... don’t let Sony import their TVs, if they want to sell to the American people, they’ll have to build the TVs here and sell them here.
Just thinking out side the box here...
[This message has been edited by dezie36 (edited 06-09-2005).]
IP: Logged
11:41 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Better that 3,500 families starve to death than 200,000 families starve to death.I can see where you're coming from, and that is a good way to look at it.
JazzMan
Good ole JazzMan, always the optimist.
IP: Logged
11:49 PM
Jun 10th, 2005
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
I already only buy from American companies (or do my best too, kind of hard now a days)... I don’t shop at the big corporate companies (Wal-Mart, Meijer ext.) I get my groceries from a farmers market, I get all things for my dogs from a mom and pop shop (except food, that’s from the vet). Only thing I buy from the mall is clothes (no mom and pop clothing shops out here). Hell I even got my TV and Computer from a mom and pop electronics shop, now if the products were all American made Id be happier... simple fact is they aren’t.
So why couldn’t we force the foreign companies out of our country? Let American companies stay American... Yes the global economy is important... but the welfare of our citizens have to come first... and outsourcing is a cancer that has to be cut out.
IP: Logged
12:04 AM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
Holy cow! That is just exactly the kind of hyperemotional, thoughtless, intentionally grossly misleading and blatantly erroneous rhetoric that is classically right out of the liberal playbook. You should get a job with the democratic party.
We make the leap from 3,500 families losing their jobs to 3,500 families STARVING TO DEATH! Yes, america, the LIVES of 3,500 families AND THEIR LITTLE CHILDREN, MANY OF THEM BABIES THAT WILL STARVE IN THEIR CRIBS, is at stake.
You know, there are SO many ACTUAL STARVATIONS TO DEATH in the United States now, that it really isn't even reported. I mean, that MUST be it. Because I can't even remember the last time the news reported a starvation death in the US of ANY kind, much less from job loss.
So I actually CAN see where you are coming from. It is someplace WAY outside of reality in this instance. Which I wouldn't mind so much if you hadn't attributed it to ME.
IP: Logged
12:17 AM
Steve Normington Member
Posts: 7663 From: Mesa, AZ, USA Registered: Apr 2001
I already only buy from American companies (or do my best too, kind of hard now a days)... I don’t shop at the big corporate companies (Wal-Mart, Meijer ext.) I get my groceries from a farmers market, I get all things for my dogs from a mom and pop shop (except food, that’s from the vet). Only thing I buy from the mall is clothes (no mom and pop clothing shops out here). Hell I even got my TV and Computer from a mom and pop electronics shop, now if the products were all American made Id be happier... simple fact is they aren’t.
So why couldn’t we force the foreign companies out of our country? Let American companies stay American... Yes the global economy is important... but the welfare of our citizens have to come first... and outsourcing is a cancer that has to be cut out.
It would work. For the TV manufacturers. But then the global community would retaliate against the US. Suddenly, the market for US grain is cut to 1/10 of what it used to be. Prices plummet and grain farmers default on bank loans. Other countries place bans against US-build planes in retaliation against Japanese-build TVs so Boeing and McDonald Douglas' lay off 40% of their US workforce. Angry foreigners decide to go to Europe instead of Disneyland for vacation. Intel and Motorola can't sell their ICs overseas for years until they build new Class 10 cleanrooms and train foreign workers. But the TV manufacturers are happy.
IP: Logged
12:45 AM
AndyLPhoto Member
Posts: 2420 From: Skandia, MI, USA Registered: Nov 2001
Yup...retaliation. Remember the steel tariffs? At the begging of the US Steel industry, Bush imposed tariffs of up to 30% on imported steel. (just tariffs now, not a ban on imports) US steel producers were concerned about "dumping," I think from China. Overseas steel was being dumped into the U.S. marketplace at below market value, making it impossible for the US industry to compete. The tariffs may have had marginal benefits for the steel industry, but it was not the cure-all the industry hoped for.
What effects did the tariffs have? They raised costs for companies that use steel. Steel users were forced to pay the increased cost for imported steel, or buy domestic steel at higher prices. Those companies of course passed along the cost to consumers. Foreign steel producers were able to pay the tariffs and still make a profit.
Meanwhile, the EU, Japan and China were all talking about retaliation to the tariffs, targeting exports from OTHER U.S. industries & companies. (See the following link for examples.) I don't know for sure if any measures were actually taken before Bush repealed the tariffs to avoid a global trade war.
The fact is, we compete in a world market. We need to import goods from other countries, just as they need to import goods from us. We start banning imports of TVs, consumers are faced with less choice and higher prices. You ban TV imports, and other industries are going to want import bans as well. Even just talking about outsourcing, where does it stop? If we are going to ban outsourcing, why don't we require that GM use only American steel, and use only parts made in America? Ford and Chrysler too. While we're at it, we should require that if Toyota (Honda, Subaru, and everyone else too) wants to sell cars in America, they need to be assembled in America, using only parts made completely in America. Isn't that the same argument?
Sure, you can say we're only talking about outsourcing some jobs right now, but wouldn't it make sense to require GM to use only parts made in America as well? Wouldn't that serve the same purpose? What about prohibiting the sale of cars in the US that were assembled in other countries? It would seem that would provide jobs for more Americans, wouldn't it? Then Mexico & Canada would be mad at us too. The more you do, the more you have government dictating how comapnies (in this case GM) run their business, and that's a bad thing IMO.
It all sounds good on paper until the cost of products skyrockets, and we start losing jobs because no one else will buy our products because we won't buy theirs.
[This message has been edited by AndyLPhoto (edited 06-10-2005).]
IP: Logged
08:29 AM
AndyLPhoto Member
Posts: 2420 From: Skandia, MI, USA Registered: Nov 2001
I already only buy from American companies (or do my best too, kind of hard now a days)... I don’t shop at the big corporate companies (Wal-Mart, Meijer ext.) I get my groceries from a farmers market, I get all things for my dogs from a mom and pop shop (except food, that’s from the vet). Only thing I buy from the mall is clothes (no mom and pop clothing shops out here). Hell I even got my TV and Computer from a mom and pop electronics shop, now if the products were all American made Id be happier... simple fact is they aren’t.
So why couldn’t we force the foreign companies out of our country? Let American companies stay American... Yes the global economy is important... but the welfare of our citizens have to come first... and outsourcing is a cancer that has to be cut out.
Why it wouldn't work: If we simply forced all foreign companies out of America, we would have less products to choose from, and the ones we had would be more expensive. You said yourself that some things aren't available made in America. You remove those from the table. That computer you bought from a mom & pop shop...anything in it made overseas? You either eliminate that from the equation, or raise the price, if we are able to produce it ourselves.
Then, as was already pointed out, you have to ask yourself what to do with all those American workers who are unemployed because no on else in the world will import our products any more. All those people who wer employed in a company that formerly exported products will be looking for work. Oh...maybe they can get retrained to build the stuff that we can't import any more because of federal law.
Hmmm....wouldn't it be easier, do you think, to just not mess with the global economy and get the whole world mad at us, and help those workers whose jobs are being outsourced find other work?
you pass a law banning foriegn products (like TVs or asian electronics) and people will smuggle them into the US anyway.
If people will smuggle illegal substances like drugs to make money, they will have no problem smuggling consumer electronics that have no moral or social negative impact.
Bottom line is, we are a capitolistic economy - the company that has the best quality-price combination wins, and the others....well...... lose.
the alternative is a socialistic economy, where everyone ends up working for the government, prices are dictated, wages are fixed
it just plain doesnt work - there is no incentive to innovate or to do your best in a socialistic economy - its been tried many times, it always fails.
[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-10-2005).]
IP: Logged
08:57 AM
PFF
System Bot
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
Ok so you all point out how my ideas won’t work (again). So what is the solution? We can’t allow companies like GM, Intel, ext. to keep out sourcing. It doesn’t make customers happy, and its not good for our work force. I’m not kidding when I say I seriously ****ing hate calling tech support and talking to people who don’t speak my language fluently.
So what do we do? We need solutions, and we need leaders who will help solve the problems not make them worse. I just can’t understand how a person can say "I love America" and support companies that out source... I got rid of my router because they out sourced the tech support, and bought one that didn’t.
I know that we as citizens we can fix this on our own, by simply making the decision to spend 10 dollars more on the router that’s made here and has American tech support. As Americans isn’t it our duty to try our best to buy products made here to support our economy our workforce??? I mean, I know there’s no way I can buy a cell phone made in America, or a desktop... or a car for that matter any more. But if you spend a little time researching the products you plan on buying, you can find out if they were always manufactured in china... or if they used to be here and moved. If so then don’t buy that company, if your stuck between 2 companies both make their stuff in China, go with the one that was always in China, not the one that went from here.
Just simple things that can possibly help.
Oh and in response to AndyLPhoto I think its funny you should say that… don’t we as Americans always do things that make the world not hate us? I cant think of one thin in the last 200 years that we have done that pissed the world off… we should stick with that track record your right.
IP: Logged
09:19 AM
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: it just plain doesnt work - there is no incentive to innovate or to do your best in a socialistic economy - its been tried many times, it always fails.
This is simply not true in fact it does work, even communism works... in theory. It can’t work in the real world because humans are greedy. In a small community of less then 500 people or so, a socialistic or communism economy would be the best solution. Make sure that the two farmers in the community make enough food to feed the other 498. Every one is given a job, and a purpose to help the greater good.
As a friend of mine from Poland once said to me, I don’t know which I hate more capitalism or communism with communism every body had a job, and lots of money but there was nothing to buy... with capitalism there are lots of things to buy but no one has any money.
Originally posted by dezie36: ...We can’t allow companies like GM, Intel, ext. to keep out sourcing....
"We" have absolutely nothing to say about what GM or Intel does. its not my company, its not your company. If you want to tell them how to run their businees, buy the majority of their stock then you can tell them how to do things
you think they suck? start your own car manufacturer or uP company and put them out of business. If they are terrible businessmen, it should be an easy kill.
Its not our job to dictate to corporate america how they should function.
This is simply not true in fact it does work, even communism works... in theory. It can’t work in the real world because humans are greedy. ...
you are slipping back into your imaginary world again - if it doenst work in the 'real world' then there is no other world.
you have a strong tendancy to sit and look at the world compaired to the way you WANT it to be, then you get angry and cry the world is not fair.
the world is the way it is. you either accept it, and work towards improving the parts that CAN be changed, or you will end up an angry bitter liberal in a very short period of time.
[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-10-2005).]
IP: Logged
09:31 AM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20707 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
You say you don't shop at Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the US, besides the government. They employ over a million people, not counting all the spin off businesses that they help add jobs, including adding jobs in other countries.
Sure most of their products are imported from China, but how does those goods get to your local Wal-Mart? Longshoremen and dock workers, trains, trucks, and you name it.
Yeah! Wal-Mart might not pay all that much to be a cashier, what like $7 and hour. But most people who work those jobs are part-time people, mostly moms, teenagers, young college students, or older people who are looking for an extra income, but don't want to work full time. It's an easy job and most people are happy about it.
Do they hurt mom and pop stores? Sure do! That's competition. Did you know that Wal-Mart alone has saved Americans more money then you can realize. This is in the multi-billions of dollars that Americans have saved by buying cheap at Wal-Mart, which in turn helps them pay for other things like car payments and mortgages.
I'm not saying Wal-Mart is an angel, but they have been a real positive in America.
IP: Logged
09:36 AM
AndyLPhoto Member
Posts: 2420 From: Skandia, MI, USA Registered: Nov 2001
Oh and in response to AndyLPhoto I think its funny you should say that… don’t we as Americans always do things that make the world not hate us? I cant think of one thin in the last 200 years that we have done that pissed the world off… we should stick with that track record your right.
Point well taken. But whether they hate us for other reasons or not, when we start messing with their economic livelihood, they'll start messing with ours. They can hate us for the war, or for whatever other reason, but they'll still buy our products, because we buy theirs.
I understand what you're saying about "made in America" products, and agree with you in principle. But on the other hand, I won't go out and pay more for a product made in America if I believe that product is inferior to another I can get, especially if it's more expensive. For example, I like both Panasonic and Sony electronic gear. I know Sony is a Japanese company...not sure where Panasonic is based. But if I'm going to go out and spend money on stuff, I'm going to buy stuff that has a proven track record.
What's the solution? I really don't know. Just to clarify, I don't like outsourcing jobs any more than you do. But I won't categorically say that it's a bad thing, if it means keeping a company in business. Maybe those outsourced jobs in India allow Indians the income to buy more American products.
IP: Logged
09:49 AM
NEPTUNE Member
Posts: 10199 From: Ticlaw FL, and some other places. Registered: Aug 2001
Well, the media isn't the "liberal media", with an agenda, so that can't be it. Wow, I just don't get it. Maybe one of our enlightened liberal friends will be kind enough to come along and explain it to us poor, dumb conservatives.
Just a wild guess, but possibly Mr Kerry was taking more challenging classes than Mr Bush. That would not be too surprising, knowing what we do about the two mens youthful motivation, or lack therof.
IP: Logged
03:30 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Just a wild guess, but possibly Mr Kerry was taking more challenging classes than Mr Bush. That would not be too surprising, knowing what we do about the two mens youthful motivation, or lack therof.
Yeah, that has to be it. Bush and Kerry having equal grades, and equivalent classes...impossible.
Of course, during the campaign, we couldn't know, because Kerry refused to release the transcripts.
Just a wild guess, but possibly Mr Kerry was taking more challenging classes than Mr Bush. That would not be too surprising, knowing what we do about the two mens youthful motivation, or lack therof.
reality is too hard for you to bear, isnt it - you have to rationalize an escape?
"Kerry got four Ds his freshman year - in geology, two history courses and political science" oooooooh yes, freshman history 101 and political science 101... those are real killer weed-out courses!
[This message has been edited by Ken Wittlief (edited 06-10-2005).]
IP: Logged
04:11 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: "Kerry got four Ds his freshman year - in geology, two history courses and political science" oooooooh yes, freshman history 101 and political science 101... those are real killer weed-out courses!
You would think that History and Political Science would be important to a politician, whether he knew he'd go into politics or not.
Anyone have a link to Kerry's and Bush's actual college transcripts? I searched but all I could find were transcripts of debates where one or both mentioned "school".
JazzMan
IP: Logged
10:31 PM
NEPTUNE Member
Posts: 10199 From: Ticlaw FL, and some other places. Registered: Aug 2001
Yeah, that has to be it. Bush and Kerry having equal grades, and equivalent classes...impossible.
Of course, during the campaign, we couldn't know, because Kerry refused to release the transcripts.
Well, I tried to access an unbiased, well informed news source for some fair and balanced information on the subject. Damn liberals must have done something underhanded here, too.:
The recent public focus on Talon News, while much of it malicious, has indeed brought some constructive elements to the surface. It has also brought many kind messages of support, and for that we are extremely grateful.
In order to better serve those readers across the country who enjoy Talon News content and look forward to receiving it each day, we feel compelled to reevaluate operations in order to provide the highest quality, most professional product possible.
Thus, Talon News will be offline while we redesign the web site, perform a top-to-bottom review of staff and volunteer contributors, and address future operational procedures.
We look forward to bringing an even better product to our readers in the future. [/QUOTE] -from the Talon/Bush news website.
[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 06-10-2005).]
Talon News? Wasn't that the site owned and run by the gay male prostitute that Bush hired to shill in the press core? The guy that somehow managed to go to Whitehouse press conferences with a fake ID for two years? Just one suicide bomb away from the President of the United States? Say, why isn't he in jail now? I wonder how he managed to get away with that with nary a spanking? Maybe he got a spanking, I heard he was into spankings.
JazzMan
IP: Logged
12:06 AM
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
Originally posted by Ken Wittlief: "Kerry got four Ds his freshman year - in geology, two history courses and political science" oooooooh yes, freshman history 101 and political science 101... those are real killer weed-out courses!
I hate to use the tired cliché of Einstein... but he did fail math.
You know most people aren’t ready for the intensity of college... and some just don’t know what they want to do with their lives at 20. Its totally not uncommon for a freshmen in college to do badly their first year and then do well in the following years... its certainly not a way to judge their intelligence. Looking at one years grades (in this case freshmen year) and making an assumption about their intelligence, is like taking a look at the fossil legs of a dinosaur and saying… yup this dinosaur definitely was blue and its young stayed with it long after hatching.
To more accurately judge their intelligence, lets look at the way they speak... their command of the language they use to communicate with the rest of us. That would be a good start.
Not every president can be a road scholar.
IP: Logged
01:02 AM
frontal lobe Member
Posts: 9042 From: brookfield,wisconsin Registered: Dec 1999
Here's an even better idea. Let's remember that someone can have a real aptitude for some subjects and not do well in others. So why are we going to arbitrarily take speaking skills?
Here's an even BETTER better idea. Let's get off the whole intelligence contest IN THE FIRST PLACE. If the best president was the one with the most intelligence, then let's just forget about voting and make some valedictorian president. Or at least, to be eligible for president you had to have been valedictorian somewhere. How about that?
The answer is that you need MORE than intelligence to be president. Both Kerry and Bush demonstrated enough in their academic record to establish that they had enough intelligence for the job. Then it gets down to OTHER qualities like speaking skills, judgement, leadership, decision making, resolve, character, etc. which become MORE important.
Let's take Clinton for an example. Intellect-high. Speaking skills-off the charts high. Unfortunately, judgement-poor. Leadership-poor. Reportedly the White House was run like a frat house. Decision making-too cowardly to be decisive. Poor. Resolve-too interested in polls. Poor. Character-come on. Off the charts poor.
The only reason for this thread was because the MEDIA and the democratic party kept making an issue of how dumb Bush was. We got so sick of hearing about it. In retrospect, since Kerry released his record, it turns out that academically he was in the same range of intelligence as Bush.
IP: Logged
02:07 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27106 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by dezie36: You know most people aren’t ready for the intensity of college... and some just don’t know what they want to do with their lives at 20. Its totally not uncommon for a freshmen in college to do badly their first year and then do well in the following years... its certainly not a way to judge their intelligence. Looking at one years grades (in this case freshmen year) and making an assumption about their intelligence, is like taking a look at the fossil legs of a dinosaur and saying… yup this dinosaur definitely was blue and its young stayed with it long after hatching.
So, when you're talking about Kerry, you're being understanding. If we talk about Bush, we're making excuses.
Don't you guys just HATE double standards? I do.
quote
To more accurately judge their intelligence, lets look at the way they speak... their command of the language they use to communicate with the rest of us. That would be a good start.
So, only people who are good speakers are intelligent? The better they speak, the more intelligent they are?
quote
Not every president can be a road scholar.
Isn't that "Rhodes"? Or are you talking about well-educated truck drivers?
Except if you're George Bush, then you have no excuses and are cut no slack.
[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 06-11-2005).]
IP: Logged
03:50 AM
Fastback 86 Member
Posts: 7849 From: Los Angeles, CA Registered: Sep 2003
In small communities, many times local governments have given WalMart substantial tax breaks to either come to town or upgrade to a Supercenter while giving their old, established, LOCAL OWNED businesses bupkis. I've seen it happen over and over again. They claim they bring employment to the area when, in fact, for every two jobs WalMart brings to an area it costs three from local mom and pop type businesses.
WalMart, if they're allowed to come to an area at all, should have to play by the same rules as everyone else. NO tax breaks and incentives. NO eminent domain claims on private property by local governments to get them that choice peice of real estate. NO more having so much control over suppliers that the manufacturers carry their inventory for them and WalMart doesn't have to pay for it until it goes across their register. I could go on with the dozens of unfair business practices of WalMart, but there's no need because those that love them will continue to love them and those that don't will continue to not like them. WalMart is single handedly destroying small business in rural America the likes of which we've never seen before, you can believe that or not.
WalMart doesn't have anything I need bad enough that I have to buy it from them.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by Wichita:
You say you don't shop at Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart is the largest employer in the US, besides the government. They employ over a million people, not counting all the spin off businesses that they help add jobs, including adding jobs in other countries.
Sure most of their products are imported from China, but how does those goods get to your local Wal-Mart? Longshoremen and dock workers, trains, trucks, and you name it.
Yeah! Wal-Mart might not pay all that much to be a cashier, what like $7 and hour. But most people who work those jobs are part-time people, mostly moms, teenagers, young college students, or older people who are looking for an extra income, but don't want to work full time. It's an easy job and most people are happy about it.
Do they hurt mom and pop stores? Sure do! That's competition. Did you know that Wal-Mart alone has saved Americans more money then you can realize. This is in the multi-billions of dollars that Americans have saved by buying cheap at Wal-Mart, which in turn helps them pay for other things like car payments and mortgages.
I'm not saying Wal-Mart is an angel, but they have been a real positive in America.
IP: Logged
08:32 AM
PFF
System Bot
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
In small communities, many times local governments have given WalMart substantial tax breaks to either come to town or upgrade to a Supercenter while giving their old, established, LOCAL OWNED businesses bupkis. I've seen it happen over and over again. They claim they bring employment to the area when, in fact, for every two jobs WalMart brings to an area it costs three from local mom and pop type businesses.
WalMart, if they're allowed to come to an area at all, should have to play by the same rules as everyone else. NO tax breaks and incentives. NO eminent domain claims on private property by local governments to get them that choice peice of real estate. NO more having so much control over suppliers that the manufacturers carry their inventory for them and WalMart doesn't have to pay for it until it goes across their register. I could go on with the dozens of unfair business practices of WalMart, but there's no need because those that love them will continue to love them and those that don't will continue to not like them. WalMart is single handedly destroying small business in rural America the likes of which we've never seen before, you can believe that or not.
WalMart doesn't have anything I need bad enough that I have to buy it from them.
John Stricker
Seriously John... This must be the apocalypse... we agree... for the first time in the history of PFF, you and I openly agree on a subject... So we both love small town America... I personally want to be nothing more then a small town mechanic and parts store... but places like Wal-Mart, and advance, muarrys ext are making it ever more apparent that that dream will never come true. If you truly love America you wont buy from Wal-Mart...
IP: Logged
09:38 AM
dezie36 Member
Posts: 2501 From: Moved to Okemos, Mi, USA Registered: Feb 2005
So, when you're talking about Kerry, you're being understanding. If we talk about Bush, we're making excuses. Don't you guys just HATE double standards? I do.
I’m being understanding of both in this situation... personally I cant understand how any one could fail History (one of my favs). But in either case its understandable
quote
So, only people who are good speakers are intelligent? The better they speak, the more intelligent they are?
In some cases yes. If a man comes up to you speaking gibberish... he’s probably not the smartest guy on the street. "Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." "It's one thing about insurance, that's a Washington term." "I think we ought to raise the age at which juveniles can have a gun."
(just a few of millions of examples) not to pick on bush... but he obviously knows what he’s supposed to say, there just be a lose connection somewhere along the line, probably not his fault... but I see a lot of ex drunks, and cleaned up coke users who do the same thing all the time... they also blank out, that I haven’t seen bush do, so maybe its a genetic flaw.
quote
Isn't that "Rhodes"? Or are you talking about well-educated truck drivers?
Except if you're George Bush, then you have no excuses and are cut no slack.
Your right it is Rhodes... which is why I am not one.
If your GWB as president you get criticized more so then anyone else. The left doesn’t give GWB or anyone on in the cabinet any slack, and the right doesn’t give Clinton, or Kerry any slack... that’s just the way the world works.
In small communities, many times local governments have given WalMart substantial tax breaks to either come to town or upgrade to a Supercenter while giving their old, established, LOCAL OWNED businesses bupkis. I've seen it happen over and over again. They claim they bring employment to the area when, in fact, for every two jobs WalMart brings to an area it costs three from local mom and pop type businesses.
WalMart, if they're allowed to come to an area at all, should have to play by the same rules as everyone else. NO tax breaks and incentives. NO eminent domain claims on private property by local governments to get them that choice peice of real estate. NO more having so much control over suppliers that the manufacturers carry their inventory for them and WalMart doesn't have to pay for it until it goes across their register. I could go on with the dozens of unfair business practices of WalMart, but there's no need because those that love them will continue to love them and those that don't will continue to not like them. WalMart is single handedly destroying small business in rural America the likes of which we've never seen before, you can believe that or not.
WalMart doesn't have anything I need bad enough that I have to buy it from them.
John Stricker
But WalMart is the epitome of American Capitalism. They represent everything that this country's leadership and party in power are striving for, everything. Heck, they've given millions to the Republicans: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2004-02-02-walmart_x.htm so it's plain to see how well WalMarts and the Republican party's goals mesh.
WalMart brings new jobs to communities. Granted, they are low paying jobs with no meaningful benefits, but they're jobs nonetheless and those jobs do bring the national unemployment rate numbers down.
I don't see how any true capitalist can be against WalMart.
JazzMan
IP: Logged
11:25 AM
Master Tuner Akimoto Member
Posts: 2267 From: South Florida,USA Registered: Jul 2003
Originally posted by JazzMan: But WalMart is the epitome of American Capitalism. They represent everything that this country's leadership and party in power are striving for, everything. Heck, they've given millions to the Republicans: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/2004-02-02-walmart_x.htm so it's plain to see how well WalMarts and the Republican party's goals mesh. JazzMan
Man, you just LIVE for making statements and comparisons like that, don't you?
If you're so down on capitalism, why don't you move to China? They'd LOVE you there. You wouldn't have to put up with all this messy capitalist stuff.
IP: Logged
12:31 PM
jstricker Member
Posts: 12956 From: Russell, KS USA Registered: Apr 2002
Man, you just LIVE for making statements and comparisons like that, don't you?
If you're so down on capitalism, why don't you move to China? They'd LOVE you there. You wouldn't have to put up with all this messy capitalist stuff.
He would ge a dose of reality! China is become a capitialist country faster than the rest of the world. Hong Kong has been rated as the number 1 capitialist region of many years straight. I've been to Hong Kong, and it is amazing there. Of all the cities in the world, Hong Kong is my favorite. It is such a great place and capitalisim is the best.
China is following and you will see a powerhouse in commerece and business there in the coming years. China has ceased being a Communist country back in the 70's. People say they are Communist, but they are just a one party government and thats it. They have elections, they have a President that has term limits, and a parlimentary system. Granted! Your average common person is not allowed to vote, but thats a good thing.
IP: Logged
01:15 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20707 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
Originally posted by jstricker: . . WalMart is single handedly destroying small business in rural America the likes of which we've never seen before, you can believe that or not.
quote
Originally posted by jstricker: WalMart is single handedly destroying small business in rural America the likes of which we've never seen before, you can believe that or not.
I do agree with that, but rural America is dying anyways. The population decline is dramatic and in the 1st time in human history more people live in cities than the countryside around the world. Kansas rural communities have been declining so fast, the only thing left is the schools, county office, and an assistant living facility. All but just jobs programs for the people who are left. There is no growth in rural America anymore. Even when Hays just got a new Home Depot, they are still declining in population.
I travel all over the state and see more ghost towns. I used to have pictures of Ford Kansas, near Dodge City, you should see that place.
I was doing a study of population changes in Kansas. Here is something I did:
The counties in white are the only counties increasing. You will notice that Dodge City and Liberal grew, but it was less than 200 people in 5 years. The only reason is because of the packing plants, but nobody knows how long they will be around, once Western Kansas depletes its water supply.
Kansas in 2010, will loose another Congressional district, and the representative will further deplete. Farmers will stay out there, but eventually there won't be much out there anymore. There will be some small towns that are off the Interstate, being nothing more than a pitstop for people traveling. There also is not any new farmers coming in...that will never happen because the existing farmers won't allow it. Most farmers are getting old and their children are not coming back to take over the farm, so they will sell it off like they have been doing for the last 30 years.
Soon! There will hardly be any farmers, everything will be runned by corporations who hire people to work on it. You all ready starting to see it in Custom Cutting crews as the start of outsourced labor groups.
The only thing really left for Kansas is ranching. It is best to turn all of Western Kansas back to grass like it was before. On a seperate note! I saw something that I thought was ridiculous out in Western Kansas... there were farms that actually used irrigation sprinklers to irrigate wheat! If you are irrigating wheat, then you really need to stop growing anything on there.
[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 06-12-2005).]
If you are irrigating wheat, then you really need to stop growing anything on there.
