Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 12:26:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
 we don't need to work hard to maintain a high standard of living.  
View Quote


Sure I'm taking this apart from itss context, but I would LOVE to join the fantasy world where this is true.

Wife and I are doing pretty good for ourselves, but we're ALSO working like dogs.

This tripe sounds like the "winner of lifes lottery" crap the Democrats try to paint wealthy people with.

Fact is, most "wealthy" people work their azzes off.

THAT is the real world.



Link Posted: 6/20/2003 12:42:09 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
_twist -

You may beleive otherwise, but your posts read like a college educated but brain washed individual.

Sounds just like typical eggheaded gobbledy gook of professors who are so far removed from actually working in the real world, they beleive the socialism lite they taught you.

My take. YMMV.

You are intelligent no doubt.  But the catch phrases you toss about betray you.



View Quote


like i said, i'm working and following this thread at the same time.  i'm not suprised i'm being hackneyed w/ some of my arguments.

let's see if i can sum myself up in a non-socialist lite way (and hopefully this will address DoubleFeed's post as well):

1. less people are needed to do the same amount of work.

2. our population is expanding.

3. new innovation is not producing jobs at the rate it was at the turn of the century.  we moved from manufacturing to services and now services to information because the proceeding markets needed fewer and fewer workers.  now the emerging markets need very few workers (and highly educated workers to complicate matters).

4. the number of unemployed and underemployed is growing.

5. that group of people *feel* they are entitled to a high standard of living, but are not allowed access to it.  this feeling comes from advertising, history, and the general human belief that i deserve what you have cause i'm me.

6. hostility towards our government's inability to address these growing problems (and i'm of the opinion that this was not government's responsibility in the first place) combined w/ envy towards those who still are needed in the workforce will result in lots and lots of good old fashioned violence.

7. anarchy is not desired (i'm arguing this point, but i don't concede it.)

leads me to the conclusion that we must employ everyone that wants a job in order to maintain a stable society... but we can't because of the almighty profit margin.

oh, f*ck it... i brought marshmallows. burn babylon, burn.
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 1:02:02 PM EDT
[#3]
twist said:
let's see if i can sum myself up in a non-socialist lite way
View Quote


Nice try, but no cigar.[:D]

I agree with Garandman that you seem sincere and educated, but if you will return to the original topic, it was "What can/should Bush do to fix the economy? "

My answer was and is, not much.  Because I don't believe that it is the Federal Government's job, or the President's job, to regulate our economy.  This is a capitalist system and works best with minimal regulation.  That's all I'm saying.

And regarding your concern that the "poor" are getting frustrated, that's hogwash.  I was reading yesterday about a comparison of the "average poor" person in the 1950's and today.  How the poor now have color TVs, air conditioning, cars, plenty of food (being overweight is a bigger problem), etc.  The "poor" in the good old US of A are in better shape than any country in the world.

And it is largely because the government doesn't run business.  When they do, they screw it up just like everything else they do.

The main problem with the "poor" is that they have been fed this hogwash about "entitlements" for so long they think the world owes them something.  The world doesn't owe you anything.  It was here first.
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 1:23:37 PM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 1:41:28 PM EDT
[#5]
why do we fight so?  come over here Old_Painless, give me a smooch - i won't even mention your tobacco breath (as long as you don't mention mine).

Quoted:

Nice try, but no cigar.[:D]

I agree with Garandman that you seem sincere and educated, but if you will return to the original topic, it was "What can/should Bush do to fix the economy? "

My answer was and is, not much.  Because I don't believe that it is the Federal Government's job, or the President's job, to regulate our economy.  This is a capitalist system and works best with minimal regulation.  That's all I'm saying.
View Quote


_twist:
i'm of the opinion that this was not government's responsibility in the first place
View Quote


And regarding your concern that the "poor" are getting frustrated, that's hogwash.  I was reading yesterday about a comparison of the "average poor" person in the 1950's and today.  How the poor now have color TVs, air conditioning, cars, plenty of food (being overweight is a bigger problem), etc.  The "poor" in the good old US of A are in better shape than any country in the world.

And it is largely because the government doesn't run business.  When they do, they screw it up just like everything else they do.

The main problem with the "poor" is that they have been fed this hogwash about "entitlements" for so long they think the world owes them something.  The world doesn't owe you anything.  It was here first.
View Quote


_twist:
that group of people *feel* they are entitled to a high standard of living, but are not allowed access to it. this feeling comes from advertising, history, and the general human belief that i deserve what you have cause i'm me.
View Quote
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 1:55:28 PM EDT
[#6]
Well heck, twist.  What were arguing about anyway.  Looks like we're in agreement.

I'll pass on the smooch though. [:D]

You migh have better luck on the smooch with the guys on the "I Have Two Daddies" thread.

Link Posted: 6/20/2003 1:57:03 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Opinions please.
(I'll tell you why I'm asking in a little bit, but don't let that stop you from jumping in)
View Quote


Other than cutting spending, not much. Of course, various presidents throughout history have tried different methods to divert attention away from it.

A long war against a tireless, and demonic enemy has been helpful in the past.. Oh, wait....


George Bush would, of course, never do that, Bush's don't lie about economics, and tax's... Oh, wait!...[:D]
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 2:08:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Bush is politically lucky to have had 911.  Had it not been for that first domino, he'd be getting skinned alive by the press, who would blame him for the economy.
View Quote


This really isn't true.  Sept. 11 had a huge effect on the domestic and global economy.  Without Sept. 11 the "recession" would have been over a while ago.  Sept. 11 may have cost us over $1 trillion in real and potential economic output.
View Quote


Wait!! I'm not an economist. But it seems to me, that far more SPENDING was caused by 9/11. Wars, security, reconstruction, new govt jobs, you name it, huge amounts! All that $$ circulating. Where's it going??
(This is a question, not to contradict yer post)

I put "recession" into quotes because there have barely been two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth, which is the traditional definition of a recession.  We are very fortunate to be in a "recession" where the unemployment rate is just 6.1 percent.  We have never been this lucky in recessions in the past 25 years.  Of course some parts of the country have higher unemployment rates and so those areas really have a recession, while other parts of the country have very low unemployment rates (examples: 4.2 percent in Maryland, 4.1 percent in Minnesota).

GunLvr
View Quote


I think the "recession", is getting worse. Latest home sales show large increase in used homes.
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 2:14:40 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Why?  The opportunity is there for even the most minimally connected person to make unprecedented advances because of computers.  
View Quote
where is the market growth here?  supply creates its own demand is a long-ago derided idea. w/o purchasing power there is no economy.
Why isn't society as a whole taking advantage of this awesome power?  
I'll tell you why.  Because people are being taught that they will go to college and graduate, then get a job working for somebody else, then retire.  People aren't being told to develop new ideas, and step out and create.  We have a society of workers and followers, and no innovators and leaders.
View Quote

the brutal truth here is that there are very few people fit to lead, and lots of people that don't want to follow.  you're never going to get real innovation from the majority of a group - it's an evolutionary constraint.  the surfacing problem is that leaders don't need followers any longer.  robots can do the physical labor, and computers can take care of an accelerating amount of the mental labor.

imagine it as a bell curve representing intellect vs. population being chased by pac-man. pac-man representing industrial and technological advances in this scenario.  at first only the dumbest people had their jobs snapped away by pac-man.  my example being the iron plow or some such thing.  no problem - the people that really weren't all that dumb in the first place moved higher up the curve and were absorbed because of the greater riches brought on by that technological advance.  the ones that really were that dumb, and that's all they could do, died off - wasn't that many of them anyway.  fast forward a couple of centuries - holy f*ck! pac-man is starting to chomp into the meaty part of the curve - taking jobs away from machinists and lower middle management paper filers.  and they can move up, because this wasn't the extent of their intellect. but there is all those people from before... and they can't comprehend past here on the curve.  and my god, there is a lot of them.  oh, and we can't really absorb upwards any longer because business figured out that they don't have to share productivity gains w/ their employees.  but that's fine - they'll all die off.  wait - what's that sound?  oh no, they don't want to die off - and whoa man there's a lot of them.  what to do?  what to do?  and pac-man's still coming.  and he brought zaxxon and galaga and they're having an atari orgy of efficieny gains!

and here we are.

Say, you haven't ever read Atlas Shrugged, have you? [;D]
View Quote


no, i haven't.  not even sure what it's about.  occasionally some piece of pop culture slips by me.
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 2:17:46 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Well heck, twist.  What were arguing about anyway.  Looks like we're in agreement.

I'll pass on the smooch though. [:D]

You migh have better luck on the smooch with the guys on the "I Have Two Daddies" thread.

View Quote


very funny.
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 3:51:43 PM EDT
[#11]
Some thought provoking posts twist, thanks.
It would appear as though, my lifestyle choices, and geographical location, are fully justified!! [:D]
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 6:06:29 PM EDT
[#12]
Do away with the Capital Gains Tax and the Estate Tax(aka the "Death Tax")...
Link Posted: 6/20/2003 6:37:00 PM EDT
[#13]
Push for a Flat Tax Business Tax Constitutional Amendment of nor more than 3%
And Repeal the Constitutional Amendment allowing Personal Income Tax

Also push for a Constitutional Amendment requiring that the Federal Government operate on a Balanced Budget.

At the same time push for similar legislation.
(faster than a constitutional amendment)

This would do several things..

(1.) it would allow people to keep all of their earnings...resulting in people spending more of their money which results in an increase in consumer spending, which would pull our economy out of the recession (kick on the after burners) and go into an unprecedented period of growth.

(2.) It would force the Federal Government to exert fiscal restraint..combined with a decrease in revenues from taxation, this would force Budget cuts, and as a result...deregulation of our economy.

(3.) It would also permanently doom the long range goals of the Communists who are calling themselves "Democrats"..
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top