Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Matt C on January 20, 2007, 01:12:12 PM
-
-
for most people in the US it's about 33 percent of your income.
-
That's a little better. :-\ Surprising considering the cost of war though.
yeah but we don't have goverment subsidized healthcare like in Canada either, we should get at least that for what we pay.
-
That's a little better. :-\ Surprising considering the cost of war though.
the war has only cost $400billion so far. We just obtained $2t in oil in afghanistan, $3T in Iraq, and potentially $3t in Iran when we go there. And the 400B was borrowed. Our kids repay that one!
And everyone pays income tax or they go to jail here. Every year you hear another story (this eyar wesley snipes) of a person who doesn't pay and ends up jailed.
-
who has 400 billion to loan? ??? :o
-
who has 400 billion to loan? ??? :o
Our congress/prez borrow money from international banks, using US property as collateral. national parks, roads, govt facilities, all become property of these large banks should we ever default on paying back our 8Trillion deficit.
-
who has 400 billion to loan? ??? :o
Vince G, CSN MFT MSN AOL
-
who has 400 billion to loan? ??? :o
oh and to answer your question,
Mindspin.
-
yeah but we don't have goverment subsidized healthcare like in Canada either, we should get at least that for what we pay.
UK it is 22 percent basic, then 40 percent on income over about £33,000...healthcare is free, but you have to wait months to years for operations...
-
Good points about the war, but where is the law showing Americans have to pay income tax? ???
i think there are laws saying they do, and laws saying they don't. it's continually tested and people continually fail. IMO you pay more in legal fees than you save on taxes. And the rich folks who influence who gets into office also influence the number of tax shelters they enjoy, so they do A-okay on keeping much of what they earn.
-
Rob = CIA
-
Apparently 67 million people per year do not file income tax claims and with enough people doing that there is no way the government can enforce the law, which doesn't even seem to exist. ???
hahaha, tell that to the IRS when they bust down your door.
-
Rob you're a lot more intelligent than i thought you were bro. How sure are you that we obtained $2t in oil from Afghanistan & Iraq? And what's T? Trillion?
yes, t = trillion. We're gonna leave the region with 10 trillion or so, plus the intangibles that come from china and russia NOT getting that oil.
in july 2001, afghanistan's ruling party the taleban declined our offer to let the US firm Unocal manage their oil. They chose an argentinian firm instead, which would have put hugo chavez's south American coalition in the drivers seat of mid east oil (afghanistan pipeline would connect persian gulf to asia).
911 happened, we had an excuse to invade afghanistan, we put in hamed karzai (an old Bush 1 oil employee) to run the place and US firms are now controlling the drilling, moving, sales, and mgmt of oil there for the next 50 years. Same in Iraq now. And soon, we might be invading the country between Iraq and Afghanistan... IRAN.
-
yes, t = trillion. We're gonna leave the region with 10 trillion or so, plus the intangibles that come from china and russia NOT getting that oil.
in july 2001, afghanistan's ruling party the taleban declined our offer to let the US firm Unocal manage their oil. They chose an argentinian firm instead, which would have put hugo chavez's south American coalition in the drivers seat of mid east oil (afghanistan pipeline would connect persian gulf to asia).
911 happened, we had an excuse to invade afghanistan, we put in hamed karzai (an old Bush 1 oil employee) to run the place and US firms are now controlling the drilling, moving, sales, and mgmt of oil there for the next 50 years. Same in Iraq now. And soon, we might be invading the country between Iraq and Afghanistan... IRAN.
not saying you're wrong, but do you have a link ???
-
Apparently 67 million people per year do not file income tax claims and with enough people doing that there is no way the government can enforce the law, which doesn't even seem to exist. ???
If you make under 6 grand you don't have to pay. we have a lot of children, elderyly, handicapped, and unmotivated people that don't file.
Rob = CIA
LOL! Nah. I was pro-bush, then anti-bush when I found about 9/11, then now I'm kinda pro-american interests. While I agree the war is BS, I know it was needed to keep china from getting those resources. Did yall see china shoot down a satellite yesterday and Jordan decide they want nukes now? The world knows we're coming...
-
The American people are too stupid to band together for any cause. They fail to realize that the power is in the people and if the people do not want to pay on a large scale, there is nothing that can be done.
-
By the way,
Income tax is not required by law. It is all in how well you can hide your money.
-
LOL! Nah. I was pro-bush, then anti-bush when I found about 9/11, then now I'm kinda pro-american interests. While I agree the war is BS, I know it was needed to keep china from getting those resources. Did yall see china shoot down a satellite yesterday and Jordan decide they want nukes now? The world knows we're coming...
Oh yeah man, I know I'm just joking. I pretty much think just about the same as you on Political issues.
-
not saying you're wrong, but do you have a link ???
Sure. here are 57 world mainstream media articles on the US conquest of oil in Afghanistan which finally collapsed in July 2001:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=pipelinePolitics
We gave the taleban 40 million, they took it and told us to piss off, and signed with Chavez' boys. :-X
-
Sure. here are 57 world mainstream media articles on the US conquest of oil in Afghanistan which finally collapsed in July 2001:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=pipelinePolitics
We gave the taleban 40 million, they took it and told us to piss off, and signed with Chavez' boys. :-X
yeah, i dont see anything there about the 2, 3 & 3 trillion figures.,.,please give me a direct link.
-
The worst form of taxes are property taxes and those associated with vehicles. Don`t even get me started on speeding tickets and the like.
People are cowardly and sheepish. Nobody should EVER pay for some of these tickets.
-
This Delusional Liberal dude is one of those free thinking conservatives, not the brainwashed type.
"If you're not a liberal when you're 20, you lack a heart. If you're not a conservative when you're 30, you lack a brain."
;D
hahaha ;D funny
-
The worst form of taxes are property taxes and thos associated with vehicles. Don`t even get me started on speeding tickets and the like.
People are cowardly and sheepish. Nobody should EVER pay for some of these tickets.
exactly, those taxes are fuccking OUTRAGEOUS here in Missouri and they keep going up, i pay 1,400 bucks a year on a 1400 square foot house on a tiny lot, crazy.
-
Look, I want a 9/11 investigation more than anyone. But the war in afghanistan was, IMO, completely justified before 9/11. Look at the details. The US wanted the oil, we put taleban into power to help us get it, they changed their mind, and you know the rest!
1991-1997: Oil Investment in Central Asia Follows Soviet CollapseThe Soviet Union collapses in 1991, creating several new nations in Central Asia.
1995-November 2001: US Lobbies India Over Enron Power PlantEnron’s $3 billion Dabhol, India power plant runs into trouble in 1995 when the Indian government temporarily cancels an agreement.
September-October 1995: Unocal Obtains Turkmenistan Pipeline DealOil company Unocal signs an $8 billion deal with Turkmenistan to construct two pipelines (one for oil, one for gas), as part of a larger plan for two pipelines intended to transport oil and gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and into Pakistan.
December 1995: Caspian Sea Said to Contain Two-Thirds of World’s Known Oil Reserves
May 1996: US Seeks Stability in Afghanistan for Unocal Pipeline
June 24, 1996: Uzbekistan Cuts a Deal with EnronUzbekistan signs a deal with Enron
August 13, 1996: Unocal, Delta Oil Plan Afghan Pipeline
September 27, 1996: Victorious Taliban Supported by Pakistan; Viewed by US, Unocal as Stabilizing Force
October 7, 1996: Future Bush Envoy to Afghanistan Wants US to Help Taliban Unify Country, Build Pipeline
October 11, 1996: Afghan Pipeline Key to ‘One of the Great Prizes of the 21st Century’
August 1997: CIA Monitors Central Asia for Oil Reserves
October 27, 1997: Halliburton Announces Turkmenistan Project; Unocal and Delta Oil Form ConsortiumHalliburton, a company headed by future Vice President Dick Cheney
November 1997: Enron and bin Laden Family Team Up for Project
December 1997: Unocal Establishes Pipeline Training Facility Near bin Laden’s Compound
December 4, 1997: Taliban Representatives Visit Unocal in Texas
Early 1998: US Official Meets with Taliban; Promote Afghan Pipeline
June 23, 1998: Future VP Cheney Raves About Caspian Sea Opportunities
August 9, 1998: Northern Alliance Stronghold Conquered by Taliban; Pipeline Project Now Looks Promising
December 5, 1998: Unocal Abandons Afghan Pipeline Project
Late 1998: Taliban Stall Pipeline Negotiations to Keep Western Powers at Bay
1999: US Ready to Fight For Oil, Especially in Persian Gulf and Caspian Regions
A top level US policy document explicitly confirms the US military’s readiness to fight a war for oil. The report, Strategic Assessment 1999, prepared for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense, states, “energy and resource issues will continue to shape international security,” and if an oil “problem” arises, “US forces might be used to ensure adequate supplies.” Oil conflicts over production facilities and transport routes, particularly in the Persian Gulf and Caspian regions, are specifically envisaged. [Sydney Morning Herald, 5/20/2003]
July 4, 1999: Executive Order Issued Against Taliban
December 20, 1999: Iran Said to Be Supporting Conflict in Afghanistan to Further Their Own Pipeline Plans
December 19, 2000: US Seeks Taliban Overthrow
January 21, 2001: Bush Administration Takes Over; Many Have Oil Industry Connections
May 16, 2001: Cheney’s Energy Plan Foresees Government Helping US Companies Expand Into New Markets
May 23, 2001: Former Unocal Employee Becomes Bush’s Special Assistant to Middle East and Central Asia
June 27, 2001: India and Pakistan Discuss Building Pipeline Project Through Iran
July 21, 2001: US Official Threatens Possible Military Action Against Taliban by October if Pipeline Is Not Pursued
August 2, 2001: US Official Secretly Meets Taliban Ambassador in Last Attempt to Secure Pipeline Deal
September 11, 2001: The 9/11 Attack
October 5, 2001: Study Reveals Significant Oil and Gas Deposits in Afghanistan
October 9, 2001: Afghan Pipeline Idea Is Revived
December 8, 2001: US Oil Companies to Invest $200 Billion in Kazakhstan
January 1, 2002: Ex-Unocal Employee Becomes US Special Envoy and ’Real President’ of Afghanistan
February 9, 2002: Pakistani and Afghan Leaders Revive Afghanistan Pipeline
February 14, 2002: US Military Bases Line Afghan Pipeline Route
May 30, 2002: Afghan, Turkmen, and Pakistani Leaders Sign Pipeline Deal
December 27, 2002: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkmenistan Agree on Building Pipeline
-
yeah, i dont see anything there about the 2, 3 & 3 trillion figures.,.,please give me a direct link.
you want the figures in earth values, or market values?
if market, 50 a barrel, 75, or something else?
-
Whats really funny is that Steam power owns everything oil-powered, yet the American government DOES NOT allow this form of energy as a viable option, nor the rest of the world for that matter, due to the bargaining chip that is oil and the sanctions one soverign entity can enact when it controls such oil resevoirs.
-
American allies like the UK want to be in our good graces. Blair is unpopular, but England will be the absolute LAST country in Europe to suffer when world oil gets scarce.
There are plenty of viable alternatives to oil, but people who invent them seem to die lol...
-
Look, I want a 9/11 investigation more than anyone. But the war in afghanistan was, IMO, completely justified before 9/11. Look at the details. The US wanted the oil, we put taleban into power to help us get it, they changed their mind, and you know the rest!
1991-1997: Oil Investment in Central Asia Follows Soviet CollapseThe Soviet Union collapses in 1991, creating several new nations in Central Asia.
1995-November 2001: US Lobbies India Over Enron Power PlantEnron’s $3 billion Dabhol, India power plant runs into trouble in 1995 when the Indian government temporarily cancels an agreement.
September-October 1995: Unocal Obtains Turkmenistan Pipeline DealOil company Unocal signs an $8 billion deal with Turkmenistan to construct two pipelines (one for oil, one for gas), as part of a larger plan for two pipelines intended to transport oil and gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and into Pakistan.
December 1995: Caspian Sea Said to Contain Two-Thirds of World’s Known Oil Reserves
May 1996: US Seeks Stability in Afghanistan for Unocal Pipeline
June 24, 1996: Uzbekistan Cuts a Deal with EnronUzbekistan signs a deal with Enron
August 13, 1996: Unocal, Delta Oil Plan Afghan Pipeline
September 27, 1996: Victorious Taliban Supported by Pakistan; Viewed by US, Unocal as Stabilizing Force
October 7, 1996: Future Bush Envoy to Afghanistan Wants US to Help Taliban Unify Country, Build Pipeline
October 11, 1996: Afghan Pipeline Key to ‘One of the Great Prizes of the 21st Century’
August 1997: CIA Monitors Central Asia for Oil Reserves
October 27, 1997: Halliburton Announces Turkmenistan Project; Unocal and Delta Oil Form ConsortiumHalliburton, a company headed by future Vice President Dick Cheney
November 1997: Enron and bin Laden Family Team Up for Project
December 1997: Unocal Establishes Pipeline Training Facility Near bin Laden’s Compound
December 4, 1997: Taliban Representatives Visit Unocal in Texas
Early 1998: US Official Meets with Taliban; Promote Afghan Pipeline
June 23, 1998: Future VP Cheney Raves About Caspian Sea Opportunities
August 9, 1998: Northern Alliance Stronghold Conquered by Taliban; Pipeline Project Now Looks Promising
December 5, 1998: Unocal Abandons Afghan Pipeline Project
Late 1998: Taliban Stall Pipeline Negotiations to Keep Western Powers at Bay
1999: US Ready to Fight For Oil, Especially in Persian Gulf and Caspian Regions
A top level US policy document explicitly confirms the US military’s readiness to fight a war for oil. The report, Strategic Assessment 1999, prepared for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretary of defense, states, “energy and resource issues will continue to shape international security,” and if an oil “problem” arises, “US forces might be used to ensure adequate supplies.” Oil conflicts over production facilities and transport routes, particularly in the Persian Gulf and Caspian regions, are specifically envisaged. [Sydney Morning Herald, 5/20/2003]
July 4, 1999: Executive Order Issued Against Taliban
December 20, 1999: Iran Said to Be Supporting Conflict in Afghanistan to Further Their Own Pipeline Plans
December 19, 2000: US Seeks Taliban Overthrow
January 21, 2001: Bush Administration Takes Over; Many Have Oil Industry Connections
May 16, 2001: Cheney’s Energy Plan Foresees Government Helping US Companies Expand Into New Markets
May 23, 2001: Former Unocal Employee Becomes Bush’s Special Assistant to Middle East and Central Asia
June 27, 2001: India and Pakistan Discuss Building Pipeline Project Through Iran
July 21, 2001: US Official Threatens Possible Military Action Against Taliban by October if Pipeline Is Not Pursued
August 2, 2001: US Official Secretly Meets Taliban Ambassador in Last Attempt to Secure Pipeline Deal
September 11, 2001: The 9/11 Attack
October 5, 2001: Study Reveals Significant Oil and Gas Deposits in Afghanistan
October 9, 2001: Afghan Pipeline Idea Is Revived
December 8, 2001: US Oil Companies to Invest $200 Billion in Kazakhstan
January 1, 2002: Ex-Unocal Employee Becomes US Special Envoy and ’Real President’ of Afghanistan
February 9, 2002: Pakistani and Afghan Leaders Revive Afghanistan Pipeline
February 14, 2002: US Military Bases Line Afghan Pipeline Route
May 30, 2002: Afghan, Turkmen, and Pakistani Leaders Sign Pipeline Deal
December 27, 2002: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkmenistan Agree on Building Pipeline
this is a real eye opener.
-
this is a real eye opener.
yeah, i used to be super pissed about 9/11, but now i understand why.
most americans would look at that, (it was on the news all those years) and not understand it.
The taleban really did fck us over.
-
So basically bottom line bro the gov't feels like its ok to have young americans die for oil just because they decided to serve for their countries because of obvious sugar coated gov't bs to lure them to serve just to die for oil?
the take the 'greater good of all' appraoch.
They lose 3000 soldiers who signed up knowing the risk. As a result, 300 million Americans will live with low gas prices, stocked grovery stores, cheap airline flights, and safe society.
The rest of the world doesn't have enough power or water and it's all downhill from here. There can only be one superpower.
It's f'cked up, and I have been one of the MOST vehement anti-war folks here for the last 6 month.
But i think now that I understand the purposes, I agree with the elective war/pre-emptive action. It has nothing to do with WMD, other than the fact that Iraq and iran wanted them because they saw us taking out their neighbors and knew they were next.
Sometimes ya just gotta give your cash to the guy with a gun on you. Sadaam could have retired to Africa with millions and lived happily ever after.
-
Rob like dude seriously my respect level for you has gone up sky rocket. Just curiousity bro where the hell do you get all these resources unless you have connections in foreign countries?? I mean i'm pretty sure the gov't prohibits any news agency including BCC to give information such as what you know?
no, this is all common knowledge and free for americans to learn. much of it is in the washington post and NY Times actually! This used to be boring, business stuff to me til i went to school for it. now I see the real reasons behind it.
it's about our security - but not in the "maybe sadaam will launch a missile at us" sense, cause that is nonsense. It's about "will china or russia take the oil first, then one of THEm will fire a hundred missiles at us"?
Many people only understand mushroom clouds, so that pretext works. But in the real world, it's about the intentions of others in ten years that matter most, and most people don't see it.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before_9/11=pipelinePolitics
-
Whats really funny is that Steam power owns everything oil-powered,
You sure about that? ???
-
here's the kicker...
both the republicans AND democrats are right.
The republicans are right - we need to invade iraq and iran for our own longterm health and survival.
the democrats are right - the wars in iran and iraq, spending 400B on Iraq, these things ARE technically bullshit, since the WMD lie was a load of crap.
Together tho, you'll notice that the politicians in DC tend to do the same thing. They will scale back forces or cut money a bit, but we aren't pulling out of Iraq, no way either party lets that happen.
Losing a loved one in war is horrible - but many say they would do it again because they're fighting for our freedom and way of life. Without iraqi oil, we will be dealing with hugo and china scooting up thru mexico in the next 15 years. Imagine how scary that would be.
It is what it is. I think that if everyone knew what I knew, they would actually SUPPORT the war, which is currently at something like 20% approval rating.
-
here's the kicker...
both the republicans AND democrats are right.
The republicans are right - we need to invade iraq and iran for our own longterm health and survival.
the democrats are right - the wars in iran and iraq, spending 400B on Iraq, these things ARE technically bullshit, since the WMD lie was a load of crap.
Together tho, you'll notice that the politicians in DC tend to do the same thing. They will scale back forces or cut money a bit, but we aren't pulling out of Iraq, no way either party lets that happen.
Losing a loved one in war is horrible - but many say they would do it again because they're fighting for our freedom and way of life. Without iraqi oil, we will be dealing with hugo and china scooting up thru mexico in the next 15 years. Imagine how scary that would be.
It is what it is. I think that if everyone knew what I knew, they would actually SUPPORT the war, which is currently at something like 20% approval rating.
I guess let me stop with this political stuff cause i'm definitely not into politics. Hopefully we'll all live in peace and that's all i care about. I dont hate anybody, just gotta leave some room for PEACE....if we'll ever have some in this world.
-
In Canada, once you make any significant amount of money, the crown takes about 50%. :-X
So much for your "free" health care system...LOL!!
-
here's the kicker...
both the republicans AND democrats are right.
The republicans are right - we need to invade iraq and iran for our own longterm health and survival.
If you would at least get your basic facts straight... :-\
Nowhere are "the republicans" claiming that USA needs to invade Iran for the longterm health and survival.
Sure, you may find one or two extremists, but believe me, it's not the policy of the GOP. Show me any quote that would suggest that.
the democrats are right - the wars in iran and iraq, spending 400B on Iraq, these things ARE technically bullshit, since the WMD lie was a load of crap.
There has not been any war in Iran. Or did I miss something?
You bunch Iran and Iraq together for some reason, which is so wrong to do. Two entirely different countries.
Different ethnicities, different cultures, different languages, et al.
-Hedge
-
240 rants about quite a bit of stuff were he blurs non linked information into some weird sort of an idea.
This form of argument is very common with CTers.
For example The ISI in Pakistan and the CIA worked together to support the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. The ISI took members if the Taliban into Pakistan when it fled Afghanistan. The ISI now is protecting the Taliban leaders.
In CT thought the CIA is protecting the Taliban. Even though CIA and the ISI have different goals.
Ummm.... steam energy is made by burning coal, oil or natural gas. Unless you mean geothermal or nuclear generated steam.
Steam energy is then used to make electricity.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/power.htm/printable (http://science.howstuffworks.com/power.htm/printable)
-
240 rants about quite a bit of stuff were he blurs non linked information into some weird sort of an idea.
This form of argument is very common with CTers.
For example The ISI in Pakistan and the CIA worked together to support the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. The ISI took members if the Taliban into Pakistan when it fled Afghanistan. The ISI now is protecting the Taliban leaders.
In CT thought the CIA is protecting the Taliban. Even though CIA and the ISI have different goals.
You can't be serious...
Don't they consider time frame and shit like that?
-Hedge
-
joker,
I never said the Pakis did anything with the mujahadeen - they're 15 years apart.
Do the CIA and ISI have different goals? We'll have to disagree on that one, as the connections between them are pretty well established. Also the morning breakfast between CIA's Goss and ISI's top general/atta money man - that's an interesting little piece of info.
joker, my mode of thinking is evolving, but that doesn't change facts (ISI breakfast with future CIA leader ON 9/11) and it doesn't change what I've written here (I never once said ISI was in with mujahadeen, the mid-80s proxy machine for warring with USSR)
-
The CIA gave the ISI weapons to give to mujahadeen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen)
-
The CIA gave the ISI weapons to give to mujahadeen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen)
this is suddenly YOUR topic, mate.
You brought it up and accused me of subscribing to this theory, which I know nothing about.
now you introduce WIKI links to it.
Perhaps YOU are the CTer here.
-
No, I had this convo with you and Sandy in the past.
You actually stated that CIA started al qeada. Sandy was the one with the ISI stuff. You just agreed.
Both aren't true.
However, I stray from that when it comes to 911 and the wars. I have studied it for nearly a year now, and I know 911 was at the very least allowed to happen to get us into war. This is murder, and whoever it was - the pricks at the FAA up to whoever ordered them - need to be in a cell for doing it. And the Afghani and iraqi wars were both justified by terrorism (and the CIS started al quida to do our dirty work in the 80s).
-
No, I had this convo with you and Sandy in the past.
You actually stated that CIA started al qeada. Sandy was the one with the ISI stuff. You just agreed.
Both aren't true.
Did the CIA give any money, intel, training, or weapons to the mujahadeen to fight Russia in the 80s?
-
In Canada, once you make any significant amount of money, the crown takes about 50%. :-X
I've heard this before. I don't know why anyone would want to live there. The tax rate is absurd.
-
I've heard this before. I don't know why anyone would want to live there. The tax rate is absurd.
But thats how they pay for their "free" health care ::)!!
-
here's the kicker...
both the republicans AND democrats are right.
The republicans are right - we need to invade iraq and iran for our own longterm health and survival.
the democrats are right - the wars in iran and iraq, spending 400B on Iraq, these things ARE technically bullshit, since the WMD lie was a load of crap.
Together tho, you'll notice that the politicians in DC tend to do the same thing. They will scale back forces or cut money a bit, but we aren't pulling out of Iraq, no way either party lets that happen.
Losing a loved one in war is horrible - but many say they would do it again because they're fighting for our freedom and way of life. Without iraqi oil, we will be dealing with hugo and china scooting up thru mexico in the next 15 years. Imagine how scary that would be.
It is what it is. I think that if everyone knew what I knew, they would actually SUPPORT the war, which is currently at something like 20% approval rating.
240...this is all short term stuff to make very rich people even more rich...The fact of the matter is that we are being lied to not to save our country but to make people very rich...
What would be big deal if we let china or Russia move in and take the resources? While they are doing that for a decade or two, the U.S could make oil obsolete...We have the technology and the know how to do it today...Sure we would take a huge hit in our economy but in the whole scheme of things--- big deal..
Our government isn't giving us a better life by lying to us and making us all rich with material items.. we are just brainwashed into thinking that is what we need out of life...For the better of all life on earth, this war was not necessary at all...Its only necessary for total globel domination...which is what they are up to...I can't be proud of any one government who believes they have to dominate all humans and use scare (terrorist)tactics to do so...The only thing this does it make a even smaller group of people even more powerful...
-
What would be big deal if we let china or Russia move in and take the resources? While they are doing that for a decade or two, the U.S could make oil obsolete...We have the technology and the know how to do it today...Sure we would take a huge hit in our economy but in the whole scheme of things--- big deal..
Dunno... I think it's the societal redesign that would be crippling.
200 million cars in the US today.
170,000 gas stations in the US today.
The Big 3 Automakers.
Several big oil companies.
Of course I'd love to see organic, solar, geo, or another alternative fuel clean up, with a nice converter for your car and everyone wins. But the pricks in charge are unwilling, there are trillion dollar groups in the world who will do anything to "end" alternative fueling.
You sound right. But people are too greedy and powerful to let you try it.
-
The American people are too stupid to band together for any cause. They fail to realize that the power is in the people and if the people do not want to pay on a large scale, there is nothing that can be done.
sure. Since they take it right out of your check before you get paid,sorta hard to NOT PAY isn't it...but wait,I forgot,you don't get a paycheck because you don't have a job.(read mooch off mom and dad)
-
I've heard this before. I don't know why anyone would want to live there. The tax rate is absurd.
Except for being freaking cold Canada is good place to live.
But to be specific our tax rats are graduated. The upper bracket is 44% for both provincial and federal tax for all money earned over $107,000.
The realized tax rate would be more like 30%.
Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits.
Plus we don't have 30 million people without coverage.
-
Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits.
Perhaps you haven't yet met our good friend outsourcing.
-
Except for being freaking cold Canada is good place to live.
But to be specific our tax rats are graduated. The upper bracket is 44% for both provincial and federal tax for all money earned over $107,000.
The realized tax rate would be more like 30%.
Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits.
Plus we don't have 30 million people without coverage.
I'd rather pay for my own health care premiums and keep more of my hard earned money.
-
Perhaps you haven't yet met our good friend outsourcing.
Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!
-
Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!
oh - i meant that joker said that "Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits"
As China becomes bigger and more extended on the North American continents (or if the N. American union materializes), those Canadian manufacturing jobs will be given to chinese or mexican laborers that'll work for a tenth what a Canandian would require.
-
Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!
Maybe true on the small scale,such as your business,but not on the large scale.
-
Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.
That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.
If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money. The company competes better in the world. The US economy grows. But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.
-
Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.
That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.
If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money. The company competes better in the world. The US economy grows. But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.
Yup. Been There.
It is funny what you said about China. Our company has more business than we can handle right now. There are a few of our parts that we buy FROM CHINA..take them out of the crate...stamp MADE IN USA on them,and then ship them to the customer. :-\ How f**ked up is that?
-
Pay ur damm taxes..thats my salary.
-
Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.
That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.
If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money. The company competes better in the world. The US economy grows. But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.
Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?
Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.
Why?
Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.
Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.
Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.
That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.
Why?
Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.
Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.
-Hedge
-
Hedge-
You forget, that is why no one is real serious about removing illegals in the US.
They perform all of the jobs that most Americans won't do.
Out sourcing and the use of illegals is very much the same thing.
-
Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?
Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.
Why?
Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.
Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.
Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.
That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.
Why?
Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.
Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.
-Hedge
The individual tragedies are micro until you count them.
When 10,000 individuals lose their jobs, it's suddenly a macro issue, adding .00X% strain on our public support system.
So while it might be $100m good for the stockholders (and 500 people who own HP stock will benefit), it will be life changing for the 10,000 people who now live at poverty line.
Still a cumulative gain for the GDP on paper. But a net loss to 9,500 Americans.
Horizon: shortterm win, longterm loss. Of course these 9500 people should go back to school and get higher level service skilled positions, but there is a hit. The use of oursourcing, IMO, should be done gradually using tariffs and financial incentives to cushion the blow and control the flow of jobs out, to manage the change.
-
Hedge-
You forget, that is why no one is real serious about removing illegals in the US.
They perform all of the jobs that most Americans won't do.
Out sourcing and the use of illegals is very much the same thing.
The problem with illegals in USA, is that they bring criminality. Statistics shows that immigrants, and especially illegal, have a higher crime rate.
The gang problem is largely related to first, second and third generation immigrants into the USA.
The gangs are one of the results, symptoms, of a nonworking immigrant policy.
There are others.
Without all these illegal immigrants, tons of work would be outsourced, and a few people would be in the USA legally, controlled, paying taxes like everyone else.
It would probably lead to less crime and higher demands on students to get through college, which in turn would create demands for ways to able everyone a college/university grad.
Fact: USA as a society makes fat dollars on every baby that is born and then later decides to go all the way, all the way through university and an engineering degree.
-Hedge
-
The problem with illegals in USA, is that they bring criminality. Statistics shows that immigrants, and especially illegal, have a higher crime rate.
The gang problem is largely related to first, second and third generation immigrants into the USA.
The gangs are one of the results, symptoms, of a nonworking immigrant policy.
There are others.
Without all these illegal immigrants, tons of work would be outsourced, and a few people would be in the USA legally, controlled, paying taxes like everyone else.
It would probably lead to less crime and higher demands on students to get through college, which in turn would create demands for ways to able everyone a college/university grad.
Fact: USA as a society makes fat dollars on every baby that is born and then later decides to go all the way, all the way through university and an engineering degree.
-Hedge
You are right. Many countries in Europe benefit from having very highly educated citizens. While immigrant populations can back fill positions such as janitors, etc.
It is good because legals pay taxes and in many cases encourage their kids to perform well at school so that their whole family can be better off.
Outsourcing is an extension of this. Getting payed 5 dollars a day in America to make shoes is crazy and very few people would do it, but in other countries people become wealth enough to push their kids through school and in the end increase the buying power of their country.
As these countries increase their wealth it increases the overall wealth of many countries and eventually gives companies another market to sell in.
It also increases the wealth in the US for these companies and increases the amount of jobs accountants and other high end white collar. It also frees up capital for people to start their own businesses, which also helps to grow the economy.
-
The individual tragedies are micro until you count them.
When 10,000 individuals lose their jobs, it's suddenly a macro issue, adding .00X% strain on our public support system.
So while it might be $100m good for the stockholders (and 500 people who own HP stock will benefit), it will be life changing for the 10,000 people who now live at poverty line.
Still a cumulative gain for the GDP on paper. But a net loss to 9,500 Americans.
Horizon: shortterm win, longterm loss. Of course these 9500 people should go back to school and get higher level service skilled positions, but there is a hit. The use of oursourcing, IMO, should be done gradually using tariffs and financial incentives to cushion the blow and control the flow of jobs out, to manage the change.
Shortterm win, longterm loss?
You got it all backwards.
It's the other way.
USA as a whole wins when these jobs are outsourced. The persons that loses their jobs, they're fcuked.
But it would be unintelligent to try protecting these jobs, they are clearly not qualified enough to keep in the USA.
Upgrade the workforce, that's the message.
As far as the people losing their jobs, and how to deal with them... It's all about what kind of political belief you have, but something's needs to be done to get their level of education upgraded.
How you want to go about that, is a political choice.
Some would choose offering a special education, through the government, paid partially by the gov and partially by the new employeer.
Some would choose offering a student loan with good deals, for all Universities in the country.
Some would choose to offer some kind of tax cut as long as studying.
Et al.
There are a number of ways to go about it.
But the goal, I am sure, everyone can agree on. To get these people upgraded, so they can work with qualified jobs.
-Hedge
-
i agree completely about upgrading our workforce - i just think it needs to be a gradual process, controlled by govt safeguards to ensure the work force has the time and available schooling to catch up.
the short term win comes for the GDP - bottom line grows. the long term loss comes from those 10,000 workers who are now scrambling to find an income to feed their .49 wife and 2.3 kids.
the longer term win can come if the unemployed get educated - but since their job loss is often unpredictable (and many can't take 2 years to relearn a marketable skill) most will take something below their performance capacity just to keep the lights on.
Under the current system, Microsoft, Ford, Coke, and 50 other top American companies could wake up Tuesday morning and decide to move overseas. We could have a million American out of work instantly. Yes, the GDP would rise, as new billions would roll in. But those million Americans all rushing back to trade school and community college would put a crippling hurt on student loans, medium level PT jobs, and a hundred other ripplers.
So I'm all for it - but slow and regulated.
-
i agree completely about upgrading our workforce - i just think it needs to be a gradual process, controlled by govt safeguards to ensure the work force has the time and available schooling to catch up.
the short term win comes for the GDP - bottom line grows. the long term loss comes from those 10,000 workers who are now scrambling to find an income to feed their .49 wife and 2.3 kids.
the longer term win can come if the unemployed get educated - but since their job loss is often unpredictable (and many can't take 2 years to relearn a marketable skill) most will take something below their performance capacity just to keep the lights on.
Under the current system, Microsoft, Ford, Coke, and 50 other top American companies could wake up Tuesday morning and decide to move overseas. We could have a million American out of work instantly. Yes, the GDP would rise, as new billions would roll in. But those million Americans all rushing back to trade school and community college would put a crippling hurt on student loans, medium level PT jobs, and a hundred other ripplers.
So I'm all for it - but slow and regulated.
If you continually upgrade the workforce, these big layoffs aren't that big of a deal.
It's if a whole nation realises that they have tens of thousands of people working the car industry, or other industries, without higher education, then is the time to wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak.
That's when a nation is bound to go through a rough translation period.
I agree with you that as few people as possible should be made to suffer.
But my reason is purely utiliary. Don't expect any humanity from me in this case. 8) It's more effective to keep people working - less crime, less poverty, less everything of problems, except job related accidents ;D.
The risk of getting Democrats in power, is that they tend to be protectionists, ie protect American jobs and industries, which allows ineffective American businesses to survive too long.
Perhaps the Democrats have changed their policies, Pelosi claims they have. But look for the Democrats of Detroit and the surrounding area to push for protection of American jobs.
Right now is when USA needs to get a much higher percentage of the youth into college.
Or the big tech companies, such as Microsoft and Apple, will start to outsource even the high-tech jobs. And it won't be due to lower costs, but due to a better educated population.
I believe that in ten years, the most important outsourcing will not be about lower salaries, but about finding the best place in regards to R&D and such. Companies will cluster around Universities and alike, where research is made.
Low cost outsourcing will be secondary.
-Hedge
-
In ten years we will likely be the north american union. manufacturing will be done in the south (mex), resources pulled from north (oh canada) and managed in the center (USA).
all this outsourcing talk will be for naught anyway.
Now, i'm off to spend some Ameros!
-
In ten years we will likely be the north american union. manufacturing will be done in the south (mex), resources pulled from north (oh canada) and managed in the center (USA).
all this outsourcing talk will be for naught anyway.
Now, i'm off to spend some Ameros!
We could only hope. ;D
Unless our free market becomes stronger, we will continue to lose growth and market share to the EU.
-
Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?
Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.
Why?
Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.
Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.
Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.
That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.
Why?
Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.
Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.
-Hedge
While I agree that everyone should have an education...you show your ignorance when you insinuate that all factory jobs are "unqualified" or unskilled. ::) There are many factory jobs that are skilled labor.You are one of those people that think a college degree makes you a "better" person than someone who works for a living. I challenge you to take your degree,and use it to weld aluminum...Or paint a car...Or build an engine/transmission. These are all things that I can do..and if you think any of them do not require skill then you are an idiot.
Meltdown..... saved someone the trouble. ;D
P.S. WOOO HOOO WOOO HOOO Colts are going to the SuperBowl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
-
i don't think he was dissing you, gt, unless of course he's a Patriots fan
I think the meaning of "skilled" means those jobs which require 4 to 8 years of schooling. I worked painting at a bodyshop and agree - it is a position requiring a great deal of skill. I think the emphasis is on the fact that one can become pretty proficient in some jobs in 2-3 months or on-the-job training like painting, while it'd take 8 years to be able to operate on someone's brain.
-
i don't think he was dissing you, gt, unless of course he's a Patriots fan
I think the meaning of "skilled" means those jobs which require 4 to 8 years of schooling. I worked painting at a bodyshop and agree - it is a position requiring a great deal of skill. I think the emphasis is on the fact that one can become pretty proficient in some jobs in 2-3 months or on-the-job training like painting, while it'd take 8 years to be able to operate on someone's brain.
You guys don't trust me to work on your brain!!? >:(
-
While I agree that everyone should have an education...you show your ignorance when you insinuate that all factory jobs are "unqualified" or unskilled. ::) There are many factory jobs that are skilled labor.You are one of those people that think a college degree makes you a "better" person than someone who works for a living. I challenge you to take your degree,and use it to weld aluminum...Or paint a car...Or build an engine/transmission. These are all things that I can do..and if you think any of them do not require skill then you are an idiot.
Meltdown..... saved someone the trouble. ;D
P.S. WOOO HOOO WOOO HOOO Colts are going to the SuperBowl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
Weld aluminum, painting a car...
Those are both jobs that requires little education, but rather experience.
Those jobs could just as well be done in India, China or any other low wage country.
So the sooner those jobs are automized or moved, the better.
But those who work these jobs, they need to be upgraded. They are a great resource for USA.
Those countries are not able to produce the same kind of educated workforce, so that's what USA need to focus on.
BTW, I never said all industry jobs are unqualified. Or unskilled.
Industries that requires engineers and highly educated people will always have a future in USA.
-Hedge
-
Weld aluminum, painting a car...
Those are both jobs that requires little education, but rather experience.
Those jobs could just as well be done in India, China or any other low wage country.
So the sooner those jobs are automized or moved, the better.
But those who work these jobs, they need to be upgraded. They are a great resource for USA.
Those countries are not able to produce the same kind of educated workforce, so that's what USA need to focus on.
BTW, I never said all industry jobs are unqualified. Or unskilled.
Industries that requires engineers and highly educated people will always have a future in USA.
-Hedge
I have worked with mechanical engineers for 15 years...and MANY of them have the mechanical aptitude of a catfish.They are intelligent people but they lack the one thing that is required for them to be good at their job...mechanical ability.But they keep their job because they have a degree.Not all,of coarse...but many of them.
You are correct by saying that welding and automotive painting require more skill and experience and less "education"...although paint technology changes very quickly so it is a constant learning process.It is impossible to automate everything.Things will always break and need repaired.
The biggest problem with your argument is that it is impossible. SOMEBODY will always have to do the work.Everyone can't be executives,lawyers and Doctors...What are ya gona do if you have a fender bender? Ship your car to India for repair? What are you gona do when your car breaks down? What about when your furnace or air conditioning goes out? I could go on and on.This country is kept going by the ordinary blue collar worker.All the business smarts in the world are useless without someone to actually do the work.
-
Let me tell you I have worked with mechanical engineers for 15 years...and MANY of them have the mechanical aptitude of a catfish.They are intelligent people but they lack the one thing that is required for them to be good at their job...mechanical ability.But they keep their job because they have a degree.Not all,of coarse...but many of them.
You are correct by saying that welding and automotive painting require more skill and experience and less "education"...although paint technology changes very quickly so it is a constant learning process.It is impossible to automate everything.Things will always break and need repaired.
The biggest problem with your argument is that it is impossible. SOMEBODY will always have to do the work.Everyone can't be executives,lawyers and Doctors...What are ya gona do if you have a fender bender? Ship your car to India for repair? What are you gona do when your car breaks down? What about when your furnace or air conditioning goes out? I could go on and on.This country is kept going by the ordinary blue collar worker.All the business smarts in the world are useless without someone to actually do the work.
There will always be a need for jobs "in between", so to speak. Repairing and building, working hotels, the media, cleaning, shop clerks.
But those are jobs in between. Those jobs are not the foundation of USA.
The foundation of USA is the industry, the farming and other different areas where capital is produced.
My point is that those who today are working the car industry, should perhaps instead have a degree in computer programming, or in biochemistry.
You can't of course change all this in one year. But perhaps that will explain to guys like you better why Bush isn't protecting "US jobs".
To protect them, would mean that the natural evolution of the industries would be temporarily stopped, and it could cause a enormous blow to the US economy and society later on.
Better that a relatively small amount of jobs vanish on regular basis, because then society is able to "swallow" it, to find new jobs for those people, after some education.
If a huge amount of people would lose their jobs, that wouldn't be possible.
-Hedge
-
The more prohibitive/inflexible tax system, more people will look for schemes to avoid it. Think about it, if you are earning say 50K a year, you'll pay say 16.5K tax. But a man earning 5-10mln will have to pay a hefty 1.5-3.5 million to the revenue service. Mind you one gets into a higher tax bracket with higher income and therefore pays proportionally more.
In most EU countries if you take in account all taxes, transfer taxes, capital gains, etc, etc... a higher-earning individuals end up facing up to 49% tax liability. Now when you work hard to earn a million you dont just want to give half of it away. In addition, they often match your assets to your (HISTORICAL) tax liability. In other words, you might have 5mln in assets but only 500K actual cash available, but you will be liable on the full 5mln! Where's the justice? Mind you that in many (even 1st world) countries a hefty chunk of tax revenue goes to the pockets of the MP's through legal or illegal schemas. No wonder high-income people try to find ways to minimize tax liability.
-
The foundation of USA is the industry, the farming and other different areas where capital is produced.
-Hedge
That is my point.
-
That is my point.
Mine too.
And the problem is, the workforce is getting obsolete, that's why outsourcing is even possible in the first place.
To "protect" these jobs, by giving these companies heavy tax breaks and shit, is dangerous.
They need to be forced to upgrade their tasks. Only tasks that require high education, more or less, have any future in the Western World.
The rough translation period, taking care of those people who don't have the ability to re-school themselves, or start own businesses, is where all the tough political decisions have to be made.
Franklin D Roosevelt did a similar thing with his "New Deal".
-Hedge