I'm Loosing Confidence In Bush
01-15-2004, 09:37 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: beyond all borders
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd just like to know who's in charge. It sure isn't me, in spite of what the Constitution guarantees, and it sure isn't George W. Bush.
We all lost something, somewhere.
We all lost something, somewhere.
01-15-2004, 09:59 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Southern Utah
Posts: 910
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man, "the poor and underpriviledged" bearing the brunt of the war? How do you figure the draft will fix that? I am on my 12th year of service, and guess what? I VOLUNTEERED! My economic status had NOTHING to do with my decision to serve my country! My dad (also a veteran) raised me to love this country and cherish the Constitution and the Bill of Rights that gives you the right to speak your mind. DO NOT cheapen my service to country by saying I am here because I am "poor and underprivileged". I respect your right to free speech, but don't think for a minute that you have the right to speak for ME! -Steve
01-15-2004, 10:04 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But is it safe to say that a legal Mexican worker would more willingly take a job paying $5/hr before an American would take it? I think they would. And if we had thousands of these immigrants taking jobs all over the country, would it be safe to say that the wages for most new jobs would be lower than they would be if there weren't poor immigrants to take those low paying jobs?
I'm talking supply and demand here. Thousands of legal Mexicans show up in the country taking ANY job. Employers see this and say, "Wow, I can hire all these workers at half of what I'm paying any American!" I think it would become a lot harder to find a job where I can work 40-60 hrs a week and still be able to buy myself a nice CTD, which is what we all really want, right?
This idea takes money away from the lower/middle class and gives the big corporations more money. I don't know which is going to come first, the chicken or the egg, but if economic prosperity is the goal, who do you give the money to? The people? Or the corporations?
I'm talking supply and demand here. Thousands of legal Mexicans show up in the country taking ANY job. Employers see this and say, "Wow, I can hire all these workers at half of what I'm paying any American!" I think it would become a lot harder to find a job where I can work 40-60 hrs a week and still be able to buy myself a nice CTD, which is what we all really want, right?
This idea takes money away from the lower/middle class and gives the big corporations more money. I don't know which is going to come first, the chicken or the egg, but if economic prosperity is the goal, who do you give the money to? The people? Or the corporations?
01-15-2004, 11:14 PM
#36
DTR Advertiser
The space exploration costs for the project to go to Mars and Moon are projected to be 1 little bity percent of the average Federal spending Budget.
Looks to me like we CAN afford it no problem.
Its nothing compared to the dole outs we give the lazy.
Don~
Looks to me like we CAN afford it no problem.
Its nothing compared to the dole outs we give the lazy.
Don~
01-15-2004, 11:59 PM
#37
DTR Founder
Originally posted by welder27
But is it safe to say that a legal Mexican worker would more willingly take a job paying $5/hr before an American would take it? I think they would. And if we had thousands of these immigrants taking jobs all over the country, would it be safe to say that the wages for most new jobs would be lower than they would be if there weren't poor immigrants to take those low paying jobs?
I'm talking supply and demand here. Thousands of legal Mexicans show up in the country taking ANY job. Employers see this and say, "Wow, I can hire all these workers at half of what I'm paying any American!" I think it would become a lot harder to find a job where I can work 40-60 hrs a week and still be able to buy myself a nice CTD, which is what we all really want, right?
This idea takes money away from the lower/middle class and gives the big corporations more money. I don't know which is going to come first, the chicken or the egg, but if economic prosperity is the goal, who do you give the money to? The people? Or the corporations?
But is it safe to say that a legal Mexican worker would more willingly take a job paying $5/hr before an American would take it? I think they would. And if we had thousands of these immigrants taking jobs all over the country, would it be safe to say that the wages for most new jobs would be lower than they would be if there weren't poor immigrants to take those low paying jobs?
I'm talking supply and demand here. Thousands of legal Mexicans show up in the country taking ANY job. Employers see this and say, "Wow, I can hire all these workers at half of what I'm paying any American!" I think it would become a lot harder to find a job where I can work 40-60 hrs a week and still be able to buy myself a nice CTD, which is what we all really want, right?
This idea takes money away from the lower/middle class and gives the big corporations more money. I don't know which is going to come first, the chicken or the egg, but if economic prosperity is the goal, who do you give the money to? The people? Or the corporations?
01-16-2004, 01:06 AM
#38
Registered User
Phewie, good discussion, except some violent and rude parts.
I would like to throw in my 2c. Since I'm no American I am not directly involved with the US economy and internal politics. BUT I am affected by the oreign policy that the Bush administration is carrying out. And I do think that it's a sad bit of childrens theater. Sorry. Where is the proof of the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, where is the proof for Saddam supporting Al Quaeda? Lots of hints pointing exactly the other way are to be found, and less and less of the promised proofs are shown. In the meantime more US soldiers have died in Iraq since the end of fighting than during the war...
Please just look at the results of Bush foreign policy. IMO a bombed out Iraq with a war still raging , the US improving the recruiting base for radical islamist groups daily for the price of just a handful of americans per week. The dead innocent people somewhere on the other side of the world really don't count....
Just my 2c, asbestos underwear ready
AlpineRAM
I would like to throw in my 2c. Since I'm no American I am not directly involved with the US economy and internal politics. BUT I am affected by the oreign policy that the Bush administration is carrying out. And I do think that it's a sad bit of childrens theater. Sorry. Where is the proof of the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, where is the proof for Saddam supporting Al Quaeda? Lots of hints pointing exactly the other way are to be found, and less and less of the promised proofs are shown. In the meantime more US soldiers have died in Iraq since the end of fighting than during the war...
Please just look at the results of Bush foreign policy. IMO a bombed out Iraq with a war still raging , the US improving the recruiting base for radical islamist groups daily for the price of just a handful of americans per week. The dead innocent people somewhere on the other side of the world really don't count....
Just my 2c, asbestos underwear ready
AlpineRAM
Here's my VOTE,,,,,,,,,,
01-16-2004, 07:20 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SC
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmmmm...tricky subject men.
#1 - the jobs. Low pay or high pay. Survival of the fittest or smartest. This would push the non lazy americans to get an education and work harder. THis should then increase the pay for educated workers. It depends on where YOU are on this scale. In the end, this would benifit the upper class since most of them get the education. Lower and upper would separate more...I could go on with underlying issues...I will not.
#2 - OT. I did not like the idea the first time I heard about it. However, I do not have all of the facts. I am salary EXEMPT. I get OT for anything over 8 hours in one day. If I am out of work, I get paid anyway. (I have perfect attendance.) Sunday is double time and holiday is tripple. I am greatful for my opportunities here and feel you have to work very hard to stay ahead of the competition. If I do not do it, someone else will...so, here I am. THe comment made about going backwards due to different tax bracket from working OT at your current job......I hear that here all the time. Well, If you are in a certain position and you want to make more money, you have to work MORE...(assuming you are not promoted).....yes, you get hit with more taxes, but you get some back at the end of the year anyway. I think it is absurd to not work more because of taxes. If you don't work more, you don't make more...you will be taxed heavily if you work or not....stopping.
#3 - I like Willie too!
#4 - Please present your arguments in a professional manner regardless of who you like or dislike. You will think more clearly without emotion.
#5 - THis is a very heavy subject. Not nearly as cut and dry as some make it out. We have a "vote" or "not vote" decision to make after hearing only HALF of the real issues with the candidate's policies. Of this half, you can probably only believe half of that...Also, you cannot please everyone. Give and take.
sorry that was so long....
JKE
#1 - the jobs. Low pay or high pay. Survival of the fittest or smartest. This would push the non lazy americans to get an education and work harder. THis should then increase the pay for educated workers. It depends on where YOU are on this scale. In the end, this would benifit the upper class since most of them get the education. Lower and upper would separate more...I could go on with underlying issues...I will not.
#2 - OT. I did not like the idea the first time I heard about it. However, I do not have all of the facts. I am salary EXEMPT. I get OT for anything over 8 hours in one day. If I am out of work, I get paid anyway. (I have perfect attendance.) Sunday is double time and holiday is tripple. I am greatful for my opportunities here and feel you have to work very hard to stay ahead of the competition. If I do not do it, someone else will...so, here I am. THe comment made about going backwards due to different tax bracket from working OT at your current job......I hear that here all the time. Well, If you are in a certain position and you want to make more money, you have to work MORE...(assuming you are not promoted).....yes, you get hit with more taxes, but you get some back at the end of the year anyway. I think it is absurd to not work more because of taxes. If you don't work more, you don't make more...you will be taxed heavily if you work or not....stopping.
#3 - I like Willie too!
#4 - Please present your arguments in a professional manner regardless of who you like or dislike. You will think more clearly without emotion.
#5 - THis is a very heavy subject. Not nearly as cut and dry as some make it out. We have a "vote" or "not vote" decision to make after hearing only HALF of the real issues with the candidate's policies. Of this half, you can probably only believe half of that...Also, you cannot please everyone. Give and take.
sorry that was so long....
JKE
01-16-2004, 05:37 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Along those lines, I have a question about unions. I've tried to join 3 unions here in Alaska and all 3 of them acted like they could care less if I worked for them at all. The Plumbers & Pipefitters, Ironworkers, and Pile Drivers & Divers unions all gave me the run-around by saying they have welding jobs open and not enough people to fill them, but when it comes time for them to call me they never do. I'm a certified welder who has been honorably discharged from the Air Force and have 5 yrs experience in the welding/construction trades...if that's not enough for them then what IS enough?
I thought unions were basically hiring halls where contractors go to find their workers. To me it seems that there's more going on here than just a group of people gathering together to employ qualified workers...it's more like a favoritism hall where they only find work for their friends and their friends' friends. Is that how it is in the rest of the U.S.? Or is Alaska just a communist state run by the Mafia?
And it's not just me who has had this kind of trouble...almost everybody I've talked to in the construction trades hates unions up here because of their discriminatory actions. I even talked to a friend of mine the other day who says his electrical company won a bid for a new $5 million job for the local university. The IBEW came in and told the contractor, "Hey, we'll not only do the work, but we'll finance u at 3%!" So the union got the job EVENTHOUGH the private contractor won it fair n square by submitting a bid like everybody else did. If the union wanted the job in the first place, why didn't they submit their proposal by the closing date like everybody else? What kinda sense is that? Please tell me the unions aren't like that everywhere!
I thought unions were basically hiring halls where contractors go to find their workers. To me it seems that there's more going on here than just a group of people gathering together to employ qualified workers...it's more like a favoritism hall where they only find work for their friends and their friends' friends. Is that how it is in the rest of the U.S.? Or is Alaska just a communist state run by the Mafia?
And it's not just me who has had this kind of trouble...almost everybody I've talked to in the construction trades hates unions up here because of their discriminatory actions. I even talked to a friend of mine the other day who says his electrical company won a bid for a new $5 million job for the local university. The IBEW came in and told the contractor, "Hey, we'll not only do the work, but we'll finance u at 3%!" So the union got the job EVENTHOUGH the private contractor won it fair n square by submitting a bid like everybody else did. If the union wanted the job in the first place, why didn't they submit their proposal by the closing date like everybody else? What kinda sense is that? Please tell me the unions aren't like that everywhere!
01-16-2004, 05:38 PM
#45
Administrator / Scooter Bum
Before this gets sidetracked into a "Unions Good or Bad" thread (again 
), I'll remind you all that the is currently a "George Bush Good or Bad: thread.
), I'll remind you all that the is currently a "George Bush Good or Bad: thread.