Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

That's what happens when socialist policies keep expanding. I know it's "fashionable" to berate the rich and "super rich" and make them the fall guys for what problems the U.S. has. But it's not that simple. Merely convenient.

 

HH

 

Just have a look at Gini Index. In regard to the distribution of wealth the USA is moving closer to 3rd World Countries... :-)

 

And here is a quote from the Federal Reserve Bank (during Bush's era - it doesn't seem to be a place for leftist socialists)

 

According to Janet L. Yellen, President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco,

 

...from 1973 to 2005... real hourly wages of those in the 90th percentile—where most people have college or advanced degrees—rose by 30 percent or more... among this top 10 percent, the growth was heavily concentrated at the very tip of the top, that is, the top 1 percent. This includes the people who earn the very highest salaries in the U.S. economy, like sports and entertainment stars, investment bankers and venture capitalists, corporate attorneys, and CEOs. In contrast, at the 50th percentile and below—where many people have at most a high school diploma—real wages rose by only 5 to 10 percent –

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just have a look at Gini Index. In regard to the distribution of wealth the USA is moving closer to 3rd World Countries... :-)

 

And here is a quote from the Federal Reserve Bank (during Bush's era - it doesn't seem to be a place for leftist socialists)

 

My link

 

The continued flood of illegal immigrants from the south (particularly) has no doubt had a tremendous effect in this regard. Most are probably illiterate in their own country and have nothing to offer aside from manual labor. The jobs they can get have never been highly paid. In addition, these illegal immigrants bring with them an almost disdain for anything above a 6th grade education, much less encouraging their offspring to continue on to a college or university...or even a trade school. Immigrants such as these, being from 3rd world countries, are bound to drag down the overall image/statistics of their host country. Like I noted above, a number of factors in play; just that socialistic policies are chief among them.

 

HH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The continued flood of illegal immigrants from the south (particularly) has no doubt had a tremendous effect in this regard. Most are probably illiterate in their own country and have nothing to offer aside from manual labor. The jobs they can get have never been highly paid. In addition, these illegal immigrants bring with them an almost disdain for anything above a 6th grade education, much less encouraging their offspring to continue on to a college or university...or even a trade school. Immigrants such as these, being from 3rd world countries, are bound to drag down the overall image/statistics of their host country. Like I noted above, a number of factors in play; just that socialistic policies are chief among them.

 

HH

 

 

What flood of illegals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would disagree about hating the rich per se. The rich were always celebrated in America for decades. People looked up to and admired JP Morgan and Rockerfellers a century ago and today Trump, Bill Gates and Warrent Buffet are equally admired.

A couple decades ago shows like 'Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous' were very popular. Its not the rich individuals per se that people have a problem with. Its corporations that get special treatment (with regads taxes, regulations, etc) and then use these advantages they have to squeeze as much out of the populace based on greed and avarice. They use these advantages to not only move jobs overseas but set up factories where people are often exploited. Not all but enough of them to, in my honest opinion, deserve the anger of the people.

They own the politicians. There is no doubt about that. So, I'm not sure how one can argue they have unfair advantages since they often write the legislation that affects them.

I have a question. If we gave corporations the right to hire, fire and discard waste in any manner they chose how many would do the right thing?

We are under the deluded and misguided belief that since these are Americans that run these companies they are patriotic and trustworthy. They are in for the profit and most feel absolutely no loyalty to provide jobs for their fellow Americans and some feel no moral obligation to look after the planet, etc. I'm not even saying they should. True capitalism and free market thinking doesn't allow for nationalism and loyalty to the state or the people. In fact, legally they can't. Corporations are publicly traded and MUST act in the best interest of their shareholders and if they forego potential profits for matters of patriotism it could be argued they broke their fidicuary duty unless they can prove acting as such enhances their company in some form or manner (admittedly sometimes it does).

I'm no fan of big government. However, its the government that has to step in and look after the interests of society and the sad fact is the modern government does not do it well enough because they are too influenced by said corporations.

 

The Occupy Wall Street do have a legitimate concern. The banks were raping us with fees,surcharges and the like before the bailout. They get bailed out with public money and are continuing the same and at even faster pace and blaming the fact their own self engineered financial issues means they must do that. Its insane. Utterly insane. I have to think some of us (HH buddy) are 'Stockholm'd'.

 

I am not looking to punish companies. Heck, I'd love to have a successful company one day if any of my hairbrained ideas I have ever come to fruition. I (and others) are simply asking for fairness and I can not imagine how it can be argued they are under the thumb of the government when its proven they own the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attempted suicide bombing of the US Capitol thwarted

 

The man accused of attempting a suicide bombing at the US Capitol building fell into what has become a typical trap set for would-be terrorist attackers in the United States.

 

Amine El Khalifi, a 29-year-old immigrant from Morocco in the United States illegally, was arrested Friday following an undercover operation in which US agents – acting on Mr. El Khalifi’s expressed desire and intent to attack government and civilian targets on behalf of Al Qaeda – posed as collaborators, providing what seemed to be operable firearms and explosives.

 

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/attempted-suicide-bombing-us-capitol-thwarted

 

So when are the travel warnings being released?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attempted suicide bombing of the US Capitol thwarted

 

The man accused of attempting a suicide bombing at the US Capitol building fell into what has become a typical trap set for would-be terrorist attackers in the United States.

 

Amine El Khalifi, a 29-year-old immigrant from Morocco in the United States illegally, was arrested Friday following an undercover operation in which US agents – acting on Mr. El Khalifi’s expressed desire and intent to attack government and civilian targets on behalf of Al Qaeda – posed as collaborators, providing what seemed to be operable firearms and explosives.

 

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/attempted-suicide-bombing-us-capitol-thwarted

 

So when are the travel warnings being released?

 

Gotta admit, one of the stories said one terrorist was going to use a model airplane, pretty good idea actually. I once heard that if you were part of the briefing about the threat assesments and such you'd be hardpressed not to want to end most civil liberties. However, its not what we are about as a people and the added exposure is the price we pay for those liberties.

 

Still, any security expert will tell you the TSA bullshyt is all show and is not worth the time and effort in the war on terrorism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/17/john-boehner-payroll-tax-cut-extension_n_1285514.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=832035,b=facebook

John Boehner Upset That The Payroll Tax Cut Extension Means Ordinary Americans Will Have More MoneySo let's get this straight: Boehner "supports" the "agreement" that will "stop a tax hike on middle class Americans." But! He says, "let's be honest, this is an economic relief package, not a bill that's going to grow the economy and create jobs." Everyone should note the separation here. Per Boehner, providing tax relief to the middle class -- while it may be swell for them, and even "fair" -- is something that has no beneficial impact on the economy or employment.

The implication here is that you're never helping the economy by giving the middle class an advantage of any kind. To Boehner's mind, it's not a good thing to put more money in the pockets of ordinary Americans, with which they could ... I'm just spitballing here ... buy stuff, increase demand and spur additional hiring. And yet, when I cast my mind back to the job creators we've talked to, they've made it pretty clear that they hire when they are profitable, and that in order to be profitable, people have to actually buy stuff.

To Boehner's mind, the only thing that can or should be done to aid the economy is funnel more taxpayer money to the wealthy "job creators,"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/stamp-price-hike-part-postal-210500032.html

A nickel boost in the first-class stamp price to 50 cents is part of the U.S. Postal Service's latest plan to stop bleeding red ink.

The Postal Service released the 5-year business plan to Congress late Thursday in part to push Congress to pass legislation to help them get through ongoing financial woes. Due in large part to declining first-class mail volume, the service recorded a $3.3 billion loss in the final three months of last year, which is usually a profitable period.

The Postal Service says that, if nothing is done, it faces $18 billion in losses by 2015. Lawmakers have been working on different plans for months, but all of them have controversial aspects and are stalled.

 

What is the issue with the post office? Is it the size of the workforce and the amounts they have to pay in retirement benefits? Is it bad management? Both and other reasons? Its been losing money for years. I am not saying it has to be a profit center. It is mandated in the constitution to have one. Not sure what the issue is frankly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...