That was a bit weak.someone said:Thanks for clearing that up. I would not take the CIA too seriously as they were the people who claimed Iraq had MWDs........
OTB
The need to raise taxes...
- Thread starter frasier
- Start date
OTB
There are those in Denmark that don't think 51% is enough... those rich guys are always getting tax cuts don't you know....papasmerf said:
LOL
OTB
I’m just curious, given your hypothesis, how do you explain the huge growth in spending under bush. It seems to me that based on your hypothesis, his large deficits, should have kept spending low. However, according to the following, even excluding defence and homeland security, he has been the biggest spending president in 30 years.onthebottom said:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3750
You will never be able to understand it. The danish system is moreonthebottom said:
foreign to you than communism. The basic concepts are equality and social responsibility.
The results speaks for themselves. Without any natural ressources,
and still supporting Greenland, Denmark is one of the best places in Europe to start
a business in, it has an impressive list of world class companies,
living standards are high, and people are secure and happy.
What a disaster.
Unfortunately neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are proposing anything close to economic sanity for the United States. Neither party will work to reign in spending (whether government or private) nor constrain the trade deficit nor constrain the budget deficit.
The Republicans are the biggest over-spenders, with the Democrats doing their level best to appear as even bigger ones without quite managing it.
No-one is actually interested in returning the United States to the sort of work ethic it once had back when people believed they had to pay their own way.
The Republicans are the biggest over-spenders, with the Democrats doing their level best to appear as even bigger ones without quite managing it.
No-one is actually interested in returning the United States to the sort of work ethic it once had back when people believed they had to pay their own way.
Problem is that back in the 50's and 60's you could turn 18 and get a job you could support a family on. Now it takes 2 incomes in most cases. As manufacturing was move off shore the blue collar work ethic began to vanish. Today for the most part you need a degree and debt to find a job that your close to the economic standard your grandfather had. Difference is grandpa knew that if you showed up everyday and gave your best effort he would succeed. Today many companies seem to want to know how they can cut position not grow positions. So many kids fund that back stabbing is a short cut to security.fuji said:
Manufacturing creates the best economic base for any area not service jobs. I earn a good living in the service industry but without companies to service my job becomes extinct.
That's what I don't believe. I think a wage today buys more than it did in 1950. People have just become greedier. Everyone now wants two cars, central air conditioning, exotic foods from far away (like fresh fruit in winter), fancy vacations, and other things that your grandfather never had.
Must have gone over your head............The term grandfather is meant to address those who's road from education is far shorter then the road to retirement........For us older farts who are wondering how much health insurance will cost when we retire it would be our fathers we look to.danmand said:
This is clearly not the case, go look at the rich countries, ALL of them are services economies.papasmerf said:
See statement earlier about wanting to work in the 1950s....
OTB
You are correct, you no longer can earn a middle class income without doing anything more than graduating from high school..... I can live with that.papasmerf said:
OTB
Both of my grandfathers grew up on farms, it would be impossible to compare my opportunities with theirs. They worked harder (one a machinist, the other a teamster) and I live MUCH better. I think you idolize those times at the peril of reality.fuji said:
OTB
I have a 4 year degree and earned 325k last year.... that degree would cost me 8,500 a year at Ohio State today, when I got it it cost me between 750 and 2,500 per year....DonQuixote said:
A good return I'd say.
OTB
You were an obvious lucky fluke......onthebottom said:
Many in Ohio are not faring as well.......
It’s grim in Ohio as voters cite economy
Clinton, Obama tailor messages to job climate
By Jerry Zremski
Updated: 02/28/08 6:54 AM
ZANESVILLE, Ohio — At 28, Crystal Young is a college graduate, a full-time worker at the local Dollar General, a part-time clerk at the Sheetz convenience store, and just the kind of person Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is counting on in Tuesday’s Ohio primary.
“I work two jobs, and I can’t afford health care,” said Young, who can’t find a better job in this Jamestown-size community in the foothills of Appalachia despite her psychology degree from Ohio University at Zanesville. “I voted for Bill [Clinton], and things were a lot better when he was president, so I think they will be if Hillary gets elected.”
You’ll find plenty of voters like Young in this beaten-down state, which has lost 200,000 manufacturing jobs — a quarter of what it had — since the turn of the decade. [more]
No. The idea of economic progress is that you can achieve more with the same amount of input (cost). It's worth pointing out here that real progress according to some estimations has been abysmal for the last generation or two.fuji said:
