Slashdot Mirror
State of the Union
travis slack writes "President Bush used his State of the Union speech to press home key domestic and international agendas. At home he promised to reform Social Security for future generations. Looking overseas, Bush vowed to spread freedoms around the world while continuing the war on terror, and he pointed to Iraq as a symbol of change."
Since the politics section opened, this was the editors vehicle for Bush-Bashing and getting Kerry elected.
Now that one of their objectives failed, is this story a sign of what we're going have this section become? There's a lot of politics going on in the world, yet slashdot ignores almost all of it unless it involved those evil, nasty Republicans or corporations. It's funny how lopsided the coverage here is. I see plenty of the elephant icons, but rarely the jackass icons.
It's time to get over losing the election, and close this section. It's pretty much dead weight, and shows how utterly pathetic the left is.
Conflict of Interest: Two men, whose family and business associates and friends have extensive investments in global oil businesses, are president and vice-president of the entire U.S. government.
Using dishonest means, these men convinced U.S. taxpayers to pay for killing people in Iraq. What has been accomplished there? The killing under Saddam was less than the killing under George Bush.
One thing that has been accomplished, however, is that the profit from oil contracts involving Iraq has been shifted from Saddam to U.S. companies. This was accomplished while minimizing the support for U.S. troops.
Visual Aid: Iraq Body Count Visual Aid. Many people can't look at this without becoming so overloaded that they become irrational.
The U.S. government is now far more in debt than ever before: Debt Clock. If you are a U.S. citizen, you are expected to pay. Those who want corruption in the U.S. government want the government to borrow. The corrupters find ways to transfer the money to their pockets.
The U.S. government has fought 24 wars since World War II. The system of violence works by creating fear so rich people can profit.
How to understand U.S. violence: For reasons beyond the scope of this comment, the mental illness called anger has been increasing in women in the United States. In general, men in the United States lack the social skills necessary to deal with this anger, so they do not provide a counter-balancing force. It is the general increase in anger and the general breakdown of U.S. society that has caused many people in the U.S. to look for outlets for their anger. Anger is easily re-directed by leaders with simplistic rationalizations that are presented as logical, and doing so has been quite profitable.
It is a characteristic of angry people that they don't think clearly. Another characteristic is that they look for ways to avoid knowing they are angry. Many people in the U.S. believe that they are superior people who should be allowed to kill because that is the only way of improving the world.
You obviously don't understand IRAs.
Far more than you give me credit for.
Money you invest in an IRA will grow far more than doubling.
I did not say that it would not double. I said it will take a hell of a long time.
Yet, under the current system it happens immediately.
Do the math. Assume the bonds accrue 3% and your stock market investment accrue 10%.
Start with $2000 for the bonds, and $1000 for the stocks.
Q: How long before both are worth the same dollar value.
Assuming "retirement" at 65 years of age...
Q: What would the difference between the two be for someone that is now 54 (the oldest person "caught" by the Bush plan).
Q: What would the difference between the two be for someone that is now 20.
Q: How do the above numbers compare to the current system, assuming no reduction in benefits.
Q: Which system has zero guarantee of future benefits.
---
I find it more than irritating that the amount of future benefits closely coincides with the amount added by the employer. That would make me believe that if the employer contribution remained... the benefit would... REMAIN THE SAME.
That, to me... is a contrived "crisis".
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
Short term, yes. But longer term, the economy takes the money and redirects it - because someone will use the money on business costs, and that person will take business away from those that don't.
As long as those business costs include predatory pricing- but never will the money go to the worker.
According to your logic, why don't they just lower your wages?
Because the law sets a floor in Oregon at $7.50/hr.
Why don't they just raise their price to the customer?
They will as soon as they use predatory pricing to eliminate the competition.
They don't do that because they do not set prices, they do not set wages, and therefore they do not set profits.
Wal*Mart has done it nationwide with great success.
The markets do that!
As long as by "The markets" you mean the C-level exectutives, you are correct.
Inefficiencies exist (Monopolies, borders, regulations), but in general it works.
It hasn't worked since 1886, when corporations became legal people with more rights than citizens.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Needless to say, the US forces left the South Vietnam Republic as soon as the elections were over and the South Vietnamese lived happily ever after. Err, wait...
And here's something to set you off: Condi in '08. Romney in '16.
And to our readers in Baghdad : Al Zarqawi in '08, Bin Laden in '12 ? All thanks to Dubya.
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.