I think you need to read what leads up to that; since they are referring to the treatment under colonial and state law in the 13 original states to prove that at the time the Constitution was framed, it could not have been intended that blacks would be citizens, it is fairly clear that they aren't referring to the applicability of the federal RKBA under the 2nd Amendment, but rather state-law rights existing in the 13 original states that provided citizens with similar rights, to show that the states forming the US could not have intended that blacks could be citizens because very many of the states (particularly the slave states) could not have intended to be obligated to submit to giving black citizens of other states they same rights as they provided, under state Constitution and laws, to their own white citizens through the action of the privileges and immunities clause of Article IV, Section 2 ("The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.")
Ah but blacks could be and some were citizens during the Revolutionary war. Only slaves could not be citizens but there were some free blacks previously then some blacks who fought in the War of Independence were freed, and they were citizens.
In short, why, yes, I do believe in the 2nd Amendment. I think gun safety should be manditory in schools to teach these kids what they're getting into when they play with guns. Learning gun safety is important. I grew up around guns, as did many of my neighbors, and we all learned about them at an early age what they can and cannot do.
Same here. Where I grew up though not everyone had firearms many did and children were taught to use and respect them. Aroung the age of 6 I got my first bb gun, then before 12 my dad gave me his.22 long rifle. Between him and my best friend's dad we were both taken out frequently for target practice.
Yeah, a knife, a compound bow, and a chain saw can all be used as a weapon, but it also has a convenient use too.
But tell me, what convenient use does a gun have? Apart from as a weapon?
THe same thing as that compound bow for one. A good example I've used and seen guns used for is hunting for wild boar in Hog Valley, Florida around Ocala National Forest. Hunters know they need a hand gun even if they have a buzuka when boar hunting. It's also a good idea to have a trained pit bull.
Do you have a problem with having to get a license for it?
Yes I have a problem with it, the Second Admendment says nothing about licensing. If a robber or house invader invades my house I want protection, to be able to protect myself and my family, and I don't want to need a license to do this. I don't want to live in a nanny state or a police state.
Gun-licensed countries -- practically those with bans have far far lower crime.
Both of those links you provided were about deaths caused by guns NOT about crime rates being lower for countries that ban firearms. In the first page, Gun Deaths - United States Tops The List, crime doesn't even appear. On the second page the only place where "crime" appears is at the top where it says "Searching for U.S. Crime Stats? Check out StateMaster" and towards the bottum where it says "
DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population." Neither of these sipport your aims instead they are totally different things.
while the rest of your post is pretty insitefull the last bit there i dont think applies well to the gun debate as marijuanna is not a weapon.
Ah but hemp, aka marijuana, has been very important in war, the US government made and showed the movie Hemp For Victory to farmers to enncourage them to grow hemp during the Second World War. The cords of the parachute that George Bush Sr used when he bailed out of is plane when it was shot down in the Pacific during WWII were more than likely made from hemp.
So, how many deaths per year are caused by passive marijuanna smoking, and how many are there by "But, but, it wasn't supposed to be loaded!"?
Nada, none, zip, zilch, there's not one documented death by smoking hemp, er marijuana. However I know of one person who was killed while cleaning a.45. In the army a friend of mine had a fear, nightmare, that he would be killed by being shot by a gun. While stationed in Germany, where one of his grandmothers lived, he was cleaning weapons in the armory when the armorer who ran the armory was playing around, pointed the.45 at my friend and shot him. He "thought" it was unloaded.
This isn't to say I support bans on firearms, the only gun or other firearm control I agree with is personal control of where the firearm is aimed and how it is fired. Oh, and I also believe hemp shoud be legalized once again.
The Constitution is actually a limit on democracy more than anything else.
Actuall the USA Constitution is a limit on government. It specifically enumerates what government can do and is limited to that. Unfortunately the government has been way past the limits put on it.
If it's not a crime to have a gun, criminals *and* potential criminals will have guns. More people to defend oneself from.
And more people who want to protect themself from criminals will have guns too. I'd rather have to coice to defend myself in a free society than to depend on the police to defend me in the nanny state. "Oh mr criminal can you wait while I call the police?" Bang your dead. Someone who faces an armed populace are less likely to commit a criminal act, whereas an unarmed populace makes for easy targets for criminals. And remember some of those terrorists on 911 only used plastic knives, are you going to make them illegal too?
And people wonder why one of my fave t-shirts back in the day was one that had the barrel of a handgun pointed at the reader with the words "Come back to Detroit / We missed you the first time" on it.
I liked the sticker the father of a friend had on his front window, it shows a smoking gun with the words "any body found here at night will be found here in the morning."
After it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like Bush Sr still wouldn't end the support.
Oops, the above should read "After it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like, Bush Sr's still didn't stop supporting Saddam."
The problem was that we never had a good reason to remove Saddam at all, even in the first Gulf War. Yeah, he was a tinpot dictator and mistreated his people, but it's not our job to "liberate" everyone from their crappy governments,
Actually I agree. We shouldn't even of been involved in the first Gulf War. But then again we shouldn't been supporting Saddam through the 1980s, it was only after the Kuwaiti invasion that US support for Saddam was ended. Before then he could use all the chemical weapons he wanted without the US doing anything about it. After it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like Bush Sr still wouldn't end the support. In 1988-89 congress was debating on whether to use a trade embargoe against Iraq, but it was nothing like the embargoe through the '90s, instead it was a ban on military equipment and such. When Bush Sr appeared before congress during the debate, he told congress it would hurt US trade.
or else most of our military would be in Africa full-time.
The conflicts, fighting, in Africa are in part caused by the west, industrialized nations. For instance in the Congo the different rebel groups, militias, and such amoung other reason are fighting to control the areas where coltan which is used in electronics equipment especially cellphones is mined. Then there are the blood diamonds, oil, and the list can keep going. Simply there are spots rich with some natural resource the west will pay for and these areas have different ethnic groups living in the same area and not all want any resource extraction or do not receive any compensation. Nigeria is one country but has several different ethnic and tribal groups for instance.
A sorta similar situation happened in former Yugoslavia as the Serbians oppressed all their neighbors, especially the Kosovars.
Here's a mistake many make, thinking Serbians did all the oppressing of Albanians in Kosovo. The Albanian KLA or Kosovo Liberation Army did a lot of terrorizing and ethnic cleansing. And working with the Albanian mafia they sold poppy and opium to finance their operations. After forensic investigations many of those "mass graves" of Albanians were found to have been staged.
Um, I apologize for not putting a "" tag at the end of my post. Really, it should have been pretty obvious that I was bashing Bush and the fact that he's totally out of touch with regular Americans.
I don't like and bash Bush myself. It's not just "regular Americans" that Bush is out of touch with, he's out of touch with reality. You know, I'm still waiting to see those stockpiles of WMDs Saddam had. Not that I was against removing him from office, I was all for removing him after the first Gulf War. Bush Sr should of went right into Baghdad instead of stopping on the Kuwaiti border. Bush Jr should of just told the truth for invading Iraq instead of lying about WMDs or that Saddam posed an imminent threat invoking mushroom clouds.
Falcon
We're talking al Qaida, not the Chechnyans.
on
Saving U.S. Science
·
· Score: 1
Ah but some Chechnyans are Muslims and I wouldn't be supprised if some were also al Qaida. Remember what happened in the school in Beslan, Russia? Or how about Russia's (Soviet Union's) "Vietnam", Afghanistan? Where do you think al Qaida started, in Afghanistan, with the mujahadeen fighting the Soviets. By the way, back then the US supported them just as it supported Saddam then too.
While some of them may or may not be part of the al-Qieda Navy, pirates still exist. Many can be found in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea between Africa and Australia. News googling "Indian Ocean" pirates returns 19 news items such as this one about shipping in the Malacca Straits. While piracy there doesn't hurt the US much, it can hurt India, China, and Japan a lot, it still exists. A strategic attack can cause a lot of harm to the US, say for instance if an oil tanker were attacked and sunk in the straits it could impact the whole world.
Japan is basically a prototype of America - it is very good at taking other people's culture and technology and modifying it to fit into their society. The only difference is the desire for racial purity
Ah but Japan isn't really racially pure. Those who are considered Japanese today aren't really anymore native Japanese than the descendents of Europeans who settled in the New World, the Americas. The predominate Japanese of today did much the same to the original inhabitants of the Japanese islands, the Ainu amoung them as the European settlers did to the American Indians.
Just to clarify, I do NOT think this would be easy, solve all the world's problems, or is something that should be attempted now. Financial infrastructure for transfers, bill collecting, etc would need to be strengthened. Groups of investors looking to do the same thing would be needed to spread the risk around. There would be costs of translators to broker the deals, investigators to make sure purchased inventory actually exists, etc. Of course, all of these things would mean jobs for those with advanced degrees.
Yes and no, it's both easy and hard to solve the world's problems. It'd be easy if the hard part is gotten rid of, that being big business and the government it controls. For instance you heard about all those "illegal aliens", most of them Mexicans, in the US? Blame it on NAFTA and the billions of dollars in subsidies the US government gives to big agribusinesses. Because of those subsidies US agribusiness can sale corn and other foods cheaper than Mexican farmers can grow it, so many of them are being driven off of their farms. Some come north while others head to the cities thus driving those already in Mexican cities north. By ending farm subsidies Mexican farmers would be able to stay on their farms. The same thing in India. Currently the suicide rate for Indian farmers is rather high as they just can't compete with US farmers who receive subsidies. That was a sticking point and the reason the Indian rep walked out of the WTO meeting in Geneva this past summer, the EU would not even talk about reducing the subsidies it pays farmers there and though the US offered to reduce them some it wasn't enough. Many blame all this on freetrade but it's not really freetrade, if it were truely freetrade then there would be no subsidies.
It's simple! Back in '03, President Bush said these displaced American workers should go to community college and get an education!
And what type of education are displaced workers supposed to get? Jobs requiring college degrees are being offshore outsourced as well. Financial work like economics, accounting, and tax properation and being sent to India. Engineering, Comp Sci, and IT? They are getting offshore outsourced as well. Heck even Boeing has engineers in India designing planes. About the only fields I can see growing in the US are the medical fields, all of the retiring Babyboomers will need someone to look after their health. But even there some jobs and being offshored, take radiology. Some tests are being sent to India for interpretations via the net.
And that ignores the fact that some of those workers who lost thier jobs are bayboomers who are about the retire. What's a worker who's 63 supposed to do? Go to college for two year then retire? Or they're 60 so they should spend two year in college only to work another 3 years? Personally I never want to retire, if I worked and this is just me, but others were promised they could retire after having some of the money they worked to earn taken from them and put into Social Security.
Tariffs are a compensation for the domestic tax burden. They equalize the taxes on the imported goods and services with those levied domestically. All that happens when you get rid of tariffs is that your tax system becomes a trade war against your own citizens.
No, if tariffs the US were reduced, by all countries, the US could export more thus creating more jobs. This was one of the reasons the WTO meeting in Geneva failed this summer, the First World or developed countries demanded the third world get rid of their tariffs and other trade barriers but they wouldn't get rid of thier own.
The USA collapse might seem fun for the rest of the world but it will be followed by anarchy and economic troubles such that nobody would want them. This catastrophe was courtesy of the "Free Traders." They built this disaster brick by brick. Never in their entire history have they made one prediction on the economy or promise that has been fulfilled. In fact the opposite happens every time they come up to bat. More trade and more prosperity is their promise. The rows of closed factories and import trucks tell how big a liars they are.
What "Free Traders"? There are very few real Freetraders, most so called freetraders want open access to other markets but they refuse to give up the government subsidies they collect. That is not free trade. Take NAFTA, US agribusinesses receive billions of dollars from the federal government. Then they are able to sale food is Mexico cheaper than Mexican farmers can grow food. So the US ends up with a bunch of "illegal aliens". Get rid of the billions of dollars in subsidies then taxes can be lowered and more Mexican farmers can stay on their farms.
The very existence of this discussion thread owes to the fact that the "Free Traders" are wrong.
Again what "Free Traders"? Real ones or fake ones?
What's going to happen is that a lot of seniors will outsource themselves. Already plenty of places in Mexico catering to US retirees; you can have a decent standard of living for less than a thousand a month.
That's exactly what it's about, choice and consepuences. If you can't save and invest a little money for retirement then you should live by your consequences. If an 18 year old were to save and invest just $2000 a year for 7 seven years, until the age of 25 at the age of 65 with 10% growth that nest egg will contain almost 1,000,000 dollars. You should also own free and clear your house. There's something really wrong if you couldn't live on that. Where I have a problem is though I believe Social Security should be at least partially privatized, ie allow people to invest some of the money paid into SS, is where it will leave those who have already paid into SS and are about to retire. There is one thing that can help keep SS solvent longer, the so called "illegal aliens". About 8 million of them pay and contribute $50 billion into Social Security even though they won't collect it. See what must people in the US don't know is that the IRS issued millions of "fake" SSNs, 8 million "illegals" were able to get these numbers and now pay income and social security taxes.
It's even more basic than that: we have to stop letting the government spend so much damn money! If we could stomach cutting service -- namely Social Security and the military -- we could solve the problem instantly.
Better yet make a list of all of the federal agencies, bureaus, departments, offices and so on, grab a copy of the Constitution of the USA and abolish all of them that are not specifically authorized by the Constitution.
Falcon
I think the days of Walter Cronkite are over.
on
Saving U.S. Science
·
· Score: 1
The days of Walter Cronkite are gone but the days of Edward R Murrow were gone a long tyme ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you need to read what leads up to that; since they are referring to the treatment under colonial and state law in the 13 original states to prove that at the time the Constitution was framed, it could not have been intended that blacks would be citizens, it is fairly clear that they aren't referring to the applicability of the federal RKBA under the 2nd Amendment, but rather state-law rights existing in the 13 original states that provided citizens with similar rights, to show that the states forming the US could not have intended that blacks could be citizens because very many of the states (particularly the slave states) could not have intended to be obligated to submit to giving black citizens of other states they same rights as they provided, under state Constitution and laws, to their own white citizens through the action of the privileges and immunities clause of Article IV, Section 2 ("The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.")
Ah but blacks could be and some were citizens during the Revolutionary war. Only slaves could not be citizens but there were some free blacks previously then some blacks who fought in the War of Independence were freed, and they were citizens.
FalconHow does a collective have rights? Beats me.
Didn't you know the Borg has rights?
FalconIn short, why, yes, I do believe in the 2nd Amendment. I think gun safety should be manditory in schools to teach these kids what they're getting into when they play with guns. Learning gun safety is important. I grew up around guns, as did many of my neighbors, and we all learned about them at an early age what they can and cannot do.
Same here. Where I grew up though not everyone had firearms many did and children were taught to use and respect them. Aroung the age of 6 I got my first bb gun, then before 12 my dad gave me his .22 long rifle. Between him and my best friend's dad we were both taken out frequently for target practice.
FalconYeah, a knife, a compound bow, and a chain saw can all be used as a weapon, but it also has a convenient use too.
But tell me, what convenient use does a gun have? Apart from as a weapon?
THe same thing as that compound bow for one. A good example I've used and seen guns used for is hunting for wild boar in Hog Valley, Florida around Ocala National Forest. Hunters know they need a hand gun even if they have a buzuka when boar hunting. It's also a good idea to have a trained pit bull.
Do you have a problem with having to get a license for it?
Yes I have a problem with it, the Second Admendment says nothing about licensing. If a robber or house invader invades my house I want protection, to be able to protect myself and my family, and I don't want to need a license to do this. I don't want to live in a nanny state or a police state.
FalconSeriously, what do you need a gun for?
Selfdefense. Against both criminals and a tyrannical government.
FalconGun-licensed countries -- practically those with bans have far far lower crime.
Both of those links you provided were about deaths caused by guns NOT about crime rates being lower for countries that ban firearms. In the first page, Gun Deaths - United States Tops The List, crime doesn't even appear. On the second page the only place where "crime" appears is at the top where it says "Searching for U.S. Crime Stats? Check out StateMaster" and towards the bottum where it says " DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population." Neither of these sipport your aims instead they are totally different things.
Falconwhile the rest of your post is pretty insitefull the last bit there i dont think applies well to the gun debate as marijuanna is not a weapon.
Ah but hemp, aka marijuana, has been very important in war, the US government made and showed the movie Hemp For Victory to farmers to enncourage them to grow hemp during the Second World War. The cords of the parachute that George Bush Sr used when he bailed out of is plane when it was shot down in the Pacific during WWII were more than likely made from hemp.
FalconSo, how many deaths per year are caused by passive marijuanna smoking, and how many are there by "But, but, it wasn't supposed to be loaded!"?
Nada, none, zip, zilch, there's not one documented death by smoking hemp, er marijuana. However I know of one person who was killed while cleaning a .45. In the army a friend of mine had a fear, nightmare, that he would be killed by being shot by a gun. While stationed in Germany, where one of his grandmothers lived, he was cleaning weapons in the armory when the armorer who ran the armory was playing around, pointed the .45 at my friend and shot him. He "thought" it was unloaded.
This isn't to say I support bans on firearms, the only gun or other firearm control I agree with is personal control of where the firearm is aimed and how it is fired. Oh, and I also believe hemp shoud be legalized once again.
FalconThe Constitution is actually a limit on democracy more than anything else.
Actuall the USA Constitution is a limit on government. It specifically enumerates what government can do and is limited to that. Unfortunately the government has been way past the limits put on it.
FalconIf it's not a crime to have a gun, criminals *and* potential criminals will have guns. More people to defend oneself from.
And more people who want to protect themself from criminals will have guns too. I'd rather have to coice to defend myself in a free society than to depend on the police to defend me in the nanny state. "Oh mr criminal can you wait while I call the police?" Bang your dead. Someone who faces an armed populace are less likely to commit a criminal act, whereas an unarmed populace makes for easy targets for criminals. And remember some of those terrorists on 911 only used plastic knives, are you going to make them illegal too?
FalconAnd people wonder why one of my fave t-shirts back in the day was one that had the barrel of a handgun pointed at the reader with the words "Come back to Detroit / We missed you the first time" on it.
I liked the sticker the father of a friend had on his front window, it shows a smoking gun with the words "any body found here at night will be found here in the morning."
FalconThe United States Department of Justice says that the 2nd amendment is an individual right
That's about the only stance of Bush's that I agree with, the Second amendment being an individual right.
FalconAfter it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like Bush Sr still wouldn't end the support.
Oops, the above should read "After it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like, Bush Sr's still didn't stop supporting Saddam."
FalconThe problem was that we never had a good reason to remove Saddam at all, even in the first Gulf War. Yeah, he was a tinpot dictator and mistreated his people, but it's not our job to "liberate" everyone from their crappy governments,
Actually I agree. We shouldn't even of been involved in the first Gulf War. But then again we shouldn't been supporting Saddam through the 1980s, it was only after the Kuwaiti invasion that US support for Saddam was ended. Before then he could use all the chemical weapons he wanted without the US doing anything about it. After it was scientifically confirmed chemical weapons had been used on Kurds, Marsh Arabs, and others Saddam didn't like Bush Sr still wouldn't end the support. In 1988-89 congress was debating on whether to use a trade embargoe against Iraq, but it was nothing like the embargoe through the '90s, instead it was a ban on military equipment and such. When Bush Sr appeared before congress during the debate, he told congress it would hurt US trade.
or else most of our military would be in Africa full-time.
The conflicts, fighting, in Africa are in part caused by the west, industrialized nations. For instance in the Congo the different rebel groups, militias, and such amoung other reason are fighting to control the areas where coltan which is used in electronics equipment especially cellphones is mined. Then there are the blood diamonds, oil, and the list can keep going. Simply there are spots rich with some natural resource the west will pay for and these areas have different ethnic groups living in the same area and not all want any resource extraction or do not receive any compensation. Nigeria is one country but has several different ethnic and tribal groups for instance.
A sorta similar situation happened in former Yugoslavia as the Serbians oppressed all their neighbors, especially the Kosovars.
Here's a mistake many make, thinking Serbians did all the oppressing of Albanians in Kosovo. The Albanian KLA or Kosovo Liberation Army did a lot of terrorizing and ethnic cleansing. And working with the Albanian mafia they sold poppy and opium to finance their operations. After forensic investigations many of those "mass graves" of Albanians were found to have been staged.
FalconUm, I apologize for not putting a "" tag at the end of my post. Really, it should have been pretty obvious that I was bashing Bush and the fact that he's totally out of touch with regular Americans.
I don't like and bash Bush myself. It's not just "regular Americans" that Bush is out of touch with, he's out of touch with reality. You know, I'm still waiting to see those stockpiles of WMDs Saddam had. Not that I was against removing him from office, I was all for removing him after the first Gulf War. Bush Sr should of went right into Baghdad instead of stopping on the Kuwaiti border. Bush Jr should of just told the truth for invading Iraq instead of lying about WMDs or that Saddam posed an imminent threat invoking mushroom clouds.
FalconAh but some Chechnyans are Muslims and I wouldn't be supprised if some were also al Qaida. Remember what happened in the school in Beslan, Russia? Or how about Russia's (Soviet Union's) "Vietnam", Afghanistan? Where do you think al Qaida started, in Afghanistan, with the mujahadeen fighting the Soviets. By the way, back then the US supported them just as it supported Saddam then too.
FalconWhile some of them may or may not be part of the al-Qieda Navy, pirates still exist. Many can be found in the Indian Ocean and South China Sea between Africa and Australia. News googling "Indian Ocean" pirates returns 19 news items such as this one about shipping in the Malacca Straits. While piracy there doesn't hurt the US much, it can hurt India, China, and Japan a lot, it still exists. A strategic attack can cause a lot of harm to the US, say for instance if an oil tanker were attacked and sunk in the straits it could impact the whole world.
FalconJapan is basically a prototype of America - it is very good at taking other people's culture and technology and modifying it to fit into their society. The only difference is the desire for racial purity
Ah but Japan isn't really racially pure. Those who are considered Japanese today aren't really anymore native Japanese than the descendents of Europeans who settled in the New World, the Americas. The predominate Japanese of today did much the same to the original inhabitants of the Japanese islands, the Ainu amoung them as the European settlers did to the American Indians.
FalconJust to clarify, I do NOT think this would be easy, solve all the world's problems, or is something that should be attempted now. Financial infrastructure for transfers, bill collecting, etc would need to be strengthened. Groups of investors looking to do the same thing would be needed to spread the risk around. There would be costs of translators to broker the deals, investigators to make sure purchased inventory actually exists, etc. Of course, all of these things would mean jobs for those with advanced degrees.
Yes and no, it's both easy and hard to solve the world's problems. It'd be easy if the hard part is gotten rid of, that being big business and the government it controls. For instance you heard about all those "illegal aliens", most of them Mexicans, in the US? Blame it on NAFTA and the billions of dollars in subsidies the US government gives to big agribusinesses. Because of those subsidies US agribusiness can sale corn and other foods cheaper than Mexican farmers can grow it, so many of them are being driven off of their farms. Some come north while others head to the cities thus driving those already in Mexican cities north. By ending farm subsidies Mexican farmers would be able to stay on their farms. The same thing in India. Currently the suicide rate for Indian farmers is rather high as they just can't compete with US farmers who receive subsidies. That was a sticking point and the reason the Indian rep walked out of the WTO meeting in Geneva this past summer, the EU would not even talk about reducing the subsidies it pays farmers there and though the US offered to reduce them some it wasn't enough. Many blame all this on freetrade but it's not really freetrade, if it were truely freetrade then there would be no subsidies.
FalconIt's simple! Back in '03, President Bush said these displaced American workers should go to community college and get an education!
And what type of education are displaced workers supposed to get? Jobs requiring college degrees are being offshore outsourced as well. Financial work like economics, accounting, and tax properation and being sent to India. Engineering, Comp Sci, and IT? They are getting offshore outsourced as well. Heck even Boeing has engineers in India designing planes. About the only fields I can see growing in the US are the medical fields, all of the retiring Babyboomers will need someone to look after their health. But even there some jobs and being offshored, take radiology. Some tests are being sent to India for interpretations via the net.
And that ignores the fact that some of those workers who lost thier jobs are bayboomers who are about the retire. What's a worker who's 63 supposed to do? Go to college for two year then retire? Or they're 60 so they should spend two year in college only to work another 3 years? Personally I never want to retire, if I worked and this is just me, but others were promised they could retire after having some of the money they worked to earn taken from them and put into Social Security.
FalconTariffs are a compensation for the domestic tax burden. They equalize the taxes on the imported goods and services with those levied domestically. All that happens when you get rid of tariffs is that your tax system becomes a trade war against your own citizens.
No, if tariffs the US were reduced, by all countries, the US could export more thus creating more jobs. This was one of the reasons the WTO meeting in Geneva failed this summer, the First World or developed countries demanded the third world get rid of their tariffs and other trade barriers but they wouldn't get rid of thier own.
The USA collapse might seem fun for the rest of the world but it will be followed by anarchy and economic troubles such that nobody would want them. This catastrophe was courtesy of the "Free Traders." They built this disaster brick by brick. Never in their entire history have they made one prediction on the economy or promise that has been fulfilled. In fact the opposite happens every time they come up to bat. More trade and more prosperity is their promise. The rows of closed factories and import trucks tell how big a liars they are.
What "Free Traders"? There are very few real Freetraders, most so called freetraders want open access to other markets but they refuse to give up the government subsidies they collect. That is not free trade. Take NAFTA, US agribusinesses receive billions of dollars from the federal government. Then they are able to sale food is Mexico cheaper than Mexican farmers can grow food. So the US ends up with a bunch of "illegal aliens". Get rid of the billions of dollars in subsidies then taxes can be lowered and more Mexican farmers can stay on their farms.
The very existence of this discussion thread owes to the fact that the "Free Traders" are wrong.
Again what "Free Traders"? Real ones or fake ones?
FalconWhat's going to happen is that a lot of seniors will outsource themselves. Already plenty of places in Mexico catering to US retirees; you can have a decent standard of living for less than a thousand a month.
One good place to start learning is "Transitions Abroad" .
Falconyour choice and your consequences will rule.
That's exactly what it's about, choice and consepuences. If you can't save and invest a little money for retirement then you should live by your consequences. If an 18 year old were to save and invest just $2000 a year for 7 seven years, until the age of 25 at the age of 65 with 10% growth that nest egg will contain almost 1,000,000 dollars. You should also own free and clear your house. There's something really wrong if you couldn't live on that. Where I have a problem is though I believe Social Security should be at least partially privatized, ie allow people to invest some of the money paid into SS, is where it will leave those who have already paid into SS and are about to retire. There is one thing that can help keep SS solvent longer, the so called "illegal aliens". About 8 million of them pay and contribute $50 billion into Social Security even though they won't collect it. See what must people in the US don't know is that the IRS issued millions of "fake" SSNs, 8 million "illegals" were able to get these numbers and now pay income and social security taxes.
FalconIt's even more basic than that: we have to stop letting the government spend so much damn money! If we could stomach cutting service -- namely Social Security and the military -- we could solve the problem instantly.
Better yet make a list of all of the federal agencies, bureaus, departments, offices and so on, grab a copy of the Constitution of the USA and abolish all of them that are not specifically authorized by the Constitution.
FalconThe days of Walter Cronkite are gone but the days of Edward R Murrow were gone a long tyme ago.
Falcon