Re:low unemployment compared to europe
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
"Europe's average was 11.3% wonder what they say to our 5.4 or 5.5 %?"
AS I said they measurements are not the same. We stop counting people after 6 months.
"I Kinda care when people start trying to make our country use thier system (socialized everything). I'd like to point out everything is a trade off."
As opposed to what? Socialized some things? Which politician is advocating getting rid of social security, medicare, medicaid, public schools, state universities, farm subsidies etc? That's right NONE OF THEM.
Wake up. We are already mostly a socialized system. There is not THAT much difference between europe and the US when it comes to socialism.
Re:Ohio is a mess...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
There was a study done recently that showed the people in the worst economic conditions tended to vote republican even though the bad economic conditions were caused by republicans. So places like Montana which have been controlled by republicans for over a decade and still have the some of the lowest wages and worst economies continue to vote for republicans overwhelminly.
The author thought that it was due to cultural issues. I guess if somebody is doing bad you can always blame the homosexuals and the fornicators.
Either Bush or Kerry will run the country next. Do you care which one does? If you don't give a fuck about who is going to be running the country then vote for a third party candidate. If you do care then vote for one of them.
Re:low unemployment compared to europe
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
"Neither party seems to realize that 27 closed hospitals in California alone are just the beginning of the financial and social problems this country is going to have if we continue to be the economic saviors of the 3rd world."
Don't feel so bad. I bet we opened up 27 hospitals in Iraq already. That and a number of schools according to the president.
As for the illegals I highly doubt any american wants to pick fruit for 12 hours at 2 dollars an hour.
Re:poor choice of story for slashdot frontpage
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"The story itself is just a massive advertisement to vote against Bush too."
Why? According to Bush the economy is doing great. If Bush is good for jobs then this thread may be an advertisement for voting for bush. It's only anti bush if Bush is horrible for jobs in the country.
" I know I wont be trying to moderate anyone in this thread, because every second post will look like trolling or flamebait depending on the perspective of the reader."
I have to agree with you there. I have never seen our country divided so much. The people who relish driving wedges to set the country apart have been very successful. I don't know what it would take to get the country back together again. Maybe if we had a president that was a "uniter not a divider" things would be different.
Re:low unemployment compared to europe
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
First of all I am pretty sure that a person without a job in Europe is much better off then a person without a job in the US.
Having said that I really don't think that unemployment is measured the same in both places. In the US if a person stops looking for job (gives up for example) unemployment goes down. The unemployment figures only take into account people who are actively looking for jobs. I am not sure how it's measured in Europe but I would bet it's different. You may be comparing oranges and apples.
Finally I really don't care how much worse Europe is. Do you? Does it really help somebody who lost a job to say to them "well other people have it worse then you".
Reagan asked the question "are you better off today then you were four years ago" and the question is still valid. Compare your (and your countries) situation to four years ago and vote accordingly.
"And "Al Qaeda" is rooted in the mideast. NOT in Iraq, but in the region. "
First of all Al Queda is not rooted in the mideast. It WAS kind of rooted in Afghanistan but now is a diffused worldwide cult. That's right, it's not an organization it's a belief system.
Secondly if it was NOT in iraq then there was NO reason to attack Iraq. Why not attack where it was? Doesn't it strike you as the supreme height of stupidity to start the attack on Al Quada by invading a country that they were NOT in? Explain that to me.
"And much of the Arab/Muslim world shares a lot of the same disdain for the US and/or West-at-large for much of the same reason."
The war is against the US not the "west at large". It's basically against the US and Israel until Iraq was invaded. Right now Britain and a few other allied who took part in the invasion and occupation of iraq are also in their target list.
There are specific reasons why the US was attacked and not Canada, New Zealand, Finland, Germany or any of the other western democracies. All those countries are also "free", they are all also "western". Americans for some reason can't understand why anybody might hate them or how any of their actions may be seen as hostile but it's true. They hate you for what you do. Not because you are "free" or because they "hate your way of life".
"Israel. Bush is the first president to call for a completely autonomous, sovereign Palestine. Short of exterminating Israel as a whole, that's the most dramatic position in FAVOR of the Israel-opponents' cause any US president has ever taken."
I think just about everybody realizes that it was all talk. Bush has done NOTHING to make that happen. He has completely abandoned his "roadmap". He refuses to even critize sharon for expanding settlements or building that wall. Even a casual observer of the situation knows who wears the pants in the Sharon Bush relationship and it aint bush. Do you remember when Bush told Sharon to pull his tanks out of some city (I forget which one now) and Sharon basically told him to fuck off. Bush did nothing. That was pretty early on in this administration. From that point on everybody knew who was in charge and it wasn't bush.
"Eliminating dependence on mideast oil. A nice idea. One wonders how he plans to accomplish that since he's also opposed to any new nuclear reactors,"
Conserve a little, increase gas mileage requirements and voila you are there. Nuclear plants are just gravy if they are built (and they should be IMHO).
" "Iraq" is but a first step to gain positive influence in the area as part of a much larger strategy. "
You keep saying that but there is no basis for it. You yourself admitted that Al Quada has no presense there. In fact Iraq was a SECULAR SOCIALIST state not a religious state like Iran or saudi arabia. If you want to attack "panislamic radicalism" (what an inane phrase did you come up with that?) then why not start with an islamic state?
"it will take a long time, will make a lot of people hate us in the meantime, and will require a lot of hard work and sacrifice."
Hundreds of billions of dollars that could have gone to repairing your schools, providing healthcare, feeding the hungry will be flushed down the drain. I guess your kids don't need those new books after all. Oh and all those people who hate us do you think a few of them might want ot kill us in the same numbers as we are killing them? You think one or two might resort to chemical or biological attacks on US soil? It'a all fine and dandy to talk about sacrifice now but wait till you actually have to start paying for all this with your money and lives. You think right now that OTHER people are going to die and OTHER people are going to pay and you are fine with that. But I bet you'll be singing a different tune when the economy starts backtracking and your city gets hit.
"But ULTIMATELY, it will be better for us, better for Europe, and better for the peoples of the mideast."
Since he has had no hand in how the war has been waged he is not complicit in HOW the war is being wages. He is complicit THAT the war is being waged because he voted for it.
I hope you are able to tell the difference between those two things.
Easy. It just passes a resolution through the congress and the president signs it. A country can sign treaties, it can sign trade agreements, it can borrow and lend money and it can damn well apologize. In fact if you remember very early on in his presidency Bush apaologized to the chinese for invading their air space and spying on them. It wasn't because Bush himself was flying the plane, he apologized for the country.
In your case and in the case of many others who live in states that overwhelmingly vote for one party or another it's OK to vote for a third party candidate. Mainly because if you vote against the grain your vote won't count anyway.
"Umm no, it proved exactly how correct that statement was, actually."
Really? You really think Al Gore would have cut off diplomatic relations with North Korea? You think he would have called the iranians evil? You think he would have pulled out of the kyoto treaties? Presuming Al Gore went to war you really think he would have fucked it up this bad?
" then their reasoning process (or lack there of) is irrelavent."
Bullshit. It matters a lot.
It also matters HOW you conduct policy. The way I see it my dog could have waged war better then Bush has. Even if they both decide on the same policy the fact that one has proven himself to be incompetent at carrying out the said policy important.
"WHY should I apologize for something done over a hundred years ago? "
YOU are not going to apologize. The country is going to apologize for what IT did.
BTW this country built itself on the backs of slaves so unless you are an immigrant or the son of one you probably did benefit a little. I mean it was only a few year ago that the slaves finally got the right to go to the same schools as you.
"I'll vote Third Party (Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party), because I do give a shit about who will run this country."
Mr. Bdnarik will not be running this country. He will have no more voice after the election then you or I. Either George Bush or John Kerry will be running the country.
If you care how this country will be run vote for one of them. If you don't care then vote for whoever you want.
"You are not free to run your business the way you like because they won't let you hire whom you wish to hire and pay them what you wish to pay for their service"
What party advocates getting rid of the minimum wage and rolling back civil rights? According to your definition republicans are socialists.
One candidate has said repeatedly that he is running because god told him to. That God elected him president and that god speaks through him. One candidate is on a JIHAD the other one is not.
If that's not enough of a difference for you then fuck off.
People who vote for third party candidates are people who don't give a shit who will run the country. No this party will win this election so only vote for them if you don't give a shit about how the country is run or who is running it.
"Reps and Dems are the same for all intents and purposes."
I think the last election proved once and for all just exactly how misguided and wrong this sentiment is. There is a profound difference between Bush and Kerry, if you can't see it then you are blind.
Sez who? You have to pass the bar to practise law, you have to get a degree in architecture before you are allowed to design buildings, you have to go through an apprentice program before you are allowed to call yourself a plumber. And yet you can pull a 16 year old kid out of high school and let them write code.
"A large software project (say, Windows) is vastly more complex than any other sort of engineering project (say, a bridge)."
That's fine for a small mom and pop type of operation. You don't get big in this country without dipping into the slime bucket and letting go of your morals.
That's because for most christians business and ethics are like oil and vinegar (remember that over 90% of this country are christians).
Business is love of money which is the root of all evil. Greed is one of the seven deadly sins. It is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle and all that.
Trying to reconsile the difference between traditional christian morality (which is the foundation of most people's ethics) and capitalism is enough to cause enough cognitive dissonance to stun an ox.
In business there is only one ethic "make more money". That's it. There is nothing else.
Slashdot Mirror
"Europe's average was 11.3% wonder what they say to our 5.4 or 5.5 %?"
AS I said they measurements are not the same. We stop counting people after 6 months.
"I Kinda care when people start trying to make our country use thier system (socialized everything). I'd like to point out everything is a trade off."
As opposed to what? Socialized some things? Which politician is advocating getting rid of social security, medicare, medicaid, public schools, state universities, farm subsidies etc? That's right NONE OF THEM.
Wake up. We are already mostly a socialized system. There is not THAT much difference between europe and the US when it comes to socialism.
There was a study done recently that showed the people in the worst economic conditions tended to vote republican even though the bad economic conditions were caused by republicans. So places like Montana which have been controlled by republicans for over a decade and still have the some of the lowest wages and worst economies continue to vote for republicans overwhelminly.
The author thought that it was due to cultural issues. I guess if somebody is doing bad you can always blame the homosexuals and the fornicators.
Either Bush or Kerry will run the country next. Do you care which one does? If you don't give a fuck about who is going to be running the country then vote for a third party candidate. If you do care then vote for one of them.
"Neither party seems to realize that 27 closed hospitals in California alone are just the beginning of the financial and social problems this country is going to have if we continue to be the economic saviors of the 3rd world."
Don't feel so bad. I bet we opened up 27 hospitals in Iraq already. That and a number of schools according to the president.
As for the illegals I highly doubt any american wants to pick fruit for 12 hours at 2 dollars an hour.
"The story itself is just a massive advertisement to vote against Bush too."
Why? According to Bush the economy is doing great. If Bush is good for jobs then this thread may be an advertisement for voting for bush. It's only anti bush if Bush is horrible for jobs in the country.
" I know I wont be trying to moderate anyone in this thread, because every second post will look like trolling or flamebait depending on the perspective of the reader."
I have to agree with you there. I have never seen our country divided so much. The people who relish driving wedges to set the country apart have been very successful. I don't know what it would take to get the country back together again. Maybe if we had a president that was a "uniter not a divider" things would be different.
First of all I am pretty sure that a person without a job in Europe is much better off then a person without a job in the US.
Having said that I really don't think that unemployment is measured the same in both places. In the US if a person stops looking for job (gives up for example) unemployment goes down. The unemployment figures only take into account people who are actively looking for jobs. I am not sure how it's measured in Europe but I would bet it's different. You may be comparing oranges and apples.
Finally I really don't care how much worse Europe is. Do you? Does it really help somebody who lost a job to say to them "well other people have it worse then you".
Reagan asked the question "are you better off today then you were four years ago" and the question is still valid. Compare your (and your countries) situation to four years ago and vote accordingly.
"And "Al Qaeda" is rooted in the mideast. NOT in Iraq, but in the region. "
First of all Al Queda is not rooted in the mideast. It WAS kind of rooted in Afghanistan but now is a diffused worldwide cult. That's right, it's not an organization it's a belief system.
Secondly if it was NOT in iraq then there was NO reason to attack Iraq. Why not attack where it was? Doesn't it strike you as the supreme height of stupidity to start the attack on Al Quada by invading a country that they were NOT in? Explain that to me.
"And much of the Arab/Muslim world shares a lot of the same disdain for the US and/or West-at-large for much of the same reason."
The war is against the US not the "west at large". It's basically against the US and Israel until Iraq was invaded. Right now Britain and a few other allied who took part in the invasion and occupation of iraq are also in their target list.
There are specific reasons why the US was attacked and not Canada, New Zealand, Finland, Germany or any of the other western democracies. All those countries are also "free", they are all also "western". Americans for some reason can't understand why anybody might hate them or how any of their actions may be seen as hostile but it's true. They hate you for what you do. Not because you are "free" or because they "hate your way of life".
"Israel. Bush is the first president to call for a completely autonomous, sovereign Palestine. Short of exterminating Israel as a whole, that's the most dramatic position in FAVOR of the Israel-opponents' cause any US president has ever taken."
I think just about everybody realizes that it was all talk. Bush has done NOTHING to make that happen. He has completely abandoned his "roadmap". He refuses to even critize sharon for expanding settlements or building that wall. Even a casual observer of the situation knows who wears the pants in the Sharon Bush relationship and it aint bush. Do you remember when Bush told Sharon to pull his tanks out of some city (I forget which one now) and Sharon basically told him to fuck off. Bush did nothing. That was pretty early on in this administration. From that point on everybody knew who was in charge and it wasn't bush.
"Eliminating dependence on mideast oil. A nice idea. One wonders how he plans to accomplish that since he's also opposed to any new nuclear reactors,"
Conserve a little, increase gas mileage requirements and voila you are there. Nuclear plants are just gravy if they are built (and they should be IMHO).
" "Iraq" is but a first step to gain positive influence in the area as part of a much larger strategy. "
You keep saying that but there is no basis for it. You yourself admitted that Al Quada has no presense there. In fact Iraq was a SECULAR SOCIALIST state not a religious state like Iran or saudi arabia. If you want to attack "panislamic radicalism" (what an inane phrase did you come up with that?) then why not start with an islamic state?
"it will take a long time, will make a lot of people hate us in the meantime, and will require a lot of hard work and sacrifice."
Hundreds of billions of dollars that could have gone to repairing your schools, providing healthcare, feeding the hungry will be flushed down the drain. I guess your kids don't need those new books after all. Oh and all those people who hate us do you think a few of them might want ot kill us in the same numbers as we are killing them? You think one or two might resort to chemical or biological attacks on US soil? It'a all fine and dandy to talk about sacrifice now but wait till you actually have to start paying for all this with your money and lives. You think right now that OTHER people are going to die and OTHER people are going to pay and you are fine with that. But I bet you'll be singing a different tune when the economy starts backtracking and your city gets hit.
"But ULTIMATELY, it will be better for us, better for Europe, and better for the peoples of the mideast."
Ah
There is a difference between "just works" and "works exactly like windows".
Personally I like the fact that my Mac does not work like windows. I don't like windows that's why I use a mac.
Since he has had no hand in how the war has been waged he is not complicit in HOW the war is being wages. He is complicit THAT the war is being waged because he voted for it.
I hope you are able to tell the difference between those two things.
"Point being, how can a country apologize?"
Easy. It just passes a resolution through the congress and the president signs it. A country can sign treaties, it can sign trade agreements, it can borrow and lend money and it can damn well apologize. In fact if you remember very early on in his presidency Bush apaologized to the chinese for invading their air space and spying on them. It wasn't because Bush himself was flying the plane, he apologized for the country.
In your case and in the case of many others who live in states that overwhelmingly vote for one party or another it's OK to vote for a third party candidate. Mainly because if you vote against the grain your vote won't count anyway.
"Umm no, it proved exactly how correct that statement was, actually."
Really? You really think Al Gore would have cut off diplomatic relations with North Korea? You think he would have called the iranians evil? You think he would have pulled out of the kyoto treaties? Presuming Al Gore went to war you really think he would have fucked it up this bad?
"Exactly. No matter who you vote for, one of these goons is going to win. You just disproved your own point."
I didn't disprove my point that IS my point.
"No way in hell will I give sanction to either of these war criminals."
Like it or not one of them will run this country. If you vote for somebody else you are saying that you don't care who runs this country.
Something like this isn't really aimed that your grandma is it?
" then their reasoning process (or lack there of) is irrelavent."
Bullshit. It matters a lot.
It also matters HOW you conduct policy. The way I see it my dog could have waged war better then Bush has. Even if they both decide on the same policy the fact that one has proven himself to be incompetent at carrying out the said policy important.
"WHY should I apologize for something done over a hundred years ago? "
YOU are not going to apologize. The country is going to apologize for what IT did.
BTW this country built itself on the backs of slaves so unless you are an immigrant or the son of one you probably did benefit a little. I mean it was only a few year ago that the slaves finally got the right to go to the same schools as you.
"I'll vote Third Party (Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party), because I do give a shit about who will run this country."
Mr. Bdnarik will not be running this country. He will have no more voice after the election then you or I. Either George Bush or John Kerry will be running the country.
If you care how this country will be run vote for one of them. If you don't care then vote for whoever you want.
"You are not free to run your business the way you like because they won't let you hire whom you wish to hire and pay them what you wish to pay for their service"
What party advocates getting rid of the minimum wage and rolling back civil rights? According to your definition republicans are socialists.
Would an "I'm sorry" kill you? What is so awful about acknowledging a wrongdoing and apologizing for it?
We spent 200 billion in iraq so far. I read someplace that it would take less then 100 billion to offer universal coverage to everybody.
Ironically the newly freed people of Iraq will have free health care and education and we won't.
One candidate has said repeatedly that he is running because god told him to. That God elected him president and that god speaks through him. One candidate is on a JIHAD the other one is not.
If that's not enough of a difference for you then fuck off.
People who vote for third party candidates are people who don't give a shit who will run the country. No this party will win this election so only vote for them if you don't give a shit about how the country is run or who is running it.
"Reps and Dems are the same for all intents and purposes."
I think the last election proved once and for all just exactly how misguided and wrong this sentiment is. There is a profound difference between Bush and Kerry, if you can't see it then you are blind.
" You can't regulate software. "
Sez who? You have to pass the bar to practise law, you have to get a degree in architecture before you are allowed to design buildings, you have to go through an apprentice program before you are allowed to call yourself a plumber. And yet you can pull a 16 year old kid out of high school and let them write code.
"A large software project (say, Windows) is vastly more complex than any other sort of engineering project (say, a bridge)."
All the more reason to have govt oversight.
That's fine for a small mom and pop type of operation. You don't get big in this country without dipping into the slime bucket and letting go of your morals.
That's because for most christians business and ethics are like oil and vinegar (remember that over 90% of this country are christians).
Business is love of money which is the root of all evil. Greed is one of the seven deadly sins. It is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle and all that.
Trying to reconsile the difference between traditional christian morality (which is the foundation of most people's ethics) and capitalism is enough to cause enough cognitive dissonance to stun an ox.
In business there is only one ethic "make more money". That's it. There is nothing else.