United States of Narcissism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whatever happened to the GOP's motto, "Country First"?
 
There's an old fellow in my neck of the woods who said, "I love my country. And its government, when it deserves it." How narcissistic. :lol:
 
Wirelessly posted

jillio said:
Whatever happened to the GOP's motto, "Country First"?

They forgot it. It changed to "policies that put me first".

Oh you didn't get the memo? They were just kidding. Those silly republicans: always crackin' jokes.
 
As for charity reducing unemployment, I think you are assuming I am talking about simply giving the poor money. There are charities/non-profit organizations that help people find jobs. Many exist already for the government: vocational rehabilitation.
OK, I see what you mean, although I'm still skeptical that such services have any significant effect on the unemployment rate because they can't really affect the jobs market. If nobody's hiring, all the job placement organizations in the world won't make a difference. In a time of high unemployment, if a firm needs new people, they're going to find new people, whether those programs exist or not. However, I can see a marginal benefit being that they're likely to help make the process of matching people to jobs more efficient. If, because of an agency's help, a firm finds a better worker faster than they could otherwise, that helps the firm's output which leads to more revenue which makes it that much easier to hire more people. They're also certainly helpful to the people who utilize these organizations. In the overall scheme, I see their function as just affecting who gets the already existing jobs, and perhaps making better matches with better efficiency than would otherwise happen.

As for "forcing us to pay at all", well, I was thinking both Bob and Dick would have to pay at least SOME tax (military, SS, etc). Dick believes that we should not pay any tax that helps poor and the needy ONLY. So Dick believes that it should be up to the individual if they want to contribute.
My MO is to give people the benefit of the doubt that they want what's best for society in general, even if I think their method of doing so is completely backwards, at least until they give me a reason to think otherwise. Coming from a position that reasonable well-intentioned people can disagree, we can focus on the actual track record of policies instead of their intentions. When it comes down to true compassion, then I think it has more to do with what the person does with his own resources.

I believe the scenario would be very different if it was shown statistically that more money to help the poor and needy does have positive results (not just for them, but for everyone else, too).
I believe that can be true depending on how you go about helping them. Too often, government programs have a poor track record that don't come close to fulfilling their flowery intentions. At best, the money was wasted and at worst, the program made the problem worse or created other problems that are bigger than the one it originally set out to solve.
 
I guess Texas is a different universe. We create jobs.

Not exceptionally more than the rest of the country:

US_state_unemployment_map_June_2011.jpg
 
Not exceptionally more than the rest of the country:

US_state_unemployment_map_June_2011.jpg
Texas' unemployment rate for June is 8.2%, one percent below the average unemployment rate. While it's not North Dakota, it's nothing to sneeze at either. However, when I made that comment, I was thinking about this:
Texas bucks national unemployment trend - USATODAY.com
Basically, a third of the new jobs created over the last years have been created in Texas. If you factor in the states with net job losses, then Texas is responsible for about half the net gains in jobs. With the unemployment figure, keep in mind that it's much different to have 8.2% unemployment after absorbing millions of people than to have 8.2% unemployment rate after a bunch of people leave.
 
Texas' unemployment rate for June is 8.2%, one percent below the average unemployment rate. While it's not North Dakota, it's nothing to sneeze at either. However, when I made that comment, I was thinking about this:
Texas bucks national unemployment trend - USATODAY.com
Basically, a third of the new jobs created over the last years have been created in Texas. If you factor in the states with net job losses, then Texas is responsible for about half the net gains in jobs. With the unemployment figure, keep in mind that it's much different to have 8.2% unemployment after absorbing millions of people than to have 8.2% unemployment rate after a bunch of people leave.

But what kinds of jobs? I know that Texas practically led the oil-drilling frenzy, and I don't think the job gains are as broad-based as the article seems to imply.
Besides, Exxon did not pay a dime in taxes.
 
Exactly. That 8.2% is pretty meaningless without some more analysis as to what it actually means.
 
Saw this book "Age of Greed" the other day.
[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Age-Greed-Triumph-Finance-Decline/dp/1400041716/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1312532611&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Age of Greed: The Triumph of Finance and the Decline of America, 1970 to the Present (9781400041718): Jeff Madrick: Books[/ame]
 
Well, does this mean anything to you? These people are the state legislators, and it was a real debate about a new budget. They did not pay attention to the speakers. Of course, they did not get fired. They are richer and richer... gain their ignorance.


congress.jpg
 
And some people wonder what's wrong with the country.
 
What will happen to us now that our country's credit rating had drop to AA+?
 
I missed on the news. Please tell me about the AA+.

I don't watch the TV news often because I am so sick about the murders and crimes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top