CP3S said:

Obama has done nothing except for load us up with more debt and fail majorly at his every promise.

*sigh*

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

 Romney is, unfortunately, the only other option.

that is not true.   You could vote for a candidate of one of the other parties.  You could also vote for a write-in candidate.  

Come on, Warb, you know that isn't really true. Yeah, we can write anyone in. Technically we could make Brad Pitt or Bob Saget President, if enough of us voted for one of them, but you know that isn't going to happen. A write-in isn't going to beat Obama. Romney is the only viable option for getting Obama out of office.

that was the logic I used when  I voted for Kerry in 2004, I can't say I am all that proud of myself for voting for Kerry.    Yeah I know only Obama and Romney have a chance,  but if you ask me with need to show the two major parties that we are willing to vote for someone else.    Things would be a lot better off if the two major parties feared a third choice.   We get candidates like W. Bush, Gore, Kerry,  and Romney(add Obama in here if you wish) because each party is willing to put up an idiot cause they know the other party will do the same thing.  

CP3S said:

 

I have been thinking a little bit about going independent this year.   There is a good chance I will end up voting for Obama, but a slight chance I will go independent. 

Please do. We don't need another four years of this kind of debt.

the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

 the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

There are huge impediments to tackling our debt. But we have to believe there is somebody with the will and skill to do it. Otherwise...we must accept that Social Security is simply going to go bankrupt, our health care is going to be rationed, and China is going to own America.

Paul Ryan has some good solid ideas for dealing with our debt, which non-hyperventilating Democrats support.

At the very least we have the ability in the next election to choose between astronomical debt vs lots of debt.

Also, I hate Comcast.

ok I am going to try to do this without breaking up your post. 

maybe there is someone with the will and skill to tackle our debt problem, but I don't think that person is Romney(not saying that person is Obama).

As for social security going bankrupt and health care being rationed and China owning America, lets hope that doesn't happen.  

As for Paul Ryan:  excuse me for hyperventilating then, for I don't like Paul Ryan.  

Why do you hate Comcast?

now for almost  every point above,  I had to waste time typing exactly what point of your post I was referring to or risk confusion.   I underlined the typing I feel is waste.  This was a very simple and short post I was responding to.  Can you image how much wasted typing I'd have to do if I was responding to a very complex post?  None of that wasted typing is necessary when using the quote button.   Now do you understand why I like to break up posts  using the quote button? 

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

Wow! just noticed this!  You used the quote button and cut out most of my post!  How dare you use the quote button!  How dare you cut out most of my post!  Why didn't you read my whole post?   

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

Obama has done nothing except for load us up with more debt and fail majorly at his every promise.

*sigh*

Don't sigh. If you feel like I am wrong an he actually has managed to do more than put us in debt and you feel like he has been able to keep his campaign promises, please share rather than just sighing in exasperation.

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

 Romney is, unfortunately, the only other option.

that is not true.   You could vote for a candidate of one of the other parties.  You could also vote for a write-in candidate.  

Come on, Warb, you know that isn't really true. Yeah, we can write anyone in. Technically we could make Brad Pitt or Bob Saget President, if enough of us voted for one of them, but you know that isn't going to happen. A write-in isn't going to beat Obama. Romney is the only viable option for getting Obama out of office.

that was the logic I used when  I voted for Kerry in 2004, I can't say I am all that proud of myself for voting for Kerry.    Yeah I know only Obama and Romney have a chance,  but if you ask me with need to show the two major parties that we are willing to vote for someone else.    Things would be a lot better off if the two major parties feared a third choice.   We get candidates like W. Bush, Gore, Kerry,  and Romney(add Obama in here if you wish) because each party is willing to put up an idiot cause they know the other party will do the same thing.  

I don't think Gore, Kerry, or Bush were that bad. Obama is a nightmare though. I don't think it usually matters who the candidate is, they are all pretty much the same. The problem with Obama is he is widely perceived to be perfect, and that is dangerous.

CP3S said:

 

I have been thinking a little bit about going independent this year.   There is a good chance I will end up voting for Obama, but a slight chance I will go independent. 

Please do. We don't need another four years of this kind of debt.

the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

It doesn't have too. Obama strategy was, we're broke, so we need to spend as much money as possible so we can kick start the economy.

I get the economic philosophy behind that thinking, but it just seems stupid, and it turned out to be. Imagine being really broke and deep in debt. Instead of hanging onto that money for the essential things, you run out and buy baseball cards, a few bags of candy, and some DVDs, because spending money is the only way to get out of debt... To use a Warbism, *sigh*.

The idea was that throwing all this stimulus money all over the place was going to create jobs. Yay! But come on, we all know the government doesn't know how to handle money. A couple of years ago I was visiting some acquaintances. They were showing me a government facility in their town, a few of the buildings were taped off. It was explained to me that those buildings were about five years old and were going to be torn down to make room for bigger buildings thanks to all the stimulus money that came in. Seriously? Debt will continue no matter what? How is that sort of thing benefiting us? Some stupid branch of the government gets to tear down their practically brand new multimillion dollar buildings and replace them with fancier buildings, not because they need them, but because there is stimulus money marked for it and they might as well apply for it.

That is pretty much what all that stimulus money did. Things like the above mentioned. The reasoning is that you get to employ all these construction workers to build these buildings, electricians, plumbers, interior design folks. Yeah, they do create a lot of jobs. But the thing is, once the frivolous buildings are completed, those construction jobs go away and those workers go back to having slim pickings for work.

That is a lot of the shit Obama called a solution. No surprise it didn't work. It is time to start cutting back, not pushing wasteful stimulus after stimulus. Not sure what Romney will do, but he does have a successful business background. And successful business men usually understand how money works. Spending doesn't make money, unless it is an investment. When the money isn't there, the budget must be cut. Those are two simple ideas that would take us a long way toward getting started on the road to recovery.

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

Obama has done nothing except for load us up with more debt and fail majorly at his every promise.

*sigh*

Don't sigh. If you feel like I am wrong an he actually has managed to do more than put us in debt and you feel like he has been able to keep his campaign promises, please share rather than just sighing in exasperation.

we've already discussed the campaign promises thing.     As for the debt, it seems like most every President in my lifetime has given us more and more debt. 

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

 Romney is, unfortunately, the only other option.

that is not true.   You could vote for a candidate of one of the other parties.  You could also vote for a write-in candidate.  

Come on, Warb, you know that isn't really true. Yeah, we can write anyone in. Technically we could make Brad Pitt or Bob Saget President, if enough of us voted for one of them, but you know that isn't going to happen. A write-in isn't going to beat Obama. Romney is the only viable option for getting Obama out of office.

that was the logic I used when  I voted for Kerry in 2004, I can't say I am all that proud of myself for voting for Kerry.    Yeah I know only Obama and Romney have a chance,  but if you ask me with need to show the two major parties that we are willing to vote for someone else.    Things would be a lot better off if the two major parties feared a third choice.   We get candidates like W. Bush, Gore, Kerry,  and Romney(add Obama in here if you wish) because each party is willing to put up an idiot cause they know the other party will do the same thing.  

I don't think Gore, Kerry, or Bush were that bad. Obama is a nightmare though.

I'm sorry, think what you want about Obama, the three others mentioned above are clowns and not real leaders. 

CP3S said:

 I don't think it usually matters who the candidate is, they are all pretty much the same.

and you don't see a problem with that?  You don't see the fact that the Presidency is guaranteed to go to one of the two major parties as reason that they are all pretty much the same? 

CP3S said:

The problem with Obama is he is widely perceived to be perfect, and that is dangerous.

I've never said Obama was perfect, no one is.

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

 

I have been thinking a little bit about going independent this year.   There is a good chance I will end up voting for Obama, but a slight chance I will go independent. 

Please do. We don't need another four years of this kind of debt.

the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

It doesn't have too.

but it will cause we will never elect a real leader since we are never willing to elect someone who isn't a Democrat or a Republican.

CP3S said:

Obama strategy was, we're broke, so we need to spend as much money as possible so we can kick start the economy.

well, it is usually the lack of people spending money the keeps the economy down.  

CP3S said:

 A couple of years ago I was visiting some acquaintances. They were showing me a government facility in their town, a few of the buildings were taped off. It was explained to me that those buildings were about five years old and were going to be torn down to make room for bigger buildings thanks to all the stimulus money that came in. Seriously?

yeah that does sound like a waste.

CP3S said:

Debt will continue no matter what? How is that sort of thing benefiting us?

its not, I was just trying to be realistic. 

CP3S said:

That is pretty much what all that stimulus money did. Things like the above mentioned. The reasoning is that you get to employ all these construction workers to build these buildings, electricians, plumbers, interior design folks. Yeah, they do create a lot of jobs. But the thing is, once the frivolous buildings are completed, those construction jobs go away and those workers go back to having slim pickings for work.

true, but all those workers did get some work and money that they might not have otherwise gotten.    Perhaps they then went and spend money that they otherwise wouldn't have spend.  Then, the places where the workers spent the money has benefited from the construction.   Maybe those businesses keep employees longer that they would have fired earlier otherwise.  Maybe it keeps businesses open that otherwise would have closed.   Its not a final solution, but it is a start.   Just like when you jump start your car,  it doesn't solve the problem but it does allow you to get the car home or to a repair shop.    

CP3S said:

That is a lot of the shit Obama called a solution. No surprise it didn't work. It is time to start cutting back, not pushing wasteful stimulus after stimulus.

somehow, I just don't see cutting back as a solution either.

CP3S said:

Not sure what Romney will do, but he does have a successful business background. And successful business men usually understand how money works.

If I recall many have question the methods he used to get his success in business.   Please also remember government is not the same as business.  In business the main goal is monetary gain.   That is not the goal of government.  The goal of government is to serve the people.

CP3S said:

Spending doesn't make money, unless it is an investment. When the money isn't there, the budget must be cut. Those are two simple ideas that would take us a long way toward getting started on the road to recovery.

I've seen a lot businesses cut their spending and still fail. 

I've seen business cut the salary of employees and the number of employees.  Then the quality of customer service goes down.  They cut costs by putting out cheaper merchandise at the same prices.  They lose customers and fail.

Warbler said:

As for social security going bankrupt and health care being rationed and China owning America, lets hope that doesn't happen. 

The social security has already happened. Social Security has run its course. The numbers going in, the numbers coming out, and life expectancy just don't add up. While we continue to pay into it, unless drastic changes are made to it, it is long gone by the time I get anywhere near old enough to draw from it. My generation is on their own as far as retirement goes.

When Obama care takes over, besides crushing a healthy but pricey healthcare system, it will lead to rationing. A system like that cannot be sustained full service.

And China already practically owns us. We rely on them for many of our goods. Tax incentives need to be made to encourage US businesses to close down their Chinese factories and to bring production to back to America. That is how we create jobs for the American people, and get our ball sack out of China's tight grip.

darth_ender said:

I know CP3S and I have had our differences and his phrasing has at times taken me aback (just a bit), but man, no one can say what he is thinking quite as well or as forcefully as he.  I love reading his posts, as long as they're not contradicting mine ;)

yeah, CP3S is very knowledgeable and is a great debater.   A better debater than I am, I think.    He is certainly more knowledgeable than I am.

darth_ender said:

Let me add that I miss georgec and walkingdork posting here.  

there are some things about them I miss and some I don't.    Both sometimes seem to get mean.  They also both harbor the kind of hostility that many on the left have for Christianity.   But was nice have other liberal minded people on here.  It was not my intention to get them to leave.   I regret whatever acts that I did that added to there reasons for leaving.

darth_ender said:

I know there was that big blowout a bit back thanks to the fuse known as abc/XyZ

yeah, and I failed once again  to control my temper.   I thought I had gotten better at anger management.  But I failed.

darth_ender said:  I truly respect Warbler and how he both stands his ground when he feels strongly about something as well as concedes points when appropriate, and I wish he had a little backup.

thankyou. 

darth_ender said:

Hmmm...while I'm being sentimental, I was sad to lose Ferris who hardly ever shows up anymore,

yes, it would be nice it he came back.   Last I heard, there was health problems with his father.   I hope everything is ok. 

darth_ender said:

but I'm glad that Mrebo is here regularly, as he is both tactful and eloquent, and often makes my points better than I do.

I just wish Mrebo and I didn't get on each other's nerves so much.  

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

As for social security going bankrupt and health care being rationed and China owning America, lets hope that doesn't happen. 

The social security has already happened. Social Security has run its course. The numbers going in, the numbers coming out, and life expectancy just don't add up. While we continue to pay into it, unless drastic changes are made to it, it is long gone by the time I get anywhere near old enough to draw from it. My generation is on their own as far as retirement goes.

social security is in trouble, but it is not yet bankrupt, just on that path to it.

CP3S said:

When Obama care takes over, besides crushing a healthy but pricey healthcare system, it will lead to rationing. A system like that cannot be sustained full service.

we shall see. 

CP3S said:

And China already practically owns us. We rely on them for many of our goods.

funny, I don't feel like I am owned by China.  

CP3S said:

Tax incentives need to be made to encourage US businesses to close down their Chinese factories and to bring production to back to America. That is how we create jobs for the American people, and get our ball sack out of China's tight grip.

that seems to make sense to me.    But I am willing to bet that if Obama proposed it, the "party of no" would block it just cause it came from Obama. 

Warbler said:

social security is in trouble, but it is not yet bankrupt, just on that path to it.

Irreversibly on that path. For all intents and purposes it is kaput. It is still sputtering for those collecting now, but when you and I reach retirement age it isn't going to be there for us, which was suppose to be the entire point of us paying into it all our lives. Now we get to pay, but we don't get to look forward to ever seeing any of it come back to us.

CP3S said:

And China already practically owns us. We rely on them for many of our goods.

funny, I don't feel like I am owned by China.  

Well, do this for me. Next time you go shopping, check the label on every item you buy, and maybe even take the time to check a few common items you don't intend to buy. Just checking a few things in arms length of me, the spindle of blank DVDs on my desk were made in China, my Converse shoes were made in China (those are popular shoes, go out and stare at the ground a bit and you'll realize how many Americans wear them, all made in China), my lab coat was made in China, I've noticed many of the games I've bought lately were made in China. My Bioshock figures that liter my desk were all made in China too. My Kindle was "assembled" in China. My wrist watch was made in China. My iPhone was "assembled" in China. My stethoscope was made in China. 

My copy of Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut was printed in the U.S.A., my sidearm was made in Croatia, and my tea cup was made in England. Those are literally the only three things in or on my desk (that are labeled) that were not made/assembled in China. That is a lot of production being outsourced. A more healthy future for America may be one where we pay more for our products, but bring their manufacture back to the states. Increasing importation taxes and providing tax breaks for companies that manufacture State side may go a long ways in this. Obama blames ATM machines and airport kiosks for taking jobs from real Americans. I think that is silly, even if the number of people put out of work by ATMs and other automated transaction systems is substantial, it is nothing in comparison to the jobs we lose overseas, but don't expect to hear that from the guy who has no end of flabbergastingly fantastic things to say about China.

I apologize in advance, but I am going to have to split your post up and respond in my normal style that bothers you for some reason.   I just don't know another way to respond to this in an adequate way.

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

 the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

Wow! just noticed this!  You used the quote button and cut out most of my post!  How dare you use the quote button!  How dare you cut out most of my post!  Why didn't you read my whole post?   

Don't be tedious, Warbler.

I am just proving that I am not the only one that uses the quote button.  

Mrebo said:

You obviously didn't understand the idiom about seeing the forest for the trees (at least you didn't understand it's application to the argument),

how could I not understand the idiom seeing as you linked to its definition?  You were saying that I concentrated on the little details too much and missed the bigger picture.   

Mrebo said:

but I wasn't going to dwell on it. Either you figure it out or you don't. I wasn't going to get into a protracted nonsensical fight like this.

you have continually attacked my posting style, so I feel I have to defend it, or at least try to make you understand why I post the way I do.   I feel we need to discuss this so it does not continually muck up our political debates.    That, am I am sick of getting criticized by you for my posting style.

Mrebo said:

My objection is not that you quote individual ideas - it's that you quote snippets of text in such a way that shows you miss the overall point.

not sure how "my snippets"  show that I miss the overall point.    I understood the overall point that both Romney's and Obama's dog incidents were meaningless.   I understood your overall point,  I just didn't get the idea of comparing the acts of child to that of a grown man. 

Mrebo said:

In your response to my last post, you honestly didn't have to quote me at all. There was no bit of text so crucial that it had to be preserved to understand your response to me.

either I quote what I am responding to, waste time and typing explaining what point(s) I am responding to, or I risk creating confusion.  

1. Someone might think I am respond to their post and not yours. 

2. You might think I am responding to another one of your posts. 

3. You might think I am responding to another point in your post. 

Mrebo said:

But I'm not objecting at all to quoting (as you probably noticed, I do it habitually).

could have fooled me.

Mrebo said:

 

Here's how I could have responded a la Warbler (yes, now I'm being tedious):

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

the debt will continue no matter who is elected. 

Wow! just noticed this!

Why only now?

You used the quote button and cut out most of my post!

That's because I didn't think the rest of it was relevant to what I wanted to respond to.

How dare you use the quote button!

Whatever.

How dare you cut out most of my post!

*sigh*

Why didn't you read my whole post?  

I read it all. The rest was separate or not necessary to the quote I was responding to.

and unlike you I see nothing wrong with responding this way, and I would not accuse you of missing the bigger picture. 

Mrebo said:

Or how about I follow your newest method:

Why did you only notice that I quoted part of your post after the fact?

I only responded to that one part because I didn't think the rest of it was relevant to what I wanted to respond to.

And I read it all. The rest was separate or not necessary to the quote I was responding to.

 

ok how about you write this response a third time in the style you would like me to use.  

gosh!  I now have no idea how it is you'd like me to respond to you in my posts.   I really don't.  You have me totally confused.     You have complained about me breaking up your posts in the past.   You have complained about  not posting all of your post. 

Mrebo said:

It's a very superficial way of responding either way. Compare it to my actual response where I addressed the core point you were making without dwelling on the sentences. You do the former to excess, apparently leading you to rebut jokes I make about the morality of green beans. As you can see, I omitted quotation of your other post - but I have little expectation that you (or anyone else) will be confused.

ok, I admit I suck at detecting humor.    Maybe I should have realized that it was a joke.    And of course,  there will be no confusion because you typed in an explanation  that you were references the green bean thing.   Either you had to do that or quote the post or there might be confusion.  

Mrebo said:

Your response to me about debt/Paul Ryan doesn't give much to respond to. You gave very literal responses about your personal opinions with no elaboration about why you feel the way you do. That's fine.

ok.

Mrebo said:

I'll clarify one point I made about Democrats supporting Ryan's ideas. I mean his current ideas (called the Ryan/Wyden compromise) and the Democrats to which I was referring are in the House.

I don't know too much about this Ryan/Wyden compromise, so I can't comment it.   I just know that I do not like Ryan.  I can't stand his stance on civil rights.  I am also willing to bet we(Ryan and I) are on opposite ends of other issues as well. 

Mrebo said:

I have no interest in beating up on you in posts. If you take offense at my suggestion that you respond in a less literal tit-for-tat fashion, then I will simply say in the future that "you missed the point."

I think responding to the whole idea expressed (rather than each separate sentence) is conducive to that end. So, again, I'm not pressing the matter. Avoid the silly sarcastic posts and let's focus on substance.

I just wish I could understand what you want of me.   Yes I respond to a lot of little details.   It  is because all of the little (and big) details add up to the big picture. 

It is normal for people in posts to make several smaller points to add up to the big point they are making in the post.   I don't understand why it is so wrong to address the smaller points.   If the smaller points are invalid and wrong, the big point falls apart.

let us look at this logical argument

fact A: all big balloons are red bulloons

fact B: tommy's balloon is a big balloon

conclusion:  tommy's balloon is a  red balloon.

if either fact A or B is wrong the conclusion is wrong.   So I were to try create an argument that the conclusion is wrong,  I try to either prove fact A or fact B or both, wrong.    I'd quote fact A and try to prove it was wrong(if I thought it was wrong) and then I'd quote fact B and try to prove it was wrong(again if  I thought it was wrong).   Why is that so wrong?  How does that "miss the forest for the trees"? 

Mrebo said:

I think responding to the whole idea expressed (rather than each separate sentence) is conducive to that end. So, again, I'm not pressing the matter. Avoid the silly sarcastic posts and let's focus on substance.

but when the several smaller point are used to add up to the whole idea, what is wrong with addresses the smaller points individually as an argument against the whole idea?  

Mrebo said:

I hate Comcast because after several repairmen, my internet is still not working.

my sympathies.  I know how frustrating it is when my computer/internet is not working properly. 

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

social security is in trouble, but it is not yet bankrupt, just on that path to it.

Irreversibly on that path. For all intents and purposes it is kaput.

are contradicting yourself.  Read the underlined from your previous post.

CP3S said:

The social security has already happened. Social Security has run its course. The numbers going in, the numbers coming out, and life expectancy just don't add up. While we continue to pay into it, unless drastic changes are made to it, it is long gone by the time I get anywhere near old enough to draw from it. My generation is on their own as far as retirement goes.

so you believe drastic changes can save it, therefore you do not believe it is irreversibly on the path to bankruptcy or already kaput.   If that were true, even drastic changes would not save it.

CP3S said:

CP3S said:

And China already practically owns us. We rely on them for many of our goods.

funny, I don't feel like I am owned by China.  

Well, do this for me. Next time you go shopping, check the label on every item you buy, and maybe even take the time to check a few common items you don't intend to buy. Just checking a few things in arms length of me, the spindle of blank DVDs on my desk were made in China, my Converse shoes were made in China (those are popular shoes, go out and stare at the ground a bit and you'll realize how many Americans wear them, all made in China), my lab coat was made in China, I've noticed many of the games I've bought lately were made in China. My Bioshock figures that liter my desk were all made in China too. My Kindle was "assembled" in China. My wrist watch was made in China. My iPhone was "assembled" in China. My stethoscope was made in China. 

My copy of Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut was printed in the U.S.A., my sidearm was made in Croatia, and my tea cup was made in England. Those are literally the only three things in or on my desk (that are labeled) that were not made/assembled in China. That is a lot of production being outsourced. A more healthy future for America may be one where we pay more for our products, but bring their manufacture back to the states. Increasing importation taxes and providing tax breaks for companies that manufacture State side may go a long ways in this. Obama blames ATM machines and airport kiosks for taking jobs from real Americans. I think that is silly, even if the number of people put out of work by ATMs and other automated transaction systems is substantial, it is nothing in comparison to the jobs we lose overseas, but don't expect to hear that from the guy who has no end of flabbergastingly fantastic things to say about China.

just because a lot of our products come from china, does not mean they own us.   I am sure if I go to any US government building I will see the American flag flying, not the Chinese flag.   I am also sure I could easily go in some stores and find things made in America.

and lets face it ATMs and other automated transaction systems have put a lot of people out of work.    You really think there are as many bank tellers today as there were when we had no ATMs and everyone had to go to a human to make a bank transaction?  It is nothing new that computers have replace humans in jobs, unfortunately.    I fear in my lifetime there may be little or  nothing left for humans to do in the workforce.    Computers are getting better and better and able to take over more and more jobs that only humans used to be able to do.   And remember business owners love that,  because they don't have to pay a computer a salary.  

But I am forced to agree with you that a lot of our problems are our outsourcing of jobs to other nations. 

g

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

social security is in trouble, but it is not yet bankrupt, just on that path to it.

Irreversibly on that path. For all intents and purposes it is kaput.

are contradicting yourself.  Read the underlined from your previous post.

CP3S said:

The social security has already happened. Social Security has run its course. The numbers going in, the numbers coming out, and life expectancy just don't add up. While we continue to pay into it, unless drastic changes are made to it, it is long gone by the time I get anywhere near old enough to draw from it. My generation is on their own as far as retirement goes.

so you believe drastic changes can save it, therefore you do not believe it is irreversibly on the path to bankruptcy or already kaput.   If that were true, even drastic changes would not save it.

I am not contradicting anything. Sometimes I wish you'd make real points, instead of looking for hairs to split that you can use in lieu agree with or arguing against a point. Yeah, maybe something very drastic could fix it, but the likelihood of that is slim. Bush tried to do something about it, and the people responded with extremely heavy resistance. So, yes, for all intents and purposes, it is dead.

just because a lot of our products come from china, does not mean they own us.   I am sure if I go to any US government building I will see the American flag flying, not the Chinese flag.   I am also sure I could easily go in some stores and find things made in America.

It means we are very dependent of them. It means jobs that could be being used to prop up this economy are instead providing for their economy.

and lets face it ATMs and other automated transaction systems have put a lot of people out of work.    You really think there are as many bank tellers today as there were when we had no ATMs and everyone had to go to a human to make a bank transaction?  It is nothing new that computers have replace humans in jobs, unfortunately.    I fear in my lifetime there may be little or  nothing left for humans to do in the workforce.   

You really do just buy into Obama's every word, don't you? Whether you mean to or not, you are literally arguing that technology is putting us out of business, and that outsourcing to China is no big deal, and you are doing it with nothing more than a "let's face it" and a shrug of the shoulders. You're not even providing evidence.

Those Wal-Mart self checkout kiosks still need someone manning them. Sure, they can get four registers with just one clerk monitoring them all, but it is an extremely far cry from nothing left for humans to do in the workforce within your life time. I've worked in construction for years, and all the technology in that field is very dependent on people. ATM's need workers for monitoring and for maintenance. We are an extremely long ways away from a fully automated workforce. These things cut down time spent in line and make things more sufficient all around. If I have to wait in a long line for my bank teller, I am being less productive and have less time to get things done than I do when I can do all my banking online. I'd love to see studies prove your and Barack's points that these things hurt us. And I'd even more love to see proof that our technology takes away more of our jobs than outsourcing to foreign countries. It is bullshit. The fact that you don't see it and are so quick to defend and support Obama's view on the matter is alarming.

Can we seriously not agree that the country would be better off if businesses moved production of goods back to the States? Everything is made abroad today. Sure, you can find some stuff made in the USA, but not if you don't want to be extremely limited in your purchases. If you want to own stuff made in the US, you won't own Apple, Microsoft, or Sony products, or very much name brand clothing. All those could be jobs helping out our own economy and our own unemployed (come on, how do we not agree that this is a better idea than borrowing trillions of dollars from ourselves and using it to temporarily employ select people to destroy perfectly good buildings and replace them with new ones that weren't even needed in the first place?)

One of the few things that is going to help this economy is bringing production back into the states. We are a nation of mass consumption. We consume far more than we produce. We are not self sustaining. Are imports are massive and our exports are practically nonexistent. An economy can't function like that. Our biggest export is money that has no value. Money with no backing that we print off when needed and our ourselves more of than we can every conceivably pay back. For how much longer do you think countries like China are going to want to accept our fake money (which at this point is worth nothing more than our reputation alone)? These things aren't usually talked about in the popular media because they are a drag. Things are pretty grim. I for one honestly don't think the US will ever recover from any of this.

Computers are getting better and better and able to take over more and more jobs that only humans used to be able to do.   And remember business owners love that,  because they don't have to pay a computer a salary.  

But I am forced to agree with you that a lot of our problems are our outsourcing of jobs to other nations. 

CP3S said:

g

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

social security is in trouble, but it is not yet bankrupt, just on that path to it.

Irreversibly on that path. For all intents and purposes it is kaput.

are contradicting yourself.  Read the underlined from your previous post.

CP3S said:

The social security has already happened. Social Security has run its course. The numbers going in, the numbers coming out, and life expectancy just don't add up. While we continue to pay into it, unless drastic changes are made to it, it is long gone by the time I get anywhere near old enough to draw from it. My generation is on their own as far as retirement goes.

so you believe drastic changes can save it, therefore you do not believe it is irreversibly on the path to bankruptcy or already kaput.   If that were true, even drastic changes would not save it.

I am not contradicting anything.

yes you did.  either social security is or is not kaput/bankrupt.   If it is, no changes even drastic ones could save it.  

CP3S said:

Sometimes I wish you'd make real points, instead of looking for hairs to split that you can use in lieu agree with or arguing against a point.

sorry, but it was as contradiction.  

CP3S said:

Yeah, maybe something very drastic could fix it, but the likelihood of that is slim. Bush tried to do something about it, and the people responded with extremely heavy resistance. So, yes, for all intents and purposes, it is dead.

but there is still brain function and a heartbeat so it is technically not dead yet. 

I only hope someone does come along and make the changes needed. 

CP3S said:

just because a lot of our products come from china, does not mean they own us.   I am sure if I go to any US government building I will see the American flag flying, not the Chinese flag.   I am also sure I could easily go in some stores and find things made in America.

It means we are very dependent of them. It means jobs that could be being used to prop up this economy are instead providing for their economy.

true, but doesn't it also work the other way around?   Are they not dependent on us?  They get a lot of jobs for us and sell a lot to us.  

CP3S said:

and lets face it ATMs and other automated transaction systems have put a lot of people out of work.    You really think there are as many bank tellers today as there were when we had no ATMs and everyone had to go to a human to make a bank transaction?  It is nothing new that computers have replace humans in jobs, unfortunately.    I fear in my lifetime there may be little or  nothing left for humans to do in the workforce.   

You really do just buy into Obama's every word, don't you?

no I don't.  I just agree that obviously computers do replace humans. 

CP3S said:

Whether you mean to or not, you are literally arguing that technology is putting us out of business, and that outsourcing to China is no big deal,

 

I didn't say that outsourcing to China is no big deal.   I thought I made it clear that I thought it was a big deal when I said :

Warbler said:

But I am forced to agree with you that a lot of our problems are our outsourcing of jobs to other nations.

I agree with you it is a big deal and something ought to be done.  If Obama thinks otherwise, I disagree with him. 

CP3S said:

Those Wal-Mart self checkout kiosks still need someone manning them. Sure, they can get four registers with just one clerk monitoring them all, but it is an extremely far cry from nothing left for humans to do in the workforce within your life time.

one clerk where there used to be 4.    Its more than just Walmart.   The same is true in Supermarkets and Home Depot.   I am surprised Best Buy doesn't use the technology.  Also haven't you noticed how many businesses use computers to answer their phones?   They even  can reply to voice commands.  Yes it is far cry from "nothing left for humans to do".   What about in 20 years? 40?  60?  80?   I can't prove that it will happen, I am guessing based upon the rapid improvement in computers in my lifetime so far.      They are getting computers to do amazing things that I never thought would happen in my lifetime.    They are getting faster and smarter.    Artificial intelligence in computers is improving.    Robots are getting better and better.   Can you really say it isn't possible that by the time we are old and gray in the nursing home, that computers will render humans obsolete?  

CP3S said:

I've worked in construction for years, and all the technology in that field is very dependent on people.

you really think robots won't improve to the point where they can replace humans in construction?

CP3S said:

ATM's need workers for monitoring and for maintenance.

 it still a lot less people working than the number tellers that the ATM replaces.  If it wasn't, the banks wouldn't use the ATM.   Do you really think banks just provide ATM solely for customer convenience?  No.  They do it cause then they don't have to pay as many tellers.  

CP3S said:

We are an extremely long ways away from a fully automated workforce.

I agree, but that doesn't mean it will never happen

CP3S said:

These things cut down time spent in line and make things more sufficient all around. If I have to wait in a long line for my bank teller, I am being less productive and have less time to get things done than I do when I can do all my banking online. I'd love to see studies prove your and Barack's points that these things hurt us.

what studies do you need to see to know that computers are doing jobs that used to be done by humans?  I should think that is pretty obvious.  Your example of 1 clerk where there used to be 4 should be enough. 

Just to be clear, I am not saying that computer are the only thing to blame for our unemployment rate.

CP3S said:

And I'd even more love to see proof that our technology takes away more of our jobs than outsourcing to foreign countries. It is bullshit.

I never said it did.  I don't know enough to know which takes away more jobs.   I won't argue with you if you say outsourcing takes away more jobs.

CP3S said:

 

Can we seriously not agree that the country would be better off if businesses moved production of goods back to the States?

I agree, however I am a little concerned when you say prices might go up.  That might create problems.    But I can't say for certain.   I am no expert on the economy. 

CP3S said:

Everything is made abroad today. Sure, you can find some stuff made in the USA, but not if you don't want to be extremely limited in your purchases. If you want to own stuff made in the US, you won't own Apple, Microsoft, or Sony products, or very much name brand clothing. All those could be jobs helping out our own economy and our own unemployed (come on, how do we not agree that this is a better idea than borrowing trillions of dollars from ourselves and using it to temporarily employ select people to destroy perfectly good buildings and replace them with new ones that weren't even needed in the first place?)

One of the few things that is going to help this economy is bringing production back into the states. We are a nation of mass consumption. We consume far more than we produce. We are not self sustaining. Are imports are massive and our exports are practically nonexistent. An economy can't function like that. Our biggest export is money that has no value. Money with no backing that we print off when needed and our ourselves more of than we can every conceivably pay back. For how much longer do you think countries like China are going to want to accept our fake money (which at this point is worth nothing more than our reputation alone)? These things aren't usually talked about in the popular media because they are a drag. Things are pretty grim. I for one honestly don't think the US will ever recover from any of this.

 fake money?   perhaps I just don't know as much as you.  But how is our money more fake than say the Euro?  

I really hope you are wrong that we will recover.    I am open to the idea that we need to bring jobs back here.