Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

actually, the republicans and the democrats are not responsible for this mess. This mess has been building since the 70's or sooner when we first closed down our first factory in favor of cheaper labor overseas. The following is an article I wrote this morning titled "Why won't you open your eyes ? " Virgil http://www.KeepAmericaAtWork.com We see articles like this every day, on the internet and in the paper and on tv. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/ap_on_bi_ge/meltdown_coming_soon But they won't open their eyes and see what is really happening. They all say the same thing. That this time it is different. But they won't take the time to understand why. And the reason why is because of what we are doing to ourselves. Fact 1 - The American consumer accounts for 70% OR MORE of all purchases made in America Fact 2 - Our companies are offshoring our work faster and faster Fact 3 - The people whose jobs have been offshored are only finding jobs paying less money which means they have less money to spend IF they can find work at all Fact 4 - Less money to go around, means less to spend at the mall, means less retailers, means less employees, means less tax revenue to run your town, county, state and country Fact 5 - Offshoring has to stop immediately in order to reverse this trend Question - Why can you not see what is so obvious ? Is it because I am not an economic expert ? Is it because of the forest for the trees syndrome ? Is it because to admit that we are causing this problem would force you to make less money by paying American wages for American jobs ?

Reply
Report this post

Re: Virgil Bierschwale;...Sir, .. don't be retarded in public... The parties have sliced and diced this country to keep progress from happening.. If the blame is not all theirs, then they have had things their own way, and have done nothing to fix the flaws in our representative democracy, our republic... Republics have weaknesses and strengths that direct democracies do not, and the same is true of direct democracies, that they have strengths and weaknesses... But the part of our government which was designed to be most democratic was tampered with from the beginning, and this was a party choice... We started this country with one representative for every thirty thousand and now have one representative for something like every 600,000.... Compare this situation to the Greeks, who in their highest representative body had over a thousand men representing 150000... Now, consider the numbers... There were 400K inhabitants of Attica, of whom 250k were slaves having no civil rights...Yet this small number existing without technology as we know it , and only by their own labor or the excess labor of slaves could in their smallest and highest office, their Dikasteria, have a ratio of 1 representative to 150 citizens ... Now, with our early government, much hampered by distance and poor communication we could afford a better democracy than what we now have by miles.... When this change was made, it was to make the house more manage-able.... Manageable for whom??? For the parties and the powers that controlled it??? How did that help us??? You see where it has helped us... It has helped us not at all... And the proof is that no one of us would vote for the situation we suffer because we were never allowed any vote except on party personalities....Between them, the government and the rich have helped themselves to the national treasure, our public lands, our minerals, our labor, our invention, our money, our liberty, and our military... They could not do this without the destruction of our democracy... The contempt of Socrates and Plato for democracy have come down through the ages to our time, and as in Greece, these oligarchs have sold out the democracy to foreign powers... It is treason, but if this treason were not allowed, and built into the constitution when it set no limits to free association, or firm limits on the ratio of the governed to representatives; then, it would not be possible, and all would not now have to be destroyed... But do not say the parties are not responsible... They are not exactly constitutional, and are only unofficially constitutional... But they are accepted, and they define the nature and limits of government on their own, and they have had their day, and should be made illegal, and outlawed...Let us see their progress now, because my bet is, that to have power the republicans will work against any solution, but this is not 1932, and the problems are far worse, and more difficult to fix, and we might see all go to hell in short order... Let it bleed... There is not a part of this government, or this economy that I would risk a finger to save... It was a born abortion... It should have died long ago... WE can do better... Begin writing your own constitution... Thanks...Sweeney

Reply
Report this post

We have a case of "Damn if you do.. Damn if you don't" Barack is in an awkward position and we must respect that. If the financial situation was not as grave as it is, I sincerely think he would take more chances on placing fresh faces aka unknowns in his cabinet. But giving the volatile and sensitive time we are in where one false move could cause an absolute crash and burn effect, he had to make a choice - go with his revolutionary vision or yield to a conservative caution. If hiring known faces helped calm the fears and anxieties of wall-street, news pundits, and the like, then it was an unfortunate tough call to make, but I'm glad he had the balls to "do the right thing" and not foresake us just because of some "campaign rhetoric" Barack can not make governing decisons based on "change we can believe in." He has to make govern based on "change that will secure our anxieties" But let's consider his campaign pledge of "Change" - That's a little word that now has over 100 different interpretations. Not to belabor the the point (smiles), I'm just going to wrap this up by saying the on change that I think he has kept his word at so far - is CHANGE in Washington were the leader is actually trying to do something for the people. CHANGE is in Washington were we actually know there is one leader, the Preseident, calling the shots and he will not be a "yes man" to his #2. CHANGE is having a President that has actually studied Goverment and American History. Another thing we have to consider, is that historically, african american politicians are often taken for granted. Obama has to be firm with some cabinet selections to send a message, that he means business and he is not a flyweight - don't let his size full you. And don't let his selections full you. He did not achieve his past victories on the message of hope! He actually tapped into the psyche of a lot of intellectual professionals. Don't forget, working with A-listers is a two-way street. They have to agree to work under his lead. So if they trust and believe in his cabinet, why can't we?