OT It could be, it might be, it is !!!

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:48:27 GMT, "Tom Littleton" wrote:


"Richard Pearson" wrote in message
. ..
But your idea is to depend on the govt for everything. That the liberal
mantra. And you just puke out the party line without thinking or
understanding the baseline issues.

thus far, I see no sign that you have a clue what the baseline issues are.
Here's a hint: Government regulation of commerce and banking was much more
pervasive in the 1950's than the present. Oddly, many people view that as a
sort of Golden Age of American Capitalism.....

It was also the real beginning period of the "Cold War," the hula-hoop was
popular, and the music died - GOVERNMENT REGULATION KILLED BUDDY HOLLY (...the
*******s...)!!!!

Actually, while regulation was simply different (as was enforcement), the
players were much different, too. You had a very limited participation in the
equities market and its collateral markets, and while the economy was vastly
different, economic principles remain the same. Moreover, the 50s were a time
of vast post-war boom in the US (which remained unscathed physically by WW2)
and tremendous upheaval in most of the rest of the world - ask older Brits,
Europeans, or Asians about the 50s, and you'll find that they weren't all that
"golden" world-wide (or heck, ask a black person who was an adult in the US...).

Tom
p.s. political ideologues aren't going to improve our situation, from either
side.

They never have or will.

TC,
R

wrote in message
...

snipped
I think what I'm trying to work through is that I feel both you and Ken are
vastly overgeneralizing. I do not feel that we NEED have a nation with a
glut of folks capable of
"burger flipping" as a skillset. Nor, do I agree with Ken that we are
overwhelmingly a nation of overachieving production machines. There is, as
always a continuum, but we have, IMO, lowered the overall skill levels over
the past few decades. For whatever reason, we have dumbed down basic
education, made higher education(especially in technical and scientific
fields) less regarded by both students and the institutions themselves, and
in so doing have done the national economy no real good.
Therefore, I applaud what Obama seems to be saying: short term stimulus
followed by a bit of belt tightening and a national focus on education and
innovation. Sure, it's political rah-rah, to an extent, but at least it
attempts to start getting the notion over to the people that this is no easy
ride that someone else does for you.
As for the way commerce was conducted in the 1950-75 timeframe, I do see
relevant ideas that seem to have been lost. Why, for instance, were
corporations perfectly profitable, and focused on the long term, when CEO's
and Presidents made around 20-30 times the entry level professional's
salary? When did it seem prudent to pay the leadership an average of 150
times entry? These weren't, for years on end, ever regulated matters, yet
were considered fair practice. I'm not claiming any rights or wrongs here,
so much as wondering where it all got off the track, with a shrinking
industrial production, widening gap between workers and exective's
compensation, lowering of educational standards and unregulated greed.
I do suspect it's going to as messy as making sausage getting back onto
sounder footing.......
Tom

On Apr 17, 5:57*pm, wrote:

Interesting. The private sector can't self police so the greedy
innovate entirely new financial shell games, fleece half of most
middleclass peoples savings for their retirement, via hidden fees,
outright fraud, legalized fraud and tax avoidance . . . the American
industrialist opts out of his job creation role and off-shores the
jobs, still fully expecting to be able to sell the products in the US,
and keep the protections of the corporation as a fictional person, etc
etc and the government is the only recourse to the workers of the US,
the people who increasingly live in double and single wides on other
peoples land, the people who fill the ranks of our defence forces, the
people who pay for our skimpy social safety net, and think twice
before they go to the Doctor. And you see the threat coming from
cleaning up the mess your team made of the government? And you don't
need to get out of your bubble? Scheeeeze

And the only tired response you have to these stalwarts of our nation,
after all the goof fortune in your own circumstances, is that its all
their own fault, caveat emptor, and they need "tough love."

Rick, if this country ever goes socialist, folks with your level of
ignorance and arrogance will be the cause.

Dave
Ideology still sucks

On Apr 17, 9:12*pm, Richard Pearson
wrote:

What? You hate American workers too? Maybe you and your family would
like to live in Kazakstan or Paraguay or one of the other **** holes
where your kind of ignorance rules. Folks like you want to live in the
USA but you don't want to pay your way. **** you and all the other
Whackjob leaches. The gravy train is over for your kind.

Dave

On Apr 17, 9:16*pm, Richard Pearson
wrote:

Hold on there Ace. You been out of the country for the last 8 years?
You rightwing Rushparrots think that everyone will forget the vast
expansion of government, the corruption, stealing and incompetence of
the 8 years of whackjob nonsense. And sloganeering is all you got
left. Next thing you will be pushing is what? Gruel and lard in the
school lunch program? Reused bandages for the troops? How about
getting off your head ass and passing some common sense thru that
piehole for a change?

Dave

On Apr 17, 4:57*pm, wrote:

Kool Richard. YOU have zip evidence and ZIP experiences or concrete
observations to share, but like a typical whackjob with a little
polish you pretend that your lighter-than-air-show trounces anyone
else's real information. Typical bubble Baby.

Like I said . . . your fact-free bull**** allows ye of the Hyena
persuasion to let their pieholes drip with all the venom they have
reserved for the American middle class and the outcome of an election
that they could not buy. Thats what this is about, plain and simple.
Sore losers who hate America. Real constructive ah huh. Real fanatical
is more like it.

I still think you got infected somehow with all that subversive neo-
fascist deconstructionist crap that was so much the rage at Yale when
you were a student there. Does your tinfoil hat have "Yale" written on
it?

Dave

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 16:33:18 GMT, "Tom Littleton" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .

snipped
I think what I'm trying to work through is that I feel both you and Ken are
vastly overgeneralizing. I do not feel that we NEED have a nation with a
glut of folks capable of
"burger flipping" as a skillset.

I didn't say, nor did I mean that we need a nation of burger-flippers (or any
other single vocation). I simply said that for some people, it's about as far
as they are capable of going, just like some are best suited to be doctors,
engineers, scientists, teachers, ditch-diggers, laborers, managers, soldiers,
etc., etc. - if you prefer, some simply aren't capable of (or even desire to)
producing more than about $15-20K a year of "work" (and some less than that).

Nor, do I agree with Ken that we are
overwhelmingly a nation of overachieving production machines. There is, as
always a continuum, but we have, IMO, lowered the overall skill levels over
the past few decades. For whatever reason, we have dumbed down basic
education, made higher education(especially in technical and scientific
fields) less regarded by both students and the institutions themselves, and
in so doing have done the national economy no real good.

I can tell you and it'll make Ken's head explode - we've created a large subset
of the population that feels they are entitled to things to which they simply
aren't entitled. It started black folks, who really didn't even ask for it -
they simply wanted what they were most certainly entitled to: the right to
succeed or fail on their own merits rather than the color of their skin. But
"liberals" went _way_ overboard - affirmative action, reverse discrimination,
etc. And it spread to all sorts of "disadvantaged" people. We've bred a
multi-racial subset who thinks they have a right to demand "fairness" as they
define it. As you well know, life isn't fair. Sometimes, even decent people
get hurt, and it just isn't the responsibility of the general public to cure,
fix, or mitigate everything. It just isn't possible to give everybody
everything.

Therefore, I applaud what Obama seems to be saying:

Oh, hell, I applaud a fair bit of what he _says_. My issues with him are what
he does, or, what he fails to do at any given moment versus what he previously
said he'd do. I'm enough of a realist to understand campaign promises, but on
not on the core things which were, by his own statements, "exempted" from the
typical promises.

short term stimulus
followed by a bit of belt tightening and a national focus on education and
innovation. Sure, it's political rah-rah, to an extent, but at least it
attempts to start getting the notion over to the people that this is no easy
ride that someone else does for you.
As for the way commerce was conducted in the 1950-75 timeframe, I do see
relevant ideas that seem to have been lost. Why, for instance, were
corporations perfectly profitable, and focused on the long term, when CEO's
and Presidents made around 20-30 times the entry level professional's
salary? When did it seem prudent to pay the leadership an average of 150
times entry? These weren't, for years on end, ever regulated matters, yet
were considered fair practice. I'm not claiming any rights or wrongs here,
so much as wondering where it all got off the track, with a shrinking
industrial production, widening gap between workers and exective's
compensation, lowering of educational standards and unregulated greed.
I do suspect it's going to as messy as making sausage getting back onto
sounder footing.......

Fair enough...

TC,
R
Tom

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:26:48 -0700 (PDT), DaveS wrote:

On Apr 17, 4:57*pm, wrote:

Kool Richard. YOU have zip evidence and ZIP experiences or concrete
observations to share, but like a typical whackjob with a little
polish you pretend that your lighter-than-air-show trounces anyone
else's real information. Typical bubble Baby.

Like I said . . . your fact-free bull**** allows ye of the Hyena
persuasion to let their pieholes drip with all the venom they have
reserved for the American middle class and the outcome of an election
that they could not buy. Thats what this is about, plain and simple.
Sore losers who hate America. Real constructive ah huh. Real fanatical
is more like it.

I still think you got infected somehow with all that subversive neo-
fascist deconstructionist crap that was so much the rage at Yale when
you were a student there. Does your tinfoil hat have "Yale" written on
it?

Here's the deal - until you can act like a ****ing adult and address the points
under discussion, you are, AFAIAC, Daffy Duck - if you want to be serious, then
act it, if not, I'll point out the fact that you wear flowered smocks to paint
pictures of monkeys...

HTH, but if it doesn't, well, there you are,
R

Dave

On Apr 18, 8:46*pm, wrote:

Here's the deal - until you can act like a ****ing adult and address the points
under discussion, you are, AFAIAC, Daffy Duck - if you want to be serious, then
act it, if not, I'll point out the fact that you wear flowered smocks to paint
pictures of monkeys...

HTH, but if it doesn't, well, there you are,
R


No Richard here's the deal. You are a radical extremist in a cleaned
up package. Your "points" are the same daily dose of rightwing crap
that every member of the Hyena wing of Whack-job Incorporated puts
out. Sometimes you should use quotes. You don't get to play adult
now.

Your vitriol is just a modestly more polished version of Beanman's
crap. A day later when most of whatever you said turns out to be from
your bottomless sack of secret sauce nonsense, you move position 2
degrees and make up more ****. You deliver ****, you get **** back.
That's how things work outside the bubble.

You want to be the lead BOO**** queen, you get to wear the dress. You
think its cute to rank on working people? You want to be the radical
wingnut, and still get treated as a reasonable person? It don't work
that way lad.

Dave

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:26:52 -0700 (PDT), DaveS wrote:

On Apr 18, 8:46*pm, wrote:

Here's the deal - until you can act like a ****ing adult and address the points
under discussion, you are, AFAIAC, Daffy Duck - if you want to be serious, then
act it, if not, I'll point out the fact that you wear flowered smocks to paint
pictures of monkeys...

HTH, but if it doesn't, well, there you are,
R


No Richard here's the deal. You are a radical extremist in a cleaned
up package. Your "points" are the same daily dose of rightwing crap
that every member of the Hyena wing of Whack-job Incorporated puts
out. Sometimes you should use quotes. You don't get to play adult
now.

Your vitriol is just a modestly more polished version of Beanman's
crap. A day later when most of whatever you said turns out to be from
your bottomless sack of secret sauce nonsense, you move position 2
degrees and make up more ****. You deliver ****, you get **** back.
That's how things work outside the bubble.

You want to be the lead BOO**** queen, you get to wear the dress. You
think its cute to rank on working people? You want to be the radical
wingnut, and still get treated as a reasonable person? It don't work
that way lad.

Dave

Nope - you're just Daffy Duck. You either don't, can't, or won't read, you
simply react to what you presume is said. I never "ranked" on "working people"
and if you think stating the fact that some people simply are not suited to
being anything more than "labor" (such as a "burger-flipper") is somehow
"radical extremism," you are among those people not suited to rational thought
or discussion.

HTH,
R