QueenZone discussion #396686

Bullwinkle wrote: I expected as much from you.

Mr.Jingles79 wrote: One word... LMAO!! Good one, man! I needed a good laugh.

Mr.Jingles79 wrote: One word... LMAO!!

joeyjojo wrote: Ok, what the hell. I'm bored. I'm pissed of at XP Pro so I need a break.
OK, bull. I'm up for a debate. I'll try and rebutt these and we'll see what we can come up with for a discussion.
"1 - The economy has improved and grown in the face of terrorism."
I'm not sure where you've gotten those statistics. I've seen plenty of statistics lately that show any perceived growth is just that...perceived...not real. Of the jobs that we've gained, a vast majority have been paying less than $13,000 a year.
MDV - as I recall, the GNP has expanded 3 to 4 percent in the last year. Our company has been very busy since October of last year.
"True, there are few new jobs, but that is primarily due to productivity improvements resulting from the "computer revolution"."
Again, where you are getting these stats? There are plenty of stats that would say the opposite...that the lack of new jobs is due to a large amount of outsourcing...especially 'computer' jobs.
MDV - here are your stats: link
"There are many American companies that have not been affected by imports because they work smarter not harder."
Such as?...
MDV - Urick Foundry (Ridgid Tools), Walker Forge (steel forgings), Applied Process Inc (specialty heat treater)
There are plenty of industries being gutted due to overseas slave labor...lumber, textiles, data entry, etc.
"There is still a niche for American know-how."
But not American hard work? That's my beef with that argument. Leave an elite, wealthy 'brain trust' in the US while outsourcing our labor to slave-conditions overseas, letting the rest here fend for themselves as Wal-Mart cashiers. (OK, that's over dramatized just a tad. ;o)
Urick Foundry is price and quality competative
"2 - Will Kerry will cave into the unions and institute more protectionist trade policies that will result in a global trade war?"
Are you anti-union, bull? If so, then I guess there's no point debating that issue with you.
MDV - Unions suck - our sister company had a drinking problem - the union guys drank their lunch. Of course the union stewards played politics - No matter the jobs are going to Mexico - because we were not price competitive for the railroads. Shoddy workmanship by that union severely hurt our reputation in the late 90's. Unions generally inhibit progress, reduce productivity, raise costs, and lower quality. When our house was built, union workers went on strike because our builder fired a shoddy siding installer. Also, the union workers were too lazy to use an outside port-a-potty - so they pissed in our basement.

"Caving in to terrorists and tyrants is not the answer."
Terrorists? No, of course not. Is kerry proposing we cave in? No. Of course not. Is either candidate proposing ways to solve the problem at the root level? I haven't heard much from Bush on that.
Kerry wants to cave into the tyrants and terrorists in Iraq - he implies he wants out ASAP
Tyrants? We do business with them daily. I know this is a point you disagree with, Bull, but that's what we do. We're a rather fickle country when it comes to business. If it makes us rich, we're OK looking a blind eye once in a while.
Point taken - but what will Kerry do different?
"The job in Iraq needs to be finished."
Well, it'd help if we had a defined job to begin with. We don't. There really is no 'finish' in site. Unless by 'finish' you mean hand over our checking accounts to Haliburton.
Gee - I guess we should just give up and leave Iraq as it is ... ignoring Saddam would have been better.
"Even France's pacivist ways did not prevent kidnapping of their citizens by terrorists."
And our bullying and oppressive dominance has not prevented kidnapping of our citizens by terrorists. Interesting.
"Who nee

<font color ="seagreen">ThomasQuinn wrote: Well, if you feel comfortable with the threat of getting nuked imminent any second because of a trigger-happy president who couldn't outsmart a boiled egg, that's up to you.

joeyjojo wrote: "MDV - as I recall, the GNP has expanded 3 to 4 percent in the last year. Our company has been very busy since October of last year."
That's good, but worker productivity isn't necessarily correlated to unemployment rates, or income levels for folks. It does tend to correlate to the amount of hours worked. Granted, I'm not an economics wiz, so I'm not much of an opponent on this topic.
"- Unions suck - our sister company had a drinking problem - the union guys drank their lunch"
Whoah! You're anti union because you stereotype an entire topic based on your own company? Yeesh.
MDV - I see you ignored my other two examples concerning unionized construction. I did not mention it, but worked for two other companies with unions - getting anything accomplished was nearly impossible because of stonewalling by the unions.
"Kerry wants to cave into the tyrants and terrorists in Iraq - he implies he wants out ASAP"
As anyone should. That should be the goal of ANY occupation, no? Leave as soon as you can. For the record, I believe Kerry has been saying that it'd take at least a year to pull out.
MDV - Ah yes Kerry wants to leave Iraq prematurely and let the Baathists, Shiite and Kurds be slaughtered.

"Point taken - but what will Kerry do different?"
Very good question. I don't know. I do know he has a hell of a lot less ties to the military industrial complex and the oil industry then the bush/cheney team does. By default, that makes it a safer bet in my book.
And yes, I suppose there's a chance he's going to make wide-sweeping favorable policies regarding the world tomatoe industry. I'll take corrupt tomatoes over corrupt war contracts and oil deeds though. ;o)
" I guess we should just give up and leave Iraq as it is ... ignoring Saddam would have been better."
No matter how many times you say this, Bull, it does not get any more valid as an actual debatable comment. The baby with the bathwater argument is just a last-resort rant. Don't stoop to using it.
The Baathists, Shiites and Kurds will be in a genocide war if the US leaves.
"Limit punitive damages for pain and suffering and stop treating the legal system as a lotery system."
It's that simple, eh? Have you ever worked in the judicial system? Our system is a tad more complex than that.
The issue is that you can't set limits. Cases are not the same. Each one is unique. Setting limits favours only one side...typically big business. Of course Bush is for that. He'd rather focus on fining CBS for showing a tit rather than allow citizens of the country to sue over environmental disasters.
"Bush is for Tort reform - that will have a more positive effect on health care cost than "talking about doing something with our healthcare system".'
That's simply not true. Actually, if you had universal health care, the government would actually have a lot more control over liability of the medical practioners.
MDV - Did you even look at look at my statement about medical malpractice insurance? The USA has a legitimate reputation for frivilous lawsuits and outrageous lottery awards. Tort reform would cap damages for pain and suffering. It is time to bring some sanity back to the US legal system. Those that are "injured" should be justly compensated, but please no lottery awards.
"What is wrong with drilling for oil in an Arctic wasteland?"
It's a waste of money...the oil reserves up there aren't much.
It's not a wasteland. It's unspoiled wilderness. It's something we're quickly running out of on this planet of ours.
Finally, sooner or later, we need to figure out ways to stop suckling the teat of oil. Money would be much better spent on figuring that out than destroying pristine wildlife habitat.
"The tree huggers (oops no trees up there) are pretty wacky and do not live in a

SergeantPepperDG wrote: OPRAH FOR PRESIDENT!

joeyjojo wrote: Bull...it's getting really hard to read your replies. You need to figure out how to use the quote tool. MDV - My quoting style is basically the same as yours except that I initial my comments on long posts and use the quote tool, while you seldom or never use the quote tool. Anyways, from looking at your post, it sounds like you're against leaving Iraq as it will lead to civil war. I'm not sure if there's much any president can do about that. Iraq is not a nation of like-minded folks. It's a nation of very different ethnic backgrounds combined with a warring tribal society. In many ways, a civil war is inevitable. Regardless of that, things aren't really getting better right now, are they? There's more terrorism in Iraq than ever and we're still loosing American soldier's lives. On top of that we're now loosing the lives of all sorts of relief workers and private citizens from pretty much any country. MDV ... and the terrorists are blameless. Kerry's point is that you can't fight terrorism by going to war with a country. He's right. We need to approach this an entirely different way. Haliburton isn't the way. MDV - By that logic, the terrorists and the Taliban government should have been ignored, and Afghanistan should never have been invaded. As for unions, you seem to have your mind made up from a small number of personal experiences. So be it. Doesn't sound like I can change your mind on that. MDV - I have worked in two jobs where the workforce is unionized. I have been in my present job for 15 years where I have worked with suppliers that were both union and non-union. I have seen ungrateful paper pushing union workers that earn over $100,000 shut down commercial trade on the west cost. Finally, every fall I see teachers hold children and families hostage. Otherwise, I didn't see much else to responsd to.

Holly2003 wrote: But your reply to Joey - "and the terrorists are blameless" - is totally pointless.

Holly2003 wrote: Believe me, grad assistants are very glad for the experience and the money whcih would not be available if every tenured professor was teaching 200-level classes.

MDV ... and the terrorists are blameless. [/quote]
Bull...what are you talking about? Please stop spinning everything people say. Either respond intelligently with something to say, or just don't bother.
[quote]MDV - By that logic, the terrorists and the Taliban government should have been ignored, and Afghanistan should never have been invaded.[/quote]
Well, more to the point, we should have found Osama. And we should have gotten him BEFORE he attacked us via intelligence we had years before (even back into Clinton's term).
[quote]MDV - I have worked in two jobs where the workforce is unionized. I have been in my present job for 15 years where I have worked with suppliers that were both union and non-union. I have seen ungrateful paper pushing union workers that earn over $100,000 shut down commercial trade on the west cost. Finally, every fall I see teachers hold children and families hostage.[/quote]
And have you considered their side of the argument? Do you simply find all concepts of unions bad because a few unions have inconveniences your life? As for teachers, they have every right to strike. It's the only time we pay attention to them. ;o)

joeyjojo wrote: OK, let's try something else. Instead of me attacking Bush, and you defending him, why don't you give me a one paragraph sales pitch as to why I should vote for bush WITHOUT any mention of Iraq nor terrorism. Can it be done? That is my challenge to you! ;o)

Bullwinkle wrote: The economy has improved and grown in the face of terrorism. Manufacturing materials are in short supply because of high demand. True, there are few new jobs, but that is primarily due to productivity improvements resulting from the "computer revolution". There are many American companies that have not been affected by imports because they work smarter not harder. There is still a niche for American know-how.

Bullwinkle wrote: Bush will take a proactive stance on critical world security issues rather than taking an isolationist view of ignoring the problem and hoping it goes away.

joeyjojo wrote: I don't think Bush, or any president for that matter has a huge direct effect on the economy

Holly2003 wrote: This seems to be yet another example of someone saying "I'm not a conservative BUT...[insert a bunch of conservative opinions]"

Holly2003 wrote: Virtually every right that workers have today was fought for and won by unions. Pick up any labor history book and you'll be stunned at the amount of violence directed at various unions by employers and by the state solely because they asked for humane working conditions. As for teachers unions and tenure, you don't seem to have much of a clue about that and yet that's the one example you use to support your assertion that "most, if not all, unions abuse their persuasive powers." In fact, since only the judicial and teaching professions use tenure, you are taking a very small percentage of the unionised workforce and using that to make a wider point about "abusive unions" that is almost laughable in its contrivance.

Holly2003 wrote: Tenure is a way of protecting scholars from unfair dismisal or other consequences that may arise as a result of their research or teaching. For example, if a professor raises controversial questions in his class and someone complains, he can't be fired as a result. This is an extremely important factor in ensuring academic free speech. To give two historical examples, tenure protected many professors from being fired when they taught that racial segregation was wrong. It also protected those professors who taught evolution from being punished due to pressure from outside the university. Furthermore, tenure is not a job for life. A university can fire a professor for financial reasons, for example. Tenured professors can also be fired for abusing their position, just as in any other profession. They just can't be fired for saying something controversial.

Holly2003 wrote:
As for teaching and tenure, I think you'll find that (firstly) it's not at all easy to get tenure: you have to do an incredible amount of work and give up huge amounts of your time for unpaid research to get into a position where you have publish