jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (123 posts)

American Voters greatest mistake ?

  1. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    The world  that we  know in reality  is far too important and imminently volatile to allow what happened  in 2008 to ever happen again . To  allow by voting , the "on the job training " syndrome  of another  American president ? The leader of the last  world superpower ?

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      So what do you propose? Abolish the bit of the constitution that limits the amount of time any one person can serve as president?
      Do away with the role of elected president altogether and have what, lifetime presidents?

      1. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        Greetings John , it probably involves the elimination of the political  figurehead position , the presidency itself .   How Ironic that the  great experiment actually needed a president to begin with , one person with so much power ?  When , in effect , it is a system  designed for the controls of "of the people , all  the people" ,  The three branches  of government  are somehow  diabolically disconnected when  two of them can be  nullified  by the vote of one ?   

        Perhaps a three member team or something instead of one ? Or , a far more visual circle  of  that silent  and politically influential team behind him !  - As that , is  who any president actually is , the twelve or so , advisors .

        Either way , the American public seems incapable  anymore  , of  properly vetting true  leadership ! As you know , I call it the American Idol syndrome.

        1. Credence2 profile image86
          Credence2posted 22 months ago in reply to this

          But that is just your opinion, that hardly makes anything you say valid in this case. In 2008, the people had spoken, and whether you like it or not the majority of the electorate prevails. As I say to all right wing people, what can you do within the confines of the current system to change the outcome of 2008 or prevent the people from voting in who it is they want? But, again I forget the right is terrorized at the idea of universal suffrage for all  citizens over the age of 18.... Not a lot you can do about that!

          1. ahorseback profile image47
            ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            Term limits  for one ! That last part escapes my understanding ,  but hey its the voters fault not the office !   Not the system itself so much .    I would rather be right and wrong though , than left and  blind !

            1. Credence2 profile image86
              Credence2posted 22 months ago in reply to this

              Ok, term limits? I could go along with that.

              But let's cut to the chase.  Does your AMERICAN Idol syndrome apply to the voting public only when they select Democrats for national office? Would you have thought better of them if they had have voted for McCain, Sarah Palin or Romney?

              1. ahorseback profile image47
                ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                For resident , the terms don't change , for congress and senate ,not only short  term limits but  a more mainstream of American  public participation , much  like a jury in fact . NORMAL people would serve and not career  political   position  !     Right or left we need  fewer career types , no more 'high school class presidents " .    Why is it Americans can be required by law to serve on a jury  or in fact , go to jail ,   and yet can't be required to serve  two years for senate ?

                1. GA Anderson profile image85
                  GA Andersonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                  "... Why is it Americans can be required by law to serve on a jury  or in fact , go to jail ,   and yet can't be required to serve  two years for senate ? "

                  You begin by lamenting the apathy and lack of intelligence of the American voter - and now you want to give them the decision-making power of a Senator for a mandatory two years? Oh my...

                  GA

      2. Onusonus profile image84
        Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        But John, If you limit the time they have to be president, how will they ever become a communist dictator?

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

          If you actually bothered to read what was written you would have quickly seen that I was speaking in favour of term limits.

          1. Onusonus profile image84
            Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            Yes I understood that. You see it is usually the position of communists and socialists such as yourself to be in favor of dictators. Which would make you the exception to the rule.

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

              That's rich coming from somebody who gets into a froth at the thought of any president who isn't a republican.

              1. ahorseback profile image47
                ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                So John , No , its just this one , One so disconnected from the  reality  of the world as to bury his head in the sand  and pretend that there are no enemies to America .

              2. Onusonus profile image84
                Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                Sometimes I am astounded at how little you pay attention.

                1. John Holden profile image60
                  John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                  Really! It is not me that makes sweeping statements with absolutely no basis in reality.

                  I do not know one single socialist or communist who wants to have a dictator in charge, and you don't either.

                  1. Onusonus profile image84
                    Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                    Sure you do, you just don't want to admit that they are actually Communists or Socialists. Perhaps because they didn't use enough socialism in their crappy countries to be considered "real socialists" or Communists, whatever, same thing.

    2. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      My dear friend, WE DON"T CHOOSE THE PRESIDENTS! The two mob (party) system does and we play right along with them. The parties have to protect their contributors and it is best done with a figurehead in the White House. We are so busy quibbling with ourselves and pinning liberal and conservative slights on each others character that there is no time or effort left to figure out the solutions. Just when we do get a little clarity the mobsters (two parties) send us off on a mission against abortion or gay marriage or whatever else there is to direct attention away from them. Guess what! The news media is only too happy to comply with them.

      I remember what a good car salesman once told me. You don't make money on the sale of a car, you make money when you purchase it. Think about it.................

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        I agree rhamson.

        Obama is the 44th President and 25th lawyer,also they would make great used  car saleman.

        The corportism is the puppy master and runs the ugly show business.

        I don' t believe anything the Government has to say, unless you just like like fairy tales.

      2. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        The two party Mob , I like that one !

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 22 months ago in reply to this

          Vote them all, they are all the same. Like pro wrestlers, after the fight, they go out together over beers
          and talk about more
          ways to screw us. I thought Clinton was a
          great president,
          maybe he was. Now
          he is good pals with
          GW Bush, now I know
          I' ve been screwed
          again.Take no sake in
          it now. Only report
          the freak show.

    3. wba108@yahoo.com profile image85
      wba108@yahoo.composted 22 months ago in reply to this

      I agree, to allow another far left ideologue with Marxist goals would probably be too much for America to recover from. The future debts of unfounded mandates and Obamacare have already headed us to second rate status at best, unless we act soon to reverse the damage. Unless the provisions of Obamacare are reversed, the regulations and expenses will render the United States to a secondary economic power without the means to finance a world-class military. This we have global implications and make the world a much more dangerous place.

      The current administration has made us look weak in the eyes of the world. When Obama came into office we were winning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but now that Obama has announced the timetable of withdrawal to our enemies all that is necessary for them was to wait in the weeds for us to leave to make their move, which they’re now doing. He’s also humiliated and turned his back on our most reliable ally in the middle east, Israel.   

      I’m not sure Obama is incompetent because he’s doing what he promised which is to fundamentally change America. Is his mind, America needs to be downsized for its own good and the good of the world, so that Russia, China, India, Brazil are all in a rough parity with the United States. People complain about Obama’s excess time at the golf course but I wish he stay there indefinitely, I’d spring for a full time pass at the course of his choosing!

    4. Kathleen Cochran profile image84
      Kathleen Cochranposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      So, I guess you are voting for Hillary if you want on the job experience.

    5. gmwilliams profile image87
      gmwilliamsposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      Exactly, Barack Obama is the BIGGEST MISTAKE ever.  To many Americans, he was the president of promise but he became the president of one unmitigated disaster after another..........after yet another.  Obama"CARE", the amnesty program, NEED I SAY MORE.....

  2. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    Castle , I'm not sure he would make a good car salesman ?

    1. Castlepaloma profile image22
      Castlepalomaposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      I like cars, do not have the passion to be a good car saleman. Unless the cars were made out of hemp, still corportism rule with oil.

      No luck.

  3. innersmiff profile image79
    innersmiffposted 22 months ago

    The Myth of The Rational Voter by Bryan Caplan

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Myth-Rational-V … onal+voter

  4. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    My point is that  what was once the political arena is now the coliseum  ,  a lowering of the political and social intelligence of the voting public has helped to lower the pole , the expectations  and the end  result of voting  outcomes . Maybe ..............its time for a king , queen and  the usual entourage ,  Oh  hell - we're there already !

    1. Castlepaloma profile image22
      Castlepalomaposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Trust in the kingdom within, horse. Stay away from leaders who want your soul.

      1. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        Good advice castle good advice , no matter the cause ! Have an awesome day !

  5. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    Except who can you report the freak show to ,  Polarization  has  its hold in the voting  booth and  like here  there is no unity !

    1. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      What is all too true is that the polarization is the mobsters way of control. What is pathetic is how easily we the lemmings play into it.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        Yes, it is hard to get a snap shot of faceless people.

        1. ahorseback profile image47
          ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

          And we need to  exile all  lobbyists of all kinds from the halls of congress , the white house and senate ......speaking of the Faceless people " !

          1. GA Anderson profile image85
            GA Andersonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            Just from the halls, or any of the government's physical properties? Or from any form of contact?

            It sounds like you think all lobbyists are bad... my point of view is that the ones that obey the laws are fine with me, (and that does not mean I approve of the Abramoff-type lobbyists) - it is their job. I suspect there are probably many instances where they serve a valuable function -  it is unrealistic to expect every politician to know the intricate details of every possible issue.

            It is the crooked politicians that I think should be exiled.

            Just sayin'

            GA

            1. ahorseback profile image47
              ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

              Disagree , if he [her ] isn't intelligent enough  with their  advisors , they don't belong in office ,  the lobbyist's  are the downfall of our system !

              1. GA Anderson profile image85
                GA Andersonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                We are not talking about the resources available to a president. For instance, a Representative can hire up to 18 permanent staffers, (plus free interns), for both their Washington and District offices.

                Not nearly enough to include experts on every possible issue. So what to do? Assign a staffer to find an authority source to get the information the legislator needs. Guess who those authority sources usually are on big issue/big industry questions - yep, lobbyists.

                So a legislator with integrity will use the lobbyist's expertise, unspin it, resist the efforts to influence that is the lobbyist's job - and get the information they need to do their job - legislate.

                A politician without integrity yields to the influence of the lobbyist for personal or professional gain.

                I know that is a simplistic illustration, but it makes the point that lobbying doesn't have to be a bad thing.

                A grandma attending a town council meeting to buttonhole a council member to get a "Kids at play" sign for her street is also a lobbyist. And if she brings a plate of homemade cookies - could they be an attempted bribe?

                Of course we can disagree, but I still think it is the slimy politician that should be exiled instead of the lobbyist.
                GA

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                  I lobbied 3 of my congressmen lately (email), to look at a fix a specific tax issue. 

                  Got back two answers.  One said "Thank you for your concern", the other said "Taxes are too high and I work to get them down".  Neither mentioned what I wrote about at all. 

                  Should I have sent cookies, do you think?

                  1. Kathleen Cochran profile image84
                    Kathleen Cochranposted 22 months ago in reply to this

                    I write my elected officials all the time.  I never get anything back but a form letter telling me what they are going to do whether I like it or not.  I'm an independent/progressive living in a suburb of Atlanta (Republican Heaven), so the only representation I have is in the White House, but they send form letters too. Maybe cookies are the trick!

          2. rhamson profile image76
            rhamsonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            I have said it many times before that term limits, publicly financed campaigns and lobby reform are paramount to getting the government back in the hands of the people. Lobby reform may include no lobbying but it is allowable in the constitution so to change that would take a great deal of effort and cooperation of the slime on the hill. What would be a more comprehensive policy would be to allow lobbying on issues as long as there are no campaign contributions, gifts or job offers for the outgoing politician. This would include appointments of family members to positions within the lobbying entity. It keeps communication on the issues open and intelligent while cutting out the nepotism.

  6. mio cid profile image64
    mio cidposted 22 months ago

    The biggest mistake of the american voters is ,Not voting. The percentage of people who vote is  shamefully low . The lobbyists are a problem, corrupt politicians are a problem ,but all those problems would be solved or become irrelevant if the vast majority of people voted on every election, from the local board  of ed to the presidential election.

    1. ahorseback profile image47
      ahorsebackposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      +++++

    2. GA Anderson profile image85
      GA Andersonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Excellent observation. Especially the point about local election participation.

      GA

  7. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    We Americans HAVE to get it together and stop seeing either red or blue !   That no longer works for us , if in fact that it ever did !  Can you imagine how awesome an atmosphere of  participation in the political system  that ,that alone could  create ?

    We already have the most prolific  system of  an economy , a supporting government , and  an other wise  well educated society ,  Eliminating the two party system while  cleaning house in congress would change our lives dramatically . 

    Hello.....................any real voters out there? ......hello

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Er. . . if you did away with the two party system wouldn't you just end up with a dictatorship?

      Or perhaps you mean to have more than two parties so that you end up with the situation we have in the UK where the government is always formed by a minority!

      1. Onusonus profile image84
        Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        What John is trying to say is we would be much better off with a socialist dictatorship. Which is why he has dual citizenship in Cuba and North Korea.
        Oh wait, it's more like a Michael Moore thing where you talk about how great communism is and how bad capitalism is while taking advantage of that very system without having to actually live in a communist country.

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

          Oh stop it please. My sides are hurting from laughing so much and now I find that not only do you do a comedy turn you do a mind reading one as well.
          I should stick to the comedy though, your mind reading just doesn't cut it.

          1. Onusonus profile image84
            Onusonusposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            I know, it is funny to think that a person who advocates socialism would remove themselves from the comforts of a capitalist society and actually live in a socialist hell hole.

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

              I see that you are still desperately trying to avoid the fact that the capitalist system is broken and needs fixing by pretending that all your captains of industry, bankers and all are closet socialists.

              1. Onusonus profile image84
                Onusonusposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                So why not pack your bags and board the next flight to North Korea? You can hang with Un and Rodman in their commie utopia. I'm sure you will love it there, or do you like being a capitalist more?

                1. John Holden profile image60
                  John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                  So that's your answer to your failing capitalist system!

                  1. Onusonus profile image84
                    Onusonusposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                    Yes, free one way tickets to North Korea for all the socialists and commies that are trying to screw up our economy.

  8. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 22 months ago

    Well , what I mean is eliminate all parties and make people think for themselves ,  thereby including all "party" ideals ,   the minute we join someone else's idea we lose control over  that which we know as truth .  If I vote for a democrat  I am selecting , joining someone else's idea of what's best , if I vote  a republican ticket I am selecting  a group choice .   

    I have met so many otherwise  bright  individual thinkers who , when pressed ,  back themselves into the corner of  a group thought , or choice .  We become  political robots , thereby  toiling  away at  a lazy man's way of acting .   

    I'm too lazy to think , to chose , to vet a candidate for myself so I think i'll just let that guy there  make my choice for me .

    Pass legislation to  make party affiliation illegal , make people  think for themselves again  . We had to in the beginning , why not now ?

    I always find it very interesting for others who's  political  systems have absolutely  failed who think they can advise me .  'Clean up your own house " ,come's to mind  ,

    1. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      "Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. "

      Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), Hansard, November 11, 1947

    2. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Fair enough but that idea overlooks the fact that we are tribal.  It would be difficult if not impossible to prevent like minded people from banding together.

      1. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        John with this you just described the middle eastern world perfectly ," tribal"  ,.... Neanderthal  even ?!

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          It's just more obvious in the middle east because it is an alien world to us. We are just as tribal. Think about sport teams, old schools, work places even. We like, even need, to group together.

  9. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

    Just like right here , lets eliminate the sticks and stones and  talk real world problems , solutions .

  10. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

    John , quite the contrary , capitalism is on the rise here ,it's only  the nay-sayers  have convinced you that  it's failing !  The truth is  large corporations are failing and as well they should . All  large companies become too big to succeed  profitably eventually, with little exception and yet  many others have a successful  mindset  , Small business on the other hand   here , are thriving , I believe there is a new  basis of smaller company mindsets that are actually very successful ., you've got to be careful who you listen to , who's "statistics  " of the day  you site.  I live in a far more rural area of America where small business has  become the new major  employer of the millennium ..

    Quite frankly capitalism is thriving here ,   a small town where I grew up  forty years ago has lost all it's major jobs of manufacturing , , shoes , furniture and  micro manufacturing jobs are gone for sure BUT , smaller  companies  are now thriving ., and employing more people than ever .  Given that and the" big box" stores ,   the new mix is far more successful.     

    You have to read further down  into the  stories and individually analyze   the specific  truths and the agenda's of  those who present the stats my friend ,  America's economy is on the rise , yes it  wears some  new colors  but  ., on the rise it is . Why  ?  Americans are consumers right ? , and so consume we do  for one ,   also   the service oriented  economy is the "new - old" manufacturing based model for this success ..  Can't call the fight yet ! This is the American ingenuity we're  seeing .

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      Part of the problem is that you and I have a different definition of capitalism.

      To you it seems to be any sort of work.

      To me it is any business where the primary purpose is making money.

      1. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        John , drop the textbooks and step away from the ideals .  I live capitalism , you study it , I think I know  of which I live in the heart of  ,I wonder if you do ?

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          Oh yes, I know which I live in the heart of. I only have to look around me to know. I see people working impossibly long hours for impossibly low wages whilst their employers and there banks rake in the money.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

            Absolutely impossible hours!  36.3 hours per week (average work week in the UK, minus 28 paid days per year without working) is simply beyond comprehension.  How can anyone possible expect their employees to put in such onerous hours!

            (I've never had a job at under 40 yours per week, and at times worked as much as 7X18=126).

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

              Wilderness, what is your source for such erroneous figures?

              You do realise that that is average? It includes folk working 16 hours a week (in one job).

              Are you suggesting that people should work 126 hours a week as a matter of course?

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                "The ONS said that across the whole UK workforce average hours worked were 36.3 per week, down 4.7% from 38.1 hours per week in 1992."

                "The UK average of 42.7 hours compares with 41.6 across the EU."

                http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16082186

                While 126 hours/week is impossibly long (literally - people cannot work very many weeks like that without collapsing): neither 36.3 or 42.7 hours/week is "impossibly long".  For comparison purposes:

                "According to a study by the National Sleep Foundation, the average employed American works a 46-hour work week; 38% of the respondents in their study worked more than 50 hours per week. "

                http://www.libraryspot.com/know/workweek.htm

                Past history:  "In 1890, a hundred years or so after the start of the Industrial Revolution, the work week was 60 hours. During the first half of this century, the length of time per week we spent "workin' for the man" gradually drifted downwards. In 1914, it was 51.5 hours. In 1930, 43.9; in 1940, 38.6.1950, 40.5; 1975, 39.4; 1990, 40.8.  In 1994, the average workweek had begun to climb again, to 42 hours. For those on the fast track, the average work week skyrocketed to 49 hours."  "Of course, these were the official hours. Time spent at home working on projects or reports, or updating information, often isn't counted. (Neither is women's work. They work, on average, 80+ hours per week.)"  (These figures are the average, not just average full time workers)

                http://www.newwork.com/Pages/Opinion/Ar … 0Week.html

                Again, neither 38 or 42 hours seems "impossibly long"; our ancestors did considerably more as a matter of course and farmers still do.

                1. John Holden profile image60
                  John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                  "Workers in the UK are in the middle of the pack, working 36.3 hours, about an hour a week less than the EU average; but the ONS points out that's because of the growing prevalence of part-time work, as flexible hours have become more common. If you look at full-time work, it puts us the top of the biggest economies in the region."

                  "Looking at full-time jobs alone, workers in the UK are chained to their desks (or more likely stuck on a building site, since the occupation with the longest hours is crane driver), for a miserable 42.7 hours a week."

                  Don't forget that those are averages which mean that some work far longer.

                  Same source of stats as you but via http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo … king-hours

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                    That jibes pretty well with what I found, yes.

                    You make a 43 hour per week job sound like the end of the world.  I have a hard time sympathizing; I've worked more than that for most of my life.  When I left the factory job, it was 54 hours per week - no breaks, no lunch.  It didn't kill me, it wasn't "impossible" and I did it for years before I decided it wasn't going to change and found other work. 

                    Yes, don't forget that some work longer.  And many work hours considerably shorter.  That's what an average means, you know.

          2. ahorseback profile image47
            ahorsebackposted 21 months ago in reply to this

            And you are in England , not America ?

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

              Yes, I'm in the UK.

  11. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

    No matter the way you describe socialism , communism  and the big bad wolf of Capitalism  ,  your  system of entitlements  fall conveniently under simply  just another cloak ! And there is the problem ! lets eliminate  economic  entitlements  and watch  whatever -the system  blossom .   

    The very minute the powers that be begin to provide social , economic ,   entitlements for a society  they begin the long slippery but ALWAYS downhill slope to doom . Its been proven over and over , 

    "Here   , you can't feed yourself or your children , let Uncle Sam  feed them "  is the new  mentality in America .  Oh , and here's money for your masters too "  ,...... We can't feed our kids but were smart enough to get a masters ,   THAT isn't hungry  , that's lazy !

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      Unfortunately ahorseback, it's not my system of entitlements, it's your system. It is capitalism's way of passing off its costs to the tax payer whilst passing on the blame to socialism. Very clever

  12. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

    I don't know that most people do not create their own situation , at least here !   

    One  thing I did years ago was to become self employed , there by eliminating the middle man ,so to speak ,   I am a home renovation , builder , remodeler , ...Before becoming self employed  I worked  forty  to sixty hours a week or more to make a living  , at the rate of average pay .  $12.00 to 20 dollars an hour or so .   Now ,   I charge  the going rate for  my trade  per hour , pay my own taxes , etc.

    I got tired of the "Company " making   100% again of what I was making  per hour , per day , per year , does that mean someone was getting rich on my back ?, no I don't think so . Living better than I ? , yes !   

    I am now , at least , in control of the benefits of my own work ethics ,  I also suffer the  consequences of a off [ slow ]season economics ,   But I'll say this .     We ARE in control of our own destiny in a capitalist  society , probably no where else in the world can one's work  ethics and drive pay off as well as here .   Unfortunately , for many more now  than ever  before , the system has  paid off for those who run to  the social services  dept. to  get help ,  more people than ever are doing just that !

    America IS still the land where a dream [ because  of  good work ethics }can happen .

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      Good on you. That doesn't make you a capitalist though.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      "I got tired of the "Company " making   100% again of what I was making  per hour , per day , per year , does that mean someone was getting rich on my back ?"

      I don't think there is a company anywhere that shows a profit as large as it's labor cost.  Maybe a one or two employee shop, but then you have to figure the owner works for free to make even that come out.

      1. ahorseback profile image47
        ahorsebackposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        Probably all the more reason for a flat tax , Instead of sooo many damned write offs  for the corporate  giants   ,   I am actually amazed at the amounts of  tax finagling a company CAN do !

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          I'm not; most of those write offs are a way for politicians to consolidate their power with both the people and with the corporations. 

          Think your inner city is going downhill?  Give a big write-off to companies for hiring in that area, making both the company happy and the people grateful for the help.  Same for hiring minorities; give away money and both are happy.  "Help" (subsidize their efforts via the tax code) a business start up in a new locale and everybody is happy.

          1. rhamson profile image76
            rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

            ....Think your inner city is going downhill?  Give a big write-off to companies for hiring in that area, making both the company happy and the people grateful for the help.....

            Fat chance of that making any difference. Relying on the charity of the corporations is not a road that we want to go down. How many cities can the or are they willing to help? How much "Throw Away" income are they willing to commit to when all they have to do is hire another lawyer to save them that money? Ridiculous notion and highly impractical thinking. You are also looking at a one and done scenario as far as long term development of such a plan. We have learned one thing about corporations and that is that they are money driven and if the profits are good enough one year that does not mean the following year will bring such benevolence. It almost sounds like Bush's letting the Churches and charities handle the homeless and hungry problem. Where has that gotten us? Many more are homeless since this policy which Reagan helped by throwing the insane out on the streets. Charity is not something that comes naturally to corporations or government when the bottom line is searched for.

            http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/526/homeless-facts.html

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

              ??  You misunderstand; corporations do not give charity to revive inner cities.  They accept it, in the form of tax loopholes to defray the extra costs of building and hiring in such locations.

              But as far as charity not being natural to governments: of course it is.  With half the country accepting charity from Uncle Sam how can you ever say it is unnatural?

              1. rhamson profile image76
                rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                ....??  You misunderstand; corporations do not give charity to revive inner cities.  They accept it, in the form of tax loopholes to defray the extra costs of building and hiring in such locations.....

                Ridiculous. With the permanent loss of so many jobs to overseas labor markets and with the new TPP there are  and will be fewer jobs still that corporations will be looking to hire. The few jobs that will be coming back are loaded with robotics and logistic distribution. Hardly an improvement.

                ....But as far as charity not being natural to governments: of course it is.  With half the country accepting charity from Uncle Sam how can you ever say it is unnatural?....

                You misunderstood. Charity is unnatural to the government because it cannot manage it properly. Many are skating the system to not work and the government neither has the skills nor wherewithal to monitor or administer it.

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                  Which is why corporations need charity to build in inner cities and still produce a profit.  The location makes business inherently unprofitable, so govt. steps in and subsidizes them.

                  Oh, government has the wherewithal to both monitor and administer it.  They just choose not to do so as it would inevitably mean loss of many recipients and the votes they produce.  When I visit a city park where the free summer lunch program is going on and find nothing but for-profit day care centers bringing bus loads of kids to cut their lunch costs and boost the bottom line...well, government could do the same thing.  They just don't; free lunches for "needy" kids sounds just too wonderful and buys too many votes.

                  1. rhamson profile image76
                    rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

                    ....Which is why corporations need charity to build in inner cities and still produce a profit.  The location makes business inherently unprofitable, so govt. steps in and subsidizes them.....

                    More trickle down BS. Corporations already have a source for cheap labor and are not going to switch now. That is why I mentioned the TPP. It is the next step to withdraw more jobs from the country. Corporations are not looking to help anyone but themselves and that is why their money is busy buying votes in the Senate to make this debacle of a treaty a reality. The only reason they would consider buying into a community at this point is to buy the property tax reduced or free and then down the road when they can't get anything started sell the land at a profit.

                    Like I said you still misunderstood what I said. Government does not have the wherewithal to administer charity as the votes are tied to it and so are the special interest groups that get cushy jobs faking like they are making a difference. I did not say charity was not needed but on both ends of the spectrum (churches and government) are not meeting the challenge.

      2. John Holden profile image60
        John Holdenposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        He didn't mention profit. A charge doesn't equal a profit.

        Employment agencies usually make three or four times the hourly rate paid to agency workers.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          We'll have to get clarification: I read "making 100% again" as a profit, not a charge.  Nor do companies even charge double what they pay out for wages, not unless there is considerably more involved than just labor.

          Sorry, temp agencies are here don't make 3 or 4 times the hourly rate they pay out.  It's less than 1.5 times the amount - I know, having been on both ends of the contract.

  13. ahorseback profile image47
    ahorsebackposted 21 months ago

    There is plenty of charity from churches , municipalities , local,  federal and state governments in America !

    What's needed far more in America right now ....is the drive to actually work for a living  once again .

    The newer generations  want to begin at upper levels of pay , benefits and  amenities in the work place . In spite of the fact that  they may be beginning with higher debts than ever from college educations [ self inflicted ]  perhaps  the new five  year  diploma's  for the sake of easy study programs  and more  frat parties shouldn't have been part of the  education  cost plan .

    Want to be better off  in America than you are now , earn it !

 
working