No Debate About The Poor Or Other Important Issues In Pres. Debates

Jump to Last Post 1-12 of 12 discussions (37 posts)
  1. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
    crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years ago

    Rev. Jackson pointed out that their is no debate in the Presidential Debates about the Poor, the Homeless, and the Hungry.
    Are both of our Presidential Candidates ducking the important issues? What do you think?

    He also pointed out that there has been no debate about gun violence. At some point in time gun violence is going to have to be addressed. I know it's not a popular issue but it needs addressed.

    All of these are issues that should be being addressed but they are not. It's like these issues are not even facing the American people.

    Our presidential candidates should be addressing issues facing us on a everyday basis but instead both candidates and their staff are playing the spin game. The political spin game to keep your minds off the important issues.

    No mention has been made of the foreclosed housing issue or the impact that is having on the American people.

    I wish we would have a Presidential Candidate who would address the drug issue.

    Prohibition did not work with alcohol and it's never going to work with drugs. The war on drugs is like trying to bail the Atlantic Ocean dry. The war on drugs is never going to work. Never.

    We should instead legalize marijuana and tax it. This money should be used here in the USA for problems here in our country.

    What Happened To Made In The USA And Americans Being Proud Of It?

    The politicians that voted for and supported NAFTA should be tried for treason. What happened to the big campaign about made in the USA.

    I'll tell you what the politicians from the Republican and Democratic parties sold us out. They shipped our jobs overseas and created ghost towns across the American south in the former textile towns. Let me tell you both parties are responsible for this. Both.

    We need to cap imports and make it a law that say 80 percent of any item that could be would have to be made here in the USA. I know people are going to scream isolationist but we need to protect and create jobs here in America and to hell with the rest of the world. We need to worry about America before we worry about any thing else. We need to bring all our jobs back home and create jobs for Americans.

    This is not only happening with textiles but also automobile tires, steel, and even call centers. What ever happened to made in the USA.

    If we can we need to use other methods and stop buying any oil from any nation. Enough corn and sugar cane could be grown here in the USA to make it possible to never have to buy one more gallon of gas or oil from the Arabs. And we need to do it now not later. If we ended America's need to purchase oil we would live in a different world.

    Why are the political candidates not addressing these issues? Why indeed.

    1. Quilligrapher profile image73
      Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello once more. I’m sitting here wondering if I should address you as “Crazy” or “Mr. Ghost.” big_smile (Just kidding).

      Your solutions do smack of isolationism in an age of expanding inter-connected global economies. Apparently, you did not study the material I suggested to you last week. Allow me to lay it out for you. Manufacturing in the US is not the robust economic engine it once was and NAFTA is not the only reason why it is sputtering today. NAFTA has several issues both good and bad but you seem to focus mostly on the job issue. You also seem to be blaming job losses due to the Great Recession on NAFTA. “U.S. employment rose from 112.2 million in December 1993 to 137.2 million in December 2006, an increase of 25 million jobs, or 22 percent. The average unemployment rate was 5.1 percent in the period 1994-2006, compared to 7.1 percent during the period 1981-1993.” {1}

      Furthermore, you do not mentioned that the US economy expanded by 38% during the first decade under NAFTA, nor that U.S. exports to Canada and Mexico grew from US$134.3 B to US$250B at the same time. You ignore, or are unaware, that manufacturing productivity in the US rose 28%; and, personal income and tax cuts from NAFTA amounted to $930 every year for the average American family of four. {1}

      As for manufacturing output in the U.S., it rose by 63 percent between 1993 and 2006, far greater than the 37 percent increase achieved between 1980 and 1993. Real compensation for manufacturing workers improved at an average annual rate of 1.6%, almost twice the 0.9% rate seen from 1980 and 1993.

      Your views are “The politicians that voted for and supported NAFTA should be tried for treason.” “The Republican and Democratic parties sold us out.” “To hell with the rest of the world.” “What ever happened to made in the USA?”

      While the country has been enjoying all of these benefits, you and others are complaining that the playing field is no longer level. The fact is simply you do not realize the playing field has been dismantled and moved to another part of the world. If truly there is to be a level playing field, American workers who want the jobs now performed by workers in China, Mexico, and Indonesia, must be willing to work for the same wages. Today, workers need math, science, and other highly technical skills to qualify for the higher paying, more advanced jobs available in this country in this new millennium. If American workers do not retrain themselves, they will surely face continuing tough times as our economy re-emerges from the Great Recession. In the end, NAFTA is just a convenient scapegoat for those who do not comprehend the world is changing and so must we.
      {1} … nefits.pdf
      {2} … de-success

      1. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
        crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Yes I did look at the links you showed to me.

        However I look at towns like Lincolnton N.C. , Belmont N.C., Gastonia N.C. and others and see how the towns were destroyed when the mills closed.

        Look at Gary Indiana which was once a huge steel town. It is sad to drive through that city today. For the most part it is a ghost town.

        If tomorrow Americans were to suddenly be willing to work for 25 cents a hour do you think China would set quietly by and let the jobs come back to America. I don't think so.

        America is going to have to make some very hard choices if the American dream is to ever be restored.

        I see nothing wrong with capping imports into the United States. I bet if it was voted on by the American people that they would vote to cap imports.

        Americans can not live on the salaries paid to people in China.

        I think one day the US will have to fight China. It will happen.

        I say if it will improve the situation in America that we should say that anything that can be must be made here in the USA. Because the American dream must be restored or America as we know it is doomed.

        I'm retired so I don't need a job but the children of America will need jobs. It used to be that every generation could say that they were a little better off than the generation before them. That is no longer so.

        America needs to stop trying to be the policemen to the world and worry about the problems here in America. Like Jesse Jackson said I don't see the important problems of America being addressed by the politicians.

        I really think that if people like John Kennedy, Harry Truman, George Washington or Bobby Kennedy were alive today they might call for out and out revolution. Because it may take revolution to bring America back to where it should be. If your an American then you should be for America first and if it hurts the economy of China or other countries that got our jobs so what. I say restore the American dream no matter what we have to do to do it.

        1. habee profile image92
          habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          My husband is from Belmont, NC!

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image67
          Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I'm inclined to agree that blind, unalloyed devotion to free trade by both parties has not served this country well. At the very least, if free trade benefits the majority of Americans by providing them products at a reasonable price, then we should be doing more for those whose jobs have been outsourced to China--more generous transition benefits and perhaps job insurance for people over age 50. These people are lost in the figures supplied by Quill.

          1. innersmiff profile image66
            innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It doesn't take a moments analysis to make your statement that both parties have been supporting free trade seem silly. Both parties support manipulation of the currency, massive government spending, massive debt and massive incursions into the market too numerous to count.

    2. LillyGrillzit profile image78
      LillyGrillzitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The poor and homeless have no advocates. They have no lobby. ACORN was dismantled and that was all she wrote. No one can profit instantly off of advocating for the poor and homeless.
      What is sadder still is that in Southern States, our non-profits are being defunded, while for profits are getting their needed monies.
      The poor include the elderly which have gotten poorer by having life savings and investments in company plans stolen.
      Banks theiving, against those who have little voice. Large businesses abandon what they don't want, go bankrupt at the drop of a hat.
      Someone is paying for all of is not social programs like we hear about, it is the constant welfare state of conglomerations, and industries who find, conquer, throw a few coins, and hit the road at the first opportunity.

    3. AndReall profile image61
      AndReallposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Most importantly, they don't talk about the desperate veterans.

  2. SpeakUpStandOut profile image61
    SpeakUpStandOutposted 11 years ago

    Your stance sounds like that of Ron Paul; some food for thought: if people can not responsibly use pot when it's illegal, how can one expect that behavior to change it pot is legalized?

    I am not a big fan of Rev. Jackson, but I will say that he has a point regarding social issues and the poor. I do believe that social programs are needed to help give people down on their luck a step up, but these programs are abused. I see men, standing on the street corners asking for money. These are strong, able bodied men; and I wonder, why do they not work in fast food, as a janitor, as a field worker...

    1. innersmiff profile image66
      innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      What about all of those people who responsibly use cannabis for medicinal purposes? Are you really going to support the prohibition of one of the most effective medicines on Earth because of some people who want to get high?

      Nobody has ever died from the direct use of cannabis yet we allow the use of alcohol which kills thousands each year. We tried prohibiting alcohol but , by creating a black market, it had disastrous effects. The reason cannabis prohibition has lasted for so long is because the negative effects of it have not been experienced by the population directly. In countries where you can grow cannabis, millions are killed through raids and gang wars that would be nullified if it was allowed to be grown and sold legally. We don't happen to know about that unless you research it so it doesn't affect us to prohibit - it only affects those families in South America that are affected by the violence, and innocent patients (including cancer patients) in need of a very valuable medicine.

      There is also very little evidence to suggest that prohibiting drug use actually reduces usage and addiction. When Portugal decided to decriminalise all drugs, usage stayed about the same, but addiction decreased because addicts were more likely to go find help without fear of arrest. And considering that cannabis is not a physically addictive substance, there would be little negative affect to legalisation. I think 70 years of the non-effective drug war is enough, don't you?

      Finally, as a pacifist, I can not endorse the prohibition of any substance - using violence to stop people from consuming substances on their own private property is immoral, by itself, regardless of the effects of the substance. It is no man or woman's job to decide on behalf of any other what they can and can not consume. This is the philosophy of the founding fathers of the United States, and should be for anyone who has ever argued for freedom of choice over any issue.

      I hope this has given you a fresh perspective on the subject. Have a nice day smile

      1. Quilligrapher profile image73
        Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Hi, Innersmiff,

        Not everyone agrees with your assessment.

        From the Mayo Clinic: “It's possible to develop a psychological addiction to cannabis compounds including tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) found in marijuana and hashish.” … N=symptoms

        “Marijuana addiction, as with many addictions, has a set of identifiable signs and symptoms.” … ide-clues/

        “Marijuana use can develop into a serious addiction, whether or not it is combined with alcoholism or the use of other drugs.”
        10 signs of marijuana addiction.

        “People get addicted to marijuana after using it a lot. They might need to smoke more and more of it to get the same high.” … -signs.php

        “An addicted marijuana smoker may allow the drug to be the central part of her life, according to the University of Wisconsin-Madison.” … ion-signs/
        (Photo Credit Medioimages/Photodisc/Photodisc/Getty Images)
        Just the same, Innersmiff, if your mind is already made up, you should not let a few opinions from addiction specialists get in your way.

        1. Mighty Mom profile image77
          Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Marijuana can be addicting, yes.
          But it is not addicting for everyone.
          Any more than alcohol is addicting for everyone (roughly 10% of the population).
          As mood altering substances go, it's less damaging than alcohol.
          And it has many medicinal benefits as well.

          As a practical matter, we have found that prohibiting a substance does not stop people from wanting it. It only drives demand/supply underground and increases crime. The "War on drugs" is as much a failure as the "War on terror."

          I don't often agree with Innersmiff, but on this I agree.
          I am in favor of legalizing marijuana.

          1. kathleenkat profile image84
            kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I don't think there is really a reason to legalize it... It's not that hard to not smoke, and on the black market, as you say, it's not really a dangerous substance so there's not a huge need to regulate it. And for it generating tax revenue; there are better things, I think, to legalize. I think legalizing gambling or prostitution could have more positive effects, and create more revenue.

            1. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
              crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              I see plenty of reason to legalize it.

              There is no reason to keep locking people up for marijuana. We did the same thing with alcohol when it was illegal. Prohibition did not work with alcohol and it will never work with marijuana.

              We lock up more people than almost any other country except for China.

              There is no reason for this.

              Do you know we have people in the USA doing thirty , forty and more years. All for a non violent crime that should at most result in house arrest.

              Cannabis or marijuana is a muti billion dollar business here in the USA.

              Rich dirty politicians want to keep it illegal so they can keep getting rich off of it.

              We should legalize it and tax it.

              We should stop locking people up for non violent crime. What is the point of giving people hundreds of years for a non violent crime. I'll tell you there is no reason.

              There will come a day when marijuana will be legal. At 62 I may not live to see it but the day will come. No I do not smoke marijuana. Though I did at 18 - 22 and could have went to jail for it.

              I think our whole entire criminal justice system needs to be overhauled. We should stop locking up non violent criminals.

              1. Mighty Mom profile image77
                Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                But if we stopped incarcerating people for nonviolent drug-related offenses, our jails would be .... almost empty! Think of the blowback on entire industries! What about the prison guards? What about the courts? What about the lawyers? What about the cops?
                See what I mean?
                Your proposal would deal a serious blow to the status quo!

                Seriously, I agree with you 100%.
                But I think there are other interests being served by keeping cannabis illegal.
                Which would Big Pharma prefer Americans use to make them feel calm and happy?
                Prozac and Valium twice a day ... or a couple of bong hits?

                1. LillyGrillzit profile image78
                  LillyGrillzitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Mighty Mom, you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. Cannibis and Hemp, are competition against Pharma and Prison Industries. Even drug testing is an inspiration of Pharmacutical companies.
                  People who use Cocaine, and Methanphetamines are in little danger of failing a drug test, as they only have a window of a few days testing.  And, of course, if you are a "legal drug addict", you are given a pass on your narcotics. It is they who use cannibis, who are the main targets.
                  In organizations, industries, and even government entitiies who use drug screening in their hiring practices, only drug test the lowest paid, and least important positions. The CEO's, Directors, and Division Managers, are not tested in hiring. They are not tested in industrial accidents, wherein the lower caste (yes, North America), are tested for jobs, benefits, and of course for the result of any accident. (Deepwater Horizon), or randomly. If a person drinks alcohol to their detriment,and the detriment of others, that is their business; it is what they do on their own personal time. If a cannibis user uses, out on the sea on the 2nd of the month, in their own cabin, without harming anyone...then 22 days later, that will show up in a screening...that is weeks away. How is an empolyer, agency or organization benefitting? There is one benefit, and that is to the pharmacutical companies, and the army of attorneys that follow them around chanting, "have you ever used Cimbalta, Phenphen, Adderill,..." call this 800# be a part of this law suit, make a few pennies while we all get richer, and richer, and richer"
                  Our prison "farms", make cotton down here in the South. Cotton is large industry. One bale is around $7,000. Cotton is not easy to harvet, not easy on a person, not easy on the soil, and not easy on the hundreds of thousands of African American (mostly) men who slave away at 'paying their price'. The use of Hemp for industrial uses is safe, sane, easy on the soil, takes 1lb to make 5 gallons of fuel, can make paper with a process using isopropyl alcohol, instead of lye. It is also good on the soil.
                  The reasons are millions, and billions for not legalizing cannibis, and hemp. None of them have to do with health, nor human compassion.

            2. innersmiff profile image66
              innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this


              The regulation itself creates a dangerous black market because the gangs that control the substance need force to protect it, and the police need greater force to enforce it - the escalation that inevitably results from this causes many unnecessary deaths that far outweigh deaths caused by any prohibited drug.

              But your argument is quite strange, as if you are saying that the issue doesn't really matter. Well, if it doesn't really matter, why not legalise it? There are more issues at stake that simply how much tax revenue you can make from it.

              I have to say that the tax argument is probably the worst argument I can come up with for legalising it - prohibition is wrong, you don't need to dress it up.

          2. Quilligrapher profile image73
            Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you for your input, MM.

            I do not oppose legalizing marijuana. I do, however, have an issue with those who claim it is not addictive.

            1. Mighty Mom profile image77
              Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Trust me, I've heard that excuse from someone I know WAS addicted to it!

              I also looked at the "signs" on your link and they are pretty spot on -- although not unique to marijuana (substitute any drug of choice and the behaviors/defenses still apply).

              I'm not going to argue the fine points of psychological vs. physical addiction. The potential is definitely there to become dependent on marijuana to the point it becomes and obsession and saps your motivation to do anything else.
              The same potential exists -- for those so inclined -- to become addicted to video games or internet porn (or the internet in general).  Or to food. Or shopping. Or exercise.

        2. innersmiff profile image66
          innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I don't have an issue with anyone saying that it is psychologically addictive, as is pretty much everything, but as it is near impossible to overdose on it it is quite rare for a person to by physically addicted, which is a much more difficult situation.

          But if you're going to argue that we need to ban psychologically addictive substances, say good bye to your TV, music, video games, etc, as MM says.

          And considering everything else that supports legalisation, the point is kind of ridiculous and unnecessary.

          1. Mighty Mom profile image77
            Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Quill said he supports legalization.
            He just pointed out -- and he's right -- that the claim that marijuana is categorically not addictive is wrong.
            There are many arguments to levy in favor of legalizing it. It sort of weakens the case to add in one that is not true.
            I think that's more or less what Quill was getting at.

            1. innersmiff profile image66
              innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              I know he did, but he's labouring on a point that diverts from the issue: I didn't say that it was categorically not addictive, I said "not physically addictive" which is true.

              1. Ralph Deeds profile image67
                Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                At last something we can agree on.

  3. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
    crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years ago

    This one kind of makes you think. Or it does me anyway.

    Go to any big chain and try to find something made in America. Revere ware, KitchenAid, Black & Decker, Craftsman: all American icons and all now made in other countries. And good luck finding any bedding that’s made here. Look at the tags on clothing the next time you buy clothing.

    We need to get our economy going. Let’s start regulating big business and cut out their tax breaks and shelters. Let’s help small businesses expand and hire more people. Let’s stop outsourcing our jobs. Let’s stop giving tax breaks to the top 1 or 2 percent of our population while the rest of us try to carry our country on our backs.

    Let’s make Congress work for us, not for the corporations and the rich.
    Lets work to get strict term limits applied to the Senate and Congress.
    Lets do away with career politicians
    Lets work to get lobbyists banned from Washington.
    And even if you have to pay more and shop on the Internet, buy American.

    When you go to stores ask for products made in the USA.

    I want America to be restored to greatness.

    I remember my Grandparents saving for their children and grandchildren. They had something to pass on to their family members when they died.

    A man went to work in the factory and he got his son a job in the factory and the son got his son a job in the factory. And then our brilliant politicians sold us down the river.

    Why should we have ever participated in outsourcing our American jobs to China and other countries. Russia fell but China prospered and they continue to prosper.

    We need to take our jobs back and we need to work to end our dependence on oil from the Middle East. We need to get to the day when we buy no oil from Arabs. Brazil is growing sugar cane and corn and using it to produce fuel. The same thing can be done here in America.

    We should tell other countries sorry but we can grow cotton here in America and we are going to make our own clothes, linens, and bedding  on our own. And no we won't buy yours.

    We need to do this with a lot of items. If it can be made here in America that's where it needs to be made.

    We need to take America back. We need politicians that would be for America first. We must restore the American dream or America is doomed.

    I don't care if third world countries have jobs. I do care if Americans do.

    I care about America. I love it. We have let it slip badly and we need to come together as an American people and demand America be restored to greatness. You know the biggest thing Americans need to do. They need to refuse to keep playing the political spin game. It can't continue or our country is in serious trouble.

  4. Mighty Mom profile image77
    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    The poor have been addressed by vice presidential candidate Ryan - during an unauthorized photo op in a soup kitchen.
    I think that pretty much sums up their commitment to the issue.

    1. profile image61
      logic,commonsenseposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I grew up poor,but did not think that others owed me anything.  I'll never forget the time my dad sent food back to the church, that they had sent, because someone said we were in trouble.  We did not have a lot, but we did have pride in being self sufficient. I worked lots of hard jobs as a child.  I did not complain about the low pay, I was happy to have an income.  I was determined that when I was old enough to be on my own, I would never be poor again.  I have busted my ass for years, sometimes working for 100 hours a week, sometimes for a lower wage than I deserved, but I did not complain, I did not expect others to provide for me.  I was and am self reliant.  I'm not happy about paying taxes so that a portion of those taxes are being used to provide an income for some that are just plain lazy or crooked or both.  I would like to know when the day was it was decided that we had to save everyone.  That we had to provide food, shelter, health care, retirement funds to all, whether they contributed or not.
      If you are trying to save a drowning person and they are fighting you, do you let them go or do you let them take you with them.  That is what we are facing today with our social programs.  Those of us that would be the livesaver are being taken under in the name of compassion.
      Whatever happened to "the Lord helps those that help themselves"?

      I know what being poor is and none of the candidates can relate to me if they think it is their right to take my hard earned money and spend it on programs that make them feel better about themselves.

      One other thing, they all keep talking about the middle class.  I got news for the yahoos, there are no classes in this country.  There may be the rich, the middle income, and the poor, but there aint no middle class!!!

  5. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
    crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years ago

    Very true. Usually when you say poor you hear about bums. But America's poor today are not bums. I have 30-40 people ( Seniors ) a week apply to us for help with getting their medicine because of the doughnut holes which still very much exist. They are left at the end of the year setting in a doughnut hole and their medicaid or medicare won't pay anymore until after the first of the year.  They have the choice of paying for rent and food or buying their medicine. This should not be happening.

    I've had people post well social issues should be a state issue. Well states can't or won't take care of the problems. And no it shouldn't be a state problem. It's an American problem. And that's how it should be handled.

    Our jobs were stolen by NAFTA and similar things and people will post but were now in a global economy and you don't understand how the system works now. Well you know what I have to say to that. If America is going to suffer from being a part of the global economy then we don't need to be part of the global economy. Anything we need can be made here in America. People in America need to wake up and demand America back. They need to demand the American dream back. It's our country and I would bet if there was a national vote on it the majority of American people would agree with me.

    I for one am for America and I think America should be put first no matter what. If we have to fight a war over it so be it. We should take back everything we have lost and at the same time we should do everything we can to stop buying one barrel of oil from outside this country. Now that would be the day.

  6. kathleenkat profile image84
    kathleenkatposted 11 years ago

    I think the economy is more important than these issues. It has been addressed time and time again.

    Our economy is terrible. The global economy is also terrible. I know I say this a lot, but in the States, you NEED money to survive. Even the homeless sit on street corners and scrounge change from passing drivers just so they can afford to eat. Food isn't free. Yeah, they have have soup kitchens, but those also cost money to maintain.

    I have no qualms with them not discussing these other things. With a good economy, there are more employed people, and less homeless people. It also doesn't matter whether or not its legal to do drugs, if you can't afford them in the first place.

    Gun violence was also addressed in the most recent debate, BTW. But it also doesn't matter whether guns are illegal when you can't afford to buy one in the first place. And I'd go out on a limb to say that starving, unemployed people may be more likely to shoot than the comfortable ones.

    Made in the USA? That was addressed. They both want to create jobs here. Obama specifically stated manufacturing jobs (which are the ones typically outsourced). However, forcing the hand on companies who outsource to save money isn't right, either. What, with so many empty storefronts, the last thing we need is to create more of those.

    Foreclosures are part of the economic crisis. Fix the economy, reduce those.

    I am glad they talked about the economy.

  7. crazyhorsesghost profile image71
    crazyhorsesghostposted 11 years ago

    They are touching on some issues. But not in depth. I would like to see a town hall type debate with a real audience not a set up audience. Then we might get real questions. These debates we are seeing are some what scripted.

  8. Repairguy47 profile image60
    Repairguy47posted 11 years ago

    Romney keeps saying its about jobs! That is about the poor and the not so poor and the rich!

  9. Wayne Brown profile image79
    Wayne Brownposted 11 years ago

    There is the chicken and then there is the egg.  When the economy which supports us as a nation is in the tank and jobs are disappearing, that is not the time to be focused on expanding or improving some social program.  That is the equivalent of attempting to teach fire safety when the fire station is burning down on top of you.  An improved economy and more jobs is a positive step for poverty but there also must be a "desire to work".  It seems that much of what the government has done to this point is create more and more incentives to give up on work and just let the government subsidize your life.  Certainly there are folks who need that help but it certainly seems that the list grows as fast as the assistance programs expand.  The community must supercede the government in this effort as the government can do nothing more than mess it up.  If Jesse Jackson is simply suggesting that the government find more ways to create "hand-outs" and "free government cheese" then he is not offering any solution to the issue. Check with your local churches and see what they are doing...see how many of them are handing out money to every needy person who comes to their door.  I dare say that you will not find one today.  Most of them have long since been burned in that type of assistance.  They will get you a place to stay, buy you food, clothing, etc. but they will not give you the money to use at your discretion.  In a robust economic environment, there is plenty demand for good, reliable workers in a wide variety of possibilities.  There are ways to make a living or to subsidize one, so the first priority must be to have that environment.  Anyone, including Jesse Jackson, can sit around dreaming up ways to help people with money we do not have....when there are no perceived boundaries, one can be very creative.  We are at a point in time at which the reality of our condition as a nation must take precedence over our dreams, desires, and hopes.  Otherwise, we continue to destroy ourselves leaving us all destitute. With regard to the export of jobs and "Made in America", we must again look at reality.  The politicians made it possible for foreign products to come into the US market but American labor made the determination as to how competitive our own products were with those of foreign source.  While we argue for higher and higher pay, we scream pain and suffering when that added overhead hits the store shelf in the form of higher prices for American goods.  We also demand a choice as consumers rather than being held hostage to high prices.  We can isolate ourselves from the rest of the world and punish ourselves at the same time.  Ultimately, there must be a balance at which the labor going into American-Made products balances with the competitive environment of the marketplace.  We cannot have it both ways. ~WB

  10. profile image0
    Janhornerposted 11 years ago

    Love this thread! 

    I'm from the United Kingdom and have absolutely no time for our politicians!  My very strong opinion is they are legalized crooks who are all out to put money in their own coffers.

    We have so many issues that do not get the attention they need and poverty is my  big thing!  If I was a politician I would literally be fighting in the corner to ease the hardship for this! 

    I'm afraid I call Cameron and Clegg the 'Muppets' amongst other things! because they make my blood boil with their patronizing attitude towards the working class.  At the end of the day both these muppets were born into wealth so how the hell do they know what's it's like to just survive every day rather then live!

    Phew! got that off my chest!


  11. Reality Bytes profile image76
    Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago

    Legalization of Hemp.

    Although marijuana for personal pleasure is often discussed, what is not discussed is the real reason that it remains illegal.

    Building Materials

    Plastic Alternatives


    Fabric, Textiles, and Rope


    Body Care

    Food and Nutrition

    That is a lot of industries that oppose the legalization of a cheaper and more effective competitor.
    It is an easy crop to grow, can be grown every year, sometimes two harvests.  Anyone with space would be able to grow and then sell wholesale.  It would turn around the economy in a dramatic way.  Not the plant to cause euphoria, the hemp plant that man has enjoyed since the beginning!  We are being denied the ability to promote our general welfare, and those that refrain us are domestic enemies!

    The USDA Bulletin #404 concluded that hemp produces 4 times as much pulp as wood with at least 4 to 7 times less pollution.

    Ford And Deisel Never Intended Cars To Use Gasoline

    Henry Ford's first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, 'grown from the soil,' had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel; Popular Mechanics, 1941.

    Rudolf Diesel, the inventor of the diesel engine, designed it to run on vegetable and seed oils like hemp; he actually ran the thing on peanut oil for the 1900 World's Fair. Henry Ford used hemp to not only construct cars but also fuel them.

    As an alternative to methanol, hemp has at least one glowing report: the plant produces up to four times more cellulose per acre than trees. And a hemp crop grows a little quicker than a forest.

    As for an alternative to petroleum...

    Hemp grows like mad from border to border in America; so shortages are unlikely. And, unlike petrol, unless we run out of soil, hemp is renewable.

    Growing and harvesting the stuff has much less environmental impact than procuring oil.

    Hemp fuel is biodegradable; so oil spills become fertilizer not eco-catastrophes.

    Hemp fuel does not contribute to sulfur dioxide air poisoning.

    Other noxious emissions like carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons are radically slashed by using "biodiesel.

    Hemp fuel is nontoxic and only a mild skin irritant; anybody who,s ever cleaned out an old carburetor with gasoline can confirm the same is not true for petrol.

    Growing hemp for fuel would be a tremendous boon for American farmers and the agricultural industry, as opposed to people like, say, the Bush family.
    Henry Ford smashing his hammer-resistant Hemp-car.

    Who is really opposing energy independence?

    1. innersmiff profile image66
      innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I should have mentioned this too - it's probably one of the more important implications.

    2. Ralph Deeds profile image67
      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think anybody is opposing energy independence. However, there is considerable opposition from people and organizations that care about the environment to environmental pollution from fracking, coal fired electric power plants and surface coal mining. Energy independence helps our balance of payments and reduces the effects of disturbances in the Middle East on our oil supply. Nevertheless, I wonder why we don't save our oil and gas supplies which present environmental issues and instead use up cheap, easy to get oil from the Middle East and other sources. That is, why not save our domestic oil and gas against the day when the oil and gas are really scarce???

    3. LillyGrillzit profile image78
      LillyGrillzitposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for including this important information regarding Hemp as a use for fuel!

  12. Mighty Mom profile image77
    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    Are my eyes deceiving me, or are Innersmiff, Reality Bytes, Ralph Deeds and Mighty Mom all actually agreeing on a topic? smile smile smile smile!!
    Thanks, RB, for pointing out the many uses for hemp. I was going to bring those up, too, but confined my discussion to cannabis.

    This is a banner day, indeed. In addition to this apparent four-way left-right consensus, on another thread today JS Chams and I agreed, too. WOW!
    Maybe I should take the rest of the day off from the HP politics forums and savor this bipartisan moment!


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)