• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What are the real issues in the U.S.?

Ignore that the sky is blue 101

Pretend the sky isn't blue, end of story

not providing evidence. Assumes himself right. Thinks his points are obvious. Thinks I'm an idiot for not seeing that. adopts arrogent, smug attitude. wonders why people are close minded. doesn't consider that he's close minded. Lives rest of life always assuming he's right.
 
Ignore that the sky is blue 101

Pretend the sky isn't blue, end of story

if you are correct, prove it with logic.

Pretend I'm blind and can't see the color of the sky.

Pretend I'm an idiot.

I don't care what, just convince me through evidence, logic, reasoning.
 
There are a few niche jobs that have a demand for workers, sure. Finding out what those degrees the job market wants is pretty difficult, however. What is in demand today is not in demand tomorrow. A bachelors in business administration used to be a ticket to a career. A teaching credential used to be the same. no more. It does no good to tell a fresh new college graduate who has worked his butt of to be a college graduate, "sorry, just get in line with the others who screwed around and barely graduated high school. Oh, you have student loan debt? Gee, too bad. Sucks to be you."

How much longer can we afford to let our human resources go to waste?

Registered Nurse is hardly a "niche" job and the fact that the US has a large shortage of them has not exactly been kept a secret. Yes, there are some that are "niche" jobs out there. If you are going to pursue a degree, then you should take the time to research the employment possiblities for that Degree. Before the market crashed and became depressed, there were jobs open for people who just had a degree, regardless of what that degree was in. In the current market, those employers who seek applicants are focusing more on degrees that have a meaning to them. There has also been a shift, amongst some employers, to a promote from within strategy instead of highering College graduates straight into management. This will mean that a larger number of graduates will not enter directly into jobs that are equivilant to their degree level. However, having a degree does offer greater advancement opportunities once hired and there is a ceiling on how high someone without a degree can rise. Anyone pursuing a non-speicialised degree, should now expect to enter the job market much closer to entry level employment than in the past. Even if the economy picks up, I suspect that many companies will continue with this pracice and we will continue to see the "underemployed" stats rise.

You mentioned teaching, we will always have a need for new teachers. There are several problems in that area which are suppressing the ability of those with teaching certificates to enter the market. With the economic downturn, states are forced into making cuts or have high deficits/debt. Education is one of the areas in which the states can cut. Unfortunately, they way the school systems are organised, at least in some states, is having a negative effect upon teachers. In Texas, the education budget was cut, however, the cuts were targeted towards reducing adminstrative positions, not teachers, but the way the structure is set up, those administrators are primarily the ones deciding what to cut, as a result, teachers keep getting cut while very few adminstrators get cut. The other main problem being seen by teachers is the inability of some districts to rid themselves of non-productive teachers who do not maintain required standards, however, there is strong opposition, especially in Union states, to basing teaching on performance instead of tenure and making it easier to get rid of bad teachers.

How much longer can we afford to let our human resources go to waste? Good question. Apparently the way things are currently going, we are going to find out. Even if we change Presidents (which I fervently support) and the makeup of Congress, I do not see a very fast or well thoughout turn around in America. I just do not believe that either party or any of the politicians available are going to do what will be necessary to completely turn things around. What needs doing will just be too unpopular for politians to do it. To me at least, it is not if we will eventually fail, it is a matter of how soon, and I see our current choices as choosing how fast we get to that point, not if we will get there.
 
The rich didn't increase their pay by 12,700% by tax cuts, they increased their pay by moving a factory offshore where workers earn 1/10th of what Americans earned, manufacturing something and then selling it in the US for $0.01 less to maintain market share and volume. (The exact same thing happened in Europe, Canada, Australia)

Wealth gap in France is getting wider - The Connexion

"THE number of wealthy people in France increased rapidly in the f irst decade of 2000"

Income inequality growing faster in UK than any other rich country, says OECD | Society | The Guardian



"Income inequality growing faster in UK than any other rich country, says OECD" wish people would stop posting that gay-ass picture of that gay-ass clown in that gay-ass movie that tries to be all 1984'ish but fails misearably

Gloabalization is real, learn to live with it or not, but it will continue and it will grow. Face it, consumers purchase more on price than on quality or source. If you restrict American companies to using only American labor, then they are going to fail when foreign producers are in the market. America cannot not compete with the global labor market for unskilled labor, especially the way that America currently does business. If we don't make changes in our education system, then we are going to continue failing in the skilled labor markets also and that failure will increase in pace. Isolationism has been tried before, and it fails, everytime. Yeah, it sucks for the unskilled American laborer, but the alternative is total failure of the companies and then America would not be able to keep at least some sectors employed and we would not get any of the profits or tax dollars.

If you are part of the labor force, then you now have several options, change the way the government does business, become competitive in the world market, or fail. Many, probably most of what I have seen you advocate leads to one end, total failure. But appaerently you are ok with that as long as the "rich" fail right along with you.
 
Globalization is slavery

No, Gobalization is expanding available markets, reducing poverty in nations and allowing prosperity to grow for everyone instead of a lucky few. Just because luck of draw saw you born into an industrialized society instead of a poverty society, you think you should protect your prosperity, even at the cost of others? Balance is going to continue, whether you, me or anyone else likes it. Until a true balance is achieved, yes, we are going to see some lose while others gain.

Abandon Globalization or else.

Or else what? Isolationism and closed markets don't work, so what are the other options? Socialism? Also has never been sucessful.
 
I agree, the government should not be for sale. I blame the system which allows for politicians to be bought off rather than corporations. If your running a business, of course your going to do whatever you can to survive. You can try the moral high ground, but if at the end of the day your not making enough money to keep the business afloat, your source of income vanishes and people lose their jobs.

Lets fight the source of the problem. government

How can you fight "the source of the problem" the government" , if the government is run by corporate CEOS and private owned special interest.

That's like saying you want to stop illegal drugs so you arrest a couple of drug pushers but leave the drug supply alone?:peace
 
I have nothing to say to you. I don't know anything about you. Have we spoken?

My "don't wrestle with a pig comment" was in reference to Matt Foley, with whom I have had several exchanges in this thread but with whom I have given up.

Well, I'm happy you've given up on me as well.

My post stands as it is I make no apologies or retractions cause gossip is still gossip best left to old ladies and kniting circles

If I have something to say about you it will be in a post directed to you..:peace
 
Last edited:
The rich didn't increase their pay by 12,700% by tax cuts, they increased their pay by moving a factory offshore where workers earn 1/10th of what Americans earned, manufacturing something and then selling it in the US for $0.01 less to maintain market share and volume. (The exact same thing happened in Europe, Canada, Australia)

Wealth gap in France is getting wider - The Connexion

"THE number of wealthy people in France increased rapidly in the f irst decade of 2000"

Income inequality growing faster in UK than any other rich country, says OECD | Society | The Guardian



"Income inequality growing faster in UK than any other rich country, says OECD" wish people would stop posting that gay-ass picture of that gay-ass clown in that gay-ass movie that tries to be all 1984'ish but fails misearably

First of all if the rich didn't increase their pay by tax cuts why do they need them for?

I cannot understand why politicians and intellectuals seem to think the number 1 priority of people in America is to be rich.

The number 1 priority for the American people is to live comfortable not in a mansion, not with servants not with millions but a little house, an apartment with enough to pay the bills, pay taxes and enough left over to save to buy better stuff or invest or retirement,

Not everybody wants to be wealthy to some being wealthy is having a good job a decent place to live and owing no or very little debt.:peace
 
Anarcho-Capitalism only concerns itself with profit profit profit, and illegal drugs make the most profits in some parts of Mexico. It's not their fault.

You are correct it's not their fault not America's business.
However once those illegal drugs cross the Rio Grande into the United States whose business is it then:?:peace
 
Economics 101.

An American worker in a factory earns $40, a Chinese slave earns $1 an hour, factory moves to China, end of story.

So why doesn't management and labor meet somewhere in the middle, or they can keep outsourcing jobs.
Since this plan is working so well for the American economy today???:peace
 
Globalization is slavery



Abandon Globalization or else.

I disagree you don't abandon Globalization, you compete in Globalization, which America currently is not doing.:peace
 
How can you fight "the source of the problem" the government" , if the government is run by corporate CEOS and private owned special interest.

That's like saying you want to stop illegal drugs so you arrest a couple of drug pushers but leave the drug supply alone?:peace

That analogy is off.

Corporations, special interests can only corupt the government because the government is corruptable. It has grown too large, adopted too much power. The government is for sale, and you want to attack the costumers.

Heres a better analogy. A little on the extreme side to make my point. The government legalizes murder. Person A murders Person B. By your logic, Person A is the source of the problem. By my logic, why the hell is murder being legalized! :peace
 
Registered Nurse is hardly a "niche" job and the fact that the US has a large shortage of them has not exactly been kept a secret. Yes, there are some that are "niche" jobs out there. If you are going to pursue a degree, then you should take the time to research the employment possiblities for that Degree. Before the market crashed and became depressed, there were jobs open for people who just had a degree, regardless of what that degree was in. In the current market, those employers who seek applicants are focusing more on degrees that have a meaning to them. There has also been a shift, amongst some employers, to a promote from within strategy instead of highering College graduates straight into management. This will mean that a larger number of graduates will not enter directly into jobs that are equivilant to their degree level. However, having a degree does offer greater advancement opportunities once hired and there is a ceiling on how high someone without a degree can rise. Anyone pursuing a non-speicialised degree, should now expect to enter the job market much closer to entry level employment than in the past. Even if the economy picks up, I suspect that many companies will continue with this pracice and we will continue to see the "underemployed" stats rise.

You mentioned teaching, we will always have a need for new teachers. There are several problems in that area which are suppressing the ability of those with teaching certificates to enter the market. With the economic downturn, states are forced into making cuts or have high deficits/debt. Education is one of the areas in which the states can cut. Unfortunately, they way the school systems are organised, at least in some states, is having a negative effect upon teachers. In Texas, the education budget was cut, however, the cuts were targeted towards reducing adminstrative positions, not teachers, but the way the structure is set up, those administrators are primarily the ones deciding what to cut, as a result, teachers keep getting cut while very few adminstrators get cut. The other main problem being seen by teachers is the inability of some districts to rid themselves of non-productive teachers who do not maintain required standards, however, there is strong opposition, especially in Union states, to basing teaching on performance instead of tenure and making it easier to get rid of bad teachers.

How much longer can we afford to let our human resources go to waste? Good question. Apparently the way things are currently going, we are going to find out. Even if we change Presidents (which I fervently support) and the makeup of Congress, I do not see a very fast or well thoughout turn around in America. I just do not believe that either party or any of the politicians available are going to do what will be necessary to completely turn things around. What needs doing will just be too unpopular for politians to do it. To me at least, it is not if we will eventually fail, it is a matter of how soon, and I see our current choices as choosing how fast we get to that point, not if we will get there.

That pretty much sums up the situation.

Getting into nursing school is no easy task, mainly because there are jobs waiting at the end, so competition is pretty intense. It wasn't that long ago that ads were playing on TV, "get your credential, the state is going to need to replace retiring baby boomers, etc." Kids who listened to that are now scrambling to find jobs. If we were to restructure education and get rid of a half dozen layers of bureaucracy, then there would be more money to hire teachers, but then, that's another issue.

Meanwhile, high schools are expected to prepare every student for university level work, never mind that there aren't jobs for even the university grads we have now.

There is no easy solution, but the fact remains that squandering human resources will lead to a downward spiral economically in the long term.
 
How much has America exported to Mexico?
In any of these mining, electronics, transportation,engineering, computers,
The biggest exports from Mexico is the one thing nobody seems to mention.
Illegal immigrants, and illegal drugs, and jobs..:peace

Really? This is your argument?

Are you suggesting that if we didn't have NAFTA, that somehow all the drug cartels would just stop shipping drugs north? That illegal immigrants wouldn't come here illegally?

They'd all say "oh hey, US and Mexico, do not have free trade, so obviously we can't illegally enter the US now."

I mean, what exactly is your point? The topic is free-trade, and you are bringing up illegal activity, which *OBVIOUSLY* is not legalized by NAFTA, or we wouldn't call it 'illegal'.

So here's your chance.... WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR POINT??

I'll be waiting for your brilliant explanation of your post..... I can't wait...
 
Globalization is slavery



Abandon Globalization or else.

LOL!

Apparently everyone in the US with imported goods is a slave now. Funny, I kind of like my imported stuff, and ironically no one has forced me to do anything, let alone buy it. I did that by choice. I guess 'choice' is 'slavery' in lib-tard speak?
 
Last edited:
So why doesn't management and labor meet somewhere in the middle, or they can keep outsourcing jobs.
Since this plan is working so well for the American economy today???:peace

A) Why would you want to meet in the middle with $1 an hour? You a sadist?

B) Even if you were a sadist, China is an authoritarian Communist country that will forever keep their own slaves earning $1 an hour, there aint going to be any "merging in the middle", there is only going to be going down to $1 an hour.
 
First of all if the rich didn't increase their pay by tax cuts why do they need them for?

The point is.....................that if the rich didn't increase their pay with tax cuts, than increasing taxes aint gonna solve the problem. Little 1+1 logic here.

I cannot understand why politicians and intellectuals seem to think the number 1 priority of people in America is to be rich.

Whatthe****ever free trader
 
*cracks whip* Get back to work, boy.

Which still doesn't change the fact I'm right.

or will soon become

Right Miss Cleo. Do you have some lucky numbers while you are at it?

Translation: Legalize slavery

Translation: Matt Foley can't come up with a single logical response, so instead he'll just make up what other people are saying, like a 5-year-old who just lost a debate.

A) Why would you want to meet in the middle with $1 an hour? You a sadist?

B) Even if you were a sadist, China is an authoritarian Communist country that will forever keep their own slaves earning $1 an hour, there aint going to be any "merging in the middle", there is only going to be going down to $1 an hour.

Which explains why 63% of the population was under the poverty level in 1976, and by 2007 only 4% was. It seems wages are rising, which disproves your pathetically idiotic statement.

The point is.....................that if the rich didn't increase their pay with tax cuts, than increasing taxes aint gonna solve the problem. Little 1+1 logic here.

Whatthe****ever free trader

Taxes never solves the problem. I have yet to see any tax that fixed anything, no matter who was being taxed.

Whathe****ever socialist traitor
 
Back
Top Bottom