Save American jobs....start with a grasshopper & a Train wreck.

[bradycros]

A slightly hyperbolic example...

How many American whalers are there today? Those jobs were lost, but what jobs replaced them? Automotive and other jobs from new technology. Now it is almost as silly to pay an American $25 an hour to assemble something as it is to have them out whaling. The world changes, the job markets change, you need to adapt to get a new job. It is that simple! I can't stand how the blame is always on some other country or some corporation or the government or other Americans who don't buy American. If you don't have a job, what are YOU doing to fix the situation personally? I rarely see Americans willing to really invest the time and effort (and even money) to become qualified to do a new job. They are then forced to do jobs that should be done by teenagers and college students or others who are just getting started.

Allow me to retort, another hyperbolic example:

manual labor and craftsman skills built America to what it was, I say was since we've gone down the tubes a bit losing world power, bad econ and such. Anyways, not everything can or will adapt. Lets say you're a homeowner. Lets say you have a septic tank, and lets say that it backs up. Now, most normal people lack any and all skills to fix something as labor intensive as this. So, you call someone who dealing with these systems, now let me ask you, do you phone in a long distance call to Beijing and fly a guy to the US who probably lacks any skills regarding fixing or making things (poor quality speaks for this), or do you call up someone a few miles away who actually knows what they're doing and gets the job done, and gets it done right?

Not everything can, should, needs to, or will adapt. There's a reason why people learned these skills. There's a reason why the USA could do anything 30 years ago, but thanks to people who think that "you need to adapt to get a new job" or that these jobs are unnecessary, you're the reason why we're the way we are today. There's a reason why you should support those who choose to instead of betraying them. Around 30% of Americans have a college degree, not all these desk drone or paper pusher jobs are necessary, there's plenty of people who would rather spend their time making something than spending eight hours a day behind a desk not learning anything.

Hell, the main reason why Germany is the power house and has a growing GDP is because they pride themselves on having an industry that delivers quality for a reasonable price. If they can keep a fairly large industrial base, why the hell can't we?

I don't know, do I.

 

[mwtoelle]

Hell, the main reason why Germany is the power house and has a growing GDP is because they pride themselves on having an industry that delivers quality for a reasonable price. If they can keep a fairly large industrial base, why the hell can't we?

Unfortunately, in America the accountants call the shots. They want the biggest possible black number on the bottom line, the #$@& with anything and anyone else.

 

[New Ocean]

manual labor and craftsman skills built America to what it was, I say was since we've gone down the tubes a bit losing world power, bad econ and such.

I would argue that most of our wealth was built on slavery and exploitation of our abundant natural resources. This was mostly achieved in the 1800s. The large number of cheap workers who came from overseas helped, as did the industrial mobilization of WWII. We never did capitalize on this great wealth by investing in the future, however. And that in a nutshell explains why the long slide downward. Blame who you want, I blame Nixon for cutting the exploration of space. That was the road to the future and we mostly gave up on it.

Around 30% of Americans have a college degree, not all these desk drone or paper pusher jobs are necessary, there's plenty of people who would rather spend their time making something than spending eight hours a day behind a desk not learning anything.

Visit a factory in China today, or check the history of American factories 100 years ago... and then tell me if you would rather be at a desk or on the line. Personal choices aside, no one is going to pay you to build something at a rate sufficient to cover the cost of living in this, the most wealthy nation. So even if you want it, it will not be. A person in China will do it for 75 cents an hour, and eventually a machine will do it 24/7/365 for even less. Now if you want to design and build the machines, a really cool job imho, you need to go to college. Maybe that isn't evolving, but it is improving.

 

[Zeus-cat]

I would argue that most of our wealth was built on slavery and exploitation of our abundant natural resources. This was mostly achieved in the 1800s. The large number of cheap workers who came from overseas helped, as did the industrial mobilization of WWII. We never did capitalize on this great wealth by investing in the future, however. And that in a nutshell explains why the long slide downward. Blame who you want, I blame Nixon for cutting the exploration of space. That was the road to the future and we mostly gave up on it.

So you are saying we have been in decline for the last one hundred and thirty years since slavery ended? That is beyond ludicrous.

 

[New Ocean]

So you are saying we have been in decline for the last one hundred and thirty years since slavery ended? That is beyond ludicrous.

The foundation for our wealth was built on the back of slavery and the exploitation of the environment. That last boost to the summit occurred as a result of WWII and the industrial build-up. Between 1945 and 1949 the country had the greatest military power advantage over the rest of the world. We coasted through the 50s on this industrial momentum. Our decline started in the 1960s, accelerating greatly in the 1970s. It was most obvious if you lived in an urban environment. At the same time, as conditions in this country started to slide, our power and influence in the world was falling as well.

 

[Peartree]

The foundation for our wealth was built on the back of slavery and the exploitation of the environment. That last boost to the summit occurred as a result of WWII and the industrial build-up. Between 1945 and 1949 the country had the greatest military power advantage over the rest of the world. We coasted through the 50s on this industrial momentum. Our decline started in the 1960s, accelerating greatly in the 1970s. It was most obvious if you lived in an urban environment. At the same time, as conditions in this country started to slide, our power and influence in the world was falling as well.

Son, if you believe even half of that, you drank some really strange Kool-Aid.

 

[New Ocean]

Son, if you believe even half of that, you drank some really strange Kool-Aid.

Explain further. Where did our wealth come from?

 

[JPVegh]

Son, if you believe even half of that, you drank some really strange Kool-Aid.

The kool-aid isn't that strange. They are handing it out at universities all over the country on a regular basis. Most just drink it down without question.

 

[New Ocean]

The kool-aid isn't that strange. They are handing it out at universities all over the country on a regular basis. Most just drink it down without question.

Do you have any information to add? Or just more anti-intellectualism?

What do you think the source of American wealth and power is? And what is your source for this information?

 

[COrocket]

Allow me to retort, another hyperbolic example:

manual labor and craftsman skills built America to what it was, I say was since we've gone down the tubes a bit losing world power, bad econ and such. Anyways, not everything can or will adapt. Lets say you're a homeowner. Lets say you have a septic tank, and lets say that it backs up. Now, most normal people lack any and all skills to fix something as labor intensive as this. So, you call someone who dealing with these systems, now let me ask you, do you phone in a long distance call to Beijing and fly a guy to the US who probably lacks any skills regarding fixing or making things (poor quality speaks for this), or do you call up someone a few miles away who actually knows what they're doing and gets the job done, and gets it done right?

Not everything can, should, needs to, or will adapt. There's a reason why people learned these skills. There's a reason why the USA could do anything 30 years ago, but thanks to people who think that "you need to adapt to get a new job" or that these jobs are unnecessary, you're the reason why we're the way we are today. There's a reason why you should support those who choose to instead of betraying them. Around 30% of Americans have a college degree, not all these desk drone or paper pusher jobs are necessary, there's plenty of people who would rather spend their time making something than spending eight hours a day behind a desk not learning anything.

I agree. As fyrwrxz said, people could learn a new trade and put the time/money in to learn a new job. Fact of the matter is, not every single person entering the work force needs a college degree. If people have a few minutes, take a look at this:

[YOUTUBE]3h_pp8CHEQ0[/YOUTUBE]

I have not fact checked the examples he presented, but they seem compelling. What this points out is there are still jobs left in America, its just that we are not promoting job growth in all areas. It is believed skilled trade jobs are not appropriate substitutes to a secondary education. I know this because when I was going through my final years of high school, college was highly expected of everyone. I'm not discounting the great opportunities that an education can provide, its just that not everyone can have high level office jobs. We still need to take care of the basics. I'd argue that this mindset is contributing to the degrading manufacturing base in this country. There are plenty of people that can design, market, distribute etc...the product, but fewer who can build/make it. Maybe as demand for trade labor increases, salaries for these people will increase, and become more attractive.

 

[sunward]

...In order to buy American, the products have to be made here. To be made here, the workers have to be willing to accept a reasonable wage to keep cost down. Society cannot survive if we insist that we are all entitled to more than is reasonable. ..

what is a reasonable wage? A number per hour please.

..As for the light bulbs, as long as our neighbors to the north haven't forced people to switch to CFL's, perhaps during my summer I'll send a few days up there, and on the drive back pack my duffel bag full of light bulbs! Watch the government try and force that BS on me lets see...

Delayed for 2 years here in Ontario to be the same as the federal rule but still going away.
https://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20111221/ontario-light-bulb-ban-delay-111221/

Personally I now love these types CFL's bulbs as they last forever and use less light.

...Hell, the main reason why Germany is the power house and has a growing GDP is because they pride themselves on having an industry that delivers quality for a reasonable price. If they can keep a fairly large industrial base, why the hell can't we?

yes a country were unions are stronger, are involved with management decisions, and get 6 weeks holidays.

 

[JPVegh]

Do you have any information to add? Or just more anti-intellectualism?

Nah, I'm good, anti-intellectualism wears me out.

 

[dave carver]

Recent articals on MSNBC are saying due to the fact that wages are riseing in China production and transportation costs new manufacturing facilities are being used here in the US.

Sure, the move is small now but it's growing. The more Chinese workers demand in wages the better for us it is

 

[sandman]

Recent articals on MSNBC are saying due to the fact that wages are riseing in China production and transportation costs new manufacturing facilities are being used here in the US.

Sure, the move is small now but it's growing. The more Chinese workers demand in wages the better for us it is

The latest trip through my local Dollar Store shows almost everything that's made of some type of injection molded plastic is made here.

Toys, baskets, etc.

 

[T-Rex]

what is a reasonable wage? A number per hour please.


yes a country were unions are stronger, are involved with management decisions, and get 6 weeks holidays.

I can't give yo a number. It would be dependent on the job description and skill level. Went I worked in a union company there were skilled operators and incompetent operators making the same inflated wage. In the nonunion workforce, the incompetent would work at a lesser wage, if they had the job at all. It most assuredly isn't a wage 70% higher than the local average for the same job description. I'm sorry $50/hr is not a reasonable wage for the person sweeping the floor at GM, $15/hr is reasonable.

Yes in Germany, and many other countries, the Union is involved with management. They can see the health of the Company and they work together for the benefit of all, including the community. The trend that I have seen in the U.S. is division, a Them against US attitude. The two factions fighting a war. The workers seem to feel entitled to what ever they want, a summer home, boat, RV and benefits. The management side is trying to figure out how to stay in business.

I haven't always been happy with my wage, but I know that I get what I earn. If I did my job better, I would have a better wage. I strive for mediocrity, so I earn a mediocre wage. I accept that I do not deserve the same wage as those who are more competent and do a better job than I.

 

[Zeus-cat]

Explain further. Where did our wealth come from?

Look at the condition of the U.S. at the end of the Civil War. We were an agrarian society; that's what the slaves built. The slaves worked on plantations and small farms in the south. Much of that specific wealth was destroyed in the war. Over the decades that followed we exploited our abundant natural resources (like every country does) and started to become industrialized. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Big important point; economics is not a zero sum game. If we play a game of poker and I win; you lose. there is no net gain. However, if I sell you something you want and I make a profit, we both gain. I have made money and you have something you want. I use the profit I made to buy something I want or to reinvest in my business. That is where wealth comes from. do this several hundred billion times over the course of 130 years and lots of wealth is created.

 

[karlbaum]

Fact: the American Union Worker has priced himself out of the market.

Unions do not negotiate anymore, they intimidate, threaten and bully, inflating the cost of goods and services. Those services, and the production of goods is pushed overseas in order to keep companies in business.

5 years ago, a fuel injector could be produced for less than $1.00, and sold for $20 each. Now they are selling for less than $4 each, and the union wage earners have driven production cost to about $3.50. Those jobs have been pushed to Mexico and China so the Companies can stay afloat.

In order to buy American, the products have to be made here. To be made here, the workers have to be willing to accept a reasonable wage to keep cost down. Society cannot survive if we insist that we are all entitled to more than is reasonable.

Terry

I could not disagree with you more. I do not know how you could make this statement when it is in fact the opposite of the truth. It is the companies that threaten, bully and intimidate workers into working for dirt wages and accepting that this is for the better good of the economy. Why is it that the time when one parent went to work and was able to buy a house, car, medical care, and have a fair retirement was when unions were strong in this country. In fact most things were made in this country in those days. Now a days both parents work just to scrape by.

 

[karlbaum]

Hell, the main reason why Germany is the power house and has a growing GDP is because they pride themselves on having an industry that delivers quality for a reasonable price. If they can keep a fairly large industrial base, why the hell can't we?

Not only that but Germany has had universal health coverage for over a hundred twenty years! In the U.S. you are screwed if you lack money sucking health insurance.

 

[T-Rex]

Recent articals on MSNBC are saying due to the fact that wages are riseing in China production and transportation costs new manufacturing facilities are being used here in the US.

Sure, the move is small now but it's growing. The more Chinese workers demand in wages the better for us it is

I would disagree. Again as the cost of production is driven up, so is the cost to the consumer. Now you ask for a higher wage so you can pay the higher price for the goods, which drives the cost of the product even higher.

It is a never ending game until the consumer (worker) finally figures out that a lot of what he desires is 'luxury' and decides to live within his means.

We need to learn to get back to basics. What do you need: shelter, food, clothing. To get those in civilization, you also need transportation.

And no, rockets are NOT a need. I know, that's blaspheme.

 

[T-Rex]

I could not disagree with you more. I do not know how you could make this statement when it is in fact the opposite of the truth. It is the companies that threaten, bully and intimidate workers into working for dirt wages and accepting that this is for the better good of the economy. Why is it that the time when one parent went to work and was able to buy a house, car, medical care, and have a fair retirement was when unions were strong in this country. In fact most things were made in this country in those days. Now a days both parents work just to scrape by.

We work to scrape by because we have to have big screen TVs, Escalaides, and designer labels. We have lost the line between what we need and what we want. In that situation, people are demanding a higher wage to pay for those luxuries. This drives up the cost of living, and the cycle repeats.

When I was growing up, we were a 2 car family and had a 31ft boat. We were also a 1 income family. Also non-union. My father was very good at his trade and worked hard, so he earned a good wage. When things got tight we got rid of the boat, and balanced the budget again. We recognized that boat wasn't necessary.

I have a 1 income household. I drive a car that is 9 years old and paid for. I don't need a new one, though I would like one. My home (in my opinion) is excessive, but I have been over ruled, so this is where I live. I do my best to live within my means.

Now, before you get on a pedestal, Yes there are people today who are scraping by with 2 & 3 incomes, just to have the basics. But I have to ask, why do the basics cost so much??
My belief is that the cost of living has been driven up by those who feel that they 'need' luxuries, and demand a higher wage to get them, thereby driving up the cost of products and services that they produce.

It is a viscous cycle driven by vanity, gluteny and greed. We desire more, have to pay for it, demand more for our labors driving up the cost of production, increasing prices, so we need higher wages again. Now the contract is up for renewal, Union says no problem, and demands a higher wage, a significant increase because it is a multi-year contract. Management is forced/manipulated/bullied to give in because he needs to stay in business, now has to increase the prices to his customers, who increase the prices to the consumer, and we repeat contract after contract. Why can't he say, I think you are charging too much, I think I will hire some folks who don't make demands on me, so my costs will be the same, or maybe decrease? Because his house & business will be burned to be ground by the Union

In a non-union world, ask for a raise, boss thinks you been doing a good job, so, ok, a little gratuity. Thanks boss, now I can get that big screen the family wants.
Or boss thinks you're reaping what you sow, he says, no, not this time, but maybe in the future if you work a bit harder. Crap no big screen this year, but, he's right I can do a better job. I work on improving so next time I'll get it. (Or he just goes postal)

We as a society are reaping what we sow. We demand more, but don't want to have to pay for it, oh and don't expand/build the facility in my backyard either.

 

[Fred22]

The foundation for our wealth was built on the back of slavery and the exploitation of the environment. That last boost to the summit occurred as a result of WWII and the industrial build-up. Between 1945 and 1949 the country had the greatest military power advantage over the rest of the world. We coasted through the 50s on this industrial momentum. Our decline started in the 1960s, accelerating greatly in the 1970s. It was most obvious if you lived in an urban environment. At the same time, as conditions in this country started to slide, our power and influence in the world was falling as well.

I'm not American but man that is strange. To me American wealth was built by hard work and using natural resouces. Slavery was and is anathema to a strong economy. Ask any Roman. I would say the decline of American economic power began when China opened up to enrich themselves and large corporations exported a lot of the manufacturing base there. Mcjobs are honest work but frankly dont pay well.
American military and economic power are hand in glove same as anyone. Theres no point in a big military if you cant afford to feed equip or train it so cutbacks make sence now. The fact is the United States could turn any nation on the face of the earth into four feet of dust in the upper atmosphere within thirty anytime they so desired so i dont know how weak that makes them. Conventionally my thought is why should they foot the bill to police a world that frankly neither wants or apreciates the effort. Dropping their costs and acting in concert with trusted allies so you are not stuck with the whole bill makes sence.
cheers
fred

 

[New Ocean]

I'm not American but man that is strange. To me American wealth was built by hard work and using natural resouces.

Yes the hard work of slaves, later replaced by an endless stream of immigrants working for a pittance, and child labor.

Slavery was and is anathema to a strong economy. Ask any Roman.

Just before the civil war, there were millions of slaves in America. You are telling me that millions of people working essentially for free is somehow not important to an economy? I never knew that the North-Atlantic triangle was such a controversial topic, or perceived as some kind of liberal propaganda among those who hate liberals or higher education (or who possibly seek to downplay the history of slavery because of some southern conservative shame.)

For the record, Rome remains one of the largest and longest-lasting empire in human history. In their case, slavery was also an important factor. But the slaves in ancient Rome were treated far better than slaves were in modern times. They were more like serfs.

I would say the decline of American economic power began when China opened up to enrich themselves and large corporations exported a lot of the manufacturing base there. Mcjobs are honest work but frankly dont pay well.

I think what you say here is essentially correct, except I don't think America was very healthy even in the late 1960s or 70s, even before the good union jobs were lost. Because the consumer-driven economy was already failing. It was only riding on the crest of the WWII mobilization. That was never followed up with anything, and as Americans turned inward and away from any coherent goals, the country started to fade. American poverty was severe at the time, but generally ignored. Infrastructure was not greatly improved, but only incrementally. America stopped exploring space, stopped innovating, and made fun of a president who put solar panels on the White House. The severe decline in urban areas was obvious if you lived there at the time. But the biggest indication of failure was the war in Vietnam, our greatest diplomatic failure in a century, and the energy crisis of 1979, the clearest indication that our national infrastructure and economy were exceedingly fragile.

American military and economic power are hand in glove same as anyone. Theres no point in a big military if you cant afford to feed equip or train it so cutbacks make sence now. The fact is the United States could turn any nation on the face of the earth into four feet of dust in the upper atmosphere within thirty anytime they so desired so i dont know how weak that makes them.

I agree that we can afford to save some money on the military is certain areas. We no longer have a need for Boomer subs at all, no longer have a need for any B-2, or a large standing army. We have, since at least 1945, had the strongest armed forces in the world. If you can outspend the enemy 10x on weapons, you will always win. And we have. It is okay to scale things back a bit and get smaller and smarter. But while our military might is as great as ever, we can be destroyed from within by our own mistakes. The greatest enemy to a super-power (or empire such as Rome) is usually internal. The country has come back from the worst times in the 1970s and 80s. It is a pretty good place to be, let's not screw it up.

Conventionally my thought is why should they foot the bill to police a world that frankly neither wants or appreciates the effort. Dropping their costs and acting in concert with trusted allies so you are not stuck with the whole bill makes sence.

I think we should carefully decide when and where we go to war or intervene. It is okay in my mind for the powerful nation, based ideally on good values and freedom for all people, to help others. But one recent example comes to mind; Iraq. It will be known, at least among all those "history book readin' new fangled liberals" like myself as one of the greatest blunders in American history. $1 Trillion down the hole, and more than 100,000 innocent people killed. In that instance, we should have focused on our own problems at the time. Still waiting for the WMD, or the links between Saddam and 9-11. Also waiting for the Iraqi oil money to pay us back...

 

[Fuse Eh!]

Well ya can't do it for everything, BUT it sure will help when ya can. Besides.... we all know Canada don't count....they are our buddies! LOl:wink:

Amen to that!

I have a part-time job working for an outdoor adventure store where we have a policy to "buy Canadian" whenever possible. By logical extension (for reasons of shared geography and convenient trade relations) this also means that we will "buy American" whenever possible.

While much of our technical and lifestyle clothing is manufactured offshore (read "in China"), we have been able to source some excellent clothing products that are "still" made either here in Canada or in the good ole U.S. of A.

Ditto for much of our gear -- while a lot of it is manufactured offshore, we are able to offer our customers many goods of superior quality made right here in North America: things like stoves, canoes, kayaks, snowshoes etc. And, happily, many of our customers are deliberately trying to "shop North American" also, even if it means paying a few loonies... uh, dollars... more.

We may never see a return to the halcyon days when retail stores were filled with a majority of goods that were manufactured domestically; but if we all do a little, we can begin to make a big difference.

And just for the record, yeah, I love my Canuckian CTI motors and Sunward kits too; but seeing the American flag on the "Brand A" motors and on various manufacturers' kit packaging is pretty cool too!!:handshake:

 

[New Ocean]

So should we also buy Mexican? They share our other border...

 

[fox_racing_guy]

Here is something I haven't seen in many years, a computer hard drive labeled "Assembled in USA" I know assembled is not the same as "made" but it's a start. The brand is a Mushkin Chronos deluxe and I just purchased it based on reviews, I will be purchasing more Mushkin products in the future.

 

[New Ocean]

But is that the kind of job we need? Screwing together high-tech devices made in Asia? I would rather go to school, get the training, and design this technology. Or work for the company that has them made in Asia. Exporting low paying jobs is not automatically bad if we then replace them with better jobs. When you get promoted, you leave the low end work for others so you can think about high level things. You get more money because of it... Look at the jobs created at Google or Apple... These are among the most profitable companies in the World, and they are American. I don't know about Apple, but Google keeps winning for "best place to work." You get more money and work under better, more rewarding conditions at a place like Google than on an assembly line. Mushkin is also an American company, so your example is a good one in that sense. They buy the hardware from economic slaves in Asia, and then assemble it here and sell at a vast profit. That may not be nice, but it is good for America and I can live with that. Certainly better us than them...

People lament the loss of blue collar jobs, when they seem to be ignoring the vast increase in really high paying technology jobs. It circles back to personal responsibility and job training, that is never as popular as something easy like "buy American." Some how there is always someone else to blame for whatever problem we have at the moment. And always some quick fix scheme to go along with it. That would best explain why nothing gets done.

 

[Fred22]

Yes the hard work of slaves, later replaced by an endless stream of immigrants working for a pittance, and child labor.

"Just before the civil war, there were millions of slaves in America. You are telling me that millions of people working essentially for free is somehow not important to an economy? I never knew that the North-Atlantic triangle was such a controversial topic, or perceived as some kind of liberal propaganda among those who hate liberals or higher education (or who possibly seek to downplay the history of slavery because of some southern conservative shame.) "
i have a number of problems with this. Historically the American economy in the south was far weaker then the economy in the North yet the north did not have slavery. i never said your statement was propoganda I merely disagreed with it. I realise political discourse in your country has become even more polarised then before but I have no axe to grind there. I am a way Northern Conservative not southern but why anybody south of the Mason Dixon would feel shame about slavery is beyond me. I don't feel your point of view in this is liberal but given it's simplistic two factor analysis of something as complex as the growth of the American economy is not quite on the mark.

"For the record, Rome remains one of the largest and longest-lasting empire in human history. In their case, slavery was also an important factor. But the slaves in ancient Rome were treated far better than slaves were in modern times. They were more like serfs."
Rome lasted a long time for many factors. If one were to cherry pick a few of the more important factors I would say a professional army was key and efficent bureacracy. Slaves in Rome were treated savagely as anywhere else. Slaves I think were protected from being arbitrarily executed by law in the latter part of the empire but thats about it. I would also say serfs had similar problems of back breaking labour for little benefit. They were essentially furniture and sold with property. The experiance of serfdom and slavery had simularites but varied from country to country and over the course of time. Your points oversimplify a complex situation.

"I think what you say here is essentially correct, except I don't think America was very healthy even in the late 1960s or 70s, even before the good union jobs were lost. Because the consumer-driven economy was already failing. It was only riding on the crest of the WWII mobilization. That was never followed up with anything, and as Americans turned inward and away from any coherent goals, the country started to fade. American poverty was severe at the time, but generally ignored. Infrastructure was not greatly improved, but only incrementally. America stopped exploring space, stopped innovating, and made fun of a president who put solar panels on the White House. The severe decline in urban areas was obvious if you lived there at the time. But the biggest indication of failure was the war in Vietnam, our greatest diplomatic failure in a century, and the energy crisis of 1979, the clearest indication that our national infrastructure and economy were exceedingly fragile."

America had coherant goals after World War 2 such as expanding the economy and preventing the spread of communism to name a few. I would say the establishment of your wonderful interstate highway system may be viewed as incremental I suppose but to me was a radical change and indicative of a strong vibrant economy. I believe America has not stopped exploring space but has gone on to do amazing science with the likes of Hubbe and more recently Kepler. American manned space exploration IMO has stalled for now but will eventually get going again. It did after after t he Saturn 1B with the shuttle but I'm hoping the next one is for beyond LEO. The energy crisis was came as a reaction to oil embargo carried out by certain states against America for political reasons. It was never based in reality as where I live has more oil under it then Saudi Arabia. It is interesting to note that this oil product was offered to the Americans though a pipeline but was refused by the current administration. This astounds me as it resulted in a loss of billions in jobs and direct benefits to the American economy. I also think getting your oil from a secure democracy makes more sence then what is going in now.
.


I agree that we can afford to save some money on the military is certain areas. We no longer have a need for Boomer subs at all, no longer have a need for any B-2, or a large standing army. We have, since at least 1945, had the strongest armed forces in the world. If you can outspend the enemy 10x on weapons, you will always win. And we have. It is okay to scale things back a bit and get smaller and smarter. But while our military might is as great as ever, we can be destroyed from within by our own mistakes. The greatest enemy to a super-power (or empire such as Rome) is usually internal. The country has come back from the worst times in the 1970s and 80s. It is a pretty good place to be, let's not screw it up.
I think you are mistaken about SLBM's. Their accuracy and ability to hide makes them a much better deterrant then Minuteman which IMO is an expensive anachronism. I think the idea of shrinking the military makes sence but where troop levels should be will be the subject of intense debate. It should be I guess.

I think we should carefully decide when and where we go to war or intervene. It is okay in my mind for the powerful nation, based ideally on good values and freedom for all people, to help others. But one recent example comes to mind; Iraq. It will be known, at least among all those "history book readin' new fangled liberals" like myself as one of the greatest blunders in American history. $1 Trillion down the hole, and more than 100,000 innocent people killed. In that instance, we should have focused on our own problems at the time. Still waiting for the WMD, or the links between Saddam and 9-11. Also waiting for the Iraqi oil money to pay us back...

I should think money is a factor here but far more important IMO is the human cost. These people who agree to shelter us by facing death and injury are far more important then dollars. I agree the decision to commit them to battle is all important. The idea of being paid back by Iraqi oil misses the point as Iraq needs to rebuild itself and it would be cheaper in the long run to let them do that. The idea you be paid for the use of your military runs contrary to idea they sacrifice for a higher good Imo.
I don't think you are book learning liberal or whatever. Your point of view reminds me of my brother who is an ardent socialist. I find his viewpoint shall we say puzzling but I respect it.
cheers
fred

 

[New Ocean]

I am a strong government republican (in the actual meaning of the word) and a supporter of capitalism, with some basic regulations. I am more of a capitalist than everyone who supported the bank bailouts a few years back, because I think ruthless capitalism is most important during lean times, to help trim the economy and keep it healthy. It appears that corporations only want capitalism when they are doing well.

We are communists on the smallest population scales; within the family. We share money, food, and shelter with our family. We are socialists on larger scales; at work we pool our resources to purchase healthcare and life-insurance at a discount. Nationally, I want a democratic republic with leaders elected to do the right thing on our behalf. I do think that we should share certain things, such as courts, police, fire departments, schools, utilities, roads, water, and military. Lucky for me, I already live in a "socialist" nation that does this.

Or to put it better: we live in a country with complex political and economic conditions. Because there are more than 300 million of us, there is no simple way or single word that can describe the government we do or should have. Anyone who thinks they can get by with single words like "socialist" needs to give the fox new a rest for a while and crack a book. It is not that simple, and if you can't put in the effort to appreciate the nuances, you may not be ready for politics at all. Thus my desire to avoid true democracy in the country, where something like 20% of all Americans think Obama is not an American. Where a similar percentage don't know that the Sun is at the center of the Solar System. Many liberals blindly hate republicans, same for many conservatives. You have the tea party, and the equally crazy occupy party. Neither one has much grasp on reality. Reality rarely fits on a protest sign. Both share in the blame game. It is always someone else who is ruining the country. Maybe it is the president, maybe it is bill gates and the 1 percent... Or maybe people need to look in the mirror more often?

Then again if Obama, typically to the right of Nixon on issues, is a socialist, I must be a commie. Or possibly a commie-nazi?

 

[Fred22]

I am a strong government republican (in the actual meaning of the word) and a supporter of capitalism, with some basic regulations. I am more of a capitalist than everyone who supported the bank bailouts a few years back, because I think ruthless capitalism is most important during lean times, to help trim the economy and keep it healthy. It appears that corporations only want capitalism when they are doing well.

We are communists on the smallest population scales; within the family. We share money, food, and shelter with our family. We are socialists on larger scales; at work we pool our resources to purchase healthcare and life-insurance at a discount. Nationally, I want a democratic republic with leaders elected to do the right thing on our behalf. I do think that we should share certain things, such as courts, police, fire departments, schools, utilities, roads, water, and military. Lucky for me, I already live in a "socialist" nation that does this.

Or to put it better: we live in a country with complex political and economic conditions. Because there are more than 300 million of us, there is no simple way or single word that can describe the government we do or should have. Anyone who thinks they can get by with single words like "socialist" needs to give the fox new a rest for a while and crack a book. It is not that simple, and if you can't put in the effort to appreciate the nuances, you may not be ready for politics at all. Thus my desire to avoid true democracy in the country, where something like 20% of all Americans think Obama is not an American. Where a similar percentage don't know that the Sun is at the center of the Solar System. Many liberals blindly hate republicans, same for many conservatives. You have the tea party, and the equally crazy occupy party. Neither one has much grasp on reality. Reality rarely fits on a protest sign. Both share in the blame game. It is always someone else who is ruining the country. Maybe it is the president, maybe it is bill gates and the 1 percent... Or maybe people need to look in the mirror more often?

Then again if Obama, typically to the right of Nixon on issues, is a socialist, I must be a commie. Or possibly a commie-nazi?

Bud you need to take a breath. I never said you were a socialist but some of your analysis with the emphasis on money struck a familiar note with me. I keep forgetting in the environment down south socialist is an insult. It is not I assure you up here. I know many people who are socialists and they are good honest hard working folks. I think your folks down your way might consider relaxing a little with that but thats your business.
Acknowledgeing the complexity of historical commentary does not have to involve calling names or demeaning others. I forget sometimes how bitter and divided things are down your way so as to preclude a calm polite discussion of government issues. I say again that there were points you made that were valid in the previous post and it is a shame you feel the need to become so obviously upset.
cheers
fred

 

[JStarStar]

Since this thread has jumped across the rails into the politics usually kept out of here:

It's been alternately amusing/bemusing/disturbing/enraging the past several days to hear one particular bat-brained candidate of one particular party spew out gooey runny bull-stuff about putting a colony on the moon, when his party has been attempting to strangle NASA with both fists for 50 years, they battled JFK tooth and nail when he proposed the Apollo program in 1961, they didn't want any of their tax money spent on that junk, they would have been deliriously happy to cancel Apollo on Jan. 21, 1969 if Apollo 8 had not made the circumlunar flight three weeks before, but they couldn't get away with it politically, they then started the shutdown of Apollo the minute Armstrong's boots hit the surface, then instead of a real manned space program, they mandated a penny-pinching, jury-rigged and inherently-unsafe (no escape system; guaranteed to kill full crews sooner or later) design for the shuttle, then a decade later when a shuttle blew up they refused to authorize a full-fledged next-generation launch vehicle, then 15 years later when another shuttle went down, instead of authorizing a viable follow-up program, they get up and say "Lookee here!!! Bright Shiny Lights!!! Let's Go To Mars!!!" (they might as well have said, "let's go to Krypton") and then immediately short-cut the development budget, utterly guaranteeing it would not meet ANY of its target dates, then when the next election rolls around they're all screaming, "You said we were going to Mars!! Why aren't we on Mars yet! Privatize everything!!!! NASA can't do anything right and I don't want to pay no taxes for nothin' anyway," and all of a sudden they are faced by an opposing president whose game plan is "punt, punt and punt some more, let's give them everything they want and maybe they will love me" so the U.S. manned space program gets deep-sixed. Starve The Beast. It only took them 50 years.