Republicans abide by a social safety net, but in no way really support one. If they thought they could destroy it, they would (see Bush "saving" Social Security") Look at Welfare Reform, and hell look at the fact that as recently as 1996 they had a presidential candidate (Dole) who voted against things like the creation of Medicaid and the Voting Rights Act.

So true.

It might have helped some if Bush had been more worried about qualifications than patronage when putting his cabinet and advisors together. It would also help if he didn't have such a complete oilman's mentality that what's good for big business is always good for the common worker. And it'd be nice if he valued the small man anywhere near in practice what he claims in speeches.

I don't blame the economy on Bush. I blame it on profiteering at the expense of long-term fiscal sense and practical health of the nation, which is certainly nothing new. But it's not something Bush worries his head about much, I don't think.

I'm not an economist and don't know what the answers are, but they've got to start with less reliance on foreign oil, looking for alternative fuels, less reliance on imports, more focus on a living wage, more realization that you can't slash payroll and manpower prepetually and still get the same results. Haven't got a clue how to achieve that since I'm not very clever in this field, but it would be nice to at least see acknowledment of the problem at the federal level and more than a token attempt to address it.

Trouble is, right now, everything from gas to fresh fruit costs more than minimum wage earners can afford. If you're earning $5.15 an hour and a bag of apples is 5 bucks and gas is 3 bucks, you can't buy the apples. You wind up going with a stack of 4-for-a-dollar Drake's Apple Pies instead of the apples. Living wage should get you the actual apples.

I don't BLAME this on Bush because it's been a problem throughout the history of our country. But I would like him to CARE about it.

and???

i think this is true:

Bush has never vetoed a bill that has passed throught the house and senate. The Republican majority has been so out of controll with pork barrell shit that even far right wing talk show hosts are disgusted.

If it's not completely true, it's damn close. I know this was the case for the entire first term, and I believe the only bill he has even threatened was the Stem Cell Bill.

I think we should start slashing the fuck out an ass-ton, if not all, of government programs plus dropping taxes across the damn board. And before one of you half-asses jumps up to lambaste this viewpoint as not giving a shit about poor people or the disadvantaged, realize that this is absolutely false. I don't think we should abolish welfare assistance or other safety net programs. At the same time, if you don't believe there isn't truckloads of wasted money pumped into the government and its programs, then you are a fool.

RE: Minimum Wage.
Most people making minimum wage are not the primary wage earner in the household. Most people on minimum wage are high school & college students, a housewife working part-time to supplement the household income or retirees supplementing their income or eliminating free time. If I remember correctly, less than one fourth of minimum wage earners are the primary source of income for a family of three or four.

There are many people in my state who are being paid more than minimum wage, but only a little more, and for jobs that pay much more in other areas of the country.

I can't blame this on Bush, as it's a problem with the local economies. But, when a job that pays 20-dollars an hour elsewhere only pays 10.50 here and one that pays 8-bucks only pays $5.35 here, I start thinking something's more amiss with this area's perception of payroll versus business survival than with anything Bush is doing.

I've got lots of more concrete reasons to dislike Bush than blaming him for the fact that businesses in northern Maine have a "but we can't afford that kind of wage and stay in business" mindset. If you can't pay a living wage, go the fuck out of business. You don't deserve the business.

But how does that compare with cost of living? Raw numbers really don't mean squat. I lived easier on $5.50/hour in Ruston, La. than I did on $13/hr. in Annapolis.

Cost of living in my area is comparable to other areas for goods and services, but housing and land are much cheaper.

I stand by my statment that the market does in fact take care of the minimum wage before government, and that by the time it does it only accounts for what the market has already dictated.

Can I come over? I'll pick up some beer.

A key principle surfaces... that the market has its own indisputable higher order of reason and determinism. Sort of like there is some Intelligently Designed economic DNA we ought not to play with.

If "the market" leaves ever increasing numbers in poverty in the richest nation (size GNP) in the world.... then there is nothing to do about it?

This is, actually, an important difference in the right and left for about 200 years. I salute the history of this and I respectfully question the unerring creative force of the "marketplace" in a world that is state and international capitalism, not freemarket production. This kind of mistaken estimation of incorporated capital was a mistake that Marx and Engels also made. Cf. Marcuse, Habermas et. al.

Of course. If your okay with Miller lite, cold beer is in the fridge.

Suck it.

Suck it.

[/quote]

Man is an animal that makes bargains: no other animal does this - no dog exchanges bones with another.
Adam Smith

Suck it capitalist pigs!!! !1

<--- thinks SB should post RE: politics & faith more. Although he is probably a minority voice here in most topics, I have a sense he would others with respect regardless of their stance.

Man is an animal that makes bargains: no other animal does this - no dog exchanges bones with another.
Adam Smith[/quote]

I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with you - in fact, I was not in disagreement at all -; it's just a wonder what you can find on Google.

I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with you - in fact, I was not in disagreement at all -; it's just a wonder what you can find on Google.[/quote]

I'm printing this to give to our Econ. teacher right now.

Thanks Sketch. That means a lot to me. You know how many times we've had these debates. It just leaves me exasperated most of the time and I don't have the energy.

I definitely enjoy SB's viewpoints on politics and faith.

I only like people who echo my exact thoughts and sentiments. That is why I only read Daily Kos and Atrios.

You're a crack-up... Who's literally on crack.

DAT rock!

Golly! You must be enlightened times two!

Rubes like me are too busy eating babies and opening sweatshops to actually do any readin'.

Eating Babies in China?

~ By E.L. Bynum

A strange and horrible report was published in the National Right to Life News¹ on April 24, 1995. They published reports of the aborted babies being sold for health food in China. They quoted from the Hong Kong Eastern Express, citing the lively market in aborted babies.

The Eastweek reporters were given specific directions on the best type of body to use and the best way to cook him or her. Dr. Zou Qin expressed a preference for the children of "young women, and even better, the first baby and a male," and claimed to have eaten about 100 bodies in the past six months. She gave the reporter a detailed explanation of how they are to be washed and prepared for eating.

In one hospital they performed 7,000 abortions last year. One of the doctors is quoted as saying, "They are wasted if we don’t eat them."

The reporters also found fervent advocates of the "health benefits" of eating unborn children. A female doctor at Shenzhen’s Sin Hua Clinic told them, "They can make your skin smoother, your body stronger, and are good for the kidneys."

Fair and balanced... diet.

Babies, tripe, endangered species... the Chinese will eat anything as long as they don't have to use a fork.