| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 2:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Well, Moody's thinks the U.S. is and will continue to be in good shape for some time to come. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jajdude wrote: |
2024...
I wonder will I still be around?
And if I had 10,000 dollars would i be a millionaire? |
not unless they change the definition of 'millionaire'.
but, depending on how the dollar is doing against the won at that time, you might still be a millionaire here in korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Literal
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Location: Third rock from the Sun.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 3:48 pm Post subject: Re: By 2024 the US will be a has-been country. |
|
|
| R. S. Refugee wrote: |
Thinking about earning a decent living in your home country sometime? Good luck. You'll need it if the home country is the USA.
Americans feel prosperous because they are consuming $700 billion annually more than they are producing.
Welcome to a Has-Been Country
The US Labor Force: One Foot in the Third World
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06032005.html |
I bring this type of information up time and time again to people I know who shop at Walmart. I get either one of these two responses each and every time:
1. I don't care. I'm saving money.
2. You (them talking to me) must be rich if you can afford NOT to shop at Walmart.
To number one, I say, "I hope you're tucking away that money you're saving. You're going to need it when your job gets outsourced."
To number two, I say, "No, I'm not rich, but I still can't afford TO SHOP at Walmart." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dulouz
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Uranus
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We have lots of Mexicans now and thats supposed to make everything OK. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wonder, if Gore had won in 2000 and were now in his second term, would the same posters here be arguing the same lines on this topic? (and please, "We wouldn't be in this predicament if Gore had won" does not wash, unless you really believe whoever sits in the White House controls the destinies of the Chinese or Indian economies) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JongnoGuru wrote: |
| I wonder, if Gore had won in 2000 and were now in his second term, would the same posters here be arguing the same lines on this topic? (and please, "We wouldn't be in this predicament if Gore had won" does not wash, unless you really believe whoever sits in the White House controls the destinies of the Chinese or Indian economies) |
That's because the democrats and republicans are basically two strands of the same party. There's not much between them really. They both work to further the interests of big business, and can not be voted in without the approval of big business. The democrats pay slightly more attention to the working classes, that's all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the far right and the far left both say that.
Most Americans don't want government by the far right or the far left. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i like wal mart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| endofthewor1d wrote: |
| i like wal mart. |
Oh, you and Walmart! First it's "My avatar is a rapist". And now this Walmart love thang. Does your villainy know no bounds!?
Walmart. It puts cheap, wobbly, metal clothes-drying racks and gaudy plastic tablecloths in the hands of America's poor who otherwise couldn't afford them, while employing many an otherwise jobless factory worker in China and (so I've been lectured) giving occupationally-challenged souls in the U.S. a chance to run themselves ragged in a dull and dead-end job.
I've never been in a Walmart, but I like what I've heard.
(There. Now that's three Current Events posts in a single day.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
(and please, "We wouldn't be in this predicament if Gore had won" does not wash, unless you really believe whoever sits in the White House controls the destinies of the Chinese or Indian economies)
|
Ummmm, no whoever sits in the White House does not control the destinies of the Chinese or Indian economies, but he certainly has a large impact on the American economy.
If Gore had been elected in '00, there is a very good chance that the budget surplus Clinton left would have been put into paying down the debt and a good chance there would be no war in Iraq, saving billions and billions of dollars. Clinton's budget was balanced and there is every reason to believe Gore would have continued that policy.
For those who say there is no difference between the parties: Then it doesn't matter to you who Bush appoints to the Supreme Court does it?
I was just listening to an author talk about his book on John Brown. He said in the '90's a representative or senator from Kansas brought up the idea of a memorial day for John Brown. Trent Lott answered, "Over my dead body." I think that says a lot about differences that matter to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Most of the US debt the US has now is because of the recession and the Nasdaq meltdown and the war on terror.The recession and the Nasdaq meltdown started before Bush came to office. They can't be blamed on Bush. 9-11 was planned before Bush came to office.
I never supported Bush's tax cuts , - I would rather the US just have paid down the debt , I even voted for Gore in 2000 - but they are not the the primary reason for the US debt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
mindmetoo wrote:
The current path the USA is going on sure does seem like it's going to end in a nasty, nasty place. At the same time, people thought the USA was a nation in decline in 1992. (They thought this about American in 1974 and 1980 too.) But then the internet happened and Microsoft took over the world and the USA was back on top of the world.
Anyway, the USA has a way of reinventing itself when it hits bottom.
The difference this time is we're cutting back on funds for research, student visas, and various other sectors that are essential for us to continue to be trend setters. |
Yes, these are disturbing trends. It's not that I think America will remain as stunningly powerful and ascendant as it was during the late 90s. It's just that I don't think that the reasons put out by R.S.'s article will be the problem.
If America stops being a place where immigrants want to come to make their claim, then America will stop being prosperous. If this continues to happen, all the nay-sayers won't be able to do a bit about it, because all the yea-sayers will have disagreed with them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mateomiguel
Joined: 16 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Ummmm, no whoever sits in the White House does not control the destinies of the Chinese or Indian economies, but he certainly has a large impact on the American economy.
|
Actually the President has surprisingly little control over the US economy. Nobody has a large control over the US economy, because we generally do capitalism. Capitalism is a lightly-policed form of anarchy, where every selfish soul is out for his own good and the police generally pray that everything works out alright at the end of the day.
The only way the President could have control over the US economy was if we switched economic systems to nationalist, socialist, or communist styles, and nobody wants that. They're worse! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Literal
Joined: 03 Jul 2003
Location: Third rock from the Sun.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mateomiguel wrote: |
| The only way the President could have control over the US economy was if we switched economic systems to nationalist, socialist, or communist styles, and nobody wants that. They're worse! |
Newsflash: We're already well on our way to being socialist. Have been for years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endofthewor1d
Joined: 01 Apr 2003
Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 5:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
For those who say there is no difference between the parties: Then it doesn't matter to you who Bush appoints to the Supreme Court does it?
|
unless he appoints me (unlikely), not in the least little bit.
wal-mart rocks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
