Everybody from the folks which does not have the smallest knowledge of international politics explains things with Bush fault. Other factors that used to play a part in the games of politics is forcefully replaced by the explanation of Bush fault. Deliberately and unconscious. With no respects of the limits, people think that he can do everything to turn this globe into a hell. If anyone thinks that I'm just talking, take a look around yourself. Bush is blamed for everything. He is considered to be a so called "monster". Instead of explaining things with God or Gods, people have found a joy in explaining things with Bush. The so called "Almighty". But he's not considered to be a god that takes care of people and do things for their best(which he actually do), he is considered to be the root of evil in all porpuses. The 666 man. A good example is Rich Michaels thread where he have added a mexican flag in the picture. The outcome of the thread is that Bush is not doing enough. He want more mexicans and so on. But look at this.. seems like da biggast Bush hater on this forum likes the immigration and thinks that they should be more welcome. Both people chose to take different sides of this issue and than pull of the shit on Bush for beeing a stable part between them. But why is this happening? Why is have Bush becomed satan? Well the real answer is that people are unconscious worring themselfs about the gas prices.
I by no means hate the man, and I wouldn't blame him for everything. I actually think the dems are about 10 times more silly than anyone...they're only geniune role is to maintain balance, otherwise I consider them useless. Cool, I'm an example... Got to have some humor. Jorge needs you on this. ; ) There's about 18 Republican Senators whom are trying to get this amnesty/guestworker-amnesty thing through. Whether Bush knows it or not, he'll kill his base of conservatives if he doesn't have some level of reason on this issue. I don't hate the man, but he'll commit political suicide for the Republican party if he does anything in haste....and especially if he signs a bad bill. While I'm not a card-carrying member, I'm absolutely not eager for a permanent democrat presence. Stable...lol. You do realize the current bill they're going over would increase our citizenship by 100-200 million. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1076.cfm His failure in noting that as wrong and needs to be reasonable dealt with, is a sign he's far from being a leader in this. I believe Senator Session spoke about this, as should any reputable leader. Bush is just bad at PR. I'm sure in most cases he means well, but it's sometimes better for him to shut-up.
Yes that's very important. Producing more babies is also very important(or at least not killing those who are meant to be people like you and me someday.. also called aborts). You must consider that US must counterstrike Chinas growth in someway. China has more than 1 billion people, has 9% growth. US already pump their workforce nearly to the max while China have space to fill. There must be a population growth that can preserve the current stabillity in the world. The growth of US needs to be higher than the world in general.
I think I agree, PR isn't Bush strength. Especially when the press and some insane/lame people tries to catch things that makes the news stories interesting. They could do the same thing with anyone else, but they chose Bush cause he is an important fighting an important battle and have much harder tasks than Clinton had. On the other hand, he has a good charecteristics and charisma. The media tries however to focus on the bad parts as usuall. That is a good example of how Bush respect the press freedom.
Within reason. We can't handle 100-200 million people in 20 years. The demand and infrastructure of such a huge change is impossible to keep up with. We're barely keeping our bearings in California with all the politics here, much less the power needs we would have with those additional people. As a country we do not have to meet the numbers other countries have in labor. We've always been the smaller country (in most cases), and our economy and social structure are so much better with a smaller amount of people. In a country with democratic-leanings, a nation of poverty would inveriable lead to a more socialistic economy...our strong suit has always been our economic freedom. That it really due to us having a huge middle class of people, whom don't heavily rely on our government. There's so many good reasons not to import poverty that I can't possible mention them all.
Bush was a failure to the people long before he handed the Oil Industry the right to triple gas prices. So what's your point? You just noticed everything Bush does is surrounded by controversy because gas prices went up?
Bush is the ultimate conundrum for his bashers: He's soooo dumb that he can't even spell dumb, and yet he's soooo devious that he singlehandedly masterminds all that is wrong with the world. They can't make up their minds about the poor guy. Personally, I think Bush is of average intelligence who does the best he can, and sometimes things just don't turn out well. Look at Carter -- he's supposed to be a brilliant guy, right? Definitely smarter than Bush, they say, and yet he's generally considered the worst President ever by historians. Go figure. (P.s. Bush bashers think Bush is the worst President ever, but that's only because they are blinded by hatred for him. Historians will judge Bush, and they'll say he was mediocre; not great, but not terrible, either.)
I can understand your frustration. However.. there's a reality that is knocking on the door. China has a yearly GDP growth of 7%-9% while the one of US was 2%-3% under Clinton but has improved to 3%-5% under Bush. However.. Bush have done pretty much all he can to pump it up on the conventional methods. But if the population doesn't grow at a healthy rate, it will hardly surpass the growth of China. We live in a time when people get's older and older and older. So while the population grows, the workforce don't. Pensioners are consumers and not producers. If the workforce remain on the same level and the number of pensioners grows, it will put a lot of pressure on the workforce which means that the tradebalance will suffer even more. You don't have an infrastucture yet, but is it better if you can't maintain it? A bigger workforce will make the workforce cheaper, which will make it possible to construct more infrastructure. That's the way to go. But the question is mayby if mexicans could be the answer. They come from another culture and won't be easily assimilated if they don't spread themselfs over the country. It's not the best alternative. But.. A ban of all abortions would make you independent from the mexicans. Millions of new people would get a chance to live and make an effort. A great alternative. I would not call US a small country. It has more than 300 million people. The economic growth that was made of ideas from the time of wildwildwest made your GDP to stand for more than 50% of worlds GDP. Today, that amount went down to 30%. The GDP-grip has cuontinued to fall if Bush didn't came and stop it. Once the GDP grip decrease more, you wont be that successfull anymore.
If your standard is to remain one step ahead of China in growth we can review the tax format, regulations, and chinese currency...but mere population growth isn't going to automatically convert to GDP growth. China and Japan will have problems in this area...a lot more than us. China for one restricts births to one child, and because of this they prodominately have one male boy. The percentage I believe is 60/40 men...something like that. Also they have a huge older population, just like Japan, and they'll find great trouble in that in the future. India is the only nation in that area (with credible economic strength) that will productively compete with us. India has a large productive (ie young class) of people. Australia recently noted this occurence and resolved many of it's problems through....tax incentives for having children. Why not in America? Regardless, we're a country that can immigrate people any time,...people aren't going to move to China. So our problems are in quality not quantity. But here's my problem. As Senator Session noted, immigrants that haven't graduated high school are a net-loser on our economy; so why not actually look at our real needs? Doctors and so forth.... I don't know about you, but a million illegal immigrants probably couldn't help in producing more refineries, nor could 99.9% of them maintain a healthcare system that's dying in demand. Energy and health might as well be shot in the head if we continually immigrate poor and uneducated people. These infrastuctures are the most important and neglected part of our economy. ^^^^ "It all really falls back to your economics. Where do you give your weight? Supply side or demand side. Do you want corporate health or purchaser health. You hope that the health of one bolsters the other, but this isn't always the case. The current US administration stance is that corporate health is more important, so they want to make it easy for them to get cheap labor." A more educated workforce (including educated immigrants) and a rational energy solution would do ten times more to help to our infrastructure than millions of illegals. The bad thing with the Mexican culture is the idea that family comes above anyone, even ones self. While selfishness is not a virtue in my mind, they absorb the cultural thoughts of the Spanish (whom aren't bright themselves), and they mix it into a bravado of strength above intelligience. Obviously not all mexicans are like that, because a culture is a chosen virtue/vice...but cultures are like diseases...both in a good ways and bad. Some suggest that the democrats would have led this country if abortions where banned ie the babies would have most likely grown-up under dem families. Sad and maybe true. It's eventual under this world-wide economy that we'll find ourselves among economic equals. As long as they're peaceful, and they socially evolve a bit, then I welcome the prospect with open arms.
You don't think that China will do the same? However.. it's easier to have growth if you are poor from the beginning. If you don't got cheap workforce, companies will outsource. China got a huge workforce to work with.. it's 4 times bigger than the one of US. And the population is still increasing. Since 1980, the Chinese population have increased with more than 300million.. that's the whole US. India is a possible future Allie of US.. That's because you had the economical grip. When you loose it, less educated immigrants will move in. Yes education is important. However, considering that immigrants don't get any benefits that they can live on like in Europe, they do need to work. And they can prevent jobs from beeing outsourced. And they will also return a second generation of themselves. Lot's of construction workers comes from Mexico. Or will they rather invest abroad when they can't buy any cheap workforce? I agree I know many people that have different values than their parents. Hah.. you wish
btw.. I think we went out of context here. Let's stay to the subject.. I mean illigal immigration has been flowing in from your borders before Bush came to power. So it's not really a Bush specific. Although, people that believes in "Demon Bush" blames it on him.
China has many serious issues in their homeland. Even though their GDP is growing, their GDP per capita is around $6,000. The United States has a GDP per capita at around $42,000. Population numbers is more of a burden than a helper. Look at the two largest states, population wise, in the world--India and China. One-third of the world's population resides within these two states. Both states have extremely low GDP per capita numbers. Both states have extremely poor people, much worse off than poor Americans. Labor jobs go where labor is cheapest. Many people in Mexico for example live on less than $2 per day. What could you get for $2 per day in America? We could have one billion people here in America, but if many were not willing to work for rates around those available in other states like Mexico, India and China, the work would not be here. You would simply have a larger strain on the country. Recently many jobs left Mexico for China. Was it because there are more people in China? No. It was because contracts ran out and the labor could be purchased for less in China. BTW, many Republicans are angry at Bush on immigration not because people are coming in, but because he has done nothing about it--as it was expected of him.
The key to a successfull economy in the globalized world is to have cheap labour to protect oneself from outsourcing and to get cheap labour, you need to have a big workforce. Monaco has a very small labour force and they are a rich country due to their position as a luxury city. Can they provide a big millitary that can compete with the one of US or China? Can they send people up to the space? Can they affect the world economy? I don't think so.. Those countries with a low GDP per capita is those with the highest growth rates. It's easier to grow if the GDP is below others. Why would poverty caused by a ban on abortions be such a problem then?
lol....what happens when most labor is obsolete? You do realize that since the end of slavery, production in those industries have grown exponentially, but the labor force has shrunk...due to incentive and technology. http://www.betterhumans.com/blogs/s...es_make_us_obsolete_My_position_outlined.aspx http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060307220709.htm http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041021085857.htm http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-freedom.htm
You know that jobs are outsourced to countries that have cheaper labour and can be almost as productive. The unemployment is record high in Europe because labour here is more expensive than in India and China.
Read my articles/links. It's already happening in the retail industry, and it will happen to all other industries. People will economically be forced to educate themselves and invest in industry. These two things are inevitable. Cheap labor (like slavery) will be marginalized like the farming industry...where everyone use to work in the past. We're moving forward and mass cheap labor will not stop the increasingly cheaper machine.
I never said that education was something bad, look at China you can get programmers that are 3 times as cheap compared to those in US or Europe.. and they do the same job.
And then their currency eventually rises and they become another Japan, with almost similiar wages per job. My arguement the whole time has been to ignore most of the cheap labor 'needs', and focus on the intellectual needs of any countries immigration policy. While you seem to think there's values in just having lots of people. It's smart/educated people we need, not just people in general. Technology is the future. Physical labor will be marginalized.
Then we immigrate educated individuals responsibly. We should try to work along with China, and not to overly fear them. It's envitable that there be an economic equal, and most obviously it would come from a culture like China or India. The sky is not falling. China's wages will rise, as did Japans. We'll evolve into Nanotech, biotech and things we don't even have yet. It's an endless process of leaving outdated things behind.