Item By Item
Aug. 30th, 2004 10:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearMy answers to a section of this post on what Kerry would do that supposedly would suck. (yes, its the Tron guy)
* He'd institute measures to stop sending jobs offshore without a single thought for the industries he'd destroy.
would those industries be destroyed anyways because so many americans were unemployed that they simply stopped buying cars, furnature, reasonable clothes...would the state and local governments be destroyed because by not having any residents with income, they would also therefore be without money to pay for schools so that the next generation might be able to actually get out of the dead-end town and maybe get their own job someday?
before it gets outsourced too?
* He'd abdicate critical decisions on our foreign policy to our putative allies, never caring that their interests are often at odds with our own.
since when are *our* interests the best for the world? Since when is *our* cheap oil (really, the only thing ANYBODY seems to be interested in) more important than anything else? It is a symbol of unbelievable arrogance to continue to feel, 60 years after WW2, that our actions alone define what is best for the world.
There's a REASON the rest of the world hates us, and you just reiterated it.
* He'd jack up taxes on the average American in order to buy votes by giving the money away to those who would not work for it.
So you're also of the belief that those on Hard Time are merely freeloaders, who are just collecting money off the hard working rich people (who, mind you, are rich people getting richer because they just outsourced the jobs of those who are now suddenly on Hard Time)?
People *WANT* to work. They really do. The tiny minority of freeloaders as been thrown incredibly out of proportion by propagandists over the decades. However, factory workers can't switch to jobs in WalMart or McDonalds. They simply can't. Similarly, they can't suddenly become super computer programmers, both because there aren't enough positions there, and because they lack the talent and education for it. And even so, *those* jobs are getting outsourced, too.
So where will they work? And in that (*long* -- my most recent unemployment lasted 5 months) period while looking for a new job that isn't there, how will they eat? How can they look for a job when they have to keep selling their clothes and their furnature just to keep the roof? And what happens when they lose that as well?
where's the "Compassionate Conservatism" in all of this?
Giving tax cuts to the rich.
again.
update: my reply to his reply is posted here in my comments. Best excerpt: In the end, the mounting costs of EVERYTHING the Bush administration has done will have my child indebted to this government FAR more than someone on Hard Time collecting a welfare check for a year.
* He'd institute measures to stop sending jobs offshore without a single thought for the industries he'd destroy.
would those industries be destroyed anyways because so many americans were unemployed that they simply stopped buying cars, furnature, reasonable clothes...would the state and local governments be destroyed because by not having any residents with income, they would also therefore be without money to pay for schools so that the next generation might be able to actually get out of the dead-end town and maybe get their own job someday?
before it gets outsourced too?
* He'd abdicate critical decisions on our foreign policy to our putative allies, never caring that their interests are often at odds with our own.
since when are *our* interests the best for the world? Since when is *our* cheap oil (really, the only thing ANYBODY seems to be interested in) more important than anything else? It is a symbol of unbelievable arrogance to continue to feel, 60 years after WW2, that our actions alone define what is best for the world.
There's a REASON the rest of the world hates us, and you just reiterated it.
* He'd jack up taxes on the average American in order to buy votes by giving the money away to those who would not work for it.
So you're also of the belief that those on Hard Time are merely freeloaders, who are just collecting money off the hard working rich people (who, mind you, are rich people getting richer because they just outsourced the jobs of those who are now suddenly on Hard Time)?
People *WANT* to work. They really do. The tiny minority of freeloaders as been thrown incredibly out of proportion by propagandists over the decades. However, factory workers can't switch to jobs in WalMart or McDonalds. They simply can't. Similarly, they can't suddenly become super computer programmers, both because there aren't enough positions there, and because they lack the talent and education for it. And even so, *those* jobs are getting outsourced, too.
So where will they work? And in that (*long* -- my most recent unemployment lasted 5 months) period while looking for a new job that isn't there, how will they eat? How can they look for a job when they have to keep selling their clothes and their furnature just to keep the roof? And what happens when they lose that as well?
where's the "Compassionate Conservatism" in all of this?
Giving tax cuts to the rich.
again.
update: my reply to his reply is posted here in my comments. Best excerpt: In the end, the mounting costs of EVERYTHING the Bush administration has done will have my child indebted to this government FAR more than someone on Hard Time collecting a welfare check for a year.
