On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:35:02 -0500, HK wrote:

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 8:47 am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 6:42?am, "JimH" wrote:
Gee, I wonder why ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and CNBC are trying their hardest to
make sure we dump into a recession. ?
Bad news outsells good news.
Some might think, "They're trying to throw the election to the D's!"
I disagree. They just want to create enough uncertainty in the market
that more folks will tune in every day to "see how bad things are
getting", thereby increasing ratings and creating some justification
for raising ad rates.
Also, the companies that survive economic downturn often do so by
*increasing* their advertising, particularly for consumer goods.
You can't be serious. Either that, or you are totally disconnected from
the harsh reality facing many millions of your fellow citizens who are
jobless, homeless, losing their homes, health-insurance-less, and
without much hope for the future.

How are social services doing in Seattle these days? Still pretty
miserable for those in need?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

About 1-2% of the homes in the US are in, or at risk of, foreclosure.
Yet it's headline news in every paper and the subject of "specials" on
radio and TV. In some of the worst hit communities, the number is as
high as 5%, meaning that 950 out of every 1000 households in those
worst hit communities have no reason to fear losing their home to the
bank or mortgage company.

The health insurance issue has nothing to do with economic cycling.
We have had a broken health services delivery model in the country for
at least 30 years. We have had booms and busts along the way, despite
the fact that our health insurance system is designed first to make
corporations wealthy, and only then to see about making people well.



There are somewhere between 30 and 40 million Americans living in poverty.

Sleep tight.

And only about 15-20 million of those are legal.
--
John H

"HK" wrote in message
...

Chuck Gould wrote:

Also, the companies that survive economic downturn often do so by
*increasing* their advertising, particularly for consumer goods.


You can't be serious. Either that, or you are totally disconnected from
the harsh reality facing many millions of your fellow citizens who are
jobless, homeless, losing their homes, health-insurance-less, and without
much hope for the future.

How are social services doing in Seattle these days? Still pretty
miserable for those in need?


Harry's Paradise.

Eisboch

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...


If we could turn off the national news, I think we'd probably have
almost boom times in this particular region.

---------------------------

Ain't too many people complaining in our neck of the woods, either.

Eisboch

On Jan 30, 1:05�pm, John H. wrote:


Very well said. Almost unbelievable. It shows an acceptance of personal
responsibility that I'd thought pretty nonexistent in liberals.

Of course, you're 'independent'. I'd forgotten.

I'm politically independent. But philosophically, what *you* would
probably consider a radical liberal. As a liberal, I take personal
responsibility very seriously. The more I can do for myself, the less
I need the intrusion of your Republican or Democratic parties with
their professional con men, accomplished liars, and organized hatreds.

Try an experiment. Take your prejudices and stereotypes, (just one at
a time, no reason to endure too large a shock at once), and ask
yourself "What if this isn't right? What if every conservative,
liberal, black, white, Latino, man, woman, Republican, Democrat, etc
doesn't fit the very narrow pigeon hole to which I have mentally
assigned them?"

Most people are far more accomplished and complex than we care to
imagine. I know that even people who disagree with me can be worthy
and valuable assets to society. I know that sometimes (maybe not too
often) they actually turn out to have a better perspective of certain
issues than I do. Consider challenging your own stereotypes- You might
find the process very LIBERAting. :-)

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:27:10 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Jan 30, 1:05?pm, John H. wrote:


Very well said. Almost unbelievable. It shows an acceptance of personal
responsibility that I'd thought pretty nonexistent in liberals.

Of course, you're 'independent'. I'd forgotten.

I'm politically independent. But philosophically, what *you* would
probably consider a radical liberal. As a liberal, I take personal
responsibility very seriously. The more I can do for myself, the less
I need the intrusion of your Republican or Democratic parties with
their professional con men, accomplished liars, and organized hatreds.

Try an experiment. Take your prejudices and stereotypes, (just one at
a time, no reason to endure too large a shock at once), and ask
yourself "What if this isn't right? What if every conservative,
liberal, black, white, Latino, man, woman, Republican, Democrat, etc
doesn't fit the very narrow pigeon hole to which I have mentally
assigned them?"

Most people are far more accomplished and complex than we care to
imagine. I know that even people who disagree with me can be worthy
and valuable assets to society. I know that sometimes (maybe not too
often) they actually turn out to have a better perspective of certain
issues than I do. Consider challenging your own stereotypes- You might
find the process very LIBERAting. :-)


I will save this sermonette. I like the smiley face at the end, and the
implication that you are without stereotypes and prejudices.

Yes, I have some stereotypes. Several are reinforced on a daily, nay,
hourly basis right here. You've probably not noticed.
--
John H

On Jan 30, 1:48*pm, "JimH" wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message

...







"HK" wrote in message
...
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 8:47 am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 6:42?am, "JimH" wrote:
Gee, I wonder why ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and CNBC are trying their
hardest to
make sure we dump into a recession. ?
Bad news outsells good news.
Some might think, "They're trying to throw the election to the D's!"
I disagree. They just want to create enough uncertainty in the market
that more folks will tune in every day to "see how bad things are
getting", thereby increasing ratings and creating some justification
for raising ad rates.
Also, the companies that survive economic downturn often do so by
*increasing* their advertising, particularly for consumer goods.
You can't be serious. Either that, or you are totally disconnected from
the harsh reality facing many millions of your fellow citizens who are
jobless, homeless, losing their homes, health-insurance-less, and
without much hope for the future.

How are social services doing in Seattle these days? Still pretty
miserable for those in need?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

About 1-2% of the homes in the US are in, or at risk of, foreclosure.
Yet it's headline news in every paper and the subject of "specials" on
radio and TV. In some of the worst hit communities, the number is as
high as 5%, meaning that 950 out of every 1000 households in those
worst hit communities have no reason to fear losing their home to the
bank or mortgage company.

The health insurance issue has nothing to do with economic cycling.
We have had a broken health services delivery model in the country for
at least 30 years. We have had booms and busts along the way, despite
the fact that our health insurance system is designed first to make
corporations wealthy, and only then to see about making people well.

There are somewhere between 30 and 40 million Americans living in
poverty.

Sleep tight.

What is your definition of poverty because my daughter may meet that
threshold yet she is doing fine.

Check that. * The poverty level is $10k/year and under. *My daughter makes
far more than that working part time as a server at a sports bar while
applying for and interviewing for a position matching her college degree.

Hooter's?

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message ...
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:39:18 -0500, D-unit penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:


"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 8:51?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:39:05 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:11?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:58:04 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
If this economic indicator is worth anything, the national news may be
overstating the certainty of a recession, at least in the Pacific
North Wet.

I think the boats you are talking about are out of the range of your
average Joe Six-Pack.

Absolutely. I will do a little informal polling among some of my
contacts selling aluminum fihsing boats, etc and see if the market is
as strong in that sector.

I'll be interesting comparing the results from Boston and Hartford to
yours.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In many ways, the Pacific North Wet is enjoying a bout of prosperity
when compared to the rest of the country. Our governor just yesterday
called for a $3-million apprenticeship program to train people for
jobs in aircraft assembly. Boeing can't find enough qualified help,
and the ripple effect from that is that wages are being driven up
throughout the region.

If we could turn off the national news, I think we'd probably have
almost boom times in this particular region.

I heard that Boeing has orders-a-plenty for that new Dreamliner.
Thats good news as well.

db



Don.... I can't follow the thread.....

... you realize that my program is spending about 2/3 of that amount
spooling up for FedEx, Honda, TIMCO, and we don't have a clue who else
is coming at Guilford Technical Community College at the Greensboro
Airport (GSO)? I've done nothing but write specifications and POs
since November.... we will probably end up with the largest and best
equipped aviation facility east of the Mississippi.

The Guilford County Schools are looking at a feeder magnet school,
too.

Can you give me more info on what Easley is saying....

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats


Sorry Gene,

I don't know the problem is with my newsreader but..
I think you're responding to something that Chuck penned.



db

On Jan 30, 11:04Â*am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 10:35�am, HK wrote:

There are somewhere between 30 and 40 million Americans living in poverty.

Sleep tight.-

Imagining that the results of a Tweedle Dee vs. Tweedle Dum election
will materially reduce poverty may be the ultimate copout. Your party
is as impotent and corrupt as the party you oppose, to put it bluntly.
There are some problems that government cannot solve, and poverty is
on that list. Some of the communist and socialist governments
originally organized to eliminate poverty only succeeded in fostering
record amounts of it. The Republicans can't fix it. The Democrats
can't fix it. The Communists and Socialists can't fix it. As a society
we *can* fix it, but not through government action. Therefore the
party in power at any given moment is a fairly meaningless factor when
considering the problem of poverty.

I always do.

I see. So...let's give up!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Let's look for solutions that don't involve believing the fairy tales
told by candidates on the campaign trail.

On Jan 31, 5:15�am, John H. wrote:


I will save this sermonette. I like the smiley face at the end, and the
implication that you are without stereotypes and prejudices.


I challenge mine, on a daily basis. A stereotype is a trap that
precludes
accurate observation. Inaccurate observation of the people and
situations around you will make a person less able to cope with the
world.



Yes, I have some stereotypes. Several are reinforced on a daily, nay,
hourly basis right here. You've probably not noticed.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jan 30, 11:36�am, "JimH" wrote:


Why? �Working 2 full time jobs at even minimum wage: $5.85 x 80 hours x 52
weeks = $24,336 gross. �Note that I used the rock bottom MW figure. �Some
State are well above that.

http://www.laborlawcenter.com/state-...asp?gclid=CMjv...

The MW will again go up in July, resulting in this 80 hour MW worker
grossing $26k. �Many college grads start off their careers making not much
more than that.

I am not cold and thoughtless but I truly believe poverty is often a
personal decision, especially when our government continues to enable folks
taking advantage of its assistance.- Hide quoted text -

Working two full time jobs is easy to say, but look at the realities.

You will probably be on the job 18-hours out of every 24 to work "two
full time jobs", given an hour for lunch and/or coffee breaks during
the day.
Add another hour and a half to commute to the first job, commute from
there to the second job, and from the second job back home again:

19.5 hours out of 24, leaving exactly 4.5 hours to eat, sleep, shower,
etc. Few people can sustain that kind of schedule for very long,
particularly on the crappy, mostly-starch diet normally eaten by the
poor. To get really complicated, the two jobs will have to have
opposite hours adn never require any overtime. The two job worker
doesn't have the flexibility to accept a shift change- very common in
mini-wage jobs.

To make things even more complex, a lot of those poor folks who need
to work two full time jobs to make ends meet are going to be single
mothers. Who's going to watch their kids? No money to pay for day
care, maybe no relatives not also working "two full time
jobs"......odds are that the kids will be left to fend for themselves
without adequate parental supervision and *that* alone will ensure
another generation of educational underachievement, delinquency, drug
abuse, prostitution, etc.

There are no simple answers.