"america's Ignorance Of The World Is Now A

[Alex H]

Well, the rest of the world has known this for a while, but now the Americans have figured it out too!

Task force calls for more study abroad (http://us.cnn.com/2003/EDUCATION/11/19/study.abroad.ap/)

Don't blame me, I didn't write it.

[ang3968]

I think the same could be said to some extent to most English speaking countries... we know what we hear on the news but little else about a lot of countries... and ignorance is no longer a viable excuse if it ever was..

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

http://hist.academic.claremontmckenna.edu/jpetropoulos/holocaust/hitlerarmstretch.jpg


this guy hated americans too.......

nice company you keep.

[Adster]

The one thing I don't get is Annie being Governor you only have to go back 70 years ago and his name associates back with the Nazis

[Alex H]

Originally posted by HeavyMetalParkingLot@24 November 2003 - 05:12
http://hist.academic.claremontmckenna.edu/jpetropoulos/holocaust/hitlerarmstretch.jpg


this guy hated americans too.......

nice company you keep.
Like I said, don't blame me: The US Federal Government comissioned the study and it found that most Americans don't really know whats going on in the rest of the world. So they reckon it would be a good idea to help Americans study overseas so they can get a better understanding of the world and why so many countries and terrorist factions seem to hate you guys.

And pulling out photos of Hitler and saying people who disagree with you are Nazis only proves the point.

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

i never once said that anyone who disagreed with me was a nazi in the least. i stated a fact, hitler hated americans. and i have noticed your anti-american crap on this board, hence the shared hatred between the two of you.

[muchspl2]

http://members.cox.net/dodger1954/pics/sct-hitler.jpg


kinda works on many levels :P

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by HeavyMetalParkingLot@24 November 2003 - 05:10
i never once said that anyone who disagreed with me was a nazi in the least. i stated a fact, hitler hated americans. and i have noticed your anti-american crap on this board, hence the shared hatred between the two of you.
just because someone exhibits anti-american feelings doesn't mean you can call their thoughts crap

[Alex H]

Well Al Quada hates America too, but I don't want to go around bombing your country like they do.
My only issue with the USA is stated quite clearly in that report: America's economy affects the entire world and America has a huge influence. But Americans GENERALY don't realise the consequences of their country's actions and it has and will continu to create huge problems for you guys unless you wake up and realise that there are another 6.3 billion people sharing the plannet with you who are affected by what you do.

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

Originally posted by Alex H@24 November 2003 - 06:23
Well Al Quada hates America too, but I don't want to go around bombing your country like they do.
My only issue with the USA is stated quite clearly in that report: America's economy affects the entire world and America has a huge influence. But Americans GENERALY don't realise the consequences of their country's actions and it has and will continu to create huge problems for you guys unless you wake up and realise that there are another 6.3 billion people sharing the plannet with you who are affected by what you do.
the problem here is that you fail to see the difference between americans and american foriegn policy. i really doubt that there are 6.3 million people in the world that are affected if i go to the bar on a friday night with my friends.

[Alex H]

That is actually 6.3 BILLION, and no, the rest of the world probably doesn't care if you go out drinking with your mates.

BUT I have to say that a country's foriegn policy come directly from it's general society, and while it is very easy for a government to a create a big scare and push legislation through that will affect people in other parts of the world, it is VERY hard to change the policy once people have stopped to think about what is going on.

A great example is Australia's policy on Illegal Immigrants. For years they have been slipping in on boats from Indonesia in lots of 10 or 15 or 40. No-one really cared about it until afer 9/11. America had a big panic about how they hijackers got into the country and because Australia is friends with the US, the paranoia filtered down to us. Then a BIG boat of refugees sunk and a nice freighter ship picked them up and tried to take them to Australia. Our Prime Minister had promised George Bush he would make sure that no terrorist came to the US from Australia, so WE started to look at OUR border security. The Prime Minister pretty much said: "Look at that big boat full of people, that's my point, we don't know who is getting through our borders!" So many people panicked and said they wanted tougher border protection that the Australian government created laws saying that you can be deported if you don't apply for refugee status in your OWN country before coming here. The the problem now is that if you try apply to Australia for refugee status in your own country, they kill you. Which is why you are trying to get out of there in the first place.

We have had so many public inquiries about it, and there have only been TWO guys who may have had terrorist links. And they both came by plane. 97% of the people we kick out on technicalities are REAL refugees. So thousands of legitimate refugees, fleeing from murderous regiems and persecution are punnished because we let a stupid bit of legislation get through while we were scared.

The only reason we passed the legislation was because we thought we migt be a target.
The only reason Australia could be a target is because we backed the US.
The only reason we backd the US is because we want beter trade deals, so you see even your foriegn TRADE policy can affect an Afganian refugee.
And US trade policy comes from the people you vote for, so please choose carefully, and don't just vote for someone cause thy say they will cut your tax bill (like Bush did).

[james_bond_rulez]

wow americans keep throwing money like that i am gonna be rich!!! :lol:

more money for me ;)

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by ang3968@24 November 2003 - 04:30
I think the same could be said to some extent to most English speaking countries... we know what we hear on the news but little else about a lot of countries... and ignorance is no longer a viable excuse if it ever was..
and that's precisely what people like Alex H seem to forget. I'm not saying Americans aren't uninformed about the rest of the world in general. They are. However, Alex would do good to look at his own country's "uninformedness" rather than attacking America's. It goes both ways. Also, your attack on hmpl was childish in my opinion. I read the thread, it look to me like you were looking for an American target, and you found one.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by ang3968@24 November 2003 - 04:30
I think the same could be said to some extent to most English speaking countries... we know what we hear on the news but little else about a lot of countries... and ignorance is no longer a viable excuse if it ever was..
Agreed.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by HeavyMetalParkingLot@24 November 2003 - 05:12
http://hist.academic.claremontmckenna.edu/jpetropoulos/holocaust/hitlerarmstretch.jpg


this guy hated americans too.......

nice company you keep.
Well, the Bush family was building concentration camps for him in the 30's.


This isnt anti-American, at the same time 100's, if not 1000's of US citizens were coming to the UK to fight against nazism....

What one set of citizens do, does not define a country.

Now for "Devils Advocate".....

America, The 4th Reich (http://www.rense.com/general40/americathe4th.htm)


Again; i dont hold with his views, but as Voltair said "I will fight to the Death for his Right to state them".


You keep shouting "Anti-American"......please define this, as i think its something that is not possible.

The USA is a collection of 50 States, each with different Laws, Cultures and Traditions. The only thing they have in common is Federal Taxes and Foreign Policy.


If you say I am anti-american foreign policy....I agree. I have news for you, most of the world are, and quite a number of Americans.

If you say Im against Federal Taxes....tell me about them and i'll give you an opinion. I have no opinion, as I dont know what they are, and dont impact on me (well they do, but in an abstract way that i cant predict, and so reserve judgement on)



If you say im "Anti-American", your talking crap...

Am i anti:

The States where you marry your cousin @ 15, or the ones you cant sneeze without permission until 21?

The ones where Brothels and Hookers are a way of life, or the ones where its frowned upon to kiss a girl until your married?

The ones where you will be lynched for not being being a White heterosexual Christian if you so much as J-walk, or the ones where there is a different Religion on each Street Corner?


I dont know why im bothering to write this, as all you will come back with is "Anti-American"...its a null word. It means nothing.


Now that you have decided im anti-american.... There are a lot of good stuff come out of the USA. I cant stress how much i admire the Peace Corps, for example... I doubt you will find one member on here with anything bad to say about them.

However, you call us "Anti-American" to criticise something that has a direct impact on every other country in the world.


How can you expect us to listen when you spout the same crap about every subject?

If you look up, on this topic I agree that this is a flaw of every English Speaking Nation....if anything, I'd say that parts of the USA are well ahead of the UK in basics such as speaking a 2nd language. I cant, yet there are parts of the USA that speak Spanish as easily as English. Others that speak German as easily, and yet others that speak French as easily.

However, instead of taking advantage of these facts and shooting the poster down in flames, you fall into the trap of attacking him and changing the subject to something as distasteful as Hitler?

Think.....why do you think Americans are so misunderstood?

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

than if you feel i spout nothing but crap, i will make everybody happy and leave.

[Rat Faced]

You misunderstood the meaning of my post.

I meant about the "Anti-American" stuff...


You had a perfect opportunity to totally discredit the poster on this one...

You wasted it.....why? :'(

[james_bond_rulez]

bravo, rat faced, well said

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@25 November 2003 - 03:30
There are a lot of good stuff come out of the USA. I cant stress how much i admire the Peace Corps, for example... I doubt you will find one member on here with anything bad to say about them.


The Peace Corps! Are you kidding? This organisation is so infiltrated by the CIA that it may as well share offices. They are also responsible for huge amounts of drug smuggling into the USA and Canada. I know this from PERSONAL experience.


:)

[Alex H]

Sorry, I'm not trying to get up anyone's nose. I just know that after 9/11 there were a lot of people asking "whodunnit and why?" and that report shows that America needs to know a lot more about the rest of the world, and the the more understanding there is, the less likely it is for international "situations" to become inflamed.

And Australia would do well to follow the report's recomendations too!

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean+25 November 2003 - 04:41--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Billy_Dean &#064; 25 November 2003 - 04:41)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@25 November 2003 - 03:30
There are a lot of good stuff come out of the USA. I cant stress how much i admire the Peace Corps, for example... I doubt you will find one member on here with anything bad to say about them.


The Peace Corps&#33; Are you kidding? This organisation is so infiltrated by the CIA that it may as well share offices. They are also responsible for huge amounts of drug smuggling into the USA and Canada. I know this from PERSONAL experience.


:) [/b][/quote]
I stand by what i said..

The idea behind the organisation, and the 1000&#39;s of legitimate americans that join this organisation have my greatest admiration.

The CIA are a bunch of wankers that get there grubby little hands into anything and everything and corrupt what they touch... just like most of the Worlds "Intelligence Organisations"


It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest re: The CIA etc, if your allegations are true. It would not detract from my admiration of those that are in the Peace Corps......just increase my contempt for those that control the CIA.

[Arm]

<_< Americans are dumb motherfuckers I agree. I am also 15 years old and an American. :D

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Arm@25 November 2003 - 10:08
<_< Americans are dumb motherfuckers I agree. I am also 15 years old and an American. :D
Many studies indicate Americans (especially those in their mid-teens-specifically 15 year-olds) are developmentally challenged with regard to their ability to interact gracefully in cyberspace. ;)

[clocker]

Although I would certainly be in favor of Americans broadening their knowlege/experience of the rest of the world, I find this frequently expressed ( and apparently, lovingly held) belief that we are somehow deficient when compared to Europeans to be pure malarkey.
I have traveled widely in Europe, not as much as some, but more than most I would guess, and found the people there to be strikingly similar to myself. Outside of the obvious differences of language and local culture, Europeans didn&#39;t impress me as being glaringly more intelligent or involved in the world than my neighbors at home.

Currently, about 130,000 of the nation&#39;s 13 million full-time and part-time undergraduate students participate in university-sponsored study abroad programs each year, the report said.

By contrast, Simon said, 584,000 students from other countries studied at U.S. colleges and universities during the 2002-2003 academic year.
How many of these foreign students came here because we offered a standard of education/living far superior to that available in their home country? Maybe they preferred not having goats grazing in the classroom.

More than half of all students who do study overseas go to Britain, Italy, Spain or France, the report said. To combat that, the program wants to encourage students to consider countries outside Western Europe, such as China and those in Africa.
Well no shit, Sherlock.
Africa? Half the continent is either a warzone or racked with disease. Yessir, sign me right up.
China? An ex-girlfriend attended school in Beijing. Had a nervous breakdown.
My brother has business interests there ( just returned 3 weeks ago, in fact) and is always completely stressed out after returning. Just the setting for a productive educational experience.

As I said before, we are far from perfect.
I just don&#39;t think that we are all that different from ya&#39;ll, either.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@25 November 2003 - 14:26
Although I would certainly be in favor of Americans broadening their knowlege/experience of the rest of the world, I find this commonly expressed ( and apparently widely held) belief that we are somehow deficient when compared to Europeans to be pure malarkey.
I have traveled widely in Europe, not as much as some, but more than most I would guess, and found the people there to be strikingly similar to myself. Outside of the obvious differences of language and local culture, Europeans didn&#39;t impress me as being glaringly more intelligent or involved in the world than my neighbors at home.

Currently, about 130,000 of the nation&#39;s 13 million full-time and part-time undergraduate students participate in university-sponsored study abroad programs each year, the report said.

By contrast, Simon said, 584,000 students from other countries studied at U.S. colleges and universities during the 2002-2003 academic year.
How many of these foreign students came here because we offered a standard of education/living far superior to that available in their home country? Maybe they preferred not having goats grazing in the classroom.

More than half of all students who do study overseas go to Britain, Italy, Spain or France, the report said. To combat that, the program wants to encourage students to consider countries outside Western Europe, such as China and those in Africa.
Well no shit, Sherlock.
Africa? Half the continent is either a warzone or racked with disease. Yessir, sign me right up.
China? An ex-girlfriend attended school in Beijing. Had a nervous breakdown.
My brother has business interests there ( just returned 3 weeks ago, in fact) and is always completely stressed out after returning. Just the setting for a productive educational experience.

As I said before, we are far from perfect.
I just don&#39;t think that we are all that different from ya&#39;ll, either.
If you&#39;ll listen, I&#39;ll create an echo. :)

Well stated, sir. ;)

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@24 November 2003 - 19:30
The USA is a collection of 50 States, each with different Laws, Cultures and Traditions. The only thing they have in common is Federal Taxes and Foreign Policy.

Think.....why do you think Americans are so misunderstood?


A bit off topic, but I cannot understand this perception. You know that Clocker, J2, and myself lives 1000s of miles from one another, but seem to have many common touchstones. Statehood is a political construct, not a way of distinquishing one "culture" from another. We use statehood only as a means to "create" sports rivalries. Missouri hates Kansas in college sports, but in real life this has no "teeth" to it. Simple fun. Differences in laws between the states are mostly trivial, execpting perhaps the death penalty here in Texas, but there is really no difference in cultural identity. I have lived in Texas, California, and Missouri, there are local quirks but nothing major.

National stability takes precedence over local interests, that is why Clocker is not allowed to dam the Colorado River and steal all the water from the people down south in Arizona.


As posted before, in response to MyFiles when he stated that we have no culture:

Myfiles, this is very narrow minded of you. There are plenty of things that bind Americans. I could tour the country asking people what it means to be American. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and justice would be the common thread, the ideal we are pursuing. Not to mention our unity through professional sports, rock and roll, the spirit of invention, the spirit of adventure, mass production, automobiles, etc. I would say America does have a culture (with good and bad elements), but beneath this there are many sub-cultures.

To say we are strangers with a common passport is not supported by what I see everyday.

A great example is the Macys 4th of July Celebration. In the audience I saw black people, white people, asian people, hispanic people all standing shoulder to shoulder with little flags in their hands. Unified under passports, hardly, they were celebrating what this country provides them: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That is what is so great about America, potentially. When people of different cultures mix freely, they find that although they may look different, people are basically people.Original Thread (http://klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=49497&view=findpost&p=357460)


Obviously, this is not a flame, just wondering how you came to this conclusion.

[Rat Faced]

So Californians think the same way as New Yorkers? (as an example)

I better call my Stock Broker..... :o


Seriously, I havent met many Americans "In the Flesh" as it were, maybe 450 or so..not a lot....especially since 400 of them was via an exchange visit with a Kansas National Guard Reg&#39;t :P


I have to say here, that i got on with the vast majority...and maybe 4 or 5 were the "Steriotyped American" that appears to be getting drawn on this forum more and more recently <_<


I do talk online to loads of you though. I find that in a chatroom, you get to know people quite well, and i find the people from different parts of the USA have distinct differences on their outlook and beliefs. I dont find this on a message board.

As an example... myself and SuperJude on the boards would argue black was blue, and to anyone looking at these message boards, it would appear that we had no common ground. In the chatroom, you get to know the person however; we actually get on very well, and agree on a lot more issues than we disagree.



The culture in the North will, by its very nature be different than the culture in the South, if only due to climatic differences and its History. By "Culture", i am not refering to "Opera", "Ballet" and McDonalds, as i&#39;m sure you realise... :P

In the North East States, there is left over influence from British Colonialism, in the South East by French Colonialism, the South by Spanish and the North West probably has none of these influences....

Parts of the USA had large influx&#39;s of German Settlers, yet others Irish.... the list goes on. All of these influxes will have effected the culture of an area; as will current hespanic influx.

Basic Laws are the same the world over, they wont change from State to State...Murder, Theft, Kidnapping, Fraud, etc etc etc

The Laws/Traditions that are affected by "culture" are different though...

A couple of examples:

In some States Brothels and Prostitution are 2nd nature, in others they virtually still have chaperones for the under 21&#39;s (j/k).

In a few States they are the Christian movement is so strong as to affect the teaching of the Theory of Evolution in Schools.

I hear that in NYC they are seriously considering not acknowledging the Nativity at Christmas, can you imagine that in the Bible Belt?

Age of Consent varies from State to State, and the Laws as regard to Marriage (Basic stuff, not how much each gets on Divorce....although that varies horrifically as well ;) )


These types of things can only happen due to the different Culture and current makeup of the individual areas.



I hope that explains what i mean to your satisfaction sir ;)

[clocker]

Rat, Do all Belgians think alike?

Some Californians think just like some New Yorkers.

And probably just like some Brits, French, Germans, etcetera, as well.

@ hobbes, I may not be able to dam the Colorado, but I piss in it every chance I get. Those fuckwits in Arizona and Nevada who insist on maintaining golf courses in the desert deserve nothing less.

[Rat Faced]

You posted while i was editing my reply, to try and explain what i meant ;)

[clocker]

Jeez, you call that an "edit"?

[Rat Faced]

It did take a while :lol:

[Rappy]

well i hate when people outsie of america agrees with what are government does its jut not true

[clocker]

Yes RF, all those things you mention may be factually correct, but you overstate their influence, I think.
Regional differences exist, but we are a very fluid people and it is increasingly rare to find someone who has been rooted in one spot their entire life.
I myself have lived everywhere from the Deep South all the way up into Canada. From one coast to the other.

All of the influences you make note of certainly exist, but in my experience only add a distinctive flavor to a relatively uniform whole.

Of course I could be wrong.
My experience also teaches me that we tend to seek out our peers, no matter where we may be. I think that certainly holds true in this forum and in this section in particular. World Events has a fairly rigorous self-selection mechanism at work, those who can&#39;t/won&#39;t cut it drop away quickly. I don&#39;t mean that we all agree, just that there is a common level of intelligence, logical coherence and sheer bull headedness displayed.
I am always amused by the perceptions of some of the lounge habitues that this is a fearsome place, to be avoided at all costs.
If they only knew. :P

[hobbes]

Well, as I explained, we have a lot more in common than Federal Taxes. You are correct that there are regional variances, with distinctive populations and unique cuisine, but no group will have any trouble telling you what America is about (freedom of the individual to live as he sees fit).

I prefer to think of us a a stew, with beef as the common stock. The regional contributions are simply spices which add to the overall complexity of the flavor, but not changing the fact that it is still a "beef" stew.

Remember that most American families, particularly those with college graduates, are living all over the country, rather than living near to and doing as what their fathers are fore-fathers had done. This country-wide cross-pollination is very evident to me and homogenizing us.

It is like during football or baseball season, you could go anywhere in the country and ask, who do you think is going to win it all this year. People everywhere would voice strong but differing opinions, but none would say, "what is this game you speak of?"

Anyway, we are a unique amalgam of souls, and there are regional differences, but we are not just people sharing a common passport. That was my point.


Edit: Clocker&#39;s post was not present when I was typing mine, kind of an eerie similarity.

[clocker]

You&#39;re not hungry are you hobbes?

[balamm]

Originally posted by hobbes@25 November 2003 - 20:28

It is like during football or baseball season, you could go anywhere in the country and ask, who do you think is going to win it all this year. People everywhere would voice strong but differing opinions, but none would say, "what is this game you speak of?"


I still shake my head and wonder at the game ya&#39;ll call football down there :P

Fields are too short and sissified for our players :D

Can&#39;t wait for the commercials so&#39;s I can see some live action movement on the screen.

But you got some damn fine women and corn liquor that make up for all that ;)

Just do something to stop those damn tampon commercials and you might be able to sell it to the rest of the world. :angry:











You know I&#39;m kidding, right?

:P

[balamm]

Are you hiding in here somewhere clocker? I see your name but not your post.

[clocker]

Hiding?
Oh no.

I just don&#39;t think I can top hobbes&#39;s "acquired taste" post.

That is a classic.

I was very tempted by the tampon setup, but, nope, I got nothin&#39;.

[j2k4]

Clocker-

I was struck just now by this thought:

"WILD TURKEY"

Impressions?

I think that would solve that small dilemma I spoke of earlier. ;)

[clocker]

Works for me.

Soda on the side?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 November 2003 - 01:27
Works for me.

Soda on the side?
As you wish. ;)

[clocker]

I like the bubbles.

[j2k4]

They become absolutely fascinating after just the right amount of W.T.-

Beyond that, and they&#39;re just plain difficult to see. :blink:

[clocker]

Beyond that, I don&#39;t care. :P

[j2k4]

Gonna be fun, sho&#39; &#39;nuf.

We&#39;ll have to behave, though.

You-know-who will be watching us critically, I think. :D

She doesn&#39;t drink.

[clocker]

A paragon of virtue, no doubt.

Will we be banished to the porch?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 November 2003 - 01:48
A paragon of virtue, no doubt.

Will we be banished to the porch?
Certainly not.

She&#39;s concerned for me, and won&#39;t allow me to desecrate my temple in your name.

We must get her to care about you, too. :lol:

[Billy_Dean]

I hope you two are gonna take photos, the two of you together is an oportunity not to be missed. At least PM me one.

As for Yanks; I&#39;ve met heaps of them travelling, some "stereotypical" some not. There does seem to be an arrogant air about some Americans, much like the English. They are yobbish, nationalistic, and couldn&#39;t give a fuck what you think, America is best at everything; as I say, much like the English, some of them anyway

Others are as nice as pie, and blend in with everyone, have the same thoughts and desires, the same ups and downs.... and always "up for it".

One trait I find hard to cope with from a lot of nations, and America is one, is an air of condescension towards countries like Australia, we&#39;re treated like little kids who live somewhere "far away" in a cute little country with kangaroos running through the streets. You half expect them to offer you a lolipop&#33;

The Yanks on this board are a wide spread also, but no more than any other nation. And the triumvirate here, you know who you are, have helped to make this place "the" place to be.

Now, your government, on the other hand ....


:)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@26 November 2003 - 02:08
I hope you two are gonna take photos, the two of you together is an oportunity not to be missed. At least PM me one.

As for Yanks; I&#39;ve met heaps of them travelling, some "stereotypical" some not. There does seem to be an arrogant air about some Americans, much like the English. They are yobbish, nationalistic, and couldn&#39;t give a fuck what you think, America is best at everything; as I say, much like the English, some of them anyway

Others are as nice as pie, and blend in with everyone, have the same thoughts and desires, the same ups and downs.... and always "up for it".

One trait I find hard to cope with from a lot of nations, and America is one, is an air of condescension towards countries like Australia, we&#39;re treated like little kids who live somewhere "far away" in a cute little country with kangaroos running through the streets. You half expect them to offer you a lolipop&#33;

The Yanks on this board are a wide spread also, but no more than any other nation. And the triumvirate here, you know who you are, have helped to make this place "the" place to be.

Now, your government, on the other hand ....


:)
I would kill to go "down under". :)

Just about got to Sydney for the games, but events intervened.

That wouldn&#39;t have counted, anyway; hard to see what&#39;s real at an Olympiad.

I understand why people do Europe, and I&#39;d like to do that, too, but if I had the same urge that leads people to the Caribbean (and I do, just not the money), my ass would be flying to Aussieland, you damn betcha&#39;. ;)

I&#39;ve been around enough people to know that commonality of experience does not in any way correlate with the asshole/non-asshole ratio.

That&#39;s always pretty static.

Billy-

If Clocker brings his cam, we&#39;ll see about some pictures-I would think he&#39;s already got that little beauty packed.

[Arm]

Originally posted by j2k4+25 November 2003 - 16:15--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 25 November 2003 - 16:15)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Arm@25 November 2003 - 10:08
<_< Americans are dumb motherfuckers I agree. I am also 15 years old and an American. :D
Many studies indicate Americans (especially those in their mid-teens-specifically 15 year-olds) are developmentally challenged with regard to their ability to interact gracefully in cyberspace. ;) [/b][/quote]
B) Good for that study. I can act alot better in cyberspace then alot of people.

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by Arm@26 November 2003 - 17:56
B) Good for that study. I can act alot better in cyberspace then alot of people.
You just don&#39;t&#33;


:)

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@26 November 2003 - 06:08
I hope you two are gonna take photos, the two of you together is an oportunity not to be missed. At least PM me one.

As for Yanks; I&#39;ve met heaps of them travelling, some "stereotypical" some not. There does seem to be an arrogant air about some Americans, much like the English. They are yobbish, nationalistic, and couldn&#39;t give a fuck what you think, America is best at everything; as I say, much like the English, some of them anyway

Others are as nice as pie, and blend in with everyone, have the same thoughts and desires, the same ups and downs.... and always "up for it".

One trait I find hard to cope with from a lot of nations, and America is one, is an air of condescension towards countries like Australia, we&#39;re treated like little kids who live somewhere "far away" in a cute little country with kangaroos running through the streets. You half expect them to offer you a lolipop&#33;


That must really get under your skin to see them talking as if they were as intelligent as you. I could see how that would bother you.


As for Yanks; I&#39;ve met heaps of them travelling, some "stereotypical" some not. There does seem to be an arrogant air about some Americans, much like the English. They are yobbish, nationalistic, and couldn&#39;t give a fuck what you think, America is best at everything; as I say, much like the English, some of them anyway

Others are as nice as pie, and blend in with everyone, have the same thoughts and desires, the same ups and downs.... and always "up for it".

One trait I find hard to cope with from a lot of nations, and America is one, is an air of condescension towards countries like Australia, we&#39;re treated like little kids who live somewhere "far away" in a cute little country with kangaroos running through the streets. You half expect them to offer you a lolipop&#33;


The english people I&#39;ve met while traveling explained to me something I had been curious about-the accents. That people living only miles away in England would speak differently from each other, because the country is so rich and diverse. The opposite of "common" and "homogenous". Well, America is not quite that diverse. I mentally divide the U.S. into 3.5 "sections". Yes, i meant to say "3.5", because one section is only a "half section". First there is the south, which stretches from the virginas, west to Missouri, then down to Louisiana, and the states encompassed as well. Then there is the midwest, which counts for a "half". It includes the states of Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. The west stretches from Texas, up north to Nebraska, then even further north and to the west to Montana, then west to Washington state, and the encompassed states as well. All other states belong in the northeast. The northeast is the unfortunate home to the traditonal stereotypical "yanks", complete with accents.

Does America consider itself better than Australia, as a whole, yes. So I don&#39;t disagree with BD on that one, it&#39;s true. Even though I&#39;ve never been to his country, I do realize it&#39;s not some cute little country with kangaroos running wild everywhere. I realize that many Australians, because of the geographic makeup up the country, live within a certain distance from the ocean. So when I think of Australia, I think of beaches, surfing, ect....

[MagicNakor]

:blink:

Are you putting Washington state and Texas in the same "area?"

:ninja:

[clocker]

What an interesting mental picture of the US you have MS.

Personally, I would divide the States into three areas: the East coast, the West coast and that amorphous mass in the middle, best labeled-"Here there be monsters"*. :P


* Except for Colorado of course...that would be labelled-"Here there be skiing and Kobe Bryant".

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@26 November 2003 - 14:03
:blink:

Are you putting Washington state and Texas in the same "area?"

:ninja:
texas is a problem because if you don&#39;t cut states up, you can&#39;t easily put it in one of those 3.5 areas without people saying "hey&#33; :angry: texas don&#39;t belong there". I&#39;ve been to Texas many times. It&#39;s damn huge. Eastern texas could be part of the south. West texas could be part of the west, as it is in my proposal. So it&#39;s a matter of size.


@Clocker, you would seriously put people from new mexico in the same category as people from wisconsin? those cheezy midwesterners sometimes even talk with that ever-so-loveable canadian accent. not only that, the attitudes are different. as for colorado, the first time i passed through the front range, i thought i was in paradise. blackhawk city, ect.... i especially liked the cool air coming up from the streams, as a result of the snowmelt. very scenic.

[clocker]

Cheezy midwesterners?

Hey son, I was born in Wisconsin.

[MediaSlayer]

i meant it literally ;)

[clocker]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@25 November 2003 - 23:08


One trait I find hard to cope with from a lot of nations, and America is one, is an air of condescension towards countries like Australia, we&#39;re treated like little kids who live somewhere "far away" in a cute little country with kangaroos running through the streets. You half expect them to offer you a lolipop&#33;


You do realize that to a certain extent this is due to the way your Tourist Board markets Australia to the rest of the world?
Babes in bikinis, that Animal Planet weirdo and "Put another shrimp on the barbie" are the images pushed at us from your own marketing geniuses.

Maybe a quick ring on the phone would straighten them out...

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Arm+26 November 2003 - 04:56--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Arm &#064; 26 November 2003 - 04:56)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by j2k4@25 November 2003 - 16:15
<!--QuoteBegin-Arm@25 November 2003 - 10:08
<_< Americans are dumb motherfuckers I agree. I am also 15 years old and an American. :D
Many studies indicate Americans (especially those in their mid-teens-specifically 15 year-olds) are developmentally challenged with regard to their ability to interact gracefully in cyberspace. ;)
B) Good for that study. I can act alot better in cyberspace then alot of people.[/b][/quote]
Would you, then?

Drop the third-person act, too, if you&#39;re going to spend time in here.

We are (most of us) adults who, if forced to spend time with children, prefer those children exhibit extraordinary talent in the area of acting OUR age.

[clocker]

Originally posted by j2k4@26 November 2003 - 09:17


We are (most of us) adults who, if forced to spend time with children, prefer those children exhibit extraordinary talent in the area of acting OUR age.
Arm, just to clarify...

"Our age"= "near death", which explains the extreme morbidity and tendency to gloom around here.

j2..what "third person act"?

[j2k4]

There is a bit of truth in what everyone has said about the US&#39;s "geographic demographic", but I think it can be more easily understood by breaking it down into an urban/suburban/rural construct.

Toss the accents, which don&#39;t mean anything.

Go from the urban, where such things as "tradition" are "quaint" or "quirky" through suburbia, out to the rural, where tradition is "everything".

Go from the urban, where continued "enlightenment" is the rule, again out through suburbia to the rural, where enlightenment is "urban".

Exceptions exist, of course, but there&#39;re your delineations, culturally and otherwise.

[clocker]

Or, to qualify even further...

Urban= Black, Hispanic and Asian

Suburban= White

Rural= a couple of Amish families


Hope this helps :D

[j2k4]

QUOTE (j2k4 @ 26 November 2003 - 09:17)


We are (most of us) adults who, if forced to spend time with children, prefer those children exhibit extraordinary talent in the area of acting OUR age.


Arm, just to clarify...

"Our age"= "near death", which explains the extreme morbidity and tendency to gloom around here.

Morbidity? Gloom? Near death?

Speak for yourself, sir.

j2..what "third person act"?

Arm has, in other threads, adopted a sort of "Bo knows baseball" thing. It was irritating.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 November 2003 - 12:39
Or, to qualify even further...

Urban= Black, Hispanic and Asian

Suburban= White

Rural= a couple of Amish families


Hope this helps :D
Clocker overstates, however slightly. :D

I am not Amish. :P

[Billy_Dean]

I can see your point there Clocker, Australia years ago was promoted as the "Outback" country, deserts, scrub, Ayres Rock, etc. When my mates came here in the 60&#39;s I wasn&#39;t interested, India was as far as I got. Now it&#39;s being promoted as a beach&#39;n&#39;barbie lifestyle. Maybe they are just trying to give people what they don&#39;t have in their own countries.

BTW, the attitude I was alluding to was more the patronising type, not necessarily intended, but there none the less.


:)

[clocker]

Originally posted by j2k4@26 November 2003 - 09:42


Morbidity? Gloom? Near death?

Speak for yourself, sir.




I would love to speak only for myself, but I represent a large and rabid constituancy which clamors for a voice.

Arm has, in other threads, adopted a sort of "Bo knows baseball" thing. It was irritating.
Oh.

BTW, does Bo "know baseball"?
I mean, I thought she was good in "10" and all...

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 November 2003 - 12:48
BTW, does Bo "know baseball"?
I mean, I thought she was good in "10" and all...
Yes, she does-

She is a great fan, and is stupifyingly attractive in a baseball cap. :w00t:

I also like her politics. :)

[clocker]

She has politics?

They aren&#39;t silicon, are they?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by clocker@26 November 2003 - 13:11
She has politics?

They aren&#39;t silicon, are they?
No, they&#39;re conservative, and they stand up right proud, don&#39;t they? ;)

[MediaSlayer]

as a true conservative pair should, but be warned...
there is a liberal in your mist
:devil: :devil: :ermm: :&#39;(

j/k

[j2k4]

Originally posted by MediaSlayer@26 November 2003 - 15:54
as a true conservative pair should, but be warned...
there is a liberal in your mist
:devil:&nbsp; :devil:&nbsp; :ermm:&nbsp; :&#39;(

j/k
:blink: :&#39;(

NO&#33;&#33; NO&#33;&#33;&#33;




Wait a minute-

In my mist?

That&#39;s okay, then.

That&#39;s where all the libs hang out. ;)

[clocker]

MediaSlayer, you must stop offering up waffleballs to j2.

No sense in making his odious task any easier.

[MediaSlayer]

libs? that&#39;a a slur :angry: sir&#33;&#33;&#33;%&#036;&#33;@@#*

but i can live with that, since i can just call you umm... ermm..a rep. :wacko:

[balamm]

Originally posted by MediaSlayer@26 November 2003 - 06:30
The northwest is the unfortunate home to the traditonal stereotypical "yanks", complete with accents.


:blink:


The only "yank accent" I&#39;ve noticed is from people who migrated from the east coast or deep south.

That&#39;s the extreme Northwest mind you, it may be different closer to Oregon.

[MediaSlayer]

that was a typo, balaam, and i edited the post. thanks for catching it. :D

[Alex H]

Originally posted by j2k4+26 November 2003 - 18:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 26 November 2003 - 18:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-clocker@26 November 2003 - 13:11
She has politics?

They aren&#39;t silicon, are they?
No, they&#39;re conservative, and they stand up right proud, don&#39;t they? ;) [/b][/quote]
I&#39;ve always wondered why American&#39;s call their political right wing "conservative". I mean you guys founded the country on the basis that everyone gets to be free and do whatever makes them happy. I know most of you guys believe in:

*Better working conditions
*Laws to protect the environment
*Gun laws based on favoring hunting weapons rather than fully automatic machine guns
*A better universal medical system
*Laws to help get rid of racial and sexual descrimination
*Better control of the corporate sector to protect small investors and their savings (and 401k retirment plans), etc.

They are all your really traditional values (in Australia we have quaint term, "giving someone a fair go" and I&#39;ve never heard it said anywhere else).

So why do you call yourselves conservative? I know I don&#39;t mind paying higher taxes if it really does improve the society I live in, although my current government is right wing and they are the highest taxing government in our history - but have managed to significantly reduce services and protection for the community.

[MagicNakor]

I&#39;ve heard "giving someone a fair go" before.

It&#39;s an unfortunate circumstance that the ideals and the reality really don&#39;t mesh.

:ninja:

Edit: Oh, and as for taxes, I pay ridiculous amounts in taxes, and still don&#39;t see any "good" come of it. I have, however, managed to have a lengthy correspondance with the government offices because they don&#39;t know how to communicate with each other.

14% tax on eggs...and they can&#39;t even afford a telephone...

[hobbes]

Originally posted by j2k4@26 November 2003 - 17:34
There is a bit of truth in what everyone has said about the US&#39;s "geographic demographic", but I think it can be more easily understood by breaking it down into an urban/suburban/rural construct.

Toss the accents, which don&#39;t mean anything.

Go from the urban, where such things as "tradition" are "quaint" or "quirky" through suburbia, out to the rural, where tradition is "everything".

Go from the urban, where continued "enlightenment" is the rule, again out through suburbia to the rural, where enlightenment is "urban".

Exceptions exist, of course, but there&#39;re your delineations, culturally and otherwise.
A rather crude assessment, but still probably the best way to break it down. I was thinking something very similar myself, but did not include before because my post was too long anyway.

If you were blindfolded and placed randomly in America and were allow 1 piece of information, which state you were in would be least useful.

Urban- Keep you head down, wallet hidden and don&#39;t ask to join into the next pick-up basketball game.

Suburban- No problems. Go to the mall for a slice of pizza. You will find people there who will hold doors open for you and tell you to have a nice day.

Rural- Watch your pooper, but marry your sister if you want.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by hobbes@27 November 2003 - 04:25
...If you were blindfolded and placed randomly in America and were allow 1 piece of information, which state you were in would be least useful...
Unless you were trying to get home. ;)

:ninja:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H+26 November 2003 - 19:57--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 26 November 2003 - 19:57)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by j2k4@26 November 2003 - 18:14
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker@26 November 2003 - 13:11
She has politics?

They aren&#39;t silicon, are they?
No, they&#39;re conservative, and they stand up right proud, don&#39;t they? ;)
I&#39;ve always wondered why American&#39;s call their political right wing "conservative". I mean you guys founded the country on the basis that everyone gets to be free and do whatever makes them happy. I know most of you guys believe in:

*Better working conditions
*Laws to protect the environment
*Gun laws based on favoring hunting weapons rather than fully automatic machine guns
*A better universal medical system
*Laws to help get rid of racial and sexual descrimination
*Better control of the corporate sector to protect small investors and their savings (and 401k retirment plans), etc.

They are all your really traditional values (in Australia we have quaint term, "giving someone a fair go" and I&#39;ve never heard it said anywhere else).

So why do you call yourselves conservative? I know I don&#39;t mind paying higher taxes if it really does improve the society I live in, although my current government is right wing and they are the highest taxing government in our history - but have managed to significantly reduce services and protection for the community.[/b][/quote]
The political differences are a bit more profound than you think, Alex H.

Your understanding of what a conservative would consider "traditional values" would indicate you are a bit behind the curve, if you&#39;ll excuse my saying it that way.

Rather than go into all that here, though, I can only resort to urging you to run a search-while I&#39;m not the only conservative here (there is one other one, young kAb-a good man) I think others would agree I am the most prolific.

So, since I&#39;m feeling really lazy, if you want to find out what this conservative is about, run a search and do some reading. :D

I know, I know.

Never mind.

Just ask the others here-I&#39;m sure they&#39;ll tell you about me and my politics. :lol:

Seriously-

Just stick around-things will clarify themselves soon enough.

[FatBastard]

I always saw it as Conservatives look after each other, whilst Liberals looked after others. Wouldn&#39;t you agree j2k4?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by FatBastard@27 November 2003 - 03:21
I always saw it as Conservatives look after each other, whilst Liberals looked after others.&nbsp; Wouldn&#39;t you agree j2k4?
No, &#39;fraid not.

It might be more appropriate to say (as a conservative) that we would prefer to teach people how to look out for themselves, as they are best equipped to do that job. ;)

Liberals administer "programs", which make the liberals feel good, but don&#39;t do anything for "others", than make them dependent on the liberals. <_<

Conservatives find this methodology elitist.

[FatBastard]

So which side of politics in the US brought your social welfare programs then?

[j2k4]

Originally posted by FatBastard@27 November 2003 - 03:45
So which side of politics in the US brought your social welfare programs then?
The general blossoming of such social programs is attributable to Lyndon Johnson&#39;s "Great Society" legislation of the &#39;60s.

[FatBastard]

Was he a Conservative?

[MagicNakor]

Don&#39;t be so coy. He was a Democrat. ;)

Which is still fairly conservative by the standards here.

:ninja:

[Alex H]

Originally posted by j2k4@27 November 2003 - 07:02
The political differences are a bit more profound than you think, Alex H.

Your understanding of what a conservative would consider "traditional values" would indicate you are a bit behind the curve, if you&#39;ll excuse my saying it that way.

Rather than go into all that here, though, I can only resort to urging you to run a search-while I&#39;m not the only conservative here (there is one other one, young kAb-a good man) I think others would agree I am the most prolific.

So, since I&#39;m feeling really lazy, if you want to find out what this conservative is about, run a search and do some reading. :D

I know, I know.

Never mind.

Just ask the others here-I&#39;m sure they&#39;ll tell you about me and my politics. :lol:

Seriously-

Just stick around-things will clarify themselves soon enough.
Ok, thats a fair call - I know the whole situation is more complicated, and I knwo what you mean about Leftist "programs". It just seems obvious that you look after everyone in a society, otherwise the people at the bottom end up being such a drag on the whole society that it eventually brings everybody down.

I shouldn&#39;t complain really: with Bush draging your economy down, its making ours look much better in comparison :P

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H@27 November 2003 - 22:20

I shouldn&#39;t complain really: with Bush draging your economy down, its making ours look much better in comparison :P
You aren&#39;t up-to-date, then, on what&#39;s happening here?

If Bush is "dragging" the economy, he&#39;s dragging it uphill, because that is the direction it&#39;s going. ;)

[ClubDiggler]

The economy actually has had tremendous numbers recently. All favorable.
(GDP, consumer confidence, etc.) I would have to say employment is the area that needs much improvement now.

[clocker]

Oddly enough, as the "economic indicators" take an upward swing, Colorado posts another record year for bankruptcies.

There is a disconnect between "indicator" and application, apparently.

[bigboab]

Originally posted by clocker@29 November 2003 - 00:45
Oddly enough, as the "economic indicators" take an upward swing, Colorado posts another record year for bankruptcies.

There is a disconnect between "indicator" and application, apparently.
Are you suggesting Sir, that stastistics and facts do not coincide?

[chalice]

Originally posted by bigboab+29 November 2003 - 00:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigboab @ 29 November 2003 - 00:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-clocker@29 November 2003 - 00:45
Oddly enough, as the "economic indicators" take an upward swing, Colorado posts another record year for bankruptcies.

There is a disconnect between "indicator" and application, apparently.
Are you suggesting Sir, that stastistics and facts do not coincide? [/b][/quote]
Lies, damn lies and Boabisms.

[j2k4]

The job supply has so far expanded by about 60-80 thousand jobs.

Growth in this area has always been, and presumably will continue to be, of the "fits and starts" variety.

I&#39;m making no excuses-I think it&#39;s lagging a bit, too.

The overall numbers are undeniably good though, and are cause for cautious optimism. ;)

[MagicNakor]

With things like that, you really have to look at what kinds of jobs have been "created."

A huge majority of the time you&#39;ll find that they&#39;re minimum-wage, low hour, entry-level part-time "jobs."

Hardly something one could live off of.

:ninja:

Edit: And you have to look at where in the country they are. Chances are it&#39;s New York, or California, or some more-populated state, which is not going to help Billy in Iowa.

[junkyardking]

Originally posted by j2k4@29 November 2003 - 04:05
The job supply has so far expanded by about 60-80 thousand jobs.

Growth in this area has always been, and presumably will continue to be, of the "fits and starts" variety.

I&#39;m making no excuses-I think it&#39;s lagging a bit, too.

The overall numbers are undeniably good though, and are cause for cautious optimism. ;)
I totally agree with Magic, most of these are jobs that pay poorly and in which you love to hate.

In Australia we have record low unemployment rates (work/volunteer one hour or more and your not considered unemployed) but if you look at the statistics more closely most if not all the jobs created are casual/part time crapwork these are also the first jobs to go if the economy slides.

I think the mistake is to look at low unemployment levels as some indicator that people are happy and that people feel good about themselves.

Alot of these jobs depress people and that leads to a much poorer society.

[j2k4]

Ahem.

The 60-80 thousand jobs created are burger flippers?

No-these are light-manufacturing jobs paying decent wages, and it doesn&#39;t matter where they come up; actually, to have any growth at all in California right now would be a bit more of a feat than in Iowa, unless such things are happening merely on the strength of Arnold&#39;s having taken office.

You guys really think the the leading edge of economic growth is more Burger Kings and McDonald&#39;s?

The economy rebounds and that&#39;s the first thing that happens?

SHEEESH&#33;&#33; <_<

[internet.news]

Originally posted by bigboab+29 November 2003 - 01:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigboab @ 29 November 2003 - 01:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-clocker@29 November 2003 - 00:45
Oddly enough, as the "economic indicators" take an upward swing, Colorado posts another record year for bankruptcies.

There is a disconnect between "indicator" and application, apparently.
Are you suggesting Sir, that stastistics and facts do not coincide? [/b][/quote]
the whole economy is really worse...

[j2k4]

Originally posted by internet.news+29 November 2003 - 17:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (internet.news &#064; 29 November 2003 - 17:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by bigboab@29 November 2003 - 01:52
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker@29 November 2003 - 00:45
Oddly enough, as the "economic indicators" take an upward swing, Colorado posts another record year for bankruptcies.

There is a disconnect between "indicator" and application, apparently.
Are you suggesting Sir, that stastistics and facts do not coincide?
the whole economy is really worse...[/b][/quote]
:huh: What "whole" economy? :huh:

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by j2k4@29 November 2003 - 22:11
Ahem.

The 60-80 thousand jobs created are burger flippers?

No-these are light-manufacturing jobs paying decent wages, and it doesn&#39;t matter where they come up; actually, to have any growth at all in California right now would be a bit more of a feat than in Iowa, unless such things are happening merely on the strength of Arnold&#39;s having taken office.

You guys really think the the leading edge of economic growth is more Burger Kings and McDonald&#39;s?

The economy rebounds and that&#39;s the first thing that happens?

SHEEESH&#33;&#33; <_<
That&#39;s what the "job growth" is here. Part-time, minimum-wage service sector, in the populated areas.

I don&#39;t imagine that it would be terribly different in the States.

:ninja:

[junkyardking]

Originally posted by j2k4@29 November 2003 - 21:11
No-these are light-manufacturing jobs paying decent wages, and it doesn&#39;t matter where they come up; actually, to have any growth at all in California right now would be a bit more of a feat than in Iowa, unless such things are happening merely on the strength of Arnold&#39;s having taken office.

You guys really think the the leading edge of economic growth is more Burger Kings and McDonald&#39;s?

The economy rebounds and that&#39;s the first thing that happens?

SHEEESH&#33;&#33; <_<
light manufacturing jobs = Process work.

These jobs are as depressing as flipping burgers.


Just because people are employed doesnt mean everything is aok.

There is more to life than economic indicators, having people work in jobs they hate to survive while owners make money is nothing to be proud of.

[clocker]

Even if the newly created jobs aren&#39;t minimum wage "starter" positions, things still aren&#39;t as rosy as the indices would indicate.

The trend is to make employees shoulder an increasing percentage of health care costs and retirement benefits aren&#39;t what they used to be either. So, what initially may look like a halfway decent wage is, in fact, closer to minimum wage than it may appear after subtracting those costs.

My parents generation expected to retire comfortably, my generation hopes to, and the next guys can just kiss the whole idea away. They&#39;ll have to work till death&#39;s doorstep just to support the burgeoning "baby boom" generation and to pay off all the "tax cuts" of the present administration.

[j2k4]

So it&#39;s not happening fast enough, huh?

Jobs you don&#39;t enjoy?

A small percentage of us (surely not me) has jobs they enjoy.

Wages are a relative thing, also.

These supermarket checkout clerks in California are on strike because their fringes were cut back a bit.

These are clerks, mind you-making &#036;16-&#036;18 an hour&#33;

They are not joined in their picketing activities by the grocery baggers, who make &#036;6-&#036;7 an hour, but are not unionized, and so make less, and don&#39;t get strike pay while their co-workers have put them out of work.

Oddly enough, I heard one of the picketers interviewed say, "We&#39;d all like better jobs, but there aren&#39;t any."

I should say not.

Pray tell, how many of these light manufacturing or even burger flipping jobs are manned by someone trying to support 2,3 or 4 kids?

Is there a problem with entry-level jobs to go along with other growth?

I&#39;ve been in my share of burger joints.

They are not, in the main, staffed by late-twenties, early-thirties family men and women.

[MagicNakor]

There&#39;s nothing wrong with entry level jobs as part of economic growth. It&#39;s when it forms the bulk of the "oh look at all the new jobs we&#39;ve created&#33;" spiel when it becomes a problem.

Checkout clerks here don&#39;t make &#036;16-&#036;18 an hour Canadian. They (and most service-sector jobs) make &#036;8-&#036;9 (&#036;8 is minimum wage here), if they aren&#39;t forced onto a &#036;6 "training wage."

Where I am, these jobs are, in fact, manned by people trying to support a family. And it doesn&#39;t work out too well. Sure, you&#39;ll see a few teenagers here and there, but most of them aren&#39;t. Anyone that&#39;s able to leaves as fast as they can. Unemployment bounces from 11-17% (in my area, not provincial (which is 9.1%), or a nation-standard), and while the government says "look at the new jobs," they almost never come here, and they certainly don&#39;t pay enough to live from, even if you get 36-40 hours a week (which is almost unheard of). What happens is the companies fire one full-time employee to hire two part-time, and then they don&#39;t have to pay for health benefits either, if they even do in the first place.

:ninja:

Edit: Clarification.

[clocker]

Where in California are you talking about j2?

LA?

&#036;16-18/hour will barely put gas in your tank there.

When Wal-Mart announced the job fair for their new Super Center here recently, they had over 3000 applicants ( it made the nightly news), many of whom were middle aged professionals laid off from tech/aerospace jobs. They were trying to support families and keep their homes together.

I&#39;m sure that they found the news about the upswing in the economy richly ironic as they were fitted for their new red vests...

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by clocker@29 November 2003 - 23:05
When Wal-Mart announced the job fair for their new Super Center here recently, they had over 3000 applicants ( it made the nightly news), many of whom were middle aged professionals laid off from tech/aerospace jobs. They were trying to support families and keep their homes together.

I&#39;m sure that they found the news about the upswing in the economy richly ironic as they were fitted for their new red vests...
actually, those would be blue vests. the red shirts are a few blocks away at target. ;)

a comparative review of shopping at wal mart vs shopping at target, from some chick&#39;s blog:

Friday, October 31, 2003

WalMart versus Target. There&#39;s a huge difference, but I&#39;ve had trouble putting my finger on it exactly. All I know is that when I walk into WalMart, I feel utterly overwhelmed by the mass of humanity and screaming children and crap for sale as cheap as possible. I hate the feeling I get when I walk in there. On the flipside, I really enjoy shopping at Target most of the time. It&#39;s easy to find what I&#39;m looking for. The prices seem reasonable without screaming at me about how low they are. The store feels clean and easy to navigate. And it has a warmer feel to it. Less sterile and warehouse-like.

There&#39;s a couple of things I&#39;ve been able to pinpoint. At WalMart, many of the shelves are very high. So high, that you can&#39;t possibly see over them even when standing at a distance. This leads to a sort of claustrophobic feeling. Also, WalMart has a tendency to place large displays in the aisles even when there&#39;s no room to pass comfortably. Beyond that, it&#39;s smaller things. Target seems to use more color, especially rich reds and blues. While Target puts sale prices on things in font about 3 inches high, WalMart tends to put up big plastic numbers that are a foot tall. WalMart seems to focus exclusively on low prices where Target also seems to have a desire for some level of quality. Employees at Target are easy to spot by their red shirts and khaki pants with a small name badge, but at WalMart, employees must wear incredibly tacky blue vests with "How May I Help You" in huge block letters on the back. That doesn&#39;t make WalMart employees any more helpful (especially as evidenced by the pregnant woman asking one about microwaves on Sunday, who completely ignored her and kept walking). It does increase the load as far as visual stimulus goes. And I think that&#39;s one of basic problems with WalMart. There is just too much text, too big, too omnipresent. Add to that the towering shelves and narrow, cluttered aisles, and it just feels oppressive. Add to that hoardes of bargain-seeking parents dragging their squalid packs of children of dirty children behind them.

All I know is that from the moment I walked into WalMart on Sunday, it felt overwhelming. We left without purchasing what we&#39;d planned to purchase, and drove a mile to the Target, found what we wanted quickly and easily, and left very happy.

[clocker]

Ah.

I can&#39;t afford either.
No one wears vests of any color while dumpster diving...

[MagicNakor]

I&#39;ve seen those reflective-florescent ones being worn. I think maybe it serves to "call" a particular dumpster.

:ninja:

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC@30 November 2003 - 07:16

a comparative review of shopping at wal mart vs shopping at target, from some chick&#39;s blog:

Friday, October 31, 2003

WalMart versus Target. There&#39;s a huge difference, but I&#39;ve had trouble putting my finger on it exactly. All I know is that when I walk into WalMart, I feel utterly overwhelmed by the mass of humanity and screaming children and crap for sale as cheap as possible. I hate the feeling I get when I walk in there. On the flipside, I really enjoy shopping at Target most of the time. It&#39;s easy to find what I&#39;m looking for. The prices seem reasonable without screaming at me about how low they are. The store feels clean and easy to navigate. And it has a warmer feel to it. Less sterile and warehouse-like.

There&#39;s a couple of things I&#39;ve been able to pinpoint. At WalMart, many of the shelves are very high. So high, that you can&#39;t possibly see over them even when standing at a distance. This leads to a sort of claustrophobic feeling. Also, WalMart has a tendency to place large displays in the aisles even when there&#39;s no room to pass comfortably. Beyond that, it&#39;s smaller things. Target seems to use more color, especially rich reds and blues. While Target puts sale prices on things in font about 3 inches high, WalMart tends to put up big plastic numbers that are a foot tall. WalMart seems to focus exclusively on low prices where Target also seems to have a desire for some level of quality. Employees at Target are easy to spot by their red shirts and khaki pants with a small name badge, but at WalMart, employees must wear incredibly tacky blue vests with "How May I Help You" in huge block letters on the back. That doesn&#39;t make WalMart employees any more helpful (especially as evidenced by the pregnant woman asking one about microwaves on Sunday, who completely ignored her and kept walking). It does increase the load as far as visual stimulus goes. And I think that&#39;s one of basic problems with WalMart. There is just too much text, too big, too omnipresent. Add to that the towering shelves and narrow, cluttered aisles, and it just feels oppressive. Add to that hoardes of bargain-seeking parents dragging their squalid packs of children of dirty children behind them.

All I know is that from the moment I walked into WalMart on Sunday, it felt overwhelming. We left without purchasing what we&#39;d planned to purchase, and drove a mile to the Target, found what we wanted quickly and easily, and left very happy.
Wal-mart in the UK (ASDA) isnt like that :blink:

Sounds like KwikSave or Netto... :unsure:

[Alex H]

@ j2k4 - you&#39;re economy ain&#39;t that great. The only reason it would be on the "upswing" would be because America started a war (always goes down) the war ended (always goes up) and Bush got his oil (up again).

Think about where the economy of the most powerful nation on earth should be. It may be ok, but its not meeting it&#39;s potential.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Alex H@30 November 2003 - 19:31
@ j2k4 - you&#39;re economy ain&#39;t that great. The only reason it would be on the "upswing" would be because America started a war (always goes down) the war ended (always goes up) and Bush got his oil (up again).

Think about where the economy of the most powerful nation on earth should be. It may be ok, but its not meeting it&#39;s potential.
Alex-

In order, then:

Right, wrong, wrong, and, to conclude, right.

As to your whiffs-

The war (such as it is) ain&#39;t over.

Bush didn&#39;t get any oil.

And, to your last:

Our economy has never met it&#39;s "potential".

If it did, I reckon we&#39;d be hearing complaints about that, so......

[Alex H]

The war is over&#33; "Mission Accomplished" right? (Or am I just naive to think that?) And the war was about oil. Always was. Bush still thinks he is running an oil company (and badly, like he has always run his oil companies).

And America&#39;s economic potential? 10% of the population controls 90% of the wealth. Fine, those guys were smart enough to get the money so they should have it. But surely there is enough money to go around so that everybody can have a decent quality of life.

[clocker]

"Mission Accomplished" was a public relations/political stunt that has come back to bite Bush in the ass.
Presumptuous twit.

The war was never about oil.
Had that been the overriding motive we would have invaded Canada.

Actually, I think it&#39;s more like 1% controls 90% of the capital, but it&#39;s a capitalist system, so what are you gonna do?

We are in Iraq because the Bush advisory cabal realized early on that their boy was too stupid to deal with the economy or diplomacy, so instigating a war and reveling in the "Big Stick" image was a easy ( and ultimately, the only) course to take.
You have to work with what you got, after all.

[Alex H]

Well maybe it wasn&#39;t totally about oil. Maybe it was so that Bush could help out his campiagn contibutors by giving them lucrative reconstruction contracts in Iraq :blink:

Rather than the "Big Stick" image, couldn&#39;t they just impeach him? He&#39;s lied to Congress enough. Someone is ging to come back at me and say he never lied: Telling your advisers they can&#39;t give you any bad news, or ignoring information that does not support your case for going to war is worse than lying - And soldiers shouldn&#39;t have to die on a foreign battlefield because Bush needs to prove he can weild the "Big Stick".

[Billy_Dean]

So it wasn&#39;t about oil? Then let&#39;s look at the "Axis of Evil"
North Korea, Iran, Iraq.

Weapons of mass destruction? N. Korea, yes, Iran, almost, Iraq, no.

Threatening neighbours? N. Korea, yes. Iran. no. Iraq, no.

Army, navy and air force? N. Korea, yes. Iran, yes. Iraq, no.

Democracy? N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, no.

Human rights abusers? N. Korea, Iran, Iraq, yes.

Large oil reserves? N. Korea, no. Iran, no. Iraq, yes.

And so on ... Now, if you were to pick on one country to invade, which should it be first? Which country is the biggest threat to world peace?

If Iraq had no oil, the US and the others wouldn&#39;t be there. They went in supposedly looking for WMD, now they claim it was to liberate the people of Iraq. Bullshit&#33;&#33;

The same reason they armed the Mujahadin, oil&#33; The same reason they installed the Taliban, oil&#33; The same reason they are now paying off the Afghani warlords, oil&#33;

The US has to leave Saudi Arabia, they need a base in the Middle East to protect "their" oil, simple as that.


:)

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@30 November 2003 - 12:34
Wal-mart in the UK (ASDA) isnt like that :blink:

Sounds like KwikSave or Netto... :unsure:
WalMart is a combination of the dept. store from the robin williams movie "one hour photo" (the looks of the store) and the fictional MegaLoMart from the cartoon series "king of the hill" (low prices, but aisle after aisle full of shoddy products & inept employees).

[3RA1N1AC]

oil, human rights, and democracy aside... and i don&#39;t believe any of those are THE primary motive in most decisions... it&#39;s about forcing countries like iraq to act like well-behaved citizens of the capitalist community, and to contribute to the western economy in some way. as long as they do that, the citizens of those places can get stuffed, as far as business interests are concerned (and business interests are basically the only interests that matter, as far as i know...).

[clocker]

Originally posted by Billy_Dean@30 November 2003 - 21:42


The same reason they armed the Mujahadin, oil&#33; The same reason they installed the Taliban, oil&#33; The same reason they are now paying off the Afghani warlords, oil&#33;

The US has to leave Saudi Arabia, they need a base in the Middle East to protect "their" oil, simple as that.


:)
So Billy, how much oil are we getting from Iraq?

Gee, that&#39;s right, NONE.
In fact we are paying ridiculous prices to import gasoline into Iraq.

How long till the Iraqi infrastructure is rebuilt and the oil industry is back in full swing?
Hmmm, the ever optimistic Bush administration says 1 year. Maybe.
More realistic observers might say 2 or more years and that is assuming that sabatage/ terrorist attacks don&#39;t happen.
Fat chance.

I never bought the Bush explanation of WMD and I don&#39;t buy the "American Oil" theory either.
Sorry.

[Billy_Dean]

It doesn&#39;t matter when the oil comes up, it&#39;s in the ground, same as in the bank. And it isn&#39;t just Iraq&#39;s oil they are protecting, it&#39;s the Middle East&#39;s oil, all of it.



:)

[Pitbul]

people always complain about America&#39;s problems even if they dont even live in America. thats pretty sad and pathetic.then u turn it around on us acting like your country doesn&#39;t have its share or problems like drugs have never touched your soil, or you do not have prositutes. what a bunch of pathetic shitty ass hypocrits and clocker u fuckin moron the water we use to keep our Golf Resorts going in Arizona also play a big part in our economy in this state which actually effects America instead of some asshole halfway around the got damn world u jackass.

[ilw]

:lol:

[Billy_Dean]

:lol:

[clocker]

My, oh my.

Did we get up on the wrong side of the gurney this morning, Pitbul?

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Pitbul@1 December 2003 - 08:36
the water we use to keep our Golf Resorts going in Arizona also play a big part in our economy in this state
maybe we could convert iraq to a golf-based economy...

... just need to figure out where they hide their rich old men who all wear white belts, white shoes, argyle socks, and those little old man golf hats. if they don&#39;t have any, i guess we&#39;d have to import some.

[clocker]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC@1 December 2003 - 17:08
if they don&#39;t have any, i guess we&#39;d have to import some.
3BRA1N1AC, you may have inadvertently hit on the real reason we are in Iraq.

Tiger Woods wanted his own country to rule and Izod and Nike bought off Bush to make it happen.
Then, all of the geniuses who figured that the desert in Arizona would be perfect for water intensive golf courses can emigrate and be consultants to the Iraqis.

Too bad Del Webb is dead.

[Alex H]

Originally posted by Pitbul@1 December 2003 - 16:36
people always complain about America&#39;s problems even if they dont even live in America. thats pretty sad and pathetic.then u turn it around on us acting like your country doesn&#39;t have its share or problems like drugs have never touched your soil, or you do not have prositutes. what a bunch of pathetic shitty ass hypocrits and clocker u fuckin moron the water we use to keep our Golf Resorts going in Arizona also play a big part in our economy in this state which actually effects America instead of some asshole halfway around the got damn world u jackass.
Dude, did you read the title of this topic? We&#39;re talking about American problems.

As for which country should have liberated (read invaded) first? Well North Korea is rapidly approaching the time when they will be able to send an ICBM to hit a mainland American target, so that could have been a pretty damn good reason for liberating them first.

And yes, Bush is hungry for oil. (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/19/anwar.vote.ap/) As you can see, he is after oil, and "liberating" a huge supplier of oil probably isn&#39;t just a coincidence&#33; (Looking forward to someone trying to explain how it IS a coincidence&#33;)

And something for the yanks to look forward to: Snowballing Debt Awaits Tomorrow&#39;s Taxpayers (http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120203J.shtml) :(

[ilw]

As for which country should have liberated (read invaded) first? Well North Korea is rapidly approaching the time when they will be able to send an ICBM to hit a mainland American target, so that could have been a pretty damn good reason for liberating them first.

Are you seriously saying that you would have preferred it if N.Korea was attacked first? A country potentially armed with nuclear weapons and situated not a million miles from China and Japan.
The reason they don&#39;t go after N.Korea is the same reason they didn&#39;t directly attack Russia during the cold war, ie because it would have been a monumentally stupid thing to do.

[Billy_Dean]

Originally posted by ilw@2 December 2003 - 22:10

As for which country should have liberated (read invaded) first? Well North Korea is rapidly approaching the time when they will be able to send an ICBM to hit a mainland American target, so that could have been a pretty damn good reason for liberating them first.

Are you seriously saying that you would have preferred it if N.Korea was attacked first? A country potentially armed with nuclear weapons and situated not a million miles from China and Japan.
The reason they don&#39;t go after N.Korea is the same reason they didn&#39;t directly attack Russia during the cold war, ie because it would have been a monumentally stupid thing to do.
Quite right ilw, better to bully Cuba.


:)

[ilw]

For once billy we&#39;re in total agreement :rolleyes:

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Alex H@1 December 2003 - 22:49
And something for the yanks to look forward to: Snowballing Debt Awaits Tomorrow&#39;s Taxpayers (http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120203J.shtml) :(
yeah, but, see...

... it&#39;s the middle class that pays taxes in america. so the high ranking politicians are prolly okay with that, since neither they nor the people who are priveleged enough to be close personal friends with them will actually be in debt.

[Alex H]

Re: North Korea - If Bush had gone after them first, they wouldn&#39;t have the nukes. Clinton got the info about nuclear development in his last few weeks in office and Bush has ignored it since then. WHY?

Re: American Debt - Who have the most votes: the priviaged few or middle America? Don&#39;t let yourselves get screwed&#33; Get rid of Bush and stop him spending your money&#33;

[Tasty]

Originally posted by Alex H@3 December 2003 - 04:38
Re: American Debt - Who have the most votes: the priviaged few or middle America? Don&#39;t let yourselves get screwed&#33; Get rid of Bush and stop him spending your money&#33;
sorry chap, we have already been screwed, we didn&#39;t vote him in, we voted quayle in, the courts gave him the presidency.

[clocker]

Originally posted by Tasty+6 December 2003 - 22:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Tasty @ 6 December 2003 - 22:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Alex H@3 December 2003 - 04:38
Re: American Debt - Who have the most votes: the priviaged few or middle America? Don&#39;t let yourselves get screwed&#33; Get rid of Bush and stop him spending your money&#33;
sorry chap, we have already been screwed, we didn&#39;t vote him in, we voted quayle in, the courts gave him the presidency. [/b][/quote]
Quayle?

Truly, the election was stranger than I recalled.

[semi-sane]

Clocker.........let&#39;s talk about the Arkansas River........... :D ;)

And how about K-State beating OU 35 to 7????&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; :D

[j2k4]

Edit: nevermind