|
"Dwight Stewart" wrote
As I see it, your position is that whites should NOT have the jobs, money, or power exactly because they are the majority - much of it should be transferred to minorities instead. Dwight, You have a vivid imagination, but it's damned distorted! Since I haven't stated my position, whatever you "see" is something that you're making up on the fly. (In short, you don't have a clue.) To save you the effort of further imagining, here is my position in three words. "Race is irrelevant." You seem to place great emphasis on race/ethnic background; ipso facto, you're a racist. With all kind wishes, de Hans, K0HB |
|
|
"Hans K0HB" wrote:
To save you the effort of further imagining, here is my position in three words. "Race is irrelevant." You seem to place great emphasis on race/ethnic background; ipso facto, you're a racist. You only say that because I'm white. If that were not the case, you'd be saying the same thing to Condoleezza Rice (Nat, Sec, Advisor), Colin Powell (Sec, of State), Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Mary Berry (Chair, US Com. on Civil Rights), and a very long list of other minorities who think race and race issues are very relevant in this country. Why should it be any less so for whites? In reality, your open criticism of whites who talk about race, without criticism of other races who do the same, only demonstrates your own racism towards other whites. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Dave Heil" wrote:
Dwight Stewart wrote: Americans working at those jobs would do the same things (pay taxes and so on), Dave. Do some research on the number of retirees and the number of workers paying taxes to support those retirees. Why do we need immigrants to do that? Because there aren't enough Americans born to do it. What you fail to point out is how much those retirees paid into the system over several decades of their lives to help support their own retirement, only to have the government now say their isn't any money available because it was spent on something else. The problem isn't the number of retirees - it's the spending habits of this government. Now it's time for this government to put that money back by cutting some of today's spending (a few less military weapons should do it) instead of supposedly trying to gather more people to collect taxes from. No, that isn't correct. Moving dirt is menial work. Lifting boxes is menial. Clerking at a convenience store is menial. Employers choose not to pay folks in those positions more than the jobs are worth. And, by having a ready supply of cheap labor to fill those jobs, employers ensure those jobs are not worth much. Employment and wages are simply matters of supply and demand, Dave. By creating a glut in the workforce, employers are able to pay less wages and still find employees to fill those jobs. After all, people have to work to survive and employers know it. Today, while business profits are astronomically high, working families are struggling to pay bills and cover their massive debts (while those business owners buy yachts and huge homes for their families). And now, to add insult to injury, those employers financially support political candidates that will pass legislation to enable millions of immigrants to enter the country, creating an even larger glut in the workforce so business can pay even less wages and make even higher profits. And if anyone objects to this massive immigration, they're called racist. You can call me racist all you want - it certainly isn't going to stop me from speaking out against this nonsense. So let's all make 30 bucks per hour and then wonder why the cost of everything skyrockets, huh? Americans want good pay and they want the price of everything to be dirt cheap. Tell us how to achieve both of those. (snip) They've done it in other places around the world. Europeans make decent wages, pay no more taxes than here (when you add in ALL our taxes - local, state, federal, and so on), and consumer goods are not that much more expensive then here (gas prices in Europe are high solely because of government efforts to control pollution). They've done the same in the wealthy countries of Asia. Why is it so impossible for this great country to do what other countries have already done - provide decent wages for workers, provide decent (not astronomical) profits for business, and keep market prices reasonable? Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message hlink.net...
"Hans K0HB" wrote: To save you the effort of further imagining, here is my position in three words. "Race is irrelevant." You seem to place great emphasis on race/ethnic background; ipso facto, you're a racist. You only say that because I'm white. Nope, I don't care what color you call yourself. I type slower so you can read my lips ----- "R a c e i s i r r e l e v a n t." With kindest personal regards, de Hans, K0HB |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
You only say that because I'm white. If that were not the case, you'd be saying the same thing to Condoleezza Rice (Nat, Sec, Advisor), Colin Powell (Sec, of State), Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Mary Berry (Chair, US Com. on Civil Rights), and a very long list of other minorities who think race and race issues are very relevant in this country. Why should it be any less so for whites? In reality, your open criticism of whites who talk about race, without criticism of other races who do the same, only demonstrates your own racism towards other whites. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ Lets see, we can have an all black mayors conference, but just listen to the uproar from all the Jesse Jackson idiots if we tried to have an all white mayors conference. We can have a Miss Black America contest but what a howl there would be if we attempted to have a Miss White America contest. Yea Hans, it is just the whites that are racist. |
Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Dave Heil" wrote: Dwight Stewart wrote: Americans working at those jobs would do the same things (pay taxes and so on), Dave. Do some research on the number of retirees and the number of workers paying taxes to support those retirees. Why do we need immigrants to do that? Because there aren't enough Americans born to do it. What you fail to point out is how much those retirees paid into the system over several decades of their lives to help support their own retirement, only to have the government now say their isn't any money available because it was spent on something else. Lucky I failed to point that out because it simply isn't true. When Social Security began, where did the money to pay retirees of its early years come from? It didn't come from those folks because they never paid much in. It came in advance from the coffers of government. What was paid in by early workers covered under Social Security went to pay for the retirement of future workers. Social Security was never, by the way, designed to be a full retirement package. It was designed to supplement what a worker saved. The problem isn't the number of retirees - it's the spending habits of this government. Now it's time for this government to put that money back by cutting some of today's spending (a few less military weapons should do it) instead of supposedly trying to gather more people to collect taxes from. You've got a problem comprehending simple math. There are too few workers contributing to the system and too many retirees drawing from it. No, that isn't correct. Moving dirt is menial work. Lifting boxes is menial. Clerking at a convenience store is menial. Employers choose not to pay folks in those positions more than the jobs are worth. And, by having a ready supply of cheap labor to fill those jobs, employers ensure those jobs are not worth much. Those jobs were never worth much and they'll never be worth much. Employment and wages are simply matters of supply and demand, Dave. By creating a glut in the workforce, employers are able to pay less wages and still find employees to fill those jobs. Everybody wants high wages for any kind of work. High wages lead to high prices for products and services. Yet no one wants to pay higher prices for products and services because that would make their wages worth less. Your stuck in an endless loop, Dwight. After all, people have to work to survive and employers know it. ....and workers know it. Today, while business profits are astronomically high, working families are struggling to pay bills and cover their massive debts (while those business owners buy yachts and huge homes for their families). You're painting that picture from imagination, Dwight. I have a cousin who owns a small town pharmacy which employs three people other than himself. He has yet to buy his yacht and huge home but he has been in business for almost twenty years. There is a fellow here in town who owns a hardware store who will close it and retire next year because he can find no one who will buy the business. He has no huge home and no yacht. He has managed to make a living for some decades. And now, to add insult to injury, those employers financially support political candidates that will pass legislation to enable millions of immigrants to enter the country, creating an even larger glut in the workforce so business can pay even less wages and make even higher profits. Both the Democrats and Republicans support continued immigration because they can read the writing on the wall. And if anyone objects to this massive immigration, they're called racist. Only if in objecting they raise an alarm only over Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. You can call me racist all you want - it certainly isn't going to stop me from speaking out against this nonsense. You can be a racist all you want. That isn't going to stop me from calling you one. So let's all make 30 bucks per hour and then wonder why the cost of everything skyrockets, huh? Americans want good pay and they want the price of everything to be dirt cheap. Tell us how to achieve both of those. (snip) They've done it in other places around the world. Europeans make decent wages, pay no more taxes than here (when you add in ALL our taxes - local, state, federal, and so on), and consumer goods are not that much more expensive then here (gas prices in Europe are high solely because of government efforts to control pollution). Those holes in your knowledge base are gaping ones. My wife worked on the local economy in Finland in the mid-1990's. She paid 42% of her income in income tax. Her overtime was taxed at 50%. We paid 21% in Value Added Tax on most items and 17% VAT on food items. We just got back from a trip to Finland. The same dishwashing liquid we buy here is double the price there. A 1.5 liter Pepsi sells for the price we pay for 3 liters. A half liter bottle of Scotch sells for $13.00 A tiny washing machine which would hold no more than half what our American machine holds runs $500. A mixed drink in the average bar runs ten bucks while a half liter beer will set you back about four clams. The cheapest car on the market, a Russian Lada (a Fiat clone) is $20,000. Gasoline prices are about $4.50 per gallon, not because of intent to reduce pollution but because a) Finland imports 100% of its petroleum and b) the Finnish government charges high additional taxes. Now, I'll entertain additional lectures from you on how the Europeans do things. They've done the same in the wealthy countries of Asia. Why is it so impossible for this great country to do what other countries have already done - provide decent wages for workers, provide decent (not astronomical) profits for business, and keep market prices reasonable? Why not just quit whining, Dwight? Dave K8MN |
"Dave Heil" wrote:
Lucky I failed to point that out because it simply isn't true. When Social Security began, where did the money to pay retirees of its early years come from? It didn't come from those folks because they never paid much in. It came in advance from the coffers of government. (snip) You really need to study up on Social Security, Dave. You have to pay so much into the system before you're eligible to collect a dime. When Social Security first started, people were not able to collect for several years (how many years depended on how much they were able to pay into the system each year). With the additional interest from that money, the system was supposed to pay for itself. Of course, there was no interest after the money was spent elsewhere. You've got a problem comprehending simple math. There are too few workers contributing to the system and too many retirees drawing from it. Oh, I understand math very well. You just don't understand the Social Security system, which is why your math is flawed. Everybody wants high wages for any kind of work. High wages lead to high prices for products and services. (snip) Nobody, other than you, is talking about "high" wages, Dave. What I'm talking about is "decent" wages that have not been artificially reduced by a created workforce glut. Today, even a two income family would have a hard time getting by on the minimum wage. They certainly wouldn't be able to put much money aside for their future so you can kill off that Social Security system you dislike so much. While you're traveling around town, take a good look at those minimum wage, or near minimum age, workers. A growing number of them are middle age or older (not young kids). Many were pushed out of decent paying jobs by industry moving overseas and a growing glut in the workforce here. How are these people going to provide for their families and still put away money for the future? Both the Democrats and Republicans support continued immigration because they can read the writing on the wall. Both parties support immigration because it provides direct benefits to them and/or their financial supporters. It provides no benefit to the American worker or American families. Indeed, it harms both of those. Only if in objecting they raise an alarm only over Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. They're the primary immigrants today, Dave. When talking about immigration, who would you rather I talk about - Aboriginal Australians? Those holes in your knowledge base are gaping ones. My wife worked on the local economy in Finland in the mid- 1990's. She paid 42% of her income in income tax. Her overtime was taxed at 50%. We paid 21% in Value Added Tax on most items and 17% VAT on food items. We just got back from a trip to Finland. The same dish- washing liquid we buy here is double the price there. A 1.5 liter Pepsi sells for the price we pay for 3 liters. A half liter bottle of Scotch sells for $13.00 A tiny washing machine which would hold no more than half what our American machine holds runs $500. And I've lived in Europe (Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and the UK) almost half of my adult life and worked for European companies for much of that time. While prices may be that high in Finland, what you say certainly is not the case throughout Europe. Taxes were never even close to that high and neither was the sales tax. As for your dishwashing liquid, I'm sure your imported liquid was fairly expensive, as are all imported products in any country. We paid more for our imported tea, but that doesn't mean there wasn't cheaper local brands on the store shelves. And, finally, if you paid that much for a washing machine, you got ripped off. We paid that much for stackable washer/dryer sets in both Germany and the UK. Either Finland has extraordinary prices or you need to learn how to shop better on the European economy. The cheapest car on the market, a Russian Lada (a Fiat clone) is $20,000. (snip) Nonsense. Throughout Continental Europe, you can buy a BMW 315 or 318 for that price. The Fiat "duck" is only about $4,500 (my wife wanted one). While we were in Germany, we purchased a darn fast, and darn comfortable, French-made Citroen BX-19GT for less than $16,000 (loaded, with even air conditioning for those trips to Southern Europe). Why not just quit whining, Dwight? Why not just quit listening, Dave? Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"JJ" wrote in message
... Dwight Stewart wrote: You only say that because I'm white. If that were not the case, you'd be saying the same thing to Condoleezza Rice (Nat, Sec, Advisor), Colin Powell (Sec, of State), Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Mary Berry (Chair, US Com. on Civil Rights), and a very long list of other minorities who think race and race issues are very relevant in this country. Why should it be any less so for whites? In reality, your open criticism of whites who talk about race, without criticism of other races who do the same, only demonstrates your own racism towards other whites. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ Lets see, we can have an all black mayors conference, but just listen to the uproar from all the Jesse Jackson idiots if we tried to have an all white mayors conference. We can have a Miss Black America contest but what a howl there would be if we attempted to have a Miss White America contest. Yea Hans, it is just the whites that are racist. It behooves all of us to be just as indignant about racism in any venue, regardless of ethnicity of the racist. That having been said, I can understand some of the seclusion each race enjoys from others, IF the purpose is cultural. What is specific to a black mayors conference are those things specifically related to black issues in the community(ies) they represent. I am certain that if there were issues that needed addressing in a "whites only" venue, then you'd see a white mayors conference and, honestly, I am not so sure there isn't one. What we may find generally attractive in a representative for the United States in a Miss America, is totally different from what the Black/Negro/Colored (depending on the part of society and geographical/historical perspective you come from) find in a representative specific to Black America. I also don't see those things as racist and I am wondering if you really do. I mean, the "race" card--as its so affectionately come to be known--can be played anywhere. And, there are people just stammering to be offended, no matter what. I disregard them. I don't see that a all male organization is necessarily discriminatory, either. Do you? I would hope not and, if you do not, then why is there a problem for you with a all _________ (whatever race) organization? What about a sports organization that won't allow women? What about.....??? Kim W5TIT |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:59 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com