America, your so funny. You think your rich and powerful but all you are is a bunch of squatters. The way I see it if a criminal kicks open the door to your home and shoots you and your family, then claims the home as his own, he's not a rich and powerful man- just a criminal that's squatting. And just because you kick open the door of the Mayor doesn't mean your the Mayor.
See (and you republicans will love this!), Native peoples had far lower taxes than you impose on your people. We also had the lowest unemployment and much smaller Federal government. Also smaller local government and almost total individual responsibility. They also (key here) are preservationists when it comes to the earth. So for all the arguments that Ive ever heard that white society is "better" because they have indoor plumbing, this seems a weak argument when you consider that the world is in danger of melting due to the emissions left from "civilized" society.
So it appears that the Natives of this land had the answers all along so maybe they shouldn't be confined to reservations that whites define, and should be in the society, revered for their ancient wisdom. When listened to, this wisdom can lead us out of this dark time for both the economy and Mother Earths' long term health, and thus our own.
But the only ones that deserve to be here in the first place are the Natives, the African brothers that were brought here against their own will, and the Mexican brothers that watched as their homeland borders were re-drawn around them. So until all of them are living upper-middle class lives the rest of ya'll really should go back to England or wherever you came from.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Goodby America - the holocaust of the poor and middle class in America
I recall a Jewish proverb or story, whatever you call it:
It basically references a Jewish man during the holocaust. When Nazi soldiers came to the houses of his neighbors to remove them, he just watched as each family was removed one at a time. No one ever protested until he himself looked around and realized he had no way to rebel anymore as he was all alone. Then they came for him.
I look around at all the people from India replacing Americans in law, medicine and science. I cant help but get a feeling like what the last Jew felt like.
Difference is, I am screaming and yelling, and no one listens.
I feel like this is the holocaust of the poor and middle class in America.
It basically references a Jewish man during the holocaust. When Nazi soldiers came to the houses of his neighbors to remove them, he just watched as each family was removed one at a time. No one ever protested until he himself looked around and realized he had no way to rebel anymore as he was all alone. Then they came for him.
I look around at all the people from India replacing Americans in law, medicine and science. I cant help but get a feeling like what the last Jew felt like.
Difference is, I am screaming and yelling, and no one listens.
I feel like this is the holocaust of the poor and middle class in America.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
To All American Business Owners Who Off-Shore......
This is to all the business owners that don't hire Americans because other countries will do it cheaper:
Al-Queda is always hiring programmers, but I choose to not work for them because Im a patriot, and I expect you to hire me over someone from India for the exact same reason, because after all, aren't we all just capitalists?
If business owners continue to off-shore work, then the government has to step in and tax the hell out of business owners to pay for basic services, and to create the jobs business owners should be providing to Americans. When business owners employ Americans, the government can lessen the tax burden of business owners, so employ Americans and pay your fair share.
In this system we have, there cant be high taxes for the rich or middle class all the time. What happened recently is the tax burden was shifted to the masses because the massess were adequately employed, it made sense. As more jobs were lost, to the point that the government was not able to pay for basic services, the tax burden now has to be bore by the rich. Our system is just a teeter-totter. When required, it tilts in the direction it needs to, always striving for balance.
Wow! I was doing some research and this guy pretty much is saying what I have been saying for a while now, but he sounds important!
Al-Queda is always hiring programmers, but I choose to not work for them because Im a patriot, and I expect you to hire me over someone from India for the exact same reason, because after all, aren't we all just capitalists?
If business owners continue to off-shore work, then the government has to step in and tax the hell out of business owners to pay for basic services, and to create the jobs business owners should be providing to Americans. When business owners employ Americans, the government can lessen the tax burden of business owners, so employ Americans and pay your fair share.
In this system we have, there cant be high taxes for the rich or middle class all the time. What happened recently is the tax burden was shifted to the masses because the massess were adequately employed, it made sense. As more jobs were lost, to the point that the government was not able to pay for basic services, the tax burden now has to be bore by the rich. Our system is just a teeter-totter. When required, it tilts in the direction it needs to, always striving for balance.
Wow! I was doing some research and this guy pretty much is saying what I have been saying for a while now, but he sounds important!
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Funny Similarities
For some reason Ive always seen similarities between these faces. And Michelle, I think I found the inspiration behind your dress!
Thursday, November 6, 2008
What Christ would say about American society
So here's how Christ would feel about certain aspects of today's American society:
Money
Would Christ be rich like Republicans? Christ would have never been rich for one simple reason; he would have given away any money he had to those that really needed it. Hey "Christians", how many of you are rich? How many of you have more than our chocolate brothers in the ghettos? If you have more than people in your nearest "bad" part of town, you aren't practicing Christs love. In communities that practice Christs' true love, there are no ghettos. And rest assured, those forced to live in the ghetto know God and Christ far better than those that confine them there, as they have endured oppression faithfully, never marching on societies rich kingdoms and killing their inhabitants though their actions are clearly sin full.
What would Christ say about "in god we trust" on the dollar bill?
He'd be disgusted. God has nothing to do with money. People kill each other, distrust and generally don't like each other over money. What is the number one thing that kills a marriage? Its money. Anything that opens one to greed, hatred, and suspicion is not a thing of God. Christ would say that people that feel he would have been fine with "in god we trust"on money, don't understand Christs' true love. Sin is really defined as: purposeful behavior that defies the true love of Christ.
So lets talk about "sins".
Here's what Christ feels about what "Christians" are calling sins:
People living together before being married;
People that love God and have to find survival living together, trying to survive a society of "Christians" that make it so they have to live together to stay alive, is not sinning, its the opposite of sin. It is a reflection of God. Anyone that criticizes these children of God is partaking in sin. Why haven't today's "Christians" created a society where one income can provide a place to live for a man? I seem to remember that in the 50's in America a man could find a job that would pay him enough for shelter not only for himself but a family as well! The fact that greed has allowed society to take this from its own men is one of the biggest sins "Christians" can perpetrate. Somehow today's "Christians" feel they can ship the lively hood of good God loving men, trying to have families of their own, to other nations and that's not a sin. This is a misunderstanding of Christs true love.
What could possibly turn into sin for these children of God is if one becomes pregnant and both parents refuse to shelter the new life from the harms of life, for this is truly sin; knowingly and willingly neglecting the needs of life one has created is a gross sin. A society that forces men to not be able to provide for their young is also a sinning society. So when one ignores the sin that creates a situation where others have to sin, this is also one of the greatest sins of all, literally. Let us all partake in the blame of sin, that way well be more compelled to create a society where Gods children don't have to sin.
The term sin has come to be defined as whatever "Christians" disapprove of. So like the White house that has recently been hijacked by the Bush family and Republican cronies, I'm taking it back. I'm taking the true definition of the term sin back to how Christ defined it.
Sinning is really defined as: purposeful behavior that defies the true love of Christ.
Sex before marriage:
The implication here is that 2 people will not come together for the protection of the child if there is no commitment on their behalves to do so (marriage). This lack of protection for the new life is sin full. This is regardless of the marital status of the couple. In other words, a couple could be together, unmarried, only want to be with each other, love each other and the child and not be sinners or sinning in any fashion. Sin is the purposeful rejection of Christ pure love.
When no child is involved;
If the partners have no love for each other and have sex before marriage, they may willingly or not give each other disease. If they don't stay together sparing others this infection, they are sinning. Whether lack of love for their own safe well being, lack of love for each others safe well-being or not caring about the safe well-being of others who may get infected later is the sin, the lack of Christ pure love.
Guns:
Christ would never have approved of any man made apparatus that takes life away. He would say that in life we all will tend to disagree and sometimes passionately, however we must keep our disagreements to an intellectual level, make all arguments with true love in mind and lovingly respect the ideas of those you will disagree with. If those that you disagree with turn to violence against you, use the gifts god has given you to protect yourself, your mind, your body, and your love, but never seek to destroy them. For they are life like you and simply need help, not punishment.
The Chinese created gun powder and to this day do not rely on guns for protection. They created the yo-yo, which we laugh at here in America as a viable weapon of protection, however the Chinese understood early that weapons used to forcefully remove ones life was not the true loving way. Yes, the yo-yo is a more Christ like weapon if there ever was one, than the gun.
So Americans would logically ask how would Christ feel about the 2nd amendment?
This is a very complex matter as it mixes the fore fathers intent for citizens to arm themselves against tyrannical governments with a society that ever increasingly feels that Christs truly loving way would not allow for a dependence on guns. This is a bit of a dilemma and requires some real deep consideration using Christs love as the base for all thought.
On the one hand, lets say in the recent election John McCain would have won. Lets say that people rioted in the streets in protest and he sent in the Militia / Army to quell the situation. Would I agree with guns being used to protect good citizens from this corrupt fascist regime? Christ of course would not want the fighting to exist, but would he suggest to the people to allow themselves to be destroyed by the Militia? Would he know that their hearts are but the few last pure hearts left and suggest for them to use their god given faculties to protect themselves?
Besides, I imagine a scene where ordinary citizens are having to arm themselves against U.S. military. Even if you were armed, would you want to step to the U.S. army even if it was to protect your family? I cant imagine anyone that would want to do that. I suppose the founders wanted a way that the people could be free of tyranny by any means necessary, but in todays age, might there be better, less violent ways to protect ourselves?
How do we protect ourselves in truly Christian ways?
Obviously the Military will need a way to shoot down missiles from other countries, so they would be permitted to have large enough guns that they could not take life with, but rather shoot down missiles from other countries. The Military might be to weak if it didn't have proper guns when other nations do attack on foot. These guns however could be used against its own people, according to the founding fathers.
The founding fathers imagined a possibility of a government being so out of control and tyrannical that they delivered to us the 2nd amendment, allowing for citizens to protect themselves from their own government. Wow. When I imagine this situation I firstly imagine that there must be more diplomatic and / or legal ways to keep the U.S. forces from attacking their own people. Is this all were really left with in today's society? A society that calls itself foremost "Christian" to all other nations, and clings to its 2nd amendment right to stockpile weapons in ones house just in case a corrupt government kicks open your door and wants to kill you and yours?
I digress here for a moment;
(As a side note away from the current issue)
So what are we selling to the rest of the world? We expect the rest of the world to accept American democracy and free market capitalism; which allows for homeless men to be forgotten about and stepped over on the street, and a society clinging to its guns in fear of what its own government will to do it? Wow, isn't that what you would expect happens in a place like China that we've all been lead to believe has some of the worst human rights abuses in the world?
As a piggy back to this idea, Ive always seen the white pride movement claim that they are the superior race to all others. "Really?", Ive always asked inquisitively. So Ive looked. What is it that makes the white pride people so proud of their culture that they so bravely burn crosses on others lawns? In my mind, when I think of a culture worth fighting in the streets for, or killing innocent people for, that culture must (when left to its own devices) provide health care and schools to all its people. Full employment to all its own people with attention to them first and not other countries that will simply "do it for cheaper". Healthy foods abound to take care of the populace, free and open places of worship. Healthy and happy, caring and loving societies. Well it appears that after you annihilated the native population you were left to your own devices. This was a time before slaves reached the American shores. What does that society represent? All the wonderful things mentioned above? Well, you've created a society which allows for homeless men to be forgotten about and stepped over on the street, and a society clinging to its guns in fear of what its own government will to do it? Besides, if your true racists, then when left to your own devices, you will start to pull your own members out of the pack to accuse them of racial impropriety, ultimately turning on itself. We saw this happen during the Salem Witch trials. So don't kid yourselves white pride-sters, if all of the "mongrels" were wiped out, you'd have the same miserable, crappy, hate-filled lives you've always had, just with out the rest of us to blame for it. So before you look like an idiot and start violence against innocents, because deep down you know your racist lifestyle is weak, take and use that energy to create the society you claim is worth fighting for. I'm sure the elders of your group will agree.
So basically its unchristian to not think with love and its un-American to remove the ability to choose and to remove options when one can choose. Christians frequently seek to remove options in the name of religion, and this is against Christ pure love.
Christianity in America has been hijacked by hate-filled rich people. If they can get us all to feel guilty enough about not being as religious as they are, then they think they control us. We all know they yell so loudly about our morals because behind the scenes they can not follow what they preach. And the truth is we are morally superior, as evidenced in the fact that we don't yell as loudly at others about their morals. As morally superior people, we don't have to accuse anyone or ever say "I don't agree" with someones lifestyle. Id absolutely love to hear all about the grapefruits love of God if they could just say they love someone not like them.
Money
Would Christ be rich like Republicans? Christ would have never been rich for one simple reason; he would have given away any money he had to those that really needed it. Hey "Christians", how many of you are rich? How many of you have more than our chocolate brothers in the ghettos? If you have more than people in your nearest "bad" part of town, you aren't practicing Christs love. In communities that practice Christs' true love, there are no ghettos. And rest assured, those forced to live in the ghetto know God and Christ far better than those that confine them there, as they have endured oppression faithfully, never marching on societies rich kingdoms and killing their inhabitants though their actions are clearly sin full.
What would Christ say about "in god we trust" on the dollar bill?
He'd be disgusted. God has nothing to do with money. People kill each other, distrust and generally don't like each other over money. What is the number one thing that kills a marriage? Its money. Anything that opens one to greed, hatred, and suspicion is not a thing of God. Christ would say that people that feel he would have been fine with "in god we trust"on money, don't understand Christs' true love. Sin is really defined as: purposeful behavior that defies the true love of Christ.
So lets talk about "sins".
Here's what Christ feels about what "Christians" are calling sins:
People living together before being married;
People that love God and have to find survival living together, trying to survive a society of "Christians" that make it so they have to live together to stay alive, is not sinning, its the opposite of sin. It is a reflection of God. Anyone that criticizes these children of God is partaking in sin. Why haven't today's "Christians" created a society where one income can provide a place to live for a man? I seem to remember that in the 50's in America a man could find a job that would pay him enough for shelter not only for himself but a family as well! The fact that greed has allowed society to take this from its own men is one of the biggest sins "Christians" can perpetrate. Somehow today's "Christians" feel they can ship the lively hood of good God loving men, trying to have families of their own, to other nations and that's not a sin. This is a misunderstanding of Christs true love.
What could possibly turn into sin for these children of God is if one becomes pregnant and both parents refuse to shelter the new life from the harms of life, for this is truly sin; knowingly and willingly neglecting the needs of life one has created is a gross sin. A society that forces men to not be able to provide for their young is also a sinning society. So when one ignores the sin that creates a situation where others have to sin, this is also one of the greatest sins of all, literally. Let us all partake in the blame of sin, that way well be more compelled to create a society where Gods children don't have to sin.
The term sin has come to be defined as whatever "Christians" disapprove of. So like the White house that has recently been hijacked by the Bush family and Republican cronies, I'm taking it back. I'm taking the true definition of the term sin back to how Christ defined it.
Sinning is really defined as: purposeful behavior that defies the true love of Christ.
Sex before marriage:
The implication here is that 2 people will not come together for the protection of the child if there is no commitment on their behalves to do so (marriage). This lack of protection for the new life is sin full. This is regardless of the marital status of the couple. In other words, a couple could be together, unmarried, only want to be with each other, love each other and the child and not be sinners or sinning in any fashion. Sin is the purposeful rejection of Christ pure love.
When no child is involved;
If the partners have no love for each other and have sex before marriage, they may willingly or not give each other disease. If they don't stay together sparing others this infection, they are sinning. Whether lack of love for their own safe well being, lack of love for each others safe well-being or not caring about the safe well-being of others who may get infected later is the sin, the lack of Christ pure love.
Guns:
Christ would never have approved of any man made apparatus that takes life away. He would say that in life we all will tend to disagree and sometimes passionately, however we must keep our disagreements to an intellectual level, make all arguments with true love in mind and lovingly respect the ideas of those you will disagree with. If those that you disagree with turn to violence against you, use the gifts god has given you to protect yourself, your mind, your body, and your love, but never seek to destroy them. For they are life like you and simply need help, not punishment.
The Chinese created gun powder and to this day do not rely on guns for protection. They created the yo-yo, which we laugh at here in America as a viable weapon of protection, however the Chinese understood early that weapons used to forcefully remove ones life was not the true loving way. Yes, the yo-yo is a more Christ like weapon if there ever was one, than the gun.
So Americans would logically ask how would Christ feel about the 2nd amendment?
This is a very complex matter as it mixes the fore fathers intent for citizens to arm themselves against tyrannical governments with a society that ever increasingly feels that Christs truly loving way would not allow for a dependence on guns. This is a bit of a dilemma and requires some real deep consideration using Christs love as the base for all thought.
On the one hand, lets say in the recent election John McCain would have won. Lets say that people rioted in the streets in protest and he sent in the Militia / Army to quell the situation. Would I agree with guns being used to protect good citizens from this corrupt fascist regime? Christ of course would not want the fighting to exist, but would he suggest to the people to allow themselves to be destroyed by the Militia? Would he know that their hearts are but the few last pure hearts left and suggest for them to use their god given faculties to protect themselves?
Besides, I imagine a scene where ordinary citizens are having to arm themselves against U.S. military. Even if you were armed, would you want to step to the U.S. army even if it was to protect your family? I cant imagine anyone that would want to do that. I suppose the founders wanted a way that the people could be free of tyranny by any means necessary, but in todays age, might there be better, less violent ways to protect ourselves?
How do we protect ourselves in truly Christian ways?
Obviously the Military will need a way to shoot down missiles from other countries, so they would be permitted to have large enough guns that they could not take life with, but rather shoot down missiles from other countries. The Military might be to weak if it didn't have proper guns when other nations do attack on foot. These guns however could be used against its own people, according to the founding fathers.
The founding fathers imagined a possibility of a government being so out of control and tyrannical that they delivered to us the 2nd amendment, allowing for citizens to protect themselves from their own government. Wow. When I imagine this situation I firstly imagine that there must be more diplomatic and / or legal ways to keep the U.S. forces from attacking their own people. Is this all were really left with in today's society? A society that calls itself foremost "Christian" to all other nations, and clings to its 2nd amendment right to stockpile weapons in ones house just in case a corrupt government kicks open your door and wants to kill you and yours?
I digress here for a moment;
(As a side note away from the current issue)
So what are we selling to the rest of the world? We expect the rest of the world to accept American democracy and free market capitalism; which allows for homeless men to be forgotten about and stepped over on the street, and a society clinging to its guns in fear of what its own government will to do it? Wow, isn't that what you would expect happens in a place like China that we've all been lead to believe has some of the worst human rights abuses in the world?
As a piggy back to this idea, Ive always seen the white pride movement claim that they are the superior race to all others. "Really?", Ive always asked inquisitively. So Ive looked. What is it that makes the white pride people so proud of their culture that they so bravely burn crosses on others lawns? In my mind, when I think of a culture worth fighting in the streets for, or killing innocent people for, that culture must (when left to its own devices) provide health care and schools to all its people. Full employment to all its own people with attention to them first and not other countries that will simply "do it for cheaper". Healthy foods abound to take care of the populace, free and open places of worship. Healthy and happy, caring and loving societies. Well it appears that after you annihilated the native population you were left to your own devices. This was a time before slaves reached the American shores. What does that society represent? All the wonderful things mentioned above? Well, you've created a society which allows for homeless men to be forgotten about and stepped over on the street, and a society clinging to its guns in fear of what its own government will to do it? Besides, if your true racists, then when left to your own devices, you will start to pull your own members out of the pack to accuse them of racial impropriety, ultimately turning on itself. We saw this happen during the Salem Witch trials. So don't kid yourselves white pride-sters, if all of the "mongrels" were wiped out, you'd have the same miserable, crappy, hate-filled lives you've always had, just with out the rest of us to blame for it. So before you look like an idiot and start violence against innocents, because deep down you know your racist lifestyle is weak, take and use that energy to create the society you claim is worth fighting for. I'm sure the elders of your group will agree.
So basically its unchristian to not think with love and its un-American to remove the ability to choose and to remove options when one can choose. Christians frequently seek to remove options in the name of religion, and this is against Christ pure love.
Christianity in America has been hijacked by hate-filled rich people. If they can get us all to feel guilty enough about not being as religious as they are, then they think they control us. We all know they yell so loudly about our morals because behind the scenes they can not follow what they preach. And the truth is we are morally superior, as evidenced in the fact that we don't yell as loudly at others about their morals. As morally superior people, we don't have to accuse anyone or ever say "I don't agree" with someones lifestyle. Id absolutely love to hear all about the grapefruits love of God if they could just say they love someone not like them.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Why sending jobs overseas has led us to the 2nd great depression
So all I hear from Republicans with regard to sending jobs overseas is how so many new high paying jobs will be created in the U.S. when we send our jobs overseas. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Here's a comprehensive list of the damaging effects of off shoring:
1. That's great that you send every Americans job overseas but then what do we do with Americans that have to change industries now? The government that promotes sending jobs offshore has a responsibility to take care of Americans displaced by this off shoring. That means more tax money spent now in the form of Vocational / School vouchers and government sponsored training programs. Also, the government gets to do the research to see what training they should offer. The government is responsible if they offer training for industries that get shipped overseas the next day. Wow, sounds expensive but it is the right thing to do, and is done in many countries in Europe. That raises taxes for all by the way.
2. There is a smaller amount of tax dollars coming into the government because the off shore wage is so much smaller. Less money for homeless and cleaning up ghettos here in America. That money could also go to education, investment in alternate fuel sources, medical care for all Americans. The list of things Americans deserve is endless but gets shorter when we decide to send jobs off shore.
3. Those dollars made by foreigners are kept in their economies, sent back home to family, I'm sure you've no doubt heard someone from China or India say in this country. Hey, what about my family and my parents? Why don't I deserve to make that money for them? Why should it go to someone elses family in India or China or wherever decides to undercut Americans? Fairytale economics teaches us that they will spend those dollars sent back home on expensive American products in their own countries. But if they do not, if they purchase much cheaper products made in their own country, those dollars are lost to you and I forever.
4. The government frequently makes student loans for training in work that is strictly done overseas (basically everything), thus shipping those jobs away that one was recently trained in! So now there are huge student loans that cant be paid back simply because the government gave tax credits to businesses to ship those jobs away. Now all that's available if your lucky is a job at Wall mart that will keep that loan open for much longer and raising taxes for all because of this. Taxes go down when there aren't looming student loans.
5. When one is made unemployed because their industry has been shipped overseas, they usually will receive unemployment insurance which once again drains on the system, again raising taxes. The fewer people we have collecting unemployment the less tax money we have to pay as tax payers.
6. When everyones spending power is reduced to Wallmart wages, dont expect banks to stay around very long. If everyone has to live in an apartment, that is just profit to the pocket of apartment owners instead of being capital gaining interes and being available to new business owners, anyone looking for capital for any reason. Now again weve shrank the amount of tax money comming in thus raising tax rates. We can have lots of tax dollars comming in from employed Americans so we can have a lower tax rate overall, or we can have fewer tax dollars becuase ther is less income to tax thus forcing us to raise the tax rate becuse there are fewer dollars to tax!
7. Fairytale economics teaches us that the savings earned by businesses by offshoring will be reinvested into the company and new higher paying jobs will emerge!! But what if the business owner or board investor wants to turn a profit instead of reinvest this year? Well guess what, no job creation and again a lower tax base for what all society needs.
So all you "lower tax" fans out there, guess what; when you offshore jobs, taxes go way up exponentially for everyone!!! So its very hard to listen to someone that says that they support offshoring and lower taxes.
Whats so great about depression anyway?
1. That's great that you send every Americans job overseas but then what do we do with Americans that have to change industries now? The government that promotes sending jobs offshore has a responsibility to take care of Americans displaced by this off shoring. That means more tax money spent now in the form of Vocational / School vouchers and government sponsored training programs. Also, the government gets to do the research to see what training they should offer. The government is responsible if they offer training for industries that get shipped overseas the next day. Wow, sounds expensive but it is the right thing to do, and is done in many countries in Europe. That raises taxes for all by the way.
2. There is a smaller amount of tax dollars coming into the government because the off shore wage is so much smaller. Less money for homeless and cleaning up ghettos here in America. That money could also go to education, investment in alternate fuel sources, medical care for all Americans. The list of things Americans deserve is endless but gets shorter when we decide to send jobs off shore.
3. Those dollars made by foreigners are kept in their economies, sent back home to family, I'm sure you've no doubt heard someone from China or India say in this country. Hey, what about my family and my parents? Why don't I deserve to make that money for them? Why should it go to someone elses family in India or China or wherever decides to undercut Americans? Fairytale economics teaches us that they will spend those dollars sent back home on expensive American products in their own countries. But if they do not, if they purchase much cheaper products made in their own country, those dollars are lost to you and I forever.
4. The government frequently makes student loans for training in work that is strictly done overseas (basically everything), thus shipping those jobs away that one was recently trained in! So now there are huge student loans that cant be paid back simply because the government gave tax credits to businesses to ship those jobs away. Now all that's available if your lucky is a job at Wall mart that will keep that loan open for much longer and raising taxes for all because of this. Taxes go down when there aren't looming student loans.
5. When one is made unemployed because their industry has been shipped overseas, they usually will receive unemployment insurance which once again drains on the system, again raising taxes. The fewer people we have collecting unemployment the less tax money we have to pay as tax payers.
6. When everyones spending power is reduced to Wallmart wages, dont expect banks to stay around very long. If everyone has to live in an apartment, that is just profit to the pocket of apartment owners instead of being capital gaining interes and being available to new business owners, anyone looking for capital for any reason. Now again weve shrank the amount of tax money comming in thus raising tax rates. We can have lots of tax dollars comming in from employed Americans so we can have a lower tax rate overall, or we can have fewer tax dollars becuase ther is less income to tax thus forcing us to raise the tax rate becuse there are fewer dollars to tax!
7. Fairytale economics teaches us that the savings earned by businesses by offshoring will be reinvested into the company and new higher paying jobs will emerge!! But what if the business owner or board investor wants to turn a profit instead of reinvest this year? Well guess what, no job creation and again a lower tax base for what all society needs.
So all you "lower tax" fans out there, guess what; when you offshore jobs, taxes go way up exponentially for everyone!!! So its very hard to listen to someone that says that they support offshoring and lower taxes.
Whats so great about depression anyway?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
