"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
news
"charlesb" wrote:

OH, I see! - You're talking about the government
being intelligent enough to keep it's hands off of the
economy so that it can mature and grow! I couldn't
agree with you more. - And you have history on
your side, in this arguement. Every recorded instance
of governmental meddling with the parameters of the
economy has resulted in fiasco, a net loss. (snip)


I'm arguing for a change in the ways things are done now, Charles. Not
for
more of the same garbage. If you're truly that dissatisfied, you should
want
some form of change. Instead, you seem to arguing to keep the existing
status quo.

Amazing that you can interpret all that from my post, which I had thought to
be fairly straightforward and easy to understand.

Let's try again: The kind of economic manipulation that you are advocating
has been tried many, many times, with consistently poor results. It is not
"new" and further manipulations of this kind would not be a "change", as it
has been tried extensively already. - Again; With consistently poor results.

A good "change" would be to adopt a more intelligent attitude about the
market and resist the "Pollyanna" temptation to attempt to legislate
prosperity.

Of course it could be that you will read this and conclude that I must mean
that parrots are smarter than doves, so they would be the best thing to use
for a messenger service... After your left-field response to my first post,
I would not be at all surprised.

This may point out where some of our economic woes may originate.... Are all
people who advocate manipulation of the economy by well-meaning fools
functionally illiterate? Perhaps that is what keeps them from learning the
simple lessons of history, tempting them to advocate old, bad ideas that are
conspicuous for thier repeated failure?

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...
"N2EY" wrote:

I think that when Kim writes "no one" in a context like
that, she really means "almost no one" or "hardly anyone"
rather than the literal standard meaning "not a single
person" or "nobody at all".


I know what she means, but it's not what she wrote, Jim. And if we can't
get past the absoluteness of that "no one," there is little way to
continue
the discussion. If we're instead talking about "almost no one" or "hardly
anyone," then the obvious question becomes why bring in immigrants to take
even those few people's jobs or drive down their wages.


And, if you want to argue symantecs, Dwight, then you have a roadblock that
won't allow for reasonable discussion of the topic. I am telling you that
my experience has been that people who are customarily born in this country
feel that the jobs we are speaking of are beneath them. Period. Now, the
only areas of this country that I have lived in with enough time to gather
that opinion is in NE NY and down here in the DFW area. If your experience
is different--sobeit. But, how dare you dismiss the experiences I have
seen.

Not only am I basing the opinion I have off true experience and
observations, I am also an above-average (or was) politically active person.
When topics like this come up on radio talk-shows, television news magazine
shows, and in Congress--which I used to spend hours and hours every day
watching--the discussion is that "immigration" is killing jobs in this
country vs. that the jobs in this country immigration fills are those that
will not customarily be done by people born here.

I wish I could say to you, "prove to me that there are people born here who
will ______" and you fill in the blank. But that is both unrealistic and
not constructive. So, the only mechanism I have by which to comment on the
topic *is* from my experience. I even added enough honesty into the
discussion to say that, neither now or when I *was* young enough to do it,
would *I* do those jobs. And, as Jim/N2EY pointed out, *immigrant* farming
is a whole other ballgame than just farming. Immigrant farming involves
migrant lifestyles that few of us are even familiar with--let alone willing
to do.



Of course, I don't
really expect Kim to answer those questions. Few seem to care about the
Americans who are losing their jobs, or are seeing their wages reduced, as
a
result of immigration and other government policies. They have their
pro-immigration blinders on and refuse to see the obvious fallout of these
government policies.


And, how dare you again, Dwight. You are being as overhanded with your
remarks about my character, related to this conversation as anyone like
Larry Roll would be--so don't even bother calling him on the carpet for his
behavior!! How dare you imply that I "don't care" about bad policies in
this country. Have I once said I don't care? Furthermore, the obvious
fallout that you believe is not what I see--and I've just told you I am
basing that on experience. Go to the Unemployment lines. I haven't--but I
*BET* the majority of people in those lines are not looking for work on
farms, at Wal-Mart, with municipalities, landscape companies, construction
firms, asbestos abatement firms, chemical and biological hazard waste firms,
and our ever-famous convenience stores such as 7-Eleven--all of which need
people constantly. I reiterate *CONSTANTLY* because there is no one who
will "take" those jobs--*EXCEPT* people who recognize them as a job to take
when one is desperate. (An aside--if you want to break off into symantecs
and argue about defining "no one," go debate with yourself, Dwight).

Those jobs, and so many more that I could think of, are *generally* not
taken by people who have been born in this country. There are some who
do--and they are in what used to be the ethnic miniorities. All one need do
is look around them to see where our youth find important and meaningful
employment: McDonald's and other fast food joints, light dining restaraunts,
and that's about it. Why did I break-out to light dining restaraunts?
Because I don't see teen-agers in the "finer" dining restaraunts--and my
husband and I love to eat out so we have some experience. Know why *I*
think they (teen-agers) aren't there? Because there, the customer service
is higher scale, which demands more personality, better etiquette, and of
course--greater work ethic. Guess who we do see serving us in those
restaraunts?

My husband has been at his formerly family-owned business for 27 years. His
mom sold the company last year. For most of those 27 years, until about 10
years ago, they had a great crew of folks. Since then, the main focus of my
husband's every day work has been to get someone in there who wants a job
and will work. Know how many nieces nephews, and his own kids and my son,
he has had through those years? Ten. Not one of them has ever, ever worked
there. Know how many great nieces and nephews he has had who, of course,
have been old enough to work through those years? They are just now getting
in to their early-mid teens. A quick count of those that could work there
is somewhere around seven. Not one has ever done it. Oh, I take that back.
My husband's daugher worked there--for literally four days.

For goodness sake, here's a great example: I am privvy to a situation where
I know a kid of coworker's who had "no prospect" (yeah, right) of a job
after completing a 2-year program with one of these "tech" type training
institutions. So, she's back living with mummy and daddy and pining and
sighing every day. I have a co-worker who is from India. He's brought his
wife over here and she'd been here for about, oh, three months before they
both learned of the medical transcritption service industry that's been
popping up over the past few years. He has a problem with his wife going
out in the workforce, but she wanted to work to contribute to the recovery
of costs it took to get her here, etc. She went to a 6-week (I think it
was) school to learn medical transcription, blah, blah, blah, she now has
her own home-business with her family doctor as her first customer and
she'll get more, I'm sure. We were all talking about this at work. He
mentions this to this coworker whose kid has no prospect for a job. Know
what the kid's response was? I think you do.

So, it isn't only you who has your own company, Dwight, whose livelihood is
at stake with things such as they are. I'll come full circle with my
indignation again: how dare you imply that I don't care.


I look around and see many in my hometown (a small town) unemployed or
working in low paying jobs while every factory in the area closes and
immigrants move in to take jobs.


If the factories are closing, then what jobs are the immigrants moving in to
take? And, have you any friends or casual acquaintances that you can ask if
they have tried to get those jobs? I am still curious to know if factories
are closing, what jobs are available for anyone to take? I take your
comment above to be pretty dismal. I've been in dismal (the NE when the oil
crisis happened--talk about getting dismal) and I had to move down here to
make it.


A friend, who has been doing lawn care for
almost three decades, recently lost a long-standing contract to another
out-of-state company using all immigrant employees. As a result, he filed
for bankruptcy and had to fire his entire workforce - Americans who were
willing to work.


Well, excuse me for the honesty--you'll call it having my blinders on or not
caring, maybe even because I am a "liberal"--but, if one contract put this
company out of business, then perhaps the person should have gone on to some
form of vocational or higher level training in business practices before
they took such a jump. I've had my own company too, years ago. And, if I'd
had just one "large" job/contract, I would have been in a constant state of
panic. And, as an aside, if this person's seeing other companies get the
contracts...then go get a job with those companies as a Salesperson, or
whatever. Maybe he/she *won't* make the money he's accustomed to--but we
gotta do whatever it takes to make adjustments to the things we have no
control over. And, if we have no control over the employment situation in
this country--we don't whine about it. We knuckle under, get the menial
jobs, sell the big house, get the little house, sell the SUV and get the
Saturn, and we begin the task of seeing what we can do--if anything--to
change the route of what we perceive as being awful.


I'm feeling the pressure right now. One of my companies (wetland
maintenance) is facing competition from a company with almost all illegal
immigrant employees.


Then, report the company to INS. REPORT THEM. If the company is getting
contracts based on their employment of illegeal aliens, then I am sure the
firms they are doing services for will want to know this. For goodness
sake, REPORT their ass.


I just barely held onto a county contract last time,
but profits are now dismal. To hold onto that contract next time, either I
cut my employee's wages sharply or I replace them with illegal immigrants.


Don't you dare buy in to the illegal and unethical side of this. To join is
not to change or conquer.


The only other option is to not even bid at all, which means the other
company (with it's illegal immigrants) is assured the contract (and I let
employees go).


And, if it illegal immigration that is nulling you out, you use the laws and
shouting as loud as you can shout to fight it.


The economy of this country is quickly heading to hell in a handbasket
and
few seem to even notice or care.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



I don't know who's not noticing or caring. I see a lot of doing nothing to
get involved against it, or to even lift a finger of their own to change it.

Kim W5TIT

"JJ" wrote in message
...
Larry Roll K3LT wrote:


However, in the context of our modern and presumably more enlightened
times, they represent something that is, best, an anachronistic example
of age-old prejudices. We should all be united under one flag, and that
flag has 50 stars and 13 stripes -- not a big "X" running through it.

73 de Larry, K3LT


Just saw on the news that more blacks are leaving the North for the
South than blacks leaving the South for the North. Reason? More jobs in
the South and less racism.


The news said that? That there's LESS racism? Compared to where and
where?! I come from NE NY and never really saw any racism.

Here, the topic is a part of every-day life.

Kim W5TIT

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...

For example, the flag [the Rebel flag, sic] is displayed
most often when a liberal is in the White House and less often when a
conservative is in the White House. A few years ago, during the Clinton
years, you could see that flag everywhere (vehicles, yards, and so on).
Today, it has virtually disappeared.


Maybe that has more to do with the fact that Clinton was from the South and
the flags were some form of "solidarity." You sure do see things from a
weird perspective, in my opinion.

When another liberal gets in the White
House, that flag will suddenly show up on everything again. The more
liberal
that person is, the more you'll see that flag displayed.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



Perhaps it will be because the more Southern someone is, the more the
Southerners feel more like they are being better represented? I mean, if
we're going to come up with divisible concepts...let's make them good at
least. Maybe the Norwegian Californians will start waving theirs.
shrugging in disgust

Kim W5TIT

Kim W5TIT wrote:

won't allow for reasonable discussion of the topic. I am telling you that
my experience has been that people who are customarily born in this country
feel that the jobs we are speaking of are beneath them. Period.

It isn't everyone, Kim. I do agree that here in the US, that many
people feel that some jobs are "too low class" for them. Educators (and
many others in authority) have demeaned jobs they consider beneath
dignity. I remember my high school principle personally taking me aside
and telling me "Mike, you're a smart kid, why do you want to go to
Vo-Tech?" I took the academic courses also, but he was worried about the
"Tekker" image and what damage it could do to me. I was flattered for
his concern and intervening in what should have been between my guidance
counseler and myself, but I went to Vo-Tech anyhow.


For goodness sake, here's a great example: I am privvy to a situation where
I know a kid of coworker's who had "no prospect" (yeah, right) of a job
after completing a 2-year program with one of these "tech" type training
institutions. So, she's back living with mummy and daddy and pining and
sighing every day.

But she has options! She can live with Mommy and Daddy and not work! I
never considered that one of my options, so when I was young, I'd take
whatever job would put food on the table. And that makes for a big
difference in what job is demeaning, and what job isn't.



- Mike KB3EIA -

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote in message
...
In article . net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:


If the Civil War was about slavery, then why was there a war at all?
Prior
to the war, the slave states were the majority in both the House and
Senate,
insuring no legislation could be passed to end slavery. Slavery was only
abolished after the war by not allowing the former Confederate States
(which
included several, but not all, of the slave states) to participate in
that
vote.


(snip) why, in it's aftermath, did one of the most famous
Confederate Generals, Nathan Bedford Forrest,
organize the Ku Klux Klan? (snip)


When you answer that, perhaps you can also answer why so many
Northerners
join the KKK.

Dwight:

I consider the KKK to be about racism, not slavery. It was originally
started as a response to the heavy-handed political disenfranchisement
of the former Confederate states by Northern "Carpetbaggers" who
essentially swept into the South and took over in the aftermath of the
Civil War. I don't believe that was right and never said so. However,
the KKK, instead of targeting the mostly white Yankee politicians
who violated the constitutional rights of the citizens of the Southern
states, chose instead to target ethnic and religious groups, such as
blacks, Catholics, and particularly Jews. Therefore, their motives were
wrong from the start.

The South has a lot to answer for, IMHO. (snip)


Why would they have any more to answer for than the Northern states
that
profited from the sale of slaves? Or more to answer for than those who
used
indentured or bound black workers in the North, even into the early
1900's?
Or more to answer for than the many countries around the world which
practiced slavery in this last century (the 1900's), the previous
century,
or in the many centuries before that?

I never said that slavery wasn't practiced in the North.

(snip) Modern-day Rebels with the Confederate flags on
their pickup trucks don't do much to heal the wounds of
the past. (snip)

Perhaps because they have absolutely no responsibility for what
happened
in a past long before they were born.

However, in the context of our modern and presumably more enlightened
times, they represent something that is, best, an anachronistic example
of age-old prejudices. We should all be united under one flag, and that
flag has 50 stars and 13 stripes -- not a big "X" running through it.

73 de Larry, K3LT


The flag of the confederacy is NOT the battle flag being displayed as the
flag of the Confederacy.

When the Tennessee Battle Flag is flown in the South, by real Southerners,
it is meant as a sign of respect for the fallen and a symbol of STATES
RIGHTS.

No one advocates seccession from the Union, or starting another war.

But....we get real tired of Northerners and blacks trying to tear the flag
down, especially since the reason they want to tear it down is they believe
it is a racist symbol.

If it IS a racist symbol to them. Then they have fallen for the big lie.
Govern yourself accordingly.

Dan/W4NTI

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"JJ" wrote in message
...
Larry Roll K3LT wrote:


However, in the context of our modern and presumably more enlightened
times, they represent something that is, best, an anachronistic
example
of age-old prejudices. We should all be united under one flag, and
that
flag has 50 stars and 13 stripes -- not a big "X" running through it.

73 de Larry, K3LT


Just saw on the news that more blacks are leaving the North for the
South than blacks leaving the South for the North. Reason? More jobs in
the South and less racism.


The news said that? That there's LESS racism? Compared to where and
where?! I come from NE NY and never really saw any racism.

Here, the topic is a part of every-day life.

Kim W5TIT



It is a part of everyday life, because it is in the interest of people like
Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, etc. to KEEP IT in everyday life. If the
'racism' issue was let to die a natural death, it would go away. As it
is....it is being pushed down everyones throat.

Dan/W4NTI

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
nk.net...

For example, the flag [the Rebel flag, sic] is displayed
most often when a liberal is in the White House and less often when a
conservative is in the White House. A few years ago, during the Clinton
years, you could see that flag everywhere (vehicles, yards, and so on).
Today, it has virtually disappeared.


Maybe that has more to do with the fact that Clinton was from the South
and
the flags were some form of "solidarity." You sure do see things from a
weird perspective, in my opinion.

When another liberal gets in the White
House, that flag will suddenly show up on everything again. The more
liberal
that person is, the more you'll see that flag displayed.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/



Perhaps it will be because the more Southern someone is, the more the
Southerners feel more like they are being better represented? I mean, if
we're going to come up with divisible concepts...let's make them good at
least. Maybe the Norwegian Californians will start waving theirs.
shrugging in disgust

Kim W5TIT



Most northerners I know that have crossed the Mason Dixon line and stayed in
the South for a period of time have 'adopted' their new surroundings. With
one major exception....those from NY.

Wonder why that is?

That is one of the main reasons I left South Florida. Bunches of New
Yorkers bringing all their bad habits with them.

When I decided to stay here I was told by a good friend to do two things;

1. Pick a football team.

2. Don't try and change a thing.

Good advice.....Roll Tide.

Dan/W4NTI

Kim W5TIT wrote:
..


Just saw on the news that more blacks are leaving the North for the
South than blacks leaving the South for the North. Reason? More jobs in
the South and less racism.



The news said that? That there's LESS racism? Compared to where and
where?! I come from NE NY and never really saw any racism.

Ask the blacks, they are the ones leaving claiming more racism in the
North than the South.

JJ wrote:


Suggest you and Kim read this:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/987498.asp?cp1=1


Ancient liberal press trick of assigning reasons for something to
something else.

My read:
1. Earlier, a lot of Black people moved north for jobs.

2. Jobs go away, and next generation is better educated.

3. People move to where they can get a job.



The closest thing to a quote from an actual person who MOved south and
said this is why they moved south was from some dude in the urban
league. I hesitate to draw the same conclusions. YMMV

- Mike KB3EIA -