imperatrixx -> RE: Jim Rogers: US nearing worse financial crisis (6/8/2011 10:53:44 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lockedaway Brilliant!!!! See what I mean when I say Americans are stupid? You elected a President that has helped RUIN you. The next year will be a raw catastrophe and every leading economist says so. And YOU...genius that you are....want to vote more liberal. I think you missed the part where I said that I didn't vote for him. Yes, I do think we should vote more liberal, because what we have now is outdated and decaying. The world is moving on - the corruption, lack of regulation, lack of social responsibility, and exponential divide between salaries of rich and poor is something found today in developing nations, not the first world. It's Mexico, not Canada. quote:
Well let me tell you something, bright girl, we aren't getting away from fossil fuel in YOUR LIFETIME. Sure...invent this, tinker with that and it's all good. But 50 years from now, oil, coal and natural gas will still be the fuels that are predominantly running this planet...unless we entirely gunk the planet up with nuclear. 50 years from now India and China will have far more need for oil than we should. quote:
Raising salaries for our teachers? Our education system is ranked....what? 36th in the world? Education in the U.S. is a fucking joke. We don't teach math or science or civics, we teach that the Prince has Two Daddy's and that there are more genders in the world than simply male and female. Oh yeah, baby, let's raise those salaries. Let's tax more and raise those salaries. Brilliant. Oh...and I guess you would like for more principals and vice principals and super intendents and administrative assistants and assistants for those assistants to be hired too. All with big fat pensions paid for by the tax payer. Yeah...fucking brilliant. No, mostly just teachers. I think most people would agree that the quality of the nation's education has fallen within the past 50-60 years. Allow me to suggest one significant factor in this - the womens' movement. 50 years ago, women had very limited career opportunities. They could be teachers, secretaries, flight attendants, nurses, shopgirls, or work in factories...I'm sure there were a few more options, but that's about the gist of it. So the most intelligent women in the workforce gravitated toward teaching and nursing, as the rest required less education and more opportunities for sexual harassment. The world is different today - the most intelligent women now are bankers, lawyers, brokers, diplomats...teaching is a low paid, low status job, especially in poor neighborhoods. I mean, it's simple economics. In every graduating class, there will be the top 5% and the bottom 5%. The top 5% get the jobs in wealthy suburbs and private schools, and the bottom 5% get the public schools in poor districts. So how on earth do you think that offering less salary and less benefits will entice brighter minds to take these jobs?
|
|
|
|