Bush .vs. Gore

[TWTCommish]

I will not argue with all of that...some of it I think its a bit nuts, but there's nothing I can say that will be anything else other than my opinion against yours, so I'll only address a few things...

Originally posted by LuZeR

Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart's strategy is to move into a town and operate at a loss, underselling the locally owned stores until they go out of business. Then they raise their prices. They also have ridiculous policies restricting employee's dating each other and paying low wages.

Their prices are still VERY low. In addition, people obviously love the stores - I never see a WAL-MART without seeing a K-Mart or something similar nearby. They basically always have competition.

Last time I checked, people WANT to work there...in fact, they want to work there enough that they actually (gasp!) submit applications in HOPES of being accepted. If they don't like the policies, they can leave. People do not have to buy from Wal-Mart. I honestly believe it's hated because Sam Walton was a conservative...

They sell things cheap...I see no problem.

Originally posted by LuZeR

Kentucky Fried Chicken

Kentucky Fried Chicken is owned by PepsiCo who has been collaborating with military forces in some countries for years that supress and kill the local populations.

Why are they collaborating with the military? I'm quite surprised by this.

Originally posted by LuZeR

K-Mart

They have put numerous locally owned stores out of business and contributed to the plasticization of the world.

I knew that "they put mom and pop stores out of business" line was coming...even though it was worded differently.

Business is business...K-Mart sells things to people at a low price and the people buy it happily. We can't have a world full of tiny shops, and even if we could, we never would...by the logic you seem to be using, no company should ever strive to be large and successful.

FYI: Mom and Pop want to make a buttload of money too - they just don't usually do so. Sam Walton was once one of those tiny stores...he ran a small General Store himself. Small stores have to grow - it does not make them evil for doing well.

Plasticization? Wha?

[edshuck]

hi

here is the test;

when bush looks at a miner does he see a person? or does he see inventory?

i think gore does sees a person.

peace ed

my dad was a miner. i loved him. but he was little more than inventory to the company.

[Plebius]

Originally posted by TWTCommish

Why are they collaborating with the military? I'm quite surprised by this.

There are resources, etc that they want.

That's true, Mom & Pop want to make money too. However, their profits stay more in the local community instead of going off to some billionaire miles away. They are also in less of a position to exploit other countries resources as a form of economic imperialism. I'm not necessarily anti capitalism, I'm anti corporatism. Corporations tend to put profits before people. What should be more important? The almighty dollar or the sovereignty and self determination of people? Every day transnational corporations are taking more and more power from the people and putting it in the hands of a few profit motivated people. The WTO is just one example of this. Corporate WTO leaders, in an undemocratic process, have already ruled that a Canada patent law must be changed. The effect is that thousands of patents in Canada will have to be reassessed and the consumers will end up spending far more for brand name drugs because the generic versions will no longer be available.

[Plebius]

See more about Pepsi Co. at http://www.corpwatch.org/trac/featur...b-pepsico.html

[TWTCommish]

Mom and Pop would love to be international I'm sure. I can possibly understand your gripes with corporations, but they are not evil just "because" they are the way they are...and not all of them are immoral either. I'd think most of them are not.

I don't see anything that can be done, and I personally don't see how you can fault someone like Sam Walton for running a succesful business. He provides many people with jobs and even more people with goods at a reasonable price.

[Plebius]

Sure, Wal Mart has tons of employees. But have they really created any jobs? Maybe they just put people who used to work at mom & pop places out of a job. Maybe they actually took away jobs and gave lower pay.

[TWTCommish]

I seriously doubt it. I think overall they're providing a great service for their employees and customers.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that you're right: there's not a thing that can be done anyway...you cannot limit the growth of a business...if running a successfull business is a crime, then we're all aspiring felons.

[RussellG]

Well I'm not American, so me posting is kinda irrelevant and stupid, but what the hell...

if anyone watches Letterman, you would know he invited Bush and Gore on his show for a debate, Bush declined while Gore didn't and came on the show, shook some hands and had a few good laughs with letterman.

So I say Gore! Booya!

[TWTCommish]

I don't know what on earth is up with Bush...it's in his own interest to go on the show...but whatever. I think we have bigger concerns than whether or not Bush is taking the time to see Letterman.

[adam]

If I was an American and allowed to vote... I'd vote Al Gore.

And I wouldn't vote Al Gore because I think he's the lesser evil... Gore is intelligent, and can pronounce most of the words he says. He knows what is going on in the world, is experienced and his policies (international at least) are of a much higher standard than W's.

Quite honestly... do you want to vote for a candidate that really, just says what his advisors tell him to? Al Gore has thrashed George W at EVERY single debate or other such event, and basically has some intelligence... he is the right person for the most important job in the world.

Adam

[TWTCommish]

Uh, I don't think they've had any public debates yet - have they?

No one is saying he wouldn't think for himself, but all I want is a better country - that's the bottom line...and Gore will provide more of the same. Not good enough.

[edshuck]

hi

one item that was a major issue 8 years ago was nafta.

for me this is still an issue. here is why. and it is not being discussed by the candidates.

many american (and european companies) were producing product along the mexican border. many of those products also have by-products that are highly toxic. with mexico being a seperate nation state, the by-products continue unabated.

this is not a new problem. and solutions will not be immediate. but i would like to hear what bush has done about it. as the leader of texas, he should have an established record.

How about gore. what has he done.

about walmart.

about 12 -15 years ago k-mart was opening a superstore next to walmart in Joplin, MO. A hugh build up through tv, radio and print. biz at the walmart was off a bit with folks waiting for the grand opening prices. so 3 or 4 days before the opening, walmart ran a small, 1 1/2 inch ad on the front page of the Joplin Globe. "Bring any newspaper ad to our stores and we will match it, available stock only." the store next to the new k mart, was cleared to the shelving by grand opening day and shut down for some remodeling. an hour before the opening of the k mart, the k mart lot was packed. so walmart opened their lot for the k mart shoppers. i drove mom to the grand opening and we could not move once in the store. so we headed back to oklahoma and stopped in baxter spings kansas (at the walmart) with the k mart ad and all coupons, etc. were accepted - even substitutions were allowed.

walmart started construction of a store in miami oklahoma just before the announced closure of the bf goodrich plant in that town. the plant had a payroll of 15 mil a year and that - going through the economy provided 70 million in goods and services. the math may seem funny but folks use the 15 to buy food, clothes, cars, boats, houses, etc. and those folks do the same and so on.

before the closure, the income of the entire county was 90 mil. after it was to drop to 15.

the old man was ask if he would stop construction. his response was "No, they need the jobs now more than ever"

the old man may have been a jerk (which i do not believe) but he sure knew how to market product and make his customers loyal.

peace ed

[Plebius]

Originally posted by TWTCommish
Uh, I don't think they've had any public debates yet - have they?

No one is saying he wouldn't think for himself, but all I want is a better country - that's the bottom line...and Gore will provide more of the same. Not good enough.

He wouldn't think for himself. He's already said the NRA would have offices in the white house. How is that thinking for himselft?

Bush would provide more of the same! He'll be exactly like his daddy! Not to mention the fact that conservatism is a reactionary movement and is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo. (If you don't believe me, just ask any political science professor). The Republican party used to be the liberal party in the United States, until the entire politics shifted left and they became the more conservative party. I'm sure glad conservatives haven't always gotten their way though because we'd still be under British rule if they had!

[Lorina]

Why are so many people afraid of industry and growth?

In a changing world, some things must go the way of the 8 track tape. The amount of people who benefit vs. the amount of people who lose out has to be weighed. Portrait painters were made almost completely obsolete by photography. People who made horse carriages went out of business when the car was invented. Mom & Pop corner stores (even though I love & support small businesses) couldn't compete with quickie-marts and superstores. People have to learn to adapt and change. The world isn't going to wait for them.

That said, what we *need* desperately in this country is a president & government who will encourage small businesses and make it easier for businesses to grow. Today, people who try to get ahead in this world are punished by horrendous taxes. Wanna start your own business? Start saving your money, because 15% of your income is coming off the top for a self-employment tax. That's criminal. People who try to succeed are punished so the government can use OUR HARD EARNED MONEY on the policies that they choose, such as allowing a woman to sign up for welfare checks for her and her 7 illegitimate kids, of federally funding a guy who calls himself an artist when all he does is pee in a jar and put a cross in it. (BTW, I'm an artist too, and worked as one for 8 years before getting addicted to web work, but I think if someone can't support themself as an artist, they should get a stinkin' job!)

Problem is, neither candidate stands out as someone I'd want as president. They're politicians. They're all the same. Personally, I'd prefer Steve Forbes. I'd rather someone who knows something about business and making money in charge.

[DaveMaxwell]

Oh, I LOVE to argue politics and social issues!!! Here we go, some comments..

Wal-Mart's strategy is to move into a town and operate at a loss, underselling the locally owned stores until they go out of business. Then they raise their prices. They also have ridiculous policies restricting employee's dating each other and paying low wages.

Wal-Mart is capable of offering lower prices because they buy in large bulks. It is not to drive locally owned stores out of business, just a fact of life. They have such a large inventory and such buying power they can negotiate favorable terms for themselves. Most locally owned stores form "cooperatives" to gain more advantage and get a better price. Unions also work on the same principle. Most companies have policies against co-workers dating. It prevents trouble when people break up and disrupt work when they aren't dealing well together.

Some McDonald's toys are made by children in illegal sweatshops. McDonald's grows it's beef by clearcutting rainforests and has made no effort to reduce their packaging which not only kills trees but ends up in landfills.

Unless a company owns the facility, they can't control who makes the product(there has even been a movement in the US to allow younger kids to work more). Kids aren't regarded the same way in most countries the way they are here in the US. It's hard to compare apples to oranges. As for the beef, most of McDonalds beef does come from the US, though a small portion does come from outside sources (mostly for the non-US chains). And for the packaging, they have made great strides to reduce their packaging over the years (anyone remember the styrofoam). They simply choose to limit their reductions to an amount which won't affect the quality of your food. Anyone else have a cup from Burger King which leaked through because of the cheap paper they use? Or how about the grease which comes through the papers of Hardees or Burger King??

Kentucky Fried Chicken is owned by PepsiCo who has been collaborating with military forces in some countries for years that supress and kill the local populations.

I would have to say this is a pretty big stretch (and yes I did read the article you posted the link to). A lot of companies (Nike, Pepsi, Ford, etc) produce a majority of the products they make outside the US because the Unions in this country have pushed the salaries and benefits to outrageous levels and created safety barriers around people so it makes it nearly impossible to let the most incompetent people go. They need to be efficient in todays marketplace.

They have put numerous locally owned stores out of business and contributed to the plasticization of the world.

See my response about Wal-Mart. They same theory applies here...

Amazon.com - putting real bookstores out of business by the hundreds! Getting software patents on things that are not only obvious but not that hard to do.

So having smart business prices and being able to offer lower prices since they don't have to pay rent, sales tax, etc is being corrupt? I don't understand this comment.

OK, enough comments about that one post. Here are some more from the other posts:

I personally cannot understand why anybody would want to vote for Bush considering his record in Texas.

What these numbers don't show is how they have changed since he took office. The numbers are all moving in the right direction. These numbers also include a large number of illegal immigrants, so the numbers will drop accordingly and the poverty statistics will go up.

Institutions are by their very nature corrupt.

Please define what an institution is. How many people would determine an institution?

You know what, all people are corrupt. We're not by nature good. Throw a bunch of corrupt people toghether to forum a corpration, and what do you have? A corporation of corrupt people. There was only ever one person who wasn't corrupt, and the rest of us killed him.

I think this is a bit strong. All people have the capacity for good and evil. It depends on which way people react to it which defines if they are corrupt or not. Not all people are corrupt. Most are honorable people and do what's right, but everyone makes mistakes once in a while.

for me it has to be Gore. he is smart, experienced, has tech savy

I wouldn't necessarily say he's tech savvy. He has had good advisors and he's always been a good Teflon politician and been able to reinvent himself accordingly. Remember during the early to mid-90's when the environment was such a big issue, there was Al with a book on the subject. Now he's taking credit for the expansion of the internet, a stretch at best. His story changes from day to day and has an incredible knack for making figures up and trying to pass them off as fact.

"Free speech ought to be limited"

This may have been one of George W's infamous gaffs, but I believe this point may be more one of "Speech is free, but be prepared to face the consequences of the speech" I see this as no different than allowing a controversial group of people say their peace, but they had better be prepared to take the consequences of any threats or hate-filled speech which they may make.

Get rid of the ridiculous teacher's unions and let the schools hire whomever they want...that will boost test scores: guarenteed.

I think this is only part of the problem. Another big problem is that the teachers have no power in their own classrooms and have no respect. When I was in school (I graduated from HS 11 years ago, not THAT long ago), if I got in trouble in school, I was in worse trouble in school. For the most part, if the teacher said I was wrong, my parents said I was wrong. I don't see very much of that now a day. Most teachers are afraid to stand up and take control of their class for fear of being sued. The administration would rather pass a kid on than hurt their self-esteem if they can't do the work (my wife got this lecture when she applied for a job in one of the local school district -- needless to say, she's glad she didn't get offered the job)

However, their profits stay more in the local community instead of going off to some billionaire miles away.

Most of the times, large corporations are more likely to make large donations to charitable organizations or for sponsor events than local mom and pop groups. I am in a barbershop chorus, and when we put our program to help us finance our annual show, a large majority of our larger advertisers are the larger corps. in the area. Corporations actually infuse more money into the local economies than the mom and pops.

Maybe they actually took away jobs and gave lower pay.

Larger corporations usually are capable of higher pay and benefits for the same reason they can charge lower amounts for their prices. They may be more impersonal in dealing with their employees, but they still can pay more.

...it's in his own interest to go on the show

He and Gore have also been invited to go onto WWF Smackdown and have a debate. Do you really think that's an appropriate place for a "serious" politician to go? They all have so many burdens placed on their time, they have to make choices along the way.

Gore is intelligent, and can pronounce most of the words he says. He knows what is going on in the world, is experienced and his policies (international at least) are of a much higher standard than W's.

Gore is also Vice President of the country. He better be better versed in the matters of the country. THAT'S HIS JOB!!! Bush isn't as well versed since his job is to be involved in the affairs of the state of Texas. He will have plenty of time to be indoctrinated to foreign policy if he gets elected. He will also be careful in who he picks for his advisors and cabinet members. A good executive has great people working for him.

He wouldn't think for himself. He's already said the NRA would have offices in the white house.

When did he say this??

IN CLOSING
To actually reply to this topic, let me state that I plan to vote for Bush.

Gore is the typical teflon politician. He does fundraising from the Vice Presidential office, has political fundraisers where foreign investors make contributions. What does he then say? That election fundraising reform will be a top issue. He tells the entertainment industry that he will enact tough legislation to reduce the amount of violent advertising aimed at kids, then a week later at a political fundraiser in Hollywood tells the crowd that he won't regulate them. He tells Senior citizens that he will enact legislation to make perscriptions more affordable. His plan gives you ONE chance ever to sign up (age 63.5), has a monthly premium of $23 and then only pays half up to $1000 dollars a year. Does that really sound affordable. His spending and budget plan is banking on the fact that the economy will continue at the growth it has and then STILL overspend by over 1/2 billion dollars. He has stated that George W's tax cut will only be for the rich, when the tax cut is the same amount for EVERYONE and the tax cut will increase the poors income level by the greatest percentage. Gore talks about going back to "Reagonomics," but conveniently forgets that the national debt was around 3.5 trillion dollars when Bush left office and now stands at over 6 trillion dollars.

Bush's educational plan requires schools to prove they're producing before they get money. In other words, if they want to get paid, teach the kids. NOVEL CONCEPT!! His spending plan is based on much more conservative estimates than even what the General Accounting Office is predicting, still reduces the national debt within a reasonable amount of time, and has over 1/2 billion dollars left over!!!

Whew!! I'm tired from typing all this. Putting on my flame suit and waiting for replies....

[TWTCommish]

Originally posted by LuZeR

Bush would provide more of the same! He'll be exactly like his daddy! Not to mention the fact that conservatism is a reactionary movement and is primarily interested in maintaining the status quo. (If you don't believe me, just ask any political science professor). The Republican party used to be the liberal party in the United States, until the entire politics shifted left and they became the more conservative party. I'm sure glad conservatives haven't always gotten their way though because we'd still be under British rule if they had!

No they wouldn't - I'm sure that people like Lincoln and Henry had morals and beliefs closer to that of Reagan and Bush than that of Clinton and Gore! If liberals had always gotten their way, we wouldn't be "officially" under British rule, but the leaders of the country would be corrupt and still reporting to them. And yes, I'm convinced of that.

I don't care about Bush and his daddy - he's the less bad of two bad candidates (didn't want to say "evil")...

[edshuck]

hi

i am not afraid of industry or growth. and i recognize that profit is the usually motive.

i think a part of the cost of doing business should be cleaning up the problems that result while the company does biz.

buckminster (sp) fuller may have said it best.

"There is absolutely nothing on Earth that does not belong here. The problem is so much of it is out of place"

(this is not a direct quote but it is close.)

if i pick up as i go, little or nothing goes missing. but when i have time to forget where something was left, then i can have real problems.

the polution in the rio grande? Once it leaves the pipe at the back of the building, the companies have deniability. at this stage of development, the argument is jobs, money, food, health care, education. the process is always from the top down and the top don't have to smell the sewers.

"Orange glow? That is not OUR orange glow! Must be from next door."

A note to all.

Your passion gives me hope.

peace ed

[Plebius]

Conservatives always whine about personal responsiblity, but what about corporate responsibility? I never hear much about that from them. I suppose it would put to much strain on the unhindered progress of the economy if corporations should be held accountable for their actions.

Chris, maybe Lincoln would have similar views to Reagen, HOWEVER at that time in American history he was considered a liberal! Things have become more liberal since then, so those ideals are now on the conservative end rather than the liberal end. Lincoln was not a conservative in relation to the political climate at the time. Conservative and liberal are relative terms that only apply to a certain moment in time, and comparing the thought of a person 140 years ago to the thought of somebody today doesn't make much sense. What's liberal today is going to be conservative in 100 years, assuming that there is any progress in human thought.

Conservative is "more of the same". Just look at the word CONSERVEative. They want to conserve the 'good old days' and the current power structure.

[eradtke]

Originally posted by LuZeR:
One other thing about Bush.

I hope all of you that run websites will pay attention to this one. Especially if George W. doesn't like your website.

"Free speech ought to be limited" - George W. Bush in response to a parody site critical of him.

The quote is actually "There ought to be limits to freedom", and I saw him say it myself on the local news about a year ago. Talk about losing my respect.

[Plebius]

Oh yeah. The conservatives at the time of the revolution were the ones that were in support of the crown. Of course given the nature of conservatism as a reactionary movement this concept may be somewhat difficult to understand.

[Plebius]

Originally posted by eradtke

Originally posted by LuZeR:
One other thing about Bush.

I hope all of you that run websites will pay attention to this one. Especially if George W. doesn't like your website.

"Free speech ought to be limited" - George W. Bush in response to a parody site critical of him.

The quote is actually "There ought to be limits to freedom", and I saw him say it myself on the local news about a year ago. Talk about losing my respect.

OOps. You're right. You can hear it at http://www.gwbush.com/gwtv/index.htm if you like.

[TWTCommish]

Originally posted by LuZeR
Conservatives always whine about personal responsiblity, but what about corporate responsibility? I never hear much about that from them. I suppose it would put to much strain on the unhindered progress of the economy if corporations should be held accountable for their actions.

Chris, maybe Lincoln would have similar views to Reagen, HOWEVER at that time in American history he was considered a liberal! Things have become more liberal since then, so those ideals are now on the conservative end rather than the liberal end. Lincoln was not a conservative in relation to the political climate at the time. Conservative and liberal are relative terms that only apply to a certain moment in time, and comparing the thought of a person 140 years ago to the thought of somebody today doesn't make much sense. What's liberal today is going to be conservative in 100 years, assuming that there is any progress in human thought.

Conservative is "more of the same". Just look at the word CONSERVEative. They want to conserve the 'good old days' and the current power structure.

I don't care about the definition...the definition changes with time, as you've stated yourself twice now. You can't tell me George W. Bush wants to have more of the same that we've had the last 8 years under Clinton.

Yes, things have become more liberal in some ways - I think thats a problem...what exactly is your point? We all agree Lincoln was a model President...and his views are MUCH closer to that of your average conservative than your average liberal.

As for corpoations taking responsibility: for what? Being successful? Responsibility should be taken where it belongs...and it's not Sam Walton's job to make sure his competitors are doing okay!

By the way: if you don't like your statement being called "dumb" in the adjacent thread, then don't accuse me of "whining"...it works both ways...dish it out, but take it, too.

It's also not fair to say "Conservatives think people should take responsibility"...that's a big generalization...they think that more people ought to...it does not apply to everyone and everything...so corporations are held to it in a reasonable amount...but I don't see Wal-Mart shying away from responsibility.

Heck: by taking on a mass market in need of goods, it SEARCHED for responsibility, took it on, and has been rewarded for filling a need, or improving upon the system.


[Edited by TWTCommish on 09-21-2000 at 07:31 PM]

[JRS385]

Originally posted by RussellG
Well I'm not American, so me posting is kinda irrelevant and stupid, but what the hell...

if anyone watches Letterman, you would know he invited Bush and Gore on his show for a debate, Bush declined while Gore didn't and came on the show, shook some hands and had a few good laughs with letterman.

So I say Gore! Booya!

It should be noted that bush did not decline, he is "officially considering it".

lol...with that said - I still must say I hope Gore wins. Not only that, but he is an awesome dancer (he did the macerana a couple of years ago on tv...well...he did his version of it)

Luzer - could you please explain how a company as good as Microsoft could be corrept? Thanks

</sarcasm>

John

[patricknw]

Who in their right mind would vote for Gore?

The same gore that is anti-2nd amendment, anti-hunting, anti-gun, anti-teacher testing, etc.

The same gore that reinvents himeself whenever necessary.

The same gore that had no personality until a couple months ago.

http://www.GoreWillSayAnything.com

^^ go look at that site.

Patrick

[Plebius]

Originally posted by TWTCommish

By the way: if you don't like your statement being called "dumb" in the adjacent thread, then don't accuse me of "whining"...it works both ways...dish it out, but take it, too.

My comment was not personally directed to you. I'm sorry if you took it that way. There's a difference between attacking an ideology and attacking a person.

Good day.





[Edited by LuZeR on 09-21-2000 at 09:03 PM]