marks2065

it has always been vote for the lessor of 2 evils, to bad they didn't do that in 2008.

If a little regulation is good, then more is better. and if more is better, then extremely more is better - there are agencies that justify their existence this way then if you back off just a little bit - the world will end and grampa will literally dissolve just by standing in open air without his full body condom. do you want that?!! HUH??!! do you hate grampa THAT MUCH??? do you love corporate profits and hate grampa that much????!!! I can't even look at you right now what you are not understanding is that it is better to have less regulation and produce the products here than it is to have more regulations and not produce the products here. If you are really concerned about grandpa you need to understand that there are less emissions if you produce the product here just because you are not transporting it here much less the increase in emissions by producing it in china under china's regulations. The product will be produced no matter what you think or want, lets do it the best way possible by reducing our standards enough to make it profitable to produce it here thus causing a reduction in emissions on a global scale.

That's nice that you have never had to be unemployed for more than 3 weeks...do you want a cookie? Here's the problem to your statement of not wanting to take certain 'prideless' jobs- even educated, experienced people aren't even getting those jobs because they do not have a background for that specific job. I just graduated with my Master's degree in biology, and am in a similar niche as the OP. My experience is solely scientific research. I've been unemployed for four months even though I've probably applied to, I don't know, every single job opening in my area that aligns with my expertise. On top of that, I just moved to a new state where I have very few contacts. I've also applied to secretarial, clerical, government and administrative positions (read: minimum wage jobs), but get the same response- I don't have the secretarial, clerical, administrative experience to even be competitive. So, even though one is willing to take a job that underemploys them, many times they won't even be considered. Food for thought. sorry but I don't feel sorry for someone that limits their opertunities. cut grass, wait tables, learn to pack at the dz. there are jobs, maybe ones you don't like but there are jobs.

The republicans are trying to scale back corporate taxes and epa regulations, 2 things that would make us more competetive without lowering wages and that would greatly increase job growth. Yes, because scaling back on EPA regulations will help create environmental disaster clean up jobs and help out in medical and mortuary industries. I didn't say eliminate, just scale back. is the left to stupid to understand that as companies go overseas that epa regulations are not being followed and the same products we used to produce here are being brought here while being made under little or no regulation overseas.? we have advanced our regulations beyond what our economy can handle and thus caused a worsening of world wide polutants by importing these products to purchase here.

At least they are working or retired people that have paid into the system working towards a goal of respnsible government and not standing in NY asking for free everything. Nobody likes loosing benifits they thought they had earned, unlike the OWS crowd that just wants everything given to them without any effort on their part.

The republicans are trying to scale back corporate taxes and epa regulations, 2 things that would make us more competetive without lowering wages and that would greatly increase job growth.

Maybe they wouldn't be so angry if manufacturing jobs came back to the US. But that won't happen untill the EPA and the IRS get off the backs of companies so they can compete again. Many people are happy working on an assembly line collecting enough pay to pay their bills and a little left over for a couple beers on fri night. That is the kind of job that manufacturing gave people, low eduacation, low skill work that supplied a descent living to many, that is were the middle class worked for many years.

Maybe the unemployment office should say "go work here and we will give you your check".

No I do not have such a list. there should not be a list of jobs you won't do, only a list of jobs you want to do. never turn down a when you are staring welfare in the eye. Maybe they should try the local unemployment office or pay for an add in the help wanted section of the paper.

Refusing to do is not an option, maybe the unemployment office needs to be notified when someone turns down a job, maybe some people will just have to take any job until they find one they want.

Well, I've never received either of those when I've been unemployed. I have, however, collected on the unemployment insurance that I paid into (indirectly, through my employer). But, y'know, go right ahead and imply that you feel I'm a lazy drain on society. I did not imply that of you, but if you feel guilty about it you probably were. I do not know you nor is it my place to judge you, I was just letting my thoughts known.

Yep, I'm probably no more or less qualified than people who just sent their resume in to be put on the pile, but I was able to get someone to pay attention to my resume because I took the time to find a personal connection. It's a benefit to the hiring manager because they have more of a "known quantity" and it's a benefit to the job seeker because they can get more specific intelligence about a job rather than just relying on the "marketing spin" they get from the hiring manager or HR. I think a lot of people believe that networking is all about having "friends in high places." It's not. It's using everyone you know to get you to the right person who can make a decision about whether to consider you as a hire. That's especially important in a brutal economy like this. I'm fortunate in that I got my current job in 2008, literally days before the bottom dropped out of the economy, and just a couple months before my department responded with a hiring freeze. I've been on the market in bad economic times and I don't wish it on anyone - the constant application/rejection cycle can be really awful on your sense of self-esteem and self-worth; even this last job search of mine took me 5+ months; I've had unemployment cycles that have lasted longer than that and it's a major stressor for sure. I don't understand long term unemployment, there are many jobs open, just not the ones that people like. I have never been unemployed for more than 3 weeks unless I wanted more time off. but then again I am not too proud to cut grass or flip burgers. I think it is a copout to recieve welfare and food stamps while I am capable of working.

Speaking of "needing someone to hate"... Not emotion. Just the facts. If you have trouble finding the errors, just let Bill or me know and we'll help you. Thanks for proving my point. Here's a pro-tip; I wasn't referring to typos. You really *should* give up on that telepathy gig - you suck at it. I have no desire to read YOUR mind. And these weren't hastily typed internet posts, they were deliberately made signs for rallies. Pig-ignorance is not a typo. I'll take a person that can not spell well but works over a good spelling lazy liberal anyday.

Yes you correct but why sit on wall street when you are mad about college tuition? Why sit on wall street when the Obama administration is the one that is actually causing business to hold the money because of EPA regulations and possible tax hikes they are trying to push through?

Last I remember Bush had the authority based on a vote in congress Amazing what feeding false intel to voters will do, isn't it? Yep I guess you would have since it would make your position weak.

I guess "Occupy Harvard" or "Occupy Yale" doesn't sound quite as catchy... Why blame those responsible when you can blame the guys with the deeper pockets. im not looking to blame anyone. i dont even think the schools did anything wrong. raise your prices to what the market will pay. i just dont understand how the kids cannot direct some of their animosity at the schools. at some point they have to feel they paid to much. Why not blame the schools? Because they have been given everything without earning anything, and told who to blame for not getting it by the teachers and parents.

FORCED? since when should the US government FORCE them to spend money? How would you like to be FORCED to spend your money? sounds kinda like comunism.

I guess "Occupy Harvard" or "Occupy Yale" doesn't sound quite as catchy... Why blame those responsible when you can blame the guys with the deeper pockets.

Are they the enemy (yet)? You might be mixing up the talking points again. Still waiting on the bit about secret iran sales, too. How many Americans have died as a direct result of the products of that methanol and petrochemical plant. How many Americans died in Beruit with the explosives supplied by Iran??? But its what I expect from the people that brought us Iran-Contra... and all the fine business dealings with our sworn enemies ever since... as long as the profit margin is good... and the checks to the law fiorms keep coming. Those with variable morality and ethics seem to have no problem with doing business with terrotists.... yet still attempt to wrap themselves in the American flag and blither on and on about patriotism. This forum is full of them. Your mad that these guys made money from Iran? I would be mad if Iran made money from them.

Just because it was the minority opinion doesn't mean it was wrong.

Last I remember Bush had the authority based on a vote in congress

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. You're admitting a Congressional voting record has nothing to do with it. Now that we're past that bit of nonsense. Actually, he did. If you choose to ignore it, that's your decision, but he had a record of previous public service. during his time in congress, his votes would have given people an better idea of how he would be as president but by voting present he gave no idea of how he would govern. but then again maybe he did, he is present in the whitehouse but doesn't actually do anything.

that shows the stupidity of America, vote for anything other than a rep from the same party. you may not like a candidate but don't vote for an idiot just because he isn't in the same party.

I'm not so certain being a member of the US Congress before becoming President is as big a deal as you're making it out to be. Please tell me how exactly many US Congressional votes each of the following people cast before being elected either President or Vice President of the US: Dwight D. Eisenhower Ronald Reagan George H.W. Bush George W. Bush Perhaps you might want to find a better metric. all of these people had a record to look at and tell what kind of president they would be based on how they performed in the previous job they had. Obama had no record to tell how he would make descissions.

Yes, but there are others on the list no more likely to win than she was. I expect that if the poll were done now, she would still come out ahead of half the pack. Which speaks volumes about how utterly fucking STUPID people in the USA have become. The propaganda from the corporate media is making folks dumb and dumber. Faux News makes people believe that the Black Panthers are a real organization, that voter fraud is a real concern, and that all Muslims are a serious threat to the USA. Dumb and Dumber, without any shame or embarassment. The USA is fucked. We'll be a second rate country in my lifetime. Much like England became after WWII. perfect example of how stupid america has gotten is when they elected Obama without even a record of voting in congress. present doesn't count.