Can the USA ever be United again?

[Mac1958]

.

I don't see how this country becomes united again until and unless the narcissistic division pimps on the radio and teevee are marginalized, and until their flocks stop acting like narcissistic division pimps.

.

 

[HenryBHough]

Those alleged "rightwing" folks didn't go into teaching.

They got real jobs.

 

[Votto]

When one reads the various threads on this message board, listens to the media, listens to the rhetoric coming out of DC, it becomes a real concern whether this country has become so divided politically and philosophically that it may not ever be united again.

we have always had different ideas, but we have always been able to find the common ground and go forward as Americans with a common purpose. I do not see that happening today.

Thoughts, comments.

I think just the opposite.

Case in point, during the 1960's you had a younger generation that rebelled against the powers that be. They rallied against the establishment and the wars abroad. However, today you have young people lining up in droves to support President Obama even with wars abroad.

I'd say with the massive influx of immigrants, the continuous media propaganda, and a public education system geared towards propaganda, the establishment has finally figured out how to quell rebellion and agitation. Now all they have to do is sit back and wait for all the conservative folk to die off and the country and let the younger generation take over coupled with illegal immigrants and we will all be united into one size fits all group think tank. It will be utopia!!

 

[occupied]

America is fine, we survived a civil war and even healed some, maybe one day the assholes in Washington will quit trying to keep it going for mere votes.

 

[RandomVariable]

Those alleged "rightwing" folks didn't go into teaching.

They got real jobs.

That public education prepared you for?

 

[HenryBHough]

Those alleged "rightwing" folks didn't go into teaching.

They got real jobs.

That public education prepared you for?

An independent life - but then I was educated before liberals took over. Et tu?

 

[RandomVariable]

Those alleged "rightwing" folks didn't go into teaching.

They got real jobs.

That public education prepared you for?

An independent life - but then I was educated before liberals took over. Et tu?

Where and when I got my public education I think there can be little doubt that it was hardcore rightwing. I doubt very much it has changed.

 

[HenryBHough]

That public education prepared you for?

An independent life - but then I was educated before liberals took over. Et tu?

Where and when I got my public education I think there can be little doubt that it was hardcore rightwing. I doubt very much it has changed.

You apparently are older than your writing suggests.

 

[Jughead]

When one reads the various threads on this message board, listens to the media, listens to the rhetoric coming out of DC, it becomes a real concern whether this country has become so divided politically and philosophically that it may not ever be united again.

we have always had different ideas, but we have always been able to find the common ground and go forward as Americans with a common purpose. I do not see that happening today.

Thoughts, comments.

I think just the opposite.

Case in point, during the 1960's you had a younger generation that rebelled against the powers that be. They rallied against the establishment and the wars abroad. However, today you have young people lining up in droves to support President Obama even with wars abroad.

I'd say with the massive influx of immigrants, the continuous media propaganda, and a public education system geared towards propaganda, the establishment has finally figured out how to quell rebellion and agitation. Now all they have to do is sit back and wait for all the conservative folk to die off and the country and let the younger generation take over coupled with illegal immigrants and we will all be united into one size fits all group think tank. It will be utopia!!

I would replace "utopia" with "a banana republic"

 

[francoHFW]

No wonder everyone's sick to death of the ugly American loudmouth party...lol...

 

[HenryBHough]

I seriously can't recall a time when "Utopia" was spoken or written without sarcastic intent.

 

[Unkotare]

Now all they have to do is sit back and wait for all the conservative folk to die off and the country and let the younger generation take over coupled with illegal immigrants and we will all be united into one size fits all group think tank. It will be utopia!!

Fortunately, "the younger generation" will get older, and some will get wiser (much wisdom revealed via rising tax rates, no doubt). Many of today's immigrants (even the illegal ones) come from fundamentally conservative cultures. The process of assimilation will clarify a few things they (or more likely their forebears) may not fully appreciate upon first arrival.

We'll be ok.

 

[Unkotare]

No wonder everyone's sick to death of the ugly American loudmouth party...lol...

Feel free to STFU anytime, idiot.

 

[Andylusion]

In the last few years we seem to have gotten more and more divided.

Oh, we were talking about politics. I'm sure it is just a coincidence.

Well logically, in any free system, the top 1% is going to end up more wealthy, by a massive margin. It's just natural.

Consider this:

Say that I own a restaurant "Food R us".

So I have a few part time people, earning minimum wage. Some full time people, earning 9/hr. I have a couple of shift managers, making $10 to $11 or more based on experience, and job history.

Then you have me the owner.

Now as with all business, I make my profit off of the margin. So after I take out the money to pay for power, heat, food product and goods, and then deduct taxes, government fees, and lastly all the hourly wages, I end up with $100,000.

However, that's not really true. I have to set aside a large chunk of money, for capital repairs and improvements. When that big sign out front gets worn and faded, that's several thousand. When the A/C unit goes out in the summer, that's another $10,000 grand. When the parking lot needs resurfaced, that's multiple grand.

So $30,000 ends up being set aside. My real profit is $70K. Meanwhile my top employee is making $20,000.

Is that fair? Yes, absolutely it is.

One of the cheapest franchises to startup, is McDonalds. The base amount to open one, is $700,000. Often the top end, is over $1.5 Million.

Now, you can finance most of that, but you are required to bring no less than $300,000 in raw non-borrowed cash, to open a store, and that does not include the franchise fees.

If earned only $40,000 a year, which would be double the wage of my shift manager, it would take me 18 years to earn back the amount of money I spent to open the restaurant, not including interest on the debt. With a debt that large, and my income so low, I'd likely never pay it back, and end up bankrupt, closing the store.

Instead, I would never open the store to begin with, never hire anyone, and never provide goods and services to the public, which grows the economy and makes the country more wealthy.

Instead, everyone is unemployed, and I keep my $300,000 by buying property, or stocks, or some other investment.

The incentive to make more money, is why people take the risk of opening a business. If you deny them that, because you don't like that burger flippers earn $20,000 a year.... then you will earn zero. Because no one would take the cost and chance to open such a store, only to earn $40,000, while being hundreds of thousands in debt.

But here's the second half of argument.....

Let's assume for the moment, that you grasp the prior concept, but suggest that people are not earning just $100K, but millions, and that's the problem.

Well back to my Food R Us store.

So I save up money, and open another store. Now have the fundamentals of the business changed? Nope.

The food is still worth exactly the same to the customer. They don't pay more for a product, just because you have a second store.

So the margins on the product are the same. Thus the wage rates for the employees are the same.

And I still end up with $100,000 profit. Or... do I?

I can't be the manager of two different stores, at two different locations at the same time.

So now I have to hire a good quality store manager to run my store. Good quality, trust worthy managers, don't work for $11 an hour. I have to pay him a good wage. So I pay him $50,000 a year to run my store.

Now my profit is down to $50,000. But again, now the new store will have it's own capital repair problems, so I need to set aside another $30,000 for that store as well. So my real profit, is only $20,000 a year.

So with this new store, my income goes up by $20,000 in profit. With each additional store I open, my income goes up by $20,000.

If I open 50 stores across the US, how much is that in income? $1 Million.

Does that mean I can afford to give everyone a raise? No. Because my income is going up on the margin at each store. The marginal profit, is exactly the same, as when I only had one store.

The new stores are not charging a higher price, just because I have more stores. The profit margin per employee has not changed at all, thus their wages can not change either.

Maybe I should prove the concept?

Easy. Mike Duke, CEO of Walmart, earned a total compensation package of $18.7 Million.

Which would you rather have? A 1¢ raise, or distribute the entire CEO compensation to the employees?

Would you rather earn ONE PENNY per hour more, or would you rather have Mike Duke's compensation package distributed to all the employees?

Trick question: Most of that compensation was in stocks and non-cash compensation. He didn't actually get a check for $720K every two weeks. But let's pretend he did.

Walmart has 2.2 Million employees. $18.7 Million dollars divided by 2.2 Million employees, is $8.50. That's per year. That's less than one half of one cent per employee.

You should have taken the 1¢ raise, over the CEO compensation package.

The point again, is that the amount of money the wealthy are earning off of the employees, is exceptionally tiny. But as you get more and more stores, which provides more and more jobs, providing more and more wealth and products to the public... naturally the guy at the top is going to earn more. But that doesn't mean that the economics of each individual store, is going to be any better, nor can they pay any more.

 

[deltex1]

The 50 states are united...it's the aholes in DC who are in disarray.

 

[francoHFW]

No wonder everyone's sick to death of the ugly American loudmouth party...lol...

Feel free to STFU anytime, idiot.

Eat shytte and die, loudmouth Pubtroll. lol

"( Noam Chomsky) told Radio VR during an interview posted online last week that he agreed with the conservative political analyst Norman Ornsteins' characterization of the Tea Party.

“He described them as a radical insurgency opposed to rationality, to political compromise, to participation in a parliamentary system — in fact, with no positive goals themselves."

Noam Chomsky: The Tea Party is the ?petit bourgeois? face of corporate oligarchs | The Raw Story

Boy is that you...

 

[francoHFW]

154- Fair, but your lowest paid employee should make 20k...and so should every other full time employee..

 

[HenryBHough]

And when they do a burger and fries will price out at fifty Obamabucks.

Now that's growth you can believe in!

 

[hazlnut]

When one reads the various threads on this message board, listens to the media, listens to the rhetoric coming out of DC, it becomes a real concern whether this country has become so divided politically and philosophically that it may not ever be united again.

we have always had different ideas, but we have always been able to find the common ground and go forward as Americans with a common purpose. I do not see that happening today.

Thoughts, comments.

We shame the Tea Party back into the swamp they crawled out of.

We put the Koch Bros in jail.

Both parties move toward the middle and only get paid when they solve problems.

We stop watch reality TV and get outside and live.

 

[candycorn]

The nation is 237 years old. You could likely find factions of division in all 237 years.

What has changed?

The advent of Internet and 24 hour cable news channels need to fill 168 hours each week. So what gets airtime? Everything. Witness the three rebuttals to Obama's State of the Union tonight.

Another good example...
The OP mentioned the messages on this messageboard. Fifteen years ago during the "united" times, you didn't have this forum so you were not aware of the divisions that were always there. Sure, maybe you thought that there were pockets of ignorance here and there but thanks to people posting hundreds of messages a month; it sounds like there is a lot more than there actually is.

Additionally, this graphic explains quite a bit:

I don't doubt that there are some who live their rhetoric. I would think that most have no interest in following through on what they say they would do, "only if". Hell, many couldn't even keep their word to leave this board if Romeny lost...you think these folks would be with you in a foxhole fighting for anything? If they can't keep their word when the stakes are zero...what happens when they have real skin in the game?

Anyway...the nation is fine on the whole; we aren't any more or less divided than we were. Minorities are just more vocal than they have been in the past thanks to this forum and the 24 hour news channels.