The greater depression?

Originally Posted by Tenser

@Billy: That's why I use the USPS as an example. There still exists FedEx, UPS, DHL, etc... You're allowed to freely choose between any of them that you wish. If you still wanted to fill up your car at Citgo or Exxon instead of say USOC (US Oil Company) that's your option. If you wish to purchase extra health care coverage from the private sector or your company, that's your choice. The idea is not to force you into using government owned companies but to let the government own and operate companies fairly alongside the private sector.

I just think the nationalization of health care and other important industries has the potential to lead us down a slippery slope. Over a quarter of my salary already goes to the government, what happens if those goverment run entities are mishandled?

@Dudebro/Tenser: Until recently, Palin had about an 80% approval rating in Alaska. I don't think she could have achieved that type of number if she was the religious fanatic some in the media attempt to portray her as. The statements she has made and positions she has taken on issues that involve religion are, in my opinion, just the Republican Party trying to solidify their base. Once again, politics are being played. Do we all realize that these candidates don't write their own material? They certainly play a part in what is included, but the advisors and people behind the scenes control what these candidates do and say.

[Kugyince]

Originally Posted by Billy Hoyle

The statements she has made and positions she has taken on issues that involve religion are, in my opinion, just the Republican Party trying to solidify their base.

Well then the question is, if I'm not suppose to base my opinion of her on statements she's made and positions she's taken on issues, what am I suppose to base them on?

Originally Posted by Tenser

Well then the question is, if I'm not suppose to base my opinion of her on statements she's made and positions she's taken on issues, what am I suppose to base them on?

That's a great question and I am not arrogant enough to claim to have the answer.

What I will say is that I do not trust either of the presidential or vice-presidential candidates in this election. I know the Obama campaign is hammering the "real change" and "change we need" campaign slogans, but real change is not going to take place in this country until a third party comes to power (unlikely) or some type of unprecedented event takes place (more likely) that forces government as we know it to evolve into something different.

[Dudebro]

Ok I'll admit my resentment towards certain religious beliefs causes me to dislike Palin but I still feel she isn't deserving of being a heartbeat from control of the country.

First, she has laughable experience in a state that barely matters on the national scale.

Second she's ok with creationism being taught in schools.

Third she is/was trying to take polar bears/beluga whales off the endangered list. For this one alone she should be disqualified. Polar bears are dieing off in record numbers. It's one of the saddest things I can think of in recent history.

Lastly she is against abortion except if the mothers life is in danger. That includes victims of rape and incest. This is a terrible thing to support. Also she is against same sex rights. She pushed to deny them medical rights.

I realize that not all of you will agree with my reasons for disliking her. I still think she's a backwards nutjob that doesn't deserve the position she's seeking.

I will say that I used to like McCain. Until he started kissing up to the religious people who are trying to push thier agendas into the spotlight. Basically, if we vote in McCain we can expect 4-8 more years of the same crap Bush has been doing.

I respect your viewpoints, Dudebro, but couldn't help myself.

Originally Posted by Dudebro

First, she has laughable experience in a state that barely matters on the national scale.

And Arkansas was/is a power player in exactly what aspect of the U.S.? Just sayin'...

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Second she's ok with creationism being taught in schools.

People get so upset about this, but it really needs to be no more than a paragraph in a high school biology text. Several polls, including a Gallup Poll, have concluded that approximately 80% of Americans classify themselves as religious. Nine out of ten of those people consider themselves Christian, obviously to varying degrees. I see nothing wrong with presenting Creationsim alongside Evolution in Biology classes, which is where this issue arises. One is a belief; one is a theory. Allow the students to choose which they prefer to explain our existence.

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Third she is/was trying to take polar bears/beluga whales off the endangered list. For this one alone she should be disqualified. Polar bears are dieing off in record numbers. It's one of the saddest things I can think of in recent history.

I hadn't heard about this one, but I will research it further. C'mon though, I can think of much sadder things - involving human life - the Tsunami, Katrina, Ike, random acts of violence throughout the world, etc...

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Lastly she is against abortion except if the mothers life is in danger. That includes victims of rape and incest. This is a terrible thing to support.

I'd like to see the actual occurences in a year of how often a woman is impregnated as a result of rape or incest, then seeks an abortion. People always use that argument, but I've never seen any numbers. Personally, I'm Pro-Life, but contradictory at the same time because I don't believe I nor anyone else has the right to tell a woman what she can or can not do with her own body.


I think people get caught up in issues like this because they evoke such strong emotional responses. We need to get past these issues because they are so divisive. There are certain issues that are of the utmost importance for the U.S. and Global future; when you look at the big picture, these are not. I'd like someone to tell me why any of these issues mentioned in this post have more bearing on our daily lives than the economy and national security.

[Dudebro]

Originally Posted by Billy Hoyle

I respect your viewpoints, Dudebro, but couldn't help myself.

And Arkansas was/is a power player in exactly what aspect of the U.S.? Just sayin'...

Are you talking about clinton?
I'm not saying Alaska is worthless overall, I'm just saying a short term governor of a very underpopulated state is not good enough experience to run the entire country.

People get so upset about this, but it really needs to be no more than a paragraph in a high school biology text. Several polls, including a Gallup Poll, have concluded that approximately 80% of Americans classify themselves as religious. Nine out of ten of those people consider themselves Christian, obviously to varying degrees. I see nothing wrong with presenting Creationsim alongside Evolution in Biology classes, which is where this issue arises. One is a belief; one is a theory. Allow the students to choose which they prefer to explain our existence.

You are falling into the crap that creationist cling to. Evolution is a theory sure, but it's a SCIENTIFIC THEORY. That means it's been tested and put under extreme scrutiny. It's not like a normal theory at all.
Creationism is a STORY. It has no place alongside Evolution at all. Has any of it ever been proven in any way? No. Putting it in a biology class is harmful to our kids education.
Also if you teach creationism stories you have to teach all religious creation stories. Our country is not just about christians.

I hadn't heard about this one, but I will research it further. C'mon though, I can think of much sadder things - involving human life - the Tsunami, Katrina, Ike, random acts of violence throughout the world, etc...

See I feel worse for animals because they can't help themselves like a human can. All those things you listed could be solved by one thing. MOVE AWAY FROM BAD PLACES. If you live in the path of yearly hurricanes then move. If you live in a war torn country then move. Ect Ect.
Btw you realize if we don't worry about the animals now then slowly the whole eco system will die off right? It's not just an animal here and there, everything is connected. Only focusing on human life is arrogant.

I'd like to see the actual occurences in a year of how often a woman is impregnated as a result of rape or incest, then seeks an abortion. People always use that argument, but I've never seen any numbers. Personally, I'm Pro-Life, but contradictory at the same time because I don't believe I nor anyone else has the right to tell a woman what she can or can not do with her own body.

The numbers don't matter at all. Are you saying if only 20 women seek an abortion for rape then we should deny them? That's pretty heartless. Face it, rape is a real issue and pregnancies happen sometimes because of it. It's evil to force a woman to carry that baby to term if you doesn't want it.

I think people get caught up in issues like this because they evoke such strong emotional responses. We need to get past these issues because they are so divisive. There are certain issues that are of the utmost importance for the U.S. and Global future; when you look at the big picture, these are not. I'd like someone to tell me why any of these issues mentioned in this post have more bearing on our daily lives than the economy and national security.

Because a canidates stances on important issues like abortion and endangered animals shows his/her character. Would you vote for a person if they said "I'LL KILL ALL THE WHALES AND I'LL CUT TAXES!"? I sure hope not.

[Kugyince]

Creationism is a theological theory, evolution is a scientific theory. Biology is a science class. If schools want to discuss creationism in a theology class, then I'm all for it.

While religious, I am not a Christian. I still would not have a problem with a Christian based theology class being taught in school as long as it was an optional course study.

[Kong]

I haven't read all this topic - been busy/sick this week.

Tenser's point is a very important one. Evolution is a scientific theory. Biology is a science class. Creationism has nothing to do with science. It is not scientifically testable. Evolution can be proven wrong. Example - find a fossil of a complex organism in a strata layer below a simpler organism that should have pre-dated the first.

If you teach Christian Creationism in a public school then you should also have to teach all other creation myths - there are thousands of them. I see no way you could justify teaching only one myth without admitting you are being unconstitutional and pushing one religion over another.

Do the people in favor of this really want to teach Hindu and Scientology creation myths side by side with the Christian one? Seriously if your goal is to make/keep your children Christian then I think this is going to backfire on you. Teaching children about all religions just makes them doubt their own.

Example. When a child learns Santa is not real they might ask if the the Easter Bunny is real and you say no. Then they ask about the Tooth Fairy. And you say no, made that one up too. Then they ask and Jesus too? And you say no, honey, that one is real. If you have a class that teaches about Vishnu, Xenu, and Adam you are going to have the same conversation only stepped up a notch. And there is going to be more doubt in the child's mind. Side note - why do parents lie to children and tell them about Santa and the Easter Bunny. I don't see the point.

So if you want to have a theology class that teaches about every religion, I am all for it. If you want to have a class that teaches only one religion then you are, IMO, un-American. And I said in a theology class - not biology.

Back on topic.

Understanding really big #s is almost impossible. Our national debt is over $10-trillion. That # is so big that it is almost meaningless. Some perspective - find the US on this list.

Most of our debt is borrowed from ourselves - as in taking money from social security - which is why when you retire there will not be any left for you - the next biggest chunk is from individuals - such as CDs - the rest is owed to other countries - mainly Japan and China. America buys all of the cheaply made products from China so it is in their benefit to loan us money to keep us doing that. But if our economy gets bad enough that we stop shopping and our dollar falls enough that we are a bad investment then they are going to want their money back.

Governments, just like individuals, should borrow money only if - 1. It is a good investment, you will make a profit after paying the interest - example borrowing money to create a school or go to school or to start a bussiness. 2. To protect yourself example upgrade water treatment facilities, reduce pollution, have an army for defense. That is it. Any other expense should come from interest free money. Borrowing money to buy a car are start a needless war is a poor investment.

We will owe $451,154,049,950.63 - 4.5Trillion - in interest this year. That means if we spent zero dollars all year, just to keep our debt at 10trillion we would have to give away 4 and a half trillion dollars.

Also when we run out of money and can not borrow it then we print it. This causes inflation. Which is a tax on the poor.

On October 10th the inflation rate was 5.36%. My savings account has a 5% interest rate. So at the end of the year I will have 5% more money but be able to buy .36% less stuff.

We are artificially keeping our economy alive by borrowing money from the future of our country and encouraging shopping.

This system can not last forever - it can last a long time, maybe even my entire life - but the bubble will pop.

I read a story in a magazine once. There was a Russian village that for whatever reason lost all it's food crops that year and they were starving. The only thing they had to eat was the seeds for next years crops. They continued to starve instead of eating the seeds. Many of them died. They said they would not eat the seeds because they did not want to steal from the future.

And slightly on the subject of money and debt, I read the Rich Dad, Poor Dad book several years ago. It was about %99.9 fluff and could be boiled down to one important sentence. Income buys assets; assets buy luxuries. Income (your job) buys assets (investments, business, money that makes money by itself even while you are sleeping or on vacation) buys luxuries (new clothes, car, vacation, things you want but don't need). Your credit card should never buy luxuries.

And about the presidential candidates. I have said this before. I don't like either one of them. A two party system is not a true democracy. We are told we have to vote for one of the two people that have already been bought and paid for. People don't think they can vote for a third party because they are told that is the same as throwing your vote away. I disagree. I know a third part can not win this year. Obama or McCain will be our next president. But if you vote for a third party you are voting for a change. Voting to have a chance to eventually have a third party by showing that you are willing to vote none of the above.

Third party lists
http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_th...ial_candidates
http://www.votenoneoftheabove.us/

Ralph Nader and Cynthia Ann McKinney seem like decent choices. I would have voted for Ron Paul but he lost the Republican Primary and he didn't want to run as an independent.

Sorry for the long post. I like to rant sometimes.

[oasis]

Originally Posted by kong

So if you want to have a theology class that teaches about every religion, I am all for it. If you want to have a class that teaches only one religion then you are, IMO, un-American. And I said in a theology class - not biology.

I am fine with having religious classes but it should be taught in college not in grade school. There is absolutly no value in teaching kids about religion or evolution in grade school. Parents will teach there kids what they want and kids will naturally learn from the parents its what kids do.

you could still have science class and teach about space and atoms and how things interact in the universe but you dont need to teach about the oragins of things (Big Bang and Macro Evolution). If A kid asks how did we get here just tell them to ask there parents and change the subject... its that simple

And I would vote for Kong as president. and Penn and Teller as presedent and VP

and sorry I went off topic again its just that I was discussing the exact same topic with my class mates just moments before I read this topic.

[Kugyince]

I think Biology is an important subject to teach. I am not paying school taxes to have a teacher tell my son to go ask his parents.

Since Biology is an optional class I see no problem in an optional theology class. I also don't think a theology class should be required to teach every religion or even give equal amounts of time to different religions. That would be near impossible to accomplish. I liken it to asking a Mythology class to discuss every mythos equally.

[Dudebro]

Originally Posted by oasis

I am fine with having religious classes but it should be taught in college not in grade school. There is absolutly no value in teaching kids about religion or evolution in grade school. Parents will teach there kids what they want and kids will naturally learn from the parents its what kids do.

you could still have science class and teach about space and atoms and how things interact in the universe but you dont need to teach about the oragins of things (Big Bang and Macro Evolution). If A kid asks how did we get here just tell them to ask there parents and change the subject... its that simple

Terrible idea. I don't think we wanna go off about religion vs evolution but Evolution is not on the same level as creation stories. Until creation stories prove anything they don't get the right to be part of basic studies. As optional classes sure.

[Kong]

@oasis I think around 7th grade should be OK for both a theology class and evolution class.

I would definitely vote for Penn and Teller.

@Tenser. I don't think biology is optional. It wasn't in my school. Although I'm not sure if my school taught evolution or not. If they did then they glossed over it and spent no more than a couple days on it.

I agree it would be pointless and near impossible to give every religion equal time but it would violate the separation of church and state if the class was 90% Christianity and 10% everything else. Since most Americans are Christian then it would seem reasonable to devote 10-25% of the class time to it.

@Dudebro. I think the point of this is that creation not be taught as an alternative to evolution. It is for creation to be taught as an alternative to the Earth coming from a lotus that grew out of Vishnu's naval (the Hindu creation story). It should be taught as literature, myth or philosophy and not as science or fact. I had an ancient Greek myth class and American Folk Lore class in 4th grade. Same idea.

[Kugyince]

Originally Posted by Kong

@Tenser. I don't think biology is optional. It wasn't in my school. Although I'm not sure if my school taught evolution or not. If they did then they glossed over it and spent no more than a couple days on it.

I'm unsure about anything prior to High School as its much too far back for me to accurately remember. I do remember that in NY, at least from 1992-1996 there were four different science classes that you could take, each gave you 1 credit. You only needed 2 Science and 2 Lab credits to pass. The four science classes you could choose from in the order you wished were: Earth Science, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Each with their own Lab class to go along with them.

This case was also true with Mathematics. But you needed 4 credits of other things like English, History, and Phys Ed. 1 credit of Health, and so on. But for the most part you got to pick and choose what type of courses you wanted to take, when you wanted to take them. Like I mentioned previously, I was able to take Mythology as an English credit.

I took Honor's Earth Science in my Freshmen year. Honors Biology in my Sophomore year. And a college credit AP Physics in my Junior year.

[Dudebro]

Originally Posted by Kong

@Dudebro. I think the point of this is that creation not be taught as an alternative to evolution. It is for creation to be taught as an alternative to the Earth coming from a lotus that grew out of Vishnu's naval (the Hindu creation story). It should be taught as literature, myth or philosophy and not as science or fact. I had an ancient Greek myth class and American Folk Lore class in 4th grade. Same idea.

Well yeah I totally agree with that. I'd love to see creationism taught in literature classes and theology classes. That's where it belongs. My point is to keep it out of science classes.
Oasis was saying it's not ok to teach Evolution in grade school. I can't begin to express how much I'm against that. Kids need to learn about life facts, things that can be tested and proven not stories.

Back on topic about the economy. I think we're screwed and I hope it doesn't get too bad before it gets better. I can't see a good way out of all this.