" Govt. bug business"
Engarde!!--Touche

TK's glass house must be HUGE!

" Its even worse to facilitate it and not accept ones role in the matter"
So you're telling me that there is nothing labeled Made in China under your ownership??

He was the animal.

Oh, sweet irony.

Duckie,

I accept my role in it. I am also smart enough to accept that we are headed towards a two class system in this country that will reflect the rest of the world. It is based on our spending and consumption habits. I do not balme the Govt. i do not blame business I blame consumers 100% There is no middle class in the world by our measure. On the other side of the coin being economic isolationists brings a whole host of issues as well.

"The dollar in your wallet is sending jobs over seas everytime you hand it to someone that is not supplying you with 100% made in America goods."

OK... but your diatribe still fails to explain how the economy could be "rolling"... while American middle class workers have "lifestyle choiced" themselves into the lower wage, less discressionary spending position they are in today?

Who is the economy REALLY "rolling" for... besides the top 1%?

Sorry Dan... I didn't mean to do it!

"OK... but your diatribe still fails to explain how the economy could be "rolling"... while American middle class workers have "lifestyle choiced" themselves into the lower wage, less discressionary spending position they are in today?:

#1 That his not a complete process yet.

#2 ever hear of credit?

Also take a look at what the avg. person has done with their home via the lower mortgage rates. It will suprise you. Take a look at wages even though they are creeping up a bit. Then take a look at savings there is your answer.

So, I'm just reaching here, but are you not aware that we allow N. Mariana Islands to stamp products "made in USA"? Have you forgotten that DeLay himself went to Saipan and remarked about how great it was to see America at work, as he was surrounded by slaves from the third world. This was yet another nasty lobby campaign worked out by Abramoff through his buddy DeLay. I'm glad you accept your role, but if you have anything in your home that is MADE IN ? (insert country other than USA here) you are not practicing what you preach, you are apart of the problem.
The two class system that the neo-cons are reaching for is based on greed, nothing else, the rich have the power to be more rich, so...

TK, it seems like sometimes you get all you talking points from The Project for the New American Century.

"I'm glad you accept your role, but if you have anything in your home that is MADE IN ? (insert country other than USA here) you are not practicing what you preach, you are apart of the problem.
The two class system that the neo-cons are reaching for is based on greed, nothing else, the rich have the power to be more rich, so... "

I am preaching that you are all hypocrites for creating the very process you want to pawn off as a conspiracy of "the rich" and Corps" to get richer. You friggen idiots are handing it to them by the container load. I am all for people making people rich and poor if that is what they want to do. I am not for people doing it and crying about it. You cannot be that slow can you?

I am however pro isolationist. I would like to see all free trade end and I would tarrif the [Bleeeeep!] out of competing gooods to the US.

Well then, where are we going to get all the uranium to keep your poor(bottom class) paranoid self feel safe.
The problem is that we are in a double deficit, we have used up our surplus and gone into record debt and we import about $617 billion a year more than we export. Is isolationism going to fix that??
We have generated a huge debt at about $2 billion a day. China and Japan, with higher exports hold a lot of american currency. Consider the South Koreans with about $200 billion, when they considered trading it in on a stronger currency caused the dollar to drop 3%. What's going to happen as we continue on the path is that eventually China and Japan will favor stronger currencies (where's that leave us??).

It would be much easier to take the word of a house hen that has only worked at dairy queen back in the 60's . Let the men talk and go open a package and microwave dinner.

Yeah, let's try isolationism.

I especially want the oil stopped. You know, so the economy doesn't stumble.

Oh, hold it...........

Aunty, I thought China has been slowly liquidating for awhile now. I'm sorry to sound so narrow minded, I actually think it's a blend of problems, like outsourcing, deficit, continued tax breaks, lop sided world economy, emerging technologies that allow once restricted regions more input and influence in today's world. I don't portend to have the answer, but I don't think isolationism has a chance. Unless the world is prepared to revert to the dark ages for awhile.

"The dollar in your wallet is sending jobs over seas everytime you hand it to someone that is not supplying you with 100% made in America goods. "

It sounds like the solution, ala TK, is to not give his bro in law any business now that he off shored.

I don't know why you guys are worried about China; Napoleon already said their economy would collapse last year....

Wait... last year?

TK,

I cringe everytime you mention Darwinism.

Evolution is a fact substantiated by a fossil record. Now, if you share the belief of many superstitious people that "God" created the fossil record to "test our faith", nothing more needs to be said.

Charles Darwin did not invent evolution. He wrote a book on the subject in the mid 19th Century, The Origin of Species, which pulled together a lot of ideas going around at the time and which was widely influential.

Calling evolutionary theory Darwinism is as inane as calling physics Newtonism.

One phrase from Darwin's book captured the popular imagination: "survival of the fittest"

Darwin never intended, and no serious student of evolution has ever claimed "the fittest" meant the most powerful or the strongest or the most dominant. If that were the case T-Rex and/or Saber Tooth Tigers would still be dominant predators.

Social Darwinism came into vogue in England in the late 19th Century as a perversion of the phrase "survival of the fittest" to justify the horrific conditions of the time for factory workers and to justify the dominant social order and English imperialism. It had nothing to do with any reputable scientific theories about evolution, and nothing whatsoever to do with "fitness" as Darwin used the term. Social Darwinism was, and is, crap, popularization of the lowest order.

So what is "fitness" in evolutionary terms?
Determining fitness only works in hindsight. A "fit" physical characteristic is one which has survived.

In order to predict what characteristic will prove to be fit in the future,i.e, will survive, one would need to be able to predict the future.

In general, and certainly in the modern era, when ecological systems have undergone rapid change, there has been a premium on characteristics which increase flexibility in a species.

Hazarding a guess, I would predict that catfish or their descendants will do better in the future than Steelhead or their descendants.

(The ability mammals have to form habits in lieu of hard wired behaviors increases flexibilty because it allows the mammal to deal with temporarily unchanging aspects of the environment on autopilot, freeing up attention for dealing with aspects which are changing.)

Highly specialized species (Steelhead?) are often short on flexibility and tend to go extinct quicker than less specialized species.

Humans have been here just an eyeblink on the evolutionary time scale. Hard to say whether we will survive in our present form for long. Maybe we will. Maybe we will evolve into something else. Maybe evolutionary descendants of rats will do better over the long run.

TK, as a personal favor, please stop expounding Social Darwinism. It's embarassing.

SS,

"Evolution is a fact substantiated by a fossil record"

It's called the "theory" not the fact of evolution. Please cite the scientific communitities that claim it to be provable fact by generally accepted scientific guidelines? I should really stop right here because your level of understanding on the matter is clearly lacking. But in an effort to teach I will continue.

There is no documented fossil records that can be certified complete. For any species. There is assunption and generally accepted "thoretical" complete fossil records.

"Darwin never intended, and no serious student of evolution has ever claimed "the fittest" meant the most powerful or the strongest or the most dominant."

But more often than not this class is the survivor.

SS the term social Darwinism is cureently beiung uesed and has always been used to describe a process. You cannot untie it just because you do not like it. Quit trying to pretend that you have the power to change things and just accept the fact that the club you use is often the club that will be used against you.

tk also thinks that the world is 6000 years old and he is a member of the Discovery Institute and The Flat Earth Society. You can not have an intelligent discussion with anyone who does not have an open mind and truely it seems that tk has closed his mind to everything but the world according to tk.

Stever,

You have never been a liar here before. Misinformed but not a liar. Show me where I have said this? "tk also thinks that the world is 6000 years old"

Showing that evolution is just a theory and like all unproven postualtes and that it has holes is a far cry from writing it off as a posibliltiy. Which is what most non belivers have done with the role of "god" in such events.

read all you wish http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/organizations/
Am I correct about the other two? The first one kind of goes hand in hand with the other two. I was guessing about all three so 2 out of three isn't bad. Belief in an omnipotent being is not science. The existance of one neither can be proven or disproven, it is not science. Postulates by defination require no proof. The American Heritage Dictionary defines "postulates" as;
1)To make claim for, demand. 2)To assume the truth or reality of with no proof. Again not science.

Stever,
I have read TO from front to back several times and most of the linked stuff as well. I have also taken 400 level biology courses in college. "You can not have an intelligent discussion with anyone who does not have an open mind " So how many times have you read the bible and taken bible study courses?. Read it a few times do some precept level courses and we can talk about it since your mind is so open. Your terms as stated above.