|
Author
|
Topic: A picture is worth a thousand words... Bush vs Kerry
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
Why shouldn't the President be able to appoint competent people regardless of their sexual preference, even if he espouses Christianity?
In fact as a Christian he should strive to be fair in appointing the best people for the job.
It's jobs, not a religious bishopship!
I agree with you 100%... what I was really doing by showing he appoints gay people to high positions was to rabble-rouse. Sorry about that. I'm just showing why some right-wing conservative christians might not want to vote for him.
Just trying to be objective... althoght the "Christians values? ha!" comment was just a low punch. or something like that.
I will respond to your other points after I'm done watching the debate.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by ericbusby:
Well it depends on ones point of view I'd guess.
I agree. However, a lot of prophets were warning the church of just such a judgment back in the 90's. These saints shared the point of view of God. But the people decide who to trust.
And this isn't a political thing. Some saints spinned the warnings as "God hates Clinton (or the Democrat du' jour)" but failed to acknowledge the people's right to choose their representative.
Now, the many of the church seem to be completely enamored with President Bush. I pointed out his position on muslim and Christian unity. Some others have pointed out his "worth-ship" of false gods. His supporters say he is against abortion and that is good. He is for the freedom of people and that is good. He is for lower taxes and that is good. I say that the anti-Christ will do miracles and still be a devil! (note: this is not an indictment against Bush nor am I saying that he is the anti-Christ)
My wife and I are in much prayer about this election. I trust the saints who visit this board are, too.
You are Blessed,
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
WhiteEagle
Advanced Member
Member # 3728
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niedziejkore:
wow. "Jesus Day" how ingenious. He's a Christian without a doubt.
nevermind the fact that he said he believes Roe vs Wade shouldn't be overturned. And he believes abortion is justified in the case of incest or rape.
pro-life? hah!
To correct you on Bush's stand about Roe v. Wade:
I heard him state that until the majority of people in this country agree that abortion on demand should be banned, then it wouldn't be accepted by the people. He is pro-life, but has the wisdom to realize that unless society decides that abortion on demand is evil, then overturning Roe v. Wade won't happen anyway.
Unfortunately he is right. It's sort of like religion this abortion issue. One can't explain to someone all the medical facts and all the reasons why abortion is evil, and expect someone who has totally different priorities to understand your reasoning. A person either believes it's wrong, and the baby is a person, or they believe it's not a person yet, and it's not really killing. It's funny how people can delegate a human life as their "opinion".
Rape and incest are circumstances beyond a woman's control and are very sensitive, I think that's why he isn't adamant about those issues, as even before Roe v. Wade a woman could obtain an abortion in those circumstances. Also theraputic abortions would still be legal, as these are done for REAL medical reasons to save the mother, when the baby has already died or will not survive anyway. It's only Abortion on demand that really needs to be done away with.
quote:
And let's forget about that interview with Dianne Sawyer where he agreed that gay "civil unions" were alright if done at the state level. He also appoints open homosexuals to high positions. Here's a cut and paste list:
On April 9, 2001, he appointed a renown homosexual activist Scott Evertz to the Office of National AIDS Policy, which was the first appointment of an open homosexual to this federal position.[29] On June 18, 2002, he transferred Evertz to direct U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS and appointed another homosexual activist to take over as new director of the Office of National AIDS Policy.[30] On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed a homosexual activist to be Ambassador to Romania at the protest of the Romanian government. Furthermore, President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an “unmarried partner” of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status as a married spouse. So the ambassador’s homosexual lover accompanies him to official government functions, travels with and resides with him on the taxpayers’ tab.[31] On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts.[32] He presided over the appointment of another open homosexual to oversee the choice of civilian personnel at the Pentagon.[33] The Bush administration posted a job for a "gay and lesbian program specialist" at the Department of Agriculture. On November 1, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the State Department as an arms control advisor, which was the first appointment of an openly gay person to a senior arms control post. President Bush insisted that openly homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention.[34],[35] On January 25, 2002, President Bush appointed many openly gay Republicans to the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.[36]
Way to go for Christian values!!!
Why shouldn't the President be able to appoint competent people regardless of their sexual preference, even if he espouses Christianity?
In fact as a Christian he should strive to be fair in appointing the best people for the job.
It's jobs, not a religious bishopship!
As far as homosexual unions....Bush can't stop them if the people really want them anyway, and due to the constitition amendment on Privacy rights.
Marriage is something he can make protected as an institution and keep it separate from civil gay unions.
I know, you know he doesn't have the power, and even if Bush did have the power he wouldn't override the people's wishes, as that's not what democracy is about and he knows that.
quote:
Do I really have to go on? I will if that's not enough to convince you. I'm sure others would agree that his comments that Christians and Muslems worship the same god to be a bit heretical. And isn't his bowing down at a Shinto Shrine in japan a bit blasphemous as well?
I agree that claiming that Muslims worship the same God as Christians and Jews is not correct, but it is politically correct, as the Muslims themselves claim that Allah is the same as the Hebrew God of Moses, and Abraham. Bush has to walk a fine line.
quote:
The Patriot act is slowly turning our country into an ever-growing police state. Do you even know what's all in the Patriot act? I've read it, and every American should too.
How? Can you be specific?
Posts: 1392 | From: Maine | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
The alternative view is that our provision hangs on the whim of certain radical groups. Interesting that you are more inclined to believe that.
Well it depends on ones point of view I'd guess.
I mean I could spin things and say all the hurricane that are striking Florida of late are God's punishment for our governments supreme court system discarding so many votes and the whole hanging chads thing that help bring Bush into power in the first place.
I mean if I look at it that way it's clear as day God is telling Florida not to vote for Bush again.
Well that or they weathers just been bad that way of late. Take either way you want.
Then again up here Mount St. Helen's is rumbling again. Perhaps that's God telling us he's not happy that Nader is on the ballet... Or is he off it again? It's hard to remember.
That or something seismic is happening. But again you can take it either way.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Hitler was a brilliant strategist too -
He just supported immorailty -
Just like Kerry does.
quote:
We're not voting for the people Kerry is condoning. We're voting for John Kerry.
I cannot even comment on that ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
It is not about what they have control over, it is about what they stand for...
The Word / The Bible is FULL of war, violence, and standing for what is right -
So do I think God would support a President who stood for morality? Absolutely -
And tha t speculative funding issue has little to do with Christian morality -
So you are saying that what they stand for does not matter...
I believe to God it truly does matter...
IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
Do you know what the connection to Kerry and Mass IS?
Kerry was a Massachusetts senator. Now he's running for president.
Q: What does he have to do with sexual education?
A: Nothing. It's not his decision to make. That's a decision left to the massacusetts board of education to decide. Kerry was not in charge of appointing the members of that board. Nor was he ever in a position to overturn that decision.
*swoosh*
quote:
Do you honestly believe that God wants a President who will condone a leader who OPENLY wants to help teach children Gay Sex Ed? Gay home life styles and Gay adoption?
We're not voting for the people Kerry is condoning. We're voting for John Kerry. Do you think God wants a president who goes to great lengths to condone the Saudis who in part financed the sept. 11 terrorists?
Both Dem and GOP candidates are in some way bad candidates. I wasn't looking forward to Kerry winning the primary, nor was I looking forward to Bush winning the 2000 election. Because both candidates morals are so screwed up, I can only vote for the man who will promise to bring in a new administration as the current administration is completely twisted.
I don't care about Kerry's past or what immoral things he may do in office. Those things can be fixed, but if the majority of the United States doesn't want those immoral problems to be fixed, then they shouldn't.
This is precisely why we have elections. The 2000 election had the lowest turnout in history. This time around I think more people are going to vote because if anything, the 2000 election showed people that their vote REALLY does count.
We have State Governments to decide what's taught in our schools. The president has no control over that. All he can do is increase or decrease funding to those schools. How those schools use that money is up to the state and the guidelines the government imposes.
If Kerry's elected our country isn't going to turn into an immoral orgy of wickedness. It's going to be pretty much like it was under Clinton. Wether that's a bad thing or a good thing is entirely up to you. Personally i'd rather Kerry win.
But that's what the democratic process is about. We as americans don't all bow to one god. We don't even have to bow to any god. That is our right as people in a free country. And for me to tell a pagan that he is wrong and force him to live by my rules is not only unamerican, is it unchristian.
I don't know why, but for me, being a christian isn't about world domination.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Israel
Advanced Member
Member # 3254
|
posted
I am so thankful there will be no elections in Heaven ![[dance]](graemlins/dance1.gif) ![[clap2]](graemlins/clap2.gif)
BTW I just saw on FOX NEWS where Kerry wants the church to stay out of politics. I wonder if the men who wrote the constitution is rolling in their graves, Kerry Beware Ghost of politics past might come to you some night ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Israel
--------------------
Psalm 122:6 Pray for the peace of Jerusalem; they shall prosper that love thee.
Posts: 97 | From: Indiana | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Again -
Did you know Mass has begun teaching Gay Sex Ed in school?
AND, they are planning on introducing Gay lifestyle AND Gay adoption to kindergarteners?
Do you know what the connection to Kerry and Mass IS?
IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Not ONCE have I BASHED Kerry - And regardless of what others are doing, it does not have anything to do with 30 YEARS AGO!!
It has to do with morality - And that was NOT 30 years ago...
I have not heard you once speak to that, at all.
Those are the Christian morals - The children.
Please explain how Kerry and his promotions help our children and please explain hw this is morally acceptable in Gods eyes?
I would like to hear your stand on IMPORTANT issues.
Speak from a Christian moral perspective.
Do you honestly believe that God wants a President who will condone a leader who OPENLY wants to help teach children Gay Sex Ed? Gay home life styles and Gay adoption?
The Lord Jesus COMMANDS you do not cause a child to stumble -
That alone should be enough to know what is morally right to do....
Mark 9
Causing to Sin
42"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. 43If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.[1]
I say Kerry WILL HAVE MUCH to answer for in causing children to stumble -
This issue is more important than anything else in my opinion...
IP: Logged |
|
|
Ripp
unregistered
|
posted
I had one more thought on this election. Remember folks that there are some judge seats that need to be filled. Some are supreme court seats that will reside over a lot of serious cases including gay marriage. The president who is elected will nominate these judges. Just a thought as you make your decision this year.
![[1zhelp]](graemlins/1zhelp.gif) ![[Cross]](graemlins/cross.gif)
IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
Notice that thse were all mor ethan 2 years ago?
Oh, right... it's fine to bash Kerry for things he did 30 years ago, but when someone brings up something bush did two years ago i'm delving too far into his history?
2 years isn't that long ago! This is stuff he's done since in office. 9/11 was only 3 (three) years ago.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Notice that thse were all mor ethan 2 years ago?
Notice that he has since taken a stand at the Federal level AGAINST gay marriage?
Kerry, on the other hand, is not - He WANTS their votes....
He openly supports abortion, Gay rights, civil unions / same sex marriages -
In Mass they are beginning Gay Sex Education in Junior High, and are introducing Alternative Lifestyle and Gay child adoption ideals to Kindergarteners -
All at the express Abhorrance of Bush, and the Express Acceptance of Kerry -
IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
I have, and it's so full of legalese I can't make heads or tails of it.
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
wow. "Jesus Day" how ingenious. He's a Christian without a doubt.
nevermind the fact that he said he believes Roe vs Wade shouldn't be overturned. And he believes abortion is justified in the case of incest or rape.
pro-life? hah!
And let's forget about that interview with Dianne Sawyer where he agreed that gay "civil unions" were alright if done at the state level. He also appoints open homosexuals to high positions. Here's a cut and paste list:
On April 9, 2001, he appointed a renown homosexual activist Scott Evertz to the Office of National AIDS Policy, which was the first appointment of an open homosexual to this federal position.[29] On June 18, 2002, he transferred Evertz to direct U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS and appointed another homosexual activist to take over as new director of the Office of National AIDS Policy.[30] On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed a homosexual activist to be Ambassador to Romania at the protest of the Romanian government. Furthermore, President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an “unmarried partner” of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status as a married spouse. So the ambassador’s homosexual lover accompanies him to official government functions, travels with and resides with him on the taxpayers’ tab.[31] On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts.[32] He presided over the appointment of another open homosexual to oversee the choice of civilian personnel at the Pentagon.[33] The Bush administration posted a job for a "gay and lesbian program specialist" at the Department of Agriculture. On November 1, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the State Department as an arms control advisor, which was the first appointment of an openly gay person to a senior arms control post. President Bush insisted that openly homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention.[34],[35] On January 25, 2002, President Bush appointed many openly gay Republicans to the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS.[36]
Way to go for Christian values!!!
Do I really have to go on? I will if that's not enough to convince you. I'm sure others would agree that his comments that Christians and Muslems worship the same god to be a bit heretical. And isn't his bowing down at a Shinto Shrine in japan a bit blasphemous as well?
The Patriot act is slowly turning our country into an ever-growing police state. Do you even know what's all in the Patriot act? I've read it, and every American should too.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
I was looking for something on the internet and I inadvertently found this article from election year 2K. I thought this was kinda interesting in light of some people's opinions that Bush is not a true Christian....
August 6, 2000
THE RELIGION ISSUE
Bush's 'Jesus Day' Is Called a First Amendment Violation
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Four months ago in Texas, Gov. George W. Bush signed a proclamation declaring June 10 to be Jesus Day, and urging all Texans to "follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods."
The proclamation received little attention at the time, except for some gratitude from a Christian organization that had asked many governors to issue proclamations supporting its annual day of charity, prayer and parades in Jesus' name.
Now what seemed purely ceremonial has turned into a controversy for Governor Bush. As word of Texas's Jesus Day has spread through e-mail, Jewish newspapers and church-state separationists, the Republican presidential nominee has come under criticism for insensitivity to people of non-Christian faiths and a disregard for the First Amendment.
"The assumption is that Christianity is the norm for America," said Phil Baum, executive director of the American Jewish Congress, "and that Jews and other minorities are here essentially as guests at the sufferance of our hosts, in a secondary position, which is an uncomfortable situation to be in."
Mr. Baum called the proclamation "an egregious and blatant violation of the spirit of the First Amendment." He added, "Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, members of other faith groups, and nonbelievers would have a hard time responding to the Governor's call to practice civic responsibility by following Christ's message on June 10."
Mr. Bush, who has put his Christian faith front and center in the campaign, has tried to project an image of inclusiveness to people of all ethnicities and religions. In the past, he has been put on the defensive for saying that the only way to heaven was through Christ, and for naming Jesus as his favorite political philosopher.
Now the governor's office has been receiving letters and e-mail messages from people outraged by the Jesus Day proclamation, or asking if it is true, said Linda Edwards, a spokeswoman for Mr. Bush in Texas.
"George Bush is sensitive to those concerns," Ms. Edwards said, "but is also mindful of the longstanding tradition of governors in both parties to honor individuals and organizations for their good works through greetings and proclamations." Governor Bush has also signed proclamations supporting Bahai centenary day, Holocaust Remembrance Day, and a Hanukkah celebration, in Austin, she said.
As to whether the proclamation caused offense, Ms. Edwards said, "I think everyone knows that Governor Bush is a religious person, and he believes that faith can play an important role in people's lives."
The proclamation, which Ms. Edwards said was written by the governor's staff, begins: "Throughout the world, people of all religions recognize Jesus Christ as an example of love, compassion, sacrifice and service. Reaching out to the poor, the suffering and the marginalized, he provided moral leadership that continues to inspire countless men, women and children today.
"To honor his life and teachings, Christians of all races and denominations have joined together to designate June 10 as Jesus Day," it reads. "Jesus Day challenges people to follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods."
The proclamation was sought by the "March for Jesus," an Atlanta group that organizes marches and assistance for the poor in about 500 cities on the same day each year. The group, which was formed in 1991, had previously sought proclamations commemorating "March for Jesus Day." This year, the group called the event Jesus Day. Ten governors agreed to issue proclamations or greetings, but some refused, the group said.
Tom Pelton, founder and organizer of the March for Jesus, said in an interview: "To me it would be a stretch to see that proclamation as being demeaning toward other religions. It's meant to point out that the things that Jesus taught are consistent with what many religions teach. Instead of Jesus being a divisive name in the community, we are hoping to establish his name as a point of unity among people."
Religious groups routinely seek governmental proclamations, and since such proclamations do not have the force of law, involve no money from taxpayers, and call for no particular action, they are very difficult to challenge in court, First Amendment experts said.
In 1997, a federal district judge did issue a temporary restraining order against the city of Redlands, Calif., for proclaiming a "March for Jesus Day," saying it violated the United States and California constitutions.
"A declaration of support for religion is not the same as declaring National Dairy Week," said Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "Any time government embraces a particular religious viewpoint it violates the spirit of the Constitution." The phrase in the proclamation signed by Governor Bush that "people of all religions recognize Jesus" was proposed by the March for Jesus, said Mr. Pelton, particularly to avoid offense. But it is this assertion that seemed to most outrage observers.
"With the exception of Islam," said Bruce Lincoln, the Caroline E. Haskell Professor of History of Religions at the University of Chicago Divinity School, "all the major religions emerged before Christianity, so there is no place for Jesus in their original foundations and scriptures.
"They carefully worded this thing to make it look like they've just got a good guy here, and so the state of Texas can have a party for him without running into church-state problems," Mr. Lincoln said. "It's patently fraudulent."
**********************************************
To that end, I say ...
2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land
Matthew 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
Luke 12:8 Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
CBJ
Community Member
Member # 3810
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Favor Minded:
While I agree I was less than appropriate, I would also encourage you to spend some time reeading some of the many extensive threads on various subjects, and get to know the members and their repsective points of view, passions, etc.
I have read nearly all of them, Favor Minded, and I choose to spend more time reading than writing...for now.
CBJ
Posts: 13 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
SciptureAndPrayers
Advanced Member
Member # 3633
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by CBJ:
People are reading this forum, and Christians are responsible to those unbelievers who might be looking over your post right this very minute, and waiting for your explanation "about what the Word says about Christian leadership".
Step up, instruct others in the spirit of loving exhortation, and follow the Father...
CBJ
CBJ,
Excellent point. Just this week we witnessed an unbeliever who came to this forum out of curiosity. He lasted two days, after providing some interesting and insightful posts, before throwing up his hands and leaving the board for good. And it wasn't because of any personal attacks made on him, but because of the self-righteousness and lack of compassion he witnessed in the posts.
--------------------
In Christ's love. Amen.
Posts: 345 | From: Rochester NY | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
To CBJ -
While I appreciate your candor, and certainly I for one deserve reprimands from time to time, would invite you to become more familiar with the community and it's members.
You are correct, my statements were inappropriate - And you have just as necessary a voice to this community as any other long or short term member.
This thread caused some "heat" amongst many for different reasons, as politics usually can.
It can be used as a tool of the enemy to cause division and separation.
Hence my reasoning for choosing to stop posting in it.
While I agree I was less than appropriate, I would also encourage you to spend some time reeading some of the many extensive threads on various subjects, and get to know the members and their repsective points of view, passions, etc.
Favor Minded
IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
What do you MEAN you hate Bush?
when I use the word hate, I am using it in place of the word "dislike" but i found the word "dislike" to be rather weak as he is in the highest position of power. So it was a toss up between saying hate and dislike. I chose the word hate because I dislike the guy intensely.
However my dislike for the man knows it's bounds. I would never wish harm against him or personal ruin for that matter. If he were to change his mind on some issues (Kick Karl Rove to the curb) i could even like the man.
And when I say I hate bush, I should really be saying I hate his administration, not just the man.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
CBJ
Community Member
Member # 3810
|
posted
I intend to vote in November, have put much thought into it, and I generally like to read the things people are saying about both candidates, in both the secular forums as well as Christian Forums as this, but I can tell you that all that went out the window when I read this just now:
quote:
Originally posted by Niedziejkore
However, I do hate Bush enough that I will vote him out of office.
What do you MEAN you hate Bush? How can you say something like that on this forum? Personally, I cannot stand the man, nor the policies of this administration, but that is WAY different from hate, friend, and you cannot harbor these hateful thoughts in your heart and mind--I will pray for you the moment I sign off this night...
And to you, "Favor Minded", only this: There is no justification whatsoever for your response to Niedziejkore--none! Your reply was all judgment and no substance--consider what you've written (in Jesus' name) to this person: quote:
Originally posted by Favor Minded:Proof that even "Christians" do not know what the Word says about their leadership or what to do with and for and about it...It is sad that we can let morality slip...(and on and on)
Could you be ANY more self-righteous towards this person? I think not. Today is the accepted time for us all, friend! TIme for the unsaved to believe SOON, and those of us professing to be children of the Father should be desperate in our attempts to convey this to the world--we are to have a burden for souls, and to be our brother's keeper, no matter what.
People are reading this forum, and Christians are responsible to those unbelievers who might be looking over your post right this very minute, and waiting for your explanation "about what the Word says about Christian leadership".
Step up, instruct others in the spirit of loving exhortation, and follow the Father...
CBJ
Posts: 13 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by TEXASGRANDMA:
It has been proven that both President Clinton and President Bush Sr. and Jr. made mistakes that enabled Sept 11 to happen. But I do NOT believe we can blame either one.
Certainly not! The nation chose him as our representative a second time and then chose him a third (his approval rating was quite high even during the trial).
This is not a political matter: Democrat vs. Republican. As I've pointed out earlier the sitting president calls muslims and Christians "brothers"- echoing the sentiment of many (most?) Americans. What will happen to the "people of the promise" if they should promote "brotherhood" with the people of bondage? And this from a guy who has voted "Republican" all his life. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Just things to consider. And if, as most of us agree, we are in the last days then our choices become more important.
Phew! I've posted some sobering things. I'd like to move on now. Such things, with the emotions they touch, tend to wear on the "bond of peace".
God bless you and keep you till the coming of our Lord!
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by ericbusby:
But I do not feel God had anything to do with the events of 9/11.
Our guard was down and someone sucker punched us.... Both times.
I think I'll be leaving now. I came to try and understand faith and God.... But I don't think I'm going to find answers here
Admin can you delete my account please?
The alternative view is that our provision hangs on the whim of certain radical groups. Interesting that you are more inclined to believe that.
Perhaps you should stick around and learn some more. Righteous judgement is not the only working of God. Then again, "darkerprojects" might require a good bit of time. I would not know.
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
It has been proven that both President Clinton and President Bush Sr. and Jr. made mistakes that enabled Sept 11 to happen. But I do NOT believe we can blame either one. That's blaming someone for what someone else did. Like: "It is the teacher's fault that my son killed him, because, the teacher graded his paper wrong!" It does not matter even if the teacher did not like the boy. The boy choice to shoot.
Sept 11 happened because a group of people is so filled with hate that kill anyone that is not Muslim. (even kill there own as in Muslims in the building that day) The truth is God allowed it to happen. We are living in the last days. Things will happen a certain way no matter who is President, simply because God has a plan. If you read Revlations you know things are going to happen a certain way. I don't recall reading a verse that says :"IF America gets it's act together; consider this book nil and void."
Does that mean we are not to pray for our Country and pray God's will who is President? No, of course not. But, then no matter who wins, we have to realize that God does have a plan.
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Were we not warned on February 26, 1993?
Oh? Was God behind that one too? I didn't get the note. Oh well
quote:
It was in 1999 that our "king" came under judgment for his actions. Even them the true matter was not presented to the American people. What was presented was: "Does this man's actions weaken the Republic of which he is representative?" The true issue was, "Does the conduct of the man offend a Holy God? And since he is a reflection of us should he therefore be removed and the nation be called to repentance?"
Ahhh right... Got yah. Maybe my coming here was a mistake after all.....
quote:
Why would judgment come during the rule of the following king? Because our merciful God desires that we repent that we might be restored. Such things are not possible during the reign of a king who mocks God.
No offence or anything Aaron.
But I do not feel God had anything to do with the events of 9/11.
Our guard was down and someone sucker punched us.... Both times.
I think I'll be leaving now. I came to try and understand faith and God.... But I don't think I'm going to find answers here
Admin can you delete my account please?
IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by ericbusby:
[QUOTE]Let me see if I'm reading this right.....
It's you belief that the trade centers were attacked because Clinton was elected President?
Even though Bush was president at the time of the attack. And God was behind the whole thing?
Thats quite an interesting theory.
Were we not warned on February 26, 1993?
It was in 1999 that our "king" came under judgment for his actions. Even them the true matter was not presented to the American people. What was presented was: "Does this man's actions weaken the Republic of which he is representative?" The true issue was, "Does the conduct of the man offend a Holy God? And since he is a reflection of us should he therefore be removed and the nation be called to repentance?"
As our representative king it was as if our sins were brought to trial. Whether or not we feared God was the question. Our two other king's (judicial and legislative) were present as well so the whole of our nation's conscience was gathered into one place. And the record that was certified against us(i.e. "He is still who we choose as king. He is as we are.") came from our own hands.
Why would judgment come during the rule of the following king? Because our merciful God desires that we repent that we might be restored. Such things are not possible during the reign of a king who mocks God.
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
based upon the country's current economic strength erstwhile ignoring the egregious character of the man (re: Clinton) we can expect God to move against us and our perceived notion of economic prowess (World Trade Center disaster and recession).
Let me see if I'm reading this right.....
It's you belief that the trade centers were attacked because Clinton was elected President?
Even though Bush was president at the time of the attack. And God was behind the whole thing?
Thats quite an interesting theory.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Endoxos:
"Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king." 1 Peter 2:13-17
No matter who wins the election, it *WILL* be God's choice, and even if we *don't* agree with their views, we still are to honor them as our leader.
Soon, the Anti-Christ and his "protitutes" will rule the whole world. How much honor should be given them?
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
Aaron
unregistered
|
posted
The thing about our electoral system is our nation gets to have the "king" they choose and we are thusly judged according to the man's character. He does, after all, by definition "represent" us. So, for instance, when the people re-elect a president based upon the country's current economic strength erstwhile ignoring the egregious character of the man (re: Clinton) we can expect God to move against us and our perceived notion of economic prowess (World Trade Center disaster and recession).
So what happens now if our country puts its own protection (WMD's = only justification for war) over the oppression of the Iraqi people under the Baathist regime? I say it is likely that we will become oppressed ourselves.
Aaron
IP: Logged |
|
|
BORN AGAIN
unregistered
|
posted
For who knows, the LORD may choose Kerry to make things better or worse, because ultimately the LORD is preparing the circumstances in the earth for the coming of His Son Yehoshua-Jesus, and sometimes that means that the LORD has to choose a "certain" candidate to accomplish His purposes.
May God bless us all on this BBS, BORN AGAIN
IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
AMEN!!
IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
apisdn umop
I agree with you. No matter who wins, we should pray for them.
betty
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ripp:
I just pray that the person elected is God's choice. ![[Prayer]](graemlins/prayer.gif)
"He changes times and seasons; he sets up kings and deposes them. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning." Daniel 2:21
"'Do you refuse to speak to me?' Pilate said. 'Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?' Jesus answered, 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'" John 19:10-11
"Do not revile the king even in your thoughts, or curse the rich in your bedroom, because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say." Ecclesiastes 10:20
"Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king." 1 Peter 2:13-17
No matter who wins the election, it *WILL* be God's choice, and even if we *don't* agree with their views, we still are to honor them as our leader.
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Ripp
unregistered
|
posted
Hard to believe this thread is still going. Of course, it will probably go til November. I have given up trying to make political points. It's like trying to persuade a 2nd grader that eating broccoli is good for them (on both sides) ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) . Once people get set in their ways, it's VERY difficult to try and explain things to them. So I choose to focus my energy in other areas. I don't have much time these days to do anything else. My school work and a job are enough. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I just pray that the person elected is God's choice.
IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
quote:
But when I read this I get the impression that unless you do more than that. Then accepting Christ is not enough and your not really saved. Not to mention that it seam if you vote wrong then you have offended God thus your not saved and will answer to him for voting wrong.
2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
But when I read this I get the impression that unless you do more than that. Then accepting Christ is not enough and your not really saved. Not to mention that it seam if you vote wrong then you have offended God thus your not saved and will answer to him for voting wrong.
Thank you! There is a problem when people regard voting for the Republicans as a service to our lord. The problem is here: let's say we had a candidate that wanted to do some really idiotic things, and a candidate that wanted to do some really intelligent things.
the idiotic candidate believes in God, and is anti-homosexual and anti-abortion. But wants to cut education spending by 1/4, military spending by 1/2 and go to war with China and Russia.
The intelligent candidate thinks the idiotic candidate is just that. Idiotic. Oh, did I mention he's a pro-choice pagan hippie?
Some people would let their emotions blind them to the extent that they'll vote for anyone who's anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage just because they think it's the moral thing to do, while on the other hand they could be voting for someone who can turn this country around.
I'm not saying the idiot is bush, nor am i saying Kerry is intelligent. I'll make this clear again: I support neither candidate. However, I do hate Bush enough that I will vote him out of office.
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
BORN AGAIN
unregistered
|
posted
It's time to take the wife and kids and move to India!
I'm glad that during the heyday of the British Empire, that the English mostly taught the Indians to speak English. We would be in a HEAP, HEAP, HEAP of trouble if the Chinese also spoke English to that same extent--but more and more Chinese ARE learning English. An American woman I know just returned from a 6-month stint of teaching English in central China. Yikes--it almost amounts to "aiding and abetting the enemy"!
BORN AGAIN
IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
When you vote for a President because it will help you and your pocket book over the right moral things. You will answer to God on judgement.
Okay there is where things really confuses me a lot in issue of religion and faith.
Now my basic understanding of Christianity is that you have to accept Jesus as your personally savior. Once you do that and believe it, your born again and your saved. Then your not going to hell but heaven.
But when I read this I get the impression that unless you do more than that. Then accepting Christ is not enough and your not really saved. Not to mention that it seam if you vote wrong then you have offended God thus your not saved and will answer to him for voting wrong.
Could someone explain this to me. I think I'm really missing something someplace here.
IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
Wow I just read that article.
Kind of creeps me out. Being between jobs right now is creepy enough as it is. Thinking I may not be able to find anything in my field, let alone any other field because of outsourcing, is really quite scary.
*shudder*
IP: Logged |
|
|
BORN AGAIN
unregistered
|
posted
Office of Tomorrow Has an Address in India
U.S. companies that discreetly embrace outsourcing find workers -- accountants typists, editors -- who are eager and talented.
By David Streitfeld
Times Staff Writer
August 29, 2004
MADRAS, India — Task by task, function by function, the American office is being hollowed out and reconstituted in places like this, a makeshift facility on the sixth floor of a shopping arcade.
OfficeTiger Ltd., one of the most prominent and aggressive of a new breed of outsourcing companies, has hired 2,000 Indians, most of them young and all of them relentlessly gung-ho.
They work as typists, researchers, librarians, claims processors, proofreaders, accountants and graphic designers. Their clients are U.S. brokerage firms, investment banks, law firms and even copy shops.
The Indians take on jobs both big — 100-page investment reports requiring weeks of work — and small. Iayaraja Marimuthu, for instance, is designing a program for next month's wedding of Ann and John, a Texas couple proclaiming their joy in being "together for life." It will take him less than an hour.
Outsourcing, which started with U.S. firms laying off software programmers and call center workers and hiring cheaper employees overseas, is now stretching to encompass almost any kind of work that is done on a computer and is orderly and repetitive in structure. That's a vast category that stretches from copy editing to financial analysis to tax preparation.
Just as voice mail reduced the need for receptionists and word processors transformed the traditional role of secretaries, outsourcing is beginning to reshape the American office, eliminating some jobs and redefining others. Its proponents say it will lift the burden of tedious chores from millions of office workers, giving them more time to spend on challenging and creative enterprises.
"We're allowing employees to delve deeper, to learn more, to push the boundaries of what had been standard work," says OfficeTiger's American co-founder, Joe Sigelman.
That's one side of the argument.
But for other employees, outsourcing means the permanent threat of dismissal in favor of someone who can do the same job for one-tenth the salary.
It also means revamping the methods of entering certain professions, including law and finance. There's a time-honored tradition in those fields of making new associates do the drudgery. It teaches them the subject and winnows the number of aspirants to the truly dedicated. That won't happen if the drudgery is shipped elsewhere.
Some economists say outsourcing is so pervasive that it helps explain why the U.S. economy is doing a poor job of creating employment. Analysts expected a net increase of 200,000 positions in July, but payroll growth totaled 32,000. The August employment report will be released Friday.
Sigelman said he was doing his best to keep American corporate hiring down.
"We hope to be leading the move of white-collar jobs from the U.S.," he told the Economic Times, an Indian paper, in December.
Although many Indian firms, as well as American multinationals, are setting themselves up as outsourcers, OfficeTiger is particularly striking because it has come so far so quickly on so little.
Founded four years ago by two New Yorkers in their early 30s who had no expertise in the Internet, bureaucracy in India or even starting a business, the firm says it will have revenue of $40 million this year. Eight of the best-known financial firms in New York and London have signed on as clients.
Most started tentatively, with just a few employees doing data processing. But they rapidly scaled up, moving more jobs and more complex jobs. Stock market analysts are among the latest to see their work realigned.
Among other things, associate analysts prepare information on possible corporate acquisition targets. They go to databases, pull documents and put numbers into templates that can compare the company with its competitors.
"Once you've done it a couple of times, it's highly repetitive," says an OfficeTiger client, an executive with a New York investment bank. "You can't be an idiot, but you don't have to be Albert Einstein."
As this work, too, gets shifted to India, the executive predicts that there will be "fewer but happier analysts. They'll be doing more brainpower work."
The process is already moving beyond the associates.
Vinitha Venkat is an OfficeTiger manager whose team assembles data for a Wall Street brokerage firm that declined to be named. She and a colleague are going to New York, where they will enroll in the broker's analyst training program.
"I'm waiting for them to send everything to us," says Venkat, 27. "I don't think it will take that long."
During the flush times at the end of the 1990s, when it seemed the dot-com boom would go on forever, any young person with an ounce of ambition wanted to start his own company.
Sigelman and Randy Altschuler, best friends since their first day at Princeton University, had good jobs on Wall Street — Sigelman with Goldman Sachs, Altschuler at Blackstone Group — but dreamed of setting out on their own. The eureka moment came one evening when they were both waiting for documents to come back from the word-processing pool.
Junior investment bankers have to do this a lot, and it's one of the more frustrating parts of the job. They live by the presentations they make for their bosses and clients, and every word must be checked and double-checked. If too many documents are submitted at once, the wait can be interminable, like it was that evening.
To fill the time, the friends were chatting on the phone, as they often did. Then their impatience and ambition merged, and they started talking about using technology to create an off-site support center to process documents.
Sigelman and Altschuler scraped the initial funding together. Then they got lucky: The tech stock bubble burst. Financial firms shrank, and then shrank some more.
"The recession forced people to push the issue of outsourcing faster and further than they would have in a boom," says Peter Lowes, an outsourcing specialist with consulting firm Deloitte & Touche. "Now that there's a recovery, there's no slowdown. In fact, it's accelerated."
*
At Odds Over Numbers
How many jobs are being transferred is a matter of dispute. In the government's first effort to come up with an official tally of jobs sent outside the U.S., it concluded a mere 4,633 employees in the first quarter were laid off because their jobs were moved to another country.
Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach thinks such numbers greatly understate the job shift. "A new force has come into play that is now altering the fundamental relationship between domestic demand and domestic employment in the United States," Roach recently told clients.
He termed it "global labor arbitrage" — the high-tech "efficiency tactics" that allow U.S. companies "to substitute high-wage domestic workers with like-quality, low-wage foreign workers in goods-producing and services-providing functions alike."
Roach sums up: "Subpar job creation in the U.S. could well be here to stay."
Part of the reason it's difficult to measure the effect of outsourcing is because nearly every company doing it, including all but one client of OfficeTiger, declines to be publicly named. Some sense of the speed with which companies warm to the process can be seen in the announcements of Reuters, the financial news giant.
Late last year, Reuters said it would send 200 data-processing jobs to India. In February, it said it would hire six Indian journalists to do basic financial analysis of U.S. companies, a move a Reuters executive said would "free up" journalists in the West. Three weeks ago, Reuters said it would cut 20 journalism jobs in unspecified high-cost locations and hire 40 journalists in India to do their work and more.
Editorial work in the form of copy editing is already an Indian fixture. A few blocks from OfficeTiger is Alden Prepress Services, a division of an English printer that dates to 1832. Alden prepares for publication dozens of U.S. and European journals, including Foot and Ankle Surgery, the Journal of Molecular Biology and the International Journal of Fatigue.
Alden began in India five years ago with five employees, and now has 100 editors and 270 other employees. They review articles for consistency and intelligibility, and query authors by e-mail if there's a question they can't straighten out on their own. Alden then typesets the material and transmits the finished journal to the printer.
This means that the editors of, say, Pain, the official journal of the Seattle-based International Assn. for the Study of Pain, can concentrate on finding the best articles. Alden recently announced it would expand its Madras staff by 60% this year.
Examples like these are why business forecasters are forced to keep updating their calculations. Forrester Research just boosted its estimate of the number of jobs that will be outsourced by the end of 2005 by nearly 50%, to 830,000 from 558,000. In one year, 43 financial multinational companies quintupled the number of offshore workers they employed to 1,500, a survey by Deloitte Research found.
Over the longer term, Celent Communications, a consulting firm, calculates that 2.3 million financial jobs are at risk. Researchers at UC Berkeley think that as many as 14 million jobs of all types are vulnerable.
In reaction to such numbers, measures are being proposed to limit outsourcing. Last week, both houses of the California Legislature passed a bill that would prevent the state from hiring contractors that use outsourced workers. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not said whether he will sign it.
"I hate it when Americans lose jobs, obviously," says OfficeTiger's Altschuler, who works out of New York. "I'm an American, and think that's terrible."
He makes the standard argument in favor of outsourcing, one endorsed by many economists: "If you put up barriers to save jobs, the exact opposite will happen. As companies get less profitable, more Americans will lose jobs."
Outsourcing, however, isn't only about money. Proponents say it's often about quality, too, which would make them even more unhappy to see protectionist barriers enacted.
Allen & Overy, a large English law firm, has 74 people working for it full time at OfficeTiger, which allowed it to lay off 50 people back home this year. Yet the firm's head of operational services, Steven Chernikeeff, says the firm "didn't come here for cost cutting. The main driver was getting a better value for the money. When we advertise for document processors in England, we don't get people with master's degrees. And they've got passion for their work here. You don't always see that in the West."
India has so many educated people and so few office jobs that people often do outsourcing work they're overqualified for. And they're happy to do so.
Unemployed and poorly paid lawyers and paralegals are eager to come to work for OfficeTiger to type revisions of Allen & Overy's legal briefs. Because these employees have legal training, it also makes sense for OfficeTiger to try to get some assignments doing more complicated legal work.
"I have a friend who's a lawyer in the States who says appeals cost $30,000 because of all the work that needs to be done in researching precedents. All that could be done here," says OfficeTiger executive Lou Fox.
The first lawyer to successfully outsource to India the actual writing of a brief will either make a handsome profit or be able to undercut the competition to win a lot of business. To get a slice of this business, OfficeTiger formed an alliance in June with a New York legal consulting company.
Fox contends that just about every corporate job has elements that can be outsourced, even if part of it — litigating in a courtroom, making a sales call — must be done in person. Outsourcing is inevitable, he says. "There's going to be a big job shift. Geography doesn't make a difference anymore."
Madras is a perpetually humid city on India's southeastern coast with a population of 6 million. Unlike Bangalore or Hyderabad or other high-tech centers, it's a conservative place where traditional Indian life holds sway. Grown children live with their parents. Arranged marriages are the rule. A new couple moves in with his folks. Only watchmen work at night.
"My mom used to call me, 'When are you coming home?' " says Vidhyavathy Munnuswemy, a manager on an investment banking team.
To a cynical American's ears, employees like the 25-year-old Munnuswemy sound unbelievable.
How many people in the U.S. would say, "For three years, I didn't go on vacation; I didn't feel like it," as she does?
This sort of zeal is widespread at Indian outsourcing companies, if little understood. At Wipro, one of the biggest companies, the phenomenon has a nickname: the Hafim generation, after slang for a drug. The Hafims act as if they're drugged, as if they take enthusiasm pills every morning.
It can't be the ambience that is making them this way. OfficeTiger's offices are high-tech, with rooms accessible only by electronic card swipes. The chairs would flunk any ergonomic test. There are three shifts, which means no one can personalize his desk, and no natural light. Not many clocks, either. Sigelman compares it approvingly to a casino: It's a place without distractions.
This is Munnuswemy's life, all night long. Her college dreams of being an aeronautical engineer are forgotten. "The more you work, the more you enjoy it," she says. "Well, except for drinking and dancing, but it would be boring to do that every day."
Of course, the company's been good to her too. She won't reveal her salary but starting wages are $1,000 a month, and she's moved far beyond that. With her savings and a loan, she's buying a $90,000 apartment for herself and her parents. It's bigger than the place the family has now, with a pool and security.
Still, the passionate attachment to the outsourcing companies by their employees goes far beyond the money.
"In New York, people do this work as a means to an end — housewives, students, actors," says OfficeTiger executive Lonnie Sapp, an American. "It's a quick way to make a buck. Here, they're not driven by the paycheck."
*
Prestige and money
Part of it is the appeal of working, even indirectly, for a brand-name corporation, a mark of high achievement here. Another is the sense that the rigid Indian business culture, where rising through the ranks is a glacial process, is being broken up. If you choose to work hard, you'll get somewhere — and will make good money too.
"I took a pay cut to come here," says Sangeetha Ravi, an OfficeTiger administrator. "Now I'm making twice as much as I was, and it's only been a year and a half."
The last time OfficeTiger ran a help-wanted ad — it intends to double in size to 4,000 people by the end of next year — it received 1,500 applications for 15 jobs.
It sounds ideal, this setup, the beginning of a long-term relationship. Yet perhaps part of the urgency among the OfficeTiger employees is that they know how suddenly this romance could end, how soon they could be like the American workers no one wants.
"OfficeTiger is not about India," Sigelman says. "It's about scouring the world to find the best cross-section of value and talent."
The company is opening an office in Sri Lanka, its first in South Asia outside India.
There will be others. Sigelman is keeping a particular eye on China. After all, they're learning English there.
"In five years," he says, "all this may change."
IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
Texasgrandma -
Of course there many specific instances of good people - I had MANY MANY good people -
But I can tell you that when you manage managers of 700+ employes, you see there are MANY MANY who do not want to work.
I know, I dealt with them and their lousy work ethic daily - Again, about 30% of the work force.
Our turn over rate was less than 4% in 5 years - That speaks volumes about the environment -
Again I know - I had some AWESOME employess that could never be replaced.
All I know for sure is -
A Kerry ad has Bush saying that sending jobs overseas "makes sense." But Bush didn't say that.
The quote is actually from Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. The Kerry campaign claims Bush signed the report containing those words, but that's wrong, too.
Some Bush administration officials do indeed defend the practice of contracting for white-collar services overseas as one aspect of free trade, which they say creates jobs in the US. Textbook economics supports that notion. But the Kerry ad goes too far when it makes the President seem to be rooting for the loss of US jobs using words he never used.
A Kerry ad released April 1 states that "George Bush says sending jobs overseas 'makes sense' for America." That politically clumsy remark was actually written by the President's economists, however. Bush himself never said it. The Kerry campaign went over the line in attributing the words falsely to Bush himself.
In a news release defending the ad, the Kerry campaign claims that the report in which the words appear was "signed by President Bush." But that's also false.
Actually, what Bush signed was The Economic Report of the President, which occupies only the first few pages of a 412-page volume that also contains the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisers , a separate document signed by the three members of the council, not by the President.
The President's signature appears on page 4, at the end of his economic report. The passage to which the Kerry ad refers appears on page 25, in the midst of the report by the President's economists. In that passage they argue that free trade benefits the nation as a whole even when it includes "outsourcing" of white-collar jobs overseas.
Council of Economic Advisers says -
Outsourcing of professional services is a prominent example of a new type of trade. The gains from trade that take place over the Internet or telephone lines are no different than the gains from trade in physical goods transported by ship or plane. When a good or service is produced at lower cost in another country, it makes sense to import it rather than to produce it domestically. This allows the United States to devote its resources to more productive purposes.
That's standard economic theory, of the sort that can be found in any freshman-level economics text. And in fact, several such textbooks have been written by none other than Council of Economic Advisers chairman Gregory Mankiw, an economist on leave from Harvard University. Mankiw's words may be good economics, but they are also bad politics, especially at a time when unemployment remains at 5.7% of the workforce.
The Kerry ad also quoted the President's "top economic advisers" as saying that moving jobs to low cost countries is a plus for the U.S. But what the White House and the President's advisers are actually saying is that trade is a plus, which is different.
The Kerry news release says that part of the ad refers to something Treasury Secretary John Snow said in an interview with the Cincinnati Enquirer on March 30. The ad makes it sound as though Snow and other advisers are rooting for Americans to lose jobs, but of course they didn't put it that way at all. What Snow actually said was that trade makes business more efficient, benefiting the entire economy.
The Enquirer interviewer said he asked Snow if outsourcing made the economy stronger, and got this response:
Snow: "It's part of trade. . . It's one aspect of trade, and there can't be any doubt about the fact that trade makes the economy stronger. . . .I was struck by the fact coming in this morning, the number of foreign companies that have operations right here,(Toyota for example) proudly displaying their logos. America can compete with anybody. What we need to do is not build walls but tear walls down. We don't have a lot of walls here. We need to tear walls down in other places, that stop our products, our services from being in the marketplace.
The newspaper said Snow praised the recent fast growth of US business productivity and suggested that contracting for services overseas has helped bring that about. "You can outsource a lot of activities and get them done just as well at a lower cost," the Enquirer quoted Snow as saying.
And that's also the way the President's chief spokesman puts it. Asked March 31 if the White House views "sourcing" as desirable or undesirable, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said free trade helps create jobs in the US.
McClellan: Our view is that trade and opening markets is very important to creating jobs here at home. The President is focused on creating jobs here at home in America. And one important way to continue to strengthen our economy even more is to continue opening markets and make sure that there is a level playing field for American producers and American farmers and others to compete. And that's what we will continue to do. Free trade is vital to continuing our economic growth.
Is that an endorsement of outsourcing?
McClellan: What I'm saying is that free trade -- and those that would support economic isolationism put us at a competitive disadvantage. And that harms our economy; that harms job creation here at home. Our views are very well-known that we need to continue working to open markets and make sure that America is the best place to do business in the world.
Kerry’s plan to deal with the problem of outsourcing jobs would eliminate rules allowing companies to defer paying taxes on income earned by their foreign subsidiaries until they bring the profits back to the United States.
Kerry says the elimination would ensure that American companies will be taxed on their foreign subsidiaries’ profits just like they are taxed on their domestic profits.
THIS IS NOT GOING TO STOP ANYTHING - In Fact, It may very well prevent companies LIKE TOYOTA from continuing to employ at American rates...
The president’s plan for dealing with job losses is through job training, increased funding for community colleges and creation of “opportunity zones” of reduced taxes.
Bush says the jobs picture is improving, largely due to his tax cuts which he said have helped push down the unemployment rate to 5.4 percent.
Remember - God IS OUR SOURCE! Not our jobs, our economy, etc.
Money IS A RESOURCE, GOD IS OUR SOURCE -
On More "CHRISTIAN RELATED TOPICS"
Hate Crimes: Kerry supports the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity in Federal Hate Crimes Law. Current law does not include either, but does include race, religion and national origin.
Family Medical Leave: Kerry supports extending the Family Medical Leave Act to same-sex couples.
Same-Sex Immigration: Kerry supports the Permanent Partners Immigration Act (H.R. 832) which would allow American citizens to sponsor their same-sex partners for immigration into the country.
Gay and Lesbian Adoption: Kerry supports gays and lesbians having the same rights to adopt children as heterosexuals.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Kerry supports the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, which would allow gay and lesbian soldiers to serve openly in the military.
KERRY SAYS -
I oppose discrimination of all kinds and my office policy prohibits discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity and expression. I believe we should focus efforts on getting ENDA passed and signed into law, and I am concerned that adding gender identity and expression to the ENDA legislation is likely to significantly hinder that effort."
On 2/24/04 after President Bush said he would endorse a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriages Kerry said, "I believe the best way to protect gays and lesbians is through civil unions. I believe the issue of marriage should be left to the states, and that the president of the United States should be adressing the central challenges where he has failed--jobs, health care, and our leadership in the world--rather than once again seeking to drive a wedge by toying with the United States Constitution for political purposes."
On 2/27/04 Kerry said, in the Boston Globe about a Massachusetts amendment to ban same-sex marriage, "If the Massachusetts Legislature crafts an appropriate amendment that provides for partnership and civil unions, then I would support it, and it would advance the goal of equal protection." He was referring only to the state constitution, not US Constitutional ban that Bush has endorsed.
Have you ever noticed how much scripture there actually is in the US Constitution?
Imagine that being removed and Civil Union Same Sex being placed in it - After all, the EU has done it, why shouldn't we - Or maybe, the US should just Join the EU, then we an use their constitution instead of ours!!
Check out this EVER SO POPULAR bumper Sticker of today -
Kerry staunchly resisted restrictions on abortions, including a ban on the 'partial birth abortions
Q: Do you support the ban on partial-birth abortions recently signed into law?
Kerry: I don't support the President's law because it doesn't allow the exception for situations where the health of the woman is at risk. I believe this is a dangerous effort to undermine a woman's right to choose, which is a constitutional amendment I will always fight to protect.
The Republicans want to criminalize the right of women to choose, take us back to the days of back alleys, gag doctors and deny families the right to plan and be aware of their choices - we Democrats want to protect the constitutional right of privacy and make clear that at the center of this struggle is our commitment to have a Supreme Court that will protect the equal rights, the civil rights, and the right to choose in this nation.
Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. This Bill would make it a criminal offense to harm or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. The measure would set criminal penalties, the same as those that would apply if harm or death happened to the pregnant woman, for those who harm a fetus. It is not required that the individual have prior knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to harm the fetus. This bill prohibits the death penalty from being imposed for such an offense. The bill states that its provisions should not be interpreted to apply a woman's actions with respect to her pregnancy.
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions.
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.
This legislation, if enacted, would ban the abortion procedure in which the physician partially delivers the fetus before completing the abortion. (A NO vote supports abortion rights)
Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions.
The Murray amendment would have repealed current laws prohibiting overseas U.S. military hospitals and medical facilities from performing privately funded abortions for U.S. service members and their dependents.
Oh - And let's not forget how those dead babies can be used!!
Kerry signed a letter from 58 Senators to the President
Dear Mr. President:
We write to urge you to expand the current federal policy concerning embryonic stem cell research.
Embryonic stem cells have the potential to be used to treat and better understand deadly and disabling diseases and conditions that affect more than 100 million Americans, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and many others.
We appreciate your words of support for the enormous potential of this research, and we know that you intended your policy to help promote this research to its fullest. As you know, the Administration's policy limits federal funding only to embryonic stem cells that were derived by August 9, 2001.
However, scientists have told us that since the policy went into effect more than two years ago, we have learned that the embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federal funding will not be suitable to effectively promote this research. We therefore feel it is essential to relax the restrictions in the current policy for this research to be fully explored.
Among the difficult challenges with the current policy are the following:
While it originally appeared that 78 embryonic stem cell lines would be available for research, only 19 are available to researchers.
All available stem cell lines are contaminated with mouse feeder cells, making their therapeutic use for humans uncertain.
It is increasingly difficult to attract new scientists to this area of research because of concerns that funding restrictions will keep this research from being successful.
Despite the fact that U.S. scientists were the first to derive human embryonic stem cells, leadership in this area of research is shifting to other countries.
We would very much like to work with you to modify the current embryonic stem cell policy so that it provides this area of research the greatest opportunity to lead to the treatments and cures for which we are all hoping.
At least Kerry will have the Gay votes - Then we can look forward to Gay Marriage Licenses in America if he gets elected - And, we can look forward to increased abortion - A plus for the doctors who do it and the Pharmaceutical companies - And we can look forward to happier Parkinsons victims because instead of using Pigs which work JUST as well, they will be able to start using humans again for their stem cell research -
I wonder if God thinks thats a plus??
FM
IP: Logged |
|
|
SciptureAndPrayers
Advanced Member
Member # 3633
|
posted
Okay, let's say the current economic climate isn't Bush's fault, or that of his administration. I think that's fair. I mean, realistically, this is a very complicated issue, and it doesn't do anyone any good to try to oversimplify it by pointing fingers. It's easy to try to find root causes in corporate greed, investor greed, lazy American workers, the welfare system, or NAFTA, for instance. And I'll admit, that until we get to the roots of the problem, we have little chance to effectively solve it.
But solve it we must! If you've never been homeless, you can't imagine what a horror story it can be. If you've never had to feed your kids tomato soup made from ketchup because the cupboards are bare and the wallet is empty, you've never felt the depths of inadequacy. If you've never applied for a job that 200 other people are applying for, knowing that you probably won't get it because you're overqualified you don't know what frustration is. It surely must be awful to know that the medication that you or a loved one needs is unavailable to you at a price you can afford because our government doesn't want local pharmaceutical companies to lose money. Or that you can't receive financial aid because you either make too much money or too little money to qualify. Yeah, they get you from both ends!
These are real problems facing real people every day. And not just in America. It's not enough to look for who's to blame. Let's ask God how we can fix it. Let's look to God for answers. It's not enough to sit back and say that these are sure signs of the End Times; that's a moot point. Whatever times we are in, "we" are in them, and as Christians, we are commanded to respond as Christ would.
--------------------
In Christ's love. Amen.
Posts: 345 | From: Rochester NY | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
Sorry Bro. but, President Bush has endorsed paying tax incentives for companies that outsource.
I also disagree about people not wanting to work. A couple of years ago, 60 minutes show cased a company that was well known for treating their employees with dignity and respect. They had the lowest number of people who left their company than any other company in American. Unions had tried to set up show in that company but the people rejected it because their bosses were so good to them. Mind you I am for unions. I had a non union job where if you got drunk with your boss you made more money than the person who did the same job working besides you. But, if a company treats their employees well than they are more apt to get better work from their people.
I worked in surgery at a hospital that had the biggest turn over in Houston because the pay was so slow. The head of anestichia (sorry, even spell check won’t help me)
went to the President of the hospital and explained how hard it was on him having new nurses all the time. He asked him to pay the nurses what other hospitals paid and to treat them better. The President said he did not care if everyone quit. He went so far as to bring 20 nurses over from the Philippians and set them up in a house across the street from the hospital so he could pay less wages. Surprise a year later the nurses left the hospital for a higher paying job across town.
My son took his job as a computer tech so serious that he often worked clear into the night on work related projects off the clock. He lived with us at the time and so I know that for a fact. The company was always telling the computer techs that their were a liability to the firm. But the President of the company did not mind calling my son away from Christmas dinner to ask him why he could not check his email. (man forgot his password).
My son did want to work and those who lost their job like he did, wanted to work too.
Republicans are for big business and have always been.
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Favor Minded
unregistered
|
posted
quote:
HelpforHomeSchoolers Writes -
I have no doubt about it. You think that this election is not important, it is important. But not because it may mean that there will be more money for welfare programs and not because there will be less money for defense programs and not because of war in Iraq and not because of buyig drugs from Canada.... but because it is one more day that God has given us the opportunity to say and to chose whom we will serve...
AMEN! That was most eloquent and right on the head! We focus on things we cannot change, thinking that someone can stand up and say "I'll Fix It!" when in reality - They cannot - I worked in BIG Business, Corporate Business, for more than 20 years - I know the ins and outs of outsourcing EXTREMELY well, and let me tell you unless you are familiar with it, you cannot point a finger at a president, who, at best, can say yes or no to tax issues regarding overseas outsourced work.
quote:
Texasgrandma writes -
Only CEO's benift from out job sourcing. Next time you have to call for tech support for anything you will ge someone is over seas, barely speaks english. Yet there are millions here in America who could do that job and are without work. A vote for President Bush is taking the food off American's table.
Betty - You know I love ya but I have to tell you something - This IS NOT driven by our government. Let me give you an example of why I have my business now -
In the computer industry, after being a tech for more that 15 years, I "grew up and moved up the "Corporate Ladder" - Prior to my decision and realization that I did not want to be President with an Oak Desk and a Fine View (The CEOs you mention) I managed more than 700 employees. Among the outsourced businesses I managed were Misrosoft, Adobe, Autodesk, and Symantec.
I had 450 Microsoft Employees, and the rest were divided up based on volume.
I stress MS because they are one of the single most difficult entities you can imagine.
Their agenda has NOTHING to do with Government - It has EVERYTHING to do with money - They want the ABSOLUTE MOST they can get for the ABSOLUTE least, and they drive MANY MANY businesses OUT of business with their contract tactics.
I know, I have first hand experience with it. LONG Before it became public knowledge, Microsoft had plans and were negotiating contracts overseas.
You see, American salaries are FAR TOO HIGH in comparison to what can be gained overseas.
The statement of Americans don't want to work is, unfortunately very true. Americans and their work ethic have gone down the tubes. A call center environment, which is the main topic of the outsourced jobs, is at best tough to work in. No matter how good the place is, no matter how many incentives, motivational techniques they employ, it is VERY difficult and VERY high stress.
Microsoft will, literally, at the drop of a hat, make a company believe everything is great, and then a week later pull 40% of the business out from underneath them.
Now, that "Greedy" CEO has a choice, absorb 40% of his workforce into other businesses (lets say 300 people, averaging $17.00 an hour) which may only support salaries of $12 hour...You can do the math and see that what may SEEM like corporate greed is really just bad business.
I billed over 30 Million per month to Microsoft alone, and I can tell you, that wehn they pull a plug for cheaper salaries, they DO NOT CARE what affect it has on the business or community they take it from.
Case in point would be a Compnay in one of the Dakotas, can't remember which one - Called Sikes - Sikes had a small amount of their business, with pretty inexpensive salaries compared to the big scheme, but MS used scare tactics and threats to get them to hire MORE PEOPLE FOR LESS MONEY to lower call wait times. This resulted in lower quality, which in turn MS used AS AN EXCUSE to pull the plug - The pulling of the plug WAS THE PLAN, but it had to be done in such a way that appeared to be more legitimate than just wanting a different company.
This was LONG BEFORE Bush and his admin -They have been doing it ALL ALONG, and they are one of the principle drivers in the outsourcing business for tech support today. They now outsource their outsourcing -
For them, it so cost affective that their support bills have effectively dropped more than 60%!!!
That HAS NOTHING to do with Bush -
quote:
Endoxus Writes -
Outsourcing isn't because American people won't work. It's because we expect at least $8.25/hr to live on, whereas in Mexico and China they expect whatever they company is willing to give them, even if it's the equivalent of $1.25... and if the labor is equally well, then why pay $8.25 when you can get it for $1.25?
Oh But it does - Americans, and I am speaking of large volume hires, from 10 to 300 at a time, find MANY MANY who call in sick, show up late, leave early, complain, want more money, their environment is too dark, too light, chair is too high, too low, (We have laws that protect them such that they can request ERGO equipment at HUGE costs to employers) PC screen is too dark, too light, too small, too big - We have FEMA and SSI - The terminate at will states - They cannot terminate at will unless there are blatent violations of policy - A terminated worker can run to a local SSI office and get compensated on the spot almost - You just don't hear about it unless you are like me and had to sit in on many many SSI conferences and suits -
Americans, particulalrly in this environment, DO NOT want to work for long - Certainly there are some who do, and there are many with a good work ethic, but I an tell you that more than 30% are completely and totally unreliable - That affects business performance dramatically and one cannot report to the people whose business it belongs to such as Microsoft or ADobe and say, well, ya know, some of the se people just call in sick too much - Their response is to get rid of them for better workers -
The problem with that is it takes time legally - You cannot just fire someone except for lack of work - And then you have to hold a position open in the event more work / man hours become available -
You have to go through a 3 step process to terminate - WHich in turn means 90 days of continued poor performance. By then, your "Outsourcer" is done and moving their business elsewhere.
The reason I finally stepped out and we started our own business is because of this - It is NOT THE OUTSOURCE Companies, nor is it the Government, but the greedy CEO's of companies like MS that drive it - They have been doing LONG before Bush was in office.
The straw that did it was $175,000 bonus I was to receive for one of my groups perfomance. They met the requirements for 90 days on this specific task and we were awarded the money - I was going to be able to give my managers 5000 and the employees 1-3000, and the difference was going to be used for incentive programs for the next go round -
At that SAME TIME, MS decided that we HAD TO LOWER salaries of 200 people because the business model no longer supported their salaries, or MS was going to PULL the plug on 400 jobs.
We approached the poeple, told them, and while about 80% stayed and took a cut, 20% left.
Microsoft was secretly negotiating with India to move 300 jobs there at a salary base that was about 10% of what they were paying now - You see, MS loves that 90% cut in costs!
What do you think Kerry is going to do to fix that? He can't!! Microsoft and some others will continue this business model because it makes sense - Find me an American who will work for $1.50 an hour - You can't - DO YOU THINK Kerry can stop this? Hardly - All MS and others have to do is show the hardship financially it would place on them, and the devastation to an already unbalanced economy they help drive - And it would and WILL remain as it is.
Why do you think Bush supported it? He didn't if you know the details - He supported our American workers having BETTER jobs that the JUNK that companies like MS were handing out -
I have been in it for more than 20 years - LONG before all this - It has NOTHING to do with the government - Oh, the reports, the papers, the financials, they want you to believe something different - But when you are in the middle of it, and privy to EXACTLY what is going on - You see a whole other game -
Your right Betty - It is Greed - Of companies who have cornered our society - Bush ain't causin' it folks....Been going on a LONG Time...
Only NOW it is public info - I watched more than 500 people lose their jobs with a folding, 30 year, Multi Billion Dollar American Company because of Corporate America Microsoft...And Bush DIDN'T DO IT -
FM
IP: Logged |
|
|
Endoxos
Advanced Member
Member # 2929
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by helpforhomeschoolers: Do you know why jobs are outsourced? Jobs are outsourced because people in this country are not willing to work.
What do you say about the situation of California's High Desert? There was always a high amount of unemployment there (not because noone would work, because the temp agencies and unemployment offices were always packed, but rather, there were far too few jobs to support the people), but when the major factories and such packed up and went to Mexico, the unemployment got that much worse. The streets were littered with empty businesses... in my hometown, on Main St., I can remember an entire mini-mall of sorts that, for the majority of the 12 years I was there, never had anything in any of the shops except of one K-mart and a Sizzler's (which eventually went under, IIRC). The two neighboring cities were even worse. If one business opened there, two nearby would fold.
Outsourcing isn't because American people won't work. It's because we expect at least $8.25/hr to live on, whereas in Mexico and China they expect whatever they company is willing to give them, even if it's the equivalent of $1.25... and if the labor is equally well, then why pay $8.25 when you can get it for $1.25?
That's kind of why my mother-in-law was forced out of her last two jobs... she made good money, but was getting up in age... it is far cheaper to pay a young'un $8.25 to do the same job she did at... however much she made.
--------------------
My signature is apisdn umop.
Posts: 362 | From: HELP! I'm stuck in a DOS window! | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
ericbusby
unregistered
|
posted
Well like I said before, people should vote as you see fit.
For me I truly feel that the Republicans are not that way to go.
But that's my choice.
I know other feel different about that and I respect their choice.
To each their own I guess.
For me... What can I say... I'm a bleeding heart liberal.
I feel I have a moral obligation to try and help people, stray animal.
(You should see how many cats my wife and I have)
And support the programs I feel help people in the best.
I'm one of those that thinks universal health care would be a great think for our nation.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Niedziejkore
Advanced Member
Member # 2773
|
posted
quote:
I may be annoyed by the voice on the phone that is from India, but I can tell you that those people in India are more than pleased to have those jobs that too many here in America are unwilling to do.
Tell that to the next homeless person you see lying under a bridge. Can't find one? hmm... try looking harder. Go to the crummy side of town. Wait, better yet, tell that to a laid-off factory worker who just lost his job because his company moved the factory to mexico.
quote:
The truth is that America is full of people who do not look at their service to an employer as the BIBLE says they should look at it; but then again why would they?America is no longer a nation that is influenced as much by the Bible as it is by secular humanist agenda. It is no longer they mindset of people to put HIM first; In America it is no about HIM... it is all about me...
Maybe because their employers treat their workers like disposable diapers do the workers not have a very good work ethic.
And america was founded by very liberal individuals. You can't say the founding fathers were not secular in any way. Those who participated in the early religious revival in the 1730s-1740s had nothing to do with the building of our nation. In fact, the people who did draft the constitution were opposed to the religious revival headed by Johnathan Edwards. At any rate, that revival didn't last long as it ended around the late 1740s and 1750s. But we weren't founded to be a biblical nation because it was their belief that evreyone should be able to practice their religion.
Just look at the Quakers. They had REAL religious tolerance. They tolerated the indian's religion. They even tolerated Jews, protestants, Anglicans, etc. Anyone was able to build a church in Pennsylvania because they believed in tolerance toward all religions.
It is a symptom of living in a capitalist country that people look at things as individuals. In the land of the self-made man, we are taught at an early age that we need to take care of ourselves. Few citizens opt to help others because they can't affort to help others. Why can't they afford to help others? Because nobody is helping them. And the cycle goes on...
--------------------
Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The queen is their slave.
Posts: 346 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
One more thing and I will leave you alone, I don't know where you lived . But before we left Houston, everytime a new company came in to hire there would be more peope show up than they had jobs. Many times they would say on the news 200 jobs and over 2,00 people applied for those jobs. There would be people lined up down the road. People do want to work. We had job fairs for companines to come and there would be tens of thousands of people show up in on one weekend for work.
I will leave you alone but please realize that these compaines are going over seas for money not because Americans do not want to work.
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
One more thing. You might say how can she say that it is all about making the big bucks. I will never forget about 5 years ago. AT&T laid off 2,000 workers Christmas week. In January they talked on the news that that company had made the biggest profit of any company for the year. They did not lay off those people because they had to. 2,000 was just a number to them. But those were families whose Christmas was ruined by mom and dad losing their jobs. Those were kids who most likely went to a much lower standard of livinig when mom and dad had to get a minimum wage job. All for a CEO who was greedy. The police will talk about domestic violence being up during finacial crisis. Who know how people suffer when compaines take away people's jobs and send them over seas. Who knows how people suffer over seas when children as young as 6 are forced to work in sweat shops. Out sourcing is wrong and the republician party is wrong for giving companies tax breaks for outsourcing jobs.
I like you Linda alot and I hope to always be your friend but we will not agree on this issue. sorry.
love,
betty
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
TEXASGRANDMA
Advanced Member
Member # 847
|
posted
Linda, I am sorry but you are wrong. In Washington State, they showed people from a Company that was closed and their jobs outsourced. To make matters worse, they brought over people from another Country and made these people train them. A woman was on the news saying they told her that if she did not train these foreign workers that she would not get her 2 weeks servence pay. I will never forget that poor woman who had worked for over 10 years for that company.
Her standing there saying "It is like making me dig my own grave" She had young children to support. Those people wanted to work. Jobs are outsorced for one reason and that is companines can pay workeers a dollar a day over seas. It is not that companines can't pay American wages, it is they want to tell their stock holders how much more they made last years. They don't care that they put people out of work. Do you realize how many homes are broken up because dad can't get a job and his moral goes out the door? How many people find the bottle for comfort because a job they worked hard at is sent over seas? Our sourcing hurts your neighbors and friends.
One of the biggest oursourced job is tech workers.
my son and soninlaw are both affected. My son's best friend worked for 5 years in the tech field now he workds for min wage at home depot. My son thank God finally found another tech job but the pay is 1/4 of what he made. He is thankful for his job but has decided that he can't afford to get married and have a family. Yes, I am bitter about oursourcing. You bet I am.
--------------------
Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
http://www.indieheaven.com/artists/mm (son-in-law)http://www.myspace.com/mireles
Posts: 4985 | From: Washington State | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
helpforhomeschoolers
Advanced Member
Member # 15
|
posted
Do you know why jobs are outsourced? Jobs are outsourced because people in this country are not willing to work. Too many people in this country are too concerned with how much they can get for what they do, rather than being concerned about how their work is a service to the Lord God.
I may be annoyed by the voice on the phone that is from India, but I can tell you that those people in India are more than pleased to have those jobs that too many here in America are unwilling to do.
I live in a state where there are huge government incentives for businesses to locate their call centers here and I live in a state where the work ethic among the citizens is one of highest in the nation, and I have seen even here these companies come here and then leave and do you know why? It is not because it is so much better and cheaper for them to outsource... it is because they spend millions on recruiting and advertising and hiring anbd training and they cannot find enough people willing to work.
Again, there is a heart issue at the center of this probelm and the enemy keeps us full of propaganda (A vote for Bush is a vote for jobs lost to forigen countries)and distracts us from the real issues. The truth is that America is full of people who do not look at their service to an employer as the BIBLE says they should look at it; but then again why would they?America is no longer a nation that is influenced as much by the Bible as it is by secular humanist agenda. It is no longer they mindset of people to put HIM first; In America it is no about HIM... it is all about me...
Posts: 4684 | From: Southern Black Hills of South Dakota | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
