Dell sued for "bait and switch" and false promises

Wrong, I started an IT company 2 years ago, and have been adding work
since the second month. It's no easy finding people willing to work and
that have a good technical background also.

I've found that every one of our customers, across the USA, is also hiring
on a regular basis - care to explain away reality?

 

reality is a quality or state of being actual or true. your reality may be
that there has been job creation among the people that you know, but the
national reality is that there has been a net loss of jobs during bushes
first term. this is an example of why you can not rely on local polling and
a good lesson for a startup businessman like yourself to learn.

 

Chris, the loss of jobs was started before Bush took office, at least in
the IT community it was started during the Clinton regime. During the Bush
years I've seen the normal order of business changes - meaning that due to
the expanding of technology over the globe, making data/communications
possible like have never before been possible, the outsourcing of many
jobs, and the investments of the countries in data/call centers in order
to take those jobs for low rates. It's a natural order and has nothing to
do with Bush or really Clinton - the technology made it easier and very
simple to change projects and call type jobs to countries where they rate
is 1/10th of the US rate.

As for net job loss, it's been a lot of political hype - sure, there are
many people out of work, and many people were blindly ignorant and didn't
see it happening until they got their pink slips, but it was writing on
the wall for more than a year in most locations if people just weren't
sheep.

I left a job as a director making a very good salary, I left that job on a
spurious decision, I had always want to start my own company, but, when
asked to fire a group in order to outsource their positions - I decided to
leave that company and start my own. No planning, no seed money, etc.. and
the interesting thing is that we're still growing, we're still making
money, and we're still picking up quality clients and adding to the team.
We have not been impacted by the economy, but I suspect we understand the
nature of the industry and where it's moving/needs are and were to
position our skills/resources for best ROI.

You can't blame Bush for job loss during his first term, no President has
that much impact on the economy, it was already in the works when he took
office. If you go back and look at the economy and where it was headed,
there was nothing that any President (either R/D/I) could have done to
prevent it, it's just simple economics and corporate greed.

 

Why are you bandering back and forth about the Social Security crap
when the solution is so simple? Why can't the government resolve to
keep it's greedy hands off of those funds collected and THEY can just
put the funds into a SAFE conservative investment which will be there
when the citizens need the funds?

The idea of telling people they can keep some of it to save and invest
for themselves is so ridiculous it belongs in "Believe it or not by
Ripley", IMO. Many of these folks are people barely managing to skim by
on their minimum wage and other low paychecks. Does anyone (except
those genius politicians in Washington) really believe these people are
going to save these dollars? They are going to SPEND them for rent,
food, or whatever they need at the time! Not everyone is fortunate
enough to have great paying jobs or the inclination to protect their
futures. BUT when they are old and need support, we just might find a
nation plagued with so many on the welfare roles, whoever came up with
this "let them save for their own future" will dread the day they put SS
into the hands of minimum and other wage earners.

Supposedly, the US has one of the lowest rates for saving and we are
going to entrust more money to the citizens "not" to save! The
government by this is admitting they can't be entrusted with the funds,
yet they want us to believe our fellow American "can"!

Too bad many years ago when the government first started raiding the SS
piggybank Americans did not flood Washington with letters refusing to
allow this to happen. But then again, I guess they were all on this
DELL site bitching at one another instead of their government. (Excuse
me! "I" don't spend all my time bitching in discussion groups. My
politicians in Washington are well aware of my opinions. I certainly
hope many of you are doing the same.)

Bea

 

Irene is giving in - "honey" is a sure tipoff.

I think not. When most women get to the point of saying "honey" in such
discusions, it would seem to me they are loading their big guns and will
certainly come back with more ammunition. I note she also repeated the
"honey" in another post. It's not the word she is saying but what her
tone would be if she were being vocal to him. This should "really" get
interesting now. I would not put my guard down if I were him.<g Just my
opinion as a female who is well aware of the two versions of "honey".

Bea

 

Yea, when my wife starts calling me "Honey" I know I'm in serious trouble,
and if she does it in front of other people I know that I've done/said
something wrong - now if I could just figure out what before she smacks me
in the head

 

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...
but the fact remains that bush is the first president to loose jobs since
hoover; despite your 'reality' and all the justification in the world.

 

If you understood anything about the Economy you would understand that
"Bush didn't lose any jobs", the corporations as part of our free market
moved those jobs outside the USA and there is/was nothing that the US
Government could do about it - it started under Clinton's watch and
continued into Bush's first term. You can only hold the corporate greed
responsible for it, not any elected official.

My reality is to understand the economics, market, worker skill pools,
services demand, and the value of services we offer.

How about you spout something other than news-media drivel, how about you
come back with a response based on your OWN findings and understanding and
not these news-story clippings you post.

So, you going to show me where Bush hasn't turned the Clinton economy
around?

It would also be nice if you bottom posted when you reply so that the
thread can be properly followed.

 

I am beginning to think that Chris believes in a government that does
everything for the individual and is responsible for and will care for the
individual from birth to death. In return, that same government has a right
to as much of the assets of those same individuals as said government
wishes to take. At least that appears to be the types of groups that he
likes to quote and refer to in his posts.

Irene

 

sheesh, can't you just concede a simple fact which you misspoke about?
please don't believe me, go to the department of labour's site and add up
the numbers yourself. of course when you determine the facts are as i say
you can publish your conspiracy theory on why the department of labour
statistics are wrong. http://www.dol.gov/

 

I never said you were wrong, I said that "Bush had nothing to do with it".
You do realize that the loss of jobs was entirely related to the way
business changed and had nothing to do with government? If you don't
believe me, then show me one case where a policy put in place by Bush has
cost any significant loss of jobs in the US - come one, you're the one
saying it's Bush's fault, now prove it.

From what I've seen, you won't bother posting any reputable source that
shows that Bush "Caused" the loss of jobs, but I can point you to many
companies that moved their work off-shore, and you can bet it wasn't Bush
asking them to do it - it's about Corporate greed, which starts with the
Investors greed.

So, show me where it was Bush's fault that the economy was changing and
that Businesses decided to move their work to off-shore locations - come
one, put up or shut-up.

 

Certainly. Fine with me. Write your congressperson. However NO
investment is 100% safe, remember. But the S&P ought to earn a little
and keep up with inflation.

Yes, that's the thing with private accounts. What do you do if the
participant wants to withdraw? People lose their jobs, get sick, and
they'd make a good case for being able to access that money. But then
they'd have nothing for retirement.

Yeah, it's our consumer society. Buy! Buy! Buy!

You're off base here. Whether or not the trust funds are in the
budget, they are invested in Treasury bonds. If the time ever comes
that the Treasury can't pay off, we'll have a lot more than SS to
worry about.

Anyway, it looks like the Bush plan is all but dead, so likely nothing
will get done this year and probably not in the Bush term at all.
Just yesterday four Republicans crossed over to support a resolution
not to increase the deficit.

So, I'm going to try real hard to ignore this thread henceforth.
Hasta La Vista.

 

Sparky stands by his post.

 

Work or workers?

Is this a typo, i.e., "no" should have been "not"? (or are you a Scotsman?)

The key is "net" gain/loss of jobs. Like Hoover, Bush has a net loss. No
one claims that no one has hired anyone in the US since 01/20/2001.

 

Whoa, whoa, whoa, it's not up to us to prove there is *no* crisis - Bush
claims there is a crisis to justify changing SS, so it's up to him to
substantiate that claim or STFU.

 

Sorry this was over your head.

Don't you think Wolfowitz will make a great president of the World Bank?

 

Right, but "average return" don't butter the biscuit. What's it yielded
over the last 4, 5 & 6 years and what about the people who become
disabled or retire when the market is down? The value of the current
system is that the benefit is *always* the same, i.e., it's guaranteed.
There's a lot to be said for that as a safety net. Any additional funds,
i.e., non-SS $$$, may be invested at whatever level of risk their owner
is comfortable and God bless her.

 

Paul Knudsen wrote:

You're a wise man, Paul.

 

But isn't "or something like that" her ultimate weasel phrase?

 

Exactly what does that prove, that it doesn't agree with Rush, Sean and
the other little neocon dweebs? No crime there.