Replies

I'm not going to agree with you much here. I apologize to you in advance. I like your thoughts, but I do think you're a little off the mark. That doesn't mean I disagree with your intent, or the fact that you recognize problems and want to attribute reason to them. You're coming from a Conservative point of view, and I apprecaite that. Sorry, in advance...

The loss of American Automobiles equals American Jobs has a large part in the problem.

You know MollyPitcher1, ultimately you're right, but I don't like using the auto industry as an example. I'll tell you why. The labor unions so screwed up the balance between labor and management, that the auto industry was forced into obsolescence. By contrast what we have going on today is tens of millions of jobs that never had labor union representation, also moved off-shore. IMO< those are the much more critical and destructive jobs to have lost. How many jobs were involved with the auto industry and supportive businesses overall? 10,000, 50,000? We're talking about perhaps 40 million jobs lost to off-shore concerns at this time.

When Americans started “buying foreign” they started stripping American workers of jobs.

I'd like to join you here, but there are externuating circumstance here as well. Try implementing a "no China" policy into your household. It's amost impossible to do. They were so effective in moving manufacturing off-shore, that you can't even find some items made in the U. S. Over and above the U. S. loyalty factor, was the quality of merchandise factor. When I bought my first electronics from China, I found that their circutry wasn't up to par. Devices that had tradionally lasted at least a decade before corossion became a terminal problem, were suddenly dying about 24 to 36 months out. Other items broke easily. Their products were trash.

Tradtionally, there has been the initial cost of items. There was inflation. Now there's also the life of the product factor. These were calculated into your purchase with your after tax dollars. If you look at the "life of the product" factor that China manufacturing presented to us, you realize that your purchasing power dropped significantly, because you had to replace the products every few years. There was no place to get these items repaired. When one stopped working, you had to buy a new one.

All of a sudden, our stagnant wages wouldn't buy as much, even though the new merchandise was cheaper. It didn't last. So what do you do about that? Nothing! It's China or nothing these days for many products.

My point here, what choice did U. S. Citizens have, for making a lot of purchases. They were forced into buying China.

The loss of jobs led to poverty and poverty led to this terrorism.

While I do believe that the loss of jobs led to tough economic times for those who lost them, are we really seeing people conduct these types of crimes who used to hold down good jobs? I don't think you believe that. What we are seeing is the same old dead-beats. Unfortunately these same dead-beats have been empowered by the first half-White president. They think they are entitled to be violent. They think they are entitled to meet out punishment to Whites for something that happened long ago. This isn't about jobs at all. It's about racial manipulation and hatred.

How many of these guys would run out to get a job if all of a sudden a lot of jobs became available in these areas? I'll bet hardly any of them would.

Another problem is the loss of the “draft.” Many an otherwise useless individual found his way to a better life through service in the Military. Now that said service is “voluntary” there is little chance for the dregs of society to find a “new life.” Bring back the draft because it is better to pay people to be soldiers than to pay unemployment and a zillion “human services” payouts to lazy, unmotivated, people....young or old.

In our youth, the military was hard as nails for recruits, new inductees. I'm not sure it's the same any longer. In the old days there was a fair amount of abuse leveled at the recruit. It was part of the conditioning process to eventually get these people to form a cohesive unit ready for battle. I don't have any way of knowing, but I fear the new recruits are molly-coddled too much these days. If someone knows otherwise, I'd like to hear what they have to say. I do hope I'm wrong. I think you need to have a guy in there that yells and kicks butt.

I do think the military is a good way to take a guy in and turn him around. I do think the military has too high a priority to be swamped with these types though. In the old days you'd get the rogue idiot, and the service could give him the special attention they needed. Today, the military would be swamped if every bad kid on the streets went in.

I don't know what the full answer to this is. A youth conservation corp projects type of program might be what the doctor ordered, but then you'd get gang members coming out and threating the program too.

Until we get absolutely serious about gangs and the crimes they commit, this isn't getting better.

We need RICO tactics, and a task force to simply take out anyone involved at any level in gangs. Participation in a gang should be ten years minimum. Every member of a gang should be considered to be an accesorty to any crimes committed by the gang. They are part of the support group. They love the power that gives them. Destroy it, and them if need be.