Replies

Why is your gauge college? You know that boomers for the most part boomers were not able to afford college. They went into trades, or the military (Vietnam). College for civilians did not become really popular until Gen X/Y.

You mention that working and middle class compensation has been stagnant since the early 70’s. Who do you think starting working those years, suffered through gas queues and 20% mortgage/interest rates? You think it was so easy for boomers, but mention some of the very hardships we suffered through.

Funny how it is that Gen Ys and the Gen Zs support the very policies you mention caused their downfall. Boomers don’t want illegals here. They want China to pay and give our own citizens a chance.

College is not the cure all you seem to think it is. Today’s industry moves at a much faster pace than colleges or universities can manage to keep up with. Many students are insufficiently prepared to handle the work in industries required of them. That this fact has not yet reached the masses is probably their biggest downfall. These Generation XYZers shouldn’t have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for an education that won’t help them obtain work.

There needs to be a system that combines the latest in education with practical work in industry. I know people used to talk about such a system — a combination practical education and apprenticeship/trade program. One where people could work, especially in technology, and acquire hands on experience. But instead, they decided to go with hiring H1bs and the Millenials (gen ys) and gen Zs go right along with it because they think it’s “fair.”

I’m certain boomers would support your push for slashing the number of foreigners and reducing regulations, but the ones most helped by those policies would have problems voting for them.

'Boomers don't want illegals here. They want China to pay and give our own citizens a chance.'

Except, they don't vote that way. Reagan and crew passed amnesty in 86, and we got 6 other amnesties for illegals led by neoliberal boomers like Newt Gingrich. It was boomers who pimped and pushed nafta, most favored trade for communist china, and other wto free trade 'deals'. But the idea that 'boomers' held the line on globalism and nationalism here simply isn't true. The entire point of the 90's was boomers like Newt and Limbaugh working to destroy any idea of third parties, nationalism and populism here in America.

BroJoeK: All of that is pure nonsense because: It conflates "Southern Exports" with Federal import tariffs. In reality, "Southern products" were bought and sold several times on their way to European customers, as were European and other products on their way to American customers. So the idea, that somehow Southerners "paid for" Federal tariff revenues, is ridiculous nonsense. The truth is most Southerners (or any other producer) were paid for their products when they sold at local markets, or to men called "Factors". In fact, nearly all import tariffs were paid by end users of those products, including Northern manufacturers in wool, cotton, silk and iron, plus big city consumers of coffee, tea and wine.

All of what Adams said is completely true and your claims that somehow the price paid by wholesalers to producers is not affected by the prices European customers could afford to pay is simply laughable. Where did the wholesalers get their money with which they paid the producers of the exports? Oh...that would be those very same European customers. Equally laughable is your claim that somehow end consumers paid the tariffs on imports rather than the owners of the goods. You are not only grossly ignorant about how tariffs work but you are stubbornly ignorant. Its OK, I'll just keep rubbing your nose in the reality until you get it.

Remember when President Trump put a tariff on Chinese goods? Did you see a line item on your receipt that said "Tariff" when you bought those goods? No? Why not? You are the end user. So why didn't you pay the tariff? You should have according to your "logic".

BroJoeK: However, seemingly, Rhett's, Hammond's and others' claims were and remain, highly effective Democrat propaganda.

Nope! They were 100% True. They said it. Numerous politicians on both sides said it. Newspapers in both the North and the South said it. Even foreign newspapers and commentators said it. Economists and tax experts who have looked at the period said it. But you still cling to the laughable little fantasy that you can just deny deny deny and somehow people will believe you over everyone and everything else.

BroJoeK: In 1860 about 95% of all "Southern products" -- meaning exports from Confederate states -- consisted of just one item: King Cotton.

Wrong. It was high, but it was never 95%. It was more like 83%

BroJoeK: Cotton alone represented roughly 50% of US exports with every other "Southern product" combined adding another 5%.

See above. Your percentages are incorrect.

BroJoeK: Northern, Eastern and Western products, including Union slave-states, also including gold and silver, made up the remaining 45%.

See above. This is false. The only significant export the North produced was Midwestern grain. The Northeast produced practically nothing by way of exports and never really had produced much by way of exports.

BroJoeK: There are no facts to support claims that disproportionate Federal spending went "to the North", unless you define "the North" as everywhere north of South Carolina.

This is 100% pure unadulterated BS.

BroJoeK: In reality, such data as we have says about 60% of Federal spending on forts, lighthouses and other infrastructure went to states south of the Mason-Dixon line.

This is a laughable little fantasy on your part completely unsupported by any credible source.