Hitler and Bush: In comparison. (And all of that nonsense.)

[4a6c1]

One perspective. Not mine.

The Rise of the Fourth Reich:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/reich.html

------------------------

“Naturally the common people don’t want war. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.”

--- spoken by Hermann Goering, Hitler’s Reich Marshall, during the Nuremberg
Trials after World War II.

------------------------

~Robin. Playing devils advocate for the Dems. Because every devil deserves an advocate. ;)

[Drew]

I Godwin this thread.

Thems' be fighting words.

There can be no comparison. One was bent on world domination, the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.

so IMO the perspective is wrong.

The thread is about nazi's you cant Godwin it.

[Edaarin]

:yawn:

WHITE POWERRRRR!

EDIT: America -- Founded on Christian principles, by Christians, for Christians.

Germany -- Founded by white people, on white people principles, for white people.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Edaarin]

it should read
Founded on Christian principles, by Christians, for everyone.

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by Dave
it should read
Founded on Christian principles, by Christians, for everyone.

Well, the Native Americans might take issue with that.

[4a6c1]

Originally posted by Dave
The thread is about nazi's.....

Tsk tsk. Naughty Dave. This thread is about comparison. But I can understand your hesitation. Looking too close at something always brings about its flaws. :P

I didn't know there were any laws currently limiting what Native Americans can do on U.S. soil over that of any normal American.

As a matter of fact, I will beg to venture they have more freedoms than you or I.

Change takes time;)

[Gan]

Some people have too much time on their hands. Waaayy too much time on their hands.

[Skirmisher]

I was referring to the "founded on" aspect.

Having something like 90% or more likely a good deal more of your population lost does not show a great deal of concern for their well being and certainly does not seem to include them in the grouping of people that the new government was "for".

[4a6c1]

Originally posted by Ganalon
Some people have too much time on their hands. Waaayy too much time on their hands.

Indeed. I blame Bush.

















(zing)

Originally posted by Skirmisher
I was referring to the "founded on" aspect.

Having something like 90% or more likely a good deal more of your population lost does not show a great deal of concern for their well being and certainly does not seem to include them in the grouping of people that the new government was "for".

neither was it for the blacks, the Irish, the Italians, yet things seem to have smoothed themselves out quite well.

Prejudice also takes time to come over

[StrayRogue]

Originally posted by Dave
the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.



HAHAHAHA

Originally posted by StrayRogue

Originally posted by Dave
the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.



HAHAHAHA

It is the only reson for a government to exist.

Originally posted by JihnasSpirit

Originally posted by Dave
The thread is about nazi's.....

Tsk tsk. Naughty Dave. This thread is about comparison. But I can understand your hesitation. Looking too close at something always brings about its flaws. :P
P.S. look up godwins law

[StrayRogue]

Originally posted by Dave

Originally posted by StrayRogue

Originally posted by Dave
the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.



HAHAHAHA

It is the only reson for a government to exist.

I seriously hope you aren't that naive.

[Skirmisher]

All that is needed to blunt my point it to remove the "for everyone " part, as the US obviously was not for everyone.

That does not make it some horribly evil place as much as it does not make it a supposed utopia.
:shrug:

Look around you Skirm, it is for everyone.

[Skirmisher]

But the phrase used was "founded on", not where we are at today.

"Founded on" look at the original rule of law (constitution) and show me where anyone is excluded.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Dave]

[Skirmisher]

I did.

Deeds far outweigh words as the countless broken treaties with the various Indian nations and near extermination of an entire people shows quite well.

but then you agree that the original intention was not to exclude anyone as is written down in the constitution.

[Edaarin]

Yeah, because we all know that all minority groups are perfectly happy with things the way they are now.

-- He who has to be twice as qualified as a white counterpart, or four times as qualified as a black colleague.

[Delirium]

-- He who has to be twice as qualified as a white counterpart, or four times as qualified as a black colleague.

Four times as qualified as a black colleague? Come on, how much is four times really. So to get a job where you need a 2 year degree they are hiring black homeless people? Ive never heard of job prejudices against asians before. I could be naive tho.

As shocking as this is, i am white. However if i was a minority id KNOW people were treating me like crap cause of my race/sex/etc. Since im a white male tho how can it be? Cause sometimes people are just assholes with no real explanation. Back to the topic i think there will always be the perception(not saying none exists right now) of racism or whatever because people treat others like shit all the time with no real reason. Therefore if there is a difference in the assholer and assholee it will appear that is the reason.

A Utopia could never exist in my mind because of this unless humans evolved into a less assholish(greedy/mean) version of itself. I think the US comes pretty close tho. Obviously there are areas of improvement that could be addressed.

[Warriorbird]

Y'know, I think there's a difference. "Domination theology" and corporate control are a very different thing than insane hate and genocide. Doesn't make them good, but they're on different levels.

Hitler != Bush

[Pines]

Originally posted by Dave
One was bent on world domination, the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.


C'mon Dave, I give up. Which one is supposed to be Bush?

[Gan]

Its hard for me to believe that someone is actually being compared to Hitler... much less that its Georege Bush. I really hope this is all in jest.

Since there's not really much to compare to it means you're either a) making light of the holocost and the European campaign in WW2 or b) over exagerating the direction of the office of the president of the US in such a way as to consider it is bent on genocide and world domination.

Either you're aim is to insult those who fought in WW2 or died in the holocost or you're attempting to insult the american public.

Amazing I say. I propose to think higher of those who participate on these boards and will consider this thread in jest.

[Atlanteax]

As for the broken treaties with the American Indians...

It was my understanding (after I spoke with a knowledgable Oklahomian about it) is that the Indians generally sided with the South during the Civil War, which the North then used as a pretext to ignore/disregard previous treaties.

After listening to him, I can agree with his assessment that the broken treaties (most of them) are of the combined faults of the US Gov't and the Indians themselves.

The American Indians were wronged, but they were not completely innocent.

[Warriorbird]

Most of the notions of "broken treaties" and such came around before the Civil War. The main difference was many of the Indian tribes didn't have concepts of permanent land ownership. They thought the white people were crazy. So, yes, it really was the fault of both sides. There was a critical perception error on the part of the Indians. If they wanted to, they could've come down a LOT harder on colonists. They also did not cooperate very well between tribes.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Warriorbird]

[Gan]

Since indians and land have been brought up. Do you think that the reimbursement be given to the Shinnecock? See below CNN article:

source: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/15/shinnecock.hamptons.reut/index.html

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- The Shinnecock Indian tribe said on Wednesday it was seeking billions of dollars for 150 years of back rent on land it inhabited for 12,000 years in New York state in one of the largest suits of its kind.

The area is part of the Hamptons, known as a summer playground for New York's rich and privileged classes who flock there to escape the heat of the city.

The tribe filed the lawsuit against New York State in the U.S. district court in Central Islip.

The suit, which also names the governor, a local railroad and the town of Southampton, lays claim to 3,600 acres of land encompassing the upscale Shinnecock Hills Golf Course and Long Island University's Southampton College.

The Shinnecock tribe's suit comes just days after New York State Gov. George Pataki urged lawmakers to settle a suit between the state and the Akwesasne Mohawks over 12,000 acres of land in northern New York.

The Shinnecock tribe, known for its whaling expertise and crafting "wampum" beads from sea shells, said they have inhabited the shores of Long Island for 500 generations and were swindled in an 1859 deal they say was forged with a group of unnamed private investors, wherein members of the tribe signed over their claim to the disputed land.

"We have been good neighbors to the very people who stole our ancestral land for their own financial gain," Randy King, chairman of the Shinnecock Indian Nation's trustees, said in a statement.

"Before every inch of our sacred lands are lost, we will fight," King added.

The suit does not name area homeowners and does not seek to "displace residents from their homes -- a consideration never shown to the Shinnecock," the statement said.

The tribe is seeking to be paid back rent and interest for the land but the actual dollar amount of the suit is difficult to pinpoint. Representatives of the tribe said it had assessed the value of the land last year at around $1.7 billion, but that figure was beneath fair market value and the actual amount claimed would be well above that.

A Pataki spokesman said the state had not yet reviewed the suit. "We will take whatever steps may be necessary to protect the interests of property owners and taxpayers on Long Island," Kevin Quinn, Pataki's spokesman said in a statement.

About 600 out of 1,300 Shinnecocks are now based on an 800-acre strip of land in the area.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2005 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Ganalon]

[DeV]

Originally posted by Dave
yet things seem to have smoothed themselves out quite well.
Yeah right. :rolleyes:

Edited to add a smilie.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by DeV]

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Dave

There can be no comparison. One was bent on world domination, the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.

so IMO the perspective is wrong.

wasn't hitler's position from the start that he was 'protecting his countryman's interests'?

I mean, wasn't it initially about safety and reclaiming their economy?

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Y'know, I think there's a difference. "Domination theology" and corporate control are a very different thing than insane hate and genocide. Doesn't make them good, but they're on different levels.
Hitler != Bush

domination theology and corporate control are just a new face of facism.

same principles still exist.

1> it's our god-given right
2> they're wrong, we're right
3> its always playing on the fear and insecurity of the people, rather then an attempt to positively motivate
4> preying on people's fear is a bad habit consumer american culture has develped.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Dave
"Founded on" look at the original rule of law (constitution) and show me where anyone is excluded.

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Dave]

My pleasure:

"the continuance of slavery was clearly sanctioned in the U.S. Constitution, although the words slave and slavery are not found anywhere in the document. Section 2 of Article I states that apart from free persons "all other persons," meaning slaves, are each to be counted as three-fifths of a white person for the purpose of apportioning congressional representatives on the basis of population. Section 9 of Article I states that the importation of "such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit," meaning slaves, would be permitted until 1808. And Section 2 of Article IV directs that persons "held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another," meaning fugitive slaves, were to be returned to their owners"

LINK (http://civilwar.bluegrass.net/secessioncrisis/constitutiononslavery.html)

[Warriorbird]

They're not killing nearly as large a portion of the populace in the process, Yswithe. There's nowhere near the scale of invasion.

It's a silly comparison.

Domination theology and corporate control are something to work against on their own merits. We don't have to call them Nazism to not like them.

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Delirium
Back to the topic i think there will always be the perception(not saying none exists right now) of racism or whatever because people treat others like shit all the time with no real reason. Therefore if there is a difference in the assholer and assholee it will appear that is the reason.

People are more likely to blame something other then the actual cause of the problem.

ie: that person's a racist (no, he's an equal opportunity asshole)

ie: why did that kid do that? he had a perfect life (look at the parent's behavior, then understand why the kid is a sociopath)

ie: he was so quiet and polite, who knew he was a serial killer? (even serial killers are quiet and polite, perhaps his history of being a drifting construction worker with the special soundproofed van should have pointed that out)

ie: Well, perhaps everyone/no-one is at fault (no, the people who contributed directly and indirectly to the situation are at fault for their action/inaction, no arguing).

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by Yswithe

Originally posted by Dave

There can be no comparison. One was bent on world domination, the other on the safety of the public he is charged to protect.

so IMO the perspective is wrong.

wasn't hitler's position from the start that he was 'protecting his countryman's interests'?

I mean, wasn't it initially about safety and reclaiming their economy?

Of course.

No one rational is saying that Bush as he is now is equal to the evil that Hitler became.

The concern is that he and his philosophy does however resemble very much the way that the facists looked when beginning in pre war europe.

It isn't what he is, as much as what the climate he is creating COULD be twisted to become.

Lets not be that guy.

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
They're not killing nearly as large a portion of the populace in the process, Yswithe. There's nowhere near the scale of invasion.

It's a silly comparison.

Domination theology and corporate control are something to work against on their own merits. We don't have to call them Nazism to not like them.

Well, look at the end result of all the efforts on the "powers that be" and then you can get an idea as to what's going on. It's going to get worse before it gets better. (we're killing people with poverty)

The widening gap between the upper-class and poor class is going to be the main key in the next 14 years that exposes what's going on.

Anyway, you have to "break" people in to a process, what's the comparison, put a frog in boiling water and it will jump out, but if you gradually increase the temperature, it won't notice the change and die.

[Apotheosis]

Oh yeah, I'm not saying bush = hitler, I'm just saying the way we're going, we're gearing up for somethin' Facist.

[Back]

Originally posted by Skirmisher
Of course.

No one rational is saying that Bush as he is now is equal to the evil that Hitler became.

The concern is that he and his philosophy does however resemble very much the way that the facists looked when beginning in pre war europe.

It isn't what he is, as much as what the climate he is creating COULD be twisted to become.

Lets not be that guy.

Far better than I could have put it. When I suggest we are getting closer to living in a fascist state, I am not saying its a Nazi state.

Pretty sure we learned our lesson from WWII that that sort of thing will never happen again.

[DeV]

They both believe they were chosen by God to lead their nations...

His grandfather was known as "Hitlers Angel"...

Ut oh!

Seriously though, I understand the concept behind the comparision to be a philosophical one with more emphasis on their style of dictator... er... leadership.

[4a6c1]

The crazies behind the original link I posted. Maybe some of you have more tolerance than me. I couldnt get past the first page. :no:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by JihnasSpirit
The crazies behind the original link I posted. Maybe some of you have more tolerance than me. I couldnt get past the first page. :no:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/


This was the only interesting news item on that site (i think whatreallyhappened are a bunch of loonies, too)

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/africa/06/21/ethiopia.lions.ap/index.html

[xtc]

Heil to the Furor

[Warriorbird]

Well, the Republican movement to end the 22nd amendment is pretty dodgy, mind you.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Well, the Republican movement to end the 22nd amendment is pretty dodgy, mind you.

Huh? Republicans want to remove term limits? First I heard.

[DeV]

Doesn't this happen every once in a while or so? I believe Clinton broached the issue of the 22nd amendment as well.

[Gan]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Well, the Republican movement to end the 22nd amendment is pretty dodgy, mind you.

H.J.RES.24
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution.
Sponsor: Rep Hoyer, Steny H. [MD-5] (introduced 2/17/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Latest Major Action: 4/4/2005 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments, Summary

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY AS OF:
2/17/2005--Introduced.

Constitutional Amendment - Repeals the Twenty-Second Amendment to the Constitution (authorizing limitation of presidential terms).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAJOR ACTIONS: (color indicates Senate actions)
***NONE***


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALL ACTIONS: (color indicates Senate actions)
2/17/2005:
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
4/4/2005:
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
2/18/2005:
Introductory remarks on measure. (CR E302-303)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE(S): (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)
***NONE***


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSPONSORS(4), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 2/17/2005 Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 2/17/2005
Rep Sabo, Martin Olav [MN-5] - 2/17/2005 Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5] - 2/17/2005

________________________________________

Source: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HJ00024:@@@L&summ2=m&


Lets look closely at the sponsor and co-sponsors...

Sponsor: Rep. Steny Hoyer - Democrat
Co-Spon: Rep. Howard Berman - Democrat
Co-Spon: Rep. Frank Pallone - Democrat
Co-Spon: Rep. James Sensenbrenner - Republican
Co-Spon: Rep. Martin Sabo - Democrat

This is the same attempt to remove the 22nd amendment you're talking about right?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Warriorbird]

They've clearly lost their minds. Only one I recognized was Sensenbrenner.

[DeV]

This is not Hoyer's first time attempting this either. The first was back in 2001... sounds like he's on a crusade.

[Gan]

A democrat on a crusade? Clearly that must be a conspiracy...

[Warriorbird]

I can't blame Sensenbrenner. I'm sure he's like, "God. These guys are idiots. I so have to get on board and make everybody vote yes! It'll be bipartisan!"

[Gan]

I dont blame Sensenbrenner at all, for if opportunity knocks...

I just thought it funny that the 22nd amendment repeal was associated with the Republicans. :lol:

[Anebriated]

I didnt read the whole thread but I wanted to comment on the first post.

I don't believe it is a fair comparison because Bush isnt focused on world domination(that we know of). However I do believe that the point made is still very valid. It is something that has bothered me for awhile and I have tried to explain but never really been able to put the words on it.

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Elrodin
I don't believe it is a fair comparison because Bush isnt focused on world domination(that we know of). However I do believe that the point made is still very valid. It is something that has bothered me for awhile and I have tried to explain but never really been able to put the words on it.

consider moralistic, philosophical and economical domination.

It's different in that people aren't physically killed, but their spirit definitely is. (figureatively speaking).

It's facism, but not the facism of WWII.

While I tend to agree with capitalism and the idea of democracy, forcing our will on other nations does not exactly set a heartwarming message of goodwill to the rest of the world (although, we shouldn't have to, but someone has to set an example, oh, and 911 was wrong)

[xtc]

Originally posted by Elrodin
I didnt read the whole thread but I wanted to comment on the first post.

I don't believe it is a fair comparison because Bush isnt focused on world domination(that we know of). However I do believe that the point made is still very valid. It is something that has bothered me for awhile and I have tried to explain but never really been able to put the words on it.

Regarding World Domination.

Bush has invaded two countries so far. He is a born again Christian who thinks he was picked by God to be President. It seems in 2000 a document was drawn up for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld Chief of Staff), Dubbya's brother Jeb, and Lewis Libby (Cheney's Chief of Staff). The document calls for the creation of a "Global Pax Americana". It is a pretty scary document.

LINK (http://www.sundayherald.com/27735)

[Anebriated]

Believe me, I am anything but pro-Bush. I hate that he was elected, I hate his choices about this war and I hate alot of the other choices he has made to date. I found Kerry to be the lesser of the two evils. I have been eagerly waiting for the next election to get Bush out of the whitehouse.

As for the war documents and goodwill. I do believe that war might have come upon us either way. I do not believe we should have initiated it the way we did. Iraq was a last ditch effort for Bush so the American public would not realize that we do not have the technology/intelligence/manpower to find Bin Ladin. For whatever reason he is still on the loose but hey, we freed Iraq(who had no active nuclear missles or research according to british intel) so everything is alright.

I am not claiming to know alot about politics. I am a college guy who cares more about when the next party is than what nation is hiding their attempts to create nuclear weapons. I do know that from my perspective everything just doesn't add up.

[Back]

Its not exactly a secret.

Project for the New American Century (http://www.newamericancentury.org/)

If you read their mission, which was published at the END of 2000 (which means it was written who knows how long before), you can see their plan unfolding right up to today.

As an odd aside, I work in the same building. :scream:

[Edited on 6-21-2005 by Backlash]

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by xtc
[quote]
Regarding World Domination.

Bush has invaded two countries so far. He is a born again Christian who thinks he was picked by God to be President. It seems in 2000 a document was drawn up for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld Chief of Staff), Dubbya's brother Jeb, and Lewis Libby (Cheney's Chief of Staff). The document calls for the creation of a "Global Pax Americana". It is a pretty scary document.

LINK (http://www.sundayherald.com/27735)

yeah, i've seen that too, although, it makes sense that American leaders are dedicated to maintaining american interests, that's nothing new in american history, just a different spin on it based on the real circumstances that Islamic fundamentalism is replacing communist rivals 'aka' the new cold war.

I disagree that the European Union could be a new rival, because Europe has a whole different set of social issues that will take a very long time to get beyond.

On the economic level, we need to worry about India and China.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Yswithe
The widening gap between the upper-class and poor class is going to be the main key in the next 14 years that exposes what's going on. Out of curiosity, why'd you pick 14 years?

As for the article: how are those occult talismans treating you, Dave?

[Parkbandit]

:shibby::shibby::shibby::shibby::shibby:

[Anebriated]

I like the sig PB

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
Out of curiosity, why'd you pick 14 years?


Well, my best guess is that in the next ten years, perhaps sooner, the "big three" are going to have dropped a ton of jobs in america (ie, more mexicans building cars, less americans building cars).
Where does that leave the manufacturing based sector of our economy?

Obviously, our America's economy is going through an enormous re-structuring, which won't really make itself apparent for awhile.

Sure, we see more technology and financial sector related jobs, but where does that leave the uneducated, and unskilled? Plus, people are going to have to take paycuts when white collar work can be outsourced to india for a fraction of the cost.
But this whole thing is a new thread that I'll start soon, anyway.

[Gan]

This just follows the predictions that as manufacturing moves off of US soil due to lower prices of labor, tax, materials, etc., our market will align itself towards the service and technology sector. The burden is on American industry to retool and refit into a more competitive operation.

For those of us who favor free and competitive markets that is a good thing. It means that inefficient practices will be realigned or removed entirely. (Another reason why I dislike labor unions and how they force financial and operational inefficiencies on industry)

That means a huge labor force here in America will have to retrain/re-educate in order to remain in the labor market. Sometimes that means learning new skills.

That example is following a true competetive market model. However, what it does not take into effect is the government stepping in to save a particular industry like it did with Chrysler back in the late 70's. With American Airlines in the early 2000's. Will they do it again with General Motors?

[Artha]

The document calls for the creation of a "Global Pax Americana".
Yay, peace.

[Apotheosis]

well, from what I understand, general motors is cutting 25,000 jobs by 2006 or 2008, but according to some insiders (and yes, I know there are plenty of doomsayers), it could go as high as 125,000 by 2008 - 2010

[Gan]

Only thing is something could happen that could change that. It would be another thing if they were going to cut all those by the end of 2005, that I would consider alarming, a protracted layoff that could be reversed should the market swing back towards GM doesnt worry me that much.

Its all about making the best and most attractive widgett that the public will flock to and spend their money. Right now the balance is on foreign autos. We'll see how that changes domestic car manufacture/retail strategy.

[Apotheosis]

Originally posted by Ganalon
Right now the balance is on foreign autos. We'll see how that changes domestic car manufacture/retail strategy.

I would say the spiral is too great for the american auto companies to get out of at this point.. oh, and plz move this portion of the discussion to my new economy thread, because, umm, i dunno, it would be easier to deal with there.., and the posts here won't be off topic, or will they?

http://www.forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=15588

[Warriorbird]

Our technology sector's lost 25% of it's jobs in the past two years to outsourcing. I wouldn't count on a revival there. You're interested in economics. Wishing doesn't make something so.


[Edited on 6-22-2005 by Warriorbird]

[Gan]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Our technology sector's lost 25% of it's jobs in the past two years to outsourcing. I wouldn't count on a revival there. You're interested in economics. Wishing doesn't make something so.


[Edited on 6-22-2005 by Warriorbird]

When you say our tech sector are you referring to the US or your particular employment? 25% (source?) is a pretty large number unless you're looking at the whole technology industry as a whole (service as well as production).

I would view a 25% reduction as a hard kick in the ass to become more competitive or get into a different sector where I could be more competitive. I would not view it as a bad thing unless I was a protectionist.

[Warriorbird]

Was referring to North Carolina. Should've been more clear. Some recent numbers out about the decline of the Research Triangle.

[Gan]

Ouch, a regional hit of 25% is alot to absorb. I'd definately take that as a wakeup call if I ran a technology based business there.