Kerry Bush officaial election thread

Good point. And notice how "kind" he was to the other side...It's true that we're all Americans...and at times the opposite sides seem like enemies to eachother...Both sides have been in the wrong before...I have...and I admit it...as Kingcoot and I have both stated...It's just funny that some of you have never stated that your sometimse wrong and act as though your right and we're wrong...well, I'm sure we're both wrong about points once and awhile...but I also agree that the positive thinker gets things done.

hunchy, im through with you.
if you want to be obnoxious and get yourself banned again,
thats your thing. but you are not taking me with you.
so say whatever self-rightous last words your going to say.
you are a troll and im done feeding you.

Hmmm...I smell deja vu....You said that to me when I first came on here...Funny thing is, that's what you say when your cornered and have nothing else to say...Do you really think that's a threat? Obnoxious why? Because I disagree what what you have to say? And you think that you are not obnoxious to me? You said the same thing last time again "You are not taking me with you"...I am glad that I will not have to deal with you anymore...But just as you did last time I think you will come back and continue to talk to me...I'm staying in these forums and not leaving just because of you...Done feeding me? Feeding me what? Lies...Goodbye PVS.

Good Day sir, PVS. Nice debate.

Well thank goodness the two of you are DONE! Now the rest of us can finally have a decent argument here!

Question for the rest of readers. Do you think that it is very unprofessional of both candidates to use the Stem cell research as way to persuade voters? Isn't that just sickening of both candidates? Heck yeah! Even worse use the image of Christopher Reeve's as political tool? Yup! Sure does for me.

Hey Kingcoot, did you happen to see that bulge in PVS jacket? Well I don't know if I did for sure or not...but damn did his nose grow long. I agree on using Christopher Reeves as a political tool. He was great as Superman.

They shouldn't have used Reeves. But I am strongly for stem-cell research.

I don't have too much of an opinion on stem cell research...

Destroying life to save life, interesting irony. The use of stem cells is basically a back door to cloning humans... 😬 sounds like a plot for a horror movie, forging vacuals of human parts to retrofit onto others. I understand the possibilities, but this is no different then legalizing animal testing standards on humans.

Yeah, I don't believe it should be legal really...Like you said, it contradicts itself with destroying life to save life...

Originally posted by RaventheOnly
Destroying life to save life, interesting irony. The use of stem cells is basically a back door to cloning humans... 😬 sounds like a plot for a horror movie, forging vacuals of human parts to retrofit onto others. I understand the possibilities, but this is no different then legalizing animal testing standards on humans.

stem cells will be available regardless. only thing is now they are being discarded. even if they make abortion illegal and stem cells will still be available, and discarded. they dont want to destroy life to save lives, as nobody is FOR abortion. the fetuses are already aborted, and will be aborted no matter what laws are passed, be it in a clinic by a surgeon or illegaly in some seedy shithole.

and how does it compare to animal testing on humans? lost me there.

i hope though that research is being conducted to find a way to avoid this method of obtaining stem cells, so that everyone...well most...will be happy.
perhaps there is a pro-life-frisndly way? would you be for it if there was?

and it is easy to say 'play the cards you were delt' as some say (not quoting anyone here, but i hear that line often) when you are not bound to a wheelchair or with a failing heart, kidney, liver etc.

now, as far as the cloning fear i will say this:
many means have the potential to lead to an extreme ends. thats the risk we take as we evolve. the widespread use of survailence cameras and satellite imagery make the world safer, but also have the potential of becoming 'big brother'. the computers we use, work and play on make our lives far more convenient than without, but have the potential of making us obsolete and unemployed in many fields, including manual labor as many workers have been replaced by robots. and how about our neverending need for electricity? many of our homes are run on power from nuclear plants, based on the same technology which could wipe us all out utterly. that which makes us can also break us.

things which have boundless benefits to society can also greatly hurt it. but if we choose to shun those advancements because of the potential for bad things, we will have the greatest difficulty in advancing.

Creation of jobs in technical fields requires that more people are educated. Jobs don't simply disappear, they move from one sector to another as technology develops. Many graphing/drafting artists can be needed when technology is pushed forward. Energy plants have quite a need for advanced research engineers and students who understand electronic information and engineering. I went to school for 4 1/2 years on Electrical and Information Engineering Technology. I can get a job in a Power cooperative (Control operator), Tractor, Window, Paint, Paper, Ice cream production line maintenance or manufacturing design. Robots break down, but they usually stay up and running. Many tools are needed for robots, and they wear out so someone has to get paid to control tool changes by writing programs to the machine and changing the numerical control if the line switches over to a new product. Then there has to be line workers to control points where it is simply too expensive to pay for more robots. Human work is much cheaper, and there is always a need and a time where there is simply not enough money for a certain technology projects to be cost efficient for the company. There are also quality control workers, cleaners, cooks, and desk workers who relay information for customers and human resource jobs within the company. Technology usually creates the need for more workers because of the size the operation can be.

On stem cell research, it is legal in the private sector as of right now.
From what I see, this issue isn't going to make or break the election, it is about number 6 or 7 on the list of top issues maybe 10. Bush seems to have the position that adult stem cell research is supported, and embryonic stem cell research is supported if the embryonic cell was already expired and wasn't maintaining life.

During the debate, it was a good question. When does life begin? I think it begins the moment cells start to divide after conception and the XX or XY chromosome is copied to make another 46 chromosomes for the next cell. If this has been rape or the mother is in danger, of course action must be taken to save the mother's rights. Both Bush and Kerry came to this conclusion on the debates. Its really a fine line during the debates and I don't think either candidate understands the specific science. Bush stated that the morality of the action of the research is important to review. For instance, if live babies (living Embryos/ PreFetal) were killed

It is important that both candidates think about this when investing in science. (Of course I believe we should invest in it) Science can be useful and a cost effective way of producing goods and services when enough time allows the parts of the system to be built where the company will make a profit, or the good or service would not exist, because the company could not pay for their own line to work there. A great deal of ethics is required in science. If no one looks at ethics or morals we could create any thing to do anything. If anyone has played Doom III, The team on Mars is basically allowed to do what it wants with technology and to hell with ethics and total chaos breaks out. If something created could be used to heal someone, is it ok to stop an embryo from dividing? I technically side with Bush and say it isn't ok to stop an embryo from dividing. What if it was rape or the mother was going to die and there is no hope of the embryo to survive, the same applies to the dead adult stem cells. You can't ethically breed Embryos to heal people who have suffered an accident. There is a way to research stem cells from adults (dead) that could lead to the answer we need to find.

Originally posted by kingcoot
Creation of jobs in technical fields requires that more people are educated. Jobs don't simply disappear, they move from one sector to another as technology develops...Technology usually creates the need for more workers because of the size the operation can be.

no, jobs DO simply disappear. just because technology creates other jobs doesnt erase the fact that more people lose there jobs. that is reality.
from assembly lines to the checkout line of at the supermarket, computers take jobs away. smell the coffee.

i dont think tech will be the doom of us all, but there are plenty of cases where the middle class gets screwed by technology.

not to throw it off topic, but you seem to deny the blatent truth.

Originally posted by PVS
no, jobs DO simply disappear. just because technology creates other jobs doesnt erase the fact that more people lose there jobs. that is reality.
not to throw it off topic, but you seem to deny the blatent truth. [/B]

It isn't the truth. I've seen how it works just like I've been to John Deere. Explain that to me. They employ service workers, bank workers, just for the company.

my sister was called into a meeting at her office and her boss described his business trip to japan. obviously building up to a threat of layoffs, he says "i walked into the warehouse and it was pitch black, they had to switch the lights on...you know why? robots can work in the dark"

i go shopping and in two lines of the understaffed checkout section, there are self-checkout scanners. i see a lack of a job due to a computer every day, so please stop asking me to explain that the sky is blue. your education and experience is admirable, and you are obviously a smart chap. but you are ignoring the truth.

you say SOME people are still needed at points in an assembly line, but forget the jobs lost. of coarse computers create new jobs, but you need a degree in most cases to get them. what of the blue-collar?

Originally posted by PVS
my sister was called into a meeting at her office and her boss described his business trip to japan. obviously building up to a threat of layoffs, he says "i walked into the warehouse and it was pitch black, they had to switch the lights on...you know why? robots can work in the dark"

i go shopping and in two lines of the understaffed checkout section, there are self-checkout scanners. i see a lack of a job due to a computer every day, so please stop asking me to explain that the sky is blue. your education and experience is admirable, and you are obviously a smart chap. but you are ignoring the truth.

you say SOME people are still needed at points in an assembly line, but forget the jobs lost. of coarse computers create new jobs, but you need a degree in most cases to get them. what of the blue-collar?

In fact the opposite is true in my life.

I currently work at WalMart and have paid 14,000 dollars off on my college loans... I'm not employed yet at John Deere. People in technology can't find a job. I mean, they did find a job, but I had to work at Wal-Mart. The Technical position I applied for only accepted 20%. 5 total applied. 20% is 1 accepted to work in the technical job. Yet I survive. I'm not lucky, I'm just so very patient with my career.

I also stated in my previous posts that office jobs, and informational and secretary, maintenance (yes cleaning) are needed for facilities and cooks for the workers lunch lines.

As for the industry in Japan, they can afford quite alot to replace everything. I have not seen that example being able to be built because human labor is cheaper. This is the US, not Japan.

In fact, this is Iowa, no one here can afford to build multimillion dollar machines to replace the human workers. They replace them with more ergonomic designs to care for workers.

I never asked you to believe me, I just am stating the things I have observed.

look, as i said before:

i dont think it will be the end of us (technology)
i only brought it up to make the point that many advancements in technology,
be it nuclear power, satellite imageing, computers..etc present a potential ends which could be disaterous, the same as stem cell research potentially leading to a "horror movie" scenario as raven put it.

people have lost jobs to computers, are losing jobs to computers, and will lose jobs to computers. when job shuffling of this nature goes on, people get laid off. its a fact. i never said it was a widespread epidemic, only that it can be seen everywhere, little things like the examples i gave. however, it could lead to disaster. what IF robots become less expensive than human labor? and it WILL, technology is always getting more advanced and less costly. there has to be a point where we say "ok, a robot is cheeper, more efficient, works nonstop, and would save a company such and such dollars, but its RIGHT to let the person keep their job and the hell with the robot. just as in stem cell research. if advanced enough, the question of cloning WILL come up, and it will be up to people to say..."it is possible, but we will refuse to do it, simply because it's WRONG."

when complimented with good morals, the means will not lead to a disaterous end.

No, I wasn't reffering to the ethics of Stem Cells research. I was reffering to the two candidates using it for their political gain. But then again these two are politicians.

Alright

I can't speak for what you say on "lost jobs to computers". Right now I feel that I lost my computer job before I was given a chance. What if companies expand too far? They plan their spending in ways that risk too much, and then the workers suffer layoffs. Usually the highest paid workers or the technical workers are laid off. Then those people find other jobs like Wal-Mart for the time being as a stocker (I'd call that pretty basic skill). I digress as you have indicated that people get laid off, and I agree, but not necessarily to technology. Technology only creates a bigger environment, not more or less jobs. The structure changes, but I always see positions that I could apply for such as a line worker (non-technical HS graduate). I prefer to work at Wal-mart for the time because line work isn't exactly fun, but the job is available and it pays more than Wal-mart. I just weigh what works for me and take what there is and what is more convenient.

posted by PVS

what IF robots become less expensive than human labor? and it WILL, technology is always getting more advanced and less costly.

I agree robots can become less expensive, but the production costs are very complicated. You would think people would lose jobs to the robot, but then there will be some operation that a human can only do. The only example of this "full automation" is in Japan. It is pretty pricey, and most companies in the US won't be able to afford it for at least 50 years. If they every company could afford it? I doubt it. All companies compete, and they wouldn't beable to all have the nice robots some companies have. Both companies could work business without taking each other out because it is possible to have partial robot operations with human line workers. Most operations are done like that on the line.

well, it spiralled into the issue of the (im)morality of stem cell research, so i addressed that. off topic tough i guess.

and nobody dragged mrs. reeves out on the campaign trail. she decided to support kerry because she supports stem cell research. in the end though, the democrats accepted her to gain votes, which some may argue as cheap.

i have seen adds for bush which invoke 9-11 and even show videos of ground zero. now are you going to tell me this is not absolutely tasteless?

both sides are playing dirty here, so the arguement is who is MORE dirty then.
the bush campaign is nowhere near squaky clean, so lets see both sides of the coin.