2006-11-09 22:16:27 · 4 answers · asked by Mac the Nice 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
regerrugged, you don't have a clue. Now do you? LOL @ you
2006-11-10 22:59:55 · update #1
Well, the neocons TALKED a great game - wealth for the corporations would mean corporate expansion which would mean more jobs for the poor (all they really want, anyway).
In reality, it was just more wealth for the wealthy, who "invested" their additional windfalls in themselves and their posterity, instead of expanding their commerce.
Look at the oil companies (Bush's family business, BTW) for a perfect example. Record high prices have meant record profits, with no additional capacity, no reduction in price to pre-gouging levels, and no development of new technology. Those record-setting, and frankly obscene, profits have been feather-bedded by the oil barons (and sheiks).
WHat happened earlier this week is the po'foke finally figgered out what the Neocons were up too all along. And voted accordingly.
2006-11-09 22:19:18 · answer #1 · answered by Grendle 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Uh, oh! Bad grammar. I do not understand the question. In the United States, we do not have an "underclass." No one in the Republican party has "destroyed" jobs. Currently, in the US, there are more people working than ever before. The unemployment rate is at 4.4%, which makes it the lowest rate since World War II.
2006-11-10 06:20:33 · answer #2 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Underclass? Where the *** are you coming from.
2006-11-10 06:18:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that you need to look up "full employment."
2006-11-10 06:24:05 · answer #4 · answered by kitty fresh & hissin' crew 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋