Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (198339)	10/31/2001 7:15:19 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I have heard that they will make more than $6.00 per hour, yet you have said it and Patricia said it earlier. She had no back up and I assume you don't either. Don't you see how it hurts the logical flow of an argument to inject something that is not true? That said, I am not sure what the best way to go is. I have heard that it takes 3 months to hire a federal employee and that we need 28,000 of them. That does not sound like "pronto" to me. It is an interesting political argument, and deadly important to do it right. I am pretty confident that either way will be better than the $6.00 per hour people that ARE doing it, but I think the dems mis-inform when they say that the repub plan is to keep $6.00 per hour people doing the job. Are the repubs lying iyo when they say that the gov't plans in Europe and Isreal did not work well, and that with privatized security firms they run the safest airlines in the world?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (198339)	10/31/2001 7:45:23 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The Republicans argue that the screeners should NOT be federal employees since it would then be difficult to fire those with poor job performance. Really gives you confidence in all the other federal employees. That probably explains why the stage was set for Sept 11 to happen. I agree that it should be easy to replace any screener doing an ineffective job.