SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (295519)3/8/2009 9:55:29 AM
From: Tom Clarke  Respond to of 793843
 
Working women almost certainly caused the credit crunch

NEWTON EMERSON

Wed, Feb 25, 2009

NEWTON'S OPTIC: THE ANSWER to all our problems is staring us in the face. It may even be quite literally staring at you, right now, across the breakfast table.

So put the paper down, stare back and ask yourself a selfless question.

Does the woman in your life really need a job?

Admittedly, this is not a fashionable question. From Iceland to Australia, men are blamed for causing the credit crunch, while a more feminine approach to finance is proposed as the solution.

Of course there will always be a place in the world of business for exceptional women. Women also have an important role to play in jobs that are too demeaning for men, like teaching. But the general employment of women is another matter. Indeed, working women almost certainly caused the credit crunch by bringing a second income into the average household, pushing property prices up to unsustainable levels.

Whether working women actually caused the credit crunch is now a moot point. The point is that removing women from the workforce would mitigate its effects.

Consider the issue of unemployment. There were 221,301 men on the live register last month and just under one million women in work.

Surely at least half these women have a partner who is earning? Surely at least half would be happier at home? One half of one half is a quarter and one quarter of a million is roughly 221,301. I think we can all see where this argument is going.

It would be ludicrous to suggest that women should be sacked purely to give men their jobs. In many cases, their jobs should be abolished as well.

Women are twice as likely as men to work in the public sector. They account for two-thirds of the Civil Service and three- quarters of all public employees.

Yet they are barely represented in the useful public services of firefighting and arresting people. Encouraging women to leave the workforce would go a long way towards addressing the budget deficit without any downside whatsoever.

Further benefits of sacking women have been uncovered by the Central Gender Mainstreaming Unit at the Department of Justice. According to its research, twice as many woman as men travel to work by bus and train, potentially halving the impact of cutbacks in public transport. However, it is probable that three-quarters of the Central Gender Mainstreaming Unit’s staff are women, so these figures should be taken with a pinch of salt.

While the economic case for fewer women in the workforce is irrefutable, we should also acknowledge the social advantages. Women make the majority of spending decisions in Irish households and make almost all of the purchases. They are far more likely than men to regard shopping as a leisure activity, far less likely to make savings and investments, and were even almost twice as likely to spend their SSIAs.

In short, women were the driving force behind the greed, consumerism and materialism of the Celtic Tiger years and it was female employment that funded their oestrogen-crazed acquisitiveness.

The time has come to build a more sustainable, equitable and progressive society. Why not make a start by telling your other half to quit her job? She can ask you for the housekeeping on Friday.

irishtimes.com



To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (295519)3/8/2009 11:17:29 AM
From: LindyBill1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793843
 
Jonathan Krohn's speech at CPAC
VIDEO



To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (295519)3/8/2009 5:08:58 PM
From: KLP2 Recommendations  Respond to of 793843
 
Thanks so much for posting that about Jonathan Krohn...I had seen his CPAC talk, and re-watched the link for it that LB just put up...

To think he is homeschooled, on top of everything else, might give some people cause to wonder again what our kids are being taught in school (or not taught as the case seems to be)...Plus it is just plain "cool" that he earned his OWN money to help get his book published!

His parents deserve a Standing Ovation as well! Bravo!

And go, young Jonathan, go! We need lots of young people like you!

Just looked to see if there was much about him, and found that he is even on Wiki...

Jonathan Krohn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
navigationsearch
Jonathan Krohn
Born March 1, 1995 (age 14)
Georgia, U.S.A.

Nationality United States

Occupation Writer

Jonathan Krohn (born March 1, 1995)[1] is the author of the book Define Conservatism, who gained national attention when he addressed the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference at age 13.

Biography
Krohn was born on March 1, 1995 to Doug Krohn, a computer system integrator, and Marla, a sales representative and middle-school drama and speech teacher. He was raised in Duluth, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta.[2] He was homeschooled, played cello since age three and has been acting on the stage since age eight. He had three callbacks for the part of Michael Banks in Broadway production of Mary Poppins. In 2006, Krohn began performing on the Internet radio show "The Life Connection Show", and took over as the principal writer in 2008.[3] Krohn also studied the Arabic language and once aspired to be a missionary to the Middle East.[2]

In 2006, he was voted "Atlanta's Most Talented Child" by Inside Edition.[3][4] Krohn became interested in politics at age eight, after watching news coverage of a Democratic filibuster on judicial nominations in the United States Senate. The event prompted him to research American history and governmental rules and policies, and he eventually developed an affinity for conservatism, especially after listening regularly to conservative talk radio,[1] particularly Morning in America with William Bennett, to whom he became a regular caller.[2]

Krohn wrote Define Conservatism, which was published in 2008, when he was 13 years old, because he felt the term conservatism was often misused; it was in part as a response to criticism John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate, received regarding his conservative credentials.[5] The book outlines four fundamental principles of conservative thought: support for the United States Constitution, respect for life, less government, and more personal responsibility.

Krohn went on to apply the principles to current events and define whether specifically cited actions violated those principles.[6] The book was dedicated to Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, Jr. and Barry Goldwater, whom Krohn describes as his political heroes, along with South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint.[1] Krohn paid to have the book published from his own savings. He describes it as a "first effort" and plans to write a second one, which he said will focus in part on Alexander Hamilton and James Monroe.[2]

In January 2009, Krohn contacted organizers of the Conservative Political Action Conference and asked to speak at the event. Organizers were reportedly skeptical, but gave him a three-minute spot on a February, 27 panel about grassroots activists.[2] The speech, titled "Conservative Victories Across the Nation", he described the conservative principles outlined in his book. When the speech was over, the panel moderator said, "Watch out, David Keene," referring to the chairman of the American Conservative Union.[3]

The next day at the conference, William Bennett said, "I used to work for Ronald Reagan and now I'm a colleague of Jonathan Krohn's!"[2] The speech then attracted the attention of national media outlets; Sam Stein of The Huffington Post, said of the speech, "It was filled with the type of rhetorical flow and emotional pitch one would expect from a seasoned hand. Except, [he] is more than four years away from being able to vote."[3]

In the days following the conference, Krohn's parents received hate mail accusing them of brainwashing their son; both insist their interest in politics is small and Krohn developed his own political thinking.[2] Within a week of the speech, Krohn appeared on Fox & Friends and CNN, as well as dozens of radio shows, and a Facebook fan club for Krohn was created. A staff member for a potential candidate for Georgia governor also requested an audience.[2]

The speech by Krohn was also mentioned in the March 2, 2009, episode of The Daily Show when host Jon Stewart referred to Krohn as a "precocious, teenage, Conservative firebrand" saying, "I'm not sure there's a nurple purple enough (for him)", before consulting a fictional "comedy ethics bible" and determining he could not make fun of a 13-year-old boy, only classmates and siblings had that right, though he later referred to Krohn as "Doogie Howser GOP".[7]
[