Will The Increasing Emphasis on Cultural Diversity Destroy The Country

[FaninAma]

I offer for your consideration the following query:
http://www.mennoworld.org/blog/2011/7/1/diversity-becoming-destructive/

[badger]

I offer for your consideration the following query

I do not know where the road leads, but I know that it will not always be smooth sailing. The whole Sharia law thing is probably not gonna fly in England, even if some fear it will.

[KantoSooner]

Random Points:

1. "Increasing". Measured how? By whom?
2. The last time I checked, the Mennonite World Review was not high up the list of social commentary publications. And, by its label, being a voice for a community of people who want to live in the middle ages, it's not too surprising that they should have a rather negative take on social change.
3. Sharia law (inaccurately described as 'Shiite' in the article) is not being considered for application anywhere in the UK to replace Common Law. It is being experimented with as a guide for things like divorce, custody etc between consenting persons. In a manner analogous to the use of principles of matriarchy in custody cases involving some American Indian kids. The idea the Sharia law is about to be imposed on everyday Brits, or Americans, is untrue. Further, those who repeatedly report this as fact know it is a lie and repeat it only to inflame.
4. We have had periods of far greater diversity in our country than we have today...and survived just fine. Krebs, OK had banks with over 15 different language service desks at the turn of the last century. The social fabric there seems about as intact as anywhere else.
5. We are a self-defined society, THAT is our core characteristic. When we, as a people, decide something needs changing, we change it. Deciding that, whoops, black people aren't less than human, did not 'destroy the country'. Nor did deciding that smoking in public places was a bad idea. Likewise with wife/child beating. Similarly, we found that Jews did not have horns and could be safely admitted to public universities.

It is not tolerance of diversity that generates division in our society today but, rather, different groups demanding that their version of truth be accepted by or imposed upon everyone else. And, of that crime, the Rick Santorums are just as guilty as the Hillary Clintons.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Yes.

[okie52]

Mohammed is now the most popular name for baby boys ahead of Jack and Harry
By JACK DOYLE
UPDATED: 19:41 EST, 27 October 2010

Mohammed has become the most popular name for newborn boys in Britain.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1324194/Mohammed-popular-baby-boys-ahead-Jack-Harry.html#ixzz2o24JpKmH

Yep, I'm sure Britain is better off because of this....

[KantoSooner]

Well, at least 'Angus' is on the decline.

[FaninAma]

Kanto,

You know exactly what the article is referring to. Or do you deny that groups in this society are growing further apart in their cultural perceptions of others and their expectations from our society and government?

Do you think the "divide in government" is just a haphazard occurrence devoid of any underlying cause? It is the symptom of a bigger underlying social divide occurring in this country that is only going to get worse over the next decade.

[sooner46]

Yes

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Growing up on my block, my family was the only Church of Christ household in a neighborhood of all Baptists. Being a minority could be trying at times.

[Curly Bill]

It has ended up being one of the contributing factors to many other great nations/empires/kingdoms fall. Why wouldn't it be one of the contributors here?

...and I'm not saying the barbarians are as we speak crashing the gates, but the country is not in a good way right now either.

[okie52]

Growing up on my block, my family was the only Church of Christ household in a neighborhood of all Baptists. Being a minority could be trying at times.

Well, at least in your neighborhood, it doesn't sound like anyone was dancing in the streets.

[FaninAma]

I think the term "Balkanization of America" is applicable. I thought this suggestion was interesting. I wonder what the motivations are behind it.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/53886528#.UrWiEc-x7bh

[SanJoaquinSooner]

I think the term "Balkanization of America" is applicable. I thought this suggestion was interesting. I wonder what the motivations are behind it.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/53886528#.UrWiEc-x7bh

I'd be all for California splitting into North and South, like they did Carolina and Dakota. And Southern California can grow their own damned water.

[ouwasp]

"The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a nation of squabbling nationalities..."
Theodore Roosevelt 10/12/1915

The man sounds like a prophet a century later.

[KantoSooner]

I see so much to recommend cultural uniformity, and particularly enforced cultural uniformity. Here's a list of few examples I can think of:

1. The Nazi Party.
2. Shiv Sena and 'New Hindu Nationalism'
3. The schlerotic mess known as 'Japan'.
4. The French Right.
5. The Northern Italian Secessionists.
6. Islam
7. The Serbs
8. The Black Muslims (though this may be a second bite of the #6 apple)
9. The Quebecois (or however you spell it)
10. North Korea

You could throw in Pakistan, Iran, Cuba and Albania if you wished to substitute out any of the above.

It would seem that there's a fine correlation between 'cultural purity' and failure, stagnation and ultimate national ruin. And, note, I did that without picking on any domestic sacred cows (yes, pun intended). But, hey, if it's your goal to become a nation of people with fingers stuck in ears, eyes closed, sweat beaded on foreheads, mumbling to themselves, terrified of the future, that is one way to acheive it.

[okie52]

I tell ya, these countries are struggling:


South Korea-

Immigration to South Korea-Most immigrants are not eligible for citizenship or even permanent residency, unless they are married to a South Korean citizen or have invested more than $5 million USD in the local economy. An exception is made for those whose non-financial contribution to the nation has been specifically recognized by the Justice Minister, and for holders of a business visa who have invested more than US$500,000.[1] Immigrants count for only around 1% of the population but are a growing group.

South Korea has a market economy that ranks 15th in the world by nominal GDP and 12th by purchasing power parity (PPP), identifying it as one of the G-20 major economies. It is a developed country, with a developed market and high-income economy, and is a member of OECD. South Korea is one of the Asian Tigers, and is the only developed country so far to have been included in the group of Next Eleven countries. South Korea had one of the world's fastest growing economies from the early 1960s to the late 1990s, and South Korea is still one of the fastest growing developed countries in the 2000s, along with Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan, the other three Asian Tigers.[9] South Koreans refer to this growth as the Miracle on the Han River.[10]


The economy of Japan is the third largest in the world by nominal GDP,[10][11] the fourth largest by Purchasing Power Parity [12] and is the world's second largest developed economy.[13] According to the International Monetary Fund, the country's per capita GDP (PPP) was at $35,855 or the 22nd highest in 2012.

Any casual inspection of the population reveals near ethnic homogeneity, it is under one sense possible to describe the population as "multi-ethnic," although any percentage of ethnic minorities is vanishingly small compared with the numbers in the UK, the USA, Canada, and other developed countries.[12][need quotation to verify]



Taiwan has a developed capitalist economy that ranks as the 19th- largest in the world by Purchasing power parity (PPP), ranks as 18th in the world by gross domestic product (GDP) at purchasing power parity per capita (person) and 24th in nominal GDP of investment and foreign trade by the Republic of China (ROC) government, which commonly referred to as Taiwan

About 98% of Taiwan's population is of Han Chinese ethnicity.[5] Of these, 86% are descendants of early Han Chinese immigrants known as the "benshengren" (Chinese: 本省人; pinyin: Běnshěng rén; literally "home-province person") in Chinese.

[yermom]

so then Okie52 and FaninAma, what is your "final solution"?

[okie52]

so then Okie52 and FaninAma, what is your "final solution"?

I'm advocating smart immigration policies rather than the ****storm we have now. Cultural diversity in immigration should be the template rather than 90% of our immigrants being from one ethnic group. We should be seeking the highly skilled, highly educated and high revenue generators rather than the low skilled, poorly educated, and low income producers. At the very least we should be balancing the two rather than have most immigrants be on the low end of the spectrum.

As I have posted before, I don't have a problem with temporary workers (as a compromise anyway) being given temporary visas and their employers being required to provide the health insurance and benefits necessary to sustain these workers while they are in the US.

[KantoSooner]

Okie,
1. You'll note I referred to North Korea. By contrast, South Korea is an effing haven of diversity and cultural borrowing from the outside world. Thank you for making my point for me.
Oh, and by the way, emigration from South Korea to the US is strong and growing. Must be something to do with the relative joy of living one place over the other.

2. Japan's economy is the 3rd biggest, down from 2nd of late. The population there is crashing. Down from a high of 130 million to around 124 now and there is no way to turn it around until mid-century at best. Estimates now indicate that it will reach 84 mill or so before the first possible turn-around. Reason? Young women are so thrilled by their traditional roles in society that they are refusing to marry and have kids. Boy oh boy! A soceity in which people refuse to procreate because they are miserable. Sounds like Japanese traditional society got it soooooooo right. (and I lived there for over 25 years and was married to a Japanese. When I crap on the traditional society there, I know where I'm coming from in ways that no university prof could begin to comprehend.) The Japanese are on their way to being, in a friend's words, "Austria, without the diplomatic weight."
Virtually all of the diminution of Japanese power is due to the closed nature of the society.

3. Taiwan, too, is a nice little country. (Probably the best socialized medicine program in the world. One the US could learn a lot from.) But, again, look at it vs the nearest ethnic comparison, Mainland China, and the differences are strking. Taiwan has a much more dynamic economy. One reason? Taiwan has been open to outside stuff and was never subjected to the innervating impact of nativist, ethno-centric movements like the Cultural Revolution. Once more, the more diverse, more open society proves to be the more prosperous and attractive.

Next?

[okie52]

Kanto-

You can read the facts you just can't understand them. None of those nations are culturally diverse which was your point. They are NOW primarily capitalists and were guided by the US in post world II to be economic giants. But they didn't open the floodgates to immigrants and aren't even close to being culturally diverse. in fact, as these countries show, being open to outside ideas doesn't require ethnic diversity at all.

Get the picture (yet)?

[okie52]

And BTW-Japan's population reduction is a good thing. An overpopulated island the size of California with almost no natural resources really shouldn't be having 130,000,000 people.

And South Korea should be reducing it's population too. 50,000,000 people in an area half the size of Oklahoma with almost no resources. Brilliant!!!

[KantoSooner]

Kanto-

You can read the facts you just can't understand them. None of those nations are culturally diverse which was your point. They are NOW primarily capitalists and were guided by the US in post world II to be economic giants. But they didn't open the floodgates to immigrants and aren't even close to being culturally diverse. in fact, as these countries show, being open to outside ideas doesn't require ethnic diversity at all.

Get the picture (yet)?

All are examples of relative culural openness proving to yield far superior results than identical but more culturally 'pure' twins (Taiwan and SK). Japan has no comparitor, but shows what happens when a super successful nation insists on cultural purity.

the original point had nothing to do with immigration but with cultrual diversity. The examples I cited show beyond a shadow of a doubt that too much emphasis on cultural purity is a proven path to underperformance and societal decay.

[KantoSooner]

And BTW-Japan's population reduction is a good thing. An overpopulated island the size of California with almost no natural resources really shouldn't be having 130,000,000 people.

And South Korea should be reducing it's population too. 50,000,000 people in an area half the size of Oklahoma with almost no resources. Brilliant!!!

Agreed.
And utterly off point.
When people are leaving your nation, you have issues. When people are clamoring to get in, you have a pretty good indication that you're doing something right. And when your people are commiting national suicide, you have an excellent indication that virtually everything about your society is deeply sick. And, lets hammer this home, when that society is based on concepts of 'purity' and 'tradition', then you have an inescapable indication that both of those values lie at the root of the sickness.

[okie52]

All are examples of relative culural openness proving to yield far superior results than identical but more culturally 'pure' twins (Taiwan and SK). Japan has no comparitor, but shows what happens when a super successful nation insists on cultural purity.

the original point had nothing to do with immigration but with cultrual diversity. The examples I cited show beyond a shadow of a doubt that too much emphasis on cultural purity is a proven path to underperformance and societal decay.

No, what you have been contrasting are closed societies vs open societies but mistakenly concluding that cultural diversity was the key. China as a closed society was pitiful just like N Korea. Now China has availed itself to a much more capitalistic system and with it came a need for external contact. The ethnic "diversity" of China has changed little in the last 20 years but their penetration into outside markets has grown exponentially. They have become capitalists and on a global market the need for cutting edge technology and efficient production systems will be paramount....whether they are developed internally or externally.

[okie52]

Agreed.
And utterly off point.
When people are leaving your nation, you have issues. When people are clamoring to get in, you have a pretty good indication that you're doing something right. And when your people are commiting national suicide, you have an excellent indication that virtually everything about your society is deeply sick. And, lets hammer this home, when that society is based on concepts of 'purity' and 'tradition', then you have an inescapable indication that both of those values lie at the root of the sickness.

Again you tie it to immigration which isn't accurate at all. The Japanese have never had immigration of any substance. What has changed is that the Japanese are having less kids even though they have one of the best life expectancies in the world. They aren't alone. Were it not for immigration (legal and illegal), the US, Europe and other developed countries would also have declining populations. Once the farm was abandoned in favor of technology/jobs in the city the need for large families dissipated...and that's a good thing.

This mentality that believes population growth at the expense of future generations is a ponzi scheme at the very best with the same apocolyptic crash for posterity.

[yermom]

so how do you account for the 3rd world countries that breed like rabbits around you when you aren't isolated geographically?

[okie52]

so how do you account for the 3rd world countries that breed like rabbits around you when you aren't isolated geographically?

I'm supposed to account for it?

I'm assuming most 3rd world countries are still largely agrarian and/or labor intensive. And a lack of access to contraceptives. But never discount ignorance from the equation.

[KantoSooner]

Okie,
Let me break this out for you:
1. The original question was whether 'diversity' would doom our fair nation.
2. This argument was founded on an article from some 4th rate 'paper' published by a loonie tunes apocalypse cult.
3. I pointed out that lack of cultural diversity characterized and characterizes some of the most famously bad (and unsuccessful) societies and societal movements in world history.
4. I then countered ill chosen examples of 'cultural purist' societies that were successes by contrasting their success with their even more closed cousins and made the suggestion that it was their very openness that was a key to their success. And, in the case of Japan, made a pretty slam dunk argument that Japan's current woes were a result of its ethnocentrism.

And then you counter by wanting to discuss immigration, and ethnic make up of given nations' populations....and calling my conclusions illogical.

I think it was Jared Diamond who wrote a good book (about a one day read if you're interested) called something like Germs, Guns and Steel (?) that discusses at some length the beneficial role cultural sharing had on Asian and European societies relative to those in Africa and the Americas. Pretty cogent argument that attempts at walling off ones society tend to national catastrophe.

[yermom]

I'm supposed to account for it?

I'm assuming most 3rd world countries are still largely agrarian and/or labor intensive. And a lack of access to contraceptives. But never discount ignorance from the equation.

well, in your idealized America, how do you keep the Mexicans out when there are only 100 million of us here?

what do you do with the blacks and latinos that are already here?

[okie52]

well, in your idealized America, how do you keep the Mexicans out when there are only 100 million of us here?

what do you do with the blacks and latinos that are already here?

Nothing idealized at all. I'm certainly not talking about an ethnic cleansing. There isn't any necessity for removal of any ethnic group (unless they are illegally here). This isn't really that difficult to understand. The population just has less babies and the population would eventually decline to a much more sustainable level. I say 150,000,000 but it could go as high as 200,000,000 or as low as 100,000,000.

100,000,000 Americans can't defend its borders against approximately 100,000,000 or so Mexicans? Hell, if we can't do that we don't deserve to exist.

[okie52]

Okie,
Let me break this out for you:
1. The original question was whether 'diversity' would doom our fair nation.
2. This argument was founded on an article from some 4th rate 'paper' published by a loonie tunes apocalypse cult.
3. I pointed out that lack of cultural diversity characterized and characterizes some of the most famously bad (and unsuccessful) societies and societal movements in world history.
4. I then countered ill chosen examples of 'cultural purist' societies that were successes by contrasting their success with their even more closed cousins and made the suggestion that it was their very openness that was a key to their success. And, in the case of Japan, made a pretty slam dunk argument that Japan's current woes were a result of its ethnocentrism.

And then you counter by wanting to discuss immigration, and ethnic make up of given nations' populations....and calling my conclusions illogical.

I think it was Jared Diamond who wrote a good book (about a one day read if you're interested) called something like Germs, Guns and Steel (?) that discusses at some length the beneficial role cultural sharing had on Asian and European societies relative to those in Africa and the Americas. Pretty cogent argument that attempts at walling off ones society tend to national catastrophe.

Depends on the diversity...if that is the original issue. If our country is going to continue to employ stupid immigration policies then the long term results could be harmful to the country...particularly when there are smart options available. Having most of our immigrants be poorly educated, low skilled, of virtually one ethnicity and multi generational low income producers is a burden that this country doesn't need to choose...particularly when it could be recruiting highly skilled, highly educated, high income and high tax dollar generating immigrants representing many cultures and ethnicities.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

depends on your perspective.






http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af80/sanjoaquinsooner/nm3_zps180ffd9d.jpg

[KantoSooner]

Depends on the diversity...if that is the original issue. If our country is going to continue to employ stupid immigration policies then the long term results could be harmful to the country...particularly when there are smart options available. Having most of our immigrants be poorly educated, low skilled, of virtually one ethnicity and multi generational low income producers is a burden that this country doesn't need to choose...particularly when it could be recruiting highly skilled, highly educated, high income and high tax dollar generating immigrants representing many cultures and ethnicities.

I think we've reached a point of agreement on immigration policy. And I must highlight and bookmark that as you and I so rarely do agree on this topic.
No doubt I'd kick off an immediate resumption of hostilities if I suggested that, since we share a very long border with Mexico, we are never going to optimize that fact without a guest worker program and some sort of reasonable, and quick, method of allowing short, mid and long term movement back and forth. With an everify type of thing to provide the lion's share of the enforcement.
But we digress.
I took the original question posed by this thread to be focused on cultural diversity and not immigration. To make a crude example of the distinction, a black Jehovah's Witness from Mexico would be less of a culturally 'diverse' 'threat' than a blond, blue eyed Buddhist vegan who'd grown up immersed in communist thought in Vermont.
It is my position that the latter is not much of a threat to anything worth preserving and that, whatever minor discomfort some might feel from the injection of new ideas into their communities, such new intellectual blood is critical to the ongoing health of the society.

[KantoSooner]

depends on your perspective.






http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af80/sanjoaquinsooner/nm3_zps180ffd9d.jpg

I prefer the opposite perspective.

[okie52]

I think we've reached a point of agreement on immigration policy. And I must highlight and bookmark that as you and I so rarely do agree on this topic.
No doubt I'd kick off an immediate resumption of hostilities if I suggested that, since we share a very long border with Mexico, we are never going to optimize that fact without a guest worker program and some sort of reasonable, and quick, method of allowing short, mid and long term movement back and forth. With an everify type of thing to provide the lion's share of the enforcement.
But we digress.
I took the original question posed by this thread to be focused on cultural diversity and not immigration. To make a crude example of the distinction, a black Jehovah's Witness from Mexico would be less of a culturally 'diverse' 'threat' than a blond, blue eyed Buddhist vegan who'd grown up immersed in communist thought in Vermont.
It is my position that the latter is not much of a threat to anything worth preserving and that, whatever minor discomfort some might feel from the injection of new ideas into their communities, such new intellectual blood is critical to the ongoing health of the society.

I've posted an alternative to amnesty through NAFTA that would handle temporary workers and employer needs. I don't object to meeting the employment needs but I really think the long term effects of adding 11,000,000 million citizens that are low skilled, poorly educated, not culturally diverse, etc... will be harmful to the country.

As to bilingual schools to accomodate immigrants I think it is a ridiculous and unnecessary burden to tax payers. I'm all for foreign languages being taught in schools but not as a requirement to accomodate immigrants so they will be able to receive an education in the US. If, as a US citizen, I want to learn Spanish I can take classes that I pay for out of my own pocket. The illegals, legals, etc... can do the same.

I looked at the article in the OP and took it to mean immigration because obviously our current diverse citizenship is not leaving but, on the other hand, our immigration policy currently is providing about 750,000 new citizens each year that are largely from hispanic countries and many are through family reunification. My hope is not that the 750,000 per year number is reduced as much as it is spread around and that we focus much more on the highly skilled, highly educated, high income and high tax revenue generators instead of the opposite end of the spectrum. We'd have much greater diversity and long term benefits than our current situation.

[yermom]

i'd rather import unskilled labor than skilled labor, personally. it's hard enough for citizens for find decent jobs without importing people that will take those jobs and put a lot of that money back into their home country

i'd much rather have job creators have some tie to the country as well

[KantoSooner]

Yermom, I'd prefer to keep the industries creating jobs in this country. Can't do that if you can't find the qualified people to hire or if they cost too much more than their overseas competitors. We live in a global economy, trying to protect domestic employment through sheltering jobs simply delays the inevitable and weakens the companies in the bargain.

Protectionism always fails.

And, the corollary: dumping does not exist. If a man sells you something for less than it costs him to make....you got a hell of a good deal. Manufacturing is so fungible these days that there really is no long term interest in extreme price cutting.

[KantoSooner]

Okie, Don't think we'd have too much issue with each other in implementing a program. I think we'd be hard pressed to deport all eleven million (or twelve, or however many), but I think we 'solve' the problem with cracking down on illegal employment, allowing some familial long term resident (not citizen) visas, etc etc. So we'd differ more in details rather than base concepts.

I'd make the school thing more of a local option. Not a mandate or right. Same as government forms, etc.

Having had to hire attorneys to get a Korean guy a visa for a 2 year training stay, I'd definitely make it easier to hire, legally, highly trained foreign staff.

[okie52]

Most of your job creators will be the skilled, educated immigrants. In many cases, as some have observed, we are already educating these people at our universities but they can't stay in the US because of current immigration policies.

Also, if you want to keep the population at a sustainable level in the US like I do, you will have to import brain/skills to meet the country's needs as it competes with much larger populations in China and India....kinda like OU recruiting against TX with 1/6 the population base. I damn sure don't want a billion plus people living in the US but I would like to recruit the best minds from the other 7.2 billion people in the world.

[yermom]

so your kids can work for them?

[KantoSooner]

...and I also think we do a better job when global power is a bit more distributed rather than us having to pretty much do the work and pay the bills. It's important that we get folks like India and China plugged too far into the system to want to wreck it...and then make sure they've got seats at the table. Frees us up to spend more time, effort, money on domestic issues.

[okie52]

Okie, Don't think we'd have too much issue with each other in implementing a program. I think we'd be hard pressed to deport all eleven million (or twelve, or however many), but I think we 'solve' the problem with cracking down on illegal employment, allowing some familial long term resident (not citizen) visas, etc etc. So we'd differ more in details rather than base concepts.

I'd make the school thing more of a local option. Not a mandate or right. Same as government forms, etc.

Having had to hire attorneys to get a Korean guy a visa for a 2 year training stay, I'd definitely make it easier to hire, legally, highly trained foreign staff.

The 11,000,000 could be handled through the NAFTA scenario. Give them temporary work visas, require their employer to provide all their necessary benefits like health insurance while they are in the US. Employers and/or the temp workers would be required to notify ICE if and when their work terminated. If they aren't employed then ship them out. Everify along with employer fines, etc...for non compliance.

Expedite the current visa process. I would think that would solve a lot of issues regarding employment needs and illegal immigration (along with the above).

[okie52]

so your kids can work for them?

Sure...why not? Or they could work for my kids. Either way would be keeping jobs in the US that might otherwise be overseas.

[okie52]

...and I also think we do a better job when global power is a bit more distributed rather than us having to pretty much do the work and pay the bills. It's important that we get folks like India and China plugged too far into the system to want to wreck it...and then make sure they've got seats at the table. Frees us up to spend more time, effort, money on domestic issues.

Hopefully that is already happening with China and India...particularly China since they were removed even more than India as to being a closed society. Global markets require competitive nations to be a part of the system...I really don't see how China and India can avoid it and still develop their economies.

[KantoSooner]

Yermom, I've workd, in my chequered career, for a minority owned travel agency, for a branch of the state government (second in a string of female bosses), for an American Indian owned law firm, for a Japanese multinational (in three countries) with Japanese direct bosses, for an irascible alcoholic genius Minnesota wheat farmer, for an Indian entrepreneur based in Sili Valley, briefly for a brilliant, if soulless, Chinese investor and finally for myself/my family. The foreigners out of the bunch have not been the best bosses, but they haven't been the worst, either.
Our kids should be so lucky.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Yermom, I've workd, in my chequered career, for a minority owned travel agency, for a branch of the state government (second in a string of female bosses), for an American Indian owned law firm, for a Japanese multinational (in three countries) with Japanese direct bosses, for an irascible alcoholic genius Minnesota wheat farmer, for an Indian entrepreneur based in Sili Valley, briefly for a brilliant, if soulless, Chinese investor and finally for myself/my family. The foreigners out of the bunch have not been the best bosses, but they haven't been the worst, either.
Our kids should be so lucky.

I've worked for hard working red blooded Americans...My kids should be so lucky.