Monday, June 11, 2012

Blaming the POTUS is too simplistic a solution to our complex problems

CrazyMarine 2 days ago

Romney will not bring about a recovery either, other peoples wages have been farmed out to cheaper labor markets and you will share their pain for years to come, other peoples discretionary incomes and their tax liabilities left as well, under funding permanently our consumer based economy and our state, local and federal governments, and this corporate policy also created a world wide wage arbitrage that will eventually erode all our wages and benefits, it was not just other peoples wages that left it was our entire middle class standard of living that was lost as well.







CrazyMarine 3 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Think about the ramifications that the loss of "OTHER PEOPLES WAGES" will have on your pursuit of life liberty and happiness and fell sorrow and pity for not just them, but your own family as well, the effects will be felt universally and gradually, but ever so gradually life will become more difficult for all.

teri 23 hours ago

+5 Votes
 
I trust you were making this same claim---blaming the POTUS is too simplistic---when people were hanging Bush in effigy and waving protest signs with truly ugly slogans?

Jean01 23 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
teri,

Good point. Much as I have little positive to say about Obama, blaming Him is a bit simplistic. That said, though, He does have responsibility for the actions He and His congress took, which have arguably hindered recovery. Further, the positions He and his supporters have been espousing, summed up as less personal responsibility for many, is ruinous.

Twinsdad 23 hours ago

+2 Votes
You young ladies both make good points...

CrazyMarine 23 hours ago

 
Actually if you hit on my icon you can go back to comments I made during the Bush era and my theme was the same then as now, globalization is destroying our consumer based economy by trading away our middle class discretionary income, The president cannot address that until the people demand that free trade be changed to fair trade, Obama has been no better than his predecessors in that regard, signing three new free trade agreements, and Romney will do the same, until A) people understand the long term harm that Globalization is causing, and B) demand that it be altered to save our economy, we are a long way from both.

TheScott 23 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
Just a foot note CM...... 'free' trade, from a sovereign point of view, is fair trade. the problem is, we have no free trade and don't use the power of tariffs to insure that we have free trade. Of coarse we would have to ditch our membership in the WTO and tear up all of the 'free' trade agreements...... We could also do a lot to retain some fair trade by rethinking our patient process.... If China can disregard them... If Corporations can use the intellectual capital gained from an educated US work force, the we should be able to modify to what extent a corporation can lord a patent over US inventors and creators...

LiveStrongest 3 days ago

+6 Votes
 
We only have 1000 characters to compose a response. I could write a book about Obama's misguided positions on economic, social and foreign policy issues.

When Best Buy's CEO screwed up it's operations, did people say bloggers were being to simplistic blaming the CEO? (Obama is the CEO of our country?) No such statements were made, what did happen? He resigned.

CrazyMarine 3 days ago

+1 Vote
 
Reagan stated that he knew nothing about economics and would leave that part of the job to people who did, that was an honest statement and in effect the trends that are keeping our economy down are not easily reversed by a president or our government, globalization is out of the bottle and we still cannot come to a consensus as too it,s over all effect, everyone in government, including Obama calls themselves free traders and will not admit it,s defects.

louman 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Romney will not bring about a recovery either,

Clairvoyant now?

Twinsdad 23 hours ago

+2 Votes
Marine, leadership, words that inspire, words that are easily understood.

Obama Presidency, words that, well what are the words? Times man of the year? Killing a terrorist? Passing laws in the dead of night? Skirting the Constitution wherever possible? Fast and Furious, Solyndra, GM, NRLB, unemployment, food stamps, underemployment, stimulus, debt, never has signed an annual budget, oil spill...

What are the words that define this President from your perspective Crazy?

CrazyMarine 22 hours ago

 
TD; fair question; disappointing is the key word, hoped for more help protecting American jobs, but that does not mean a vote for Mittens, he might be worse, holding off on my decision until I,m confident one or the other starts recognizing the trends that are turning us into a Haiti, or Somalia type mess. not that great an exaggeration in my mind.

Nohelp1 3 days ago

+6 Votes
 
Looking at the backgrounds of Congress, one would be hard pressed to believe that anyone of them has ever read the first book on economics.

LiveStrongest 3 days ago

+5 Votes
 


Exactly.

Jean01 23 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
I don't think that matters. The issue du jour is the economy. If it were something else, the 535 as a body would most likely be equally at sea. I don't have a problem with that, or with the expectations that the 535 (or 536) be well-versed in everything. That is unattainable. However, they do have adequate access to those who are supposed to be knowledgeable about the various matters on their plate. The problem is that, on balance, the preponderant influence on their individual/group decisionmaking is the effect on getting re-elected.

Cougardan 22 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
Well said Jean......the economy is the bottom line....the issue de jour.

stndyogrnd 3 days ago

+3 Votes
 
Looking into the actions of Congress they almost all lack the ability to discern truth from lies, or even understand what their "job" is. They are so in love with the pure gamemanship of politics, that have completely lost any connection with the vast majority of working class people they represent, as well as seeing the system of political rules they have created not only encourage, but demand that the facts and the truth those facts reveal, get trampled in the game of politics that is played, between parties and the constant barrage of special interest that have no connection to the over all welfare of the american people.

gottaloveit 3 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Thanks to the obstructionism of Harry Reid. The House has passed bill after bill and nothing is allowed to be debated on the Senate floor.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+3 Votes
 
LOL and the house has passed partisan bill after partisan bill where the input of the minority party n the house has been shut out...... go figure

louman 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
And how was that different from 2008-2009???

LiveStrongest 3 days ago

+5 Votes
 
OMG an entire post with the use of the word Corporatocracy!.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL its implied and inferred .

louman 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
They should be required to read all legislation prior to voting on a new law.

Nohelp1 2 days ago

+1 Vote
 
You do realize you are talking about 11,000 + bills per year?

RicFlair 2 days ago

+4 Votes
 
Nohelp baby, why in the world do we need 11,000 bills each year when the ones we do have ain't even being enforced or ain't doing the job, unless its to pad some politician's resume pal!

TheScott 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
"You do realize you are talking about 11,000 + bills per year?"

If the government would actually stick to the jobs outlined in the constitution instead of continually wringing the republic out of its meaning, they would have a lot less to interfere with and therefore more time to actually contemplate the implications of the legislation they do work on...

That statement of yours actually shows the lunacy that we have in Washington. It implies that they work on and understand an average of 70+ bills per day. How good could you be at reading 70 one page contracts of diverse meaning, per day... and understanding what you sign off on?

Jean01 23 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
I'd go a step further and require them to understand it. Except that I'm not sure of a good way to test for that.

louman 2 days ago

+8 Votes
 
No help,
You realize that's what they get paid for isn't it? Legislate. If they were required to read each bill, maybe they wouldn't be 2000 pages of hidden trash.

stndyogrnd 22 hours ago

 
LOL they know exactly what is in each bill, especially who get what earmarks, that they trade their vote for so that they can get votes for their earmaks.

louman 22 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
stndy,
You give them to much credit. They read few if any and rely on other and their hired help to give them the condensed short version. A well known fact that few read the ACA. I did took a day going back and forth in references to really get an understanding of the bill.

Yes, they add earmarks and trade favors. That is why each law should stand alone with no riders attached.

Aceedeucee 3 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Potus really has not done much to help. And with his penchant for adding overreaching regulations while we are in a recession he has definitely hurt.

soccermon 2 days ago

+1 Vote
 
IMHO the White house has done as much as IT can to improve the economy, but the Congress has done all IT can to undermine the economy.

And if Chris Hayse opinion is correct, it is Bernake is undermining US.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/ns/msnbc_tv#47747774

louman 2 days ago

+7 Votes
 
You just can't trust the people that run the Senate.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+3 Votes
 
Yep and the minority runs the senate with the filibuster.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL the GOP pitch, vote for me and I will sell you out for all my wealthy friends......LOL LOL

TheScott 2 days ago

+4 Votes
 
LOL the Obama pitch, vote for me and I will sell you out for all my wealthy friends......LOL LOL

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL verses who .... Romney, who is a born and bred product of the wealthy elite..... the wealthy control Congress and Obama knows that, but he did not come from there... there is a much higher probability that Obama who came from the reality of the working middle class, is going to represent the needs of the working middle class in that corrupt sewer of special interest that control the Government then Romney who wouldn't have a clue to begin with about what it means to be a working middle class individual. So is going talk about which of those two choices is gong to best represent the real majority of this country, which is the working middle class, any person who rationally plays the odds is going to go with Obama.

Jean01 23 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
soccermom,

Sorry, that didn't do it for me. Bernanke trying to ensure Romney gets elected? Really? But then, it IS MSNBC. The Congress has done all IT can to undermine the economy? Again, really? The led-by-the-nose-by-Dear-Leader for two years Congress?

soccermon 2 days ago

 
I like this discussion.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/ns/msnbc_tv#47747338

Jean01 15 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
soccermon,

I might be wrong, but I think the posting algorithm on this site only allows replies to the original post or the first reply. I don't think it has anything to do with clicking 'Track Responses' , following up on your 'yada, yada, yada' post.

Cougardan 1 hour ago

 
You have discovered why that poster is the laughing joke of writers on the mains and groups on this site.....

RicFlair 2 days ago

+6 Votes
 
Marine baby, blaming the POTUS worked fine for Obama but now that its his reelection we're talking about, his followers wanna change it up pal!

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
Actually he blamed Republicans and the system of corruption in general and he was and still is correct and accurate.

RicFlair 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Bottom line Kenny baby; blaming is the only thing democrats know how to do. They ain't fixed a thing since coming into power pal!

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL bottom line is denial is that only thing right wingers know how to do

RicFlair 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Kenny baby, just keep pointing that finger of blame and see how many jobs it creates and how many bank accounts get replenished because of it pal!

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL the right wing brings noting to the table that will be of any help, and in fact all they bring is more destruction, in the way of lies, half truths, bigotry, and ignorance and the chump is the champ of that uglyness.

RicFlair 2 days ago

+6 Votes
 
Kenny baby, the ugly truth you are in denial about; democrats ain't done anything to improve the situation pal!

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL right wingers are in denial of how much Republicans have done to hold down any improvements. It only takes a minority to do so, and they now have a majority in the house.

RicFlair 2 days ago

+6 Votes
 
So what's the value of having any democrats in power at all Kenny baby?

They can't get it done when they have a majority but the GOP can. They can't do the job when they are in the minority, but the GOP can. If you got any bandwidth at all you'll get rid of these worthless clowns and focus your reform attention on the party that's by your own admission, repeat your own admission, has got the power to get it done whether they're the majority or minority pal!

RicFlair 2 days ago

+6 Votes
 
Go ahead and frag this one Kenny baby, we all know you're beaten again by the indisputable champ, and its your last shot at saving face before crawling back into your hole with your tail between your legs pal!

soccermon 2 days ago

+1 Vote
 
Can you or any PON deny what a huge disaster the Bush years were?

This economy is huge, and does not turn on a dime, but we should credit Bush for taking the Clinton era success and turned it in to the greatest recession in the history of this nation rather quickly.

Jean01 21 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
Well, sure, I can argue that, especially if it is a BIOB. Start with the composition of the executive and legislative branches of both eras to get us past the red vs blue issue. And mention the recession that started before B43 took office, and the brevity of the baton handoff due to the election recounts. And 911. The WMD issue? Sure, that was unfortunate (will we ever know the truth?). Credit Bush? I think a little pragmatism and reality are called for. You discount the HUGE jump in employment that was unfortunately short-lived.

And then there's a favorite cause of the recession among some, repeal of Glass-Stegall, which occurred in Clinton's administration. And before you go there, if you do, please check the final ... more

Cougardan 1 hour ago

 
Ya never answered Jean01......and since you are big on people reading around here....take the time to read an intelligent post written Jean.....by an honest poster ....an adult.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+3 Votes
 

Obama for America Policy Director James Kvaal explains the policies President Obama is pushing—and Mitt Romney’s party is blocking—to help unemployed Americans:

Asked what he might do to help the unemployed on Thursday night, Mitt Romney described creating “an incentive for employers to actually hire people who had been out of work for a long time.” What Romney didn’t mention was that President Obama has been pushing for similar proposals for months—only to be blocked by Republicans in Congress, and met with silence from Governor Romney.
First, a bit of history. Back in September, as part of the American Jobs Act, the President called for providing a $4,000 tax credit for businesses that hire the long-term unemployed—a similar approach to what Romney suggested Thursday night. Yet Republicans in Congress blocked this tax credit, along with the broader package the President put forward to help workers get back on the job, at every turn. less

RicFlair 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Kenny baby, if ol'Jimmy told the truth he'd be out of a job like millions of other Americans pal!

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+3 Votes
 
LOL if the bigoted men of the right told the truth, that would be the end of republicans and the system of legalized corruption.

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+3 Votes
 
Mitt Romney provided no help, calling the President’s jobs package—which independent economists said could create as many as 1.9 million jobs, and which included several proposals Romney had supported in the past—“akin to throwing a cup of gasoline on embers.”

TheScott 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
The problem is, all of these independent economists attended the same schools and perhaps even had the same professors................. It would be like all of our constitutional law students studying under Obama and believing that they got a well rounded education....

stndyogrnd 2 days ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL no the problem is that some people are cognitively challenged, or just intentional obfuscaters (liars) that took one little phrase of "independent economist" and tried to shift the focus to some nebulous self created cynically vague discussion about who or what is an "independent economist" when the article was about how Romney is tying claim on of his big ideas about how to fix unemployment, that is some thing Obama has already tried to get congress to do and the Republicans have blocked. The dishonest attempt to shift the discussion to the "how many angles can dance on the head of a pin" or in this case the veracity of the opinion of "independent economist" is irrelevant... and those disgustingly dishonest folks from above, who just made that attempt to hijack the conversation, know that very well. less

TheScott 2 days ago

+5 Votes
 
Sorry, don't think so because main stream politicians seem to like to surround themselves with mainstream educated 'experts'.... Their has been a long standing belief that it has been done wrong for a long time and had been guided by 'independent experts' who when to the same theory departments....

stndyogrnd 1 day ago

+2 Votes
 
LOL still trying to shift the perception from the point that regardless of where it was industry insiders or independent economist that estimated the amount of jobs it would create is beside the point, ( and is only tangential at best to CM subject line) the main point was that Romney is proposing an idea Obama already has put before congress, and pretending he thought it up..... job estimates and who made them has nothing what so ever to do with the post....

CrazyMarine 1 day ago

+2 Votes
 
It,s on topic in this respect, it,s going to have limited success as far as the corporations go, since you can hire and pay 17 Chinese workers for every one American worker, plus a pile of regulations will have to be followed most of the corporations will pass on it, small business may hire a few, but business for most of them is so bad it probably will go off with a thud as well, most of the small businesses are not paying any taxes anyway, because most are losing money. Now using that money to hire government workers to repair or infrastructure, that would work, but the republicans do not want to do that because it,s socialism, true but that,s really the only way to put large numbers back to work, in the global world we live in.

CrazyMarine 1 day ago

+3 Votes
 
Began this topic 2 days and everyone missed the point, globalization is robbing our national wealth, reducing our standard of living, increasing the national debt, devastating our health care system, and causing those still with jobs to lose wages and benefits, not to mention it,s hurting small business, and all the republican,s want to do is lower taxes on the rich and the corporate "Chinese" job creators. We better start thinking about reining in this monster before we lose everything we have worked so hard to build.

RicFlair 1 day ago

+2 Votes
 
Marine baby, now that you gotta share the wealth, now that redistribution of wealth is a global reality, now that its up close and personal, you get a taste of why the big men on the right ain't rolling over for higher taxes pal!

RicFlair 1 day ago

+2 Votes
 
Kenny baby, of course its nonsense to a left wing leech whenever they're faced with practicing what they preach, walking their own talk, paying the price they keep pushing onto everybody else, 'cause its a known fact that yours is the ideology of hypocrisy pal!

Jean01 23 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
stndyogrnd,

'meaningless rhetorical phrases' indeed. And there you go again, with that LOL thingy prefacing your comments.

TheScott 23 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
Its a hard subject to talk about with brevity. Our economic problems are multifaceted and fixing them won't occur easily. Firstly we have a dysfunctional monetary and banking system. That has created more problems that many will admit. Secondly we are trying to fix our long term jobs problem with money... borrowed at that. The problem is, as you well know, the jobs that have left the country will not return without removing the denial that exists. We must understand that under our current price, wage and regulatory structure, we will not grow MEANINGFUL long term jobs.... simple as that. Once we deal with that reality, I see that we have 3 choices... none will be easy or popular. 1) we immediately deflate our economy (every loan, every wage, every price... everything) to bring us level with our competitors. Banks won't like it, people won't understand it and the paper nightmare would be hideous. 2) We opt for free trade. That is, use tariffs to level the playing field....> less

Jean01 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
TheScott,

"Its a hard subject to talk about with brevity."

It is indeed. it brings to mind these foolish so-called debates in our political campaigns. Mere collections of sound bites, showcasing the ability to adroitly sling catchy phrases .

TheScott 23 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
with the rest of the world. It would mean tearing up trade agreements and removing ourselves from organizations like the WTO. No more $10 dvd players and walmart's import business model collapses. 3) We close our borders and rebuild our economy from the ground up internally. Nothing gets in and nothing gets out. All three of these conjure endless debate as the problems and benefits would be endless. But the bottom line is that our employment will not get better for a long time and without serious change of habits, attitudes and expectations.
I think public works 'stimulus' fails because they are not been framed as to purpose. It is always a large appropriation under the name of stimulus and then we find it is loans to dubious companies or useless efforts. I think we would see broad support for specific projects and infrastructure improvement. Like a ground up rebuild of our power grid. A truly realistic and comprehensive energy plan. less

TheScott 23 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
Like I said, it is a hard subject to talk about particularly because so many are in denial of the facts. By, the way, I recall seeing the that book title Judas Economy some time ago. I read the preface and some reviews. I think the ideas presented, as far as I could tell are correct. I really don't know what we could have done to prevent what has happened.... we 'stole' a standard of living away from Britain as a nation for similar reasons. Money and employees have parted ways as a matter of education.... I spent the 90's going from project manager/engineer (unattended) to project manager/engineer ( with observers) to project oversight and engineer in standby. These were large telecom installations and they learned to do it for themselves... Our industry went east..... less

Jean01 21 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
" . . . Ron Paul was pretty on point." Well, OK, there was that. Generally, though, my view on debates and the one or two minute spots on each topic is a silly way to run them. From what I've seen, they only serve a candidate when a competitor stumbles.

Jean01 23 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
CM,

I agree with you that part of the cause of economic woes in the U. S. is competition from the globalization phenomenon. Failure to recognize and respond to the competion is part of the reason. But I think it is disingenuous to think there is a way we can find to be
'reining in this monster.' Better, I think, to face the challenge head on.

stndyogrnd 22 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
LOL.... of course we could "reign in this monster". but that would take a congress that was not made up of the majority of the corrupt that serve the wealthy elite that own international corporations that like it just the way it is.

CrazyMarine 22 hours ago

 
A global corporation can hire and get excellent productivity out of 17 Chinese workers for the same cost that it would take to hire ONE American worker, raising to that challenge is impossible, so working within the frame work of unfettered free trade and globalization and finding success is to dream the impossible dream and fight the unbeatable foe, so your terms sound great, they, in reality are meaningless rhetoric that inhibits us from finding REAL solutions.

TheScott 22 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
In terms of a sovereign nation that imports and exports products and services, what to you is a 'global corporation' and how are they different from the same company operating independently but in collaboration with its namesake in another country. I understand the problem with congress and its rather unhealthy affiliation with big business but what I don't understand is how you 'contain' business across international borders from doing exactly what a multinational does. As long as patients can be bought and sold, then products and jobs can be exported with little problem. How do you 'reign in' the movement of money, labor and products? Only through tariffs can you correct pricing disparity and the tariff system is well and truly broken with every international organization that we sign up to. less

stndyogrnd 21 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
not only that CM, Robotics are going to replace even that cheap labor.... China is already moving in that direction...The reality is that there is going to be less and less need for human labor cheap or other wise to mass produce all this wonderfully cheap junk we consume to fill the spiritual void in our mass consumption lives..... then what are the Owner producers gonna do when there are no jobs to supply incomes to buy their "stuff"

TheScott 21 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
Jean - "It is indeed. it brings to mind these foolish so-called debates in our political campaigns. Mere collections of sound bites, showcasing the ability to adroitly sling catchy phrases ."

I felt like Ron Paul was pretty on point..... ;-)

TheScott 21 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
SYG - Good long term point.... while consumers are, at present, an expanding commodity, if the likes of India and China continue to expand, their will indeed come a day when labor, in the conventional sense becomes irrelevant...... It is indeed a dilemma for the vast majority of the human population and big business.... but not for big governments with big militarys....... I guess people will just be cultivated as copper tops to power everything....

soccermon 16 hours ago

 
jean0, yada yada yada, I'm not even reading your post, because you must not be interested in a dialog, as you do not click the "Track Responses"

Jean01 22 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
CM,

You said "so your terms sound great, they, in reality are meaningless rhetoric that inhibits us from finding REAL solutions."

What terms, and what rehtoric? Reality includes facing the reality of international trade. One can opine about fair and unfair trade practices, but in the end, it still boils down, in large part, on a willingness for people to work for a much lower pay when that lower pay is still a tremendous improvement. What do you have in mind for REAL solutions regarding this facet of a difficult issue?

CrazyMarine 21 hours ago

 
There are several real solutions, tariff,s, tax structure that rewards corporations for hiring American,s, building a stronger social safety net that will make us more competitive with socialism, and their workforce, but job one is to force American,s to ask an important question that humans must always ask their government, what,s in this policy for me and my children??? and then decide if this is the policy you want to stay with, some good comes of globalization, cheaper prices on goods, but if it ruins our economy that savings becomes meaningless if people cannot afford anything but basic food and shelter, so I ask you Jean, what,s in this government policy for you? Immediate answer not necessary, it,s better if you think about for a time. less

TheScott 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
"social safety net that will make us more competitive with socialism"

Curious comment..... have we been less competitive with the likes of fairly heavily socialized Europe? and of the communist countries that we attempt to compete with, do they actually give a hoot about any of their people in a social safety net sort of way?

Jean01 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
CM,

Several posts on the social safety net issue, so I'll pass on that one.

Tariffs - very careful step to take there, I don't think it usually works well
Rewarding corporations that hire Americans - OK, sounds good, but using your 17:1 ratio, how effective would that really be? And in the long run, how would that stack up re the cost of domestic goods or services vs foreign-sourced? That isn't intended to be a question you need to answer, as I think it would take a bit. Rather, it is a point of consideration.

louman 21 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
A social safety net should provide a minimum amount of support to sustain the needy, not a net to provide comfort with all the bells and whistles. Why does a social safety net need to provide cell phones?

stndyogrnd 21 hours ago

 
LOL
Well because if used to their full advantage Cell phones can be used to provide health care, set up appoinments, help in job searches, and validate and administer to the recipient saving lots of time and manpower.

Jean01 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
Good point, from one who did have to experience the safety net, when growing up, at the 'sustain the needy' level. Served as an additional incentive to work hard to improve ourselves, for my sibs and I.

stndyogrnd 21 hours ago

 
And if done properly that is what the "social safety net is supposed to do and does for many. The people who hate and dismiss the social safety net, only focus on and look at the failures, not the many sucesses. Now if one wants to be constuctively critical about aspect of how the social safety net trys to do that, .... thats a good thing... but constructive criticism is not what haters of Government engage in.... rather it half truths, lies and cynicsm, that is in no way constructive.

Jean01 17 hours ago

+2 Votes
 
syg

"And if done properly . . . "

Yes, four very key words. And when not done properly, waste, fraud and abuse arises.

CrazyMarine 21 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
Scott; here is a good example of a safety net making a difference, government run Amtrax put up for bids it,s high speed Acela train, a Canadian company won the day thanks to not having to pay health care costs due to single payer, our companies came in higher {GE was on} because they still provided health care insurance to their workers, that,s what I mean, Sweden has actually attracted a few German jobs due to their more extensive social safety net, Follow me on this?

TheScott 21 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
I do follow you and my response isn't meant to sound argumentative but I am confused. I read a lot of irate comments on here about government subsidies for this and that.... In this instance.... is this nothing more than a corporate subsidy paid for by the tax payer? I understand your personal desire for a extensive social safety net but aren't you blurring the lines between your social beliefs and your desire to cut the ties between business and government and indeed your desire for higher corporate taxation? At what point will the use of state funded 'competitive edges' result in de-facto state ownership?

stndyogrnd 21 hours ago

 
At what point will the use of state funded 'competitive edges' result in de-facto state ownership?... just when the right wing tries to appear to be cogent and informed they let the deep paranoid ignorance that controls their minds leak out.....
At no point does Social programs like universal health care, result in "state ownership.
There are many socialist capitalist democracies that function just fine, and as CM points out the companies from those countries out bid us, because of their balance of socialism and capitalism.

TheScott 21 hours ago

+4 Votes
 
SYG - I think my question was asked of someone who can actually articulate a response... so, if you don't mind, I will wait for his.

louman 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
Now that's a stitch. A government subsidized company Amtrak, giving work to a foreign owned company.

The tax payers should revolt at the stupidity of subsidizing Amtrak.

But then again it's not a lot different that the Secret Service buying buses from Canada instead of the US.

Who again is touting their job creating prowess?

louman 16 hours ago

+1 Vote
 
Scott,
I guess I should have held out for the caddie.

TheScott 1 hour ago

+1 Vote
 
A relevant bloomberg article on the subject:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-06/booming-sweden-s-free-market-solution.html

Cougardan 1 hour ago

 
Excellent info on that link Scott.

Jean01 56 minutes ago

 
TheScott,

How come we don't hear about Sweden's change we can believe in in the MSM?
Oh. Sorry, my bad.

louman 21 hours ago

+3 Votes
 
stndy,
Many not using the social safety net do not have cell phones as they cannot afford them.

How do you justify a perk like a cell phone, give everyone a cell phone making under 50K a year for free.

The largess in your mind has no bounds. And it's perfectly ok as long as everyone else contributes. How much extra did you include in your state and Federal income tax to support your generosity again??

stndyogrnd 20 hours ago

 
as an example... you give a cell phone (set to text and local calls only maybe only) to someone on parole. You can track if they leave the area, call and talk to people they should be talking to, send them reminders for checking in, or anger managment classes they need to take. They must answer their cell phone if their parole officer calles on a spot check... the list is endless for how they are helpfull and save money.

louman 19 hours ago

+5 Votes
 
I want my free cell phone.

Add that to the endless list to save money.

Your answer is so much BS that I cannot begin to stop laughing at your lack of logic.

stndyogrnd 19 hours ago

 
LOL who cares what fools laugh at.

TheScott 18 hours ago

+5 Votes
 
louman, cut him some slack. That is the second and thriftiest option. The first was a Cadillac with lo-jack and Onstar..... that why they can track em, kill the engine and lock um in the car if their outta bounds, their parole officer can do spot checks AND this way they are assured transportation to get to work....

CrazyMarine 16 hours ago

 
Lot of good comments, the key is to get thinking and researching globalization and see what kind of society we wind up with, there is a virtual black-out of discussing of the topic, it,s rarely mentioned on the left or the right because initially globalization and free trade had bi-partisan support, only Ross Perot sounded warnings with his big sucking sound remark, but if you use your own mind and effort you can come to your own conclusion and not have let me make up your mind for you, eventually you will be able to conect the dots and see where we are headed

No comments:

Post a Comment