- #456
mheslep
Gold Member
- 364
- 729
Sure. ??SixNein said:Remember the proposed marriage amendment a few years back?
Sure. ??SixNein said:Remember the proposed marriage amendment a few years back?
daveb said:And that's the whole left vs right debate - where is that dividing line between what is necessary and what is overreaching.
WhoWee said:I'm trying to figure out the President's strategy with these comments?
http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/08/16/obama-i-m-just-lincoln
" "Lincoln," the president said, "they used to talk about him almost as bad as they talk about me.""
WOW! (IMO of course)
(my bold)The president's remarks came in response to a question from a woman who said that congressional Republicans are refusing to be a "good partner" to work with the president. "What happens to our democracy?" the woman asked. "We are in a very divided country right now. What can you say to help us with democracy itself?"
Obama told the woman that "democracy is always a messy business in a big country like this." In addition, he said, "We kind of romanticize sometimes what democracy used to be like."
"When you listen to what the Federalists said about the Anti-Federalists, and the names that Jefferson called Hamilton and back and forth -- I mean those guys were tough," Obama said. "Lincoln -- they used to talk about him almost as bad as they talk about me. So democracy has never been for the faint of heart."
daveb said:(my bold)
Um...no strategy to it. He was just trying to answer the woman's question. Granted, it was a piss poor answer by stating it's always been that way and offering no solution.
I guess that Romney's plan won't affect the opinions of most Americans. How's Romney going to put millions of laid off Americans to work when there's just no work for them? If they like Romney I'm guessing that they like him for other reasons -- the main one being that he isn't Obama.WhoWee said:"NORTH LAS VEGAS, Nev. (AP) — Casting himself as America's CEO, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on Tuesday outlined a sweeping economic plan that would reduce regulations and taxes on companies, sanction China over its currency practices and weaken the clout of labor unions."
ThomasT said:I guess that Romney's plan won't affect the opinions of most Americans. How's Romney going to put millions of laid off Americans to work when there's just no work for them? If they like Romney I'm guessing that they like him for other reasons -- the main one being that he isn't Obama.
The combined effect of the Bush and Obama administrations might be seen as ranging from pretty disastrous to essentially ineffectual, but I don't see Romney, or anybody else for that matter, including Obama, as being able to significantly affect the demographic and economic trends in America. So, fapp, I don't think it much matters who gets elected to the presidency. Flip a coin, it doesn't matter who you vote for -- which is what we've been told by the major parties for a long time. So, I'll probably vote for Nader again -- whether he runs or not.
I don't think it much matters what Obama's strategy for 2012 is. If he gets reelected, then it will be for the same reason he got elected in 2008. People like the way he talks and carries himself, and he'll get the ethnic minority and labor votes. I would guess that most people see Obama as inheriting some rather huge problems rather than creating them. But then he has been a disappointment wrt the promise of his wonderful rhetoric. So who knows what will happen?
You like Romney?
Change direction? What can be done? Businesses, banks, and lots of individuals have plenty of money to 'create jobs'. But there's not enough money in the general population, the general economy, to support that on a large scale. That is, if there was money to be made by private sector financing of new businesses and extensions of established ones, then investors would be doing it. As far as I can tell, the only way that large scale unemployment is going to be alleviated is on a nonprofit, or even losing, basis. That is, government initiated and financed programs. Otherwise, the trend of downsizing, layoffs and outsourcing seems likely to continue.WhoWee said:Romney's plan is quite comprehensive and includes specific regulatory relief. It does make a difference who is elected. We haven't yet felt the full destructive effects of President Obama's agenda - we need to change direction before our economy passes the point of revival - IMO.
ThomasT said:Change direction? What can be done? Businesses, banks, and lots of individuals have plenty of money to 'create jobs'. But there's not enough money in the general population, the general economy, to support that on a large scale. That is, if there was money to be made by private sector financing of new businesses and extensions of established ones, then investors would be doing it. As far as I can tell, the only way that large scale unemployment is going to be alleviated is on a nonprofit, or even losing, basis. That is, government initiated and financed programs. Otherwise, the trend of downsizing, layoffs and outsourcing seems likely to continue.
But I don't think it's 'critical'. The financial sector seems to be doing fine. It's just that we're going to have to get used to the general economy growing at a slower rate than before, and a permanent double digit unemployment rate.
There's lots of things that can be done to solve the country's financial problems. It's just up to the congress to do them.
I don't think it's so much any president's agenda, but rather congress's actions and inactions that directly affect the status quo. Any member can devise prospective solutions and present them for legislative action.
How might Romney's specific regulatory relief proposals affect things?
WhoWee said:It's not just President Obama's agenda - Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and Chris Dodd deserve much credit (among others). The one group that doesn't deserve ANY credit for creating the problems in the economy is the TEA Party (House Republicans) as they just arrived and are the only ones standing in the way of the aforementioned Democrat leaders agenda(s).
Specifically - Obamacare is hanging over the US economy like a black cloud, massive tax hikes are looming for everyone if spending continues unchecked, SOX was an over-reach, Dodd-Frank has major problems, union initiatives are being initiated through regulations, the EPA is implementing the President's agenda, "Green" programs are not working, the auto bailout has not "worked" - selling assets to China, handing out $45Billion in tax cuts, creating a more diverse group of auto dealer franchises, cash for clunkers, and pushing EV's that nobody wants are not the solution. The US does not have a clear energy policy and we're moving towards greater reliance on imports (not good).
Please label this entire post IMO.
ThomasT said:I'll have to take your word for the negative effects or ineffectiveness of some of this stuff until I check it out in more detail.
WhoWee said:The one group that doesn't deserve ANY credit for creating the problems in the economy is the TEA Party (House Republicans) as they just arrived and are the only ones standing in the way of the aforementioned Democrat leaders agenda(s).
Eleven days ago, Gibson Guitar [117 year old company] CEO Henry Juszkiewicz was getting ready for work when he got a phone call at home from his assistant, whose voice sounded panicky.
Half a dozen armed federal agents with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were searching the Gibson executive suite. Two of the company’s South Nashville guitar factories also had just been raided, along with one in Memphis.
mheslep said:Among the hundreds of sound answers available for the question on job creation, "what can be done?", should be http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110904/BUSINESS/309030089/Gibson-goes-offensive"
Regulation of other guitar companies? Yes. Raids by Fish and Wildlife federal agents? No.turbo said:...
Other guitar-makers have been subject to this type of scrutiny,
You know this how?turbo said:...some with justification.
No doubt many people work with foreign nationals to import wood. No doubt many of them do not want to liquidate Asia forests, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903895904576542942027859286.html"turbo said:... Bob Taylor prides himself on working with foreign nationals to provide sustainable harvests of tone-woods to build his Taylor guitars, and his "Wood and Steel" magazine (sent to all Taylor owners) has detailed articles to back it up. I own a small Taylor concert-sized guitar made with Brazilian Rosewood, mahogany neck, and cedar top. It is the sweetest-sounding guitar ever, and best of all, I have confidence that Bob is doing his best to preserve the viability and availability of tropical tone-woods, and work with the people that live in those forests instead of accepting wood from "liquidators" that want to clear rain-forests in order raise crops or cattle.
WSJ said:Scott Paul, a Greenpeace official in New York responsible for forestry issues, said Gibson for years has done "great work" to promote better forestry practices. The question, he said, is whether Gibson did everything possible to avoid buying wood from dubious sources. "We have no idea," he said.
No problems? Call me skeptical a small business owner can even <i>identify</i> all the applicable regulations, must less comply with them all with no problems.turbo said:...His is a very successful small business that has no problems complying with those "onerous" regulations that the GOP says are job-killers.
daveb said:While I agree the raid using federal agents who are armed is a tad over the top, it was hardly "dozens",
turbo said:The raid involved 1/2 dozen agents, according to the link.
And that's just this time. Gibson was also raided in 2009, about which they have never been charged:"Two of the company’s South Nashville guitar factories also had just been raided, along with one in Memphis."
CEO audio Interview said:...went down to the factory, sure enough, there were several dozen SWAT attired people with automatic weapons and bullet proof vests, and they had evacuated the plant, made all the employees stand out in the parking lot. They had grabbed several employees and put them in small rooms with four or five armed people, verbally intimidating them. [...] We haven't been charged with any wrong doing yet."
Yes this is my opinion and a sensible one.daveb said:.. and that it is "ridiculous bureaucratic minutia" is your opinion.
Physics-Learner said:most of our electorate is STUPID. they ridiculously go to one side or the other, and stay there. neither side has the best interest of the populace. until the majority realizes that govt is for govt, then we will always have way more govt than we need, and all the problems that come from it.
if we look backwards in american history and examine the results, i doubt that people will wise up in my lifetime.
daveb said:The TEA party didn't cause the mess, but some people have the opinion they're making it worse by being obstructionist.
WhoWee said:The results of the New York special election to fill Weiner's seat are in - a Republican has won.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/13/new-york-special-election-results_n_961363.html?ncid=webmail1
""The results in NY-09 are not reflective of what will happen in November 2012 when Democratic challengers run against Republican incumbents who voted to end Medicare and cut Social Security while protecting tax loopholes for big corporations and the ultra wealthy," said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Steve Israel of New York."
I have to wonder who this Democrat spokesperson is trying to convince?
Vanadium 50 said:The President has stated that his $447B jobs program will create 1.9M jobs. That's 235k per job. You would think he would have learned to be vaguer with his numbers after the 8% unemployment fiasco.
Put another way, to take the entire 9% unemployed segment of the economy and pay them minimum wage would cost only $207M.
Putting numbers like that out only encourages this kind of comparison.
Vanadium 50 said:The President has stated that his $447B jobs program will create 1.9M jobs. That's 235k per job. You would think he would have learned to be vaguer with his numbers after the 8% unemployment fiasco.
Put another way, to take the entire 9% unemployed segment of the economy and pay them minimum wage would cost only $207M.
Putting numbers like that out only encourages this kind of comparison.