The top 10% pay 65% of all income tax already, BTW.
So what? Bill Gates isn't going to close down Microsoft if his taxes go up by 5%. It won't take away his incentive to be successful. I'd much rather see him shoulder a bit more of the tax burden than see someone having to forego medical insurance or warm clothing so that they can afford to pay their taxes.
AND let me add that someone in Ghana dying from 1 of 10 things could use YOUR money that you have stockpiled for retirement a lot more than YOU.
The person in Ghana is not part of our society. That's like saying that Nationwide Auto Insurance should pay for the person in Ghana to get a new car -- even though he's not a Nationwide customer.
The unemployed guy in Detroit is part of this society. He is a fellow American. If he's fallen on tough times, then I have no problem with my tax dollars going to help him out. If the shoe were on the other foot, his tax dollars would be helping me. That's what it's like to be part of a society.
You can't do it for yourself and I guess that's why you demand that someone like the government breastfeeds you and changes your diaper.
My income and net worth probably dwarf yours. I pay far more in taxes than I'll ever see in government services. I'm arguing that I, and those of similar good fortune, should pay higher taxes and that people in lower income brackets should pay less. I guess it never occurred to you that someone could be interested in the well-being of others, did it?
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The problem with this statement is that, to literally 10 million people in this country, anyone making $30,000 a year or more is 'rich' compared to them, so I'm sure you won't mind if your income tax is raised 10% since you can 'afford it'.
No, I will not mind. I'm not some right-wing parasite who feels that he should benefit from living in the U.S. but should give nothing back. Want to hear from someone who's really rich? Then read this CNN/Money article:
Buffett slams dividend tax cut
One of world's richest calls plan 'voodoo economics,' says it puts burden on low-income families. May 20, 2003: 10:41 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Renewing his criticism of the dividend tax cut laid out by the Senate last week, Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett called the proposal "voodoo economics" that uses "Enron-style accounting."
The Senate's plan for dividends to be 50 percent tax free in 2003, 100 percent tax free in 2004 through 2006 and then face the full tax in 2007 would "further tilt the tax scales toward the rich," Buffett wrote in an opinion piece in the Washington Post.
Buffett posed a hypothetical situation in which Berkshire Hathaway, which does not currently pay a dividend, paid $1 billion in dividends next year.
Through his 31 percent ownership of the company, Buffett said he would receive an additional $310 million in income that would reduce his tax rate from about 30 percent to 3 percent, while his office secretary would still have a tax rate of about 30 percent.
"The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote.
Instead of the Senate's tax cut plan, Buffett proposed that it provide tax reductions to those who need and will spend the money in the form of a Social Security tax "holiday" or a tax rebate to lower-income people.
"Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added.
He closed the piece by saying that the "government can't deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch. And last week the Senate handed the bill to the wrong party."
Warren Buffett sits on the board of the Washington Post Co (WPO: up $3.91 to $715.01, Research, Estimates). and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B: up $2.00 to $2451.00, Research, Estimates) owns a stake in the newspaper publisher.
Not only does Warren Buffet have more money than you'll ever see, he also has morality and ethics, something you severely lack.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Like, Hong Kong, Singapore, Dubai, Oman, Bahrain, Bemuda - all countries with very high living standards and small "progressive" taxation.
In Dubai, Oman, and Bahrain, money flows out of the ground in the form of oil. That you would even suggest that their standard of living is related to their taxes is laughable. Rich people from all over the world vacation in Bermuda. Of course the standard of living is great there. That's not much of an economic model for someone living in Pittsburgh, Cleveland, or Fargo, is it? Despite your attempt at picking absurdly skewed models, you still failed.
You right-wingers really aren't very good with getting your facts straight, are you?
The pattern is that countries without what is laughably called "progressive" taxation perform economic miracles, whereas other countries, whether rich or poor in natural resources, whether starting from high living standards or low, all *stagnate* under "progressive" taxation's ruinious economic burden.
That's why people from all over the world are desperate to live here. Move to Sudan if you think that lower taxes will provide you some kind of economic nirvana.
1) Join the army because it has guaranteed income and college tuition payment. 2) Become surprised when you are actually deployed as a military force. 3) Die while upholding the contract of 'fighting in conflicts that arise' which was part of the job description...
You don't understand the difference between accepting that something COULD happen and having some meaningful way to PLAN for it. What the hell kind of plan is some 19 year old couple supposed to have? "Honey, if I don't come back, sell my comic book collection. That should see you through the tough times ahead, pay for daycare for the baby, and provide for you when you get old."
Of course the burden is on YOU to figure out this COULD HAPPEN when you join the military.
Anything COULD HAPPEN. You could keel over while driving your family at 70MPH, but it doesn't mean that you can plan for it. If you grab your chest and your car veers into oncoming traffic, everyone will probably die, regardless of how much planning you did.
Are we to believe that the thing they believe in is more arbitrary than what your head full of jelly beans concludes on a daily basis...?
Compared to you, the average liberal is a genius and I'm Albert friggin Einstein. You pretend that anything that you can imagine happening is something that can be planned for. Well, it can't. Your family could find themselves completely destitute and no amount of imagining or planning could prevent it. That's the problem with right-wingers: You're unwilling to accept that you don't have complete and total control over what the future holds for you. You want to pretend that you can plan for anything and everything that can happen to you. Well, you cant.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 4, Informative
That's right. If there is any rick of failure, don't even think about doing it.
That seems to be George Bush's thoughts on stem cell research. But, again, I ask for someone to show me profitable businesses that are started in two days that employ people.
Prove that Bill O'Reilly is a liar.
That's easy. Here's one: O'Reilly Lied About Canada Being Bankrupt
"Canada can't help us anyway. They have no military to speak of. And the socialistic system they have there has nearly bankrupted them. So Chretien is history. A new administration is upcoming. We should be trying to work things out with Canada."
Quote from the Bill O'Reilly's December 11, 2003 factor talking points memo.
From the Canadian Broadcasting Company website.
Budget surplus
Justin Thompson, CBC News Online | October 22, 2003
Finance Minister John Manley announced that Canada's budget surplus for the fiscal year 2002-2003 was a whopping $7 billion. The entire amount, he said, will go toward paying down the national debt - keeping it to a projected $510.6 billion by the end of the fiscal year. A noble decision, indeed.
On the other hand, this is Canada's sixth straight budget surplus, and debt payments aren't the most exciting way to spend $7 billion.
And as for Rush, why don't you say the same thing about your Hollywood heroes and sports heroes; ever heard of Daryl Strawberry? And I hear that Ted Kennedy has had a drink or two.
Because Daryly Strawberry was not calling for imprisoning drug users. Neither was Ted Kennedy. They, unlike Rush Limbaugh, are not hypocrites.
Abortion IS murder whether you see it that way or not.
No, abortion is not murder not whether you see it that way or not. Gee, it sure is easy to make proclamations, isn't it?
Wealth is not distributed; it is earned. What do you do when the earners get fed up? Answer - your economy fails.
No, wealth is usually inherited. Incomes are earned. And when you beat down the hard-working people who are doing the earning, the economy fails. Fuck the rich. They can afford to pay more in taxes, so let them. Some guy in a middle class job, afraid of losing it to outsourcing, downsizing, or mergers, needs the tax break a hell of a lot more than Dick Cheney, John Kerry, Bill Gates, or George W. Bush does.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I seriously suggest you check out the 10-15% long term unemplyment and microscopic growth rates in France and Germany.
I suggest that you look at the unemployment and standards of living in countries where there aren't progressive taxes.
I agree that the dotcom investments had much to do with the problem, but also, the lack of a presidential initiative to get greater deployment of broadband helped fuel the crash. Many dotcom businesses failed because their products and services were tailored for a broadband-enabled marketplace that was slow to materialize.
I also don't think that the dotcom bubble bursting has anything to do with outsourcing of everything from telemarketing to customer service call centers to processing of bank transactions. That, too, contributed to job losses.
Things were expected to start recovering in 2003, but then GWB screwed everything up with the war in Iraq, causing uncertainty and driving up oil prices.
That was part of it, but let's not forget the fear-mongering about terrorism that he's continued to use for political advantage: 'vote for me or terrorists will kill your family.' And then there is the insane deficit spending. It doesn't take a financial genius to recognize that the debt being accrued by 'Dubya' is going to dog Americans for decades.
Presidents don't make the economy go up, but they can certainly make it go down.
If they inspire confidence in the population, they can, indeed, make the economy go up.
Re:You've been listening to Rush Limbaugh again...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
Fuck you.. brainwashed scum
HAHAHAHA! You really get pissed when your idiotic beliefs (e.g., John Kerry controls the H. J. Heinz Company) are exposed, don't you?
People bash Bush because of his connections to business.
No, people bash Bush because of his favors to big business (e.g., no-bid contracts worth millions of dollars given to big campaign contributors).
Here's someone who really should have influence,
Hopefully, after the next presidential inauguration, he will.
who has a checkbook 10x bigger than Bush, and you just give him a pass.
What the f*ck is John Kerry supposed to do about a company that he doesn't own, doesn't control, and isn't a corporate officer of? You're claiming that he should do something about H.J. Heinz employing overseas workers, so what is it that you want him to do?
So much for critical thinking.
Yep, you haven't employed any thus far. If you had, you would have done some research and found that 60% of H.J. Heinz sales come from foreign markets and it therefore operates overseas facilities to serve those markets. That allows Heinz to use fresh ingredients, adjust its recipes to local tastes, and deliver the products to market quickly and at a competitive price. Can you imagine what it would cost to ship ketchup from the U.S. to China? LOL! By the way, for the United States market, Heinz makes its ketchup in factories in Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and Stockton, California.
At this point, you either feel like an idiot or you are an even bigger one than I guessed.
How many people start profitable businesses which employ people in two days as the other poster suggested?
Come out to the west coast and see how many people that can't even speak english own their own business.
And how many people do not own their own business? How many tried to start a business and failed? Want to talk about those numbers? You're like someone who believes that the lottery is the road to retirement.
Most of our economy stems from small/mid-sized businesses.
So what? The majority of people who try to start a business fail. It's not through lack of trying or lack of initiative. It's usually because of underfunding.
I, like Rush or Bill O are tired of the entitlement mentality
So you chose a hypocritical drug addict (seen him calling for mandatory minimums for illegal drug use lately?) and a proven liar as your role models? Given that you think that "I are" is proper English, I guess that I should not be surprised.
I love the narrowminded socialists that/. and open source in general seems to attract...>
If you think Geroge Bush is right wing then your just as stupid as the rest of the liberal assholes that are out there.
That I am liberal proves that I am your intellectual and moral superior.
Just what is someone who thinks there should be prayer in school, that abortions should be illegal, that the wealthy should get huge tax breaks? Just because you are even more nutty than he is doesn't make him into someone who's not right wing.
And they will be able to get a job because redistribution of wealth doesn't work you soialist idiot.
Actually, the redistribution of wealth through taxes works incredibly well and has been all hallmark of the greatest nations on Earth: U.S., England, France, Germany, etc.
As to being an idiot, you've got that covered. And you apparently recognize that as you have enough sense to post anonymously so that people can't get a clear picture of just what a nitwit you are.
Not my fault you didn't plan ahead. Baby boomers - nothing but a bunch of gimme gimme freeloaders.
I did plan ahead and I'll be abot to retire comfortably. But, unlike you, I believe in policies which help the nation as a whole and not those which simply help line my own pockets. Planning ahead doesn't always work. Just ask any of the spouses of soldiers killed in Iraq if that was part of their plan.
You've been listening to Rush Limbaugh again...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Yes, Then Tell John Kerry to bring back some of the jobs that Heinz has exported. Let's see. Almost all of their factories are located outside of the United States. Thank you John Kerry. I'm sure you'll lead by example.
What the f*ck is John Kerry supposed to do about a company that he does not own, that his wife does not own, and that she has no control over? Teresa Heinz Kerry does not own the H.J. Heinz Company and she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of it. She owns less than 4% of the company's stock, which she acquired through her inheritance of the Heinz family trust. The trust sold most of its shares of Heinz stock back in 1995.
Asshole.
You are the asshole -- and an ignorant one at that, as you have just proven.
No, I am correct. All that you did was write a long, rambling, almost pointless post on why people can't be trusted to understand the economy. Yet you provided no concrete answers as to what has caused job losses, lower wages, etc. All you seem to want to do is "blame anyone but G. W. Bush."
in rare a situation where it is completely obvious to everyone that the current president screwed up
I'd say that's pretty obvious to just about anyone with any understanding of economics in this case. The uncertainty Bush has caused in the markets with his war in Iraq, the fear mongering as he ratchets the terror alert levels up and down, the unnerving effect of $400+billion deficits, and giving huge tax cuts to the people least likely to go out and spend the money have all contributed to the pathetic economic picture. What drives the economy is consumer spending and when consumers have no confidence, there is no spending.
Oh well, at least I caught it before someone else rubbed my nose in it.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Don't blame the immigrants - they come to the country, speak little English, are very willing to do low paid lobs
I don't blame the immigrants or the overseas workers who are doing jobs previously done by Americans. I blame the corporations who hire them and the government that makes it so easy for corporations to do that.
Capitalism is a system whereby a relatively tiny number of wealthy business owners and corporate officers have an economic incentive to drive down the wages of the vast majority of workers. The only thing that keeps wages stable is the limited supply of workers in most fields. Globalization is undoing that with an almost limitless supply of foreign workers desperate for jobs. Supply goes up and wages go down. Simple economics.
Companies which outsource are sending U.S. dollars abroad. If they paid U.S. workers, the U.S. workers would be spending money at Best Buy, Walmart, local grocery stores, car washes, beauty parlors, hardware stores, shopping malls, etc. So the company doesn't only hurt the workers it lays off. It hurts the entire economy.
Sure, the price of some consumer goods are lower because of outsourcing. But cheap power tools and lower prices for hair dryers don't make up for the fact that you're unemployed. When you don't know where your next meal is coming from, it's kind of hard to get excited about Walmart being able to sell a microwave oven for $38.
Now let's look at the uneven playing field. It costs less to hire an Indian software engineer in Bangalore than it costs to lease the office space that would be occupied by his U.S. counterpart. Even if the U.S. engineer was willing to work for $6,000 per year (about the going rate in India), he/she would still be far more expensive to employ.
Nike can hire 14 year old children to work in its Asian plants while we have strict prohibitions against such practices in the U.S. In addition to prohibiting child labor in the U.S., we have many laws and regulations which are designed to protect American workers. We prohibit discrimination. We limit exposure to dangerous chemicals. We require employers to supply appropriate protective gear (hearing protection, hardhats, dust masks, goggles, gloves, etc. U.S. companies are getting around these expensive regulations by outsourcing.
Many immigrants are willing to live with 8 people sharing a two-bedroom apartment. Is that the standard of living we want for U.S. citizens? Is that how we want our families to live? If not, then we need to do something to close the doors to foreign workers. We cannot afford to be an employment agency for the third world unless we want the standard of living for the average American worker to plummet.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If what you used to do doesn't earn the living you want, be creative, be an American and "change" your output into creating something other people want to buy.
Stop feeling sorry for yourself - get over it, AND do something different until you are employed.
Ah, the vague tripe of the right-wing. Chest-pounding patriotism backed up with hollow, unspecific recommendations, based on the false premise that changing careers has zero cost and can be done overnight.
Some guy who's worked on an assembly line for 26 years or some woman who's been employed as a customer service rep at a phone bank for 12 probably can't afford to start their own business or even go to school to learn some new skill. Perhaps you think that their families should live in refrigerator boxes under bridges while the ex-breadwinners get the training to change careers. Even if they did change careers, they'd be back that the bottom rung of the ladder in their new field, probably making very little money and facing tuition loans on top of that.
Then you ignore the fact that most people don't have the intelligence to quickly change careers, start their own businesses, and learn a whole new set of skills. Any economic plan that requires that everyone be of above average intelligense is destined to fail.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Look, the rate of unemployment is 5.4%. It was 5.5% when Bill Clinton ran for reelection in 96. Amazingly, 5.4% for Bush is considered bad, 5.5% for Clinton is considered good. Go figure.
During the Clinton administration, ten people are working at $45K/year factory jobs. 0% unemployment among the ten. Their retirement account mutual funds are all showing healthy gains.
Bush takes office. All ten get laid off when their company outsources. Three get jobs at McDonalds, four get jobs at Walmart, and the other three get jobs in the mall. The mutual funds they hold stagnate and even lose money. Average pay: $10K/year. Unemployment (among the sample set): 0%.
See? There's more to judging the health of the economy than counting people who are out of work.
Re:All I know is...
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You and i know it only takes like 2 days to set up a profitable business that can employ others.
Then do it. Every two days, set up a profitable business employing others. You will be incredibly wealthy and give many people who want jobs a place to work. Or was that just more right-wing bullshit -- the kind of unsubstantiated thing that Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly says because it sounds good but isn't really true at all?
I don't consider the FCC regulation of television and radio broadcasters a free speech issue--airwaves belong to the people
So do public parks, but that does not mean that the government has the legal or moral authority to censor what people say in those public areas.
, and the people's representatives have spoken
Michael Powell is not my "representative."
--no nipples. Sorry, Football is for kids too.
So why should children not see nipples? Who do you think nipples are for? (Hint: Ever heard of "breast feeding"?) Do you think that children in Europe are being traumatized by seeing nipples on billboards, in television ads, etc.?
Let's focus on the similarities between the two: they both have the same ultimate goal: to make you vote for one candidate and against another
Agreed, and I don't deny either of them the right to pursue their goal.
and they are both biased in the information they will present to you in their pursuit of that goal.
I don't expect any political group to be unbiased. And I don't have any problem with those groups being selective about the information that they present to further their cause.
But I do have a problem when they lie. I have a problem when they air an ad with someone saying "I served with John Kerry" when, in fact, the man had never even met John Kerry, much less served on the same boat with him. I have a problem when they chop up speeches to make it appear that John Kerry was making a claim when, in fact, he was reporting that he had been told things by others.
I don't believe that 527 groups should be shut down. I do believe that they have a right express themselves and deliver their messages. But I do not believe that they should be allowed to air messages which contain falsehoods and deceptive statements ("I served with John Kerry" != "I never met John Kerry, but served in a different unit.") which are slanderous and defaming.
I did mention campaign finance reform as one of the things both sides are promoting. I notice you chose to not quote that part.
I don't consider laws preventing private organizations from voicing political views to be campaign finance reform. I consider that to be censorship.
I had not heard that Bush was launching a lawsuit against MoveOn.org, but I have heard that Kerry did so against the Swift Boat vets. Neither surprises me.
There is a big difference between MoveOn.org and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: MoveOn.org is an independent organization that existed long before the Kerry campaign did whereas Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was formed after the race got down to Bush & Kerry and it appears to be illegally coordinated by the Bush campaign. The worst thing that can be said about the MoveOn.org ads is that they are unsubtantiated whereas the SBVFT ads have been shown to be misleading, and, in many cases, untrue. Government suppression of slander and defamation has never been considered censorship.
Not such a big difference in my experience. Both seem way too focused on reducing taxes.
and oh, heres the transcript for the hearing before the Comittee on Commerce, Scirnce, and TRansportation of the United States Senate (99nth Congress). http://mars.superlink.net/~jdandrea/shrg99-529/ind ex.html . Tipper Gore was a witness.
Wait a minute. First you said that Tipper and Al Gore held the hearings because they are evil pro-censorship Democrats and now you provide a transcript of a hearing was held by a Congressional committee chaired by Republican John C. Danforth.
Moreover, if you believe that labeling would not be de facto censorship, you're mistaken. Walmart, one of the biggest music vendors in the country, refuses to carry anything with such a label - much like movie theaters often refuse to carry anything with an nc-17 rating.
You're mistaking Walmart for the U.S. government. There have been mail-order music vendors for decades as well as major chain record stores. There would probably be more record stores that survived had there been a difference in selection between them and Walmart -- something that the aforementioned labels may have provided. I don't shop at Walmart for music because I find their practice of selling edited CDs without disclosing that they are edited to be abhorrent.
Also note that i wasn't saying that republicans are anti-censorship, but i was pointing out that the democrats, the 'party of choice', is not.
I'm a Democrat and am violently opposed to censorship. I think that you paint with far too wide a brush based on the crusade of one Senator's wife.
SEMA's position has also been tried in court over aftermarket modifications on cars and in every case its been found SEMA's position is wrong.
In every one of the cases that I've seen, there was reason to believe that the failure was caused by the aftermarket parts or labor.
95% of people who argue the Magnusson-Moss relavence online seem to do so out of information they've read online from questionable sources
Like the Federal Trade Commission's web site, which explains the act as follows:
"Tie-In Sales" Provisions Generally, tie-in sales provisions are not allowed. Such a provision would require a purchaser of the warranted product to buy an item or service from a particular company to use with the warranted product in order to be eligible to receive a remedy under the warranty. The following are examples of prohibited tie-in sales provisions.
In order to keep your new Plenum Brand Vacuum Cleaner warranty in effect, you must use genuine Plenum Brand Filter Bags. Failure to have scheduled maintenance performed, at your expense, by the Great American Maintenance Company, Inc., voids this warranty.
If the hypothetical Plenum company cannot void your warranty for use of aftermarket filter bags, what makes you think that GM can void your warranty for using an aftermarket air filter? I don't think so.
Either way, I have no intent on arguing it any more. I've had that arguement far too many times, and people who so strongly take your position tend to not want to sway their opinion anyway.
Have you even read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act? Have you read the interpretations by the FTC? I have.
You remember the congressional hearings with Frank Zappa and Dee Snider? Tipper and Al Gore? Any of that ring a bell?
No, I don't. But I do remember that Tipper Gore (not Al Gore) led a series of informal hearings (not congressional hearings) by wives of Senators (not Congressional representatives) about violent and sexually explicit lyrics in popular songs. She proposed labeling the CDs as to their explicit content, not stopping them from being published and sold.
Typical Republican selective memory disorder. You choose to remember things in a distorted manner in order to demonize Democrats.
Slashdot Mirror
The top 10% pay 65% of all income tax already, BTW.
So what? Bill Gates isn't going to close down Microsoft if his taxes go up by 5%. It won't take away his incentive to be successful. I'd much rather see him shoulder a bit more of the tax burden than see someone having to forego medical insurance or warm clothing so that they can afford to pay their taxes.
AND let me add that someone in Ghana dying from 1 of 10 things could use YOUR money that you have stockpiled for retirement a lot more than YOU.
The person in Ghana is not part of our society. That's like saying that Nationwide Auto Insurance should pay for the person in Ghana to get a new car -- even though he's not a Nationwide customer.
The unemployed guy in Detroit is part of this society. He is a fellow American. If he's fallen on tough times, then I have no problem with my tax dollars going to help him out. If the shoe were on the other foot, his tax dollars would be helping me. That's what it's like to be part of a society.
You can't do it for yourself and I guess that's why you demand that someone like the government breastfeeds you and changes your diaper.
My income and net worth probably dwarf yours. I pay far more in taxes than I'll ever see in government services. I'm arguing that I, and those of similar good fortune, should pay higher taxes and that people in lower income brackets should pay less. I guess it never occurred to you that someone could be interested in the well-being of others, did it?
No, I will not mind. I'm not some right-wing parasite who feels that he should benefit from living in the U.S. but should give nothing back. Want to hear from someone who's really rich? Then read this CNN/Money article:
Not only does Warren Buffet have more money than you'll ever see, he also has morality and ethics, something you severely lack.
In Dubai, Oman, and Bahrain, money flows out of the ground in the form of oil. That you would even suggest that their standard of living is related to their taxes is laughable. Rich people from all over the world vacation in Bermuda. Of course the standard of living is great there. That's not much of an economic model for someone living in Pittsburgh, Cleveland, or Fargo, is it? Despite your attempt at picking absurdly skewed models, you still failed.
Per capita GDP ranking:Source: http://www.worldfactsandfigures.com/gdp_country_d
You right-wingers really aren't very good with getting your facts straight, are you?
The pattern is that countries without what is laughably called "progressive" taxation perform economic miracles, whereas other countries, whether rich or poor in natural resources, whether starting from high living standards or low, all *stagnate* under "progressive" taxation's ruinious economic burden.
That's why people from all over the world are desperate to live here. Move to Sudan if you think that lower taxes will provide you some kind of economic nirvana.
1) Join the army because it has guaranteed income and college tuition payment.
2) Become surprised when you are actually deployed as a military force.
3) Die while upholding the contract of 'fighting in conflicts that arise' which was part of the job description...
You don't understand the difference between accepting that something COULD happen and having some meaningful way to PLAN for it. What the hell kind of plan is some 19 year old couple supposed to have? "Honey, if I don't come back, sell my comic book collection. That should see you through the tough times ahead, pay for daycare for the baby, and provide for you when you get old."
Of course the burden is on YOU to figure out this COULD HAPPEN when you join the military.
Anything COULD HAPPEN. You could keel over while driving your family at 70MPH, but it doesn't mean that you can plan for it. If you grab your chest and your car veers into oncoming traffic, everyone will probably die, regardless of how much planning you did.
Are we to believe that the thing they believe in is more arbitrary than what your head full of jelly beans concludes on a daily basis...?
Compared to you, the average liberal is a genius and I'm Albert friggin Einstein. You pretend that anything that you can imagine happening is something that can be planned for. Well, it can't. Your family could find themselves completely destitute and no amount of imagining or planning could prevent it. That's the problem with right-wingers: You're unwilling to accept that you don't have complete and total control over what the future holds for you. You want to pretend that you can plan for anything and everything that can happen to you. Well, you cant.
That's right. If there is any rick of failure, don't even think about doing it.
That seems to be George Bush's thoughts on stem cell research. But, again, I ask for someone to show me profitable businesses that are started in two days that employ people.
Prove that Bill O'Reilly is a liar.
That's easy. Here's one: O'Reilly Lied About Canada Being Bankrupt
"Canada can't help us anyway. They have no military to speak of. And the socialistic system they have there has nearly bankrupted them. So Chretien is history. A new administration is upcoming. We should be trying to work things out with Canada."
Quote from the Bill O'Reilly's December 11, 2003 factor talking points memo.
From the Canadian Broadcasting Company website.
Budget surplus
Justin Thompson, CBC News Online | October 22, 2003
Finance Minister John Manley announced that Canada's budget surplus for the fiscal year 2002-2003 was a whopping $7 billion. The entire amount, he said, will go toward paying down the national debt - keeping it to a projected $510.6 billion by the end of the fiscal year. A noble decision, indeed.
On the other hand, this is Canada's sixth straight budget surplus, and debt payments aren't the most exciting way to spend $7 billion.
And as for Rush, why don't you say the same thing about your Hollywood heroes and sports heroes; ever heard of Daryl Strawberry? And I hear that Ted Kennedy has had a drink or two.
Because Daryly Strawberry was not calling for imprisoning drug users. Neither was Ted Kennedy. They, unlike Rush Limbaugh, are not hypocrites.
Whiner = liberal
Mama's boy = liberal
Say it to my face, coward.
Abortion IS murder whether you see it that way or not.
No, abortion is not murder not whether you see it that way or not. Gee, it sure is easy to make proclamations, isn't it?
Wealth is not distributed; it is earned. What do you do when the earners get fed up? Answer - your economy fails.
No, wealth is usually inherited. Incomes are earned. And when you beat down the hard-working people who are doing the earning, the economy fails. Fuck the rich. They can afford to pay more in taxes, so let them. Some guy in a middle class job, afraid of losing it to outsourcing, downsizing, or mergers, needs the tax break a hell of a lot more than Dick Cheney, John Kerry, Bill Gates, or George W. Bush does.
I seriously suggest you check out the 10-15% long term unemplyment and microscopic growth rates in France and Germany.
I suggest that you look at the unemployment and standards of living in countries where there aren't progressive taxes.
I agree that the dotcom investments had much to do with the problem, but also, the lack of a presidential initiative to get greater deployment of broadband helped fuel the crash. Many dotcom businesses failed because their products and services were tailored for a broadband-enabled marketplace that was slow to materialize.
I also don't think that the dotcom bubble bursting has anything to do with outsourcing of everything from telemarketing to customer service call centers to processing of bank transactions. That, too, contributed to job losses.
Things were expected to start recovering in 2003, but then GWB screwed everything up with the war in Iraq, causing uncertainty and driving up oil prices.
That was part of it, but let's not forget the fear-mongering about terrorism that he's continued to use for political advantage: 'vote for me or terrorists will kill your family.' And then there is the insane deficit spending. It doesn't take a financial genius to recognize that the debt being accrued by 'Dubya' is going to dog Americans for decades.
Presidents don't make the economy go up, but they can certainly make it go down.
If they inspire confidence in the population, they can, indeed, make the economy go up.
Fuck you.. brainwashed scum
HAHAHAHA! You really get pissed when your idiotic beliefs (e.g., John Kerry controls the H. J. Heinz Company) are exposed, don't you?
People bash Bush because of his connections to business.
No, people bash Bush because of his favors to big business (e.g., no-bid contracts worth millions of dollars given to big campaign contributors).
Here's someone who really should have influence,
Hopefully, after the next presidential inauguration, he will.
who has a checkbook 10x bigger than Bush, and you just give him a pass.
What the f*ck is John Kerry supposed to do about a company that he doesn't own, doesn't control, and isn't a corporate officer of? You're claiming that he should do something about H.J. Heinz employing overseas workers, so what is it that you want him to do?
So much for critical thinking.
Yep, you haven't employed any thus far. If you had, you would have done some research and found that 60% of H.J. Heinz sales come from foreign markets and it therefore operates overseas facilities to serve those markets. That allows Heinz to use fresh ingredients, adjust its recipes to local tastes, and deliver the products to market quickly and at a competitive price. Can you imagine what it would cost to ship ketchup from the U.S. to China? LOL! By the way, for the United States market, Heinz makes its ketchup in factories in Fremont, Ohio; Muscatine, Iowa; and Stockton, California.
At this point, you either feel like an idiot or you are an even bigger one than I guessed.
Obviously a LOT of people do it.
/. and open source in general seems to attract ...>
How many people start profitable businesses which employ people in two days as the other poster suggested?
Come out to the west coast and see how many people that can't even speak english own their own business.
And how many people do not own their own business? How many tried to start a business and failed? Want to talk about those numbers? You're like someone who believes that the lottery is the road to retirement.
Most of our economy stems from small/mid-sized businesses.
So what? The majority of people who try to start a business fail. It's not through lack of trying or lack of initiative. It's usually because of underfunding.
I, like Rush or Bill O are tired of the entitlement mentality
So you chose a hypocritical drug addict (seen him calling for mandatory minimums for illegal drug use lately?) and a proven liar as your role models? Given that you think that "I are" is proper English, I guess that I should not be surprised.
I love the narrowminded socialists that
Narrow-minded = conservative.
If you think Geroge Bush is right wing then your just as stupid as the rest of the liberal assholes that are out there.
That I am liberal proves that I am your intellectual and moral superior.
Just what is someone who thinks there should be prayer in school, that abortions should be illegal, that the wealthy should get huge tax breaks? Just because you are even more nutty than he is doesn't make him into someone who's not right wing.
And they will be able to get a job because redistribution of wealth doesn't work you soialist idiot.
Actually, the redistribution of wealth through taxes works incredibly well and has been all hallmark of the greatest nations on Earth: U.S., England, France, Germany, etc.
As to being an idiot, you've got that covered. And you apparently recognize that as you have enough sense to post anonymously so that people can't get a clear picture of just what a nitwit you are.
Not my fault you didn't plan ahead. Baby boomers - nothing but a bunch of gimme gimme freeloaders.
I did plan ahead and I'll be abot to retire comfortably. But, unlike you, I believe in policies which help the nation as a whole and not those which simply help line my own pockets. Planning ahead doesn't always work. Just ask any of the spouses of soldiers killed in Iraq if that was part of their plan.
Yes, Then Tell John Kerry to bring back some of the jobs that Heinz has exported. Let's see. Almost all of their factories are located outside of the United States. Thank you John Kerry. I'm sure you'll lead by example.
What the f*ck is John Kerry supposed to do about a company that he does not own, that his wife does not own, and that she has no control over? Teresa Heinz Kerry does not own the H.J. Heinz Company and she has no involvement whatsoever with the management or operations of it. She owns less than 4% of the company's stock, which she acquired through her inheritance of the Heinz family trust. The trust sold most of its shares of Heinz stock back in 1995.
Asshole.
You are the asshole -- and an ignorant one at that, as you have just proven.
No, I am correct. All that you did was write a long, rambling, almost pointless post on why people can't be trusted to understand the economy. Yet you provided no concrete answers as to what has caused job losses, lower wages, etc. All you seem to want to do is "blame anyone but G. W. Bush."
in rare a situation where it is completely obvious to everyone that the current president screwed up
I'd say that's pretty obvious to just about anyone with any understanding of economics in this case. The uncertainty Bush has caused in the markets with his war in Iraq, the fear mongering as he ratchets the terror alert levels up and down, the unnerving effect of $400+billion deficits, and giving huge tax cuts to the people least likely to go out and spend the money have all contributed to the pathetic economic picture. What drives the economy is consumer spending and when consumers have no confidence, there is no spending.
everyone be of above average intelligense
Oh well, at least I caught it before someone else rubbed my nose in it.
Don't blame the immigrants - they come to the country, speak little English, are very willing to do low paid lobs
I don't blame the immigrants or the overseas workers who are doing jobs previously done by Americans. I blame the corporations who hire them and the government that makes it so easy for corporations to do that.
Capitalism is a system whereby a relatively tiny number of wealthy business owners and corporate officers have an economic incentive to drive down the wages of the vast majority of workers. The only thing that keeps wages stable is the limited supply of workers in most fields. Globalization is undoing that with an almost limitless supply of foreign workers desperate for jobs. Supply goes up and wages go down. Simple economics.
Companies which outsource are sending U.S. dollars abroad. If they paid U.S. workers, the U.S. workers would be spending money at Best Buy, Walmart, local grocery stores, car washes, beauty parlors, hardware stores, shopping malls, etc. So the company doesn't only hurt the workers it lays off. It hurts the entire economy.
Sure, the price of some consumer goods are lower because of outsourcing. But cheap power tools and lower prices for hair dryers don't make up for the fact that you're unemployed. When you don't know where your next meal is coming from, it's kind of hard to get excited about Walmart being able to sell a microwave oven for $38.
Now let's look at the uneven playing field. It costs less to hire an Indian software engineer in Bangalore than it costs to lease the office space that would be occupied by his U.S. counterpart. Even if the U.S. engineer was willing to work for $6,000 per year (about the going rate in India), he/she would still be far more expensive to employ.
Nike can hire 14 year old children to work in its Asian plants while we have strict prohibitions against such practices in the U.S. In addition to prohibiting child labor in the U.S., we have many laws and regulations which are designed to protect American workers. We prohibit discrimination. We limit exposure to dangerous chemicals. We require employers to supply appropriate protective gear (hearing protection, hardhats, dust masks, goggles, gloves, etc. U.S. companies are getting around these expensive regulations by outsourcing.
Many immigrants are willing to live with 8 people sharing a two-bedroom apartment. Is that the standard of living we want for U.S. citizens? Is that how we want our families to live? If not, then we need to do something to close the doors to foreign workers. We cannot afford to be an employment agency for the third world unless we want the standard of living for the average American worker to plummet.
If what you used to do doesn't earn the living you want, be creative, be an American and "change" your output into creating something other people want to buy.
Stop feeling sorry for yourself - get over it, AND do something different until you are employed.
Ah, the vague tripe of the right-wing. Chest-pounding patriotism backed up with hollow, unspecific recommendations, based on the false premise that changing careers has zero cost and can be done overnight.
Some guy who's worked on an assembly line for 26 years or some woman who's been employed as a customer service rep at a phone bank for 12 probably can't afford to start their own business or even go to school to learn some new skill. Perhaps you think that their families should live in refrigerator boxes under bridges while the ex-breadwinners get the training to change careers. Even if they did change careers, they'd be back that the bottom rung of the ladder in their new field, probably making very little money and facing tuition loans on top of that.
Then you ignore the fact that most people don't have the intelligence to quickly change careers, start their own businesses, and learn a whole new set of skills. Any economic plan that requires that everyone be of above average intelligense is destined to fail.
Look, the rate of unemployment is 5.4%. It was 5.5% when Bill Clinton ran for reelection in 96. Amazingly, 5.4% for Bush is considered bad, 5.5% for Clinton is considered good. Go figure.
During the Clinton administration, ten people are working at $45K/year factory jobs. 0% unemployment among the ten. Their retirement account mutual funds are all showing healthy gains.
Bush takes office. All ten get laid off when their company outsources. Three get jobs at McDonalds, four get jobs at Walmart, and the other three get jobs in the mall. The mutual funds they hold stagnate and even lose money. Average pay: $10K/year. Unemployment (among the sample set): 0%.
See? There's more to judging the health of the economy than counting people who are out of work.
You and i know it only takes like 2 days to set up a profitable business that can employ others.
Then do it. Every two days, set up a profitable business employing others. You will be incredibly wealthy and give many people who want jobs a place to work. Or was that just more right-wing bullshit -- the kind of unsubstantiated thing that Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly says because it sounds good but isn't really true at all?
I don't consider the FCC regulation of television and radio broadcasters a free speech issue--airwaves belong to the people
So do public parks, but that does not mean that the government has the legal or moral authority to censor what people say in those public areas.
, and the people's representatives have spoken
Michael Powell is not my "representative."
--no nipples. Sorry, Football is for kids too.
So why should children not see nipples? Who do you think nipples are for? (Hint: Ever heard of "breast feeding"?) Do you think that children in Europe are being traumatized by seeing nipples on billboards, in television ads, etc.?
Let's focus on the similarities between the two: they both have the same ultimate goal: to make you vote for one candidate and against another
Agreed, and I don't deny either of them the right to pursue their goal.
and they are both biased in the information they will present to you in their pursuit of that goal.
I don't expect any political group to be unbiased. And I don't have any problem with those groups being selective about the information that they present to further their cause.
But I do have a problem when they lie. I have a problem when they air an ad with someone saying "I served with John Kerry" when, in fact, the man had never even met John Kerry, much less served on the same boat with him. I have a problem when they chop up speeches to make it appear that John Kerry was making a claim when, in fact, he was reporting that he had been told things by others.
I don't believe that 527 groups should be shut down. I do believe that they have a right express themselves and deliver their messages. But I do not believe that they should be allowed to air messages which contain falsehoods and deceptive statements ("I served with John Kerry" != "I never met John Kerry, but served in a different unit.") which are slanderous and defaming.
I did mention campaign finance reform as one of the things both sides are promoting. I notice you chose to not quote that part.
I don't consider laws preventing private organizations from voicing political views to be campaign finance reform. I consider that to be censorship.
I had not heard that Bush was launching a lawsuit against MoveOn.org, but I have heard that Kerry did so against the Swift Boat vets. Neither surprises me.
There is a big difference between MoveOn.org and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: MoveOn.org is an independent organization that existed long before the Kerry campaign did whereas Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was formed after the race got down to Bush & Kerry and it appears to be illegally coordinated by the Bush campaign. The worst thing that can be said about the MoveOn.org ads is that they are unsubtantiated whereas the SBVFT ads have been shown to be misleading, and, in many cases, untrue. Government suppression of slander and defamation has never been considered censorship.
Except i'm a libertarian.
d ex.html . Tipper Gore was a witness.
Not such a big difference in my experience. Both seem way too focused on reducing taxes.
and oh, heres the transcript for the hearing before the Comittee on Commerce, Scirnce, and TRansportation of the United States Senate (99nth Congress). http://mars.superlink.net/~jdandrea/shrg99-529/in
Wait a minute. First you said that Tipper and Al Gore held the hearings because they are evil pro-censorship Democrats and now you provide a transcript of a hearing was held by a Congressional committee chaired by Republican John C. Danforth.
Moreover, if you believe that labeling would not be de facto censorship, you're mistaken. Walmart, one of the biggest music vendors in the country, refuses to carry anything with such a label - much like movie theaters often refuse to carry anything with an nc-17 rating.
You're mistaking Walmart for the U.S. government. There have been mail-order music vendors for decades as well as major chain record stores. There would probably be more record stores that survived had there been a difference in selection between them and Walmart -- something that the aforementioned labels may have provided. I don't shop at Walmart for music because I find their practice of selling edited CDs without disclosing that they are edited to be abhorrent.
Also note that i wasn't saying that republicans are anti-censorship, but i was pointing out that the democrats, the 'party of choice', is not.
I'm a Democrat and am violently opposed to censorship. I think that you paint with far too wide a brush based on the crusade of one Senator's wife.
That's your choice.
SEMA's position has also been tried in court over aftermarket modifications on cars and in every case its been found SEMA's position is wrong.
In every one of the cases that I've seen, there was reason to believe that the failure was caused by the aftermarket parts or labor.
95% of people who argue the Magnusson-Moss relavence online seem to do so out of information they've read online from questionable sources
Like the Federal Trade Commission's web site, which explains the act as follows:If the hypothetical Plenum company cannot void your warranty for use of aftermarket filter bags, what makes you think that GM can void your warranty for using an aftermarket air filter? I don't think so.
Either way, I have no intent on arguing it any more. I've had that arguement far too many times, and people who so strongly take your position tend to not want to sway their opinion anyway.
Have you even read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act? Have you read the interpretations by the FTC? I have.
You remember the congressional hearings with Frank Zappa and Dee Snider? Tipper and Al Gore? Any of that ring a bell?
No, I don't. But I do remember that Tipper Gore (not Al Gore) led a series of informal hearings (not congressional hearings) by wives of Senators (not Congressional representatives) about violent and sexually explicit lyrics in popular songs. She proposed labeling the CDs as to their explicit content, not stopping them from being published and sold.
Typical Republican selective memory disorder. You choose to remember things in a distorted manner in order to demonize Democrats.