Labnerd,

I agree that we can be more friendly to businesses. The unions aren't the only ones to blame though. The union workers make on average $2-3 more an hour. It is only when you add in legacy costs do the numbers get obscene. That is only because the foreign manufacturers haven't been here long enough to incur those costs.

Still I am sure the Ford thing was some posturing by them too. They can pay Brazilians way less than a comparable American worker and not have near the environmental issues to address.

It all comes down to how far will we push it...we can eliminate minimum wages tomorrow and have salaries pushed down to $1.00 an hour and still be beat out by the Chinese or Somalis or someone else. There are countries that don't care what you do to the environment too but what is the long term cost?

 

You forget to realize that when capital and products are cheaper to produce they are also cheaper to purchase.

It doesn't matter if everyone is making $2.00 an hour when a new car would cost $3,000.

This just goes to show, democrats know economics like conservatives know how to smoke pot.

 

The Republican were voted out during the 2006 election year by the wars not the economy. Has it got any better since? I so no......the wars continue and the spending has increase under Democratic control. BTW, the Obama administration had much to do about TARP than you think.

When I speak of States that are in trouble....it's more than unemployment rates. It's how much in the red they are and projected in the years to come. The vast majority are big cities and/or states run by Democrats.

 

The problem is that wages aren't staying up with the cost of living. People that make $8/hr at Wal-Mart don't get to pay less for things they buy. A CEO that makes $5 million a year pays the same $50k for a Ford truck as the poor Wal-Marter.

Salaries are flat and energy, education and medical costs are skyrocketing.

When companies outsource to 3rd world nations, they are saving big bucks. Sure you can buy a car in India for a fee thousand $$ but it isn't the same you would buy in the US.

 

In other words, tax avoidance became the norm. After the early claim, the next years money was placed into tax advantaged structures. In other words, Just like the report found, raise the taxes, and people will find a way to further minimize them.

I am not able to predict the future any more accurate than a game of evens & odds. I only explained the why to your question on the surplus at the end of the time of the Clinton administration ( which who was in control of congress ? )

It took almost all of the 12 years of Reagan & GH Bush to recover from 4 years of Carter. Late 80's I still recall my passbook savings account paying 7.5 % APR on a balance of 1,000.00 or more. If you were under that, it was 5.75 %. Prime was still working its way down.
Clinton had his issues at the end of his 1st term, still with a high deficit.

To say the current POTUS is more of a Republican than Nixon is just false. Not sure where you got this tag line, but it is not true. Nixon was working for lower taxes for corp to bolster growth and working a war after what happened in 1972 & 1973. Basically doing anything legal or illegal to get the job done.
The current, he is going after the redistribution of wealth and apologizing for any thing we did in the past.

Raising taxes will cause a short fall on tax revenues ( if you can use previous performance as an indication ), so it will be the same or less than now.
Where to cut, the paving America program. Around here there are resurfacing projects going like mad on roads that do not need it, just because the money has to be spent, and road paving is a union job ( keep those voters happy is the only thing I can see. Also restarts the over extended unemployment program for those people ).

1. Walmart is a good source of this, the American staple company ( it was sears, and all made in the US )
2. Want a cheap steel hammer with a wooden hammer made in the US, be prepared for it to cost 100.00, no more low cost items for anyone.
The current minimum wage is not meant to be a livable wage, just the minimum that can be made. People forget this, and to live on minimum you have to buy stuff that is made in no standard counties for cheap.
Actually China is having the outsource problem, all of that is going to Vietnam, India & the likes. The dumped here for cheap is not an American problem alone.

 

1) In the private sector.

2) Mostly driven by Government intervention.

K-Mac you don't get it, you always jump to extremes. In your thinking, loosening the noose on American businesses is the equvalant to letting them rum amok.

The reason your "Guy" is doing so badly is he has NO REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE, just like so many people said before the election. The shame of it is, look how long it took you to catch on to the fact that Obama is just an empty suit. The sad part is there are still many people (including the media) who are still slurping the "Kool-Aid" like there is no tomorrow.

 

I suggest everyone do themselves a favor and just add ol' K-Mac to the ignore list. He can't make a legitimate argument. He's bought into the Chicago political machine and is spewing the crazy liberal BS.

 

 

That is another phrase spewed by democrats but there is no proof for it. Even if salaries were flat, it doesn't matter.

Capitalism and competition brings the cost of goods down over time. About 4 years ago, people were paying $600 for a Motorola Razor cell phone. Now just about everyone has blackberries, droids, and Iphones for $200.

Plasma TV's were $3,000 now everyone has a plasma or LCD TV for $400-$1,000.

Healthcare is more expensive because Obama teamed up with the insurance companies to write a new mandate. Energy is controlled by the government when it should be privatized and competed over. Education prices are going up because there are not many jobs on the market so more people are going to college (supply/demand).

 

The "conservatives" didn't have majorities in both houses, the republicans did.


Bureau of Labor Statisitcs-Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey




Progressives are advocating for socialist policy. If you call yourself a progressive, your words in this thread prove my point.

Calling a progressive a socialist isn't anything like calling a conservative a racist. You know that it was an Alinsky tactic by the progressives to paint the conservatives as racists. There hasn't ever been any evidence. I don't think that you could come up with anything that would prove that conservatives are any more likely to be racist than liberals or progressives. In fact, it was democrats who were so opposed to civil rights legislations for years of the struggle.

 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news K, but that was a movie. It was not reality.

 

absolutely delusional... K-Mac... unbelievable...

 

Frank I realize that was a movie but it is a depiction of real life. It was modeled after guys like "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap a big shot CEO that used similar tactics.

Wittom, yes year to year it appears that Obummer is running higher deficits but much of this is just a continuation of Bush's work. At this point with the "deal" Obummer worked out with the GOP and told the Dems to take it or leave it, he may as well be Bush.

FX4...the fact that electronics going down in value while a function of capitalism and free markets, it isn't the same as commodities like oil/electricity. As technology ages, it becomes less valuable as people want the newest greatest thing. Supply and Demand do play a role as well. It is cheaper to mass produce TVs than to make them by hand individually.

However, items like energy don't go down the same as TVs. There is no appreciable difference if I plug my TV into an outlet powered by Com Ed or another power company. The same way as there is minimal difference if I buy gasoline at BP or Shell. The product doesn't displace another, driving the previous model down.

I suppose you may see slightly lower gas prices if you didn't have to have clean fuels and all but the difference is minimal. I don't think deregulation tomorrow would result in us going back to $.99 a gallon.

Is making sure there are a few safety nets in our society Socialist? Social Security, Medicare, health insurance, education, unemployment insurance, disability...I mean seriously? These are things of good and will better us overall.

I agree that acts like buying up GM, AIG and Citigroup were socialistic. That trend started under Bush though...was he a socialist too?

If Bush would have been able to privatize Social Security before the markets fell, most people would have lost everything (much like most 401Ks tanked).

I mean before Social Security there were things called poorhouses in America which were essentially homeless shelters for the indigent elderly.

Maybe I am blind but I don't see how continuing a tax policy that drove us to the worst recession since the Great Depression is going to fix things. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over expecting different results.

 

I think there should be a flat tax rate across the board....if you worked hard to earn it, no reason you should be penalized for it. I also fall into the lower middle class and am fine with people above me keeping their money.

I also tend to lean more democratic when voting comes around.

Personally I think we need to have all the spending out on the table and to vote on where all this money is going. Washington State is having the same issues right now...tax revenue for the state went up this year yet the budget deficit is higher than the past legislative budget session because the politicians are spending money they don't have.

If I spend all my money and can't afford my mortgage payment or food bill I become homeless and don't eat...I don't have the option of borrowing absurds amount of money and will go homeless and hungry. Government should be the same way.

I'm a firm believer in the social service plans having strict limitations on who qualifies for unemployment, food stamps, government housing etc. If you are on drugs, committing crimes etc you should be automatically disqualified from ANY federal/state help. You made your bed so sleep in it. You want help, prove your worth helping. Someone who sticks a needle in their arm or powder up their nose and isn't working should not be receiving my tax dollars. I would much rather give them to someone who has hit a rut, been laid off and is looking for a job to support themselves or their family.

 

There is just no hope.