AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Good on you. We get a lot of students who whip out their credit/debit cards for a $1-$2 purchase. We had someone want to put 59 cents on a card. My employee -to his credit - embarrassed the customer by saying: "It's free. I will lose less money by giving it to you rather then charging it on your card."

What about debit cards - I use my debit card, but consider it cash. I know it is cheaper than credit cards.

The thing I don't understand is why there is no discount for using cash. I remember there use to be stores that did this, but not anymore. Especially a large $ purchase, there is a big discount here.

I think a) it depends on the price of the item, and b) if you ask.

I've read some time ago about Macys (or some other retail stores) gave discounts for cash purchases when the customer asked for it.

I haven't tried it myself, but ask for discounts if the price of the item I'm buying is material enough. There's more profit margin in large ticket items.

Debit cards are less costly for the merchant then credit cards. That is about all I can say. I get a monthly statement from my processor that even I, a former CPA, can't decipher. Different rates for things like whether the customer has a card with some kinds of rewards (mileage for example).
Merchants are not, under the rules, allowed to give a discount to people who pay cash. We also are not supposed to impose a minimum charge on any card.
A few years ago, I got a letter from a law firm stating that Wal-Mart was suing the credit card companies over some practice. I could be a party to the class-action suit. All I had to do was sign a form. I did, and promptly forgot about it.
Earlier in 2010, I got checks totaling almost $5,000 as my share. Go figure.
I have been to Wal-Mart one time in my life, which was once too many, but go Wal-Mart.

You can't remember which math courses you took when? Shame on you.

One of the hardware stores in the town where I live does offer a 10% discount for cash on certain items. Whether the discount is given depends upon the profit margin of the item.

The gas station I use also gives a discount for paying in cash and is generally cheaper -- even if the price reduction is only 1 cent on the gallon -- than other gas stations in the area.

Some gas stations in our area also give discounts for cash.

At the liquor store where I work, sales people were asked to encourage the use of credit cards for small purchases: under $15. For this store, debit cards are more expensive at the low end while credit cards are more expensive for large purchases.

The cash registers are programmed to not take a debit card for a purchase that is less than $5.

Yeah, I hear you ci. But, the one thing I have always liked about America is prices are set. Then again, I know that virtually everthing is for bargaining - except, I hate to haggle. Except, in the orient. I loved doing it there, then again - that is a part of their system.

There are also countries in the Middle East where they love to haggle prices, and it also includes some parts of India. As a matter of fact, on my recent trip to South India, the shopkeeper told me the price for the 3 t-shirts I was going to purchase for our friends grandchildren was 1,000 ruppes, and I said 750. We finally settled on 850 rupees. (He asked for $24, and settled on$20.) Prices in India are not always cheap; especially for tourists. We had to pay over $2. for beer in the hotels, and was able to get the same beer at a bar for $.88c.

So it goes....

This thread was started in March of 2008 after the Democrats took control of congress in 2006 and leading up to the elections of November 2008.

An original premise was that conservatives had lost faith with George Bush and the Republican Party because neither had sufficiently adhered to conservative principles.

While I think this premise was correct, it can't, alone, explain the election results of 2006 and 2008.

Candidates moving to the center at election time assume that even if their ideological base is unhappy with their "changing" views, they will never vote for their opponent. I'm sure this is a correct assumption, but it always seems that these candidates underestimate the impact of their base simply not voting at all.

For the Republican candidates in 2006 and 2008 (and most notably McCain), there clearly was a less than enthusiastic turn out of conservative supporters, but there was also a shift among the so-called swing voters: "moderates," and "independents."

I tend to credit the 2006 shift with three causes:

A seemingly unending series of revelations about corrupt or seedy Republican politicians.

A seemingly unending series of Katrina tales of woe with perceived reasons to blame the White House (and by extension, Republicans).

The Iraq War which began in March of 2003, and looked in 2006 to be a disaster.

While these three factors may have had a lingering effect on "swing-voters" in 2008, the major cause for their continued move away from the GOP was the financial meltdown. Given the condition of the economy in Nov 2008, it's pretty amazing that McCain came as close as he did.

Throw in a charismatic (at the time) Democrat candidate, whose election promised to be a significant historical event and the scene was set.

What a difference two years made though.

Obama and the Democrats in congress clearly pursued a liberal agenda during 2009 and 2010, and the White House operated in accordance with Progressive principles.

One can argue until the cows come home, that without the actions taken by the Dems, our economic conditions would be even worse than they presently are, but the majority of Americans simply don't buy it.

The Tea Party Movement energized the ideological base, and not only did its members rally to the GOP, they sought to refashion it along stricter adherence to conservative principles.

This is a center-right country, and for a majority of Americans, the notion of an ever expanding government controlling more and more of the aspects of their personal lives is at least distasteful, and more likely frightening.

Obama and the Democrats sealed the deal by making it clear that they really didn't care what Americans thought of their policies, and, in fact, had utter disdain for anyone who didn't agree with them.

Given that they controlled the White House and Congress, they could not have pursued their political agenda with greater ineptness, and so it is possible that with more skillful hands, a liberal agenda would have been better received by the public. I don't think so, but it's certainly possible. In any case, they haven't replaced any of the hands: Obama, Reid and Pelosi remain in control of their party.

Just as it was an incredibly idiotic mistake to assert that conservatism was finished in America after the 2008 elections, it would be a mistake to assert that liberalism is on an unalterable declining path given the 2010 elections.

The next two years will be very interesting, and the Republican leadership in the House seems to have a solid plan for making the most of them; while more closely adhering to conservative principles.

I won’t attempt any predictions concerning the 2012 elections, but it's safe to say that any reports of the death of conservatism in American politics were greatly exaggerated.

Finn wrote:

You make an awful lot of general charges without any detail. What Obama has accomplished is simply the fact that most of his campaign promises have been kept. Check out Politifact to confirm this point.

What's wrong with this picture?

It is hard to believe I haven't traveled Internationally now for nigh onto 25 years. I would love to still travel, only if I could do it without traveling - I know that doesn't make since to just about anyone but me......

BillW, But you can. All you need to do is visit my travelogues at travelpod.com and look for me as c.i.222. I have over 90 postings of my travels. Drop by and enjoy. I got over 1,000 hits last month from around the world. This month isn't too bad; doing about 40 hits daily.

Obamacare was shoved through congress despite numerous polls showing that the majority of Americans didn't want it.

There are numerous video clips of all three of the Democrat leaders expressing disdain for people who did not agree with them.

Keeping a simple checklist of the delivery of broad campaign promises, ignores the fact that the manner in which these promises are said to have been delivered is an important factor.

But if you are right, then how do you explain that Americans in 2010 rejected the policies they apparently favored in 2008?

I will do that!

Easy Finn, cause they will totally accept this healthcare program in 2016 and the mantra will be from both party - "DO NOT TOUCH MY OBAMA CARE"!.

The people will go back to the polls in 2012, and there will be another outcome, wow what a concept! BTW, there were just as many polls that approve Obama Care - depends on how you state the questions. Conservative lies will not prevail. Time shows how arrogant and hypocritical they are!

Finn, That's how our government operates; once they are elected into office, the public no longer has control over what congress and the president does. You should know this from past US history.

The fact that the 2010 election cycle got the GOP House majority is a questionable result of all the lies told by the GOP about ObamaCare, and that includes death panels and government takeover of health care.

I have criticized ObamaCare for many things, and did not approve of how they railroaded it into law last year.

The current problems on ObamaCare is the House's determination to repeal it, but they should know it's a waste of time and money, because the Senate and President will never repeal it.

The OMB said any repeal now will cost over $200 billion, but speaker Boehner said it'll result in job loss without showing the how's and why's. The GOP is good is misleading the American people, which I believe is more dangerous than our government. Most Americans believe that Obama raised their taxes, because they are ignorant of the facts. The Stim Bill reduced their taxes.

Can't fix stupid.

And, this will be railroaded in by way of a much more hypocritical, arrogant and abusive method. Then again, that is the Conservative way. Nothing has changed from the Bush era, I'm just waiting for the arrest warrants to start being handed out. How many conservatives go to prison this time? One has to now once again fear airport bathrooms

Really? I mean, they managed to get major reform bills passed. Surely a group who displayed the Greatest ineptness wouldn't have seen such successes.

I think the reality of governance is already colliding with various bold statements and promises the Republicans and Tea Partiers made, even in the first few days of the new Republican House. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the challenges of this year - and to the fact that Obama will likely be much more confrontational with them in an election environment than he was before.

Cycloptichorn