realjohnboy
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:35 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

Good evening.
I was a bit surprised to see the issue of the bailouts of the banks and the auto companies come up again here. I thought we had talked that to death months ago on this thread, on the "Where is the economy" thread and the "Conservatism" thread.
I was reading recently about the deficits being racked up by state and local governments. Huge deficits. I read a projection - which I alas can not cite - that some 800K workers may be terminated. Some may be the guys who lean on shovels staring at a pothole. Others may be teachers and cops. 800K nationally.
Does that, in your minds, rise to the level of a crisis worthy of some kind of federal government assistance? Or should we let these state and local governments collapse?
An A2Ker who no longer participates in discussions here because of the petty and often bitter bickering emailed me a long article today about the storm clouds she sees brewing on the state and municipal levels. I find it sad that she, who disagrees with me on some issues, no longer feels like participating.
I am still digesting that and working on connecting it to stuff I have collected.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:35 pm
@ican711nm,
But, ican, old boy! The tree is in the petrified forest and the camera is broken!
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:36 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:
I was a bit surprised to see the issue of the bailouts of the banks and the auto companies come up again here. I thought we had talked that to death months ago on this thread, on the "Where is the economy" thread and the "Conservatism" thread
it is a subject that keeps on giving. now that we can see clearly that the corporate interests had the federal government in their pocket, can see that we got robbed, and everyday have to listen to the news about how the corporations are swimming in cash even as regular America families are sinking like a stone and the Federal leaders basically don't give a **** about the suffering of regular Americans.....ya, it is a subject of interest.

Quote:
long article today about the storm clouds she sees brewing on the state and municipal levels
there is no news here...we knew a decade ago that these government where holding pension obligations that they can not afford, we knew during the stimulus debate that the fed were going to temporarily prop up state and local government budgets but that the support would be ending about now. There is no excuse for anyone to not know the score.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Mon 2 Aug, 2010 08:37 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
The Democrat majority Congress and the Bush administration "determined that letting GM collapse was unacceptable."
Both were wrong.


I would think that would make you happy, to see Democrats help big business, jam packed with conservatives, go careening on its merry way, totally without personal responsibility.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 11:12 am
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:
I would think that would make you happy, to see Democrats help big business, jam packed with conservatives, go careening on its merry way, totally without personal responsibility.

Shame on you for thinkting that!

When the OD (i.e., Obama Democrats) give away tax payer money to businesses they do not help businesses or the economy. The OD simply encourage businesses to keep on doing what doesn't work.

When the OD give away tax payer money to people they do not help people or the economy. The OD simply encourage people to keep on doing what doesn't work.

When the OD give away taxpayer money to those who do not earn it, they corrupt ALL the recipients of that money.

When the OD give away taxpayer money to those who do not earn it, they corrupt the rule of law in general, and the Constitution of the USA in particular.
Quote:
Article I.
Section 8. The Congress shall have power

To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;

--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Definition of common
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=common&x=30&y=9
Definition of general
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=general&x=24&y=11
Definition of imposts
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=imposts&x=28&y=10
Definition of uniform
http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=uniform&x=29&y=8
ican711nm
 
  1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 11:19 am
@ican711nm,
HOOVER $$$$$$$
&
ROOSEVELT $$$$$$$$$$$$$
=>
ECONOMIC FAILURE

BUSH $$$$$$$
&
OBAMA $$$$$$$$$$$$$
=>
ECONOMIC FAILURE
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 11:22 am
@ican711nm,
Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
1980……………..99 miillion [CARTER]
2000……………137 million [CLINTON]
2007………..….146 million [BUSH43]
2008………….. 145 million [BUSH43]
2009,……….....140 million [OBAMA]
2010.……………139 million [OBAMA] (June)

Year.…….PERCENT OF CIVILIAN POPULATION EMPLOYED
1980…………………………………….59.2 [CARTER]
1988…………………………………….62.3 [REAGAN]
1992…………………………………….61.5 [BUSH41]
2000…………………………………….64.4 [CLINTON]
2007…………………………………….63.0 [BUSH43]
2008…………………………………….62.2 [BUSH43]
2009…………………………………….59.3 [OBAMA]
2010…………………………………….58.5 [OBAMA] (June)

ican711nm
 
  -1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 12:02 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
1980……………..99 million [CARTER]
1988…………… 115 million [REAGAN]
1992…………….118 million [BUSH41]
2000……………137 million [CLINTON]
2007………..….146 million [BUSH43]
2008………….. 145 million [BUSH43]
2009,……….....140 million [OBAMA]
2010.……………139 million [OBAMA] (June)

Year.…….PERCENT OF CIVILIAN POPULATION EMPLOYED
1980…………………………………….59.2 [CARTER]
1988…………………………………….62.3 [REAGAN]
1992…………………………………….61.5 [BUSH41]
2000…………………………………….64.4 [CLINTON]
2007…………………………………….63.0 [BUSH43]
2008…………………………………….62.2 [BUSH43]
2009…………………………………….59.3 [OBAMA]
2010…………………………………….58.5 [OBAMA] (June)

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 02:57 pm
@ican711nm,
ican, As always, you fail to see what has happened to civilian employment since Bush's tenure; it's been going down since Clinton's 64%, and all we've been hearing from the conservatives is "the government is spending too much money!"

What would you do for those thousands of families who have lost their jobs and homes since the disaster created by GWBush? Let them starve to death?

0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 03:51 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:
I was reading recently about the deficits being racked up by state and local governments. Huge deficits. I read a projection - which I alas can not cite - that some 800K workers may be terminated. Some may be the guys who lean on shovels staring at a pothole. Others may be teachers and cops. 800K nationally.
Does that, in your minds, rise to the level of a crisis worthy of some kind of federal government assistance? Or should we let these state and local governments collapse?

I posted an article several months ago, rjb, and I doubt if I could find it now, which addressed the fact that we are on a collision course between the public sector and the private sector, with the public sector basically sucking up all of the resources to the point that the private sector can no longer support the monster that has been created, the monster being the public sector. The appetite of the public sector is just too gigantic and unmanageable anymore and it has grown so out of control that the collision course is just plain inevitable.

The reasons for this scenario are many, but among them is chiefly the fact that the public sector simply does not create any significant wealth, and it must depend upon the wealth and productivity created by the private sector, which is not a bottomless well of production that can keep up with a growing and unending appetite for entitlements and government projects. We now have a crop of politicians that simply do not understand these basic facts and the realities of how basic economics work in a free market, and in the case of Obama and his administration, I doubt they even believe in the free market as a winning philosophy. Unless and until we vote for politicians into power that actually understand some of these basics, and then have the collective political will to institute them, we could possibly be seeing the end of our success as one of the greatest countries in the history of the world.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 04:02 pm
@okie,
Quote:
I posted an article several months ago, rjb, and I doubt if I could find it now, which addressed the fact that we are on a collision course between the public sector and the private sector, with the public sector basically sucking up all of the resources to the point that the private sector can no longer support the monster that has been created, the monster being the public sector
It has also been posted that the anticipated new debt and debt rollover requirements of the global public sector and the balloon debt rollover requirements on the global corporate side over the next few years will collide. There is simply not enough money to do both all the way.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 04:45 pm
@ican711nm,
Businesses don't need to be encouraged to do what doesn't work: they do that all the time.

There is nothing more irresponsible than an AMerican rightist, so I would think encouraging irresponsibility would earn praise from you. What else is a tax relief from the rich but an invitation to irresponsibility?

Think of how huge businesses have totally destroyed competition not just in America but around the world. Think of the (shopping) "malling" of this nation. What a crime!
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 05:05 pm
@plainoldme,
pom, So true: I heard or read some years ago that 80% of restaurants go bankrupt in their first year of business. Look at all those subprime loans that backfired on most banks and financial institutions just a few years ago.

Even huge companies like Enron, Worldcom, and our three auto producers went belly up.

I'm sure there are more stories about bad business dealings out there that compares to the ones I listed above.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 06:09 pm
There was a piece on NPR this past Sunday that is germane to Obama watchers and those who would still like to analyze how a black man became president.

Margot Adler, who had been a Civil Rights Activist during the 60s, attended the current show at NYC's International Center for Photography, called "For All the World to See." She was hesitant because the show concentrates on media images. Ordinarily, she implied, she would not be interested in media images. She found it enlightening (no pub intended).

Here is link for those who have not already heard the broadcast:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/pictureshow/2010/07/30/128873100/fatwts

Adler discusses how many whites never encountered a black person in daily life and that there were no positive representations of blacks "marketed" to whites.

One of the programs that introduced blacks to whites was the Ed Sullivan Show. I remember seeing performers who were favorites of my parents -- Peg Leg Bates, Sammy Davis, Jr., Pearl Bailey, Big Ed Williams, Lena Horne, as well as Harry Belafonte who was an early favorite of mine. Certainly, their talents promoted a positive image of blacks to members of my generation.

However, my parents' generation still found these talented and attractive people the exceptions and not the rule. Lena Horne, I often heard said, was beautiful by 'white woman's standards,' but Belafonte was "good-looking for a black man."


There were laws against whites marrying people of other races, including Native Americans and Asians as well as Blacks, since the 17th C, despite the fact that, initially, Irish indentured women were allowed to marry black slave men. There were several attempts to amend the Constitution, in 1871, 1912 and 1928, to make "miscegenation laws" the law of the land.

Incidentally, the SC ruled in 1883 that laws forbidding the marriage of blacks with whites did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. It was not until after WWII that the SC came to recognize that the 14th Amendment protected inter-racial couples.

Not long after the election, I was walking with a long time friend down the Main Street of my adopted town where a book store displayed a souvenir book of the Obama inauguration. My friend said that Obama was the "most marketed president of my lifetime."

I said that I wondered how he had time to do anything since he had to pose for so many pictures. She laughed but added that she found him sexy.

I can not help but think that because women of my generation and younger could find undeniably handsome actors like Billy Dee Williams, Denzel Washington and Will Smith attractive without reprisal that the Senator from Illinois could become electable.

I am not saying that a candidate should be attractive, but, that the recognition by whites that black people can be attractive has to have been a positive step for this country.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Tue 3 Aug, 2010 07:27 pm
Listen to what Jon Stewart has to say:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-july-29-2010-liev-schreiber
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Wed 4 Aug, 2010 12:20 am
@plainoldme,
pom, And I know when I say that when we were children, we only saw whites on advertisements. We've come a long way, baby!

There were exceptions of coarse; Aunt Jemima and Black Sambo restaurants (that no longer exists) were the only "color" promoted for commerce.

That's what gives me hope about this country.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Wed 4 Aug, 2010 07:21 am
@cicerone imposter,
Aunt Jemima is still around but she's been given a face lift. I haven't checked on her appearance because I don't buy mixes but I remember an article how brand icons were brought up to current standards of dress and beauty. Her kerchief and fichu are gone and she looked more like a professional woman at the time the article was written.

Another black icon was the cream of wheat (or was it cream of rice?) man who represented a railroad chef.
He's been overhauled as well.

I remember when black fashion models started making inroads. I think Beverly Johnson was the break through model for Vogue.

Consider how popular the Old Spice man is. Certainly, the fellow is an amazing specimen but what I think is even better about him as a spokesmodel is he created the character (as far as an advertising model has a character) with the over-the-top voice. The advertiser recognized his creativity and humor!
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Wed 4 Aug, 2010 12:41 pm
There are too many businesses that are corrupt, but the great majority of businesses perpetrate jobs and other means for people to support themselves and achieve lawful personal growth.

Over the last 100 years government has become increasingly corrupt. Much of that correuption has been sponsored by those corrupt businesses. In the last three years Democrats have been recipients of most of Wall Street's donations.

Quote:
From the Center for Responsive Politics:
WALL STREET'S TOP 5 GIVING TO CONGRESS IN 2010
$1,556,099 => Senator Charles Schumer - Dem NY
$ 660,175 => Senator Harry Reid - Dem NV
$ 644,450 => Senator Kirsten Gillibrand - Dem NY
$ 516,300 => Represenative Mark Kirk - R IL
$ 445,248 => Senator Chris Dodd - Dem CT

WALL STREET TOTAL GIVING TO CONGRESS IN 2010
$13,315,043 => DEMOCRATS
$ 8,775,966 => REPUBLICANS

WALL STREET GIVING IN 2008
$14,907,585 => BARACK OBAMA
$ 8,710,135 => JOHN MCCAIN
parados
 
  2  
Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:12 pm
@ican711nm,
Source for this ican?

Wall street is what? Businesses that have offices on Wall St? Any business that is listed on the exchange?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 4 Aug, 2010 01:38 pm
@hawkeye10,
Your views about our government mirrors mine; they're all crooks that belong in prison; not as the representatives of the citizens of this country. However, we can blame ourselves for voting in these crooks and fiscal incompetents.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1733
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 07/19/2025 at 02:49:21