Say noto Euro-socialism

[ImWithStupid]

Government subsidies gone wrong is why we're stuck with the failed corn ethanol situation we have now. Corn ethanol is one of the most ineffective methods of making ethanol, but the government backed it so far, gave so much to companies to expand and produce it, if they cut the funding, tens of thousands of people would be out of jobs.

[Old Salt]

Don't need to be rich.. But peoples labor should be their own, not taken and given to billionaires..

 

 

I'd say 6 - 15 year old kids who work 16 hours a day for 7 days a week are slaves regardless of the pay. People were not built to work their life away so a few dicks can live in total freedom in the lap of luxery, or else.

Wez, wez, wez. You're going by American standards. Like here in the US pre-mid twentieth century, kids work to help support the family. It's a way of life. The families don't split up, they stay close. The kid doesn't have his rice bowl broken on his 18th birthday.

[ImWithStupid]

No one should be given anything.. It's the value that's f cked up.. Tell me, who's more crucial to society, a garbage man or a baseball player?

 

A baseball player only makes as much as the market allows. Ask those who played 50 years ago. If the economy gets to where people don't go to games, buy team stuff, tv can't afford to pay for broadcasts, they won't make as much.

 

Believe me as a cop, there are alot more people making alot more money than me that make less of a societal difference. My sister is a teacher, same thing. Neither of us feel we should take what they make to give to us, and she is a Democrat.

[wez]

Government subsidies gone wrong is why we're stuck with the failed corn ethanol situation we have now. Corn ethanol is one of the most ineffective methods of making ethanol, but the government backed it so far, gave so much to companies to expand and produce it, if they cut the funding, tens of thousands of people would be out of jobs.

 

 

I agree.. the bailouts will be the end of us.. Fukk the jobs.. Fukk the car companies.. Fukk the banks.. Fukk Wall street.. Fukk Fanny and Fukk Freddie.. Let the free market work for the first time in the history of humanity.. Can't do that though, too many welfare cases might have to sell one of their homes and cars and actually work for a living.

[wez]

Wez, wez, wez. You're going by American standards. Like here in the US pre-mid twentieth century, kids work to help support the family. It's a way of life. The families don't split up, they stay close. The kid doesn't have his rice bowl broken on his 18th birthday.

 

 

We'll see how cool it is when our kids gotta go sew jeans for 16 hours a day to feed the family..

[ImWithStupid]

I agree.. the bailouts will be the end of us.. Fukk the jobs.. Fukk the car companies.. Fukk the banks.. Fukk Wall street.. Fukk Fanny and Fukk Freddie.. Let the free market work for the first time in the history of humanity.. Can't do that though, too many welfare cases might have to sell one of their homes and cars and actually work for a living.

 

Then how can you support bottom up economics? That's what it is. Government taking from the successful and giving to those who are either unsuccessful or don't care to try.

 

That's why if this goes into effect, the people who will suffer the most are charities. Organizations that are historically more efficient in helping people than the government ever was. They understand that money isn't neverending at the taxpayer teat like the government seems to think, and do the most with what they have.

[wez]

A baseball player only makes as much as the market allows. Ask those who played 50 years ago. If the economy gets to where people don't go to games, buy team stuff, tv can't afford to pay for broadcasts, they won't make as much.

 

Believe me as a cop, there are alot more people making alot more money than me that make less of a societal difference. My sister is a teacher, same thing. Neither of us feel we should take what they make to give to us, and she is a Democrat.

 

Yep, by forming unions and sticking together.. striking for better wages.. Demanding a bigger piece of pie for their "labor"..

 

I don't want no one to take anything from anyone.. I just think if people work, they should be able to afford the basics and save something for a time when they get old.. A house needs to cost about what it did in the early 70's.. Deflation, big time.

[Old Salt]

We'll see how cool it is when our kids gotta go sew jeans for 16 hours a day to feed the family..

Kinda like kids used to help out on family farms before the advent of $150K tractors and combines?

[wez]

Then how can you support bottom up economics? That's what it is. Government taking from the successful and giving to those who are either unsuccessful or don't care to try.

 

That's why if this goes into effect, the people who will suffer the most are charities. Organizations that are historically more efficient in helping people than the government ever was. They understand that money isn't neverending at the taxpayer teat like the government seems to think, and do the most with what they have.

 

I don't support bottom up.. I support not labeling people's worth with a dollar figure.. The government will destroy itself, and the rest of us. Why does success have to be defined by money? It's unnatural.. The basics of life should be off limits to exploitation. Shelter, food, clothing..

 

 

What the hell good does Paris Hilton do for society? She awfully "successful".. she was born after all..

[wez]

Kinda like kids used to help out on family farms before the advent of $150K tractors and combines?

 

If there were any family farms left, just like that..

 

Wouldn't mind that life at all.. Be more rewarding than punching a clock in a sweatshop..

[wez]

Kinda like kids used to help out on family farms before the advent of $150K tractors and combines?

 

 

I guess this goes back quite a ways.. ever seen that Twilight Zone where the worker was replaced by the robot by his boss.. Then the boss was replaced by a robot who looked just like him down to the twirling watch and voice ..

 

It was that guy who played Fred Rutherford on Leave it to Beaver.. Good episode. Quite prophetic..

 

Prolly made in the early 60's.. Automation is great, to a point, be grand when machines can consume and spend to keep other machines employed.

[wez]

You know, we all argue about socialism and capitalism and free markets but the fact is, the working people of this country have poured ungodly amounts of money into the government through their labor for over a century for a supposedly better society for everyone. Who owns it all? Individual capitalists who charge us all out the ass for everything they get from the government .. aka us? Sounds like bullsh t to me.. Prolly why it's crumbling from under they're feet..

 

What do we have to show for all our combined labor? A big bad arsenal of weapons and fallout shelters for those who would launch them? A big bad army to tell the world how to live, or else? Roads all over hells half acre? Bridges that collapse into the Mississipi? A decaying infrastructure? Debt up the ass? We got fukked somewhere down the line..

[Old Salt]

Yep, by forming unions and sticking together.. striking for better wages.. Demanding a bigger piece of pie for their "labor".. I don't want no one to take anything from anyone.. I just think if people work, they should be able to afford the basics and save something for a time when they get old.. A house needs to cost about what it did in the early 70's.. Deflation, big time.

Their unions got them higher salaries, the teams saw that it cut into their profit margin so they raised their prices. And the fans were "foolish" enough to pay the higher prices. The players' union got them higher salaries, the teams saw that it cut into their profit margin so they raised their prices. And the fans were "foolish" enough to pay the higher prices. The players' union got them higher salaries, the teams saw that it cut into their profit margin so the raised their prices. And the fans were "foolish" enough to pay the higher prices. Etc., etc., etc., etc.. A never-ending circle.

 

My dad was adamantly anti-union, but he respected Jimmy Hoffa (Sr.). Hoffa knew how far he could push a company with union demands and would back off when he hit that "limit". Dad was supposed to have dinner with Jimmy Hoffa to talk about unionizing the company the night he (Hoffa, not dad ) was arrested for income tax evasion. It would have been the first union shop in Columbus if not for that intervention.

 

PS, never did unionize and company went from one of the largest in Eastern Nebraska to one of the smallest. Still in business since 1935, though.

[Anna Perenna]

Two main points of the Obama/Biden Trade Policy:

 

End Tax Breaks for Companies that Send Jobs Overseas: Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that companies should not get billions of dollars in tax deductions for moving their operations overseas. Obama and Biden will also fight to ensure that public contracts are awarded to companies that are committed to American workers.

 

Reward Companies that Support American Workers: Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 with Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) to reward companies that create good jobs with good benefits for American workers. The legislation would provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America if it has ever been in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.

[snafu]

Two main points of the Obama/Biden Trade Policy:

 

End Tax Breaks for Companies that Send Jobs Overseas: Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that companies should not get billions of dollars in tax deductions for moving their operations overseas. Obama and Biden will also fight to ensure that public contracts are awarded to companies that are committed to American workers.

 

Reward Companies that Support American Workers: Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 with Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) to reward companies that create good jobs with good benefits for American workers. The legislation would provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America if it has ever been in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.

 

And then tax them 35% to redeem all these incentives.

I'd like to know what companies are getting a tax break for sending jobs over seas right now.

[wez]

And then tax them 35% to redeem all these incentives.

I'd like to know what companies are getting a tax break for sending jobs over seas right now.

 

 

I'd like to know why practically every American company produces almost everything overseas now.. What American products are 100% made in America anymore? Who gets the tax breaks? Who the hell knows.. Buddies of politicians like Ken Lay from Enron?

 

Who gets handouts? Money lenders.. Insurance companies.. investment firms.. people like Ken Lay from Enron... people who produce jack sh t.

[hugo]

A fairly balanced opinion :

 

Obama a dangerous protectionist?

Posted by: Economist.com | WASHINGTON, DC

Categories: America

ECONOMISTS, the unaligned ones anyway, have had their hands full trying to parse the probable policy choices of the American presidential candidates. We often find ourselves in this position, trying to find the lesser of the available evils. Good economic policy often makes for unpopular stump speeches.

 

With potential economic strategies unclear, observers are left to ascribe great importance to the smallest policy signs emanating from the campaigns. That, I have concluded, is what's behind a breathless and overstated attack on Barack Obama at VoxEU today. Forced to read so much into so little, authors Willem Buiter and Anne Sibert throw some of the nastiest adjectives available to economists (xenophobic, protectionist) at a piece of legislation introduced by the Illinois Senator.

 

Their piece opens on an objectionable note. The authors declare, "Senator Barack Obama?s campaign has been long on slogans and mood music but short on concrete proposals and policies." This is patently false and beneath Mr Buiter and Ms Sibert, who should have stuck to an analysis of the proposed policy itself. Mr Obama's website is home to a number of (lengthy) documents outlining energy and health care policies, among other things. The merits of the proposals may be debatable, but they are substantive.

 

Mr Buiter and Ms Sibert go on to criticise Mr Obama's proposed legislation, the dreadfully titled Patriot Employer Act. There is much to dislike in the bill. Essentially, it offers employers a tax credit, worth one percent of taxable income, in exchange for adherence to a set of economic limitations. Among them are: a minimum wage, minimum standards on retirement and health plans, and protections for workers and headquarters based in America. Certainly, the bill has an element of distasteful economic nationalism to it, as well as a preference for reduced flexibility in compensation.

 

In short, Mr Obama deserves a slap on the wrist. He does not, in my opinion, deserve the rhetorical pounding he receives. Why not?

 

This bill is much less bad than it could be, primarily because the restrictions it contains are optional. The things it asks of employers are steps that firms would have already taken if they were likely to boost productivity, so we can assume they entail certain costs. The more costly the restrictions are to a business, the less likely it is that the tax credit will make the changes worth the firm's while. In other words, optionality ensures that firms will only adopt these measures if it's relatively cheap (and minimally distortionary) to do so.

 

Mr Buiter and Ms Sibert are also right to point out that the retirement and health plan provisions of the bill won't increase worker compensation but merely shift it from wage payments to benefits. This, too, will help to minimise the cost of the legislation. Workers seeking the package of benefits prescribed by Mr Obama's bill will be drawn to compliant firms. Those who value wages more highly will work elsewhere. Some inefficiencies could obviously result from changes in labour distribution, but once again, if the inefficiencies grow large for any one firm, that firm will decide not to participate in the program.

 

There is a case to be made that Mr Obama is the most economist-friendly candidate out there. One would hope that he'd use his growing popularity as an excuse to defend good but unpopular economic policies. He hasn't done that with this Patriot Employer Act, and he deserves a dose of criticism.

 

But the language used at VoxEU is odd. This bill is bad, but it's not dangerous. It's far less offensive than many of the anti-trade, anti-immigration proposals seen elsewhere in the campaign. Politicians are practically required to say silly and outrageous things. Economists shouldn't volunteer to do so.

 

We really do not need protectionism. Ricardo's Theory of Comparative Advantage still applies in today's world. It may be absolutely neccesary for a company to outsource some jobs in order to save others.

[ImWithStupid]

Two main points of the Obama/Biden Trade Policy:

 

End Tax Breaks for Companies that Send Jobs Overseas: Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that companies should not get billions of dollars in tax deductions for moving their operations overseas. Obama and Biden will also fight to ensure that public contracts are awarded to companies that are committed to American workers.

 

Reward Companies that Support American Workers: Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 with Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) to reward companies that create good jobs with good benefits for American workers. The legislation would provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America if it has ever been in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.

 

Too bad the incentives don't cover the cost savings by doing otherwise.

[wez]

ooops.. Almost forgot.. Those poor lowly millionaire players and billionaire owner of the Minnesota Twins are getting a handout too.. See, they can't afford to build their own playground to charge us $8 for hotdog and $10 for a beer on top of a $50 ticket to the game, so we get to pay for that too.. The Vikings will be the next in the soup line for a new stadium.. Isn't free market capitalism great!

 

Build it and they will come.. or else

 

 

I've had it.. I'm on the next flight to Mars..

[ImWithStupid]

I'd like to know why practically every American company produces almost everything overseas now.. What American products are 100% made in America anymore? Who gets the tax breaks? Who the hell knows.. Buddies of politicians like Ken Lay from Enron?

 

Who gets handouts? Money lenders.. Insurance companies.. investment firms.. people like Ken Lay from Enron... people who produce jack sh t.

 

Because unions and regulations on polution regulations have sent all this to countries that make it cheaper to ship the product overseas, than it does to try and meet the requirements and pay people here. Simple economics.

 

Look at all those who praise China, India, Indonesia and such for their ability to make goods cheap, and why can't that be done here. These same people are those that complain about polution by the US and other non third world industrialized nations. China, India, Indonesia, Russia and such have no environmental standards to live up to, that's how they produce cheap products.

 

Before you complain about what happens here, you should complain about what is accepatable there.

[ImWithStupid]

ooops.. Almost forgot.. Those poor lowly millionaire players and billionaire owner of the Minnesota Twins are getting a handout too.. See, they can't afford to build their own playground to charge us $8 for hotdog on top of a $50 ticket to the game, so we get to pay for that too.. The Vikings will be the next in the soup line for a new stadium.. Isn't free market capitalism great!

 

And thanks to the Dems so are partisan, corrupt organizations like ACORN. ACORN is now getting $300 million a year from the taxpayers to promote a certain political view. Sounds like creeping socialism to me.

[wez]

Because unions and regulations on polution regulations have sent all this to countries that make it cheaper to ship the product overseas, than it does to try and meet the requirements and pay people here. Simple economics.

 

Look at all those who praise China, India, Indonesia and such for their ability to make goods cheap, and why can't that be done here. These same people are those that complain about polution by the US and other non third world industrialized nations. China, India, Indonesia, Russia and such have no environmental standards to live up to, that's how they produce cheap products.

 

Before you complain about what happens here, you should complain about what is accepatable there.

 

 

Our so called political leaders and business leaders made the choice for me it appears.. Why weren't they complaining rather than jumping onboard? Setting standards for what could come here to be sold? A world economy needs world standards.. Looks like we chose the standards to live by.. Those of China and India.. I don't think pollution is gonna stop at the border..

[ImWithStupid]

Our so called political leaders and business leaders made the choice for me it appears.. Why weren't they complaining rather than jumping onboard? Setting standards for what could come here to be sold? A world economy needs world standards.. Looks like we chose the standards to live by.. Those of China and India.. I don't think pollution is gonna stop at the border..

 

My point exactly. Wouldn't it be better for the environment to give incentives to corporations to stay here, where standards are higher, as opposed to nothing but punishments and higher taxes under Obama's, corporate tax increase, cap in trade, and other limitaions on domestic production?

[wez]

My point exactly. Wouldn't it be better for the environment to give incentives to corporations to stay here, where standards are higher, as opposed to nothing but punishments and higher taxes under Obama's, corporate tax increase, cap in trade, and other limitaions on domestic production?

 

Honestly, I have no idea what Obama proposes..and don't think it matters. Really, how much control does one man have over our economy? If anyone did/does it was the bubble man Greenspan and Ben Shalom.. Didn't see federal reserve officers on the ballot.. Don't remember voting for Hank (bailout) Paulson either.. Who the fukk are these bastard people?

 

 

Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. (born March 28, 1946) is the United States Treasury Secretary and member of the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors. He previously served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs.

 

Ben[1] Shalom[2] Bernanke (pronounced ber-NAN-kee, bər-'nan-kē or bɚ.ˈn?n.ki) (born December 13, 1953) is the incumbent Chairman of the Board of Governors of the United States Federal Reserve. Bernanke succeeded Alan Greenspan on February 1, 2006.

 

 

Bernanke is particularly interested in the economic and political causes of the Great Depression, on which he has written extensively. On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday, November 8, 2002, he stated: "Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve System. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."[10][11][12]

 

In 2002, when the word "deflation" began appearing in the business news, Bernanke gave a speech about deflation.[13] In that speech, he mentioned that the government in a fiat money system owns the physical means of creating money. Control of the means of production for money implies that the government can always avoid deflation by simply issuing more money. (He referred to a statement made by Milton Friedman about using a "helicopter drop" of money into the economy to fight deflation.) Bernanke's critics have since referred to him as "Helicopter Ben" or to his "helicopter printing press". In a footnote to his speech, Bernanke noted that "people know that inflation erodes the real value of the government's debt and, therefore, that it is in the interest of the government to create some inflation."[13]

 

 

 

Awww hell.. no need to worry.. Ben Shalom will print us out of this mess..

[Old Salt]

Honestly, I have no idea what Obama proposes..and don't think it matters. Really, how much control does one man have over our economy? If anyone did/does it was the bubble man Greenspan and Ben Shalom.. Didn't see federal reserve officers on the ballot.. Don't remember voting for Hank (bailout) Paulson either.. Who the fukk are these bastard people?

Yup. Didn't see them on the ballot. That's where that one man has (some) control over the economy. While he probably won't be naming the replacement for Bernanke, he will name the Secretary of the Treasury and have control over enforcement or non-enforcement of banking regulations, etc.. With a majority in the House and Senate, it makes it just that much easier.