Hello:

I'm a businessman. You want a businessman running things don't you? Let's say I'm running a store that's not doing very well, and, I owe a lot of money, too. Is it better to let some of my GOOD people go, and stop advertising, and stop fixing my broken floor, so I can reduce my debt? Or would it be better to INVEST in my employees, fix the broken floor, and give the place a good paint job too?

It'll be much easier to pay the debt WHEN those investments pay off. No? Certainly, if I let the place go to hell, I'll have NO customers..

What's wrong the above?

excon

What's wrong the above?

excon

Nothing. For you. Passing out an unaccountable few hundred billion here and there and everywhere by the Feds and taking care of Julia (http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia) cradle to grave is just driving us "Forward (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-campaign-video-forward-20120430,0,1464799.story)" over a cliff.

Hello Steve:

Apparently, you didn't understand what I said. Otherwise, you'd see that if it's GOOD for ME to do that, it's good for the country to do it too..

excon

No, I got it fine. YOU don't have nearly the bureaucracy and can't print money you don't have. I'd give you much higher odds of being successful at it than the feds. Nearly a trillion later and unemployment is still over 8 percent. What makes you think the same people can do better with a do-over?

What makes you think the same people can do better with a do-over?Hello again, Steve:

It's not a do over. It's a do more. Because, I invested four years ago, has NOTHING to do with my need to invest NOW. You really SHOULD leave business to businessmen.

But, I see that you're not listening, or interested. All you got is right wing talking points.. To you, I'm talking about writing checks to all comers and even to some who didn't come.

excon

I got no talking points (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/05/02/dws_republiucans_would_redefine_rape), we don't have the money to pay for liberal pipe dreams and no paltry Buffet tax is going to do anything but make some libs feel better about themselves.

we don't have the money to pay for liberal pipe dreamsHello again, Steve:

Couple things.

We DO have the money. I understand that you don't KNOW that. You're constrained within the parameters of your right wing talking points. They don't allow you to think outside the box. After all, you think hiring teachers and fixing bridges are liberal pipe dreams.

Does anybody want to talk about SOLVING our problems here??

excon

No, we don't have the money.

U.S. Debt clock (http://www.usdebtclock.org/)

No, we don't have the money.Hello again:

True, we don't HAVE the money. My store above doesn't HAVE the money either. Apparently you think it's fine that I borrow some, but our government shouldn't. I KNOW you think we're TOOOOO much in debt... But, THAT'S a right wing talking point, and patently NOT TRUE.

Is there ANYBODY out there who understands what money is or what to do with it?? I thought right wingers understood the free market. I thought you wanted a guy at the helm with business acumen. No, huh?

excon

Libs think if they spend a gazillion dollars we don't have and drag everyone down to the same level we'll have this utopia. What we'll have is Greece and everyone demanding where their Obama money is.

Hello Steve
Libs think if they spend a gazillion Right wing talking point.

we'll have this utopia.Talking point.

What we'll have is Greece Fox talking point.
demanding where their Obama money is.Republican talking point.

Is there ANYBODY out there who wants to SOLVE our problems?

Excon

Me: Libs think if they spend a gazillion

[QUOTE]Right wing talking point.

Nope, Krugmanomics (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/krugman-obama-lose-reelection.php?ref=fpb).

Me: we'll have this utopia.


Talking point.

Julia (http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia), again. By the way did you notice he quit taking care of Julia after retirement? No promises the death panel will cover her treatments, eh?

Me: What we'll have is Greece


Fox talking point.

Cato Institute (http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/next-greece)

Me: demanding where their Obama money is.


Republican talking point.

cV2ngvYI_ZU

Do I want to solve this? Yes, get the government out of the way and stop coddling everyone.

P.S. We need someone inspiring and no, Romney isn't very inspiring, but Democrats are depressing - always telling us how bad things are, how we can't make without their help, how we're all victims, blah, blah, blah. And instead of giving businesses incentives they want to tax more, regulate more, just go out and crucify the first few guys you see and everyone will fall in line. How is that helpful?

P.P.S. Cabinets Gone Wild (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/05/03/cabinets_gone_wild_114038.html)


By Victor Davis Hanson

We've had some unusual Cabinet secretaries in past administrations -- Earl Butz, John Mitchell and James Watt come to mind -- but never anything quite like the present bunch.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has overseen some $5 trillion in new debt. To help pay for it, he wants the rich -- the top 1 percent already contributes more in income taxes than does the bottom 90 percent -- to pay more for what he calls "the privilege of being an American." Geithner, whose department oversees the IRS, should have taken his own advice: As a rich American one-percenter, he once failed to pay his own self-employment taxes, and improperly claimed his children's camp costs as a dependent-care deduction.

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar has pulled off the near impossible: At a time when the known gas and oil reserves of the United States on public lands have soared, he has cut back on federal leasing of them to just about 2 percent of available offshore lands and 6 percent of onshore. Meanwhile, huge new amounts of oil are now found on private lands despite, not because of, the Interior Department. When he was a U.S. senator, Salazar claimed that even $10-a-gallon gas would not change his mind about voting to increase offshore drilling. And although he controls the leases of the richest oil and gas reserves in the Western world, he just recently shrugged that no one knew whether gas would hit $9 a gallon.

Then there is the even stranger case of Energy Secretary Steven Chu, whose department helped oversee millions in bad loans to green companies like Solyndra, First Solar and Solar Trust of America -- the Teapot Dome scandals of our times. Chu once infamously quipped before assuming office that he wanted U.S. gas prices to reach European levels. Apparently Chu wanted to force less fossil-fuel burning -- although he later confessed that he does not drive a car.

Chu also once warned that the California's Central Valley agriculture might disappear due to global warming. True, it could decline, but more likely due to the Obama administration's decision to divert irrigation water in hopes of helping out the 3-inch San Francisco Delta smelt. Chu should realize that private-sector California farmers create thousands of jobs, while his own Cabinet's Solyndra-like projects have done precisely the opposite.

Attorney General Eric Holder dropped charges against the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation. That may explain why he said nothing when the same group put out a dead-or-alive bounty poster on George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin shooting case. Holder's department is suing the state of Arizona for passing a law to enforce the largely unenforced federal immigration law. Holder suggested that the Arizona law was racially inspired even as he admitted that he had never read it. Holder has praised the race-baiting Al Sharpton for his "partnership" and called the country "cowards" for not holding a national conversation on race on his terms. The attorney general has referred to African-Americans as "my people," and he has characterized congressional oversight of his office's failure to rein in the Fast and Furious scandal as racially motivated attacks on himself.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis just tried -- and failed -- to draft a proposal prohibiting kids under 18 from working "in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials," even on family farms. And she wanted to turn over some farm training programs now run by the Future Farmers of America and the 4-H to the government. Most Americans raised on a farm believe that the times spent doing chores with their parents, siblings, and neighbors were the most important and rewarding years of their lives.

Yet more worrisome, Solis is selective in her enforcement. She envisions new rules for businesses, but she first should have ensured that her family had followed old ones. When Solis was nominated, it was learned that her husband had several tax liens against his business, some of them 16 years old. And not long ago, Solis' department posted a video advising illegal aliens to call her office if they felt they were treated unfairly by employers. Abusing workers is wrong, but then so is entering and residing in the United States illegally -- as a Cabinet official should know.

The common theme with these Cabinet secretaries is loud, uninformed rhetoric; a lack of practical experience; a certain utopian zealotry -- and an expectation that there are rules for government grandees and quite different ones for the rest of us.

What he said.

Hello again, Steve:

Couple things.

We DO have the money. I understand that you don't KNOW that. You're constrained within the parameters of your right wing talking points. They don't allow you to think outside the box. After all, you think hiring teachers and fixing bridges are liberal pipe dreams.

Does anybody want to talk about SOLVING our problems here????

excon

I will take a stab at the solution. When we were in the 80's and the recession was hitting hard we had a situation. The company I worked for worked in co-operation with unemployment and everyone stayed working. It was a better decision then just sending people home. How it worked was you still qualified for your benefit but you still worked. When the work load fell below 40 hours per week (1 or 2 day layoff) then you were paid unemployment for those days. No waiting period no strings. When the economy bounced back everyone was still in place and everyone thrived after learning to live on less but still stay afloat.

It made a big difference. As opposed to today's times of mass layoffs and closings where you jump economic brackets so quick there is a major tendency to sink rather then swim.

So your answer is put everyone on parttime work, you forget that the basic problem is you have exported your jobs to other places in exchange for lower prices and no amount of parttime work will compensate for the difference in wages. Your government needs to give incentives to industry to reestablish itsself in your own nation and that will mean you will have to make massive productivity gains or pay third world wages. You have managed to retain certain industries, auto, aircraft, arms you need to work harder at saving other industries

Personally I think protectionism wasn't as big a problem as it was made out to be

Hello again,

Industry is a problem unto its own. I'm simply talking about hiring BACK all the teachers, and hiring builders to fix roads and bridges.. Ok, we could rehire a few firemen and cops too. That, alone, would drop the unemployment rate a full point.

That's are our seed corn.

excon

so your answer is put everyone on parttime work, you forget that the basic problem is you have exported your jobs to other places in exchange for lower prices and no amount of parttime work will compensate for the difference in wages. Your government needs to give incentives to industry to reestablish itsself in your own nation and that will mean you will have to make massive productivity gains or pay third world wages. you have managed to retain certain industries, auto, aircraft, arms you need to work harder at saving other industries

personally I think protectionism wasn't as big a problem as it was made out to be

I didn't say put everyone on part time. You just try to be flexible with the industries that are having the trouble. That way they can make more money then just unemployment and the economy can recover faster. There are always going to be industries that will fall in the wake of progress but it is a way to deal with the situation rather then upset the balance of an entire economy.

I didnt say put everyone on part time. You just try to be flexible with the industries that are having the trouble. That way they can make more money then just unemployment and the economy can recover faster. There are always going to be industries that will fall in the wake of progress but it is a way to deal with the situation rather then upset the balance of an entire economy.

The key to recovery is an increase in orders, no amount of keeping staff can help if there are no orders. Reality is you can paint so many rocks white and that goes for maintenance in factories too before you just have to close the doors because it just isn't efficient to run plants half speed or a couple of days a week. . The same can be said for roads and bridges. What you say is great but it should have been thought about before NAFTA, etc. What you are paying now is the price of imperialism, the price of influence pendling and it is much harder to undo than to put in place. We went though it here although on a smaller scale and there is a lot of retraining and a lot of letting go to be done. In fact we are still doing it thirty years on. Whole industries just vanish and people over a certain age may never be employed again. Now I know you have seen it for different reasons like the gulf shrimp and fishing industry, its gone and it won't be back in a generation and it takes a government to buy those people out and retrain them not have them put to sea a couple of days a week for a subsistence income.

You see the balance of the economy was upset by the greed of a few bankers, and when the bubble burst it took the whole economy with it, now there is no money for investment and no orders to get the whole thing started again and no money to pay the workers. It might take a reversal of policy to kick start the economy again but who is brave enough to do it

What he said.Hello again, Steve:

What THIS (http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia/) says.

excon

Come on ex, I've mentioned that piece of nanny state propaganda enough times, including the very first response to THIS post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/its-unemployment-stupid-not-debt-656885.html#post3105697). You can't fix things with cartoons and clichés. Besides, under Obama this (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/298859/julia-kevin-d-williamson) is more like the real Julia.

P.S. What she said (https://twitter.com/#!/BiasedGirl/status/198091441904422912).

Oh wonderful attitude, I'm all right Jack, and screw you, and for every one of them there are ten in the unemployment quque. Some people do need help, impoverished areas need a push to attract industry, business need finance and that includes bank loans and a cutting away of regulation and red tape

business need finance and that includes bank loans and a cutting away of regulation and red tape

I would say that's the 1st step. Then when those businesses are thriving ,the additional tax revenue from the expanded tax base pays the debt obligations to do infrastructure.

It should be clear that stimulant policies have been a big bust... why we would continue with them is beyond me.

And Ex's business ? Well I bet if he did maintenance work ,it wouldn't be putting solar panels on his roof in cloudy Seattle. Maybe in Seattle his busiiness is constantly facing bureacratic hurdles that eat away at that seed corn so has neither the funds for employee retention or maintenance . Maybe he is paying an inflated tax rate to pay for public service employees who's benefits are better than he could ever hope to offer his employees . Maybe he has a business that the community leaders for some reason or another have decided they don't want in their neighborhood . Maybe he would move that business to a place that was more business friendly ;in a different state perhaps ?
Office of the Governor Rick Perry - [Press Release] Gov. Perry Meets with Delegation of California Leaders to Discuss Economic Development (http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/15993/)

maybe Ex would benefit from putting in wind generators instead of solar, must be some wind up there. Reality is stimulation only works for a while and if it isn't put in the right place it doesn't work at all. If an industry can't stand alone because it is what the public want, then it will eventually go. Where I live the pizza industry is a case in point. Ten years ago it flourished and it should have, university town, lots of opportunity and then it went into decline and is still declining and indian restraurants appear to have risen in its place. What happened, the GFC happened and suddenly people didn't have that little extra to spend, healthy diets happened, changed community attitude, should the government have stepped in with a stimulation package? It couldn't because like some many businesses this was small business, its gone before you realise its going. Solar is another case in point, heavily stimulated and then the winds of change blew and government stepped back, the community only wanted it because it was subsidised, not because they saw intrinsic value in the product. Another small business down the tube.

Hello again, Steve:

What THIS (http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia/) says.

excon

http://crankytrex.blogspot.com/2012/05/life-of-julianne.html

What a lovely phantasy land you live in

what a lovely phantasy land you live in

You mean the dystopian vision of the President that portrays women as being completely dependent on the Leviathan nanny state to succeed ?
As Denis Miller says ;"The Left believes in cradle to the grave assistance, it's just sometimes really tricky making it to the cradle". What the President's narrative doesn't mention is that Julia may not make it to birth .

you mean the dystopian vision of the President that portrays women as being completely dependent on the Leviathan nanny state to succeed ?
As Denis Miller says ;"The Left believes in cradle to the grave assistance, it's just sometimes really tricky making it to the cradle". What the President's narrative doesn't mention is that Julia may not make it to birth .

Tom just as an aside let me ask you which side of politics put in place positive discrimation?what did you call it; affirmative action? which allowed women and blacks to rise and play more important role in the economy. Shouldn't have been necessary in a fair minded place such as where you live but your republican friends hadn't thought of it and wouldn't have thought of it. It took the state in the form of democrats to do it. So he is right, women and minorities need the government to succeed, to create an environment where they can succeed, where they are lifted out of the oppression of rabid capitalism and exploitation

Tom just as an aside let me ask you which side of politics put in place positive discrimation?what did you call it; affirmative action?, which allowed women and blacks to rise and play more important role in the economy. Shouldn't have been necessary in a fair minded place such as where you live but your republican friends hadn't thought of it and wouldn't have thought of it. It took the state in the form of democrats to do it. So he is right, women and minorities need the government to succeed, to create an environment where they can succeed, where they are lifted out of the oppression of rabid capitalism and exploitation

You really do need to brush up before speaking Clete. It was Nixon ( Republican President) that sign much of that into law.

It was republicans that got rid of slavery while fighting the democrats that wanted to keep it.

The democats have a poor track record when it comes to what actually gets done.

You completely lose me when you equate equate structural and historical discrimination that of course needed reform to rabid capitalism and exploitation (a phrase I completely reject) . If you read the tripe on the President's fictional (or composite character which we now know he loves doing for creative literary license) Julia ,he is not talking about programs targeting gender discrimination ,or race discrimination . He is speaking of programs that he believes the general population need for success.
Without Head Start ;Race to the Top she can't succeed in school. The truth is that government funding has tripled in my life time while comparative learning of math ,science and literacy has seen no comparable positive results . These government planned solutions have not succeeded in creating a better educated population.The opposite has occurred . United States spends more money on education than any other country, yet our test scores for important core curricula keep falling.
There is a plan that was working however . It is one that targets a failed school system populated largely by minorities... the DC school system .The DC Opportunity Scholarship Program gives parents the opportunity for choice in their children's education . It works.. so of course the President has tried to shut the program down in his term.

Without government assistance she can't move on to higher education, The irony being that the rise in school costs have followed the rise in government assistance to attend colleges and that they have been a key factor in the cost increases .

His site talks of Julia getting covered under Obamacare until she's 26 . That is true of all yutes age 26 . What he doesn't say is that under Obamacare ,many employers will drop healthcare coverage for their employees because it will be cheaper to pay a fine ,and transfer their employees into government exchanges. (which is the goal of those who want single payer systems anyway) . What he fails to mention is that under the system before Obamacare ;she would've been eligible to stay on her parents plan while attending college anyway.

He talks of her being free of wage discrimination when the real problem right now is access to any job. We have had 39 straight months of over 8% unemployment with no end in sight ;and the figure would be higher if so many people weren't dropping out of the labor pool altogether . The trend now is for people to file for disability so they can permanently feed off the government trough .

Her life goes on and on dependent on the government for her health and wellbeing . She has a child too (maybe those free contraceptives weren't effective... we never do learn if she is married or even who the father is... I guess he disappears from the child's life in Obama's world ) .The son is swiftly shoved into the government school system and never heard from again.
She takes a loan for a web design business . Fine ;thousands of businesses have started that way before Obama.
She is next heard from when she is eligible for Medicare and Social Security . I guess we can presume that all the necessary reforms have happened to make them solvent by the time she retires .I kind of doubt it.

Secure in her government provided retirement ;she is free to volunteer at a community garden . Her life's goals fulfilled .

Tom don't you think it is time we left fiction and dealt with reality. I understand Julia and Julianne and both stories are absolute crap, pure and unadulterated phantasy. Now I note that dad wants the republicans to take credit for civil rights, etc but they might have freed the slaves but they did nothing for them not recognising that education and opportunity was also important and a hundred years on, it took an uprising to do what should have been done long ago. What ever hand the republicans had in it was pure political opportunism so let's not give tricky richard any more credit than is due

But back to the little problem you now have which is how to remove a somewhat successful if inept President out of office with a mediocre candidate. Surely the electorate knows they were fooled once in the person of Bush and will not be fooled so easily again. Overreaction gets you more nightmares than you want to know and that devil you know might just be better than the one you don't

As Denis Miller says ;"The Left believes in.....Hello again, tom:

And, a few years ago, when his living depended on them, he LOVED the left...

I LOVE it when you guys cite losers like Dennis Miller and Mark Furhman... It doesn't CONVINCE anybody...

excon

So let me get this straight .You think Miller switched to conservatism for economic opportunism ? Yeah conservatives fare so well in the Hollywierd and celebrity culture .

It is inconceivable that he like me had a genuine conversion...

It is inconceivable that he like me had a genuine conversion...Hello again, tom:

When somebody totally flip flops on their politics, I for one, wouldn't have the vaguest clue what they truly believe... You think you do, huh? Okee doakee.

excon

Don't worry Ex Tom will be back come the revolution

Hello again, tom:

When somebody totally flip flops on their politics, I for one, wouldn't have the vaguest clue what they truly believe... You think you do, huh? Okee doakee.

excon

I'll keep that in mind when the President comes out of the closet and announces that his evolving position has led him to embrace gay marriage.

I'll keep that in mind when the President comes out of the closet and announces that his evolving position has led him to embrace gay marriage.

Did you have some advance notice of the policy shift Tom?

No and I suspect he won't . But he is walking a tightwire on the issue because one of his constituencies would be upset if he told them that in fact ;he doesn't approve a gay marriage.

So over the weekend ;he sent out VP Biden to appease the base . Biden said It's a matter of "who do you love" . During a press conference yesteday Obama's butt monkey Jay Carney was confronted because he gave the standard Obama reply that the President's position was "evolving " .
Jake Tapper: Why not just come out and say it? | Campaign 2012 | Washington Examiner (http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/jake-tapper-why-not-just-come-out-and-say-it/525246)

Not a good night for Obama and the Dems last night. The traditional marriage amendment in NC won by a wide margin, 20.8 percent of Democrats expressed "no preference" in the Democratic presidential primary where Obama ran unopposed.

In Wisconsin (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/democrats-wrapping-up-primary-with-eye-toward-june-5-i85ag1d-150687815.html) Tom Barrett crushed his heavily union backed opponent 58/34 and will face Scott Walker who already beat him once and received more votes than both Democrats.

The biggest insult? A prison inmate came within 20 points (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/obama-loses-west-virginia-delegates-to-prison-inma#HTWF2) of beating Obama in West Virginia. Obama doesn't stand a chance in WV anyway, but how embarrassing.

In Wisconsin Tom Barrett crushed his heavily union backed opponent 58/34 and will face Scott Walker who already beat him once and received more votes than both Democrats.
Barrett is Mayor of Milwaukee. It is said that his town benefitted greatly by Walker's reforms .

Whereas Falk ,the unions preferred candidate ,would've restored collective bargaining for public sector unions by fiat ;Barrett says he would introduce it in a special legislative session. That means that even if he wins ;there is no guarantee of a return to the days before Walker .

Exit polling also shows that the general population is no wheres near as worked up over the issue that brought the recall ,as the mob that occupied the state capitol. Issues in the election will more resemble the boiler plate issues ,like jobs and unemployment, the environment,education spending and the phony war on women that will probably dominate the fall campaign. (good luck to Barrett on that war on women issues. He has a bunch of skeltons in his closet on that issue) .

Exit polling also shows that the general population is no wheres near as worked up over the issue that brought the recall ,as the mob that occupied the state capitol..Hello again, tom:

Down goes Walker.. I'll betcha $10,000.

excon

Well Mitt... I'm tempted

Not a good night for Obama and the Dems last night. The traditional marriage amendment in NC won by a wide margin, 20.8 percent of Democrats expressed "no preference" in the Democratic presidential primary where Obama ran unopposed.

In Wisconsin (http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/democrats-wrapping-up-primary-with-eye-toward-june-5-i85ag1d-150687815.html) Tom Barrett crushed his heavily union backed opponent 58/34 and will face Scott Walker who already beat him once and received more votes than both Democrats.

The biggest insult? A prison inmate came within 20 points (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/obama-loses-west-virginia-delegates-to-prison-inma#HTWF2) of beating Obama in West Virginia. Obama doesn't stand a chance in WV anyway, but how embarrassing.

Well that's a riot... and in a federal prison too, much better treatment I hear than state prisons. Got to hand it to him I guess. Voting for him not because they want him, but votes of protest sends the message loud and clear to Obama's camp.

Well that's a riot...and in a federal prison too, much better treatment I hear than state prisons. Gotta hand it to him I guess. Voting for him not because they want him, but votes of protest sends the message loud and clear to Obama's camp.

Which, along with the marriage amendment vote in NC is probably why he announced (http://www.mediaite.com/online/prez-and-the-evolution-president-obama-comes-out-for-gay-marriage-to-robin-roberts/) his de-evolution (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/an-obama-gay-marriage-timeline) to his 1996 position today.

By the way, welcome to our little 'family.' Like all families we have our differences but we'll try not to get any mud on you.

Thanks speechlesstx... Glad to be here even when the fireworks start! It is stimulating and thought provoking. Wondering (answer if you want to) how your username came about, because I’m not seeing you have a problem holding your own, excon either, all of you for that matter. Lol! Glad to be here and since I'm a female I might lean a little more on the emotional side now and then yet realizing we need a balance of all appeals…logical, ethical and emotional in finding which appeals to us individually on a particular subject and what we can agree on collectively. I do see a meeting of the minds and hearts as being obtainable. We can always agree to disagree as well.

Speechless, as in incapable of being expressed in words, taken from an album (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speechless_%28Steven_Curtis_Chapman_album%29) title by my favorite musical inspiration and artist, Steven Curtis Chapman. I did get to meet him and Geoff Moore on that tour by the way, which was very cool.

gH-1wj7_Q6k

Oh, and I'm a Texan. :)

And FirstChair? That sounds musical...

Hello again, Steve:

In all these years, I did not know that about you. You're really a warm sort of Texan, aren't you? Ok, I'll stop beating you in politics so badly. Baseball too.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

In all these years, I did not know that about you. You're really a warm sort of Texan, aren't you? Ok, I'll stop beating you in politics so badly. Baseball too.

excon

That's because no one asked. Dude, I told you a long time ago we would enjoy sitting down and having a cold brewski together.

P.S. We're tied again. Just got to get my pitching up to speed.

Speechless, as in incapable of being expressed in words, taken from an album (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speechless_%28Steven_Curtis_Chapman_album%29) title by my favorite musical inspiration and artist, Steven Curtis Chapman. I did get to meet him and Geoff Moore on that tour by the way, which was very cool.

Oh, and I'm a Texan. :)

And FirstChair? That sounds musical...

I love it, love it! I too get speechless at times and am in awe. Thank you for sharing the meaning of speechlesstx. I kind of thought you were a Texan. Boy howdy, do tell!

This is most likely going to get mixed views and reviews. About 'FirstChair' OK, here goes... I believe we live to die and we die to live and all the living in between should have a higher purpose to life. I know there is a life after earth life. I know there are kingdoms of worlds beyond and one of those kingdoms is called, the Celestial Kingdom. In this kingdom, families can be together forever. I believe it is possible to have an eternal marriage in the next life, to be with an eternal companion and become an eternal family. I also believe in the principle of sharing my eternal companion with spirit sisters because of our sisterly love, that if there are sisters who have not an eternal companion, I would be willing to share my eternal companion of whom I am sealed to, so that they too can know the fullness of love and their creation. I would love to be in the “FirstChair” of his wives.

So first chair you are morman or at least are influenced by mormon doctrine so a companion of mitty

This is most likely going to get mixed views and reviews... I would love to be in the “FirstChair” of his wives.

No judgment here, you have a purpose and you know what you want and that's to be admired.

Hi everyone, I've been gone on business just wanted to check in and see how you'all are getting along. Jk ;-)

Long day out on the road... see you all later, I need zzzzzz Have a good night. Yes I am a member of, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints... Church nickname, Mormons.

Welcome back. :)

The latest numbers are out and once again unemployment remains above 8 percent. The WH response? "Same as it ever was...

Broken Record, Broken Promises (http://obamaisntworking.com/press/broken-record-broken-promises/)

June 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in June | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/07/06/employment-situation-june))

May 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in May | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/06/01/employment-situation-may))

April 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in April | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/05/04/employment-situation-april))

March 2012: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, and it is helpful to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in March | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/04/06/employment-situation-march))

February 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in February | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/03/09/employment-situation-february))

January 2012: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report; nevertheless, the trend in job market indicators over recent months is an encouraging sign.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in January | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/03/employment-situation-january))

December 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in December | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/06/employment-situation-december))

November 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in November | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/02/employment-situation-november))

October 2011: “The monthly employment and unemployment numbers are volatile and employment estimates are subject to substantial revision. There is no better example than August’s jobs figure, which was initially reported at zero and in the latest revision increased to 104,000. This illustrates why the Administration always stresses it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in October | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/04/employment-situation-october))

September 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in September | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/10/07/employment-situation-september))

August 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in August | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/02/employment-situation-august))

July 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in July | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/05/employment-situation-july))

June 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in June | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/07/08/employment-situation-june))

May 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in May | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/06/03/employment-situation-may))

April 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in April | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/05/06/employment-situation-april))

March 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in March | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/01/employment-situation-march))

February 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in February | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/03/04/employment-situation-february))

January 2011: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in January | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/04/employment-situation-january))

December 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in December | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/01/07/employment-situation-december))

November 2010: “Therefore, as the Administration always stresses, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in November | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/12/03/employment-situation-november))

October 2010: “Given the volatility in monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in October | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/11/05/employment-situation-october))

September 2010: “Given the volatility in the monthly employment and unemployment data, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in September | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/10/08/employment-situation-september))

July 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative. It is essential that we continue our efforts to move in the right direction and replace job losses with robust job gains.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in July | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/08/06/employment-situation-july))

August 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in August | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/09/03/employment-situation-august))

June 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in June | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/07/02/employment-situation-june))

May 2010: “As always, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in May | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/06/04/employment-situation-may))

April 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: The Employment Situation in April | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/05/07/employment-situation-april))

March 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: On the Employment Situation in March | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/04/02/employment-situation-march))

January 2010: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: On the Employment Situation in January | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/02/05/employment-situation-january))

November 2009: “Therefore, it is important not to read too much into any one monthly report, positive or negative.” (LINK: On the Employment Situation in November | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2009/12/04/employment-situation-november))

Alrighty, so when do we put some stock into that unemployment report?

Is it the summer recovery yet ?

Yep, wreckovery summer v 3.0.

Hello Steve:

What? It's Bush's fault.

excon

Today is G. W. Bush's 66th birthday. Happy birthday!

Hello Steve:

What?? It's Bush's fault.

excon

Bush is not responsible for wreckovery summer, versions 1, 2 or 3.

By the way, this month's jobs reports reveals that more people went on disability than got new jobs (http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207060945/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama.htm).

Yep, things are looking up.

And people are going on disability ;not because they are disabled ;but because their extended unemployment benefits have ended .
We are swiftly creating another permanent dependency class.

and people are going on disability ;not because they are disabled ;but because their extended unemployment benefits have ended .
We are swiftly creating another permanent dependency class.

And that's the "Julia" plan at work.

What we'll have is Greece and everyone demanding where their Obama money is.Hello again, Steve:

I wonder if going without power for 8 days has anything to do with firing city and state employees? Nahhh.

excon

8 days without power, is that a third world country or what?

How can you tell if it is an unemployed person undeservedly going on disability or a disabled person finally having to seek disability status, that is, a disabled person who has been gainfully employed all their life, but can no longer find a job? I don't know-I'm asking, but I do know of a disabled lady in that situation now.

SSDI was expanded by Congress in the fall of 2008 and took effect in 2009 .Perhaps what ailed the lady in 2008 was not covered and now is. (just a guess)
This expansion comes at a very fortuitous time for the administration because it takes more jobless off the unemployment stats. The 8+% that has been holding steady despite the lack of job creation masks a real unemployment rate that rivals the Roosevelt era.

The real unemployment rate is what you find in congress

Fair comment, tom.
Curiously enough, this lady in her late 50's was tossed on the street by a church, after 27 years of service to the church, having been supervised by about six diff ministers (who worked around her limitations) over all those years with no problems.
It is very possible that the church authorities saw a way to reduce their costs (a bigger problem now than ever for churches) by getting rid of someone who had health and life insurance benefits, by dictating working conditions to her that they knew she couldn't meet because of her disabilities. Her replacement is a part-timer with no benefits, so the church is now saving about $ 20K per year (prob more) in salary and benefits.
So, I guess the church board and minister feel that they made quite a coy move, while she has filed for bankruptcy, has no health or life insurance, will wait for five months to see a single cent from SSI, and thereafter have to live on about 50% of what she had been earning.
And to top it off, they knew that by making her resign because she couldn't meet the new conditions of employment they had established, they were in effect proving her case at SSI, for her.
Hadn't considered a lot of that until you folks brought it up, but maybe that is a popular technique now.

The only thing I can say ,not knowing any of the facts ,and not disputing yours is that the woman got the shaft . I wish her well . My advice is that there are clear laws against discrimination due to disability ,and she should pursue a grevience. .

That being said ; we are talking about 85,000 newly desginated disabled in a month. If those greedy bass turd corporatists were discarding their employees under the pretext of disability, then you know the press would be all over that story line.

The only thing I can say ,not knowing any of the facts ,and not disputing yours is that the woman got the shaft . I wish her well . My advice is that there are clear laws against discrimination due to disability ,and she should persue a grevience. .

That being said ; we are talking about 85,000 newly desginated disabled in a month. If those greedy bass turd corporatists were discarding their employees under the pretext of disability, then you know the press would be all over that story line.

Don't worry Tom it helps the unemployment statistics in a short time your government will change the definition of disability and force all these people back to work

Hello again, Steve:

I wonder if going without power for 8 days has anything to do with firing city and state employees?? Nahhh.

excon

Since that would in most cases be the power company's responsibility to get it up and running again, no.

Ex,

As an old highway engineer, I would say that roads blocked by fallen trees, and/or large limbs would be an indication of lack of road funds and employees to manage the culling of trees that used to be removed on a regular basis before they became a hazard to both vehicles and adjacent power lines.

Hello again, smear:

Of course, the cutback in the cities has something to do with it. Was this a HURRICANE?? Come on. It was a summer storm. 9 DAYS??

There's ONE thing good about it... Washington, DC is in the middle of it.

excon

Dude, you may get a lot of rain but apparently you don't have a clue to the severity of a monstrous thunderstorm. But a cut in public workers has nothing to do with it. The government's role in this is to "fume" or fine.

Power outages drag on in D.C. region; officials fuming at utility companies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-area-power-outages-after-storm-could-last-for-days/2012/07/01/gJQA3JVjFW_story.html)

Do we have enough bureaucrats to "fume?" I think so, take the Maryland governor for instance:

“Nobody will have their boot further up Pepco’s backside than I will,” said Md. Gov. Martin O’Malley (D).

Dems seem to have a thing for putting boots on necks or up a$$es of corporations when they don't (or can't) bend to their will.

Since ex found a liking to charts I thought I'd offer him up a couple...

https://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/americansjoiningdisabilityoutnumberthosefindingjob s.img_assist_custom-640x465.jpg

https://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/workforceshrinkdisabilitysurgest.img_assist_custom-640x465.jpg

I reckon that's why Obama wants a tax increase - to pay for all the new wards of the federal government he's creating.

P.S. Did you know the guy that's slamming Romney for outsourcing jobs invests in businesses that LOVE outsourcing (http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-has-investments-in-companies-that-ship-jobs-overseas/article/2502361)?

You just can't make this stuff (http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/obama-fundraises-with-ruthless-outsourcer) up. After giving a speech in Austin, taking credit for killing bin Laden again apparently on his own (he built that), preaching his "bottom up" economics, and slamming Romney for outsourcing jobs - he trudged over to a "ruthless" outsourcer's house for another $25,000 a plate fundraiser.


After giving a speech in Austin, Texas in which he decried Mitt Romney for overseeing companies that outsourced jobs, President Obama attended a fundraiser hosted by Tom Meredith, a former Dell executive who once oversaw outsourcing at his own company — and said he would be "ruthless" about cutting costs.

In 2001, while serving as senior vice president of Dell Computer Corp, Meredith defended plans to lay off between 3,000 and 4,000 employees — largely in Texas — while sparing about 4,000 jobs in Asia Pacific. When that strategy was reported by the tech press at the time Meredith defended the move.

"We will be ruthless in how we address our cost structure," Meredith said, a comment that drew wide attention at the time.

Just curious, who outsourced more jobs? Mitt or the "ruthless" obot?

Talk about a yawner... this outsourcing stuff is much ado about nothing . Dell and Apple ,and every other company manufacturing overseas does so so they can hire thousands of workers around the country to sell ,and service to hundreds of thousands of American customers who desire inexpensive electronic devices in the United States . Do they want American wages to shrink to the levels necessary to compete ? No . Would the American consumer purchase the devices if the prices reflected American wages ? No . So who would the American manfacturer be selling to exactly ?

So who would the American manfacturer be selling to exactly ?Hello tom:

One needs to ask, did SOMEBODY outsource, or did the economy REQUIRE him to outsource. I say it's the economy. That's WHY I agree with you, tom, that nobody would buy American made goods because they're too expensive... Fact is, the jobs AREN'T coming back.

Therefore, we need a NEW industry that'll take up the slack and allow us to KEEP our middle class, instead of watching it waste away.. This is where government needs to lead the way. Why?? Well, isn't the private money is sitting on the sidelines because of "uncertainty"? Besides, as you suggest, the seeds of a new green industry aren't yet ripe enough for private investment... That AGAIN, is another reason why government needs to invest.

The problem we're going to have is similar to the question, who invented the internet... I say government. You say private industry... It can't be both. In your world, there's NO place for government investment, apparently, in ANYTHING.. You know, Julia and all..

I suggest that if we followed your lead, all those numbers I posted on another thread about how the US is in decline, will PLUNGE!

excon

In your world, there's NO place for government investment, apparently, in ANYTHING.
Another clear distortion of my position. What I do not like EVER is government subsidizing ;favoring one industry or company over another . If the government is going to invest in science ,exploration ,or R&D then fine .There is a place for it... But the government tried to force an industry onto the market when there is clearly no sufficient demand ,and the technology is not ready . It was a complete waste of taxpayer's money(not the government's money)

and the technology is not ready . Hello again, tom:

As much as I'd like, I can't remember every position you've taken on every issue... IF I've distorted your position, it's inadvertent.

We've argued this point before... You think the technology will get ready on its own accord.. I think investment will PROMPT it.

excon

Dell and Apple ,and every other company manufacturing overseas does so so they can hire thousands of workers around the country to sell ,and service to hundreds of thousands of American customers who desire inexpensive electronic devices in the United States

Got to call you on this one, Tom, there is no alturistic motive to the service the unemployed and the potential customers. There is stark reality that the Dell structure employes the least number of people possible in pursuing their business which is to undercut their competition.
The people don't buy a locally made product because they know they can get it cheaper from Dell. So much for job creation , wise up, it is job destruction

The people don't buy a locally made product because they know they can get it cheaper from Dell. So much for job creation
Your wrong.. the fact that the Dell computer is affordable to many more people means that there are more customers to purchase it which means that there are more people selling it and servicing the consumer. I did not say it was for any altruistic reason ;that is not the goal for the company .The goal is to make money by providing goods and services that people want .

A great and successful model apparently and it works so long as people have money to spend which they gain from employment, so how do the unemployed participate in this bonzana or is this a plan for the haves and not the have nots

Fearing an Impasse in Congress, Industry Cuts Spending (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/06/business/fear-of-fiscal-cliff-has-industry-pulling-back.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all)

Manufacturers canceling new investments due to fear of impending “fiscal cliff”


A rising number of manufacturers are canceling new investments and putting off new hires because they fear paralysis in Washington will force hundreds of billions in tax increases and budget cuts in January, undermining economic growth in the coming months.

“The fiscal cliff is the primary driver of uncertainty,” said Timothy Powers, the chief of Hubbell Inc. a maker of electrical products.

Executives at companies making everything from electrical components and power systems to automotive parts say the fiscal stalemate is prompting them to pull back now, rather than wait for a possible resolution to the deadlock on Capitol Hill.

Democrats and Republicans are far apart on how to extend the Bush-era tax breaks beyond January — the same month automatic spending reductions are set to take effect — unless there is a deal to trim the deficit. The combination of tax increases and spending cuts is creating an economic threat called “the fiscal cliff” by Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Until recently, the loudest warnings about the economy have come from policy makers and economists, along with military industry executives who rely heavily on the Pentagon’s largess and who would be hurt by the government reductions.

But more diversified companies like Hubbell Inc. in Shelton, Conn. have begun to hunker down as well.

Hubbell, a maker of electrical products, has canceled several million dollars’ worth of equipment orders and delayed long-planned factory upgrades in the last few months, said Timothy H. Powers, the company’s chief executive. It has also held off hiring workers for about 100 positions that would otherwise have been filled, he said.

“The fiscal cliff is the primary driver of uncertainty, and a person in my position is going to make a decision to postpone hiring and investments,” Mr. Powers said. “We can see it in our order patterns, and customers are delaying. We don’t have to get to the edge of the cliff before the damage is done.”

I guess Hubbell (http://www.hubbell.com/) needs excon to run it. He doesn't fear any "fiscal cliff."

Outsourcing is much ado about nothing. Wow Tom--sounds like you have given up. Do you really believe that if American manufacturers hadn't given up and sold us out that this country would be in the same sad condition it is today? They want all the protections that America can offer while they contribute basically nothing. I ain't drinkin' your koolaid either.

Manufacturers canceling new investments due to fear of impending “fiscal cliff”Hello Steve:

So, government spending DOES create jobs, huh? I didn't know that...

excon

No sir, quite the opposite. It says the government is hindering job growth, “the fiscal cliff is the primary driver of uncertainty."

We keep telling you get the government out of the way and the jobs will come.

No sir, quite the opposite. It says the government is hindering job growth, “the fiscal cliff is the primary driver of uncertainty."Hello again, Steve:

I don't know how you got that... It's NOT "government" per se that's the problem. The problem is the congress's WILLINGNESS to throw the government OFF the cliff. I think you said as much...

The "fiscal cliff", of course, is when the CUTS in government SPENDING that will be FORCED upon us IF congress DOESN'T act... In truth, it's the LACK of government spending that going to send us over the "fiscal cliff".

These cuts should THRILL a guy like you. They're going to HACK away at Medicare and Social Security... Oh, that's right... They're going to hack away at the military too. Can't have that now, can we?

Besides, wasn't it YOU guys who were WILLING to throw us off the cliff over the debt ceiling, IF you didn't get what you wanted? I think it WAS.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

I dunno how you got that... It's NOT "government" per se that's the problem. The problem is the congress's WILLINGNESS to throw the government OFF the cliff. I think you said as much...

The "fiscal cliff", of course, is when the CUTS in government SPENDING that will be FORCED upon us IF congress DOESN'T act... In truth, it's the LACK of government spending that going to send us over the "fiscal cliff".

These cuts should THRILL a guy like you. They're gonna HACK away at Medicare and Social Security... Oh, that's right... They're gonna hack away at the military too. Can't have that now, can we?

Besides, wasn't it YOU guys who were WILLING to throw us off the cliff over the debt ceiling, IF you didn't get what you wanted?? I think it WAS.

excon

Just Reminder — It's Been 800 Days Since the Senate Passed a Budget (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/just-reminder-its-been-800-days-senate-passed-budget_576441.html)

While an Obama super pac is running an ad claiming Romney killed a steel worker's wife (http://www.businessinsider.com/priorities-usa-romney-ad-cancer-death-gst-steel-bain-capital-2012-8), we learn that this administration had no problem terminating the pensions of 20,000 Delphi workers. Non-union workers that is.


Emails obtained by The Daily Caller show that the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, was the driving force behind terminating the pensions of 20,000 salaried retirees at the Delphi auto parts manufacturing company.

The move, made in 2009 while the Obama administration implemented its auto bailout plan, appears to have been made solely because those retirees were not members of labor unions (http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/07/emails-geithner-treasury-drove-cutoff-of-non-union-delphi-workers-pensions/#ixzz22s4r2KER).

The internal government emails contradict sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts about the sequence of events surrounding the termination of those non-union pensions, and that administration figures violated federal law.

Delphi, a General Motors company, is one of the world’s largest automotive parts manufacturers. Twenty thousand of its workers lost nearly their entire pensions when the government bailed out GM. At the same time, Delphi employees who were members of the United Auto Workers union saw their pensions topped off and made whole.

The White House and Treasury Department have consistently maintained that the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) independently made the decision to terminate the 20,000 non-union Delphi workers’ pension plan.

I wonder how many people Geithner killed by cutting off their pensions?

I wonder how many people Geithner killed by cutting off their pensions?Hello again, Steve:

Man, I can't figure out if you want government to SHRINK, or you want to yell at the Democrats who do it...

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Man, I can't figure out if you want government to SHRINK, or you wanna yell at the Democrats who do it...

excon

And I can't tell if you care about people or not.

I care about people, AND facts, and the law you so want to restrict.

Delphi Plan-specific FAQs (http://www.pbgc.gov/wr/large/delphi/delphifaq.html)

No budget, No solution to the fiscal cliff, No creating jobs fixing bridges, NO early voting, just blame the guys who say NO to everything. AND the guys that egg them on, who NO nothing except NO WAY but my way. NO wonder the country got a credit downgrade. NO solution for that either.

I care about people, AND facts, and the law you so want to restrict.

Delphi Plan-specific FAQs (http://www.pbgc.gov/wr/large/delphi/delphifaq.html)

No budget, No solution to the fiscal cliff, No creating jobs fixing bridges, NO early voting, just blame the guys who say NO to everything. AND the guys that egg them on, who NO nothing except NO WAY but my way. NO wonder the country got a credit downgrade. NO solution for that either.

Lol, you ignore the facts. Fact is this administration appears to have purposely fed non-union workers to the wolves. Fact is Republicans warned Obama about the pending downgrade and Obama twiddled his thumbs. Fact is the Democrat controlled senate has not passed a budget in 800 days as required by law. Fact is even Democrats haven't taken Obama's budgets seriously. Only Dems can move anything forward, stop misplacing the blame on those out of power.

That's all BULL, nothing can moved forward without 60 votes, and all the repubs say NO. That means NO budget, No Jobs No nothing but listen to you deflect the blame on someone else without taking responsibility for NON action.

And dude since you don't know the LAW, salaried workers, and union ones have very different contracts. That's the difference between salaried office types, and ordinary workers.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse so look it up. Its like that voter suppression crap, and Romney claiming that Obama is stopping the military vote. That's pure crap.

I gave you facts and you didn't even read it so check the BANKRUPTCY law yourself. Go ahead keep believing the misinformed, and the ones with an agenda.

Maximum Monthly Annuity Guarantees, Pension Benefits (http://www.pbgc.gov/wr/benefits/guaranteed-benefits/maximum-guarantee.html#2009)

And you may as well understand the politics of this whole thing. Oh and the unions took the same cuts in wages, pensions and benefits.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2011/09/11/business/doc4e6d89a3174cc360146658.txt


Delphi, which was spun off by General Motors Corp. in 1999, has said the pensions were transferred to the PBGC to satisfy the terms of a deal with private equity groups to help bring the big automotive supplier out of bankruptcy.

Meanwhile, GM refused to take responsibility for the under-funding of Delphi's salaried pension plan, saying they had left the company with ample funds after the spin off.

The shortfall in the funding of the salaried plan was the responsibility of the Delphi's management, GM officials said.

GM, however, was obligated to take back responsibility for Delphi's hourly pension fund because of a separate agreement with the United Auto Workers that was signed during the spin off in 1999.

So how do you holler about some facts and not others. Bet you were lousy at home work, but were a great cheerleader for your team.

Budgets are not subject to cloture and haven't been so for 40 years. How do I know that ? Reid's Dem Senate majority made that very clear when they passed Obamacare .Reid has 53 votes in his caucus, and could pass a budget at any time.But I don't blame you for not knowing that. Even Obama's Chief of Staff doesn't .
White House chief of staff Jacob Lew on State of the Union – CNN Press Room - CNN.com Blogs (http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/12/white-house-chief-of-staff-on-state-of-the-union/?iref=allsearch)
The real reason that Reid obstructs the budget process is because Reid is reluctant to have Democrats vote on a large budget full of deficits and tax increases that Republicans can use to run against them.

Tom I can't believe you honestly believe what you are saying. No governmen gives up the opportunity to implement it's agenda

Unless it is politically unpopular. Their plan is to get it through in Obama's 2nd term. This is what they could've done. They could've passed a budget ;and the House passes an alternate budget. Then they could've ironed out the differences in a Conference Committee. But that would've meant compromise ;and as the Obamacare lesson shows... Dems are only willing to compromise with members of their own caucus .

We aren't like your system where the party in power has total control.

I wouldn't say total control Tom, it was only for a very small window that the Howard government controlled the senate but there is an unwritten convention not to block supply bills so it gets worked out one way or another.. Unlike your system, the budget must be voted every year, they cannot go on indefinitely with last year's budget. If the budget bills don't passed it becomes a constitutional crisis, the last time this happened was in 1975 and the government was sacked. That meant an immediate election and a nasty polarisation of the electorate. This government does not control the senate, we take the convention seriously that the senate is a house of review

Upon checking I have to admit to your correctness, and have found that this has happened before a number of times. I also found that a budget resolution was agreed upon through 2103 in the debt ceiling agreement.

Jack Lew’s misleading claim about the Senate’s failure to pass a budget resolution - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/jack-lews-misleading-claim-about-the-senates-failure-to-pass-a-budget-resolution/2012/02/12/gIQAs11z8Q_blog.html)


Republicans also failed to pass budget resolutions that reconciled differences between the House and Senate in 1999, 2005 and 2007, when they controlled Congress, according to the Congressional Research Service. But money ultimately was still appropriated for government programs.

So this is nothing new, its just you guys turn to holler and make hell of it, but its happened a lot lately.


We might be tempted to think Lew misspoke, except that he said virtually the same thing, on two different shows, when he was specifically asked about the failure of Senate Democrats to pass a budget resolution. He even prefaced his comment on CNN by citing the “need to be honest.”

He could have tried to argue, as some Democrats do, that the debt-ceiling deal last year in effect was a budget resolution. Or he could have spoken more broadly about gridlock in the Senate, after acknowledging a traditional budget resolution had not been passed. Instead, the former budget director twice choose to use highly misleading language that blamed Republicans for the failure of the Democratic leadership.
We wavered between three and four Pinocchios, in part because the budget resolution is only a blueprint, not a law, but ultimately decided a two-time budget director really should know better.




There are many ways toskin the

....Dems are only willing to compromise with members of their own caucus .Hello again, tom:

The problem is, you actually believe this tripe. Koolaid anyone??

excon

Sure ex, when it comes to "A joint resolution amending title 36, United States Code, to designate July 26 as United States Intelligence Professionals Day" they're more than willing to work together.

But I do have to correct one of my facts, I used an outdated link, it's been roughly 1196 days since the senate passed a budget, not 800. That's 3 1/4 years. Seems they had the 60 votes at some time during that span, no?

It's not "nothing new," I've been hollering and making hell of it for a long time.

But I do have to correct one of my facts, I used an outdated link, it's been roughly 1196 days since the senate passed a budget, not 800. That's 3 1/4 years. Seems they had the 60 votes at some time during that span, no?Hello again, Steve:

About the budget... I hear you right wingers screaming about it, so it MUST be bad for the country... Can you tell me HOW? If they don't pass a budget, that means they can't spend, right? But they are. Is the budget a REAL document, or just advisory? Does the president sign a budget? Is it a law? If they don't pass a budget, since they're Democrats, it would seem like that would be to the advantage of the House, who are Republicans...

So, what would have been different IF the Senate had passed a budget?

excon