Hope...Change...FBI Raid office of Obama appointee [Archive]

kaiser soze

03-12-2009, 03:29 PM

bush's presidency led to the biggest drop in household net worth in history

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=atilNtHogT_8&refer=home

U.S. household wealth fell by a record $5.1 trillion from October to December, almost twice the decrease in the previous quarter, as home values and stock prices plunged, Federal Reserve figures showed.

Net worth for households and non-profit groups decreased to $51.5 trillion, the lowest level in four years, from $56.6 trillion in the third quarter, according to the Fed’s quarterly Flow of Funds report today. The government began keeping quarterly records in 1952.

Thanks to those who supported this! I'm sure many bush supporters have suffered greatly under his reign (n)

RobMoney$

03-12-2009, 04:45 PM

bush's presidency led to the biggest drop in household net worth in history

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=atilNtHogT_8&refer=home

I hate to be in the position of defending Bush, but this statement is absolutely misleading and I think you know it.

The record drop is merely the market correcting itself from the over-inflation of property value we saw in the roughly five years previous to now.

This is like giving Bush credit for the drop in gas prices from $4.00 a gallon to the $1.75 I'm currently paying.

He really has nothing to do with either one.

kaiser soze

03-12-2009, 05:17 PM

even though I and many do believe bush's economic policies have put the U.S. in quite a tiffy, I was just making a post unrelated to the thread, it's an inside joke

tax cheats, fbi raids, guys who blew up police stations....you can judge a person by the company they keep.....

and bush's buddies were just such chipper chaps (y)

Bob

03-12-2009, 06:05 PM

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/FBI_raids_office_of_DC_CTO_Obama_appointee.html

hate it when things like this happens.......

i know this is pointless because youngremy already pointed it out and you ignored it because you didn't like it, but what exactly in this article has anything to do with obama? or the appointee? or anything at all? all it says is that the FBI raided the office and arrested two guys on bribery charges, neither of whom are obama appointees

you're like rush limbaugh without a fact checker

yeahwho

03-12-2009, 09:40 PM

you're like rush limbaugh without a fact checker

or without a fat checker

valvano

03-12-2009, 09:45 PM

wonder why he took a leave if he is innocent?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Source-Obama-official-on-apf-14623083.html

Hope....Change.....Messiah.....Failure....

Bob

03-12-2009, 10:02 PM

wonder why he took a leave if he is innocent?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Source-Obama-official-on-apf-14623083.html

Hope....Change.....Messiah.....Failure....

appearance of impropriety? i don't know. do you? or are you just being smug? if you know something the rest of us don't, please, don't be coy, share it

saz

03-13-2009, 06:39 PM

and Obama and his liberal interest groups are cashing in on our economic crisis via the "stimulus" bill??

just how are obama and "his liberal interest groups" cashing in? sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. neither obama nor are any interest groups seeing a dime of the money from the stimulus bill, as it is being distributed to each state to spend on job creation and to kick start the economy.

there's many more valid aspects to criticize obama for, such as not considering single payer healthcare in regards to health reform, or what paul krugman pointed out in his last column (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/opinion/09krugman.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss) about the obama admin. threads like these are strange and pointless.

mikizee

03-14-2009, 05:39 AM

It still blows my mind when people still defend and stand by Bush when the WHOLE WORLD is united in the fact that Bush has been the worst US president in history. For many, many, many reasons.

valvano

03-16-2009, 09:05 PM

just how are obama and "his liberal interest groups" cashing in? sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. neither obama nor are any interest groups seeing a dime of the money from the stimulus bill, as it is being distributed to each state to spend on job creation and to kick start the economy.

there's many more valid aspects to criticize obama for, such as not considering single payer healthcare in regards to health reform, or what paul krugman pointed out in his last column (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/opinion/09krugman.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss) about the obama admin. threads like these are strange and pointless.

here's an easy example, union wage rules means states will have to spend more and get less with stimulus money:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/16/union-wage-rule-means-fewer-projects-completed-stimulus-cash/

Bob

03-16-2009, 09:18 PM

here's an easy example, union wage rules means states will have to spend more and get less with stimulus money:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/16/union-wage-rule-means-fewer-projects-completed-stimulus-cash/

lol yes, those damn unions, dragging the economy down. greedy ass workers, when will they realize that laissez-faire works for them too???

valvano

03-16-2009, 09:27 PM

lol yes, those damn unions, dragging the economy down. greedy ass workers, when will they realize that laissez-faire works for them too???

yes I want the rest of the US to look like highly unionized highly taxed areas of the US such as Detroit, Michigan..Thanks to the control of the unions there thing have never looked brighter for Detroit and the auto industry

check out how well unionized Yellow-Roady Corp is doing. last of the big 4 teamster carriers getting ready to go under. just got enough financing to last another 8 weeks.

yep, unions did a good job with our formerly dominate steel industry. how much union made steel is still produced in Pittsburgh??

and, they actually do drag the economy down by creating a wage level ABOVE the natural levels set by supply and demand.

whats the latest figure, 4 grand or something of the cost of every domestic auto goes to be retirees health benefits set under old union work rules and contracts??

yep, when the economy is in the crapper we need more unions to drive up labor cost even higher and kill flexibility with archaic work rules...

kaiser soze

03-16-2009, 09:47 PM

Oh Shit!

Bristol Palin says Abstinence is not Realistic!!

In her first interview since giving birth, the teenage daughter of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said having a child is not "glamorous," and that telling young people to be abstinent is "not realistic at all."
Bristol Palin says "everyone should just wait 10 years" to have a baby, rather than when you're young.

Bristol Palin says "everyone should just wait 10 years" to have a baby, rather than when you're young.

"It's just, like, I'm not living for myself anymore. It's, like, for another person, so it's different," Bristol Palin told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren. "And just you're up all night. And it's not glamorous at all," she said. "Like, your whole priorities change after having a baby."

Shame on her promoting teen sex, what a sinner!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/bristol.palin.interview/

Burnout18

03-17-2009, 07:11 PM

wtf does bristol palin have to do with this discussion.

saz

03-17-2009, 07:17 PM

yes I want the rest of the US to look like highly unionized highly taxed areas of the US such as Detroit, Michigan..Thanks to the control of the unions there thing have never looked brighter for Detroit and the auto industry

check out how well unionized Yellow-Roady Corp is doing. last of the big 4 teamster carriers getting ready to go under. just got enough financing to last another 8 weeks.

yep, unions did a good job with our formerly dominate steel industry. how much union made steel is still produced in Pittsburgh??

and, they actually do drag the economy down by creating a wage level ABOVE the natural levels set by supply and demand.

whats the latest figure, 4 grand or something of the cost of every domestic auto goes to be retirees health benefits set under old union work rules and contracts??

yep, when the economy is in the crapper we need more unions to drive up labor cost even higher and kill flexibility with archaic work rules...

so now the economic collapse is the fault of unions? give me a break. yes, how dare working people demand a decent, living wage, in order to support their families and send their kids to college. the nerve of them.

Bob

03-17-2009, 07:21 PM

so now the economic collapse is the fault of unions? give me a break. yes, how dare working people demand a decent, living wage, in order to support their families and send their kids to college. the nerve of them.

you just don't understand economics you filthy pinko, it's the unions' fault that the US auto industry can't compete (with the heavily unionized foreign industries)

Burnout18

03-17-2009, 08:00 PM

so now the economic collapse is the fault of unions? give me a break. yes, how dare working people demand a decent, living wage, in order to support their families and send their kids to college. the nerve of them.

no thats not the point....

i would rather see union workers' wages get cut than the alternative.

Remember there is no patriotism among true capitalists.... if need be, GM and chrysler will move everything to Mexico or overseas were there are no unions, putting everyone making $80.00 the fuck out of a job.

$80.00 an hour to work a forklift... fuck college, i shoulda moved to detroit.

valvano

03-17-2009, 09:32 PM

so now the economic collapse is the fault of unions? give me a break. yes, how dare working people demand a decent, living wage, in order to support their families and send their kids to college. the nerve of them.

why dont you compare economic growth between heavily unionized states and right to work states???

i'll do it for you:

http://www.nrtwc.org/nl/nl200808p8.pdf

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/021909-right-work-and-productivity-numbers

heck, even unions have found that even they sometimes cant afford the cost of union labor:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1486380/posts

even the teamsters couldnt afford union contractors to build a local teamster hall:

http://media.www.utcecho.com/media/storage/paper483/news/2002/11/22/Culture/News-Of.The.Weird-332184.shtml

http://www.teamster.net/Forums-f29/Teamsters-Talk-f1/Houston-Local-988-Buil-t1484.html&pid=13482

"Teamsters Local 988 opened its brand-new meeting hall in Houston, Texas, to unfavorable reviews by representatives of locals representing construction workers, plumbers, electricians and other trades. According to a Houston Chronicle report, the Teamsters had the hall built with nonunion labor because union work was too expensive."

Now if the Teamsters cant afford union labor....how about the rest of America???

Bob

03-17-2009, 09:35 PM

"right to work"

saz

03-17-2009, 10:36 PM

why dont you compare economic growth between heavily unionized states and right to work states???

i'll do it for you:

http://www.nrtwc.org/nl/nl200808p8.pdf

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/021909-right-work-and-productivity-numbers

heck, even unions have found that even they sometimes cant afford the cost of union labor:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1486380/posts

even the teamsters couldnt afford union contractors to build a local teamster hall:

http://media.www.utcecho.com/media/storage/paper483/news/2002/11/22/Culture/News-Of.The.Weird-332184.shtml

http://www.teamster.net/Forums-f29/Teamsters-Talk-f1/Houston-Local-988-Buil-t1484.html&pid=13482

"Teamsters Local 988 opened its brand-new meeting hall in Houston, Texas, to unfavorable reviews by representatives of locals representing construction workers, plumbers, electricians and other trades. According to a Houston Chronicle report, the Teamsters had the hall built with nonunion labor because union work was too expensive."

Now if the Teamsters cant afford union labor....how about the rest of America???

you are completely changing the subject here. the bottom line is that this economic collapse was due to unregulated wall street greed, which of course was a direct result of disastrous right-wing conservative economic policy, championed by reagan, bush senior, dubya, and even clinton and some dems. you know, deregulate everything and let corporate america run amok. that's sure what happened on wall street. and of course with the deregulated banks too, those greedy fuckers went to town, screwing millions of americans over with predatory lending all the while screwing themselves in the process, hence all of the bailouts.

the magical fantasy of right-wing economics of a completely deregulated wall street/free market has led to catastrophy. it doesn't work. the market needs to be regulated. and i also think unions should be regulated as well - specifically police unions which can become too powerful and corrupt cops can be shielded from internal investigations. regardless, the bottom line here again is that unions have nothing to do with this. you're just ranting and subjecting us to your angst.

valvano

03-17-2009, 11:03 PM

you are completely changing the subject here. the bottom line is that this economic collapse was due to unregulated wall street greed, which of course was a direct result of disastrous right-wing conservative economic policy, championed by reagan, bush senior, dubya, and even clinton and some dems. you know, deregulate everything and let corporate america run amok. that's sure what happened on wall street. and of course with the deregulated banks too, those greedy fuckers went to town, screwing millions of americans over with predatory lending all the while screwing themselves in the process, hence all of the bailouts.

the magical fantasy of right-wing economics of a completely deregulated wall street/free market has led to catastrophy. it doesn't work. the market needs to be regulated. and i also think unions should be regulated as well - specifically police unions which can become too powerful and corrupt cops can be shielded from internal investigations. regardless, the bottom line here again is that unions have nothing to do with this. you're just ranting and subjecting us to your angst.

blah blah blah. quit repeating what your grad student econ prof teaches you when hes not working his shift at barnes and noble. again...an example is shown to you that a teamster local couldnt afford union labor to build their new meeting hall. if union labor is too expensive for the unions, what is all this pro-labor crap Obama and the unions who pull his strings going to do to the economy? again, do you want the rest of the US to look like Detroit...heavily unionized, heavily Dem controlled...massive poverty rates...high real estate taxes...foreclosure ground zero....? is that your solution? Detroit...the perfect example of left wing liberal Dem politics in conjunction with big labor run amok...

oh...and it was Dodd, Barney Frank, etc and the rest of the Dems who forced Fannie Mae and Sallie Mae to put out these crazy loan packages in the hope of expanding the "american dream" of home ownership...you know, the same Dems who got $$$$ in major political donations...and are now refusing to step up to the plate and take the game....and to show my unbiasness...Lindsey Grahams policies put into place are equally to blame...

Bob

03-17-2009, 11:49 PM

blah blah blah. quit repeating what your grad student econ prof teaches you when hes not working his shift at barnes and noble. again...an example is shown to you that a teamster local couldnt afford union labor to build their new meeting hall. if union labor is too expensive for the unions, what is all this pro-labor crap Obama and the unions who pull his strings going to do to the economy? again, do you want the rest of the US to look like Detroit...heavily unionized, heavily Dem controlled...massive poverty rates...high real estate taxes...foreclosure ground zero....? is that your solution? Detroit...the perfect example of left wing liberal Dem politics in conjunction with big labor run amok...

oh...and it was Dodd, Barney Frank, etc and the rest of the Dems who forced Fannie Mae and Sallie Mae to put out these crazy loan packages in the hope of expanding the "american dream" of home ownership...you know, the same Dems who got $$$$ in major political donations...and are now refusing to step up to the plate and take the game....and to show my unbiasness...Lindsey Grahams policies put into place are equally to blame...

seriously sazi, you were given an example. what do you need to convince you? another example? look at detroit. unions are why that city sucks, i don't think i need to explain that.

saz

03-18-2009, 12:09 PM

blah blah blah. quit repeating what your grad student econ prof teaches you when hes not working his shift at barnes and noble. again...an example is shown to you that a teamster local couldnt afford union labor to build their new meeting hall. if union labor is too expensive for the unions, what is all this pro-labor crap Obama and the unions who pull his strings going to do to the economy? again, do you want the rest of the US to look like Detroit...heavily unionized, heavily Dem controlled...massive poverty rates...high real estate taxes...foreclosure ground zero....? is that your solution? Detroit...the perfect example of left wing liberal Dem politics in conjunction with big labor run amok...

oh...and it was Dodd, Barney Frank, etc and the rest of the Dems who forced Fannie Mae and Sallie Mae to put out these crazy loan packages in the hope of expanding the "american dream" of home ownership...you know, the same Dems who got $$$$ in major political donations...and are now refusing to step up to the plate and take the game....and to show my unbiasness...Lindsey Grahams policies put into place are equally to blame...

i hate to burst your bubble, but that isn't what my grad student econ prof taught me. sorry, but that's just reality. you can spin it anyway you like and continue with your union angst, but the bottom line is that the economic collapse was due to a deregulated wall street and their unrelenting greed.

i agree with you though about barney frank (i can't stand him) and the dems, hence my citing of clinton in previous deregulation efforts (i lean towards nader/greens). you should also include phil gramm (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/economy/17gramm.html?pagewanted=all) along with lindsey graham.

DroppinScience

03-18-2009, 03:14 PM

yeahwho

03-18-2009, 03:41 PM

Bob

03-18-2009, 05:50 PM

valvano i'm sure you were just about to post this so forgive me if i'm stealing your thunder

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/17/chief-information-officer-is-quietly-reinstated/?hp

Chief Information Officer Is Quietly Reinstated
By Katharine Q. Seelye

Vivek Kundra, who was on leave from his new appointment by President Obama as the federal government’s chief information officer, has been reinstated, the White House said today.

White House officials confirmed to The New York Times that Mr. Kundra had been reinstated today; it was first reported this afternoon by Techpresident.com without confirmation.

The reinstatement comes a few days after F.B.I. agents had raided his former office at the District of Columbia’s technology department. Mr. Kundra was not a target of the raid. A former employee of his, Yusuf Acar, has been charged with bribery. The F.B.I. said that Mr. Kundra was not implicated in the bribery case, but he took a leave from his new federal job anyway.

The reinstatement comes as word was swirling around the Internet about a youthful arrest of Mr. Kundra for a theft involving something of less than $300 in value. Asked if Mr. Kundra had revealed the arrest during the White House vetting process, officials said they would not discuss the process but pointed out that the reinstatement should speak for itself.

It seems that Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia, who is also chairman of the Democratic National Committee, had pleaded Mr. Kundra’s case to the White House to get him reinstated.

After the FBI raid on Mr. Kundra’s old office, the White House wanted to distance itself from him and placed him on leave, according to someone familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for anyone.

Mr. Kundra felt his reputation had come under a cloud, this person said, and over the last few days, as his friends began to rally support for him, he called Governor Kaine, for whom he once worked.

The governor called the White House and pleaded Mr. Kundra’s case, according to the person familiar with the matter although a spokesman for Mr. Kaine said he was unaware of any contact. It is not clear who he spoke with. But the person familiar with the situation said that Mr. Kaine said that since Mr. Kundra was not under investigation, he should be reinstated. Otherwise, he said, Mr. Kundra’s reputation would be ruined and the administration would miss out on having someone with valuable skills help with its important task of making the government more transparent.

The person familiar with the situation also said that Mr. Kundra had told him that he had disclosed the youthful arrest, made in 1996 when Mr. Kundra was 21, to the White House and to all of his previous employers.

Nick Shapiro, a White House spokesman, said tonight: “Thirteen years ago, Vivek committed a youthful indiscretion. He performed community service and we are satisfied that he fully resolved the matter.” *

It was still not clear what the incident was or why someone leaked information about it while Mr. Kundra was on leave.

valvano

03-18-2009, 07:54 PM

I hate to indulge any of valvano's fantastical delusions further, but isn't the Detroit situation the fault of outsourcing (which greedy CEOs do to ship jobs overseas who work for cheaper and care about nothing more than the bottom line)?

Targeting unions is valvano's own personal scapegoat. He probably is just sour because he couldn't get a union job with job security and benefits. Or he's some CEO prick using an alias.

I would think that Detroit would be the Mecca of all liberals

1. Highly unionized
2. Highly taxed
3. Powerful teachers union keeps kids locked in pathetic school system while spending tens of thousands of dollars a year /student yet results are pure failure
4. Democratic control of local politics
5. Did I mention highly taxed?

Detroit is everything Dems / liberals want to do and you can see what shape Detroit is in today. And in regards to the auto industry, its not outsourcing. Its that management was locked to ancient union work rules and has been unable to be flexible to adjust to a global market. They were trying to survive in the 21st century while operating as if it were still 1953.

And you talk about union job security??? You got your head in the sand? Ask the teamster employees of yellow / roadway corp about job security. Ask the former teamster employees of US Trucking, Consolidated Freightways, an all the other unionized freight carriers that have gone out of business through the years due to their inability to adjust to a changing marketplace. Ask GM, Ford and Chrysler employees how their longterm security is looking. Of course, management is equally to blame but the unions are right there with them.

You should be happy with Detroit. Unchecked liberal / Dem controlled govt in a highly unionized labor market. Accuse me of scapegoating it all you want but that doesnt hide the fact, Detroit is the toilet of the USA.

Again, I ask you, how do you explain a teamster local having to use non union contractors to build their union hall because union labor cost would have bust their budget. Maybe you need to run that by your econ prof first??

Dorothy Wood

03-18-2009, 11:01 PM

dude, shut up about detroit. it's been a shit hole for over 30 years. you think that's only because of unions and democrats?

democratic philosophy and unionization didn't ruin detroit, corruption and bad choices did. that and demographic fluctuations (my polite term for "white flight") that happened in every U.S. city in the 60's, 70's and 80's. depopulation is a huge problem for any city, exacerbating the problem then was that the local government began touting detroit as a "black" city, effectively officially segregating itself...from which it has never fully recovered.

maybe you forgot how bad working conditions were before unions. maybe you forgot about outsourcing labor and the foreign market operating at such low costs that there's fucking way the U.S. could compete. that has nothing to do with "trying to survive in the 21st century while operating as if it were still 1953". it has everything to do with the fact that asian factories were operating with little or no health and safety regulation and abysmal pay. the kind that wouldn't be tolerated by anyone in america, union or not. they made their cars cheaper, on the backs of their workers. and america just ate it up.

Detroit and our great nation is failing because of greed. plain and simple.

One man (Obama) isn't going to change human nature, but his attitude and perceived intentions are a step in the right direction. I can see it on a local level every single day (I live in Chicago). People are fed up with secrets and being lied to, and more and more corruption is being exposed. and I can only hope that it's happening all over the country.

it's going to take a long time to fix the mess we're in, and we all have a hand in it, so we all have a responsibility to help. so if you're so upset about the way things are going, maybe you should get off your ass and do something other than posting snide comments and links to right-wing articles on the internet.

Schmeltz

03-19-2009, 09:28 AM

Or he's some CEO prick using an alias.

Nah, if that was the case he'd at least be halfway literate.

valvano

03-19-2009, 11:38 AM

maybe you forgot how bad working conditions were before unions. maybe you forgot about outsourcing labor and the foreign market operating at such low costs that there's fucking way the U.S. could compete.

i am confused,

dont blame unions for raising labor cost above the market equilibrium, but you blast businesses for adjusting to a global market and competition based on price structure with lower labor costs?

Schmeltz

03-19-2009, 01:11 PM

raising labor cost above the market equilibrium

Translation: paying American workers what they're worth.

adjusting to a global market and competition based on price structure with lower labor costs?

Translation: fuck American workers, let's get the Chinese to make this shit!

Your doublespeak is very telling valvano, you would do any ivory tower academic proud. Let me see if I get your point. In your own words, as expressed above, unions are to be condemned for daring to assert the right of American workers to a wage higher than an artificial and irrealistic "market equilibrium," an abstract fabrication completely diluted by the unfair and discriminatory labour practices of irresponsible and incapable developing countries. Isn't it just possible that there is more to this "market equilibrium" than the fair and honest exchange of information via free trade? Do you think the Chinese or anyone else gives two shits about the rational, even-handed, entirely theoretical "market equilibrium"? You're as naive as anyone else here.

Meanwhile in the same breath you preach the virtues of corporations who sacrifice American jobs (although of course not those of the business elite who actually run the corporations and continually demand exponentially egregious financial rewards for any action they happen to perform no matter how negligent, only the little guys who have no other way to pay their bills) for the sake of their own survival, who are apparently to be lauded for their virtuous efforts to remain in competitive lockstep with these fascists, Communists, and red-handed dictators. In other words you'd gladly see us all reduced to sweatshop labourers if that's what it took to compete with the Chinese. Well isn't that noble! And shouldn't government simply step aside and let that happen? Isn't it your real proposal that the wealthy should be allowed to have their way with the rest of us and the hell with the consequences?

This is why the American people voted so resoundingly against your all-against-all, might-makes-right, I-got-mine-Jack bullshit, valvano. Because it's hollow and hypocritical and ideological, and represents a way backward, not forward. Then you step up here with your insubstantial talking points and meaningless accusatory rhetoric (which could really use some technical glossing over, by the way). Everybody can see through this crap dude. Nobody's buying it, no matter how hard you sell it. There's no market for it here.

DroppinScience

03-19-2009, 05:31 PM

Translation: paying American workers what they're worth.

Translation: fuck American workers, let's get the Chinese to make this shit!

Your doublespeak is very telling valvano, you would do any ivory tower academic proud. Let me see if I get your point. In your own words, as expressed above, unions are to be condemned for daring to assert the right of American workers to a wage higher than an artificial and irrealistic "market equilibrium," an abstract fabrication completely diluted by the unfair and discriminatory labour practices of irresponsible and incapable developing countries. Isn't it just possible that there is more to this "market equilibrium" than the fair and honest exchange of information via free trade? Do you think the Chinese or anyone else gives two shits about the rational, even-handed, entirely theoretical "market equilibrium"? You're as naive as anyone else here.

Meanwhile in the same breath you preach the virtues of corporations who sacrifice American jobs (although of course not those of the business elite who actually run the corporations and continually demand exponentially egregious financial rewards for any action they happen to perform no matter how negligent, only the little guys who have no other way to pay their bills) for the sake of their own survival, who are apparently to be lauded for their virtuous efforts to remain in competitive lockstep with these fascists, Communists, and red-handed dictators. In other words you'd gladly see us all reduced to sweatshop labourers if that's what it took to compete with the Chinese. Well isn't that noble! And shouldn't government simply step aside and let that happen? Isn't it your real proposal that the wealthy should be allowed to have their way with the rest of us and the hell with the consequences?

This is why the American people voted so resoundingly against your all-against-all, might-makes-right, I-got-mine-Jack bullshit, valvano. Because it's hollow and hypocritical and ideological, and represents a way backward, not forward. Then you step up here with your insubstantial talking points and meaningless accusatory rhetoric (which could really use some technical glossing over, by the way). Everybody can see through this crap dude. Nobody's buying it, no matter how hard you sell it. There's no market for it here.

You literally could not have said it any better! (y)

valvano

03-19-2009, 05:46 PM

Translation: paying American workers what they're worth.

um...wouldnt paying workers what they're worth be market equilibrium?? you know, the point where supply meets demand? and if the market rate is say, $10/hour with benefits and unions come in and demand $20/ hour and endless benefits, what are you to do??

it would be nice in your fantasy la la land everybody could get what they want, but the real world doesnt respond that way. i am sure you will quickly find out once you join the rest of us in the real world :D

Dorothy Wood

03-19-2009, 06:09 PM

um...wouldnt paying workers what they're worth be market equilibrium?? you know, the point where supply meets demand? and if the market rate is say, $10/hour with benefits and unions come in and demand $20/ hour and endless benefits, what are you to do??

it would be nice in your fantasy la la land everybody could get what they want, but the real world doesnt respond that way. i am sure you will quickly find out once you join the rest of us in the real world :D

you're insane. I mean, you really have to be. or mentally challenged. that's the only explanation. this isn't a question of $10/hr vs. $20/hr. it's about the health and safety standards in america being more important and more expensive to maintain. I don't know where to find the data, but I highly doubt that foreign auto workers were making 10/hr (or its equivalent, adjusted for inflation) when the imports started rolling in.

valvano

03-19-2009, 08:09 PM

you're insane. I mean, you really have to be. or mentally challenged. that's the only explanation. this isn't a question of $10/hr vs. $20/hr. it's about the health and safety standards in america being more important and more expensive to maintain. I don't know where to find the data, but I highly doubt that foreign auto workers were making 10/hr (or its equivalent, adjusted for inflation) when the imports started rolling in.

umm dorothy, if you cant tell i was using $10 and $20 as an example. but i go back to my point, wouldnt paying workers what they are worth be the point where the demand for labor and the supply for labor meet? thats simple economics. and if the union tries to artificially raise that point above the natural labor rate...then what do you thinks happens?

:rolleyes:

Dorothy Wood

03-20-2009, 02:17 AM

umm dorothy, if you cant tell i was using $10 and $20 as an example. but i go back to my point, wouldnt paying workers what they are worth be the point where the demand for labor and the supply for labor meet? thats simple economics. and if the union tries to artificially raise that point above the natural labor rate...then what do you thinks happens?

:rolleyes:

umm, if what? yeah, I can tell that you were using it as an example, what I was clearly saying was that your example was faulty and ignoring pertinent information.

the "natural labor rate" is compromised when you factor in countries that do not value human rights when calculating profit.

roll your eyes all you want, but if things worked the way you wanted them to, all cars and most every product we consume in the united states would be imported from other countries with less regulation in regard to safety and a respectable living wage.

you're blaming democrats and unions for things that have less to do with democratic and union ideology, and more to do with corruption, dishonesty, and greed.

I've asked before, but I'll ask again, what do you do for a living? where do you live and where did you grow up? what has formed your narrow opinion and granted you access to "the real world"? prove to me that you know what you're talking about and why and maybe I won't think you're such an asshole.

valvano

03-20-2009, 07:19 AM

Schmeltz

03-20-2009, 07:41 AM

wouldnt paying workers what they are worth be the point where the demand for labor and the supply for labor meet? thats simple economics.

That's not simple economics, it's simplistic economics. Economics for Dummies. If labour were simply another finite commodity to be exploited at the minimum possible cost for the maximum possible return, which appears to be about as much as you think of your countrymen, your point might stand. But the very nature of this crisis has demonstrated that it is not possible to view workers as abstract entities or numbers on a page who can be simply discarded out of hand if their apparent supply happens to exceed the apparent demand for them. How disgusting for you to think of people dispossessed of their livelihoods and homes as just another resource to exploit - but then again your whole perspective is disgusting. That's why people voted against it.

The creation of a sizable body of people who retain their status as social actors even if their status as economic actors is suddenly destroyed presents a nation with massive problems that cannot be solved with platitudes about simple economics, much less outright silly bullshit about "fantasy la la land." That's where you're living if you think that any society would be so passive as to sacrifice itself to the abstract and quite clearly deficient ideology of the unfettered market. In a capitalist system workers are not robots who are worth the sum total of their labour value in man-hours, they are human beings who are worth as much as they can extract from their employers, through whatever mechanism they can bring to bear, and if they are pressed by circumstances beyond their control they will respond as human beings will anywhere else: by fighting for their rights. There's no room for that in your childish supply-and-demand model of human interaction, but that hardly comes a surprise.

i am sure you will quickly find out once you join the rest of us in the real world

You've really got to let go of this fantasy where being a half-literate trucker means you have a monopoly on life experience. It makes you look like a jackass. :D

valvano

03-20-2009, 11:52 AM

You've really got to let go of this fantasy where being a half-literate trucker means you have a monopoly on life experience. It makes you look like a jackass. :D

be careful, your elitism is showing...stereotyping those in the trucking industry as "half literate trucker"....could have at least referenced a CB radio...

Schmeltz

03-20-2009, 12:34 PM

Dude, you're the one who thinks "looken" and "yourselft" are words. I don't have to do anything to stereotype you, you're doing a great job all by yourself.

Now do you have anything else to say or is this now a thread about CB radios? What's your 20, good buddy? Over!

Dorothy Wood

03-20-2009, 01:31 PM

^ SE US, and I am a 15 year veteran of the LTL trucking industry, in the area of loss, damage, and security. that follows 5 miserable years in the banking industry after i graduated from college. of course, you could have answered this question for yourself had you looken at my public profile, its been there forever....

and yourselft??

ah yes, your profile says "transportation".

as for me, I've lived in Denver, Detroit, Cincinnati, and Chicago. spent some time at my father's modest family ranch in rural New Mexico. I've been under the poverty line, and I've been lower to upper middle class over the years. went to public and private school at different times. got an elementary education degree at a liberal arts college. suffered an injury that caused me to miss out on getting a job right after college like most people, so I started on a different path. I substitute taught in inner city schools for awhile. got a job building custom frames for rich people in chicago, which I do still because I'm really good at it. I also work with underserved adolescents. I make art and music on the side.

basically, I'm a poor craftsperson who helps kids and teenagers when I can.

I'm also highly intelligent (tested and proven by psychologists!), so I can process information and look at all sides of an issue and come to my own conclusions without having them fed to me by one particular side or another.

do I think unions ruined the economy? no. do I think the american auto industry made bad choices and ran themselves into the ground? yes. and their first mistake was making vehicles run on gasoline.

so, you drive trucks, or are you in the office in charge of the people who drive the trucks? I'm sure you demand a decent wage. even though it seems like mostly anyone could drive a truck. it's only driving, right? can't they just get some mexicans to do it at the "natural labor rate"?