Thread: This Is Not A CraigsList Notice

Tweet

Originally Posted by Dave Severson

Just asking the questions, that's all... Read that article awhile back, some accuracy but still a bit opinionated. I'm in no way looking for the rich to pay everyone else's way, just wondering if the tax plan Romney has is going to be able to generate enough tax revenue, and still promote economic growth??? Just trying to fine something positive in this whole economic fiasco! Seems we get a lot of the "blame game", but no definitive answers from either candidate on what will work!

I don't know if in our current media driven narrative if an honest question can filter through. It's tough enough here. But too many of our fellow citizens won't expend enough mental energy to grasp the scope of what we're dealing with. That's what makes them susceptible to the b.s. line of thought that taxing the rich is the solution. Taxing alone ain't gonna get it done. That's why silly argument points like " Romney wants to kill big bird...." flys. As pointed out earlier, PBS can do fine without government money.............letting them loose on their own shouldn't even be a matter of discussion/contention..................except it's a club to motivate the ignorant. I've been struggling to think of a way to frame the discussion in a way that might break through. The best I can come up with is a combination of ideas/information that float around separately an might work if joined in an exercise.

We borrow 40% of every dollar the government spends. That means the revenue intake covers 60%. Several analyses have calculated that "if" POTUS ever actually proposed the "Buffett Rule" against the "rich" (rather than just blathering in speeches) that that tax increase would fund the government for 6 days (that of course assumes the "rich" wouldn't change their behavior to legally minimize the new tax burden...............a behavior that, historically has always happened). So, our existing 60% covers 219 days of operation, the new tax adds 6 days for a total of 225 days. Since we have 365 days in most years, that leaves 140 unfunded days.............almost 5 months! As an aside, if we apply Obama logic to this formulation as he falsely applies to Romney's tax plan, the middle class is in deeeeeeppp doo doo! There's not enough taxing power on this continent to pull in those 140 days of operating cost. We MUST reduce spending. But anyone who proposes any cuts they are demonized mercilessly..................which leads to vagueness in an election process. The way the citizens let the media and some politicians play those games kills the opportunity for serious discussion. Again, I'll point out the Big Bird discussion here...............the loyal leftists, even when it's pointed out how little impact federal budget money has on PBS, STILL use it as a negative........................they are not serious about budget control on even the littlest item, much less move on to larger items.

Just a brief comment on the business starters discussion that sort of misses the point of business birthing. Ray Kroc may have failed at some business at some time, I don't recall one way or the other, but he was a shake machine salesman when he met the McDonald brothers. He probably borrowed a lot of that pile of money he gave them for access to their business model, plus he had ideas of his own to improve on what they developed. There was no guarantee he would succeed...........he was gutsy enough to take a risk with the hope it would prove successful. He probably had great confidence in himself, but he probably had moments of doubts when things didn't always work out. Dave Thomas was born into orphanhood by an unwed mother who gave him up. He worked himself up from the bottom, made a very good income, and save some modest wealth as he worked himself up in the Kentucky Fried Chicken enterprise. That's what gave him the experience, a small amount of seed capital, and the vision to start Wendy's. The courage to take the risk was from his heart. And that's the key commonality to almost all small business entrepreneurs..................willingness to take a risk where there is no guarantee to start a business. That's why so few step up, it's a rare trait in the human psyche, maybe less than 5% of people have that. That doesn't make them "better" than the other folks, but it does make them "special" in the context of business building. If an example helps, Michael Jordan possesses that "better" thing when it comes to basketball skill. Anyone of us can go out there and shoot some hoops, but he elevates it to art. He was highly rewarded appropriately for that "specialness" because people chose to pay to see him exibit his skills. Same thing for the entrepreneur, except there's more of a good or service involved rather than entertainment. So, how does that long blah blah relate to Dave's comment? POTUS has demonstrated that he doesn't get that whole idea at all. Yeah, the koolaid drinkers will argue, but I'm talking about actions, not words. The closest he comes is shoveling money to cronies who help him with campaign contributions. And before any lefty tries to feign angst or argue, read the article about the principles of Solyndra (Geo. Kaiser et al) in yesterday's WSJ about how they are now trying to transfer Solyndra losses to other of their profitable companies so they can REDUCE their tax payments. I know, some of you are wondering how that can be...........POTUS tells us how his rich buddies WANT to pay more in taxes...................yeah, right. Back to the point......at least Romney has an understanding of the entrepreneur, has financed many of them who he believed had a viable business plan. The mischaracterization of his business above is incomplete. Can he......will he......be able to create an environment in this economy that reassures entrepreneurs to create/expand their businesses rather than pull in their horns as they do under the current administration? There ain't no guarantees, but from that one point of view, he a better risk. This is the point where some do the "lesser of two evils...." thing. Well, every decision we make is a "lesser of two evils...." choice, it's just that we don't always couch it in negative terms.

Originally Posted by Mike P

“….I believe that POTUS told us last night that he was responsible for that….”

He took responsibility for his Secretary of the Department Home Land Security classifying returning veterans as a potential terrorist threat? I must have missed that.

No I was addressing the second portion of your comment "But I suppose that much like the results of the Libyan terrorist attack being the Secretary of States fault, this would have to be laid at the feet of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security."

Originally Posted by Mike P

“….“……It was Barack Obama's proposal that the Iraqis adopted as their own. They wanted the Barack deal, not the Bush deal……”

And your reference for this is????

Daniel Serwer, a senior fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

Originally Posted by Mike P

We do agree on one thing, it is a great country that allows open different view points.

ABSOLUTELY!!!

Originally Posted by Bob Parmenter

Again, I'll point out the Big Bird discussion here...............the loyal leftists, even when it's pointed out how little impact federal budget money has on PBS, STILL use it as a negative........................they are not serious about budget control on even the littlest item, much less move on to larger items.

If you remember, Mitt Romney brought up the fact that he would curtail funds to PBS as a part of his program. Why would Mitt even start to talk about the one hundredth of one percent of the total budget as a part of the cure for the budget woes? He seems to be missing the boat with regard to the budget when he is only addressing this small savings. Can this type of micromanagement work at the level of the total budget?

More importantly why does anyone think that big business and the wealthy can cure our economic ills as we wait for the benefits? And at what type of social cost? I honestly believe that I have a moral responsibility to help those that need it, not by paying them to stay unemployed, but to quote Lao Tzu...

"If you give a man a fish you feed him for a day. If you teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime."

We can make a difference!

Originally Posted by Hot Rod Surfer

Why would Mitt even start to talk about the one hundredth of one percent of the total budget as a part of the cure for the budget woes? He seems to be missing the boat with regard to the budget when he is only addressing this small savings. Can this type of micromanagement work at the level of the total budget?

It was a test to see who's serious about ANY level of spending cut...................................all those that poo poo'd it failed the test. If it's so insignificant why have you and POTUS made it the center of your mockery for a couple weeks. You have no idea how silly it makes you sound to serious people. I don't know you very well, but I've seen a LOT of POTUS. He won't yield on anything..............it's his way or the hiway...............in his own words when offered compromise...................I won! That's why he can't work with the House.

Originally Posted by Bob Parmenter

It was a test to see who's serious about ANY level of spending cut...................................all those that poo poo'd it failed the test. If it's so insignificant why have you and POTUS made it the center of your mockery for a couple weeks. You have no idea how silly it makes you sound to serious people. I don't know you very well, but I've seen a LOT of POTUS. He won't yield on anything..............it's his way or the hiway...............in his own words when offered compromise...................I won! That's why he can't work with the House.

Ahhhhhhhhh, a test. I see now.


OK, how about something near and dear to all of our hearts, oil!

Mitt Romney told us that he would push hard to get that pipeline from Canada. Independence, he said.

But what happens in 50, 100 or 150 years? We just extended our dependence on oil and ignored all of the other renewable alternatives out there! Independence from oil is what we need to grow into the future, not independence from middle east oil.

Gentlemen, what say ye?

Thanks Bob, finally an answer, or at least a thoughtful premise to a question about Romney!!!! Really tired of hearing all the "What will Romney do" questions answered by someone saying how bad Obama has messed something up!!!!

Hard to discredit Romney's success in business, his bottom line answers those questions! My concern with his success is the "at what cost?" part of the question.... Problems of the poor, the terribly high cost of health care, the (again) rising crime rate, rising cost of education and other things just seem to be ignored---is this just another issue with the media only drawing attention to the issues they deem important, or have these issues been ignored? Ask a doctor or lawyer what they pay in malpractice insurance, it'll scare you!

Whoever wins this election, I just sincerely hope that EVERYONE will respect the decision made by the majority of the voters, and all (Congress included) will pitch in and do their part to actually take some positive action to help improve this country and not just sit and complain about who was elected!!!!! If the people of this country could once again start working together instead of taking sides to resolve issues and problems, the politicians would be forced to either change their ways, or start looking for a new job!!!! We put them there, we can sure as heck send them home!

Originally Posted by Hot Rod Surfer

OK, how about something near and dear to all of our hearts, oil! Mitt Romney told us that he would push hard to get that pipeline from Canada. Independence, he said. But what happens in 50, 100 or 150 years? We just extended our dependence on oil and ignored all of the other renewable alternatives out there! Independence from oil is what we need to grow into the future, not independence from middle east oil.

Gentlemen, what say ye?

So what type of alternative energy do you believe is viable to stop the use of oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear power, and please be specific.

The way I see it if we tap our resourses and use them while we perfect the others well be ahead. If we have electric cars you will need chargers that run on electricity...The company we payed (I think ) $245 million to develop batteries is filing chapter 11, So there goes more of our bucks yep our leader have a grip on things ( OUR WALLETS)

Originally Posted by Hot Rod Surfer

But what happens in 50, 100 or 150 years? We just extended our dependence on oil and ignored all of the other renewable alternatives out there! Independence from oil is what we need to grow into the future, not independence from middle east oil.

Gentlemen, what say ye?

What sayest I?

Are you assuming that research may now cease? And that there will be no further developments and breakthroughs in the quest for alternate sources of power?

Are innovations and improvements in methods of utilizing the earth's greatest power source (the sun) to affordable and practical advantage, likely to peter out??

And in "50, 100 or 150 years"?

(Incidentally, wind is solar power.)

Nope.

I have no doubt. The day will come when the power source we need will manifest itself, and WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.

But we gotta live until it does.

So ramp up the drilling and start laying that pipeline.

Jim

HEY SOMEBODY WANT TO HIDE THIS TILL AFTER THE DEBATE ON TUESDAY???

Jobless claims take big jump in latest week - Economy Watch


.

Originally Posted by Mike P

HEY SOMEBODY WANT TO HIDE THIS TILL AFTER THE DEBATE ON TUESDAY???

Jobless claims take big jump in latest week - Economy Watch

And this one, too, since the war on terrorism has been won....
Bangladeshi man held in purported plot to bomb the N.Y. Federal Reserve - The Washington Post

Has CBS News Allowed A Political Campaign To Use And Alter Their Footage? | MRCTV Or this one

Here is another small item since the economy is taking off.
Welfare spending jumps 32% in four years


This reminds me of that old joke about lawyers and lips moving, the same one about used car salesmen.
"President Obama’s attempts to wriggle free from his own words and actions on Libya are making things worse."

Have I missed the post about how rich Obozo is as well as the assault on him for being that way? Sorry I forgot he is a lefty and it is ok for lefty to be that way. I am sure I will have it right some day.

This country runs on oil, coal and natural gas and without those there would be no research and development for any of the alternate energies. The high price we pay for oil just reduces the funds available for the alternate energies. Think about it.

Jack.

As for alternative clean energy sources, there seems to be Solar, Wind and water power. The last time I checked Solar cells last anywhere from 15-30 years, and have quite a lot of nasty toxic byproducts from production that have created real problems in China. Solar is also expensive, but will payout over time given some of the newer technologies. Wind is fine, when there is wind and it works, though they are a bit unseamly to look at at the Altimont pass! Water especially harnessed wave power is a great concept, but prohibitedly expensive. So now we must look at Nuclear and coal for additional power needed. Problem with electric powered vehicles is where is the electricity going to come from. At a recent State Power summit, all the power players were calling for manditory electric power vehicles for California. Everybody was for it, lower emissions, lower dependance on fossil fuels, etc., Until a California Pacific Gas and Electric official stood up and said, where are you going to get the electricity to power all of these vehicles? PG&E stated the only way they would support such a measure is if, every electric powered car household had Solar set up to offset the electrical demands to the power grid that already exist.
There is no quick solution here, and yes we need to start producing alternatives, just be carefull for what you ask for, it may create more problems than solutions.