|
|
Post by La Princess on Sept 18, 2011 14:25:53 GMT -5
I'd like to hear what ideas the Republican candidates have for jobs creation and debt reduction, and specifically how they're better than the president's. Anybody know? The deRhodes aren't much help, all the candidates do is attack each other. They're proposing tax breaks but history shows these don't really help either. I'll likely end up voting for Obama because while I am disappointed in him, a Republican would be worse. |
|
|
|
Post by kyyx4ever on Sept 18, 2011 15:03:13 GMT -5
I agree with you. If the economy turns around he will have a chance. I don't think Obama is completely out of the race. It's still salvageable but he has tons of work to do. I don't think you would attack me for my views. There seem to be a couple people here who seem to sit around waiting for me to post something then start attacking me for my opinion. I don't understand that, but it happens quite a bit. I was adding the disclaimer for them. Although I disagree with your views--I'm a proud liberal--I'm not interested in attacking you myself. Your arguments are generally well-stated, cohesive, and logical. You are far more level-headed than many of those on the Right ! That being said, Obama's going to win in 2012 imo. The current GOP field of candidates is pitiful. (well, the noisiest media darlings are, anyway. We don't hear much at all from Gary Johnson, Herman Cain, or to some degree Ron Paul, who make a ton more sense than loony Bachmann or Perry.) IMHO, I think Romney will get the nom. He has the best chance of defeating Obama. He's been through campaigns before and he's somewhat normal. Obama has disappointed many of us on the left, but he's still one of us, and a far better choice than a GOP candidate. And as long as the U.S. keeps this 2-party system, that's what we'll get. |
|
|
|
Post by La Princess on Sept 18, 2011 17:18:35 GMT -5
But is Obama really a left winger? I don't think so and I can't say he's truly one of those on the left. He appointed Geithner treasury and this is a guy who made a career out of outsourcing. He put GE CEO in charge of some committee and GE is the king of outsourcing with plans to send MORE jobs overseas. Larry Summers was also working for him and he's a disgusting man too (and a sexist). If he was truly with those on the left he never would have appointed many of the people he did.
Is he better than the Republicans? Sure but that's not saying much because most of the candidates are bat crazy.
We really need a viable third party. When I can I try to vote for either Libertarians or Green because both the Dems and Reps are corrupt. I am speaking as someone who worked for various Democratic candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by nightboat13 on Sept 21, 2011 2:40:26 GMT -5
Your arguments largely reflect the old mafia-styled unions, and there really weren't very many like that, with deadbeat workers getting overpaid while drinking and playing instead of working. I have experience where the new guys worked their asses off at entry-level wages while the guys near retirement got some breaks and perks and made the real money. Seems fair to me.
I absolutely agree that middle management is treated unfairly. They aren't part of top echelon, but they're separated from the rank & file too. There is no set pay scale, no job security, and no real chance at breaking into the executive level. But instead of getting rid of employee unions, a union should be created for middle managers. Fair.
It was overwhelming greed that sent the businesses out of the country. It was upgrading their factories, meeting pollution standards, community involvement, and taxes combined with thier hatred of unions that sent them out of the country. In China and other third-world nations they can treat people badly because the workers don't have unions.
Keep in mind, Congress has a ridiculous amount of vacation time. Sure, Obama could spend August in Chicago, or Hawaii, or at the White House. His overseas trips are necessary to building foreign relations cred. He's a lot different than Dubya, the other countries want to check him out. Then there was the Olympic nonsense. If he didn't go he'd get reamed for not trying, but if he did go he'd get reamed for wasting taxpayer money when it was a given that we wouldn't get the Olympics. What do ya do? With Chicago politics being the way they are, it might be better for him to stay away so that nobody accuses him of peddling influence there.
I can't find anything there to diagree with.
It was MarchMadness, in reply #6 on Sept 12, that made the claim that Obama is the worst President ever. I'm still waiting for some sort of explanation.
No matter who does the job, more workers will be in the tax base. Also there will be a need for satellite jobs, like lunch counters and uniform rentals. And with more money to spend the workers will want movie theaters and restaurants. They'll buy more toys for their little kids, maybe a nice used car for an older kid. It's the Trickle Up Theory.
|
|
|
|
Post by nightboat13 on Sept 21, 2011 2:53:35 GMT -5
The thing to worry about isn't the Presidential election. No one can beat Obama, unless red state legislators outlaw voting by all women, racial minorities, and people under age 25. (Wouldn't surprise me.)
No, we all need to worry about the House and Senate.
Here in Ohio we have Senator Sherrod Brown and House Speaker John Boehner. Which one is dedicated to his constituents? Which one is completely owned by corporate lobbyists? Which type will you vote for in your state's Congressional elections?
What about your state and local government?
Right now is the best time to start reading up on your candidates, all of them, from neighborhood dog catcher to US President. Read all the sources. Go to Snopes, Factcheck, Politicheck. Stay away from Fox News Propaganda
|
|
|
|
Post by La Princess on Sept 21, 2011 13:45:13 GMT -5
Your arguments largely reflect the old mafia-styled unions, and there really weren't very many like that, with deadbeat workers getting overpaid while drinking and playing instead of working. I have experience where the new guys worked their asses off at entry-level wages while the guys near retirement got some breaks and perks and made the real money. Seems fair to me. If someone works their ass off, then yes they should be paid fairly. Unfortunately at my former employer the head union guys were too busy drinking and doing other things and this lack of ambition was in all parts of the unions, including entry level. The fact is Chicago is the most corrupt city you can imagine and the unions are crooked. People with criminal records were getting jobs with unions that never should have, including politicians. People right out of high school with no skills were making $50,000 while lawyers were paid $35,000. Ridiculous. I absolutely agree that middle management is treated unfairly. They aren't part of top echelon, but they're separated from the rank & file too. There is no set pay scale, no job security, and no real chance at breaking into the executive level. But instead of getting rid of employee unions, a union should be created for middle managers. Fair. If there had been unions for middle management I might feel differently, but I did resent BIG TIME that I was managing people who made more and did less, but was ineligible to join the unions. One of the union workers even said to me that they are happy the employer didn't push college like most did. Btw, to get into middle management you needed to have a college degree, and in some higher level jobs you needed more. In my department half of us had Masters, including me and the people ahead of me. It was overwhelming greed that sent the businesses out of the country. It was upgrading their factories, meeting pollution standards, community involvement, and taxes combined with thier hatred of unions that sent them out of the country. In China and other third-world nations they can treat people badly because the workers don't have unions. Like I said I think China is a disgusting country. However, if a company can pay less they will. Like I mentioned I don't believe in outsourcing, but this is what is happening. The fact is though that yes many union people are overpaid. Of cource CEOs and head management are also overpaid too, but to me I think there needs to be more fairness in how someone is paid. Someone who works hard should make more than someone who doesn't. Keep in mind, Congress has a ridiculous amount of vacation time. Sure, Obama could spend August in Chicago, or Hawaii, or at the White House. His overseas trips are necessary to building foreign relations cred. He's a lot different than Dubya, the other countries want to check him out. Then there was the Olympic nonsense. If he didn't go he'd get reamed for not trying, but if he did go he'd get reamed for wasting taxpayer money when it was a given that we wouldn't get the Olympics. What do ya do? With Chicago politics being the way they are, it might be better for him to stay away so that nobody accuses him of peddling influence there. I had no problem with him going to the Olympics because not only would that have been his country, but his hometown (Chicago). I actually think it would have been great to have had the Olympics in Chicago and might have helped the economy, which might in the long run helped me. However, no I don't believe he should be flying around in this economy. When Bush was in power the economy wasn't as bad. No matter who does the job, more workers will be in the tax base. Also there will be a need for satellite jobs, like lunch counters and uniform rentals. And with more money to spend the workers will want movie theaters and restaurants. They'll buy more toys for their little kids, maybe a nice used car for an older kid. It's the Trickle Up Theory. But it does matter. If I knew the only people getting these jobs were Americans I would feel better. In Illinois we have a serious illegal problem and something like 75% of all people on the medical system are illegals and their children. In theory it would be better if they worked than sponge off the system but these people shouldn't even be here to begin with. Even though I am strongly anti illegal immigration, I am more strongly anti visa immigration. The fact is I am not competiting with illegals for jobs. I am competiting against visa holders, especially Indians for jobs. I am more strongly against them coming here than I am against illegals. Then of course there is the whole culture problem with Indians but that's another story. |
|
|
|
Post by sarahb1863 on Sept 25, 2011 10:31:53 GMT -5
I see Herman Cain won the Florida primary last night. Good for him, although given some of the things he's said in the past (he wouldn't appoint Muslims to his cabinet, he thinks it's OK for cities to ban mosques - a direct violation of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion - not to mention his Tea Party determination to make the government a theocracy - if you're not a fundamentalist Christian you're not an American!) I'm not sure he'd do better against Obama than Perry or Bachmann. Yes, he's apologized, but it was the sort of "I'm sorry you're offended however I'm still right" backhanded apology one is used to from politicians. Not very sincere.
Now if the Republicans had a candidate who was a fiscal conservative, AND not a religious fundamentalist openly bent on making the U.S. a Christian theocracy, then they might have a viable candidate. But they can't seem to come up with one of those. So, my money's still on Obama for re-election.
|
|
|
|
Post by marisan on Sept 25, 2011 16:26:08 GMT -5
I'm a liberal, so there's no way I'm voting for any of them. That said, I think they are too much focused on the multinational Corporation/Wall street's interest and too little on typical middle class Americans. So I don't see any of them winning against Obama. Herman Cain is too much against the EPA, Romney is lke a car sales man, and Perry is too much fundamentalist. Buckman is too much like Sarah Palin. It's likely that Obama will continue on for the second term.
|
|
|
|
Post by tracdave on Sept 25, 2011 21:54:31 GMT -5
WOW! i had no idea there were so many LIBs on this board.....ruined my day. should have never opened this thread  but on the bright side, we only have one more year of Obama left! |
|
|
|
Post by La Princess on Sept 25, 2011 22:12:03 GMT -5
I see Herman Cain won the Florida primary last night. Good for him, although given some of the things he's said in the past (he wouldn't appoint Muslims to his cabinet, he thinks it's OK for cities to ban mosques - a direct violation of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion - not to mention his Tea Party determination to make the government a theocracy - if you're not a fundamentalist Christian you're not an American!) I'm not sure he'd do better against Obama than Perry or Bachmann. Yes, he's apologized, but it was the sort of "I'm sorry you're offended however I'm still right" backhanded apology one is used to from politicians. Not very sincere. Now if the Republicans had a candidate who was a fiscal conservative, AND not a religious fundamentalist openly bent on making the U.S. a Christian theocracy, then they might have a viable candidate. But they can't seem to come up with one of those. So, my money's still on Obama for re-election. If they got a fiscal conservative, social liberal/moderate then yes Obama would have problems. Why the Republicans nationally allowed the far right religious to take over confuses me. People like Betty Ford would not be accepted by them today because she was definitely a social liberal (and I always thought she was cool). If say Olympia Snowe of Maine ran I could see her picking up women. For the most part the Republicans in Illinois are sane and that's why they get voted in. However the national parties (both of them)have been hijacked by special interest groups and one of the Republicans are the religious right. |
|
but on the bright side, we only have one more year of Obama left!