Print

[Will Sweat]

Profits are up because companies are getting more from their workers and paying less for it.

Less pay, less benefits, more productivity, more profits.

The money doesn't trickle down, it stays at the top.

This isn't a zero sum game.  Profits are up because companies are not investing or spending.  Orders for durable goods have not risen significantly.  Unemployment remains above 8.1%.  So who is purchasing these products?  Not the number of unemployed, underemployed and those no longer looking for work.  VP Biden was right when we said the "middle class has been buried the last four years" (or something along that line). 

Uncertainty is the greatest impediment to investment and growth. 

[lilly]

QUOTE:
'Nuff said. 



It's interesting how the nastiness and name calling has amplified since last night's debate. 

I wonder what that indicates . . . . . . . . .

It really is nasty to take things out of context. Not to mention dishonest.

[Will Sweat]

Not asking you exactly, but the question…  I hear all the time about the rich having uncertainty about taxes etc and it is made a big deal.  Yet, the rest of us have uncertainty as well, like when will jobs start paying a wage to live on, when will jobs return, if ever?  For many middle aged people it is the uncertainty of being able to retire after paying in to SS for a lifetime.  For the younger it is the uncertainty if it will even be there still when they want to retire.  What about the uncertainty of housing prices for those that are underwater?  The working people are swamped with uncertainty, so why does the taxes of the rich guy matter and the rest don’t?

I don't think the taxes of the rich "guy" matter more than the rest of us.  I think many (myself included) are fearful of the future and uncertainty. 

I recently read an article about the changes in Health Care that will result in an increase in taxes paid on medical devices.  This scares me because I have a son with special needs and I know that any tax levied on a company will simply be passed onto me via the cost of the product.  As such - this "fear" of what is coming has made me think about what my spending will be come 2013 when these taxes supposedly take effect. 

In terms of business - it matters because they (and those that own them; shareholders, individuals) are the ones in our society that have the money to invest and create business that employ you and I.  If these people simply "sit" on the money they have instead of investing it to create growth this causes you and I to lack the opportunity for employment or greater advancement. 

When you and I hold our money (like I am doing because of the changes in health care - in truth, what I am doing is putting more in a medical savings account in anticipation of what could occur) then we are not purchasing goods and services and therefore not helping the economy grow either. 

I don't see this as an "us v. them" thing.  Without "us" doing the work and "them" making the investment - neither group expands.  In the case of "us" we can less afford it then the "they" can (if you will). 

[Will Sweat]

Part of me hopes that Romney wins.   That way when the middle class is fully destroyed in 4 years I can say "told you so." I'm not going to lie I would absolutely love to do that.  Granted I wont be doing it on the Internet since I will be out of a job and on the streets hooking so I can get a meal, but I will have a sign I carry with me on the street corner.

lol . . . . I'll take if for the sarcasm that it is . . . but will compliment you on the fact that you are planning what you will do for support and employment if America falls apart!  LOL . . . I don't think I am attractive enough to have that option . . .

[Forsythia]

F,

I really was interested in your blast that the debate was fixed.. Do you no longer suppor that or just don't want to talk about it?

I don't think it was fixed I just think that the moderator should have had a bit more spine.  Then again that is the MO for this particular moderator.  Personally I think both candidates were going against decorum and found both of them off putting at times.  I know who I'm voting for and why, but Obama could have done better and the moderator could have done better.  Kudos for Willard for taking advantage of the situation though.  In addition I think it was quite rude that Romney said he would take away funding from PBS while a PBS empoyee was moderating.  There's a time and a place, and if I was the moderator I would have walked out of the building after that comment.

It really is nasty to take things out of context. Not to mention dishonest.

Why do you think she's pulling for Romney?  LOL

lol . . . . I'll take if for the sarcasm that it is . . . but will compliment you on the fact that you are planning what you will do for support and employment if America falls apart!  LOL . . . I don't think I am attractive enough to have that option . . .

Pure sarcasm, and considering I'm an old lady I doubt that I would get many clients I would be willing to sell myself to....LOL

[ducksoup]

QUOTE:
'Nuff said. 



It's interesting how the nastiness and name calling has amplified since last night's debate. 

I wonder what that indicates . . . . . . . . .

That was supposed to be a passive aggressive wink, wink, nod, nod, smiley face... right?

Because if you haven't noticed the major increase of right wing hate and intolerance for the last three weeks.....  Well, then again, you are a part of that and might not notice reality.

[ducksoup]

I don't think the taxes of the rich "guy" matter more than the rest of us.  I think many (myself included) are fearful of the future and uncertainty. 

I recently read an article about the changes in Health Care that will result in an increase in taxes paid on medical devices.  This scares me because I have a son with special needs and I know that any tax levied on a company will simply be passed onto me via the cost of the product.  As such - this "fear" of what is coming has made me think about what my spending will be come 2013 when these taxes supposedly take effect. 

In terms of business - it matters because they (and those that own them; shareholders, individuals) are the ones in our society that have the money to invest and create business that employ you and I.  If these people simply "sit" on the money they have instead of investing it to create growth this causes you and I to lack the opportunity for employment or greater advancement. 

When you and I hold our money (like I am doing because of the changes in health care - in truth, what I am doing is putting more in a medical savings account in anticipation of what could occur) then we are not purchasing goods and services and therefore not helping the economy grow either. 

I don't see this as an "us v. them" thing.  Without "us" doing the work and "them" making the investment - neither group expands.  In the case of "us" we can less afford it then the "they" can (if you will). 

My point was that it isn't a us vs them thing.  Yet, you have to admit that it is always framed as the uncertainty of taxes for big business, Wall Street, and big banks.  As you agreed, the working people have a lot more powerless uncertainty that the wealthy don't, yet too many in Washington only talk about one uncertainty.

[marilyn.monroe]

If Obama gets elected again (I certainly hope not), part of his 90 billion allotment for green energy will go toward lining the lake shore from Zug Island to Toledo with windmills for you voters to look at.

If that includes shutting down Fermi, he's got my vote.

I don't think either one did that great, but Romney seemed in a better mood. Obama had more than one grimace. Heavy is the head that wears the crown. Romney sounded good when he talked about education. Obama offered an olive branch to undecided voters saying he is open to anyone's ideas "Republican or Democrat". It is still too much focus on the parties and not enough on America. I didn't take away much from the three white guys in suits.

[Flanders]

That was supposed to be a passive aggressive wink, wink, nod, nod, smiley face... right?

Because if you haven't noticed the major increase of right wing hate and intolerance for the last three weeks.....  Well, then again, you are a part of that and might not notice reality.

Really?? Just from the right?  See below.

I didn't take away much from the three white guys in suits.

[Will Sweat]

Pure sarcasm, and considering I'm an old lady I doubt that I would get many clients I would be willing to sell myself to....LOL

LOL . . . ya never know . . . Za-Za was married what . . . 16 times, da-h-ling . . . lol

[Will Sweat]

My point was that it isn't a us vs them thing.  Yet, you have to admit that it is always framed as the uncertainty of taxes for big business, Wall Street, and big banks.  As you agreed, the working people have a lot more powerless uncertainty that the wealthy don't, yet too many in Washington only talk about one uncertainty.

I agree it is always presented that way.  I think the reason for that is simple - "they" have the funds that can directly impact our economy (the whole building business / hiring people thing) while you and I don't.  It also does not hurt that "they" have more money to contribute to campains which tends to highlight the concerns that "they" have eventhough this is wrong and should not occur it is reality. 

Yet, by comparison of wealth, if I "sit" on 3% more of my income (say for Health Savings) while Widget Company A sits on 3%, theres has a much more profound impact just based on the sheer dollar amount. 

[John Kopke]

Watching President Obama unscripted was a pure jo, jo, jo joy. No David Letterman, People Magazine or an adoring press throwing him softballs on this day. Confronted on a level playing field for once, he got his butt handed to him. 

[SidecarFlip]

Watching President Obama unscripted was a pure jo, jo, jo joy. No David Letterman, People Magazine or an adoring press throwing him softballs on this day. Confronted on a level playing field for once, he got his butt handed to him.

absolutely.

Will be most interesting to watch the debacle of Ryan taking apart poor old man Joe Biden and watching old Joe blunder along...........as usual.

[Forsythia]

PBS responds to Willard.

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/statement-presidential-debate/

Each day, the American public receives an enduring and daily return on investment that is heard, seen, read and experienced in public media broadcasts, apps, podcasts and online – all for the cost of about $1.35 per person per year.

Earlier in 2012, a Harris Interactive poll confirmed that Americans consider PBS the most trusted public institution and the second most valuable use of public funds, behind only national defense, for the 9th consecutive year.

A key thing to remember is that public television and radio stations are locally owned and community focused and they are experts in working efficiently to make limited resources produce results. In fact, for every $1.00 of federal funding invested, they raise an additional $6.00 on their own – a highly effective public-private partnership.

Numerous studies -- including one requested by Congress earlier this year -- have stated categorically that while the federal investment in public broadcasting is relatively modest, the absence of this critical seed money would cripple the system and bring its services to an end.

More at the link above.

Good job by PBS for illustrating the cost benefit of Public Broadcasting.  I really hope this ends up hitting Romney hard.

[Flanders]

PBS responds to Willard.

http://www.pbs.org/about/news/archive/2012/statement-presidential-debate/

More at the link above.

Good job by PBS for illustrating the cost benefit of Public Broadcasting.  I really hope this ends up hitting Romney hard.

If you're pinning your hopes on Big Bird holding Romney while Elmo sucker punches him, you're not in a very good position of winning this election.