Quote:Hooray for our idiotic congress!
I guess you answered my question. All you care about are the issues they dish out to distract you, just like the conservatives who voted based on "moral values". It doesn't matter which position you take, because they've already won by drawing your attention away from the stuff that'll legitimately affect your life, your country, and your planet. "You've got a bullet in your head."
and that's from? maybe alittle besides the point but I never have like timberlake and because of that stupid superbowl thing last year I may hate him for a long time
wait... why is it always about sex why not violence? is brutally hurting someone not as bad as someone kissing?
Quote:wait... why is it always about sex why not violence? is brutally hurting someone not as bad as someone kissing?
No, brutality is fun for everybody.
yeah we all know that but still I have a point don't I
Wisemon Wrote:I guess you answered my question. All you care about are the issues they dish out to distract you, just like the conservatives who voted based on "moral values". It doesn't matter which position you take, because they've already won by drawing your attention away from the stuff that'll legitimately affect your life, your country, and your planet. "You've got a bullet in your head."
Somebody has to look at the social issues.
Here comes Topic Resuscitator Man!
My slant, first of all, is libertarian liberal. This means I take liberal economic stances and libertarian social ones. Not Libertarian like the party, which is heavily conservative on economic issues, but libertarian.
You will help nothing by raising OR lowering taxes. How much money the government puts into the economy or takes away from it doesn't matter.
Social issues, both bad and good, are results of a process composed of rules. The inputs are constant: people, what they have, and what has them (communities and whatnot), etc. Social issues are the result. So what to do to get a better result? CHANGE THE RULES OF THE PROCESS.
Large corporate growth needs to be constrained on the one hand, and new, living wage jobs are needed on the other. The solution, IMHO, is as follows. Create tarriffs and import taxes so that once prices are jacked up to account for them foreign made products cost the same as USA made ones. Once this is done there will be no incentive to outsource since you don't make more profit for your products. It will also help the government raise money it sorely needs.
There are two reasons we don't see a lot of job growth: 1. Large corporations can outsource and mechanize, thus reducing their need for labor, especially unskilled labor 2. Small businesses are having a hard time becoming big. The first can be solved simply by regulating how large a market share in how many markets a single company can hold, like we used to do with media until the Republicans fucked it up. Small businesses are having a hard time becoming big because barriers to entry of most markets are high, due to large corps already having technological advantages AND a market foothold, because they are being bought out, and because of oligopolies. An oligopoly is what you get when several large corporations that together dominate the market agree, either openly, secretly, or implicitly by the actions they take, to not take their own competition to a point that would open the market to new competitors. Hence the endless yet irrelevant service and price wars between auto makers, package delivery companies, computer makers, soft-drink companies, and television providers (ie: cable and sattelite companies). These should be treated as antitrust cases and forced to compete with each other: in a competitive game cooperation should be considered cheating. Barrier to entry problems will be solved partially by getting rid of oligopolies, and the rest can be aided through encouraging banks to help small businesses situate themselves in the market, which would be advantagous for the banks to do, seeing as these are their loan and account clients. Possibly the government could establish center(s) for keeping of business statistics that could be assured as reliable.
Even these won't fix things completely though. Trickle-down hasn't worked, but a rising tide still lifts all boats. The source of that tide must be from the bottom. We need to pass living wage laws that determine said wage by the mathematical formula used to calculate the cost of living in an area, by area (perhaps counties?) each year. The calculated wage should be the mandatory minimum wage. Also, American manufacturing companies must be encouraged in a way other than price equalization, possibly through a small (very small most likely) tax break for each American citizen employed full time to manufacture. Thus, the more American workers being employed, the more living wages being payed, the larger the tax break. This should of course, be done AFTER rewriting the tax code from the ground up to seal the gaping holes that have been opened in it, such as offshore tax shelters and "business expenses". My father once bought me a gift and then managed to write it off as a business expense, even though he was visiting me on a pleasure trip that had nothing to do with the bank he works at.
Once you've got Americans actually being employed as something other than service-sector "professionals" again, it would be a good idea to close the loophole that allows companies to get out of much of the regulations governing health insurance by setting up their own plans. This would help because then we could revive the old system of insurance companies with many different clients, thus allowing a collective pooling of risk and allowing more people and employers to afford health care coverage.
All views expressed here are merely my own and should be taken very seriously when I run for Congress and President. Until then, please, no flamage.
Quote:Large corporate growth needs to be constrained on the one hand, and new, living wage jobs are needed on the other.
Why? Do you want to limit economic growth? And companies will always pay a living wage, becuase no company wants to lose headcount, especially in companies that require skilled labour.
Quote:Create tarriffs and import taxes so that once prices are jacked up to account for them foreign made products cost the same as USA made ones. Once this is done there will be no incentive to outsource since you don't make more profit for your products. It will also help the government raise money it sorely needs.
Outsourcing is a bad thing now? Seriously, if you want to get rid of it, cut down on business legislation here, increase the incentive to stay. Also, tariffs would decrease foriegn trade. All those foriegn companies that sell here, Honda, Toyota, Sony, Volkswagon ete. would be gone from an increase in cost. And many service jobs would be lost, not to mention it would only protect American companies, letting them make crappy products.
Quote:Large corporations can outsource and mechanize, thus reducing their need for labor, especially unskilled labor
Because of the business legislation in the US
Quote:Small businesses are having a hard time becoming big. The first can be solved simply by regulating how large a market share in how many markets a single company can hold, like we used to do with media until the Republicans fucked it up. Small businesses are having a hard time becoming big because barriers to entry of most markets are high, due to large corps already having technological advantages AND a market foothold, because they are being bought out, and because of oligopolies. An oligopoly is what you get when several large corporations that together dominate the market agree, either openly, secretly, or implicitly by the actions they take, to not take their own competition to a point that would open the market to new competitors. Hence the endless yet irrelevant service and price wars between auto makers, package delivery companies, computer makers, soft-drink companies, and television providers (ie: cable and sattelite companies). These should be treated as antitrust cases and forced to compete with each other: in a competitive game cooperation should be considered cheating. Barrier to entry problems will be solved partially by getting rid of oligopolies, and the rest can be aided through encouraging banks to help small businesses situate themselves in the market, which would be advantagous for the banks to do, seeing as these are their loan and account clients. Possibly the government could establish center(s) for keeping of business statistics that could be assured as reliable.
Small businesses have a hard time because of business legislation. Business legislation affects small businesses most. We get rid of that and large corporations have more competition.
Also, trusts aren't necassarily a bad thing. When Standard Oil had a monopoly from a trust, it lowered the prices for oil from $100 a barrel to $10 a barrel. By the time Congress did anything about Standard oil, though, it had lost it's market share, and was down to 25% of the oil market share. Monopolies are neither evil nor long lasting.
Quote:Even these won't fix things completely though. Trickle-down hasn't worked, but a rising tide still lifts all boats. The source of that tide must be from the bottom. We need to pass living wage laws that determine said wage by the mathematical formula used to calculate the cost of living in an area, by area (perhaps counties?) each year. The calculated wage should be the mandatory minimum wage. Also, American manufacturing companies must be encouraged in a way other than price equalization, possibly through a small (very small most likely) tax break for each American citizen employed full time to manufacture. Thus, the more American workers being employed, the more living wages being payed, the larger the tax break. This should of course, be done AFTER rewriting the tax code from the ground up to seal the gaping holes that have been opened in it, such as offshore tax shelters and "business expenses". My father once bought me a gift and then managed to write it off as a business expense, even though he was visiting me on a pleasure trip that had nothing to do with the bank he works at.
Any advanced economy is based more on service. Also, if you want to increase economic growth, decrease business legislation.
And geting tax breaks to the rich isn't so evil. Many small busines owners combine their business and their own income, and register witihn this bracket.
Quote:Once you've got Americans actually being employed as something other than service-sector "professionals" again, it would be a good idea to close the loophole that allows companies to get out of much of the regulations governing health insurance by setting up their own plans. This would help because then we could revive the old system of insurance companies with many different clients, thus allowing a collective pooling of risk and allowing more people and employers to afford health care coverage.
Why should companies have to provide health insurance, and a standardized one?
You're pretty much full of it and have twisted every word I say, along with making assumptions of grave nature and baseless assertions. Be happy this isn't the DHZ where Netrogo or another mod would flame your ass.
So in your opinion, $7.00 an hour is a living wage? Cause that's what the full-time, 40 hour week Wal-Mart workers around here get I believe.
Yes, outsourcing is bad. It takes away American jobs, and American jobs let people here live their lives. The economy is a means to people living comfortably, not an end unto itself. That's why only idiots like George W. Bush think that we should cater to businesses, which themselves are conglomerates of people spoken for by the richest and greediest. I never said we should "protect American firms that make crappy products", I said that by equalizing prices we give them an equal footing. When there's no difference in price due to outsourcing (and often inhumane labor practices in foreign countries like China allow for this difference) people will buy products based on what they want in the product, thus making competition work the way it's supposed to.
Quote:Because of the business legislation in the US
So business legislation is forcing them to go mistreat Chinese workers because they can't mistreat the workers here to the extent that they'd like? Yes, why not prohibit unions (which we have already done somewhat, union busting is very easy nowadays), and allow managers and supervisors to whip their workers!? See above about outsourcing, and shut up with the unfounded assertions.
Quote:Small businesses have a hard time because of business legislation. Business legislation affects small businesses most. We get rid of that and large corporations have more competition.
Eliminate the business legislation and the workers will be in chains (literally) tomorrow. The small business won't even really exist because large corporations will gobble them up as soon as they become profitable.
Yes, monopolies ARE evil. If you can say "monopoly", then say "Microsoft" and you don't get a since of the latter being evil because it's an instance of the former, you are clinically Republican.
Quote:Any advanced economy is based more on service. Also, if you want to increase economic growth, decrease business legislation.
BULLSHIT. Prove these somehow, if you even can.
Quote:Why should companies have to provide health insurance, and a standardized one?
The old regulations never forced companies to provide health insurance, they merely standardized what went on when the company chose to. If they didn't want to follow the regulations they could just not provide health insurance.
I'm the one with the assertions? What od they say abotu throwing stones in glass houses?
Quote:So in your opinion, $7.00 an hour is a living wage? Cause that's what the full-time, 40 hour week Wal-Mart workers around here get I believe.
40 hours a week is pretty short. Not to mention that $7.00 would be a living wage because of deflation (and decrease unemployment)
Quote:Yes, outsourcing is bad. It takes away American jobs, and American jobs let people here live their lives. The economy is a means to people living comfortably, not an end unto itself. That's why only idiots like George W. Bush think that we should cater to businesses, which themselves are conglomerates of people spoken for by the richest and greediest. I never said we should "protect American firms that make crappy products", I said that by equalizing prices we give them an equal footing. When there's no difference in price due to outsourcing (and often inhumane labor practices in foreign countries like China allow for this difference) people will buy products based on what they want in the product, thus making competition work the way it's supposed to.
But it allows for service jobs. Not to mention that jobs are outsourced here too. And outsourcing wouldn't happen if it was't for business legislation. If it wasn't for business legislation, communications, shipping ete. would make it unprofitable to outsource.
And competition should also be about cost, not just qualities of the product itself.
Quote:So business legislation is forcing them to go mistreat Chinese workers because they can't mistreat the workers here to the extent that they'd like? Yes, why not prohibit unions (which we have already done somewhat, union busting is very easy nowadays), and allow managers and supervisors to whip their workers!? See above about outsourcing, and shut up with the unfounded assertions.
Worker abuse has no place in business practices, nor does coercion of any kind.
Also, because of outsourcing, those people in China can get jobs, and their economy can grow, and they can eat, send their children to school ete. Don't tell me it hasn't done anything positive.
And you seem to be full of unfounded assertion about economics.
Quote:Eliminate the business legislation and the workers will be in chains (literally) tomorrow. The small business won't even really exist because large corporations will gobble them up as soon as they become profitable.
You know where is a limit to how much a company can expand before infastructure becomes too much, right? The small business will thrive because they are the ones with the smaller budget for things like minimum wage, for health codes ete.
Quote:Yes, monopolies ARE evil. If you can say "monopoly", then say "Microsoft" and you don't get a since of the latter being evil because it's an instance of the former, you are clinically Republican.
I'm no Neo-Conservative. I hate Neo-Conservativism. I am more in league with Neo-Liberalism, if anything. (by the way, protectionism is a general platoform of the Republican party)
What? Microsoft is no monoploy. What about competition from Apple and the upcoming Linux? And Microsoft simply makes better operating systems for what the customers need. They make the best product. They win.
I love how you ignore my Standard Oil example. I'm sure you've heard of it? How about Philidelphia Steel, whose monopoly also made steel much cheaper?
Quote:BULLSHIT. Prove these somehow, if you even can.
Well, for the first one, as disposable income increases, the want to buy things increases. This creates stores, restaurants ete.
As for the second one, it's simple. Decrease cost, and businesses will be able to reinvest more profit into their businesses.
Quote:So in your opinion, $7.00 an hour is a living wage? Cause that's what the full-time, 40 hour week Wal-Mart workers around here get I believe.
This is what I've been arguing for a while.
Quote:Small businesses have a hard time because of business legislation. Business legislation affects small businesses most. We get rid of that and large corporations have more competition.
You know exactly what will happen if we get rid of business legislation. The rich will get richer, and by relativity, American workers will become the equivalents of serfs in a feudal system. Taking away business legislation is a terrible idea; it's like releasing all the ghosts from the containment unit.
Quote:Outsourcing is a bad thing now?
Just to show that I always choose the correct position, and not necessarily the left position, I'll agree that outsourcing isn't always a bad thing. There are many jobs that American workers won't do, and if we did them, the price of things like toys and clothes would be ridiculously high. Jobs that involve more than grunt/hand work, like engineering jobs, should not be outsourced.