• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

imaplanner said:
I don't think it's nearly that simple. But its a fun game to play. I suppose a rebuttal in similar terms might be - what would you have done mskis? Forced the employees to work there? Make them accept pay cuts and work they don't want to do? Employees shouldn't be allowed to quit or to threaten to quit? Maybe we can use the military to force workers to do what companies want.
Click to expand...

If I ran the company, I would have done the same thing and closed the company and liquidate everything. Then I would start a new company, in a new location, with a new name, and with new employees to make the exact same product, while telling the union bosses to explain to the 18,000 laid off workers why they got screwed.

Tranplanner said:
What the hell is a "tweenkie"? The preferred junk food of pedophiles and republicans?
Click to expand...

No, it is the iPhone typing while trying to get two little boys out the door so I can get my workout in before lunch. As for the second part, are you trying to accuse me of something or just being a jerk.

imaplanner said:
You are aware that Petraeus is saying pretty much the same thing that the administration has been saying. It was likely an act of terror that used the protests as a cover. Susan Rice was saying that. Obama said it on the day or two after the attack. What exactly is the scandal here you are concerned about? One minute Fox is saying Obama should have defended the free speech of a video (he did-documented on video), then he should have called it terrorism (he did-documented on video), then he watched the attack live on tv and ordered help to stand down because he hates America (have fun with that one). Now is it back to the fact that they knew it was terror and didn't say so (they did - see documented on video)? There is a reason why people call it the right-wing bubble of misinformation. It seems increasingly likely that much of the sitting GOP congress is getting all their news from Fox as well- as evident by McCain and others holding a press conference to complain and talk impeachment because of the supposed lack of information while skipping a hearing to provide classified information.

Ask yourself this, what is the conspiracy exactly? If, like Fox keeps saying, Obama watched live video of the attack and ordered people to stand down and not help his own appointed ambassador because he secretely sides with islamic radicals, then this is a serious problem. Do you really think that is the case?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of who said what to whom and when it happened because I don't follow FOX news as much as you guys do. That is why I asked if it was true. Personally, I don't know. As for the cover-up, the only thing that I can gather is someone messed up by saying it was one group over the other. At the gym, a guy was talking about it, and he thinks it was done not by "Obama" but by his election team so that he could go into the election saying that they have not been attacked by terrorists under his watch. I personally don't think he knew who caused it for several days because different people were telling him different things. After reading the reports again, Petraeus said that the "Talking Points" that he read to congress after the incident was not original. I think he was scared to speak up then because he was just informed that the FBI was investigating him and his sex life.

As for the stand down attack, the other general who was on the ground and got fired said that there was a stand down command. Congressman Ted Poe has confirmed this.
 
Last edited:
michaelskis said:
If I ran the company, I would have done the same thing and closed the company and liquidate everything. Then I would start a new company, in a new location, with a new name, and with new employees to make the exact same product, while telling the union bosses to explain to the 18,000 laid off workers why they got screwed.
.
Click to expand...

Maybe Dave Ramsey can explain capital and market demand to you.
 
michaelskis said:
Maybe someone can explain production costs and 'mark to market' to you.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to tell me its still the workers fault that the underlying value of the Hostess business and profit model was less than what the market expected it to be? This whole thinks stinks of bad management.

You seem to be defending the idea that the workers should have just accepted a nearly 40% pay cut. But in a free market, those workers are not required to be forced to keep working. If they decide that they would rather not have a job than accept a dramatic cut in pay that is their right to do so. It's amazing to me you seem to think otherwise.
 
imaplanner said:
Are you trying to tell me its still the workers fault that the underlying value of the Hostess business and profit model was less than what the market expected it to be? This whole thinks stinks of bad management.

You seem to be defending the idea that the workers should have just accepted a nearly 40% pay cut. But in a free market, those workers are not required to be forced to keep working. If they decide that they would rather not have a job than accept a dramatic cut in pay that is their right to do so. It's amazing to me you seem to think otherwise.
Click to expand...

Do me a favor and put your union card down for a moment.

YES. The union demands on not only the pay but also the benefits are the primary reason they closed. It is the same reason that GM had to be bailed out. Is it the only reason, no, but it is the main reason. If the unions had let the workers go back to work, they would still be open. But no they went on strike. The production cost per unit was getting too high to be competitive in the market because their largest expense was the labor force. 6 years ago there was a big proposal to restructure the plant, bring in some new equipment, and reduce costs, but the unions flipped out about it. So they have been trying to work with them ever sense.

The labor cost was just too high to sustain a price point per unit to be compete. Many workers wanted to go back in, but the union said if you cross the line, you will be fined. How that works, I don't know. I am not in a union and I think many of them are way out of control.
 
Last edited:
michaelskis said:
Do me a favor and put your union card down for a moment.

YES. The union demands on not only the pay but also the benefits are the primary reason they closed. It is the same reason that GM had to be bailed out. Is it the only reason, no, but it is the main reason. If the unions had let the workers go back to work, they would still be open. But no they went on strike. The production cost per unit was getting too high to be competitive in the market because their largest expense was the labor force. 6 years ago there was a big proposal to restructure the plant, bring in some new equipment, and reduce costs, but the unions flipped out about it. So they have been trying to work with them ever sense.

The labor cost was just to high to sustain a price point per unit to be compete. Many workers wanted to go back in, but the union said if you cross the line, you will be fined. How that works, I don't know. I am not in a union and I think many of them are way out of control.
Click to expand...

So there was no other reason they had to shut down, just the unions? Bad product, falling demand, bad management decisions, etc had nothing to do with it, just the union.
 
michaelskis said:
Do me a favor and put your union card down for a moment.

YES. The union demands on not only the pay but also the benefits are the primary reason they closed. It is the same reason that GM had to be bailed out. Is it the only reason, no, but it is the main reason. If the unions had let the workers go back to work, they would still be open. But no they went on strike. The production cost per unit was getting too high to be competitive in the market because their largest expense was the labor force. 6 years ago there was a big proposal to restructure the plant, bring in some new equipment, and reduce costs, but the unions flipped out about it. So they have been trying to work with them ever sense.

The labor cost was just too high to sustain a price point per unit to be compete. Many workers wanted to go back in, but the union said if you cross the line, you will be fined. How that works, I don't know. I am not in a union and I think many of them are way out of control.
Click to expand...


What I am reading is that they have been in and out of bankruptcy at least two times in the last ten years and that unions have accepted huge cuts already. That they were already going to close the plants http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/11/13/slay-i-was-told-months-ago-about-hostess-closure/

And that recently, as they have been losing money they've been piling on debt, including raiding capital to give upper management raises of up to 300 percent while preparing themselves for bankruptcy. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304072004577323993512506050.html

Does that sound like good business sense to you? Would dave Ramsey think giving yourself a 300 percent raise while your business is failing and going bankrupt is the appropriate way to run a business?

Do you even understand what a strike is? Its workers telling management they would rather be fired or quit then accept the deal- the deal in this case being huge pay cuts. NOthing is or was stopping hostess from laying off workers or from hiring replacement workers at a lower wage. If the wage they are willing to pay is not attractive to workers, they will not get or retain workers. That is the free market at work. So much for the liberty you claim to care so much about.
 
Last edited:
michaelskis said:
As for the stand down attack, the other general who was on the ground and got fired said that there was a stand down command. Congressman Ted Poe has confirmed this.
Click to expand...

And the CIA, state department, and pentagon have all said this is total BS. So you really do believe the nonsense from partisan dingbats that the POTUS watched the attack happen on live video and ordered the military to stand down and not help his own ambassador. Because why exactly? Because not helping americans under attack from terrorists would help his election chances somehow? Or maybe he hates America? What on earth is the motive for this terrible thing obama apparently did? Maybe he just thought saving Americans under attack would hurt his election chances?

You do realize what you are accusing the president of don't you? Have you ever heard the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"? In this particular instance we have extraordinary claims from known liars with absolutely zero proof.
 
michaelskis said:
The union demands on not only the pay but also the benefits are the primary reason they closed. It is the same reason that GM had to be bailed out. Is it the only reason, no, but it is the main reason. If the unions had let the workers go back to work, they would still be open. But no they went on strike.
Click to expand...


Here and I always thought the union was the workers? Where did I get the silly idea that the workers had to vote to strike? 8-!
 
One big difference between the whole Benghazi affair, which the MSM tried their darndest to keep quiet from 2012-09-11 all the way up until just over a week ago (election day, remember?) while they went into all-in, sound the klaxons mode with that 3rd-rate burglary in Washington, DC a few decades ago is that nobody was hurt in that break-in.

:r:

BTW, I have no doubt that the trademarks and recipes for Hostess' most popular products will find buyers and, after a short period, will be back on store shelves - being made by different companies in less-expensive and much more efficient non-union shops.

Mike
 
giff57 said:
Here and I always thought the union was the workers? Where did I get the silly idea that the workers had to vote to strike? 8-!
Click to expand...

Did all the workers vote to strike? Nope. But because they are union the majority wins. If the union was not involved, then those who wanted to stay could.
 
michaelskis said:
Did all the workers vote to strike? Nope. But because they are union the majority wins. If the union was not involved, then those who wanted to stay could.
Click to expand...
And it was only one union representing about 3K of the company's 18K workforce. All of the others previously settled with concessions. What about the 'rights' of that other 15K? They're just as sunk as those who struck.

Mike
 
Changing tastes as well as legacy costs

NYTimes piece

Highlights:

...you would have gently removed the puck-shaped treat and taken a bite deep enough to reveal crème — not cream, but crème — so precious that a cow’s participation was incidental to its making.
You did not care that this processed food product in your trembling hand was an industrial step or two removed from becoming the heel of a shoe.
...the maker of Ring Dings, Ho Hos, Funny Bones and other treats whose names conjure a troupe of third-rate clowns.
...the truth is that the bad-snack market has been in decline for years. All of a sudden, it seems, nosy consumers want to know what it is that they are ingesting, and that’s not good if you manufacture edible curiosities like SuzyQs and Raspberry Zingers.
...Reading the nutrition facts, I took comfort in seeing that the word nutrition was not in quotation marks. I skipped past unimportant details — the 310 calories, the 13 grams of fat, the 37 grams of sugar — and found validation in the 2 grams of dietary fiber.
...Here is the eat-your-broccoli part of the Hostess saga. According to Harvey Hartman, a food-industry researcher and consultant in Bellevue, Wash., the country’s food culture is rapidly changing. Consumers want less processed foods, he says, and more information about “the story behind their food” — which might not be something that a Sno Ball would want told. ​


In other breaking news, Kentucky Fried Chicken changed its corporate name to enhance its image.

Wonder if Dave Ramsey eats Wonder bread.
 
Think Mitt Romney would strike a pose like this?

8191317327_5180e95d98_z.jpg


:D
 
michaelskis said:
Did all the workers vote to strike? Nope. But because they are union the majority wins. If the union was not involved, then those who wanted to stay could.
Click to expand...

They still could. Workers cross the line all the time. If they really wanted the deal they would have taken it.

mgk920 said:
And it was only one union representing about 3K of the company's 18K workforce. All of the others previously settled with concessions. What about the 'rights' of that other 15K? They're just as sunk as those who struck.

Mike
Click to expand...

That sounds like it wasn't the strike that caused the closing then. If they had 15,000 willing workers why are they not still open?
 
"Ongoing incompetence and greed"

Everything You (Probably) Didn’t Know About the Hostess Brands® Story

Luigi Peruzzi has been delivering Twinkies and Ding Dongs to gas stations and grocery stores in Detroit for 25 years. When his employer, Hostess Brands Inc., was in bankruptcy court in 2009, Mr. Peruzzi agreed to give up half his weekly base pay, going to $100 a week from about $209, forcing him to depend more on his commissions. The Hostess driver was told the sacrifices were needed to make the company thrive.
...
As the company was asking for more givebacks from workers, a group of creditors said in court papers that the company “may have manipulated its executives’ salaries higher in the months leading up to its Chapter 11 filing,” again according to the WSJ. According to the creditors’ court filing, the following Hostess executives saw substantial salary increases in July 2011:

Brian Driscoll, CEO, from around $750,000 to $2,550,000
Gary Wandscheider, EVP, $500,000 to $900,000
John Stewart, EVP, $400,000 to $700,000
David Loeser, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Kent Magill, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Richard Seban, EVP, $375,00o to $656,256
John Akeson, SVP, $300,000 to $480,000
Steven Birgfeld, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Martha Ross, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Rob Kissick, SVP, $182,000 t0 $273,008
...
All this while asking workers such as Mr. Peruzzi, a 47 year old father of three, who, according to the WSJ article grossed about $51,000 last year, to take further pay and benefit cuts.
 
Last edited:
Veloise said:
Everything You (Probably) Didn’t Know About the Hostess Brands® Story

Luigi Peruzzi has been delivering Twinkies and Ding Dongs to gas stations and grocery stores in Detroit for 25 years. When his employer, Hostess Brands Inc., was in bankruptcy court in 2009, Mr. Peruzzi agreed to give up half his weekly base pay, going to $100 a week from about $209, forcing him to depend more on his commissions. The Hostess driver was told the sacrifices were needed to make the company thrive.
...
As the company was asking for more givebacks from workers, a group of creditors said in court papers that the company “may have manipulated its executives’ salaries higher in the months leading up to its Chapter 11 filing,” again according to the WSJ. According to the creditors’ court filing, the following Hostess executives saw substantial salary increases in July 2011:

Brian Driscoll, CEO, from around $750,000 to $2,550,000
Gary Wandscheider, EVP, $500,000 to $900,000
John Stewart, EVP, $400,000 to $700,000
David Loeser, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Kent Magill, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Richard Seban, EVP, $375,00o to $656,256
John Akeson, SVP, $300,000 to $480,000
Steven Birgfeld, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Martha Ross, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Rob Kissick, SVP, $182,000 t0 $273,008
...
All this while asking workers such as Mr. Peruzzi, a 47 year old father of three, who, according to the WSJ article grossed about $51,000 last year, to take further pay and benefit cuts.
Click to expand...

Well, these were obviously all merit raises since these guys and gals were doing such bang-up jobs. I bet they all connived to provide themselves with golden parachutes protected from the creditors, too.
 
From a Hostess employee

Inside the Hostess Bankery

In July of 2011 we received a letter from the company. It said that the $3+ per hour that we as a Union contribute to the pension was going to be 'borrowed' by the company until they could be profitable again. Then they would pay it all back. The Union was notified of this the same time and method as the individual members. No contact from the company to the Union on a national level.

This money will never be paid back. The company filed for bankruptcy and the judge ruled that the $3+ per hour was a debt the company couldn't repay. The Union continued to work despite this theft of our self-funded pension contributions for over a year. I consider this money stolen. No other word in the English language describes what they have done to this money. ...

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Remember how I said I made $48,000 in 2005 and $34,000 last year? I would make $25,000 in 5 years if I took their offer.
It will be hard to replace the job I had, but it will be easy to replace the job they were trying to give me.
That $3+ per hour they steal totaled $50 million last year that they never paid us. They sold $2.5 BILLION in product last year. If they can't make this profitable without stealing my money then good riddance.
​
 
Will we see the return of rational republicans? Or does Grover Nordquist still own the souls of these folks?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/grover-norquist-tax-pledge-no-one-caving-142521888--election.html
"I will violate the pledge," said South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham Sunday during an appearance on ABC's "This Week." In return, he added, Democrats must agree to overhauling federal programs like Social Security and Medicare.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a pretty good deal to start negotiations... we shall see.
 
Veloise said:
Inside the Hostess Bankery

In July of 2011 we received a letter from the company. It said that the $3+ per hour that we as a Union contribute to the pension was going to be 'borrowed' by the company until they could be profitable again. Then they would pay it all back. The Union was notified of this the same time and method as the individual members. No contact from the company to the Union on a national level.

This money will never be paid back. The company filed for bankruptcy and the judge ruled that the $3+ per hour was a debt the company couldn't repay. The Union continued to work despite this theft of our self-funded pension contributions for over a year. I consider this money stolen. No other word in the English language describes what they have done to this money. ...

What was this last/best/final offer? You'd never know by watching the main stream media tell the story. So here you go...
1) 8% hourly pay cut in year 1 with additional cuts totaling 27% over 5 years. Currently, I make $16.12 an hour at TOP rate of pay in the bakery. I would drop to $11.26 in 5 years.
2) They get to keep our $3+ an hour forever.
3) Doubling of weekly insurance premium.
4) Lowering of overall quality of insurance plan.
5) TOTAL withdrawal from ALL pensions. If you don't have it now then you never will.

Remember how I said I made $48,000 in 2005 and $34,000 last year? I would make $25,000 in 5 years if I took their offer.
It will be hard to replace the job I had, but it will be easy to replace the job they were trying to give me.
That $3+ per hour they steal totaled $50 million last year that they never paid us. They sold $2.5 BILLION in product last year. If they can't make this profitable without stealing my money then good riddance.
​
Click to expand...

Veloise said:
Everything You (Probably) Didn’t Know About the Hostess Brands® Story

Luigi Peruzzi has been delivering Twinkies and Ding Dongs to gas stations and grocery stores in Detroit for 25 years. When his employer, Hostess Brands Inc., was in bankruptcy court in 2009, Mr. Peruzzi agreed to give up half his weekly base pay, going to $100 a week from about $209, forcing him to depend more on his commissions. The Hostess driver was told the sacrifices were needed to make the company thrive.
...
As the company was asking for more givebacks from workers, a group of creditors said in court papers that the company “may have manipulated its executives’ salaries higher in the months leading up to its Chapter 11 filing,” again according to the WSJ. According to the creditors’ court filing, the following Hostess executives saw substantial salary increases in July 2011:

Brian Driscoll, CEO, from around $750,000 to $2,550,000
Gary Wandscheider, EVP, $500,000 to $900,000
John Stewart, EVP, $400,000 to $700,000
David Loeser, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Kent Magill, EVP, $375,000 to $656,256
Richard Seban, EVP, $375,00o to $656,256
John Akeson, SVP, $300,000 to $480,000
Steven Birgfeld, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Martha Ross, SVP, $240,000 to $360,000
Rob Kissick, SVP, $182,000 t0 $273,008
...
All this while asking workers such as Mr. Peruzzi, a 47 year old father of three, who, according to the WSJ article grossed about $51,000 last year, to take further pay and benefit cuts.
Click to expand...

How strange the people who don't get their "information" from Faux are informed on the subject. Surely our Faux watcher has an ideologically pure talking point to refute reality.
 
Speaking of Fox News. I saw this one yesterday where they cut the interview of a foreign policy writer after he claimed Fox News was over hyping the Benghazi story.
Scott pushed back on the accusation that Fox News "hyped" the attack, asking, “When you have four people dead, including the first U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?”

“How many security contractors died in Iraq? Do you know?” Ricks replied.

“I don’t,” Scott said.

“No, nobody does, because nobody cared,” Ricks said. “We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I say this focus on what was essentially a small fire-fight, I think, number one, I’ve covered a lot of fire-fights, it is impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes.”
Click to expand...
 
Hink said:
That PBS, what a waste of money ;) I agree though, it is a pretty telling piece.
Click to expand...

PBS? I watched it on HULU because I think cable is a waste of money. :D

There was quite of bit of information that I did not know before I watched it. I also think it is a very interesting contrast with Dr. Stanley’s book The Millionaire Next Door.
However, after seeing it, I am even more of an independent, but I wonder if things will ever get better.
 
Today Romney & Obama are having lunch. Do you think anything good will come out of this meeting. I am optimistic that the President will incorporate at least some of Romney's idea into his plans for the next 4 years.
 
michaelskis said:
Today Romney & Obama are having lunch. Do you think anything good will come out of this meeting. I am optimistic that the President will incorporate at least some of Romney's idea into his plans for the next 4 years.
Click to expand...

My guess is Obama is wanting to see if Romney will drink beer. Other than that, maybe he is asking if the Romney of pre-2008 can come back and help fight the good fight for healthcare, social equality, and tax reform.... or not.
 
michaelskis said:
Today Romney & Obama are having lunch. Do you think anything good will come out of this meeting. I am optimistic that the President will incorporate at least some of Romney's idea into his plans for the next 4 years.
Click to expand...
I think it's a token gesture. It's pretty obvious Obama does not like Romney at all and I doubt winning the election changes that. On top of that, Romney is now toxic to both Democrats and Republicans.
 
Blide said:
I think it's a token gesture. It's pretty obvious Obama does not like Romney at all and I doubt winning the election changes that. On top of that, Romney is now toxic to both Democrats and Republicans.
Click to expand...

Yup. Rmoney has nothing to offer BHO.

OTOH, I'm finding it frustrating that even NPR is tremulously reporting on the gentle fiscal decline and the political posturing behind it as if it were the ennnnnnnnnd of the worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrld-uh! sigh. :-{
 
Meh politics is so boring now that the election is over. This fiscal cliff stuff is so uninteresting due to all the obvious posturing.
 
NPR tries so hard to shill for republicans these days its not funny. It's almost as if they think republicans might actually change their mind on attacking them constantly.

NPR Fools.
 
Duke Of Dystopia said:
NPR tries so hard to shill for republicans these days its not funny. It's almost as if they think republicans might actually change their mind on attacking them constantly.

NPR Fools.
Click to expand...

It seems to be a quality many Democrats and liberals have - this desire to make peace with neocons. Sort of like those people who show up in the news every so often who get mauled to death after insisting that they can make friends with bears.

In either case - neocon or grizzly bear - he is not your friend. He has no desire to be your pal and sees your entreaties as weakness and an opportunity to destroy you.

Keep your friends close. And keep your enemies as far away as possible. Pack pepper spray if possible.
 
Blide said:
Just after I made that post I see this gem:

Senate rejects treaty to protect disabled around the world
Click to expand...

Truly shameful. but also I think it exposes the fact that so many senators don't even understand what they are voting on. All this would have done is apply our own American disability laws as a model for the international community. We would have no new requirements. But we just have some really stupid and hateful politicians.
 
imaplanner said:
Truly shameful. but also I think it exposes the fact that so many senators don't even understand what they are voting on. All this would have done is apply our own American disability laws as a model for the international community. We would have no new requirements. But we just have some really stupid and hateful politicians.
Click to expand...

Here it is in full text. I read over it and I don't see how it relinquishes any control to the UN other than they have the ability to change it and it would take a year for the US to drop out of it.

I find it ironic that Iran supports it given how they treat women.
 
It was pretty sick to see Santorum bring his severely disabled daughter to a hearing to argue against the treaty. I'm really hoping the treaty passes in the new Congress. I'd be surprised if Reid doesn't bring up again since it makes the GOP look bad.

Unfortunately anything involving the UN brings out the fringe right wing lunatics. I mean just look at Agenda 21.
 
What is your prediction of the Fiscal Cliff? Will we go off it? If so what will really happen? Do you think an agreement will be made and if so, what do you think it will look like?
 
michaelskis said:
What is your prediction of the Fiscal Cliff? Will we go off it? If so what will really happen? Do you think an agreement will be made and if so, what do you think it will look like?
Click to expand...


The Gentle Fiscal Slope will be seen as a nothingburger while the GoOPers make idiots of themselves and BHO gives them enough rope to continue to wrap it around each others' necks.

Oh, and events will be reported as they occur, not as transcribed from a press brief.

hey, a guy can dream that all these will continue, can't he (save for the transcriptions, which need to stop)?
 
michaelskis said:
What is your prediction of the Fiscal Cliff? Will we go off it? If so what will really happen? Do you think an agreement will be made and if so, what do you think it will look like?
Click to expand...

My guess is our dysfunctional congress will come to an agreement that does the following:

- Raises the rate on the top 2% to pre-Bush years.
- Continue the AMT patch for 1 year
- Extending the doc fix for 1 year
- Allowing the payroll deduction to expire
- Keep 800 billion of the sequestration cuts / loophole closures.


Honestly, I am confused how the strongly R (tea party) people can be against the sequestration and increasing of taxes. The CBO estimates that it would reduce the deficit by almost double the "fix" of all the cliff stuff. Yes, it will stifle growth, but that isn't what many tea partiers are about... they want reductions in government / spending / etc. This will do that.
 
There has been discussion about Michigan becoming a ‘right to work’ state. The union people make it sound like the end of the world, the GOP makes it sound like the best way to boost the economy and create jobs.

I don’t know enough about the regulations but from my general understanding of the regulations, it would not require anyone to join a union and would not require them to pay to be part of the union.

What are your thoughts on right to work laws? Is that all that they do or is there something else that was not listed?
 
So we have this:

GOP senator backs tax rate hike on wealthy
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...tor-backs-tax-rate-hike-on-wealthy/?hpt=hp_t1

Then we get this:

BREAKING: Sen. Jim DeMint will step down from Senate
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-demint-will-step-down-from-senate/?hpt=hp_t3

"No organization is better equipped to lead this fight and I believe my experience in public office as well as in the private sector as a business owner will help Heritage become even more effective in the years to come," he said.
Click to expand...

So he is leaving his public servant role to make money at a think tank? Hmm this smells of Sarah Palin.
 
michaelskis said:
There has been discussion about Michigan becoming a ‘right to work’ state. The union people make it sound like the end of the world, the GOP makes it sound like the best way to boost the economy and create jobs.

I don’t know enough about the regulations but from my general understanding of the regulations, it would not require anyone to join a union and would not require them to pay to be part of the union.

What are your thoughts on right to work laws? Is that all that they do or is there something else that was not listed?
Click to expand...

I share many views with the Democrats. Their unflinching support of unions is not one of them. I hope this gets done.
 
Hink said:
My guess is our dysfunctional congress will come to an agreement that does the following:

- Raises the rate on the top 2% to pre-Bush years.
- Continue the AMT patch for 1 year
- Extending the doc fix for 1 year
- Allowing the payroll deduction to expire
- Keep 800 billion of the sequestration cuts / loophole closures.


Honestly, I am confused how the strongly R (tea party) people can be against the sequestration and increasing of taxes. The CBO estimates that it would reduce the deficit by almost double the "fix" of all the cliff stuff. Yes, it will stifle growth, but that isn't what many tea partiers are about... they want reductions in government / spending / etc. This will do that.
Click to expand...

I think they forgot that huge cuts will stifle growth. Spending money supports growth, regardless of who is doing it. I just hope that this process gives an honest look to what programs should be cut and which ones should remain. The idea of slash slash slash is simply too short sighted, but some things should be trimmed.
 
Back
Top