Reality? Is it better to have someone like Obama who hands out goverment aid and failed work projects that spend trillions to create a few million low paying jobs, not even enough to keep up with population growth, versus a choice of a guy who has worked in business and knows what inspires employers to start hiring again?
All heart, but no competence or results: Obama
Romney: A tough love guy who looks with disdain on people with talent and ability continuing to sit on the sidelines. Example: The OWS crowd. Instead of hanging out for months at a sit in, they have the drive and ability to organize these marches, why don't they use this to develop small businesses offering eco friendly products.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Example: The OWS crowd. Instead of hanging out for months at a sit in, they have the drive and ability to organize these marches, why don't they use this to develop small businesses offering eco friendly products.
You think that OWS was organized?
I don't. I think it was just a bunch of hippies who in between bong hits down in their parents basement - happened to look at their iphone to see the tweet about a party going down on wall street.
"Were gonna sock it to the man"!
These people couldn't organize their way out of a paper bag, much less innovate eco friendly products.
I might actually support some measure of individual welfare programming if it was being used to pay folks to patch the holes in the streets, mow the grass on publicly owned land, get rid of the beetle kill that permeates federal lands in our State, that type of thing. It's the handout/entitlement mentality that I take issue with. I have no issue, per se, with paying someone from the public treasury to perform work that benefits the public who are helping to support them until they can find more productive work on their own. Heck, I'd be happy with 15 hours of work per week for the public benefit in exchange for receiving benefits from the public. We've got enough pushed public works projects that we could give a bunch of guys a shovel and let them dig holes 15 hours a week in exchange for their benefits rather than hiring a private contractor to use a backhoe to dig out the pipes. We'd be stimulating the shovel industry, the wheelbarrow industry, the boot industry, the glove industry and getting some useful work out of the funds we're handing out by doing it that way.
PrintSmith wrote: I might actually support some measure of individual welfare programming if it was being used to pay folks to patch the holes in the streets, mow the grass on publicly owned land, get rid of the beetle kill that permeates federal lands in our State, that type of thing. It's the handout/entitlement mentality that I take issue with. I have no issue, per se, with paying someone from the public treasury to perform work that benefits the public who are helping to support them until they can find more productive work on their own. Heck, I'd be happy with 15 hours of work per week for the public benefit in exchange for receiving benefits from the public. We've got enough pushed public works projects that we could give a bunch of guys a shovel and let them dig holes 15 hours a week in exchange for their benefits rather than hiring a private contractor to use a backhoe to dig out the pipes. We'd be stimulating the shovel industry, the wheelbarrow industry, the boot industry, the glove industry and getting some useful work out of the funds we're handing out by doing it that way.
Sounds more appealing that way, doesn't it?
But you do help out more people because you don't have to provide them workplaces, managers, support, etc.
I think it was Forbes who while visiting China seeing thousands of coolies digging ditches with shovels asked his guide, why don't you use a back hoe instead? The guide responded using shovels provided more jobs, Malcolm responded, if
you want to make jobs, give them spoons instead of shovels.
Mexico always had that work ethic, use people instead of equipment because labor is cheaper, but last time I was in Mexico I was watching a project where they actually had a Bobcat to help them. The operator did such a poor job I am sure he would have been faster if he had used a shovel.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Having people perform 15 hours of public service work would probably be difficult in our legalistic, union run, labor law mandated culture. What if you get injured? Its already getting more difficult to be a self employed independent contractor, the IRS would rather you become a cubicle slave with payroll withholding.
Besides, the struggle today is going to be viewed as minor compared to what we are heading for in the coming decades when the borrowing and interest payment hits the wall like Greece and Spain.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
For me - welfare is not that big of an issue. It's blown way out of proportion in terms of fiscal impact. If Romney was really a fiscal conservative (he's not) - sure - he'd be slightly better for our state of affairs than Obama.
Take a look at all the mega companies that have paid their quadrennial tithes to the red tie cult - both Romney and Obama are going to be corporate welfare pimps. That's how DC works. Thank you super PACs. There's some big hogs in DC - and they're getting hungry. They don't really care who feeds them - but it better happen..........
Disclosure of partisan bias: I voted for change once before. I learned my lesson. I'm deciding between a vote for nobody -- or vote for Romney.
I've already decided most of my other votes.
Over the last 3 years, I've lost about $3,000 to higher energy costs (home and vehicle), $3,000 to higher insurance (mostly health), and $5,000 to higher food costs - and I'm just one household. Funny thing is - I refinanced my home (thank you Mr. President) - and should have MORE buying power --- but it's been swallowed up by the aforementioned costs.
The energy costs are a product of world markets, as well as our unwillingness to diversity energy sources. The insurance costs are a product of insurance companies losing money in fake money markets (mortgages) ---- and struggling to recoup their costs from the subscriber. The higher food causes come from higher energy costs, and again - transition from local to world markets.
I'll grant you that government (i.e. - Obama) facilitated the skyrocket in my insurance costs.
My concern - I think Romney will sit and speak woof for the war mongers ---- and my energy and food prices will blow through the roof.
War with Iran does not fall under the "quick n easy" category. There's not going to be any "mission accomplished" banners. Iran is more developed
and sophisticated than Iraq ever dreamed. Iran also has the capacity to stir up anti-American sentiments in every country from Turkey to China.
I do not have much confidence in Romney's international capacity.
bailey bud wrote: For me - welfare is not that big of an issue. It's blown way out of proportion in terms of fiscal impact. If Romney was really a fiscal conservative (he's not) - sure - he'd be slightly better for our state of affairs than Obama.
Take a look at all the mega companies that have paid their quadrennial tithes to the red tie cult - both Romney and Obama are going to be corporate welfare pimps. That's how DC works. Thank you super PACs. There's some big hogs in DC - and they're getting hungry. They don't really care who feeds them - but it better happen..........
Disclosure of partisan bias: I voted for change once before. I learned my lesson. I'm deciding between a vote for nobody -- or vote for Romney.
I've already decided most of my other votes.
Over the last 3 years, I've lost about $3,000 to higher energy costs (home and vehicle), $3,000 to higher insurance (mostly health), and $5,000 to higher food costs - and I'm just one household. Funny thing is - I refinanced my home (thank you Mr. President) - and should have MORE buying power --- but it's been swallowed up by the aforementioned costs.
The energy costs are a product of world markets, as well as our unwillingness to diversity energy sources. The insurance costs are a product of insurance companies losing money in fake money markets (mortgages) ---- and struggling to recoup their costs from the subscriber. The higher food causes come from higher energy costs, and again - transition from local to world markets.
I'll grant you that government (i.e. - Obama) facilitated the skyrocket in my insurance costs.
My concern - I think Romney will sit and speak woof for the war mongers ---- and my energy and food prices will blow through the roof.
War with Iran does not fall under the "quick n easy" category. There's not going to be any "mission accomplished" banners. Iran is more developed
and sophisticated than Iraq ever dreamed. Iran also has the capacity to stir up anti-American sentiments in every country from Turkey to China.
I do not have much confidence in Romney's international capacity.
:goodpost: As many have said, we need campaign finance reform. And a lessening of influence by two bought-and-paid-for parties. You guys who argue between Obama and Romney are going to have nothing change regardless of either being voted in - you're voting for the same thing essentially. Obama has failed miserably on his transparency and environmental efforts and Romney is an obvious puppet, the extremes in each party only use both to widen the partisan gap by screaming about how the other will destroy us. Make a difference, vote for someone other than R or D. JMHO.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Its not only about the President choice, congress needs to change its ways too. Very dysfunctional. And bad leadership... Everything at the last minute, in a crisis, no budgets, budget gimmicks, offsets and CBO trickery. Demagoguery, arrogance, pompous speeches, and silly code words, like "invest in this", blah blah.
And paying attention to the constitution when drafting laws.
Sh*t like that. SOBs
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
:goodpost: As many have said, we need campaign finance reform. And a lessening of influence by two bought-and-paid-for parties. You guys who argue between Obama and Romney are going to have nothing change regardless of either being voted in - you're voting for the same thing essentially. Obama has failed miserably on his transparency and environmental efforts and Romney is an obvious puppet, the extremes in each party only use both to widen the partisan gap by screaming about how the other will destroy us. Make a difference, vote for someone other than R or D. JMHO.
