Politics

[irishpat183]

Taker states? Is this a joke? The reasons a lot of these companies and people are fleeing the coasts for other regions are clearly stated (lower cost of living, business friendly, economic growth, etc.). Red states aren't "taking" anything, just offering better opportunity and better standard of living than other states. You paint a picture of highway robbery, but this is a perfect example of American people being resilient and willing to move to where the opportunity is. There is no coercion here, unlike most progresive policies. Citizens are free to come and go as they please.

Sour grapes.

Exactly.

Remember, polish, the left only wants you to better your situation according to THEIR rules and standards.

They know what's good for you.

 

[Buster Bluth]

With drugs equals violence. As well as drugs getting laced or mixing of drugs with other thin to make more money. This is going to be bad for the country.

hahahahahahahhahahahaha

I think you've spent too much time in the fire house watching old DARE videos.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Rarely for both. I should clarify I meant drugs as in weed, meth, heroine, cocaine, etc.

One of those things is not like the others.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Unbelievable that his supporters let him get away with this.

I mean, really?

This is really only the start. So, Mr. Lew (Treasury Sec to be) got paid two bonuses that look really sketchy. This goes on in both parties, but I am shocked how little outrage there is at this.

"After Mr. Lew repeatedly responded "I do not recall" to key questions about his actions while working at New York University and Citigroup.......

This is a shame because Mr. Lew is well qualified to explain how the Washington-Wall Street axis of access really operates....... They relate to the paychecks he received from his last two employers before returning to government.

We wrote recently about the oddity of New York University paying severance to Mr. Lew in 2006 when he left there voluntarily to work at Citigroup. NYU hasn't explained why it would pay someone for quitting to take a job on Wall Street.

As for the Citi paycheck, the story is how Wall Street has become a get-rich-turnstile for Democratic political operatives. The terms of Mr. Lew's original employment contract with Citi included a bonus guarantee if he left the bank for a "high level position with the United States government or regulatory body."

Most companies include incentives for top employees not to leave, but in this case the contract was written to reward Mr. Lew for treating the bank like a revolving door. Citi says it likes to accommodate employees who do public service or work at nonprofits. But the Lew contract was specific about a senior job in the federal government. There would be no special payout if he left to run the Red Cross or the New York state budget office........

Mr. Lew's contract suggests that Citi knew from the start that Mr. Lew was headed back to a powerful job in Washington, and that it wanted him to remember the bank fondly when he left.......

All of this matters in particular in a Dodd-Frank world when the biggest banks are public utilities. They have little choice but to do what a Treasury Secretary tells them to do.....


Review & Outlook: Jack Lew's Golden Parachute - WSJ.com

 

[GowerND11]

One of those things is not like the others.

A, weed. Final answer

I include that as a "drug" since it is listed as one right now. As I mentioned, I'm in favor of legalization.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I think Chicago was the one on here a few days prior talking about how we need more protectionist policies to combat the impact of globalization. Well, he is an example of protectionism gone bad (as well as gov't seeking out new laws and looking for ways to modernize laws). Fixing this problem, and letting the XL pipeline be built) would produce lower gas costs.

Repeal the Jones Act, Reduce the Price of Gasoline > Hawaii Free Press > Articles Main

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

This is actually somewhat true. The psuedo legal status of marijuana in California has allowed a bunch of "hippies" to make a lot of money growing weed. I've read some estimates that marijuana growers in the state spent millions to prevent the full legalization of marijuana during the last couple of election cycles.

The best arguement I have heard against across the board legalization is that our healthcare system is allready a mess and a large influx of new addicts that legalization might produce would only add to its woes. Not to mention affordable mental health services are pretty much non-existent in this country as well.

I like that hippies are in quotes. Hippie looking people might be smoking a lot but they aren't the ones growing the stuff a majority of people are smoking on. On the spending money part, maybe the huge producers put money down, but in NorCal the people in general voted it down.

 

[chicago51]

I think Chicago was the one on here a few days prior talking about how we need more protectionist policies to combat the impact of globalization. Well, he is an example of protectionism gone bad (as well as gov't seeking out new laws and looking for ways to modernize laws). Fixing this problem, and letting the XL pipeline be built) would produce lower gas costs.

Repeal the Jones Act, Reduce the Price of Gasoline > Hawaii Free Press > Articles Main

The Jones Act causes problems no doubt.

This has nothing to with I was talking about. This does not make the case that we should not be putting higher taxes on imports. By the way like any law we could always exempt resources that we can't produce on US soil from the tariff just we make exemptions for other stuff.

There are arguements against tariffs the main one being that things would cost more. Although when you buy something labor cost typically only represents 10% or less of the cost in most instances; there are exceptions of course.

 

[RallySonsOfND]

Are there really people on here who want to tax imports aka tariffs? I've studied that issue both in the USA and overseas. TARIFFS kill consumers. If another country can more cheaply build something, then they should build it! Comparative advantage, look it up.

 

[ND NYC]

Are there really people on here who want to tax imports aka tariffs? I've studied that issue both in the USA and overseas. TARIFFS kill consumers. If another country can more cheaply build something, then they should build it! Comparative advantage, look it up.

i do.

when US mfg are competing against countries that use slave labor (close to it), have no environmental regulations, no workplace safety standards, are from Communist countries who impose tariffs/import taxes on goods our manufacturers in the US are trying to sell into their countries. easy to have a "comparitive advantage" in this "arrangement. US workers are the most productive in the world with a level playing field. our govt should be doing all it can to assure that. and they are not.

 

[Ndaccountant]

i do.

when US mfg are competing against countries that use slave labor (close to it), have no environmental regulations, no workplace safety standards, are from Communist countries who impose tariffs/import taxes on goods our manufacturers in the US are trying to sell into their countries. easy to have a "comparitive advantage" in this "arrangement. US workers are the most productive in the world with a level playing field. our govt should be doing all it can to assure that. and they are not.

By the way, did you see this question I asked you before?

http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/lep...t-out-curiosity-president-158.html#post918509

 

[ND NYC]

By the way, did you see this question I asked you before?

http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/lep...t-out-curiosity-president-158.html#post918509

i dont know. does it matter?
the CEO of Caterpillar discussed this whole situaton during an on-air CNBC interview about a year ago.

 

[chicago51]

Are there really people on here who want to tax imports aka tariffs? I've studied that issue both in the USA and overseas. TARIFFS kill consumers. If another country can more cheaply build something, then they should build it! Comparative advantage, look it up.

Almost every country outside of the United States has VAT taxes which function as a tariff. We are the only idiots that get burned. So we end up a billion dollar a trade deficit. Think about everyday our economy spends a billion dollars more buying other countries things than coutries do buying our things. If we had a trade surplus or even cut trade debt in half it would go a long way to reducing our unemployment and reducing our deficit.

So you are advocating a race to the bottom. Lets buy from the places that pay people terrible wages. Basically if we don't lower wages here then we can't compete. The only reason we do compete to an extent is that Americans are very productive.

I would advocate a race to the top. Not only through tariffs but through measures like raising the minimum wage. If we are making more we can avoid to pay more.

 

[Ndaccountant]

i dont know. does it matter?
the CEO of Caterpillar discussed this whole situaton during an on-air CNBC interview about a year ago.

Well, it kind of does. The reason I ask is because one of my good friends from college works there and he and I were talking about something after Cat had to write off an investment they made in a company in China. The long and short of it was that Cat doesn't use the factories in China to ship finished product to the US. They had some factories in Japan from a JV that did, but they are in the process of opening up plants in Texas and Georgia to bring it back home. Additionally, IP is a big thing to CAT and they do not risk manufacturing product in China that goes to regulated economies, like the US.

I don't doubt that exports are hurt and Cat opened factories to reduce costs, but he made it a point to say they do not use the factories in China for US goods.

 

[Bluto]

I like that hippies are in quotes. Hippie looking people might be smoking a lot but they aren't the ones growing the stuff a majority of people are smoking on. On the spending money part, maybe the huge producers put money down, but in NorCal the people in general voted it down.

The main reason people in Nor Cal voted legalization down was due to the fact that it is a huge source of income for a large number of people. There's even a "trimmers union" if I'm not mistaken. Anyhow, kind of shows that people from all parts of the political spectrum are more than willing to flush their self professed morals down the drain when it comes to making money.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Almost every country outside of the United States has VAT taxes which function as a tariff. We are the only idiots that get burned. So we end up a billion dollar a trade deficit. Think about everyday our economy spends a billion dollars more buying other countries things than coutries do buying our things. If we had a trade surplus or even cut trade debt in half it would go a long way to reducing our unemployment and reducing our deficit.

So you are advocating a race to the bottom. Lets buy from the places that pay people terrible wages. Basically if we don't lower wages here then we can't compete. The only reason we do compete to an extent is that Americans are very productive.

I would advocate a race to the top. Not only through tariffs but through measures like raising the minimum wage. If we are making more we can avoid to pay more.

Ok, in your race to the top, what happens to profit margins for the companies that are manufacturing?

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

The main reason people in Nor Cal voted legalization down was due to the fact that it is a huge source of income for a large number of people. There's even a "trimmers union" if I'm not mistaken. Anyhow, kind of shows that people form all parts of the political spectrum are more than willing to flush their self professed morals down the drain when it comes to making money.

The marijuana economy is interwoven with so much in the NorCal counties. Never heard of a trimmer union but I know there is a general agreement on price for work put in.

Do you think the majority of people voted down because they think they want to get rich or to protect their small piece of the pie?

Go to run but when I have time I'll send you a interesting clip.

 

[chicago51]

Ok, in your race to the top, what happens to profit margins for the companies that are manufacturing?

I don't know what happened 1945 to Richard Nixon's presidency? Last time I checked manufacturing in the United States did just fine with high tariffs.

The minum wage from the Kennedy presidency would be almost $11.00 an hour in today's money.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I don't know what happened 1945 to Richard Nixon's presidency? Last time I checked manufacturing in the United States did just fine with high tariffs.

The minum wage from the Kennedy presidency would be almost $11.00 an hour in today's money.

Manufacturing does great with tariffs -- won't see any complaint there.

It's the whole "what's cheap at the store?" part that sucks.

 

[RallySonsOfND]

I don't know what happened 1945 to Richard Nixon's presidency? Last time I checked manufacturing in the United States did just fine with high tariffs.

The minum wage from the Kennedy presidency would be almost $11.00 an hour in today's money.

Yeah tariffs are great for a select group of people, but for everyone else, they suck. Take an International Trade class, dead weight loss due to tariff always outweighs producer surplus.


Ah the 'Race to the Bottom' FALLACY. Learned about all that in an Environmental Economics class in New Zealand.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I don't know what happened 1945 to Richard Nixon's presidency? Last time I checked manufacturing in the United States did just fine with high tariffs.

And the purchasing power of today's dollar is much better than then.

The minum wage from the Kennedy presidency would be almost $11.00 an hour in today's money.

When Kennedy was President, China didn't really exist.

 

[Bluto]

The marijuana economy is interwoven with so much in the NorCal counties. Never heard of a trimmer union but I know there is a general agreement on price for work put in.

Do you think the majority of people voted down because they think they want to get rich or to protect their small piece of the pie?

Go to run but when I have time I'll send you a interesting clip.

Kind of a mix of both. Some people make big bucks off the industry. Some a modest living. Then there's all the hydro stores and materials suppliers as well.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

And the purchasing power of today's dollar is much better than then.



When Kennedy was President, China didn't really exist.

Seriously. In 1960 the only thing China imported was kung-fu.

 

[irishff1014]

hahahahahahahhahahahaha

I think you've spent too much time in the fire house watching old DARE videos.

No this means we see to much of these happening on the streets. Its the field we working and with that you see this happening.

 

[Downinthebend]

That was back in the day when the Sup. Ct. enforced the Commerce Clause. Nowadays, the feds can prohibit you from growing a single plant with in-state seeds and in-state water, solely for the purpose of in-state consumption. They call it "interstate commerce".

Which is a problem, I find that (absurd commerce clause interpretation) a large abuse of government.

 

[Downinthebend]

No this means we see to much of these happening on the streets. Its the field we working and with that you see this happening.

So drug use = violence ? Somehow, I don't think that is a logical causation. Infact, I think a very good option to solve violence involving drugs is to legalize them so that those people have methods to settle their injuries that doesn't involve guns or knives.

 

[Buster Bluth]

No this means we see to much of these happening on the streets. Its the field we working and with that you see this happening.

Marijuana doesn't cause people to be aggressive, and the vaaaaaast majority of violence happens because of prohibition (which we saw with alcohol in the 1930s). The cost for drugs is high (pun!) because it's illegal; there is violence involved in any underground market dealing with expensive property.

The price of marijuana would plummet upon legalization (which is why even growers/dealers don't want that), the black market would be obliterated and violence would cease to exist. The same thing happened with alcohol.

Then, of course, there's this whole thing:

 

[chicago51]

My dad not he is has been user in recent decades used to always point out that Marijuana never killed anybody. Does it cloud judgement and make people lazy? Yes but that is hardly reason for illegalization.

My question how would things work if we did legalize certain drugs. I am not sure people be able to just walk to the supermarket and buy them just that easy. Even if legal the FDA isn't going to sign off on them.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Regulate, Tax, Mitigate

Those three words describe my stance on everything from industrial pollution to drugs to guns to abortions to... Just about anything. It's a model that was enormously successful with tobacco, and I don't see why it shouldn't be applied for drugs.

 

[Buster Bluth]

My dad not he is has been user in recent decades used to always point out that Marijuana never killed anybody. Does it cloud judgement and make people lazy? Yes but that is hardly reason for illegalization.

Careful how you word that with "lazy," there are certain strands that give you something referred to as "couch lock," but marijuana has never been shown to make someone's overall attitude become lazy. You won't turn into a noncontributing loser if you use cannabis, that happens because you're, well, a noncontributing loser.

There has never been a test that has shown that cannabis will cloud judgment or people people lazy, in the long term. But, you cannot expect to be productive while high, and you wouldn't expect that with alcohol either of course.