More Farting Sounds From Unions

There is a cost for wetting your beak. When you get called to the table of Marsellus Wallace and get your bulging envelope, a quid pro quo is expected. It may be to go down at a certain round ,”It’s just not your night, Butch”, or more commonly, to break out the brass knuckles and unleash the thuggery. The unions take their marching orders from one man, those cushy benefits and that fashionable purple T shirt does not come gratis, like the dancing monkey with the organ player, when he plays, you dance.

Now that the Chicago teachers are back to work (too bad for the students) the torch gets passed, other unions equally indentured to the master must carry on and provide a voice for the message.

AFSCME is another in a long line of lap dogs for Obama (Those Tony Soprano types don’t talk so good, but they get the job done). And speaking of garbage:

I just don’t, you know, understand, you know, what this guy’s beef is, you know, because, you know, he is getting paid for that job he does, you know.

I have been living in the same house now for about 23 years, not once have I ever gone outside to bullshit with the “sanitary workers” that pick up my garbage. Mostly because they come early in the morning, but the few times that I am out there getting my paper when they arrive, a friendly “Good morning” is about it, no hand shakes, no ,”Gee, thanks so much for making sure I don’t die of some grizzly disease like bubonic plague, you guys are life savers and deserve way more then you are getting paid”, which btw is probably more then 80% of all private sector workers out there.

I would bet that the Romney residence is pretty far removed from the curb at which said garbage man makes his appearance, I doubt anyone inside would even know he is out there trolling for accolades. But we can just naturally assume that since Mitt did not come out with a Gatorade, or the misses didn’t bring out any baked cookies, that he is a mean heartless SOB, a rich guy far removed from the reality of working stiffs, and he does not care about black people, or poor people.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, both sides need to up the level of their game, stuff like this is just pathetic. If you don’t have clear proof of degradation or depravity, stay on the sidelines, and give back that envelope of cash, you don’t deserve it.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    I’m pretty sure I could hire someone to do his job for less, and can actually make a point when being interviewed.

    Thumb up 2

  2. AlexInCT

    Actually this lame attack is gonna bomb on the donkey just like all their racist class warfare junk. It’s like they are serving the Romney campaign softballs. Unfortunately with the LSM still covering for the “Community Organizer in Chief” and his team, even if Romney came out and knocked it out of the park, it would be reported as a “gaffe” while the fucking idiotic donkey add will be touted as genius.

    If I recall correctly, Romney, either when he was running for the job of governor of “The People’s Republic of MA” or after he got it, actually made it a point to do many of those types of blue collar jobs that supported the state in order to understand his constituency. Romney did the work of a garbage man for a day and when asked about the experience told the LSM that it had been one of the hardest jobs, with the least appreciation for the effort to do that shitty job, that he had ever done. Think some savvy LSM reporter would pick this story and run with it? My bet is they will tell us Obama has also done the job of the garbage man because he comes from the Chicago machine, and all mobsters know garbage collection.

    Fucking stupid.

    Thumb up 3

  3. Seattle Outcast

    Thanks CM.

    My hardest job was doing day-labor. Nothing quite like shoveling a couple tons of pea gravel in 100+ degree heat, or making blocks of ice. For the great talent of providing a strong back and following simple directions I was paid a bit over minimum wage, but it paid the rent and groceries when the economy was in the tank.

    Doing shit jobs to survive gives you perspective on life. I rather doubt Obama has ever stooped so low as to work with his hands doing idiot work.

    Thumb up 2

  4. CM

    Doing shit jobs to survive gives you perspective on life.

    Could not agree more Seattle. I started a newspaper delivery route at 13 years of age and kept it up until well into my last year of high school (so almost 5 years). It doesn’t sound much but it was a particualrly hilly route and often wet and windy and dark and on days when the paper was fat (Saturdays) I had way way too many to handle. It was extremely physcially demanding and I didn’t get paid a hell of a lot. I did a fair few labouring and factory jobs during school holidays. It was all an invaluable experience in so many ways, least of which it demonstrated that I should go to University and get a cushy desk job if possible. Anyway, I’m certainly no different to so many other people in learnig these things. I’ll certainly be getting my boys out working as soon as they’re capable.

    Thumb up 0

  5. HARLEY

    Doing shit jobs to survive gives you perspective on life. I rather doubt Obama has ever stooped so low as to work with his hands doing idiot work.

    Agreed, nothing gives you perspective like busting you ass all day.

    I works 6 years in a iron foundry doing everything from shoveling sand, shakeout, pouring, cleaning castings and making cores. summer temp over 110 every day and sometimes during the winter it never got above freezing.. It was a dirty filthy hard job, but, it paid the bills well, and i felt good about myself.

    Thumb up 1

  6. Mississippi Yankee

    Thanks rich, that AFSCME video will always remain one of the funniest vids to me.
    “We make sure your kid doesn’t drink piss from the fuckin’ water fountain”

    BTW when I mentioned last week that I was not being notified of new comments but new post were still there. Well someone fixed THAT for me… now I receive nothing, post nor comments. How very mature!

    Thumb up 0

  7. salinger

    Agreed, nothing gives you perspective like busting you ass all day.

    I wonder how many of the folks holding down these jobs would be part of the 47%?

    Speaking of garbage men – when I was growing up there used to be three guys on the truck – one driving and two picking up cans and feeding them into the scary jaws in the back . Nowadays there is one person driving with a mechanical arm that picks up the wheeled bins and drops it into the truck.

    What happened to those other two guys – those guys who were happy to have the job and maybe weren’t capable of anything more cerebral but were ready to bust their humps in order to put food on the table. I’m not so sure efficiency is always the best route.

    Thumb up 0

  8. richtaylor365 *

    BTW when I mentioned last week that I was not being notified of new comments but new post were still there. Well someone fixed THAT for me… now I receive nothing, post nor comments. How very mature!

    Only the administrator (JimK) has the access and know how to manipulate the site. What you are describing seems like an easy fix, I would shoot JimK either a PM or an email addressing the problem.

    I’m not so sure efficiency is always the best route.

    Come on, Salinger, you are not going to begrudge a private company, one that is in the business of making money, to innovate and downsize. Maybe those two other guys got their trucking driver training and can operate other trucks, maybe they got other jobs within the company, or, maybe they were let go, that is how the free market works.

    OT, the first debate starts in about 20 minutes. It seems like such an easy task for Romney, to indict Obama on a failed domestic policy. He can only pick from about a million benchmarks, charts, and graphs proving his point. That is the easy part, but then he has to offer up a viable solution, to convince the folks that he can do better. You would think this would also be easy, but he has to do more then just say he is NOT Obama, we shall see.

    This is the most important moment in Romney’s life, it is all up to tonight.

    Thumb up 1

  9. CM

    BTW when I mentioned last week that I was not being notified of new comments but new post were still there. Well someone fixed THAT for me… now I receive nothing, post nor comments. How very mature!

    You’re very welcome ;-)

    I wonder how many of the folks holding down these jobs would be part of the 47%?

    Almost all of them. Some of the 47% even built nuclear reactors for US submarines.

    Thumb up 0

  10. CM

    OT, the first debate starts in about 20 minutes.

    Can’t wait! Got my live-streaming sorted out there…

    It seems like such an easy task for Romney, to indict Obama on a failed domestic policy.

    He’s failed miserably so far, why would be able to do it now?
    Fascinating to watch though, whatever happens…..

    Thumb up 0

  11. HARLEY

    I wonder how many of the folks holding down these jobs would be part of the 47%?

    depends. on if they expected the government and/or their employer to provide them with the life style they demand.
    See the Foundry that i worked at went under due to 2 things
    piss poor management , from the jackwagons that bought the place. and the fucking assholes that worked that that expected the company to provide them with a living. This also known as Retiring on the job, or being a lazy fuck. oh yes it was a union shop, my old man was the union steward for a few years, he hated it, swore he never belong to a union again after that experience.

    the 47%: Those that expect some one else to foot their bill.

    Thumb up 4

  12. Poosh

    Have you read about how bad a fail this propaganda video is? Romney (sorry if someone mentioned this above) specifically mentioned and praised garbage men in a book a few year ago – AND – he actually worked for a day as a dustbin man to see what it’s like. This sort of bullshit can technically work on any politician out there, APART from Romney, of allllllllllll the politicians out there, you don’t pull this crap on the guy who in a printed book singled out garbage men as some sort of unsung hero.

    Thumb up 0

  13. HARLEY

    What happened to those other two guys – those guys who were happy to have the job and maybe weren’t capable of anything more cerebral but were ready to bust their humps in order to put food on the table. I’m not so sure efficiency is always the best route.

    They got another job? or are driving their own truck on a newer route.

    Efficiency, not the bast route? WTFucking hell, ok back to Incandescent light bulbs and coal fired trains….

    Thumb up 1

  14. Seattle Outcast

    I’ll certainly be getting my boys out working as soon as they’re capable.

    Holy crap! You were allowed to have children? I need to file a complaint…..

    Thumb up 2

  15. salinger

    Come on, Salinger, you are not going to begrudge a private company, one that is in the business of making money, to innovate and downsize.

    Didn’t garbage men used to work for the city? I’d rather my taxes go to pay for a little inefficiency than welfare. The self respect one gains from working engenders a better citizenry.

    Thumb up 0

  16. CM

    …he actually worked for a day as a dustbin man to see what it’s like.

    Really Poosh? I’d be surprised.

    Holy crap! You were allowed to have children? I need to file a complaint…..

    Unfortunately the same people who granted me permission to have children will be dealing with your complaint…..;-)

    God i hope hes not voting!……..

    I bet you do – he’s sure lock for Obama, being a victim and all…..

    Thumb up 1

  17. Mississippi Yankee

    Only the administrator (JimK) has the access and know how to manipulate the site. What you are describing seems like an easy fix, I would shoot JimK either a PM or an email addressing the problem.

    No way dude! If I piss “the powers that be” off much more I’ll be sent to the Diseased Anus site.

    Didn’t garbage men used to work for the city? I’d rather my taxes go to pay for a little inefficiency than welfare.

    salinger, yes they did. Now Waste Management, a subsidized ‘private’ company picks up the garbage in many, many cities and towns across America. It appears you get both inefficiency and a further tax burden. And they just might get an EBT card too.

    Thumb up 0

  18. JimK

    BTW when I mentioned last week that I was not being notified of new comments but new post were still there. Well someone fixed THAT for me… now I receive nothing, post nor comments. How very mature!

    Dammit…

    I thought I was fixing it. I upgraded the add-on that manages it and also wordpress itself. So something isn’t talking to something else again. Frigging technology.

    I’ll poke around.

    Thumb up 2

  19. richtaylor365 *

    Didn’t garbage men used to work for the city?

    MY is correct, most cities now have private companies picking up their garbage and you can bet that they are doing it more efficiently and more cheaply. Like most government endeavors, the private sector can do it better.

    I’d rather my taxes go to pay for a little inefficiency than welfare.

    Thus exhibiting the bane of liberalism, the inability to critical think passed two bad solutions. It’s like you telling us ,”On my next marathon I would prefer a few blisters over shin splints”, or, you get get neither, how about that? You assume (wrongfully) that those two guys are too stupid to be retrained so if we don’t keep them doing useless tasks then they will naturally end up on welfare.

    The self respect one gains from working engenders a better citizenry.

    Some municipal worker getting paid to hold up a broom all day knows nothing about self respect, but knows a whole bunch about manipulating an inefficient system.

    Thumb up 1

  20. Miguelito

    Yeah, this guy is likely full of shit anyway. As someone that lives in San Diego, and can confirm the trucks they showed as the examples, they are the ones that are fully automated and use an arm to lift only the city approved buckets. The garbage men haven’t actually had to lift the cans to empty them themselves for well over a decade. I’m sure there’s some manual labor involved at the end of the day (likely cleaning out the truck post dumping) but claiming the lift tons of stuff is crap.

    In fact, the rules are so strict now they won’t even get out and fix anything if they accidentally make stuff go flying and will refuse to pickup the cans that are overfilled much. To make my life easier I got 2nd cans for both trash and recycle. I don’t need them often, but when I do, it’s a huge help. I’ve got both my cans full now because I had to cut a pepper tree (damn those things suck) way back and had far too much to even fit into both cans, so I’ll be finishing up breaking down the limbs and stuff this weekend too.

    Thumb up 0

  21. salinger

    You assume (wrongfully) that those two guys are too stupid to be retrained.

    And you assume that they aren’t. (Although, rather than stupid I would say not as bright as most – stupid has a tone of derogatory condescension in my book.) There are a substantial number of folks out there who are hard working, moral and goodhearted who are suited and happy to do unskilled labor. Taking these jobs away to simply improve the bottom line leaves these citizens out in the cold.

    Now any business man is going to try and maximize profits so it makes sense for him to court efficiency. I’m just postulating that maybe a function of government might be to run a little less lean in order to promote employment. This could even be part of a workfare program.

    Otherwise – what should be afforded our below average intelligence citizens?

    Thumb up 0

  22. Mississippi Yankee

    JimK,
    I appreciate everything that you do for this site cause,
    I LOVE YOU MAN!

    At least CM vomit isn’t in my mailbox anymore :)

    Thumb up 0

  23. CM

    And you assume that they aren’t. (Although, rather than stupid I would say not as bright as most – stupid has a tone of derogatory condescension in my book.) There are a substantial number of folks out there who are hard working, moral and goodhearted who are suited and happy to do unskilled labor. Taking these jobs away to simply improve the bottom line leaves these citizens out in the cold.

    This is why I don’t agree with Rich’s ongoing contention that most of these jobs just need to be seen as ‘stepping stone’ jobs. Yeah, for some. But for many these are the sorts of jobs they’ll have for their working lives. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with that.

    Otherwise – what should be afforded our below average intelligence citizens?

    I think I know the answer – “life isn’t fair”.

    At least CM vomit isn’t in my mailbox anymore :)

    I put Big Bird shit in there instead.

    Thumb up 2

  24. richtaylor365 *

    I’m just postulating that maybe a function of government might be to run a little less lean in order to promote employment.

    I happen to believe that government should be in the governing business, not the hire someone to do a useless task so that he has a job business, which probably goes toward that whole small government/big government fight that we continually wage.

    Otherwise – what should be afforded our below average intelligence citizens?

    There are many jobs that “our below average intelligence citizens” can get and live on, the above chucklehead is a prime example. Garbage guys by and large make acceptable money, throw in all the union benefits, the healthcare, matching 401k contributions, dental, and they actually get to call themselves middle class. If they are happy here, good on them, but you think they are relegated to menial tasks because they can’t do better for themselves, I think they can, which again goes to the fundamental differences between us, you liberals limit achievement and ability, we want it unleashed.

    This is why I don’t agree with Rich’s ongoing contention that most of these jobs just need to be seen as ‘stepping stone’ jobs.

    You assume facts not in evidence, or are you intentionally distorting my position? The only discussions we have had on this topic had to do with minimum wage jobs, sorry pal, but this does not qualify. Minimum wage jobs are in fact stepping stones and were not designed to support a family or keep someone at that station. Now if you or Salinger are going to complain that the minimum wage should be raised so that one can remain at that station indefinitely, then that is a whole separate discussion.

    I think I know the answer – “life isn’t fair”.

    Correct, so you would like to change that, the whole redistribution thing I presume?

    Thumb up 4

  25. salinger

    but you think they are relegated to menial tasks because they can’t do better for themselves, I think they can, which again goes to the fundamental differences between us, you liberals limit achievement and ability, we want it unleashed.

    Oh can that bullshit – you know exactly what I am talking about – the population with an IQ of 90. They’re out there and all your unleash their hidden potential crap might make it easier for you right wingers to sleep after you’ve turned their asses out onto the curb – but it ain’t turning these folks into X-ray technicians.

    Thumb up 0

  26. CM

    You assume facts not in evidence, or are you intentionally distorting my position? The only discussions we have had on this topic had to do with minimum wage jobs, sorry pal, but this does not qualify.

    Honestly I didn’t know where garbage workers fitted in, I assumed they were towards the lower end, it seems not.

    Minimum wage jobs are in fact stepping stones and were not designed to support a family or keep someone at that station.

    Who says? Where were they designed? This suggests some sort of organised system.

    Now if you or Salinger are going to complain that the minimum wage should be raised so that one can remain at that station indefinitely, then that is a whole separate discussion.

    I think raising the minimum wage is far too simplistic, and doesn’t really solve a whole hell of a lot. I think the problem of wages being increasingly disproportionate is a structural failure in the market system. The ‘47%’ stat (or whatever it is) is the result of the government trying to bend over backwards to keep the whole ship afloat. It happens because rewards from producitivity gains and profit almost exclusively flow up and stay there. This is why the rich have gotten far far richer and the rest have seen an average loss in real wages. And before anyone starts, this is nothing to do with ‘hating the rich’ or ‘envy’ or any of those other usual diversions. And neither does it need to be about ‘fairness’. It’s about what people get paid and what that buys them.

    Correct, so you would like to change that, the whole redistribution thing I presume?

    As I’ve said, I’m not really into the ‘fairness’ argument as I am into keeping the whole regluated-capitalist ship afloat. I don’t favour government interference, but if that’s what’s necessary because the (wage) market sure ain’t going to start magically heading in the right direction, then that’s better than the alternative (the collapse of the middle class). It seems to me that the number of people who don’t pay federal income tax is sympomatic of a failed market-based wage system. The right-wing ‘solutions’ I always hear are vague and ideological and logically make the situation even worse. When that’s pointed out the response is usually something along the lines of the immorality of government interference (i.e. it doesn’t really matter if it makes things worse, the results are actually irrelevant).
    Romney did a great job last night of convincing the middle-class to martyr themselves in the name of ideology.

    Oh can that bullshit – you know exactly what I am talking about – the population with an IQ of 90. They’re out there and all your unleash their hidden potential crap might make it easier for you right wingers to sleep after you’ve turned their asses out onto the curb – but it ain’t turning these folks into X-ray technicians.

    Agreed.

    Thumb up 0

  27. richtaylor365 *

    you know exactly what I am talking about

    I certainly do, you are perpetuating the nonsense that some folks (many by your count) just can’t hack it for themselves because they aren’t as smart as you, so we need government to take care of them, more of those useless jobs that is the role of government to provide. As I said before, there exists out there a number of jobs that those not blessed with your brain power can do and make a living doing it.

    right wingers to sleep after you’ve turned their asses out onto the curb

    Ah yes, the oh so typical and oh so tired mime, that we are the heartless ones, that we would just as soon pushy granny off a cliff then provide for her, I could set my watch by your predictable tripe. And there is CM, lapping it up, and he should know better.

    The phony compassion that the liberals wrap themselves up at night , it’s pretty funny actually. You compassionate souls that think you are making a difference, helping you sleep at night, all the while perpetuating that cycle of dependence. Tell me, how is Obama doing with all that compassion of his, is the poor any better off, how about black people in general, you seen that unemployment statistic? The food stamp president is making a remarkable difference in this country, isn’t he?
    If you want to can something, can that insulting baseless mime that we conservatives would just as soon run over a poor person with our Hummer then look at him, it only makes you look foolish.

    Thumb up 5

  28. richtaylor365 *

    I think raising the minimum wage is far too simplistic, and doesn’t really solve a whole hell of a lot. I think the problem of wages being increasingly disproportionate is a structural failure in the market system. The ’47%’ stat (or whatever it is) is the result of the government trying to bend over backwards to keep the whole ship afloat. It happens because rewards from producitivity gains and profit almost exclusively flow up and stay there. This is why the rich have gotten far far richer and the rest have seen an average loss in real wages. And before anyone starts, this is nothing to do with ‘hating the rich’ or ‘envy’ or any of those other usual diversions. And neither does it need to be about ‘fairness’. It’s about what people get paid and what that buys them.

    I’n not disagreeing with this. I think we have had enough of these discussions that you should know that I don’t hate poor people like Salinger seems to believe and that from a conservative point of view, we want all people to succeed, all people to be productive tax paying citizens satisfied in their station in life. But the simple unvarnished truth is that poor people will always exist, slackers will always exist, and unfairness will always exist. You want more of the money to trickle down, make more of those people at that level more sought after. Either through education or training, increase their skill level and their abilities and they will be more employable. I know you don’t mimic the notion that many people are predestined to dismal failure because they are just too stupid, like Salinger.

    Thumb up 3

  29. Mississippi Yankee

    I put Big Bird shit in there instead.

    Rumor has it that he’s been shitting constantly since Mitt threatened his job. What’s you excuse :0

    Thumb up 0

  30. CM

    Ah yes, the oh so typical and oh so tired mime, that we are the heartless ones, that we would just as soon pushy granny off a cliff then provide for her, I could set my watch by your predictable tripe. And there is CM, lapping it up, and he should know better.

    To be honest I skimmed over that part. I actually don’t agree with that. I think most of you are sincere in your beliefs. I just don’t understand them.
    Anyway, I retract my comment as it applies to that part.

    Thumb up 0

  31. CM

    I’n not disagreeing with this. I think we have had enough of these discussions that you should know that I don’t hate poor people like Salinger seems to believe and that from a conservative point of view, we want all people to succeed, all people to be productive tax paying citizens satisfied in their station in life. But the simple unvarnished truth is that poor people will always exist, slackers will always exist, and unfairness will always exist. You want more of the money to trickle down, make more of those people at that level more sought after. Either through education or training, increase their skill level and their abilities and they will be more employable. I know you don’t mimic the notion that many people are predestined to dismal failure because they are just too stupid, like Salinger.

    Yes I agree that poor people will always exist, slackers will always exist, and unfairness will always exist. No doubt.

    This piece seems to ask the same questions as I (constantly) do on this.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-economic-plan-jobs-2012-8

    To be more specific, the author claims that it doesn’t work and explains why, whereas I keep asking for specific evidence of how it could possibly work beyond vague theory because I assume you’re all holding back on the explanation…. ;-)

    This is what the super-rich do with their excess…..
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jul/21/offshore-wealth-global-economy-tax-havens
    Trickle-free.

    Thumb up 0

  32. richtaylor365 *

    This piece seems to ask the same questions as I (constantly) do on this.

    You know that Blodget is a convicted felon, a liar and a cheat? I know, don’t shoot the messenger but it does seem funny that he is criticizing that which he aspired to but was not very good at obtaining.

    But this should make you feel better. To re cap, those folks that actually do the hiring, small business owners, have some pretty definite ideas about what will spur hiring and what will kill it quicker then you can blink:

    The top two obstacles to business growth and job creation, according to the small business owners and managers polled, are burdensome government regulations (27 percent) and a legal system that encourages too many lawsuits (23 percent). These two concerns are followed by difficulty obtaining financing (20 percent), high taxes on business (18 percent), availability of a qualified workforce (9 percent), and the rising cost of energy (7 percent).

    The small business survey also found:

    68 percent of those interviewed say that more businesses are investing in new technology rather than new employees “to avoid complications created by federal employment laws,

    86 percent say regulations would be more effective in protecting public health and safety if they gave business “clear, certain goals” as well as “more freedom to use common sense in making daily decisions.”

    89 percent say that most government bureaucrats make decisions “based on rules and not on common sense” when regulating small businesses.

    69 percent say business would create more jobs if local, state and federal government agencies coordinated small businesses regulatory approvals and permits into a one-stop shop approach.

    Romney specifically addressed burdensome regulations as job killers in the debate. I have mentioned many times how removing government’s boot off of the neck of those that hire would go a long way to kick starting the economy. And yes, taxes were also mentioned, weren’t they?

    Maybe Romney has a better handle on what’s going on then you think?

    This is what the super-rich do with their excess…..

    And that is a problem how exactly? That money (I assume) was legally earned and taxes properly paid on those earnings, why do you care what they do with after tax proceeds? If tax fraud was committed then by all means, let’s go after those bastards, but if they want to buy an Hawaiian island with it or a big yacht, or stick it all in a bank and go swimming in gold coins, who cares? Or does it bug you that if somehow government could just confiscate that money, they could do so many good things with it, the possibilities boggle the mind.

    Thumb up 1

  33. CM

    You know that Blodget is a convicted felon, a liar and a cheat?

    I didn’t know that. Didn’t really look at who wrote it.

    I know, don’t shoot the messenger but it does seem funny that he is criticizing that which he aspired to but was not very good at obtaining.

    Not sure you got the point then. It’s nothing to do with envy.

    But this should make you feel better. To re cap, those folks that actually do the hiring, small business owners, have some pretty definite ideas about what will spur hiring and what will kill it quicker then you can blink:

    This also misses the whole point. Regulations are close to irrelevant if insufficient people have sufficient money to generate demand for the goods and services.

    Romney specifically addressed burdensome regulations as job killers in the debate. I have mentioned many times how removing government’s boot off of the neck of those that hire would go a long way to kick starting the economy. And yes, taxes were also mentioned, weren’t they?

    Again this misses the whole point being made that it’s far more than simplistic ideological slogans.

    Maybe Romney has a better handle on what’s going on then you think?

    No, he’s doing exactly the simplistic ideological slogan thing. And his policies would logically make the situation worse. The article explains why.

    And that is a problem how exactly? That money (I assume) was legally earned and taxes properly paid on those earnings, why do you care what they do with after tax proceeds? If tax fraud was committed then by all means, let’s go after those bastards, but if they want to buy an Hawaiian island with it or a big yacht, or stick it all in a bank and go swimming in gold coins, who cares?

    Yikes, this is the SAME old stuff which AGAIN misses the point. You also seem to be suggesting I’m basing this on greed or envy .

    Or does it bug you that if somehow government could just confiscate that money, they could do so many good things with it, the possibilities boggle the mind.

    Honestly, did you even read what I wrote. It’s not even the first time I’ve written it.

    Thumb up 0

  34. richtaylor365 *

    Yikes yourself, the point was not missed but rather obvious, you seem to think that Romney does not know his stuff because your link suggests that rich people don’t do the hiring. Then I provided a link where those folks that actually do hire people complained about the same stuff that Romney was complaining about in the first debate, ergo, Romney has a better handle on what would get the economy growing then you wish to give him credit for. It is irrelevant whether you admit it or not, he is simpatico with employers and knows what they need to get hiring again.

    Honestly, did you even read what I wrote. It’s not even the first time I’ve written it.

    And this is not the first time I have taken you to task for minding your own business and allowing rich folks to spend (or waste) their own money the way they see fit. You don’t get to decide what they do with it, worry about your own stuff and give they the same courtesy.

    Thumb up 2

  35. CM

    Whether ‘Romney knows his stuff’ is not the issue. But ok, I’ll play, how does Romney explain the issue I keep raising, which is set out comprehensively at the link?

    Given the ongoing and therefore obvious avoidance I’ll put you down on the ‘ideology trumps results/reality’ team. Because all you keep doing, much like everyone else here, is keep repeating ideological mantras.

    Thumb up 0

  36. richtaylor365 *

    Whether ‘Romney knows his stuff’ is not the issue

    Of course it is, that is what that debate and this election is all about, can he do better than what we have now.

    how does Romney explain the issue I keep raising, which is set out comprehensively at the link?

    Which link was that, the one that portrayed rich folks as greedy uncaring bastards because they have a different idea then you wrt to what to do with THEIR money? Or the other one, written by the rich guy wannabe criminal who couldn’t get their on his own talent/ability so he had to resort to criminality? I’ll assume it was the latter.

    Here’s the deal, whether the “super” rich create oodles of jobs is not really the issue. If you want to believe that guys like Jobs, Gates, Ellison, the Waltons, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Jerry Yang are not responsible for hundreds of thousands of jobs out there, there is nothing I can say to change your mind, you look foolish thinking that, though.

    Because all you keep doing, much like everyone else here, is keep repeating ideological mantras.

    To you, everything is an ideological mantra, because you refuse to get out of the weeds. In last week’s debate Romney talked specifically about job creation, I provide a link describing exactly what job creators are looking for in a candidate and what they need to start hiring again, they talked about removing the onerous and obstructive government regulations, and they talked about taxes, both which was argued by the candidates, Romney being on the side of the job creators and Obama being against. But you can’t get passed the predictable ,”Rich folks just hire gardener’s and servants, and don’t contribute significantly to job creation”.

    This debate clearly showed me that Romney has a better handle on what is needed then Obama.

    Thumb up 5

  37. Kimpost

    This debate clearly showed me that Romney has a better handle on what is needed then Obama.

    The debate showed you that? It’s not that I don’t believe you, but I find it a bit odd. I know I certainly didn’t become a Romney supporter, even if I think that Romney won the debate. Could you have seen a debate scenario ending up with you supporting Obama? I mean short of Romney calling himself a Nazi with a promise to end democracy.

    Thumb up 0

  38. CM

    Of course it is, that is what that debate and this election is all about, can he do better than what we have now.

    Not what we’re talking specifically about there though.

    Which link was that, the one that portrayed rich folks as greedy uncaring bastards because they have a different idea then you wrt to what to do with THEIR money? Or the other one, written by the rich guy wannabe criminal who couldn’t get their on his own talent/ability so he had to resort to criminality? I’ll assume it was the latter.

    Yes, the second one.

    Here’s the deal, whether the “super” rich create oodles of jobs is not really the issue. If you want to believe that guys like Jobs, Gates, Ellison, the Waltons, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Jerry Yang are not responsible for hundreds of thousands of jobs out there, there is nothing I can say to change your mind, you look foolish thinking that, though.

    Why on earth would I want to believe that? That’s ludicrous.

    To you, everything is an ideological mantra, because you refuse to get out of the weeds.

    By ‘weeds’ you’re referring to detail. But yeah, almost exclusively the response to any question about details is ideological mantra.

    In last week’s debate Romney talked specifically about job creation,

    Yeah he delivered the usual right-wing job-creation mantras. But then I really wouldn’t expect anything else in a Presidential debate.

    I provide a link describing exactly what job creators are looking for in a candidate and what they need to start hiring again, they talked about removing the onerous and obstructive government regulations, and they talked about taxes, both which was argued by the candidates, Romney being on the side of the job creators and Obama being against.

    I could tell you what the company I work for looks for in employees, as I manage the employees they hire, but that’s completely irrelevant to whether we’re in a position to hire any. Likewise, I’m sure the directors and I can wax lyrical about removing ‘onerous and obstructive government regulations’ and taxes, but again it has nothing to do with the fact that we can’t hire anyone until the demand for our services picks up again.

    But you can’t get passed the predictable ,”Rich folks just hire gardener’s and servants, and don’t contribute significantly to job creation”.

    Not even remotely close to being correct or relevant. That’s like something from an entirely different discussion you’re having with someone else.

    Thumb up 0

  39. CM

    Robert Reich outlines the same issue:

    Romney says we’re not doing well enough, and he’s right. But the prescriptions he’s offering – more tax cuts for the rich and for big companies – won’t do anything except enlarge the budget deficit. And the cuts he proposes in public investments like education and infrastructure, and safety nets like Medicare and Medicaid, will take money out of the pockets of people who not only desperately need it but whose spending is necessary to keep the tepid recovery going.

    Romney promises if elected the economy will create 12 million new jobs in his first term. If we were back in a normal economy, that number wouldn’t be hard to reach. Bill Clinton presided over an economy that generated 22 million new jobs in eight years – and that was more than a decade ago when the economy and working-age population were smaller than now.

    Both Obama and Romney assume the recovery will continue, even at a slow pace, and that we’ll be back to normal at some point. But I’m not at all sure. “Normal” is what got us into this mess in the first place. The concentration of income and wealth at the top has robbed the vast middle class of the purchasing power it needs to generate a full recovery – something that was masked by borrowing against rising home values, but can no longer be denied. Unless or until this structural problem is dealt with, we won’t be back to normal.

    http://robertreich.org/post/32938315335

    So if the middle class are poorer, where does the recovery come from? How are jobs created if there is no greater demand for goods and services, because the people who are relied on to consume don’t consume sufficiently?
    As he says, previously the issue was masked by unsustainable debt. If that’s not going to happen this time, and the middle class are worse off, how does the economy improve?

    This debate clearly showed me that Romney has a better handle on what is needed then Obama.

    So you obviously know, along with Romney, how the recovery will occur, and what will generate the demand for all these jobs to start. Less corporate tax and fewer business regulations don’t automatically lead to a greater demand for goods and services if people have LESS money. So I don’t understand. Can you tell me please? As Obama said, is the answer just so amazing that it has to be kept a secret?

    Thumb up 0

  40. hist_ed

    If you cut taxes, then people will have more money in their pockets that they can spend on shit.

    If you cut regulation and corporate taxes then businesses have a greater incentive to invest and more money to invest with.

    Four years of Obama’s policies have led people in the middle class to have less money to spend on shit.

    Finally, if you make it more expensive to hire people then businesses will hire fewer of them. Raise the cost of employment and you will have fewer employed. So repealing Obamacare and buttloads of regulation will incetivize employers to hire more people!!!!

    Thumb up 4

  41. salinger

    Here is an article somewhat related to our earlier discussion. This one cites a study of IQ vs self reported happiness. The actual study – which is linked to from this article – does cite employment as a means toward a happier life. The interesting thing I found was that they estimated people with a 70-89 IQ range to be around 15% of the population. That’s a lot larger than I had suspected. This study is from the UK – but I would assume the numbers would be comparable here in the US.

    Thumb up 0

  42. richtaylor365 *

    Salinger, I think your link is sandbagging the numbers. I would agree that UK and the US are probably comparable, but this graph puts our percentage (89 and lower) at a quarter of the population.

    But I still contend that those with lower IQ’s can still secure a job adequate to live on, higher then minimum wage. While I was working I had to deal with Caltrans, these are the guys that work on and improve the highways. I would guess that over 90% of these guys only had HS degrees and would fall fairly close to that parameter, yet they all made good money that could support a family. The above garbage man is another example. Laborers or blue collar workers can make good money. Things like showing up on time, being able to work unsupervised, putting in a good days work, these things are cherished to employers and would equip anyone with an advantage at any endeavor.

    I did find this part interesting:

    “There is also some evidence that long term intensive strategies directed at young children from socially deprived backgrounds can have a positive impact not only on IQ but also on wellbeing and life opportunities,” said Dr Hassiotis. ”Such interventions are likely to be costly but the initial costs may be offset by future benefits such as a reduced reliance on state benefits and better mental and physical health.”

    Aside from making sure that the kid has enough to eat , clothes for school, a method to get to school, and medical care for any ailments or maladies, I don’t know what else this guy wants.

    Thumb up 3

  43. salinger

    Aside from making sure that the kid has enough to eat , clothes for school, a method to get to school, and medical care for any ailments or maladies, I don’t know what else this guy wants.

    I think that would pretty much cover it – you might be surprised how often these needs go unfulfilled.

    Thumb up 1

  44. CM

    If you cut taxes, then people will have more money in their pockets that they can spend on shit.

    They’ll have LESS money in their pockets if any tax rate reductions are more than outweighed by eliminating tax breaks. Either that or it’s not paid for and gets added to the debt.

    If you cut regulation and corporate taxes then businesses have a greater incentive to invest and more money to invest with.

    They do, but it doesn’t neccessarily mean that they invest it in ways that put money back into the pockets of the lower and middle class (i.e. the consumers). The $21 trillion tied up in foreign tax havens is good evidence of that.

    Four years of Obama’s policies have led people in the middle class to have less money to spend on shit.

    Which specific policies? Compared to what, and how?

    Finally, if you make it more expensive to hire people then businesses will hire fewer of them.

    This assumes companies are wanting to hire because they have pent up demand they can’t deal with, but are hamstrung by cost. If regulations or tax changes made it less expensive to hire people in the small business I work for, it would lead to exactly zero additional employees. It would be terrible business to hire people to sit around doing nothing. People don’t get hired for the sake of it. Making it easier to hire people is only part of the equation. I don’t understand this implication that it’s the entire equation. IMO, a much more significant part of the equation is the loss of spending power of the vast majority of the population. Because if the demand isn’t there, the jobs aren’t there.

    Raise the cost of employment and you will have fewer employed.

    Not necessarily. If there’s more money in the pockets of those who are employed they’ll pump a far higher percentage (and immediately) into the economy than further reducing the tax rates of the super-rich.

    So repealing Obamacare and buttloads of regulation will incetivize employers to hire more people!!!!

    Which is only part of the equation – and a close to irrelevant part if there isn’t any reason to hire more people. Business owners aren’t going to just hire people for the sake of it, there has to be a reason to hire.

    Thumb up 0

  45. salinger

    While I was working I had to deal with Caltrans, these are the guys that work on and improve the highways. I would guess that over 90% of these guys only had HS degrees and would fall fairly close to that parameter, yet they all made good money that could support a family.

    And who hands out the contracts for these type of labor intensive infrastructure jobs?

    Thumb up 0

  46. richtaylor365 *

    And who hands out the contracts for these type of labor intensive infrastructure jobs?

    I assume that is all handled in Sacramento, where the money source is. But what does that have to do with blue collar workers making a livable living?

    Thumb up 1

  47. salinger

    But what does that have to do with blue collar workers making a livable living?

    Nothing I guess. I just found it interesting that the first example you could think of was supported by government contracts.

    Thumb up 0

  48. richtaylor365 *

    The example I used was anecdotal, like I mentioned, not sure what is so “interesting” about it, I can give you many other examples if you like.

    I also mentioned Richard Hayes, he has nothing to do with government contracts.

    Thumb up 1

  49. drunkkus

    I just watched the video again, and I think I figured out what this guy’s problem is. He’s probably been getting his news and advice on who to vote for from the other garbage men.

    I’m left wondering what the hell whoever made this video was thinking. Are there really people outside of concrete and barbed wire or padded rooms who would see this and say, “Like, hey….uhhh….that guy is, you know, a garbage man, so he must be really, you know, smart, and he totally, you know, doesn’t like Romney. Just, you know, look at him! I’m like, you know, gonna vote for Obama now, since the garbage man, you know, said so!”?

    Thumb up 3