Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 12:43am PT
|
Remember how the establishment media use to make a big deal out of the Bush girls when they would have their little brushes with the law.
Yet Obama has two relatives in this country illegally,with phony SS IDs, driving around drunk, and been doing it for 19 years. And not a peep out of the media.
Seems to me, to be a difference between someone who is a RESIDENT OF THE WHITE HOUSE, and someone who is a distant relative.
Clinton's brother got lot's of press.
Besides, front web page LA Times is not good enough for you? How the hell did you find out?
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 12:51am PT
|
Repubs argue that corporations need tax breaks! Sob, Sob!
Corporations are people too, says Romney!
Alms for the poor!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/some-companies-pay-their-ceos-more-than-uncle-sam-study-says/2011/08/30/gIQAHMcxqJ_story.html?hpid=z3
Some companies pay their CEOs more than Uncle Sam, study says
It has become a bipartisan article of faith in some quarters that the income tax on U.S. corporations must be lowered.
But for many large U.S. companies, the burden of U.S. taxation pales in comparison with what they pay their chief executives, according to a study released Wednesday by the Institute of Policy Studies, a liberal think tank.
Of last year’s 100 highest-paid corporate executives in the United States, 25 earned more in pay than their company recorded as a tax expense in 2010.
Those 25 firms reported average global profits of $1.9 billion. Among the 25 were Verizon, Bank of New York Mellon, General Electric, Boeing and eBay.
“These individual CEOs are being rewarded for presiding over companies that dodge taxes,” said Chuck Collins, one of the study’s co-authors and a senior scholar at the Institute of Policy Studies. Eighteen of the 25 firms last year operated subsidiaries in countries that the U.S. Government Accountability Office and other groups have identified as tax havens, one of the report’s authors said.
For example, Bank of New York Mellon paid its chief executive Robert Kelly $19.4 million last year, while the company got $670 million in what amounted to a tax refund, according to the report. The company has 10 subsidiaries in foreign countries, the report said.
Kelly has complained about the high U.S. corporate tax rate in the company’s annual meetings.
My nominee for jerk of the year. He can take up residence in Pakistan.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 01:17am PT
|
I really don't care to much either way- I try to waste as little time as possible thinking about murderers- that is a jury and courts issue and the problem of the criminal.
Lock em up forever...kill em....whatever.....
We have such bigger issues to worry about in the world...IMO
All this fascination we see with the drama of murder trials is sort of indicative of our ill society.
Well, Riley, I'm sure that your point of view reflects what many people think.
However, I'd point out to you that this issue does not exist in a vacuum. The report that just came out that says that we've spend 4 BILLION dollars on capital punishment in Ca in the last 30 years, and only executed 13 people, is startling. I'd like to think we could have spend that money for better things. Another cable on Half Dome, perhaps? :)
To make the death penalty functional in the state, we need to spend 60 million A YEAR. INDEFINITLY. Can we afford that? In this economy?
What do we take the money away from? Or more realistically, WHO?
Put your head in the sand if you want, but the decision has to be made, and when the money is taken away from someone you love, YOU CAN"T COMPLAIN!
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 01:18am PT
|
Fanning public fears about security, and spending money on the police, prisons, and so forth, are a good part of the Republican agenda. A simple way to control people.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:38am PT
|
Hi Stewart,
No worries.
Just to clarify, my post was directed towards DT, and his dickish (and cowardly) post directed at you with regard to how you spell "coloring / colouring".
I quoted his post and addressed him directly, so I'm not sure why you thought I was criticizing you.
Anyway, cheers.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:45am PT
|
bluering wrote:
I didn't say I wasn't pro-choice, I'm just against abortion. It shouldn't be illegal.
Just discouraged.
No one is for abortion, that's why the "pro-choice" advocates call themselves "pro choice".
As far as discouraging goes, that's what organizations like Planned Parenthood do day in and day out.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 08:50am PT
|
Besides, front web page LA Times is not good enough for you? How the hell did you find out?
There you go again, Ken. Using that "logic" thing.
|
|
Gary
climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 11:03am PT
|
Tovarich, that prediction should keep your election calling record at 100%.
100% wrong! Or did I miss something and you called one correctly?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 11:27am PT
|
"Fanning public fears about security, and spending money on the police, prisons, and so forth, are a good part of the Republican agenda. A simple way to control people. "
Problem is, Dems really have done nothing but complement that strategy for the last 20 years. Where does that leave us? Fear-filled, monitored, searched, imprisoned and broke.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 11:43am PT
|
Telling that none of the Republicans here have anything to say about the clear anti-science direction that their party is plowing at full steam ahead.
The GOP’s refusal to believe the world’s smartest people isn’t accidental. It’s smart strategy. As the party of business, the GOP has to oppose scientific findings that threaten business. That means denying climate change — because the reform to fix it would cost corporations money. That means pushing for the abolition of the EPA — because environmental regulations cost corporations money. ...
Read all about it here:
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2011/08/the-us-republican-party-hates-science/
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 12:46pm PT
|
fattrad wrote:
Gary,
I called McCain winning GOP primary (longshot) and Repubs taking the house.
So did I. How does that guarantee that any of my (or your) predictions about the future will be correct?
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 12:51pm PT
|
fattrad wrote:
aposgee,
We've also not had a "major" terrorist incident. And many small ones have been stopped, so the dollars have been well invested.
The predicted future unemployment rate post 2008 crisis was that it would be greater than 12%, the US is now hovering at just over 9%, so by your reasoning we can conclude that all money that has been spent to address the economy and employment has been both effective and well invested.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 12:56pm PT
|
"It's just unbelivable how naive Obama is, he touts green jobs, throws money at at projects the are not economically viable and this is what happens....."
Yeah! What we need is another good war! Why can't that weak-kneed pansy grow a set, and take us back to the good ole days when wars served first as economic expansion tools, and second because of an actual threat to the US?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 01:28pm PT
|
Are you kidding me, fattrad? How many times do I have to express my disappointment with Obama and the Democrats before you get it?
We're all Republicans now.
At least until a true progressive party comes forward.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 01:36pm PT
|
The predicted future unemployment rate post 2008 crisis was that it would be greater than 12%,
As a professional economic forecaster, we always joked "give 'em a date or give 'em a number, but never give 'em both."
Since I don't see a date, I'm a bit skeptical. Could I get a source of that prediction, please?
Thanks.
John
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 01:55pm PT
|
One reason for its woes is that low-cost Chinese manufacturers are building massive factories that have rapidly driven down the price of solar panels and shifted more than 50 percent of production to China If you want to blame it on political systems, then it looks like the "socialists" are the winners over the "capitalists". China's most recent 5 year plan (March 2011) calls for massive investment in renewable energy.
It could be that Solyndra's technology is too expensive to be competitive. It could also be that the Venture "Capitalists" got overly stimulated and greedy BEFORE Solyndra came to any politician's notice. Solyndra was overhyped from the start, by it's financiers looking for a quick buck. An expensive, complex solution looking for a market.
I really don't see how a VC funded company's demise can be charged to the account of any politician. Or perhaps you'd like to credit GM's current success to Obama's account?
NO?
I didn't think so.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:06pm PT
|
I guess no Repugs wants to address the anti-science GOP crowd. All they can do is say "Look! Obama is getting bad press."
Meanwhile, their party is a bunch of science-school drop-outs. The Bush tax cuts have shown ZERO relief, and their policies have dug us into this huge hole.
Tell me, Smart Ones, how is a US populace going to compete with the other economies in the world with dumb-farts as stupid as the smartest ones you can must for the presidential campaign?
You sound all smart and smug, yet your political heros can't understand simple math. And you have the nerve to call Obama a loser. Oh, the irony.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:07pm PT
|
fattrad,
Given that you are way right of center, I fail to see the relevance - according to your personal logic - of the Solyndra case. It's just "free market" forces at work, right? Or are you arguing that Obama and Congress should putting in place more protectionist meaures to cultivate an infant industry?
If you don't agree that the stimulus and other monies spent have saved and stimulated the US economy post 2008 crisis, then how can you make the claim that the money spent on defense, wars and homeland security was money well invested since, by your logic with regard to the failure of Obama, there is no causal link between the lack of terrorist attacks post 9/11 and the money spent.
Over 9 trillion dollars spent since 2001 on the 2 wars and homeland security, much of it borrowed, all for nothing (according to your logic).
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:08pm PT
|
Hey Fatty, your heros, Cheney and McCain, are in the press again!
Cheney thoroughly trashed McCain in his new book. Who's side are you going to take, the war criminal or the guy who got his ear chewed off.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
Aug 31, 2011 - 02:10pm PT
|
"I really don't see how a VC funded company's demise can be charged to the account of any politician."
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|