In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1352
Online now 1042 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
No, no, no. Didn't you get the lars memo? Only the FIRST debate matters.
Kaiser seems very angry.
I must be crazy to be in a loony bin like this.
Your wife couldn't understand why Obama made the horses and bayonets comments? Of course you can't either. Think about what Romney said preceding it.
Referencing the number of naval ships we had in 1917 to today's navy is just stupid and Obama zinged him on it pretty good. In other words capabilities and operational needs change as time goes on.
Do you also advocate us going back to a draft and increasing our army to WWII size as well?
regardless if when and who started the program etc, etc, welfare spending has gone up 32% in 4 years.
The people receiving these goodies see Obama as Santa clause regardless of the specifics.
This post was edited by xwing 18 months ago
Put your dislike of Obama and his policies aside.
How do the Romney supporters here feel about Romney basically changing every position he's campaigned on the last 6 months in the final weeks of the election? This is not the "Conservative" that was running the last 6 months. He's a left of center moderate right now. Do you think he's just saying whatever he thinks it will take to get elected, but he'll run things from the Right? I have a feeling there are some bonifide Conservative Republicans here, will you vote for a Liberal just because you hate Obama?
I remember when Hannity whined about the fact that under Clinton the number of tanks had dropped and thinking "that idiot does realize that tanks are inefficient for future US conflicts, right?". It's the same principle. Saying we have fewer ships ignores the full context. What's really funny is that a CNN online fact check found the number of ships in the Navy had increased from Bush2 to Obama. Either Romney didn't know (which means a staffer hand picked the stat and gave it to him) that portion which makes him comes across as misinformed or he did know and being the opportunist he is still ran with it.
I've been pointing this out and asking the same questions for some time now. Good luck getting a response.
The people receiving those "benefits" would like a job that pays enough to live on...but the wealthy insist on paying them starvation wages...so they get a stipend from the wealthy by way of taxes and food stamps to keep them alive.
Lurking on tRCMB since 1996
They're making it harder?
Not in Ohio
The cost of the program in the first quarter of 2012 jumped from 15 million to 27 million, DOUBLING the number of recipients. The total bill for the program last year was 1.5 billion. That means that of 50 states, Ohio represents almost 10% of the total costs.
Things that make you go hmmmmm
A program that provides subsidized phone service to low-income individuals has nearly doubled in size in Ohio in the past year now covering more than a million people.
Since the economy crashed, I'm glad welfare is there as a safety net for people. And I'll still laugh at the gullible people who express outrage over the "Obamaphones".
I expect nothing less from the food stamp president.
We will probably never agree on this issue but let me just say that the government works programs under FDR at least helped to give people a sense of pride that they were working and accomplishing something and even helped people learn skills.
The current welfare system discourages people from working and doesn't help people often times in any way in my estimation.
Also when you give people welfare benefits someone has to pay for them and business shares the burden. The U.S. has some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. That is actually counterproductive in creating jobs for people.
I understand helping people but we are creating a socialist state where people don't think they have to work and think that they are entitled that other people take care of them.
Some People apply for government help for anything and everything they qualify for. My co-worker has 3 daughters (she lives with one of them) and she encourages them to apply for everything and anything they can get (she shares in these benefits by living with one of them). Two of her daughters are getting govt provided or assisted housing (they actually live in their own houses), plus health care, food stamps, etc.
none of her daughters work full time (two of them barely work at all and the other one has is currently failing out of highschool). My co-worker (their mom works but although she works full time and makes a good wage says that she has still applied for assistance but doesnt qualify. she also laments the fact she has to pay for her own eye glasses and prescription.
She says I don't understand because my parents didn't accept food stamps growing up and "if I don't take part in the struggle" I am not qualified to understand.
The thing is I saw my dad work 2 jobs growing up while going to school. Just because my family didn't accept government help doesn't mean we were privileged it just means they had different convictions.
I think in many cases good intentions harm people they are intending to help and welfare is one of them. My co-worker is totally capable of taking care of herself but not only does she try to freeload she encourages all of her daughters to do the same. I don't blame her I blame the system which encourages it.
Cool story bro. The only problem with it is that people like you think that story is the rule. I think it is an exception. That is why you support mittty and I support the Pres.
The answer to your question is quite simple. There are more people receiving assistance because the wealthy corporations moved all the decent paying jobs out of the country and the jobs remaining don't pay enough to support a person, much less a family,anymore. And why in the hell should someone be expected to work 2 or 3 jobs just to survive? Why not pay a person a living wage instead? If someone chooses to work 2 jobs to make extra money to enable them to purchase a luxury item, that's a different situation. Your idiotic notion that someone should just shut up and work themselves to death for slave wages is the real problem. The system doesn't encourage freeloading. The system encourages work. The problem is that the "job creators" insist on paying slave wages, or less, and demanding one person do the work of three for the low wage. Force employers to pay living wages and the issue of people living on assistance goes away.
I am curious as to how you think the outsourcing of jobs be fixed? Even Obama keeps saying US corporations need to be more competitive. There are a few ways to do this. Lower wages closer to other countries and increase productivity through technology. Are you advocating that we close our borders so that corporations pay artificially high wages? Are you advocating that the consumer be forced to pay a higher price for a car or electronics so that the workers can get higher wages? I am not even going to argue your point that corporations have some sort of social obligation to pay a higher wage than their global competition. The fact of the matter is that globalization has lowered our standard of living as the developing countries standard has risen. For years, we have consumed more energy and goods and lived a high standard of living relative to the rest of the world. Now things are starting to balance out. The other by-product of this is that the government can't afford to continue the welfare state and huge military. Sooner or later, it is going to have to come to an end.
I am also curious as to what your definition of a wealth company is? Does that include Ford, GM and Chrysler? At one point, they had about a $2,000.00 cost per car disadvantage over their Japanese competitors. Now they are moving their plants to Mexico so they can compete against Honda, Toyota and Hyundai. How would you suggest they compete otherwise?
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by spartanwill 18 months ago
Outsourcing can be stopped by removing the excess profit garnered by companies that move American manufacturing to slave wage countries. That is done by placing tariffs on those goods once made in America and now made in slave countries. The lie is that consumers will pay more if the jobs don't move. Companies don't move jobs to lower selling cost, they move to lower wages paid and increase the money stuffed into CEO pockets. Every company that moves manufacturing out of the country charges the exact same price for the finished goods as when it was made here. The difference is that the cost of manufacturing allows the CEO to stuff more money in his pocket because the workers making the goods are paid so little. A washing machine that cost 500 dollars when it was made here, still costs 500 dollars when it's made in China. The difference is between paying 20 dollars an hour to an American and 90 cents an hour to a Chinese worker that goes into the CEO's pocket, and the consumer saves NOTHING.
And yes, corporations exist by the grace of the people and DO have a moral and social obligation to pay living wages. If they don't there is no reason to allow their continued existence. The end of the huge military wouldn't be a bad thing either. It's much better to focus spending on people than things that kill.
Who deems what is excess profit?Who should be in charge of establishing compensation of executives if not what the market is willing to pay? Why should Americans make more in wages than the Chinese, Mexicans or Indians? What makes us more entitled because we are Americans? Why do you think nobody is building assembly plants in Michigan and are building plants in the south? Why do you think there is an exodus of manufacturing from Michigan, Illinois, Oregon and California to Texas, Mississippi and the Carolinas. Not only an exodus of manufacturing but also people too. Should Michigan establish a Tarriff on vehcles made in the US but not by UAW workers? Globalization is not going to go away and you can't Tarriff your way out of it. By the way, isn't China a communist country?
This post was edited by spartanwill 18 months ago
If a company manufacturing washing machines in the US sells them for 500 dollars and makes a profit of 100 dollars for every one sold while paying living wages to American workers, but chooses to move the manufacturing to China and pay Chinese workers slave wages, then sell the same washing machine in the US for the same 500 dollars and make a profit of 300 dollars for every one sold, THAT is excessive profit. Placing a tariff on the washer to keep the profit at 100 dollars would make the reason to move the jobs to China disappear. Thus the American jobs would be saved. Quite simple.
I have no problem with a Chinese manufacturer going into business making washing machines and selling them globally. That's free enterprise. However, if a Chinese manufacturer is going to sell them in the US, a tariff that keeps the selling price competitive with American manufactured machines needs to be instituted. Much like the Chinese tire industry that tries to dump low priced tires recently faced. A tariff creates a level playing field. We don't need to lower American wages to compete, we need to RAISE Chinese wages. That way we don't lose jobs to what is basically corporate greed. And greed is the reason for moving jobs to slave wage countries, nothing else. As for setting executive compensation levels, maybe it should be regulated by the government and not a dozen people sitting on a board of directors.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports