The Perils for Obama of Not Talking About Poverty in America

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi, apparently you havent noticed...I don't respond to your posts. You're so fucking full of shit and couldnt carry on an honest discussion if your mom's life depended on it. Keep talking if you must, just don't expect a response.

Transaltion: I get bested in every discussion.

I understand. You need to cut your losses and run.

 

[Vanquish]

You're the only one I don't respond to because of the reasons I've stated earlier. Don't trip patting yourself on the back for "besting me". Get over yourself. You couldn't best a toddler.

 

[Full-Auto]

If you listen to what the majority of conservatives say, they blame Obama for the stockpiles of cash not being spent. "They're afraid of what healthcare is going to cost / do to the markets." Blame it on the boogeyman.

I know you have your eye on the international profits. Just confused onhow to tap that.

Good question. It's hard for America to win in the modern economy where we don't lead in technology...we don't lead in efficiency of our work force...we can't lead in price...we don't have specific markets that can't be copied. Every product can be copied by some other country, produced more efficiently by some other country, and made cheaper due to cost of living than some other country.

Isolationist trade tariffs may be the answer...or be our total downfall.

It has been sad to see us fold at the table of disagreement on open markets. It certainly will be an interesting catch 22

 

[The Rabbi]

If you listen to what the majority of conservatives say, they blame Obama for the stockpiles of cash not being spent. "They're afraid of what healthcare is going to cost / do to the markets." Blame it on the boogeyman.

I know you have your eye on the international profits. Just confused onhow to tap that.

Good question. It's hard for America to win in the modern economy where we don't lead in technology...we don't lead in efficiency of our work force...we can't lead in price...we don't have specific markets that can't be copied. Every product can be copied by some other country, produced more efficiently by some other country, and made cheaper due to cost of living than some other country.

Isolationist trade tariffs may be the answer...or be our total downfall.

It has been sad to see us fold at the table of disagreement on open markets. It certainly will be an interesting catch 22

The notion that America is not competitive on the world market is a dangerous socialist and anti-American one. The AMerican worker is among the most efficient in the world. American engineering is among the best, and thousands of foreign students come here every year to study in our universities. Given unfettered markets, American companies will compete and win on the world stage.
Too bad the Left has already thrown in the towel on America.

 

[Avatar4321]

Because im sure those in poverty need to be reminded that they are in poverty.

And of course, because Obama is clearly the only way to help them. Big government to save the day, right?

id rather be poor than get assistance from Big government. I figure that hard work, thrift and frugality, and most importantly, the Lord can help me get by.

 

[editec]

Given unfettered markets, American companies will compete and win on the world stage.

Delusional thinking, Rab.

If an industry can find cheaper workers and still sell into this market, they must find cheaper workers.


If they do not go offshore to offset production costs, their competitors will eat them alive.

 

[Vanquish]

Say anything that puts America in perspective and you'll be labeled anti-American. You don't say America is the best? You hate America.

 

[Vanquish]

You'd like to think that all that would be enough. But bad things happen to good people. Medical emergencies and natural disasters and sometimes just plain ol' bad luck can't be overcome by hard work and personal responsibility alone.

That's not an excuse for being lazy, but it's a reality that some people don't want to acknowledge. If just wanting a job and promising to work hard at it were enough to stop unemployment, it wouldn't be at 10%.

 

[The Rabbi]

Given unfettered markets, American companies will compete and win on the world stage.

Delusional thinking, Rab.

If an industry can find cheaper workers and still sell into this market, they must find cheaper workers.


If they do not go offshore to offset production costs, their competitors will eat them alive.

Not every company has off-shored its produciton, numbnuts. You look at the total cost involved. Off shoring involves significant costs and delays that will make it unworkable for many companies.
This reminds me of the debate about automation in the 1960s when it was claimed machines would take over all production and people would be unemployed in masses. Didn't happen that way. Won't happen this way either.

 

[The Rabbi]

Say anything that puts America in perspective and you'll be labeled anti-American. You don't say America is the best? You hate America.

Saying that America sucks and its people are lazy and stupid is, yes, UnAmerican. Thanks for clearing that up, asshole.

 

[xcelerate]

The flight of capital won't just happen because of taxes. It will happen ANY time any company can identify a way to become more efficient overseas to make more money. But what does that do? It takes money overseas and puts it in the hands of India, Mexico, and other countries that ARENT the United States of America.

Where is your patriotism there? Why won't they lose a little profit to help American workers? "Oh you can't ask them to do that!! That's not fair!!"

Wait wait wait. They're creating the problem by moving jobs overseas, but yet you want to defend their right to profit? The gap in logic is astounding.

Continue to blame Obama and your stereotyping of liberals as tax and spenders. I don't disagree that Obama and liberals have their faults, but the conservatives in this thread just dont want to face facts that people with money and power in big business are using their money and power to suck up all the money and power...and it's not as easy as Joe Plumber just starting his own business and living the American success story.

Most big businesses are international and have an obligation to their shareholders and investors both foreign and domestic to make as much profit and be as successful as possible, this fact will never change as a business is not a person but an entity in and of itself. The fact the a company is willing AT ALL to move overseas should be proof enough that we need policy reform.

 

[Vanquish]

Say anything that puts America in perspective and you'll be labeled anti-American. You don't say America is the best? You hate America.

Saying that America sucks and its people are lazy and stupid is, yes, UnAmerican. Thanks for clearing that up, asshole.

make shit up much, douchenozzle? *sigh* there you go. you've won. not the actual argument, but you've gotten me to respond to your crazy-ass shit. pat yourself on the back for your forum trolling. ya got me.

 

[The Rabbi]

Say anything that puts America in perspective and you'll be labeled anti-American. You don't say America is the best? You hate America.

Saying that America sucks and its people are lazy and stupid is, yes, UnAmerican. Thanks for clearing that up, asshole.

make shit up much, douchenozzle? *sigh* there you go. you've won. not the actual argument, but you've gotten me to respond to your crazy-ass shit. pat yourself on the back for your forum trolling. ya got me.

I didnt make anything up, fuckstick. You just babble without understanding what you say. If you wrote:

Good question. It's hard for America to win in the modern economy where we don't lead in technology...we don't lead in efficiency of our work force...we can't lead in price...we don't have specific markets that can't be copied. Every product can be copied by some other country, produced more efficiently by some other country, and made cheaper due to cost of living than some other country

then you are saying we can't work efficiently (lazy) and we don't lead in technology (stupid). I'm not making anything up. Your words are there for everyone to see.

 

[Vanquish]

Quote where I said America is lazy or stupid. I dare you. Don't post again until you have MY NAME and LAZY or STUPID in the same post about AMERICA.

You can't, fucktard. So go sit the fuck down on a rusty nail.

 

[The Rabbi]

Quote where I said America is lazy or stupid. I dare you. Don't post again until you have MY NAME and LAZY or STUPID in the same post about AMERICA.

You can't, fucktard. So go sit the fuck down on a rusty nail.

The last cop out of the terminally stupid. I showed you where you wrote that, fucktard. Can you not read? Do you not understand what you yourself write?

 

[Trajan]

Poor economy strainin' charities ability to help...

Charities Struggle to Cope With Rising US Poverty
September 17, 2011 - Recent U.S. Census Bureau figures show that more than 46 million Americans now live in poverty. That’s the highest amount on record since the agency began tracking poverty rates in 1959. Additionally, about 50 million Americans are living without health insurance. The increasing number of people seeking assistance is a growing concern for agencies helping the poor.

Gina Zbikowski says struggling to find a job while living on a meager disability allowance is not the American dream. “To me the American dream was owning your own home, owning your own business, having your own car, you know, living life to its absolute fullest. I can’t even do that now… I can’t even dream about that now," she said. Gina’s boyfriend John Ohlerich works a part-time job with no health insurance. And he has epilepsy. “The prescription is really expensive, and I pay for it every month. When I don’t have money to pay for it, I have to rely on my grandmother. And so that’s money right out of my pocket right there because I have to have my medication, I have to pay for my doctor's visit, otherwise, I don’t want to die," he said.

One out of six Americans, like Gina and John, lives in poverty. “Poverty is a struggle every day to decide if you put food on the table or if you pay your rent, if you can feed your children or buy them medicine," said Kim Perez, who runs the People Resource Center in DuPage County, Illinois. They operate the food pantry that helps Gina and John get by. “People who have led successful lives, who were educated, are now finding themselves in poverty because they cannot bring in enough, their unemployment benefits have ended and there are not enough federal, state or local programs, to be quite honest, that are available to help support their needs," she said.

With more people living in poverty, aid agencies find their resources stretched thin. Lisa Mayse-Lillig is with Heartland Human Care Services, a suburban Chicago agency that tries to prevent homelessness. She says only a small fraction of those who need help get assistance. “The dollars just aren’t as plentiful as they used to be. So as those funding sources dwindle, the need increases, and the differential between those two things just gets bigger and bigger," she said.

Gina Zbikowski knows there are limits to the help agencies can provide. She says she would rather have a job so she can take care of herself. “I’m hoping one of these days to get out of this, but things look grim right now," she said. Zbikowski says unless something is done to reverse the unemployment rate, now just above nine percent, the lines of people looking for help will continue to grow.

Source

well don't worry Obama is on that, he would like to trim the deductions for charity. an article here says it problematic anyway as the economy will do that on its own as it appears to have, but any drop now will hurt all the more I think and, the article is from early 2009, which was part of the 'plans' he sent up to HIS congress who didn't want to approve it. we are re-living 2 year old history..


* March 4, 2009, 3:28 PM ET

Why the Obama Tax Hikes Won’t Kill Charity

BUT- snip-

According to the survey, 51.7% of wealthy donors said their giving would remain the same if they received zero income-tax deductions. Granted, 47% said they would give less if deductions were wiped out. Of that group, about a third said their giving would “somewhat decrease,” while 10% predicted their gifts would “dramatically decrease.”

So only 10% of the rich would cut off their contributions–and that is only if deductions went to zero. President Obama is proposing to reduce the deduction for top-income households to 28% from 35%.

Still, there is troubling news. Those households earning $5 million or more gave less in 2007 than in 2005. And the economy in 2007 was in a lot better shape than it is now. Patrick Rooney, interim executive director of Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy, told the Chronicle of Philanthropy that the economic downturn may have hit the very wealthiest donors before other Americans.

“In 2007, the economy hadn’t collapsed the way it has now, but we were beginning to see some fraying around the edges,” he said. “That may have had a bigger impact on some of the high-net-worth households in a bigger way, and sooner, than it did on the overall economy.”

If the wealthy were feeling less charitable in 2007 because of the economy, imagine how they are feeling now.

So when charity takes a tumble this year–and it will–the economy, not Obama, will be the culprit.

more at-

Why the Obama Tax Hikes Won’t Kill Charity - The Wealth Report - WSJ

 

[rdean]

Joseph A. Palermo: The Perils for Obama of Not Talking About Poverty in America

Did Obama really think he could "jump start" the economy by leaving millions of home "owners" to the tender mercies of Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America? Did he really believe he could "stimulate" the economy with a largely Republican package of tax incentives when virtually every dollar of federal "stimulus" money was erased by draconian budget cuts at the state and local levels? Does he really think that "triggers" inside the debt ceiling "deal" are going to have a moderating influence on his nemeses among the Far Right?

Without a significant tax hike on the richest people in this country the $825 billion bailout of the big investment banks and insurance companies of September 2008 represents a massive transfer of wealth from working people to Wall Street and another hit against ordinary taxpayers. Where's the fairness in that? Where's Obama's sense of outrage toward those who ransacked the middle class? Why doesn't he feel any righteous anger toward those who promulgated the terrible policies during the Bush years that kicked the country to its knees economically? Why is Obama so implacable and emotionless in the face of those who have done so much damage to the country he supposedly loves? That guy really must have ice water running through his veins. He simply takes in stride the onslaught that has so crippled the nation, destroyed the lives of millions of unemployed Americans who had no responsibility whatsoever in bringing about this sorry state affairs. He and other "leaders" sit on the sidelines while many of our most important public institutions that bind us together as a people are ruined or cut back to nothing including public schools, public health, public services, public parks, public safety.

I'm sending this article to Obama.

He already knows. He's working on it. The only thing that will help are jobs. If you really want to help, send it to Republicans in congress, not that any of them care.

 

[The T]

Joseph A. Palermo: The Perils for Obama of Not Talking About Poverty in America

Did Obama really think he could "jump start" the economy by leaving millions of home "owners" to the tender mercies of Chase, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America? Did he really believe he could "stimulate" the economy with a largely Republican package of tax incentives when virtually every dollar of federal "stimulus" money was erased by draconian budget cuts at the state and local levels? Does he really think that "triggers" inside the debt ceiling "deal" are going to have a moderating influence on his nemeses among the Far Right?

Without a significant tax hike on the richest people in this country the $825 billion bailout of the big investment banks and insurance companies of September 2008 represents a massive transfer of wealth from working people to Wall Street and another hit against ordinary taxpayers. Where's the fairness in that? Where's Obama's sense of outrage toward those who ransacked the middle class? Why doesn't he feel any righteous anger toward those who promulgated the terrible policies during the Bush years that kicked the country to its knees economically? Why is Obama so implacable and emotionless in the face of those who have done so much damage to the country he supposedly loves? That guy really must have ice water running through his veins. He simply takes in stride the onslaught that has so crippled the nation, destroyed the lives of millions of unemployed Americans who had no responsibility whatsoever in bringing about this sorry state affairs. He and other "leaders" sit on the sidelines while many of our most important public institutions that bind us together as a people are ruined or cut back to nothing including public schools, public health, public services, public parks, public safety.

I'm sending this article to Obama.

He already knows. He's working on it. The only thing that will help are jobs. If you really want to help, send it to Republicans in congress, not that any of them care.

Repub;icans prefer to get Government off the backs of business to unleash the private sector. Obama proposes to make the leash shorter.

 

[FA_Q2]

Given unfettered markets, American companies will compete and win on the world stage.

Delusional thinking, Rab.

If an industry can find cheaper workers and still sell into this market, they must find cheaper workers.


If they do not go offshore to offset production costs, their competitors will eat them alive.

Not every company has off-shored its produciton, numbnuts. You look at the total cost involved. Off shoring involves significant costs and delays that will make it unworkable for many companies.
This reminds me of the debate about automation in the 1960s when it was claimed machines would take over all production and people would be unemployed in masses. Didn't happen that way. Won't happen this way either.

But we incentivize off shoring and that is plain dumb. We should be incentivizing local business, NOT the other way around. Do you really think that our trade policy is effective? Tell me how it helps this nation? I do not like most regulation on business but this is not a business issue, it is a national issue with relations between 2 nations as the point. That is the governments preview.

 

[The Rabbi]

Delusional thinking, Rab.

If an industry can find cheaper workers and still sell into this market, they must find cheaper workers.


If they do not go offshore to offset production costs, their competitors will eat them alive.

Not every company has off-shored its produciton, numbnuts. You look at the total cost involved. Off shoring involves significant costs and delays that will make it unworkable for many companies.
This reminds me of the debate about automation in the 1960s when it was claimed machines would take over all production and people would be unemployed in masses. Didn't happen that way. Won't happen this way either.

But we incentivize off shoring and that is plain dumb. We should be incentivizing local business, NOT the other way around. Do you really think that our trade policy is effective? Tell me how it helps this nation? I do not like most regulation on business but this is not a business issue, it is a national issue with relations between 2 nations as the point. That is the governments preview.

What incentives do we give for off shoring?
Every "business issue" is also a national issue. Red herring.