stack's Comments (64)
Gone with the Wind: Blowing U.S. Tax Dollars Off Shore
Commented Nov 20, 2009 at 11:32:14 in Green
“OMG! You SO don't know what you are talking about. TARP, passed by Republicans under BUSH bailed out Wall Street banks.
Separate Business and State? Are you out of your mind? That kind of deregulation brought us the Great Depression and this Great Recession -- with the word "great" used unfortunately.”
Separate Business and State? Are you out of your mind? That kind of deregulation brought us the Great Depression and this Great Recession -- with the word "great" used unfortunately.”
higherstrategy replied on Nov 20, 2009 at 12:32:01
“and by separating business and state, i'm talking about LOBBYISTS bribing
and Corporations from Donating to individual campaigns!
MY GOODNESS!!
your 'allegiances' are easier to see everyday”
and Corporations from Donating to individual campaigns!
MY GOODNESS!!
your 'allegiances' are easier to see everyday”
higherstrategy replied on Nov 20, 2009 at 11:59:19
“OMG! you SO don't know what your talking about!
BUSH passed a bill worth 350 billion!
Did you forget in Feb. Obama making that 'inspired' speech claiming that if"WE" didn't pass this TARP we would face dire economic consequences!!??
WOW!
you need to do some studying before you keep passing around such false information
Sheesh!”
BUSH passed a bill worth 350 billion!
Did you forget in Feb. Obama making that 'inspired' speech claiming that if"WE" didn't pass this TARP we would face dire economic consequences!!??
WOW!
you need to do some studying before you keep passing around such false information
Sheesh!”
Gone with the Wind: Blowing U.S. Tax Dollars Off Shore
Commented Nov 20, 2009 at 09:35:53 in Green
“What are you talking about? Republicans blocked strong Buy American language in the Stimulus bill. That's a fact. And if strong language were in the bill, none of this would have happened. Broad Buy American provisions would have required that turbines be made in America -- not in Spain or China.
There is nothing dishonest going on here. The stimulus bill failed to require that all products bought with stimulus money be made in America, so they're not.”
There is nothing dishonest going on here. The stimulus bill failed to require that all products bought with stimulus money be made in America, so they're not.”
Gone with the Wind: Blowing U.S. Tax Dollars Off Shore
Commented Nov 20, 2009 at 09:30:22 in Green
“Demonstrating at sites where stimulus already has been spent to create foreign jobs is a good idea. But an even better idea is stopping new grants of our tax dollars intended to create jobs in foreign countries.”
Gone with the Wind: Blowing U.S. Tax Dollars Off Shore
Commented Nov 19, 2009 at 15:25:07 in Green
“Even when a U.S. manufacturer is healthy -- like the Simmons Mattress Co. -- some private equity company will come along and suck all the wealth out of it and leave it on its death bed (so to speak), which is, in the business world, bankruptcy court.”
Gone with the Wind: Blowing U.S. Tax Dollars Off Shore
Commented Nov 19, 2009 at 10:55:34 in Green
“"The Texas windmill farm developer announced this week that its Chinese partner plans to construct a $50 million turbine factory in the U.S., according to a story in the New York Times. But that facility won't supply the turbines for the project that the partnership wants $436 million in stimulus funds to support. Those would come from China. So, in the end, it still means nearly half a billion in U.S. tax dollars would create 2,000 turbine-building jobs in China."
Let's see, the Texas consortium wants $436 million in taxpayer money to build turbines in China, but as a sweetener offers to invest a measly $50 million in a wind turbine factory in the U.S.
Why don't we just use our $436 million in U.S. tax dollars to build wind turbine and solar cell factories in the U.S. and cut out the Chinese completely?”
Let's see, the Texas consortium wants $436 million in taxpayer money to build turbines in China, but as a sweetener offers to invest a measly $50 million in a wind turbine factory in the U.S.
Why don't we just use our $436 million in U.S. tax dollars to build wind turbine and solar cell factories in the U.S. and cut out the Chinese completely?”
amdezurik replied on Nov 19, 2009 at 11:32:10
“well, I agree with you. but we need to find folks to run the places you suggest and target them to encourage re-building our manufacturing base but G.nopers will block it every way they can”
Business Council Honors Vale CEO for Clipping Workers, Wacking Towns
Commented Nov 16, 2009 at 17:05:42 in Business
“Really, really? There wasn't a better CEO in America for the Business Council for International Understanding to toss a prize? Well, maybe there wasn't a better CEO who wasn't a member of the secretive BCIU. Secretive? Why would an organization supposedly begun by a U.S. President need to be clandestine? You tell me. Call and ask for a list of the Council's member companies. The tight-mouthed little group won't give it to you. What's the problem? Are there really only five member companies or what?”
Hell No! We Won't Send Our Tax Dollars to China
Commented Nov 06, 2009 at 15:12:52 in World
“Frederik Balfour wrote this in his blog in the New York Times on Nov. 2 about readers upset by the notion that their tax dollars would go to China: "But what a lot of readers overlooked {though the Times did not} was that A-Power is listed on Nasdaq. Remember that ordinary Chinese are not allowed to invest in overseas stocks, so while jobs may be created in China, the profits will accrue to U.S. and other international investors in A-Power."
So, Mr. Balfour, American taxpayers should fork over nearly half a billion dollars so that a few stock holders can, possibly, realize a profit in one of the three companies in the consortium? What kind of capitalist are you, Mr. Balfour, a communist/capitalist? Governments don't invest in companies in capitalist countries. If you want to live in a country like that, Mr. Balfour, move to China!
Also, stockholders got their bailout. It wasn't called the Stimulus. It was called TARP. They need to keep their grubby hands off the workers' Stimulus funds!”
So, Mr. Balfour, American taxpayers should fork over nearly half a billion dollars so that a few stock holders can, possibly, realize a profit in one of the three companies in the consortium? What kind of capitalist are you, Mr. Balfour, a communist/capitalist? Governments don't invest in companies in capitalist countries. If you want to live in a country like that, Mr. Balfour, move to China!
Also, stockholders got their bailout. It wasn't called the Stimulus. It was called TARP. They need to keep their grubby hands off the workers' Stimulus funds!”
Wiping Blood Off White Buck Shoes
Commented Oct 23, 2009 at 11:25:30 in Business
“In the New York Times story Friday about the Federal Reserve and Treasury actions, reporter Stephen Labaton talked to Citigroup traders who,he said, "shrugged off the pay rules imposed by Mr. Feinberg as affecting only a handful of the company's 275,000 employees."
Do they really think they are going to get huge pay packages when the guys at the top are not? Even if it happens for a year or so, that's not going to last long. Underlings aren't going to take home more than the top dogs.
Silly boys.”
Do they really think they are going to get huge pay packages when the guys at the top are not? Even if it happens for a year or so, that's not going to last long. Underlings aren't going to take home more than the top dogs.
Silly boys.”
The Chamber of Commerce's Jobs Deception Campaign
Commented Oct 14, 2009 at 15:56:29 in Business
“This is what cracks me up:
'In testimony before Congress, statements to the press, and on its website, the Chamber claims to represent "3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions." In reality, the number is probably closer to 200,000." '
Man, they'll lie about anything. I mean, that's quite an exaggeration!”
'In testimony before Congress, statements to the press, and on its website, the Chamber claims to represent "3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions." In reality, the number is probably closer to 200,000." '
Man, they'll lie about anything. I mean, that's quite an exaggeration!”
"Anything Goes" Capitalism Destroys Companies and Workers' Lives
Commented Oct 08, 2009 at 13:04:55 in Business
“Unions are fighting hard FOR health care reform! Take a look at the AFL-CIO blog site! Day after day they post a story pushing for the public option! The AFL-CIO voted for single payer at its convention in September. Unions waste way too much of their time negotiating over health care costs. They'd like to get that off the table so they could get raises for their members.
What are you talking about?????”
What are you talking about?????”
petef59 replied on Oct 09, 2009 at 23:39:22
“$750 million to the private equity group/$1.3 billion bankruptcy
Creative bookkeeping? Fraud?”
Creative bookkeeping? Fraud?”
"Anything Goes" Capitalism Destroys Companies and Workers' Lives
Commented Oct 08, 2009 at 06:50:00 in Business
“You are so right, o2bmw76. I often wonder why people are not in the streets here, the way they would be in places like France. Why do Americans just sit back and take this stuff like sheep?”
catbite replied on Oct 10, 2009 at 11:35:04
“I am surprised too that the middle class is so passive. The majority of people are just taking it. Remember, we have the numbers. Vote wisely.”
Obama and China: Vandalism or Vision
Commented Sep 30, 2009 at 10:41:46 in Politics
“A huge difference between Bush's spending and Obama's is that Obama tells the truth about his. He didn't put his Iraq and Afghanistan spending "off budget" so that it wouldn't be included in the deficit figures like Bush did.”
Obama and China: Vandalism or Vision
Commented Sep 30, 2009 at 10:38:49 in Politics
“Yes, of course you are right. I am sure all Americans want to buy Chinese products that they know were made by mentally retarded Chinese people held in slave conditions working in brick kilns or by Chinese teenagers held in locked factories with caged windows 12 days a week under the condition that they must pay a fee to get out of their "work contract" in order to escape. Yea, that's certainly how I want my Wal-Mart sneakers and Christmas decorations made! Nothing like celebrating Christmas with slave-labor decorations! Read the New York Times investigations of labor conditions in China, Hippie Chucker.”
therealredstateblues replied on Sep 30, 2009 at 20:19:57
“recent polling has suggested people are willing to pay more for US made goods and services”
Obama and China: Vandalism or Vision
Commented Sep 30, 2009 at 10:00:30 in Politics
“Hippie Chucker,
The reason the Chinese buy Treasury Bonds is to artificially reduce the value of Chinese currency. They do that to keep Chinese people employed and their economy strong at the expense of the rest of the world, particularly the U.S.
Here is how China expert Peter Navarro explains it in the book "Manufacturing A Better Future for America": "Since 1984, China has pegged its currency, the yuan, to the U.S. dollar at roughly an 8-to-1 ratio. Under pressure from the United States and the international community, China adopted a 'managed float' regime in 2005 based on a market basked of currencies. For all practical purposes, however, the dollar peg remains intact, and the yuan remains, by most estimates, considerably undervalued.
"As noted by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 'China's undervalued currency encourages undervalued Chinese exports to the U.S. and discourages U.S. exports because U.S. exports are artificially overvalued. As a result, undervalued Chinese exports have been highly disruptive to the U.S. and to other countries as well, as evidenced by trade statistics."
This market manipulation has made the U.S., once an import/export creditor nation, the largest debtor nation.
Go ahead, Hippie Chucker, keep buying your artificially cheap Chinese products at Wal-Mart. You are "buying" your country down the tubes. Clearly you respect the Chinese more than capitalists. Why don't you love the U.S or leave it?”
The reason the Chinese buy Treasury Bonds is to artificially reduce the value of Chinese currency. They do that to keep Chinese people employed and their economy strong at the expense of the rest of the world, particularly the U.S.
Here is how China expert Peter Navarro explains it in the book "Manufacturing A Better Future for America": "Since 1984, China has pegged its currency, the yuan, to the U.S. dollar at roughly an 8-to-1 ratio. Under pressure from the United States and the international community, China adopted a 'managed float' regime in 2005 based on a market basked of currencies. For all practical purposes, however, the dollar peg remains intact, and the yuan remains, by most estimates, considerably undervalued.
"As noted by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 'China's undervalued currency encourages undervalued Chinese exports to the U.S. and discourages U.S. exports because U.S. exports are artificially overvalued. As a result, undervalued Chinese exports have been highly disruptive to the U.S. and to other countries as well, as evidenced by trade statistics."
This market manipulation has made the U.S., once an import/export creditor nation, the largest debtor nation.
Go ahead, Hippie Chucker, keep buying your artificially cheap Chinese products at Wal-Mart. You are "buying" your country down the tubes. Clearly you respect the Chinese more than capitalists. Why don't you love the U.S or leave it?”
RW11 replied on Oct 01, 2009 at 01:58:43
“The value of the yuan has not made the US the world's largest debtor nation.
That has been completely self inflicted by the US spending more than it earns. What on earth does the value of the yuan have to do with the fact that the US Congress is completely incapable of taxing the same amount as it spends?”
That has been completely self inflicted by the US spending more than it earns. What on earth does the value of the yuan have to do with the fact that the US Congress is completely incapable of taxing the same amount as it spends?”
Obama and China: Vandalism or Vision
Commented Sep 30, 2009 at 09:29:39 in Politics
“The tire tariffs are different because they come under a special section of trade law called Section 421 to which the Chinese agreed specifically in order to receive U.S. support for their acceptance into the World Trade Organization. Because China is not a market economy --in other words, it is a communist country where the economy is controlled by the government, China agreed that if a surge of their imports damaged a U.S. industry, the U.S. could impose relief measures like tariffs until the year 2013. In a non-market economy, the government can decide to provide economic support to an industry, so that it can, for example, sell tires in the U.S. at prices lower than they cost to make.
This imposition of tariffs on tires is not symbolic. The International Trade Commission determined that the tire tariffs would preserve jobs in the U.S. tire industry. That is crucial. The U.S. cannot lose its manufacturing base. It must continue to be able to make products of value to sell here and overseas. Trading paper of questionable value on Wall Street clearly is not enough to support an economy. The U.S. has lost 40,000 manufacturers in the past decade and millions of manufacturing jobs. That is a threat to the stability of our nation.”
This imposition of tariffs on tires is not symbolic. The International Trade Commission determined that the tire tariffs would preserve jobs in the U.S. tire industry. That is crucial. The U.S. cannot lose its manufacturing base. It must continue to be able to make products of value to sell here and overseas. Trading paper of questionable value on Wall Street clearly is not enough to support an economy. The U.S. has lost 40,000 manufacturers in the past decade and millions of manufacturing jobs. That is a threat to the stability of our nation.”
RW11 replied on Oct 01, 2009 at 02:09:41
“China agreed to that clause as the cost of it getting into the WTO. Those cowards in Congress insisted on it.
It is not only non-market economies where the government can decide to provide economic support to an industry. Have you not noticed that the financial and auto sectors in the US are now completely supported by the government?
There is no indication that the tires China is selling to the US are sold at a loss. That was never the basis of the section 421 action.
On jobs, the ITC found that the tariffs it was recommending would result in increased wages of less than $60m per year in the tire industry. The cost to consumers (through higher tire prices) would be around $500m in the first year. So consumers pay half a billion bucks to produce $60m in extra wages. And you think that's good policy??
The US is the most prolific manufacturing nation on earth.”
It is not only non-market economies where the government can decide to provide economic support to an industry. Have you not noticed that the financial and auto sectors in the US are now completely supported by the government?
There is no indication that the tires China is selling to the US are sold at a loss. That was never the basis of the section 421 action.
On jobs, the ITC found that the tariffs it was recommending would result in increased wages of less than $60m per year in the tire industry. The cost to consumers (through higher tire prices) would be around $500m in the first year. So consumers pay half a billion bucks to produce $60m in extra wages. And you think that's good policy??
The US is the most prolific manufacturing nation on earth.”
eilish replied on Sep 30, 2009 at 12:58:27
“Wow, thanks. Do you teach Economic Policy for Dummies 101? I'll sign up.”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 28, 2009 at 09:41:17 in Business
“Yes, and what's outrageous is that the transfer of the technology in many cases is forced. The Chinese require American companies to hand over their technology if they want to open factories in China. And they do it, even though those strong-arm tactics violate World Trade Organization rules.
So the Chinese benefit from technology that is developed on American soil -- sometimes with the help of government grants and virtually all the time with the help of American taxpayers in the form of support to public colleges and universities like Penn State that train the engineers and scientists that develop the transferred technology.”
So the Chinese benefit from technology that is developed on American soil -- sometimes with the help of government grants and virtually all the time with the help of American taxpayers in the form of support to public colleges and universities like Penn State that train the engineers and scientists that develop the transferred technology.”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 28, 2009 at 09:35:17 in Business
“I don't know, realredstateblues. But, again, this weekend, newspapers called the USW position "protectionist" instead of "enforcing it."”
RW11 replied on Oct 01, 2009 at 02:18:41
“The tire decision does not enforce anything. China did not break a rule in selling cheap tires to the US. So there is nothing to enforce.
Rather, the US exercised a right it has under China's accession protocol.”
Rather, the US exercised a right it has under China's accession protocol.”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 26, 2009 at 23:07:37 in Business
“It's interesting that in addition to jobs, our biggest export to China is raw materials. They send us toys and electronics. We send them iron ore.”
therealredstateblues replied on Sep 27, 2009 at 10:18:08
“iron ore, uncut timber, scrap metal, paper pulp, etc that all returns as finshed goods,
this is what colonies do
there should be at least some value added to exports if it to be of any benefit to our own economy for example processed metal ingots rather than scrap and ore, cut lumber rather than uncut, finished paper etc
and bsides exporting jobs we are also exporting technology - without technology there is no innovation, and puts national security at risk”
this is what colonies do
there should be at least some value added to exports if it to be of any benefit to our own economy for example processed metal ingots rather than scrap and ore, cut lumber rather than uncut, finished paper etc
and bsides exporting jobs we are also exporting technology - without technology there is no innovation, and puts national security at risk”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 26, 2009 at 09:02:22 in Business
“Sorry, but you just cannot be high while making steel. Much too dangerous.”
lightningbolt replied on Sep 28, 2009 at 11:27:39
“He said legalize it, not smoke it. Did you know hemp is very useful in making many things? The United States was built on hemp and tobacco in the early days.”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 26, 2009 at 08:58:44 in Business
“You are not overreacting.
It is loyalty to the dollar that is the problem here.”
It is loyalty to the dollar that is the problem here.”
Enforcing the Rule of Trade Law
Commented Sep 25, 2009 at 12:16:32 in Business
“On Sept. 21 David Rockefeller wrote in the New York Times that President Obama should "urge Congress to pass free trade agreements with Panama, South Korea and Colombia that would truly open these markets to our products." That's dandy, except what products? By failing to enforce trade laws, the U.S. has lost 40,000 manufacturers over the past 20 years and millions of good, family supporting jobs. We are losing the ability to make things to trade because we allow other countries to cheat in our trade relationships with them. It is destroying our economy and our country, and for some reason, people like Rockefeller can't see it. Oh, yeah. ROCKEFELLER. He doesn't work for a living.”
FreedomCorpse replied on Sep 25, 2009 at 18:12:27
“same with Charlie Rangel, another corrupt politician who needs the boot from New Yorkers.”
Obama Plans to Reform Economy, Not Just Health Insurance
Commented Sep 18, 2009 at 11:23:17 in Business
“Yes, you are right. My brother plans to go to the next health care town meeting near him and ask those opposed to the public option to sign a petition. And then he is going to say he hopes that all of those on that petition have clearly stated with their signatures their plan to relinquish their rights to the "public option" of Medicare.
He is going to take a body guard with him. Not a gun, mind you, just a big guy.”
He is going to take a body guard with him. Not a gun, mind you, just a big guy.”
Nonpartay replied on Sep 18, 2009 at 12:56:30
“I wish him luck. With the fear ginned up by right-wing media, you're gonna need it.”
Obama Plans to Reform Economy, Not Just Health Insurance
Commented Sep 18, 2009 at 11:18:41 in Business
“I run every morning. My weight is correct. I never eat at MickyD's. I don't have high blood pressure or diabetes. But genetics are a strange thing. I could get cancer tomorrow. And I believe it is morally wrong for a company to profit from my illness -- particularly when they are profiting by denying me coverage after collecting my premiums for years.”
Obama Plans to Reform Economy, Not Just Health Insurance
Commented Sep 18, 2009 at 11:14:54 in Business
“Obama did take a first step toward making trade more fair by imposing those tariffs on imported tires from China. Bush never had the guts to do that.”
Obama Plans to Reform Economy, Not Just Health Insurance
Commented Sep 18, 2009 at 11:13:29 in Business
“Leo Gerard's income is available on the National Labor Relations Board web site. It is less than $200,000 a year. He is the lowest paid leader of a major union in the USA. Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about.”


