Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Sory guys, but you can't overlook the brain washing by the Marxist media members worlwide. The worldwide media is FAR LEFT of even our liberal media and citizens realy don't get other viewpoints to ponder.> Really? You're going with that? How do you explain Britain, then, whose most prestigious and widely read newspaper, the Times of London, is owned by Rupert Murdoch? And which has far more right-wing papers than left-wing? Britain doesn't get "other viewpoints" to ponder? You're really going with that? What I found interesting was the the country that favored Obama the least was India. Worried about the offshoring drying up if we don't elect another Republican?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh "With our near trillion dollar trade deficits it will be only a matter of time before we are totally owned by the rest of the world. Heck, all they would have to do to defeat us is cut up Uncle Sam's Visa card and stop trading with us. The shelves at WalMart would be bare within a week." What do you propose we do about it?
Originally Posted By ecdc >>What I found interesting was the the country that favored Obama the least was India. Worried about the offshoring drying up if we don't elect another Republican? << Excellent point.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<What do you propose we do about it?>> For one thing kick Corporate America out of the driver's seat. Actually, the term "Corporate America" is a misnomer. The megacorps no longer consider themselves as "American". All the more reason why they should not be running things. But this will be very, very hard. The Davos crowd isn't going to meekly step aside and let us reclaim what is ours.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***What do you propose we do about it?*** Gee Doug, I really have no clue. Perhaps a little fiscal conservatism? Coupled with {gasp} some actual belt tightening for the ultra-rich in the form of mildly higher taxes? How about YOUR party actually sticking to their word and refusing to bail out failed businesses (even big uns) to the tune of billions? How about handling wars a little differently in the future, with true international consensus and lots of partners to share the burden both in blood AND in money? (unfortunately requires NOT pissing off the planet with our isolationist tinged belligerence towards friendlies). Maybe that won't fix it, but a few trillion saved is a start, anyway.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***refusing to bail out failed businesses (even big uns) to the tune of billions?*** Oops. Trillions, rather. (how could I forget about fraudie/phoney)
Originally Posted By utahjosh <How about YOUR party actually sticking to their word and refusing to bail out failed businesses (even big uns) to the tune of billions?> I would love that!!!! It's one thing that makes me mad. But it's not enough to make me want Obama in the white house.
Originally Posted By Mr X Josh, nothing would make you want Obama in the white house. I'm convinced of that. Did you notice that your girl Palin casually mentioned maybe going to war with Russia? If THAT doesn't convince you that McCain is reckless and irresponsible regarding his judgment (and Obama has proven to be pretty darned savvy about that stuff), nothing will. Unfortunately.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy C'mon Mr X, we need more wars with oil producing nations! How else will we get crude oil to $200 a barrel? And how else will we get the inflation that is required to keep the U.S. debt Ponzi scheme going? War with Russia is the only answer!
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <>>What I found interesting was the the country that favored Obama the least was India. Worried about the offshoring drying up if we don't elect another Republican? << Excellent point.< I've posted about this 100 times in the last few years since this is the area I work in in Corp America -- the off shoring of almost 10M jobs in 8 years started in earnest 2 years BEFORE the Republican's took the White House - but hey, why let facts get in the way of an 'excellent post'. Now that being said neither party has done squat about the issue - and India has not been the top destination for off shoring in a few years now since they are actually demanding wages that are not an embarassment - the top destinations today are Brazil and Kuala Lumpur. Although unlessyou did what I do for a living you'd never know since the press doesn't cover the story, and neither political party wants to talk about it. The ONLY candidate who took it seriously was Kucinich - and who would takehim seriously..
Originally Posted By Dabob2 vbdad, did you notice the smiley at the end of my post? I was having a little fun with cliches - I've actually said before that I'm quite aware the offshoring problem has been with us for a decade at least.
Originally Posted By queenbee Obama mentioned offshoring in his DNC speech. It was very brief. However, he did state he would like to provide economic incentives to keep jobs here in the form of tax break for corporations who choose to do just that. He also stated he would "close loopholes" for companies that offshore. It's good he acknowledges the problem but I'm not convinced it will a priority for his administration.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 True, he did say he would end the practice of giving tax BREAKS to companies who offshore jobs (a nutso practice that should have been ended long ago), and instead give tax breaks to companies that keep jobs here. McCain, AFAIK, has not proposed doing either.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<McCain, AFAIK, has not proposed doing either.>> Don't anyone hold their breath. Instead we will be lectured to retrain for jobs that are already being offshored.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Don't anyone hold their breath. Instead we will be lectured to retrain for jobs that are already being offshored.< you are so right - I see as a fellow member of major corp America - they at least collaborate in the BS messages they deliver.
