ThinkFast: July 26, 2007
ThinkFast: July 26, 2007
In a letter to the Washington Post, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) responds to the paper’s opposition to the Senate’s recent all-night debate on Iraq. “On reading the July 21 editorial ‘The Phony Debate,’ it became clear why The Post’s editorial writers have been such eager cheerleaders for the Bush administration’s flawed Iraq policies — the two share the same disregard for the facts en route to drawing dubious conclusions,” Reid writes.
“In a little-noticed addition to legislation requiring the July and September assessments on Iraq from the White House, Congress mandated a third report” from the Government Accountability Office, which has “quietly done the most work to track the missteps, miscalculations, misspent funds and shortfalls of both the United States and Iraq since the 2003 invasion.”
As part of the debate over the farm, “House Democrats proposed legislation that would make it harder for overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits, drawing immediate opposition from the Bush administration.”
“The commanding general at Fort Lewis, Wash., the third-largest Army base in the nation, on Wednesday rescinded a plan calling for a once-a-month collective memorial service rather than individual ones for soldiers killed in action.”
“A new media report that Rep. Don Young (R-AK) is now a target of an expanding federal criminal investigation involving an Alaska oil company and state elected officials has once again put House Republicans in a difficult political position, as they continue to be dogged with corruption scandals eight months after they lost the majority in the midterm elections.”
“A presidential commission examining the care given to wounded U.S. service members recommended ‘fundamental changes’ aimed at simplifying the military’s convoluted health-care bureaucracy and overhauling the veterans disability system.” Bush said the administration will “look at every one of these recommendations,” take them seriously and “implement them.”
“One of the largest American contractors working in Iraq, Bechtel National, met its original objectives on fewer than half of the projects it received as part of a $1.8 billion reconstruction contract, while most of the rest were canceled, reduced in scope or never completed as designed, federal investigators have found in a report released yesterday.”
And finally: The new “CQ’s Politics in America 2008: The 110th Congress” is “an intriguing compilation of trivia.” One tidbit is that three congressmen — Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-WI), and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) — are all lottery winners. Gregg “donated a portion of his $853,492 in winnings to a charity,” Sensenbrenner “put his $250,000 toward charities and investments,” and McCarthy used his $5,000 to “open Kevin O’s Deli.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
“One of the largest American contractors working in Iraq, Bechtel National, met its original objectives on fewer than half of the projects it received as part of a $1.8 billion reconstruction contract, while most of the rest were canceled, reduced in scope or never completed as designed, federal investigators have found in a report released yesterday.â€
If I met my original objectives on fewer than half of the projects I’ve been assigned, I’d be cleaning out my desk.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:13 amWake me up when Congress actually DOES something,
RUN, CINDY, RUN!!!
July 26th, 2007 at 9:15 amShahristani: Iraq oil unions not legit
2007-07-26 By Ben Lando, UPI
WASHINGTON, July 25 (UPI) — Iraq’s oil minister said Iraq’s oil unions are not legitimate and have no more standing in the debate over the oil law than an ordinary citizen.
“There are no legal unions in Iraq,” Hussein al-Shahristani said Wednesday in response to a question about various factions’ positions on the controversial oil law. “Those people who call themselves representatives of the oil workers have not been elected to the position.”
The lone remaining law from the Saddam Hussein regime kept by U.S.
occupying powers and the successive Iraqi government is the one that
bans worker organizing in the public sector.
Despite that, workers have come together and leveraged their power.
Since 2003 they’ve blocked numerous attempts to privatize management
of both oil and other facilities and stopped work over disputes –
most recently early last month over the oil law and other unmet
demands.
Earlier this month workers in the southern, oil-rich town of Basra
marched in protest against the oil law and demanded Shahristani’s
resignation.
The law would govern exploration and development of Iraq’s 115 billion
barrels of proven reserves and unknown reserves to be found in
under-explored areas. But the law is stuck over central government vs.
regional/local control over certain oil fields. And the unions, along
with other political elements, have led the charge that the law allows
for contracts they see as too friendly to foreign oil companies.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:15 am“Government Accountability Office, which has “quietly done the most work to track the missteps, miscalculations, misspent funds and shortfalls of both the United States and Iraq since the 2003 invasion.â€
I assume this report is going to include the 9 billion dollars that went “poof”. This report is all well and good, but useless if they don’t do something to recover some of those misspent funds. And the first place to start is Halliburton.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:16 amIraq oil refineries go private
2007-07-25 By BEN LANDO, UPI
Iraq’s Parliament has approved a law privatizing the country’s oil-refining sector in order to lure investment and stem a fuel shortage.
The law, approved Tuesday, is a step toward relinquishing government involvement in the refining sector and, when poverty is alleviated, moving Iraqi consumers from state-subsidized to market prices for fuel.
Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani told United Press International Wednesday…”This is a law that will privatize the refining sector in Iraq and allow the private sector, whether it’s local or international investments, to be able to invest in refining activities in Iraq, including building refineries,” Shahristani said.
The refinery law is not the same as the highly contested oil law, stuck in Parliament, which would govern access to and development of Iraq’s vast oil reserves.
Despite its oil wealth, Iraq produces less than 2 million barrels per day — compared with 2.6 million bpd before the war — and exports more than three-quarters of it. That income covered more than 90 percent of the 2006 federal budget.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:17 amHouse Democrats proposed legislation that would make it harder for overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits, drawing immediate opposition from the Bush administration.â€
Consistency is the essence of the Bushit regime. They consistently oppose what’s good for America, while supporting profit over people. Avoiding tax responsibilities is corporates primary mission. Bushit, et al, ensure that success whenever possible.
Profit over people. Party over people.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:18 amWorst. Administration. Ever.
As part of the debate over the farm
Farm? What now?
overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits
July 26th, 2007 at 9:21 amGood, let them use tax havens, we want to make it easier for them to do business in the US not harder.
Wake me up when Congress actually DOES something,
RUN, CINDY, RUN!!!
Comment by Jake
That’s right, Jake. Go back to sleep, like you’ve been for the last 6 plus years. Just hit the Faux Snooze button on your clock radio and trust Rupert to spoon feed your talking points.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:23 am#1 ~ So true. Once upon a time in America this kind of performance was called war profiteering and people were disgraced, jailed, and even exiled. No longer; the whole purpose of the war is to fuel corporate priorities, so collecting on promises due is counterproductive.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:24 amIMHO, Congress under Democratic initiatives have been doing a great deal of important work, primarily in bringing issues to the foreground and highlighting the differences between Democrats and Republicans around those issues. This is hugely important. Oficials in a Democracy are as much “followers” of public sentiment as they are “leaders” of policy – and rightly so.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:25 amOMG! Reid writes a LETTER after his scathing round of NAME CALLING and a SLEEP-OVER! Surely the republicans are wilting under such a legislative trifecta! The troops must indeed be cheering such courageous verbiage and bedtime antics!
But with the onslaught of qualifiers in the news regarding Dem actions such as “MAY lead to,” or “Dems are CONSIDERING,” how can an expectant public doubt the majority’s commitment to ending the war and impeaching a walking Felony of an administration?
Harry Reid: A man WHO USES WORDS AND WILL MAKE YOU MISS YOUR BEDTIME!!!
The mind boggles…
July 26th, 2007 at 9:25 amIf I met my original objectives on fewer than half of the projects I’ve been assigned, I’d be cleaning out my desk.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey
Picky, picky. The important question is: did Bechtel get their payments? Because it’s not the construction projects that matter, it’s funneling cash to corporations that is the real work of the Bushies.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:27 aminsert obligatory wingnut comment from frank j here.
hey bilbo, i’ll answer your question for francine from the earlier post: no he don’t care if a democratic president has these powers, because republicans, unlike democrats, have already proven they will impeach for the pettiest of reasons.
democrats seem to want to wait until gwb walks into congress, takes a big dump on the floor and says, “mission accomplished”. and even then they might not do it. it boggles the mind.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:28 amPicky, picky. The important question is: did Bechtel get their payments?
Comment by gummitch
Screw the payments. I want to be sure they got their performance bonuses. What was the name of that law – “Leave No Executive Behind”?
July 26th, 2007 at 9:29 amand even then they might not do it. it boggles the mind.
Comment by lonesomerobot
Almost impossible to get impeachment anywhere w/ the current make-up of Congress.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:31 am“overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits
Good, let them use tax havens, we want to make it easier for them to do business in the US not harder.
“omment by squegeeboo
Sure, that makes perfect sense. Let overseas companies sell stuff in the US free of any taxes but tax the companies in the US that make stuff to sell. Which one do you think has the financial advantage here?
Don’t all the dumb ass neoCONs out there realize that if they impoverish this country there will be no one left to buy their goods? And don’t they care…now, that last one was a stupid question, of course they don’t care. They got theirs and to hell with the rest of us. That’s the neoCONs mantra.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:32 amAnd today CNN reports that the increased accuracy of mortar attack on the Green Zone MUST be the result of Iranian training. Jeez, ya think the increased accuracy might have something to do with getting alot of live-fire practice?
July 26th, 2007 at 9:32 amMenehume sez:
Yes…I heard that this morning on NPR. The Iran war drums are still beating…
July 26th, 2007 at 9:36 ampossibly, TRoS, but i do know this: an impeachment would require a special prosecutor, and invoking executive privilege is no longer an option (unless it is a matter of national security) as soon as congress decides that a potential crime is being investigated, which is why libby and rove couldn’t claim it during the plame affair.
if congress decides this is a criminal investigation, the rules change. if it comes out that crimes have been committed, those votes might just appear.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:37 amGive ‘em hell, Harry!
July 26th, 2007 at 9:38 am18. I practically threw my coffee at the TV when they were going on about the Iranians again. But then Kiran Chetry comes on to make it all better. Show us 10 minutes of Beyonce falling off the stage and once more, all is right with the world.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:40 amthe iran war drums are still beating, despite reports that most foreign insurgents are coming from saudi arabia. they are essentially fighting a proxy war with iran through iraq.
and it’s all about sunni vs. shia. we’re on the cusp of a wider regional war.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:40 am“hey bilbo, i’ll answer your question for francine from the earlier post: no he don’t care if a democratic president has these powers, because republicans, unlike democrats, have already proven they will impeach for the pettiest of reasons.”
Well, I’m going to keep at him until such time as he is man enough to actually answer a question given to him. But, I’ll make it easier for him. I will ask one question at a time. I think asking two questions confused his pea brain.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:40 amif congress decides this is a criminal investigation, the rules change. if it comes out that crimes have been committed, those votes might just appear.
Comment by lonesomerobot
Don’t get me wrong. I’m on your side. This is a such a nasty, convoluted situation. If nothing else, we’re well on our way to the worst constitutional crisis in US history.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:41 ambilbobaggins
Sure, that makes perfect sense. Let overseas companies sell stuff in the US free of any taxes but tax the companies in the US that make stuff to sell. Which one do you think has the financial advantage here?
If you were to have read the article, instead of going to your standard bag of insults, you would realize that in this case they are talking about companies that actually do business in the US, not just sell stuff
July 26th, 2007 at 9:42 am“His legislation aims to stop an accounting technique known as “earnings stripping” in which foreign companies make high- interest loans to their American subsidiaries, who are able to deduct interest.”
hey i didn’t say you weren’t on your side, i was just trying to brighten everyone’s day with some positive thinking.
on another topic, i actually wrote “no, he don’t care…”? i’m too old to be a victim of nclb!
July 26th, 2007 at 9:44 am“if congress decides this is a criminal investigation, the rules change. if it comes out that crimes have been committed, those votes might just appear.
Comment by lonesomerobot”
I so agree with you lonesomerobot. Just brining Articles of Impeachment is enough. Congress will then be able to investigate this ugly mess unimpeded. And even if they don’t convict, it will have been worth it on a couple of points. The first is that it will brand forever the Republicans who don’t care about the constitution or the rule of law. The second is that it will show the world that there are still people in this country who are not bat-shit insane. That may lay the ground work for reconciliation with the world once the Democratic president takes office.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:44 am“f you were to have read the article, instead of going to your standard bag of insults, you would realize that in this case they are talking about companies that actually do business in the US, not just sell stuff”
It’s the same difference. Just substitute “do business” with “sell stuff” in my original post.
Right now we are destroying our middle class by sending their jobs to India and then bringing people from India here to do their jobs. Now how does that make sense? And please don’t give me any of the Republican talking points about the economy being so bright and unemployment being so low because both are artificial numbers. One China calls in the enormous debt Bush has racked up, our economy will collapse. And the unemployment numbers don’t take into account the fact that many who are “employed” are now working two jobs to make the salary they made on one job before. And there is also the fact that the unemployment figures don’t include people who have run out their unemployment benefits and still don’t have a job. If the government ever reported on the true unemployment numbers in this country, I’m willing to bet it’s more like 10%.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:48 amI have been hesitant about impeachment because of the trigger-happy, trivial way it was used against Clinton and I have not wanted the Democrats to follow in those footsteps. However, I now think it is time for impeachment for two reasons:
1. Bush and Cheney have been increasingly ignoring the law and engaging in willfully illegal acts, as well as encouraging others to do so.
2. The authoritarian thinking of many conservatives may see impeachment as a retaliation and a “balancing of the books”. Perhaps (my own wishful thinking at work) we can then begin our own reconciliation here in the US and get our democracy to work if we get this “balance”.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:53 amRight now we are destroying our middle class by sending their jobs to India and then bringing people from India here to do their jobs.
Doesn’t apply to the point of the article/legislation?
It’s the same difference. Just substitute “do business†with “sell stuff†in my original post.
Um No? For example, all the Japanese auto-makers that now have plants in the US are ‘doing business’ not just ’selling stuff’ in the US. All the Chinese companies that produce cheap sh*t for Wal-mart are just ’selling stuff’ in the US.
the unemployment numbers don’t take into account the fact that many who are “employed†are now working two jobs to make the salary they made on one job before.
Why would the unemployment numbers take them into account? They have jobs, they aren’t unemployed.
there is also the fact that the unemployment figures don’t include people who have run out their unemployment benefits and still don’t have a job.
I’m aware. They only report on people actively job searching. Maybe they should add a ‘lazy’ category to their numbers.
If the government ever reported on the true unemployment numbers in this country, I’m willing to bet it’s more like 10%.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:56 amYah, I think I’ve seen it estimated at 8-12% depending on who’s running the numbers.
Um No? For example, all the Japanese auto-makers that now have plants in the US are ‘doing business’ not just ’selling stuff’ in the US. All the Chinese companies that produce cheap sh*t for Wal-mart are just ’selling stuff’ in the US.
To expand on my comment above. Those Chinese companies can’t take advantage of this tax loophole, the Japanese companies could, because they are doing business and have American subsidiaries, and because they have those subsidiaries they have employees in the US. If you close the loophole you raise the cost of doing business in the US and risk some of the companies moving to cheaper areas as a result.
July 26th, 2007 at 9:59 amRight now we are destroying our middle class by sending their jobs to India and then bringing people from India here to do their jobs.
Doesn’t apply to the point of the article/legislation?
So, in case you missed it, this is a ThinkFast thread. And just because it doesn’t apply to the point you ignore it. Typical neoCON thinking. Are you sure you aren’t Francine (aka Frank)?
“the unemployment numbers don’t take into account the fact that many who are “employed†are now working two jobs to make the salary they made on one job before.
Why would the unemployment numbers take them into account? They have jobs, they aren’t unemployed.”
No dumb ass, they don’t have jobs. They ran out their unemployment benefits and still don’t have a job. But they are not considered “unemployed” by our government statistics.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:04 amOops…I was answering another point. So, here’s my reply. The problem is that they are counted twice. That inflates the job numbers.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:06 am“And today CNN reports that the increased accuracy of mortar attack on the Green Zone MUST be the result of Iranian training. ”
Or the insurgents have somebody on the inside, probably with access to GPS and Google Earth, who’s giving them information on directions and distances to targets.
Plus the frequency of the mortar attacks means you probably have several insurgents who are watching where the rounds land in the Green Zone, and then calculate the best places to deploy and fire mortars around the Green Zone.
As someone who was in a mortar platoon in the Army, I can tell you that it really isn’t that hard to figure out. And considering that many of the insurgents are former Iraqi Army, I’m pretty sure a number of them already knew how to deploy mortars and adjust fire.
Fore further information, please consult FM 23-90 http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/23-90/index.html
Finally, I’m still wondering just why would the majority-Shia government in Iran support the Sunni insurgents in Iraq, a Shia-dominant country?
July 26th, 2007 at 10:08 am“there is also the fact that the unemployment figures don’t include people who have run out their unemployment benefits and still don’t have a job.
I’m aware. They only report on people actively job searching. Maybe they should add a ‘lazy’ category to their numbers.”
That remark is seriously insulting to a vast number of Americans. They are not “lazy”, there are no jobs for them.
Do you seriously think that all those Americans who had jobs in the manufacturing industry for 10-20-30 years and lost it because the company sent their job overseas are “lazy”. I THINK NOT!
My daughter was unemployed for almost two years. It had nothing to do with her being lazy. It had to do with the fact that there were no jobs in her field because they were being shipped over seas or the companies were bringing in people from India who would do her job for $12 an hour rather than the $25-30 an hour going rate for the job. And when she applied for jobs outside her field she was either “overqualified” or “underqualified”.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:10 am” . . . harder for overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits . . . “
Why do we still award government contracts to Halliburton, which has moved its headquarters to Dubai in order to avoid U.S. taxes?
July 26th, 2007 at 10:13 amhttp://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Business/story?id=2942429&page=1
“I’m aware. They only report on people actively job searching. Maybe they should add a ‘lazy’ category to their numbers.”
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 9:56 am
That roar you hear is from all of us who have ever been laid off and found ourselves in the position of trying to find a job within the six months allotted by unemployment. That was me about a year ago. I scoured job boards, registered with temp agencies, pounded pavement, networked, sent my resume out everywhere I could, stated my willingness to do any kind of work, and worked my butt off to find a job. Many of the places I applied received a couple hundred resumes for a single position. It was obvious there were far more people out there looking for jobs than there were jobs available. I even looked into retail and fast food work, but I could only afford to work a minimum wage job if I was a young person living with my parents (which, since I’m in my 50’s, is not an option) or willing to be homeless. Fortunately, I found a job as a result of all my efforts, but I got it after my unemployment had run out and I had nearly exhausted my savings.
To suggest that people who can’t find a job are “lazy” is one of the most pompous things I’ve ever heard. I hope for your sake you don’t ever find yourself in this awful position.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:15 amDenmark pulls out Iraq troops early
Denmark has withdrawn most of the 430 troops it has stationed in Iraq earlier than expected, a report said Wednesday quoting the Danish military.
http://www.focus-fen.net/?id=n117912
July 26th, 2007 at 10:16 am“One of the largest American contractors working in Iraq, Bechtel National, met its original objectives on fewer than half of the projects it received as part of a $1.8 billion reconstruction contract, while most of the rest were canceled, reduced in scope or never completed as designed, federal investigators have found in a report released yesterday.â€
It’s only a measly $1.8 billion, and these guys have huge expenses. If they knew that taking the money meant that they had to deliver on their end of the contract, they’d never have done us the favor. Plus, they are clearly entitled.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:21 ambilbobaggins
Oops…I was answering another point. So, here’s my reply. The problem is that they are counted twice. That inflates the job numbers.
No biggy. I had not heard that they get counted twice, and from what I just googled, it does not appear to be the case, any chance you could throw a link at me?
Right now we are destroying our middle class by sending their jobs to India and then bringing people from India here to do their jobs.
People loosing their jobs in this case is an example of structural unemployment, as they learn new skills they will be re-employed. It’s a consequence of technological advancement thats been around for a long long time.
My daughter was unemployed for almost two years. It had nothing to do with her being lazy.
There is always a job. It might not be the one your best suited for, it may be beneath your skill level, but it’s a job. Unless your disabled or in the circumstances such as a single mother with X amount of kids that people always like to bring up around here, there is no excuse for not having a job for 2 years.
Do you seriously think that all those Americans who had jobs in the manufacturing industry for 10-20-30 years and lost it because the company sent their job overseas are “lazyâ€. I THINK NOT!
Once again, structural unemployment, learn a new skill, get a new job. The candle makers did it, the whip and buggy makers did it, the farmers did it, why can’t todays Americans?
missmolly
July 26th, 2007 at 10:21 amI even looked into retail and fast food work, but I could only afford to work a minimum wage job if I was a young person living with my parents
Making some money is better than making no money, and can help string you along until you get a better job.
well, i guess we know where ministry of fact’s sympathies lie.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:23 amMy daughter was unemployed for almost two years. It had nothing to do with her being lazy. It had to do with the fact that there were no jobs in her field because they were being shipped over seas or the companies were bringing in people from India who would do her job for $12 an hour rather than the $25-30 an hour going rate for the job. And when she applied for jobs outside her field she was either “overqualified†or “underqualifiedâ€.
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 26, 2007 @ 10:10 am
When the original poster looses his/her job, it’ll be a National catastrophe.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:31 amMaybe they should add a ‘lazy’ category to their numbers.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 9:56 am
well, shit, squeege… you blew it… your mom now frowns…
July 26th, 2007 at 10:35 amreally, engage brain before typing, k?
…
The commanding general at Fort Lewis, Wash., the third-largest Army base in the nation, on Wednesday rescinded a plan calling for a once-a-month collective memorial service.
I’m glad that Fort LEwis changed it’s collective mind about this, but it’s still extremely troubling that this ever seemed like a good idea to anyone. It’s just sad when protesting families of Soldiers have to make the General step up and do the right thing. As a General officer, he should already KNOW the right thing to do, from a human level, not a ‘logistical’ one.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:42 amkaty
well, shit, squeege… you blew it… your mom now frowns…
really, engage brain before typing, k?
Sorry Katy, this is one of the sections where I tend to get most of the locals all riled up at me. My views diverge quite a bit from others here when it comes to (un)employment.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:42 amOn the bright side, illegal immigrants have 100 percent employment. Go Latin America!
God help us, we’re screwed.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:49 amOnce again, structural unemployment, learn a new skill, get a new job. The candle makers did it, the whip and buggy makers did it, the farmers did it, why can’t todays Americans?
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 10:21 am
The learning curve is a bit steeper, isn’t it? I mean, it’s one thing to retrain from one manufacturing job to another – it’s a different thing to retrain for a service economy – particularly when many service jobs are being outsourced as well.
I’ll agree that a small amount of unemployment is good for an economy. No rational person who’s studied economics would want 100% employment. The real issue is cost-of-living. Americans can not compete in a global economy, because anything we can do, India can do cheaper.
And the root of the problem is a corporatocracy that views the long term as the next two quarters rather than the next ten years. American multinationals are making a quick buck by cutting domestic jobs or offering them to foreign workers for low salaries so that they can bump their stock prices up and pay a nice fat dividend each quarter. But where will that leave them if fewer and Americans can afford their products and services?
Emerging markets! That’s where! The multinationals are eventually going to have to drop Americans as consumers as well, in favor of growing middle classes in the developing world.
And I don’t think the government can do much to stop it – the economic forces were set in motiion decades ago.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:15 am“… make it harder for overseas companies to use tax havens to avoid taxes on U.S. profits…”
Yeah, heaven forbid corporations should have to pay their fair share of taxes. Geez, the poor stockholders, granny and gramps would not have enough coupons to eat.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:23 amMaybe they should add a ‘lazy’ category to their numbers.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 9:56 am
I haven’t worked in eight months — you calling me lazy?
July 26th, 2007 at 11:34 amThe next time our conservotrolls trot out the statement that “the democrat congress” has lower poll numbers than Bush, here’s something to throw into their faces: http://mediamatters.org/items/200707250003
Emphasis added.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:34 amThanks, gummitch. I’ve bookmarked your comment. :)
July 26th, 2007 at 11:37 amThere is always a job.
Comment by squegeeboo
That was really funny.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:38 amZehava
I haven’t worked in eight months — you calling me lazy?
Darn college students, always think they have the answers, talk to me once you’ve experienced the ‘real world’ :)
Besides I worked thru college. Pick yourself up by your bootstraps, etc, etc.
RUCerious
Yeah, heaven forbid corporations should have to pay their fair share of taxes.
Corporations pay their taxes by charging more for their goods or paying less. By allowing for tax loopholes for corporations, you help keep down the final cost of their product, or allow for higher wages/more growth within the company.
toasterhead
The learning curve is a bit steeper, isn’t it?
Yah, it is.
The real issue is cost-of-living. Americans can not compete in a global economy
July 26th, 2007 at 11:40 amMaking America a tax-haven for business would bring more to the US, creating jobs and opportunities for more Americans.
Darn college students, always think they have the answers, talk to me once you’ve experienced the ‘real world’ :)
Besides I worked thru college. Pick yourself up by your bootstraps, etc, etc.
Comment by squegeeboo
Twerp.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:43 am“Um No? For example, all the Japanese auto-makers that now have plants in the US are ‘doing business’ not just ’selling stuff’ in the US. All the Chinese companies that produce cheap sh*t for Wal-mart are just ’selling stuff’ in the US.”
That would be the companies who actually assemble most of their products in Mexico , to avoid paying American taxes on wages?
July 26th, 2007 at 11:43 ambarfly
That would be the companies who actually assemble most of their products in Mexico , to avoid paying American taxes on wages?
So we should tax them even more to make them assemble all instead of most of it in Mexico? How does that help the American middle class?
Additionally, the south has seen some growth in the past decade in manufacturing/assembly line jobs due to their lower tax rates. Tenn. for example has seen quite a few auto-plants open or expand in the recent past.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:48 am“Besides I worked thru college. Pick yourself up by your bootstraps, etc, etc.”
Comment by squegeeboo
All well and good when there are jobs to be had – but I remember a time in the seventies in the midwest, when gas prices were forcing farmers out of the business, and businesses who supplied these farmers also went bankrupt, and even low-wage jobs had hundreds of applicants. Contrary to what you believe, just because someone wants to work, doesn’t mean they will find a job, if none are available.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:50 amMaking America a tax-haven for business would bring more to the US, creating jobs and opportunities for more Americans.
Comment by squegeeboo
Heh. I heard that 20 years ago, when I was 10 and even then I didnt believe that crap.
Latinamerica meet squeegee, squeegee meet Latinamerica.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:51 amThere is always a job.
Comment by squegeeboo
That was really funny.
Comment by Juan C — July 26, 2007 @ 11:38 am
squeegeeboo should talk to his grandparents.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:52 am“So we should tax them even more to make them assemble all instead of most of it in Mexico? How does that help the American middle class?”
It has little to do with taxes by itself – they also like the lax environmental laws. Are you arguing that we should emulate Mexico, to put everyone to work?
July 26th, 2007 at 11:53 am“Corporations pay their taxes by charging more for their goods or paying less. By allowing for tax loopholes for corporations, you help keep down the final cost of their product, or allow for higher wages/more growth within the company.”
Bullshit Econ 101…
July 26th, 2007 at 11:53 amRUCerious
Bullshit Econ 101…
Then lay it out for me.
Minister of Fact
squeegeeboo should talk to his grandparents.
Great-grandparents actually, and somehow they worked thru it.
barfly
I remember a time in the seventies in the midwest, when gas prices were forcing farmers out of the business
You mean when Carter was raising taxes and using price regulation for gas?
It has little to do with taxes by itself
July 26th, 2007 at 11:57 ambut you just said it was the taxes…but the environment is another reason for choosing the south over the north.
Seems some people would really want us to adopt even less stringent regulations. It’ll be great when we have a Union Carbide/Bhopal-like disaster in the United States because we’ve decided to compete by racing to the bottom.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:58 am“Corporations pay their taxes by charging more for their goods or paying less. By allowing for tax loopholes for corporations, you help keep down the final cost of their product, or allow for higher wages/more growth within the company.”
That’s a joke, right? Tell that to the executive who pull in $500,000,000 in salaray + bonuses in a single year. Or the wealthy shareholders who make millions in gains that are taxed at the low capital gains rate.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:00 pm#63 Seems some people would really want us to adopt even less stringent regulations. It’ll be great when we have a Union Carbide/Bhopal-like disaster in the United States because we’ve decided to compete by racing to the bottom.
Comment by Republicans Can’t Govern. — July 26, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Has happened a lot of times already in the USA. Just see the movie “Erin Brockovich” (based in an actual case), or the many times a military (for example) affects surrounding terrain with toxic waste.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:00 pm“but you just said it was the taxes…but the environment is another reason for choosing the south over the north.”
Comment by squegeeboo
“By itself” – read a little closer next time Squeege…
“You mean when Carter was raising taxes and using price regulation for gas?”
And partisanship once again rears its ugly head – I was refering to OPEC’s putting the economic squeeze on the US, and right away, you bring up Carter. Why don’t you be honest, and state the reason for Carter raising taxes?
July 26th, 2007 at 12:03 pm#65 Correction: a military *dump*
July 26th, 2007 at 12:03 pmMaking America a tax-haven for business would bring more to the US, creating jobs and opportunities for more Americans.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 11:40 am
LIES!! Maybe if we all wanted to work for $20 a day those businesses that moved to China and India might move back. As well if employers did not have to pay health care. Look at industries that moved to Canada. (Ford, GM, etc), one huge reason is the money they save by not having to pay healthcare.
America is a tax haven for businesses now. Buy a personal car, claim it’s for business. Go to lunch, claim it was a business lunch.If you’re a big business cities/states will entice you to come with no taxes, if you’re walmart we’ll build your million dollar parking lot. I think you need to get out in the real world more squeeky.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:04 pmMake that “raising prices.”
July 26th, 2007 at 12:05 pmMaking America a tax-haven for business would bring more to the US, creating jobs and opportunities for more Americans.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 11:40 am
Really? So how many non-expatriate jobs have been created in the Cayman Islands or Vanuatu or Jersey or Monaco as a result of being a tax haven?
July 26th, 2007 at 12:09 pmbarfly
Why don’t you be honest, and state the reason for Carter raising taxes?
A failure to grasp the Laffer curve?
Jihad Jesus
Buy a personal car, claim it’s for business.
If you get audited your in trouble if you do that. You can only claim the car if you need it for your business, not if you need it to get to/from your business. I looked into it when I was seeing if I could write off my purchase of a bicycle.
one huge reason is the money they save by not having to pay healthcare.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:11 pmRight, and their employees pay it in higher taxes. While being a good argument for gov’t health care, it also points out the benefits in general of lowering the cost of doing business for a corporation, one way of doing so is to create tax havens for them.
barfly
Make that “raising prices.â€
His inability to understand supply and demand?
July 26th, 2007 at 12:12 pmCorporations pay their taxes by charging more for their goods or paying less. By allowing for tax loopholes for corporations, you help keep down the final cost of their product, or allow for higher wages/more growth within the company.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 11:40 am
And by allowing these offshore tax loopholes, you also help keep poverty rates high in the developing world. Not only do these multinationals dodge U.S. taxes, they also dodge taxes in Mexico and Bangladesh and Cambodia. It’s a myth to think the G8 puts money into the developing world through foreign aid and IMF loans. There’s a well-documented net capital flight from low-income countries.
A primary reason for this is tax havens such as Jersey and the Cayman Islands. The governments of these countries can’t collect revenue from companies exploiting their mineral and labor resources, and thus can’t develop their infrastructure, can’t raise the standard of living, and can’t enforce environmental and labor laws when they do have them on the books. This all keeps wage rates low and allows these companies to grow their overseas operations and produce cheap goods for the U.S.
This is why we need to close these offshore loopholes.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:32 pmone huge reason is the money they save by not having to pay healthcare.
Right, and their employees pay it in higher taxes. While being a good argument for gov’t health care, it also points out the benefits in general of lowering the cost of doing business for a corporation, one way of doing so is to create tax havens for them.
Comment by squegeeboo — July 26, 2007 @ 12:11 pm
Is the difference between paying taxes and private healthcare or only taxes. Even with higher taxes, you can bet that I prefer a system where higher taxes is lower than private healthcare + US “lower” taxes.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:34 pmSquegeeboo:
You seem to be operating under the impression that jobs are easily had everywhere you look. I hate to burst your bubble, but the only jobs available are crappy jobs, for the most part.
Yes, you have your minimum wage jobs, of which there is an abundance. Guess what? Minimum wage jobs don’t cut it. Not if you’ve worked for $30/hr, especially. There gets a point where the money you take in for working for someone is not worth the lost time, and for me, $5.85/hr (or worse, ~$3/hr servers make) just isn’t worth it.
Why? The time you’re working is less time you can be out looking for a job. My wife felt this painfully. She was making $9.90 an hour at CompUSA, getting painful 40c raises per _excellent_ evaluation, having to deal with the crap that retail brings, and hating every moment of it. She always talked about getting a new job, but she was too drained every day she came home and same during the weekends to go do the legwork needed to find the better job. It took her job being (heh) downsized before she could find a new job. Let’s just say I was worried sick while she didn’t have a job. My $14/hr working 20 hours a week (while taking classes) wouldn’t have cut it.
And about that jobsearch. Had my wife not found a coop position, she may well have run into this.
Free Market can frickin’ SUCK sometimes, and here’s where it sucks the most. Today’s IT world is filled with companies who put out job listings with no intention on filling them. Why? Why pay me $20 an hour when an Indian dude, who doesn’t live in Denver, CO, and doesn’t have to pay $650/month in Rent, $150/month+ in utilities, $300/month in groceries, $100 a month in transportation costs, and so on (not to mention the $450/month in car note, $250/month in insurance, and $100/month in gas before we got rid of the damn thing) will work for $12/hr or less? Nitpick every little single thing, insist on rediculous requirements like 10 years supporting Windows 2003 Server (Hello! 2007 – 2003 = 4, and can NEVER = 10!) or some obscure program that is so specific that they won’t take a different version of the same program, or other such nonsense. Do everything in your power to show ‘There are no qualified American applicants, we need a H2B to bring in an Indian.’ I wish I could attribute the movie properly, but there was a recording of an industry seminar where they discussed doing exactly this. 300 applications for 1 position, dude! That’s what we’re seeing, and it’s not because someone found an easier way to do it. Call Dell’s tech support one day. You get bent over for Dell’s bottom line, and what do you get? Some Indian guy who barely speaks our language trying to do something that’s fricking hair pulling without the language barrier, let alone with.
Please stop with the protecting American businesses stuff, squegeeboo. They are some of the scummiest organizations on Earth, especially the big ones. The last thing they deserve is our pity.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:35 pmA primary reason for this is tax havens such as Jersey and the Cayman Islands. The governments of these countries can’t collect revenue from companies exploiting their mineral and labor resources, and thus can’t develop their infrastructure, can’t raise the standard of living, and can’t enforce environmental and labor laws when they do have them on the books. This all keeps wage rates low and allows these companies to grow their overseas operations and produce cheap goods for the U.S.
This is why we need to close these offshore loopholes.
Comment by toasterhead — July 26, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
Ever wondered why these contries, islands or city-states almost without taxes are so tiny?
First, because they have no natural resources to live from, or enough population to have another noticeable source of money, as services or technological development. Thus, they had to attract money from other sources.
Second, such a country without taxes, being of a bigger size, would crumble under his own weight, incapable of having a funcional military, police and firefighter departments, or a decent national transportation system, such as highways or railroads.
Just imagine the USA without any taxes. Without military, police, firefighters, highways, nothing.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:40 pmSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is a frail old man.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:41 pmI see Flaco came out from under his bridge, got into his old beat up crap mobile that his minimum wage jorb could barely afford, and drive-by trolled the thread…
July 26th, 2007 at 12:46 pmSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is a frail old man.
Comment by FLACO — July 26, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
Uhm… flaco=frail. Just saying…
July 26th, 2007 at 12:47 pmPlease stop with the protecting American businesses stuff, squegeeboo. They are some of the scummiest organizations on Earth, especially the big ones. The last thing they deserve is our pity.
Comment by Jeremy — July 26, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Not to mention that there are no American businesses anymore. There’s no such thing as an American company or a Japanese company or a British or German company. Not in the world of international business, anyway. Everybody’s everywhere. Just because the senior management in New York makes an extra $500,000 a year doesn’t mean a policy is “benefitting American businesses.”
Uhm… flaco=frail. Just saying…
Comment by Evil Spaniard — July 26, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Owned by irony.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:56 pmJust imagine the USA without any taxes. Without military, police, firefighters, highways, nothing.
We thrived without an income tax for 120 years!
July 26th, 2007 at 1:14 pmIf the foolish Democrats want money, perhaps they can start by taxing John Kerry’s bonds!
July 26th, 2007 at 1:15 pmAmerica is a tax haven for businesses now. Buy a personal car, claim it’s for business. Go to lunch, claim it was a business lunch.If you’re a big business cities/states will entice you to come with no taxes, if you’re walmart we’ll build your million dollar parking lot. I think you need to get out in the real world more squeeky.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:17 pmTax haven? The average American works until April 30 to pay all of his confiscatory taxes!
Evil Spaniard
doesn’t mean a policy is “benefitting American businesses.
No, but policies can benefit or harm businesses in America. It doesn’t matter where the company is HQ’ed, it matters where they are employing people.
Just imagine the USA without any taxes. Without military, police, firefighters, highways, nothing.
I didn’t say get rid of taxes, I said get rid of corporate taxes.
Even with higher taxes, you can bet that I prefer a system where higher taxes is lower than private healthcare + US “lower†taxes.
As long as the healthcare system is decent, who wouldn’t want that.
Jeremy
insist on rediculous requirements like 10 years supporting Windows 2003 Server (Hello! 2007 – 2003 = 4, and can NEVER = 10!)
I’ve seen requirements like that, you should still apply, if you get an interview you can then explain why you don’t have x years in the specific version of program y.
(not to mention the $450/month in car note, $250/month in insurance, and $100/month in gas before we got rid of the damn thing)
Rent, food and utilities are costs that normally have to happen, the ones above are optional ones (as you admit)
toasterhead
So how many non-expatriate jobs have been created in the Cayman Islands or Vanuatu or Jersey or Monaco as a result of being a tax haven?
Ignoring non-expatriate for the moment, enough to run the offices they’ve placed there to use the tax haven.
Now not ignoring the non-expatriate part, if we become a tax-haven, many if not all of those expatriate jobs would come back to the US.
Please stop with the protecting American businesses stuff
I’m not trying to protect American businesses, I’m trying to think of ways to bring more business to America.
And like Evil Spaniard said:
July 26th, 2007 at 1:23 pmFirst, because they have no natural resources to live from, or enough population to have another noticeable source of money, as services or technological development. Thus, they had to attract money from other sources.
Companies are willing to build offices and play shell games in areas with no other economic potential, just think of what could happen if they now had a tax-haven with huge amounts of resources and population.
Question: Who bears the brunt of the burden of the corporate income tax?
Answer: Domestic labor!
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/75xx/doc7503/2006-09.pdf
Sucks for them to be a victim of liberal tax policy.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:25 pmEdwards releases tax plan
He said he would pay for such programs by closing loopholes and tax breaks now benefiting the wealthiest Americans.
That means repealing tax breaks for families earning more than $200,000. He also would raise the top tax rate on long-term capital gains to 28 percent — the same rate signed into law by President Reagan. Edwards said the increase would ensure that high-income investors pay taxes on their investment income at a rate similar to what regular families pay on earned income.
Edwards promised to crack down on wealthy Americans who skirt paying their share of taxes.
He said about $300 billion a year in taxes go unpaid, and about $1.5 trillion in personal assets of U.S. taxpayers are held offshore. He said he would allow the IRS to investigate offshore tax havens, and he pledged to crack down on peddlers of tax shelters and cooperate with other countries to fight tax havens. Closing hedge fund and private equity loopholes and capping executive pensions are also part of the proposal.
Hypocrite! Edwards used those exact private equity loopholes in the 1990s while he was profiting on BS lawsuits!
July 26th, 2007 at 1:30 pmhttp://takeourcountryback-snooper.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20Why
The only thing “dubious” is Reid’s intelligence.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:49 pmSquegeeboo, you don’t get it.
Apply for the job anyway? We do! The goal is to prove that I, the IT guy who insists on $20 to $25 dollars an hour, do not have what they want. Do you know how this works? Easy. My resume, an accurate accounting of my work history has one of two lines given below on it:
Windows Server 2003: 4 Years, Expert
Windows Server 2000: 6 Years, Expert
Windows NT4 Server: 10+ Years, Expert
-or-
Windows Server OSes: 14 Years, Expert
The resume pushers?
“Oh, Server 2003, only 4 years.” *toss*
“Windows Server, 14 Years? It’s not 2003. *toss*”
So the only way to get an interview? Lie…
You don’t even get your foot in the door unless you lie on your resume. How right is that?
Again, my point is the goal of American IT businesses are to disqualify as many American Workers as possible so as to bring in Indian and other H2B Visa workers for as cheap as possible regardless of how much it f**ks over American Workers and Customers. Do you disagree with that, Squegeeboo? Do you think it’s right that they do that?
I suspect you’re a libertarian, Squegeeboo. Libertarianism is great on paper, just like Communism. But like Communism, Libertarianism falls to human greed. If a totally hands-off system is implimented in todays world, the people with the most power, the multinational corporations, will walk over everyone else. There needs to be a level of restraint applied to businesses, like there is to regular people.
Libertarianism worked imperfectly well in the 1700s and 1800s. Then the early 1900s, we saw what unregulated businesses could do as the economy crashed again after a series of crashes in the 1800s. Today, we need a moderate form that emphasizes punishing companies that take advantage of their customers and employees while fostering a competitive environment, balancing those two needs against each other.
July 26th, 2007 at 2:10 pmJeremy
So the only way to get an interview? Lie…
You don’t even get your foot in the door unless you lie on your resume. How right is that?
Or, instead of lying, you go with this in your resume,
Server 2003 – 4years
Windows Server – 10+ years
And then in your cover letter, you explain why you don’t have 10 years in 2003.
I suspect you’re a libertarian, Squegeeboo. Libertarianism is great on paper, just like Communism. But like Communism, Libertarianism falls to human greed.
Sounds about right, but I’m not advocating for a hands off system, I’m just advocating for removing corporate taxes. I’m aware we need oversite of some sort to keep the system in check.
for as cheap as possible regardless of how much it f**ks over American Workers and Customers.
July 26th, 2007 at 2:36 pmCheap doesn’t have to F over the customer. cheap can help the customer if done right, but that goes back to someones comment higher up about business only looking 1-2 quarters into the future instead of multiple years into the future.
But if all you do is try and insulate the American worker from the forces of globalization, then your slowly pushing our economy towards a cliff. Globalization of American business’s and American business interests needs to continue to happen, otherwise the same thing that happened to US Autoworkers will happen to the entire US economy as real-world forces catch up to and then overtake the protections put in place for American labor. Would you rather a bunch of minor (in the scale of things) changes to take place over decades, or a total collapse due to an inability to make changes that should have happened over time like what the rust belt as seen?
Again, Squegeeboo, you don’t get it.
They don’t read your cover letter! You assume that companies want to hire American workers. They don’t! They themselves have said this. Their goal is to find something–anything!—to keep from having to hire me for $25 an hour, or whatever the going rate is. Before they can secure an H2B Visa for a foreign worker who will do my job for less than half what I’d do it for, they have to jump through the various hoops that the federal government puts in front of them. In your ideal world, they want to hire an American. They do everything they can, giving interviews, looking for reasons to hire me or another American who is qualified to do the job. Then reality strikes.
The goal of American IT businesses are to avoid hiring American IT workers! That previous sentence is a topic sentence. It’s important. How do they do this? I’ve already mentioned. Give unreasonable requirements. Refuse to negotiate on requirements and salary benefits. Do ANYTHING (emphasized that word for a good reason!) to get that H2B they so desparately want. “We can pay some Indian half of what we’d have to pay him!” “It looks like his resume is perfect? FIND SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT!” This is what they are doing! Your fantasy land where they’re ‘reluctantly’ hiring H2Bs because they can’t find willing and able Americans Does. Not. Exist!
Get that through your head!
American businesses are scum, Squejeeboo. They’ve gotten all the cards in their hands. Only a few laws can reach through the Corporation sheild to the man who runs the show and gets fat off of his employees work if he should do something illegal. The last thing I think they they deserve is getting scott free on taxes. They deserve to have the screws tightened on them, forced to pay higher taxes to make up for what they get screwing us over.
You argue that we should join the globalist movement. That’s a fundamental disagreement I have with you. More protectionism is what I call for. Make it so that American workers can compete in the global marketplace here in America. I have a fundamental idea of my own. If you do business in an area, you should employ workers in the area.
You sell computers in America and India? Hire American employees to do customer support for American consumers, and Indian employees to do customer support for Indian consumers. Yes, build factories in India to allow cheaper Indian workers to build cheaper Indian computers, which those workers can afford to buy. What’s wrong with the idea that a company should pay its workers enough to afford its goods/services? Ford believed in that, and Ford Motor Company lasted strongly for at least 60 years. Why can’t today’s companies do the same thing?
I guess I just don’t feel as sure that the entire American economy will go off a cliff if we don’t do what you suggest, Squegeeboo. Yes, things change and certain types of jobs do go by the wayside as technology progresses, but in the end, today’s problems, IMO, are all because Big Business has taken over things and is in control.
July 26th, 2007 at 2:59 pmThey deserve to have the screws tightened on them, forced to pay higher taxes to make up for what they get screwing us over.
And then they hire even less American workers and even more foreign workers to cover the higher costs.
More protectionism is what I call for.
And then we get into tariff wars with other countries, which have a history over hurting, not helping economies, and/or eventually the protectionism fails and you end up with a large/bloated industry just like the auto-industry in America, and they’re doing great now. Protectionism’s only actual use is to help fledgling industries, any other use (and more often than not in it’s one good use) it just leads to bloat and inefficiency.
What’s wrong with the idea that a company should pay its workers enough to afford its goods/services?
Theres nothing wrong with it. But as the market grows, and the work pool grows, you have to accept comparative economic set backs in the more prosperous regions and poor regions can begin to compete thru lower wages or any other advantage they can marshal. Look at the unification of East and West Germany, it was like a mini-globalization. The East German economy did great at the expense of the west German economy IN THE SHORT TERM, since then the entire German economy is doing good (in comparison to other European economies) Thats the same exact thing that globalization is doing. The world economy isn’t a zero-sum game. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd world can all gain thru it.
Ford Motor Company lasted strongly for at least 60 years.
July 26th, 2007 at 3:50 pmAnd what happened during those 60 years, they let themselves become insulated, gave to much to the Unions, and when they didn’t change to cope with emerging threats/competition throughout the world (in part due to the strength of the Unions) look at what happened to them, or most of the other US auto makers.
I guess I just don’t feel as sure that the entire American economy will go off a cliff if we don’t do what you suggest
Ford Motor Company.
gah, man I had a bunch of typo’s in that last one. But the most important one is this:
you have to accept comparative economic set backs in the more prosperous regions and poor regions
Switch that and to an as,
July 26th, 2007 at 3:52 pmyou have to accept comparative economic set backs in the more prosperous regions AS poor regions
is how it should have read.
“There is always a job.
Comment by squegeeboo”
You know, I don’t usually wish people ill will. But in your case, I will break my rules. I hope that someday you lose your job to someone from India and then you try to find another job. Unless you are in a profession where there is a lack of workers, you are going to be in trouble my friend. And it couldn’t happen to a more deserving candidate.
You, sir, are scum.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:04 pmChuck Schumer is sinking the Democrats hedge fund tax plan!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a9DpYagBpVIo&refer=us
Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York is fighting a plan to raise taxes on hedge funds and buyout firms with his own legislative poison pill: a demand that other powerful interests share any pain.
Schumer is expressing concern about plans by lawmakers including Republican Senator Charles Grassley that would more than double taxes on private-equity and hedge-fund firms or their managers. He told the Senate Finance Committee this month that he would agree to the proposals only if taxes were also raised on oil-and-gas, venture-capital and real-estate partnerships.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:06 pmOff topic. This is a story that every American must see.
July 27th, 2007 at 1:01 amhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/26/AR2007072602025.html