Mitt Wins So What Does That Say? What's The Message?

[JoeB131]

I've covered it in other posts, but here's the nutshell version.

Mitt Romney -and people like him- got very rich by dismantling the old Post New Deal economic order. That people brought home good wages, established a solid middle class and perpetuated economic prosperity. It was a system that was good enough that smart Republicans- Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, even Reagan- embraced it.

Then somewhere along the line, the mentality got there wages were the problem. That good pensions and good wages were limiting profits. So there was a series of union busting, of offshoring, of down sizing, of outsourcing that kind of reduced average working wages.

And this is the problem. A compassionate government should help those who can't help themselves or find themselves in a bad spot. But lifetime dependency is a bad thing. But when you replace that good union job with a McJob, and people have to make up the difference with government assistance,

So, really, the working class gets it twice from Romneyism. Once in the form of reduced wages, and again in teh form of a higher tax burden to support those on the bottom rungs of "working poor".

It's a recipe for disaster, and at some point, will bite them back.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeB is homophobic at times and can get very, very old style in his condemnations.

I agree 100% that The Rabbi is barely sentient.

Hey, dude, it's not "homophobic" to point out your stalking behavior is a bit... ummm... weird.

Especially when you were talking about imagining me in high heels... That was kind of odd.

(I never call anyone "son". I usually use "Guy" or "dude".)

Incidently, I freely admit to being an old person...

of course, the liberals think I'm conservative and the conservatives think I'm liberal... But I think I'm beyond labels and just go with what works.

Sure it is, when I am not stalking and you are the one thinking in sexual terms. Creepy.

 

[The Rabbi]

I've covered it in other posts, but here's the nutshell version.

Mitt Romney -and people like him- got very rich by dismantling the old Post New Deal economic order. That people brought home good wages, established a solid middle class and perpetuated economic prosperity. It was a system that was good enough that smart Republicans- Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, even Reagan- embraced it.

Then somewhere along the line, the mentality got there wages were the problem. That good pensions and good wages were limiting profits. So there was a series of union busting, of offshoring, of down sizing, of outsourcing that kind of reduced average working wages.

And this is the problem. A compassionate government should help those who can't help themselves or find themselves in a bad spot. But lifetime dependency is a bad thing. But when you replace that good union job with a McJob, and people have to make up the difference with government assistance,

So, really, the working class gets it twice from Romneyism. Once in the form of reduced wages, and again in teh form of a higher tax burden to support those on the bottom rungs of "working poor".

It's a recipe for disaster, and at some point, will bite them back.

Are you making less than you were 15 years ago?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The correction question is "Is your purchasing power greater than what is was 10, 20, and 30 years ago?"

 

[The Rabbi]

The correction question is "Is your purchasing power greater than what is was 10, 20, and 30 years ago?"

No, it isn't.
And next time try writing in English.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Rabbi, don't ever try to correct anyone on diction, syntax, and semantics. You will end up looking even more stupidly than you do every day here. That is saying a bunch, kiddo.

Now, yes, the question as I phrased it is contextually and mechanically the correct question.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi, don't ever try to correct anyone on diction, syntax, and semantics. You will end up looking even more stupidly than you do every day here. That is saying a bunch, kiddo.

Now, yes, the question as I phrased it is contextually and mechanically the correct question.

There is no such thing as a "correction question." You mean "correct question." The first word "is" needs punctuation after it, like a comma. "what is was" when you really meant "what it was."

In the next post you mean "stupid" rather than "stupidly."

And your post has no intellectual content in any case.

 

[JoeB131]

Are you making less than you were 15 years ago?

before or after inflation?

It isn't a matter of making more or less. 15 years ago, I had 15 years less experience, and a couple less professional qualifications than I do now... I know my salary took hits in 1992, 2001 and 2008, pretty much every time these jokers triggered a recession.

And that's the point. When you are putting the squeeze on wages to increase profits, eventually you bankrupt yourself. I refer to this as the Cocaine Rule. At first it feels great and then you can't stop and eventually it kills you, which is what nearly all these businesses have done.

If you look at the rise of American prosperity from 1945 to 1980, you will see that the gap between rich and poor narrowed. Since 1980. the wealth of the top increased, but the wealth of the bottom remained flat after adjustment for inflation.

 

[Liability]

This has been a really strange GOP primary. Almost the whole way through we've seen an almost rabid attempt to deny Mitt the nomination so a REAL conservative can be nominated. But the primary electorate would have none of it.

Since Mitt's got this all wrapped up what does this say about conservatism and the GOP party?

Is Mitt the REAL conservative and the rest RINO's?

Is this the fallout from the Citizen's United ruling?

Is the religous wing of the party losing it's influence?

Is the Tea Party no longer a driving force?

Will we see moderates gaining power in congress?

What say you? What's the message? Or is there a message? How can a moderate win the nomination in a party full of hard core conservatives?

Mitt Wins So What Does That Say? What's The Message?

Mitt wins the GOP nomination? That says that the GOP is indeed a powerful political PARTY that has lots of arcane rules and veteran political folks who can shape the outcome (more or less) to their liking. It means the other contenders were not as good at the game as Team Mitt.

Mitt wins the General Election? That says that America finally came to its senses.

 

[JoeB131]

Mitt wins the General Election? That says that America finally came to its senses.

By electing a guy who advocates the same crap that got us into this mess?

I think it shows we have no attention span and are easily fooled.

Free Trade, low taxes on the wealthy, and poor regulation- how we got into the Great Recession.

Weeee, let's do it again!

I mean it's like you guys never learn.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are you making less than you were 15 years ago?

before or after inflation?

It isn't a matter of making more or less. 15 years ago, I had 15 years less experience, and a couple less professional qualifications than I do now... I know my salary took hits in 1992, 2001 and 2008, pretty much every time these jokers triggered a recession.

And that's the point. When you are putting the squeeze on wages to increase profits, eventually you bankrupt yourself. I refer to this as the Cocaine Rule. At first it feels great and then you can't stop and eventually it kills you, which is what nearly all these businesses have done.

If you look at the rise of American prosperity from 1945 to 1980, you will see that the gap between rich and poor narrowed. Since 1980. the wealth of the top increased, but the wealth of the bottom remained flat after adjustment for inflation.

You've proven my point.
All the talk from the Left about "stagnating wages" is merely a statistical conjuring. Look at actual flesh and blood people and they are ALL making more than they were 10 and 15 years ago.

 

[JoeB131]

You've proven my point.
All the talk from the Left about "stagnating wages" is merely a statistical conjuring. Look at actual flesh and blood people and they are ALL making more than they were 10 and 15 years ago.

you are looking at a individual average and not a statistical average.

This is the problem. The point is, a 35 year old entry level buyer is NOT going to make what I was making as an entry level buyer 15 years ago. (At least not after adjusting for inflation.) Yes, I can demand more now, because I have more experience and qualifications. Or at least I should be able to.

Actually, I just got back to what I was making four years ago, before Bush's Wall Street Pals crashed the economy. Other buyers I know are making a lot less. One lady I know with 25 years of experience was out of work for two years after the crash.

And this is the problem, really. When we have one of these crashes, the first thing the suits attack are wages and benefits. And if someone has been there a while, get rid of them becuase you can always hire someone cheaper. It's self-defeating, and why we've been on an economic decline for the last couple decade, save that shining moment during Clinton's tech boom. (Not that Clinton actually had anything to do with it.)

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes, I am not looking at the statistical average. Because statistical averages don't vote. I am looking at real people, because they do vote.
And real people have not been experiencing stagnating wages over 20 years.

 

[Liability]

Mitt wins the General Election? That says that America finally came to its senses.

By electing a guy who advocates the same crap that got us into this mess?

I think it shows we have no attention span and are easily fooled.

Free Trade, low taxes on the wealthy, and poor regulation- how we got into the Great Recession.

Weeee, let's do it again!

I mean it's like you guys never learn.

No, dope-o.

By kicking out the worst offender in history.

You are incapable of learning.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Rabbi, don't ever try to correct anyone on diction, syntax, and semantics. You will end up looking even more stupidly than you do every day here. That is saying a bunch, kiddo.

Now, yes, the question as I phrased it is contextually and mechanically the correct question.

There is no such thing as a "correction question." You mean "correct question." The first word "is" needs punctuation after it, like a comma. "what is was" when you really meant "what it was."

In the next post you mean "stupid" rather than "stupidly."

And your post has no intellectual content in any case.

The question was a correction question, correcting your questioning.

Look up the use of adverbs, pea brain.

I love when you post. You far right wing progressive statists are a hoot.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi, don't ever try to correct anyone on diction, syntax, and semantics. You will end up looking even more stupidly than you do every day here. That is saying a bunch, kiddo.

Now, yes, the question as I phrased it is contextually and mechanically the correct question.

There is no such thing as a "correction question." You mean "correct question." The first word "is" needs punctuation after it, like a comma. "what is was" when you really meant "what it was."

In the next post you mean "stupid" rather than "stupidly."

And your post has no intellectual content in any case.

The question was a correction question, correcting your questioning.

Look up the use of adverbs, pea brain.

I love when you post. You far right wing progressive statists are a hoot.

No such thing as a "correction question." The term would be "correcting question". Or else re-phrased to make it clearer.
No such thing as a "right wing progressive" either.
Poor Jake. King of the Unsubstantiated and Ungrammatical Statement.

 

[ThinkCritically]

Milquetoast.
Support Anarchism and really support freedom!

OK i'll bite Rabbi. You think I am milquetoast because I am in favor of liberty and freedom?

I do not support anarchy because it does not support freedom....get it.....

OK so you support coercive laws of the state. Got it.

I think the state should protect my life and liberty, if another individual or organization threatens those rights then the state should have the power to use coercive power to stop it.

i.e. business polluting the water, somebody trying to kill me, etc....

 

[ThinkCritically]

Yes, I am not looking at the statistical average. Because statistical averages don't vote. I am looking at real people, because they do vote.
And real people have not been experiencing stagnating wages over 20 years.

What are you looking at? The real wages of the entire population have risen over the past 40 years, but the middle class real wages have been flat for 40 years now.

 

[Clementine]

If you guys are looking for an Everyman conservative candidate, he does not exist.

There are many competing ideas on how to stop the communist infiltration.

How about just a conservative one?

We had the perfect conservative in Herman Cain, but the left was ruthless. He was knocked out of the race by allegations and then the women crawled back into the woodwork, probably with a bigger bank account than before. Of course, the media helped choose Mitt. They rarely went after him the way they did the others and it was reminiscent of the way they helped picked McCain. They left them alone until they got the nod, then they stood with their guy and helped Obama win. I believe the media saw Mitt as the least threatening of the choices, the same way they thought McCain would be easy to beat. I hope Mitt doesn't cowtow to pressure and play Mr. Nice the way McCain did. He should call it as he sees it.

I think Mitt would have much better chances if he chose a true Republican for a running mate.

Obama is the one who said if he should only have one term if he didn't fulfill his campaign promise. Well, he didn't, so time to go.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes, I am not looking at the statistical average. Because statistical averages don't vote. I am looking at real people, because they do vote.
And real people have not been experiencing stagnating wages over 20 years.

What are you looking at? The real wages of the entire population have risen over the past 40 years, but the middle class real wages have been flat for 40 years now.

Wrong.
Again you are looking at stats, not flesh and blood people.