The GOP base support for corporations, and what do they have to show for it?

[rdean]

How about corporations invest in that Republican base? After all, with all that support, doesn't the base deserve to get something out of it?

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Corperations are good
1. They employ a lot of workers
2. Supply and demand = cheaper prices for the good for the consumer
3. Big r@d department. I doubt we'd have the tech we have today if it wasn't for them.

 

[depotoo]

How about corporations invest in that Republican base? After all, with all that support, doesn't the base deserve to get something out of it?

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

oh, you mean these companies?

But the rare momentum behind comprehensive immigration reform this year has reverberated with the tech industry. While it has traditionally focused on the high-skilled section of the immigration debate, tech companies and trade groups have joined forces with the agriculture, hospitality, travel and other industries to push for Congress to overhaul the nation's immigration laws.


Even the once politically shy Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has become actively involved in the debate. Zuckerberg invested some of his personal wealth to help launch FWD.us, a group that's currently lobbying for comprehensive immigration reform; Zuckerberg is set to give an address on immigration next week at the premiere of a documentary directed by immigration rights activist and journalist Jose Antonio Vargas.

In a letter sent to Congress earlier this week, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, California Strawberry Commission, California Farm Bureau Federation and other agriculture groups stressed that immigration reform is necessary to ensuring the economic success of their disparate industries, which are among the largest in California.

and -

The Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents Facebook, Google, Stanford University and Yahoo, and the California Strawberry Commission held a series of back-to-back meetings with lawmakers on Thursday to hammer home a pro-immigration message before Congress breaks for the August recess. The two groups met with House GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise (R-La.) on Thursday, as well as lawmakers from the House New Democrat Coalition, according to the Silicon Valley Leadership Group's Twitter account

California, hmmmm

 

[rdean]

yeah, it's interesting they support GM, which its CEO got $11 million in 2011 and it had only 68,500 employees.
They hate Walmart, whose ceo got $20 million in 2012, with 2 million 1 hundred thousand employees.
2,100,000 vs. 68,500 livelihoods
GM paid $160 a year to the ceo per employee to make sure they continue to have a job.
Walmart paid $9.52 cents a year to the ceo per employee to make sure they continue to have a job.

I'm trying to figure out what you are saying. How many at GM are "skilled" workers with medical, dental and retirement benefits. What is it they do at GM?

Walmart is fighting to pay it's workers LESS than minimum wage and Republicans, want to hurt those workers by making sure they not only don't make enough to live on, they can't even get food stamps.

Come on, that is not at all what they want to do. Trying to mislead is all you are doing.
And you do forget they actually do get benefits, dear. As well as a discount from Walmart & Sams Club for purchases. And DC already has one of the highest minimum wages in the country.

The city’s minimum wage is $8.25, a dollar higher than the federal minimum wage.

D.C. Council approves "living wage" bill - Washington Post

According to a recent report from the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, the low wages provided by a single Walmart store costs taxpayers upwards of $1 million in governmental support for those workers and their dependents. "The report finds that a single 300-employee Wal-Mart Supercenter in Wisconsin may cost taxpayers anywhere from $904,542 to nearly $1.75 million per year, or about $5,815 per employee. Wisconsin has 100 Wal-Mart stores, 75 that are Wal-Mart Supercenters."

The cost of Wal Mart

Someone making 8.50 and hour will make a little over 17,000 a year. If you have kids, that's not enough to live on. Food Stamps become a "business subsidy". Besides, companies like Wal Mart get around paying benefits by employing people "part time, or 35 hours a week. And that's nearly full time and only 15,000 a year with no benefits.

I can't believe Republicans on this board are fighting for low wages and no benefits and then saying, "But at least it's a job". Why do they aim so low?

 

[rdean]

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

oh, you mean these companies?

But the rare momentum behind comprehensive immigration reform this year has reverberated with the tech industry. While it has traditionally focused on the high-skilled section of the immigration debate, tech companies and trade groups have joined forces with the agriculture, hospitality, travel and other industries to push for Congress to overhaul the nation's immigration laws.


Even the once politically shy Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has become actively involved in the debate. Zuckerberg invested some of his personal wealth to help launch FWD.us, a group that's currently lobbying for comprehensive immigration reform; Zuckerberg is set to give an address on immigration next week at the premiere of a documentary directed by immigration rights activist and journalist Jose Antonio Vargas.

In a letter sent to Congress earlier this week, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, California Strawberry Commission, California Farm Bureau Federation and other agriculture groups stressed that immigration reform is necessary to ensuring the economic success of their disparate industries, which are among the largest in California.

and -

The Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents Facebook, Google, Stanford University and Yahoo, and the California Strawberry Commission held a series of back-to-back meetings with lawmakers on Thursday to hammer home a pro-immigration message before Congress breaks for the August recess. The two groups met with House GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise (R-La.) on Thursday, as well as lawmakers from the House New Democrat Coalition, according to the Silicon Valley Leadership Group's Twitter account

California, hmmmm

Exactly. Because Republicans are trying to block everyone. If tech companies can help get farm workers in, for sure they can get skilled workers with degrees. Besides, immigrants want their kids to go to school and get degrees. Republicans don't.

About the Party :: TexasGOP - Republican Party of Texas

Read the Texas Republican Party Platform:

opposes the “teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills” and “critical thinking skills"

You won't find immigrants with such an ignorant mind set.

 

[depotoo]

I'm trying to figure out what you are saying. How many at GM are "skilled" workers with medical, dental and retirement benefits. What is it they do at GM?

Walmart is fighting to pay it's workers LESS than minimum wage and Republicans, want to hurt those workers by making sure they not only don't make enough to live on, they can't even get food stamps.

Come on, that is not at all what they want to do. Trying to mislead is all you are doing.
And you do forget they actually do get benefits, dear. As well as a discount from Walmart & Sams Club for purchases. And DC already has one of the highest minimum wages in the country.

The city’s minimum wage is $8.25, a dollar higher than the federal minimum wage.

D.C. Council approves "living wage" bill - Washington Post

According to a recent report from the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, the low wages provided by a single Walmart store costs taxpayers upwards of $1 million in governmental support for those workers and their dependents. "The report finds that a single 300-employee Wal-Mart Supercenter in Wisconsin may cost taxpayers anywhere from $904,542 to nearly $1.75 million per year, or about $5,815 per employee. Wisconsin has 100 Wal-Mart stores, 75 that are Wal-Mart Supercenters."

The cost of Wal Mart

Someone making 8.50 and hour will make a little over 17,000 a year. If you have kids, that's not enough to live on. Food Stamps become a "business subsidy". Besides, companies like Wal Mart get around paying benefits by employing people "part time, or 35 hours a week. And that's nearly full time and only 15,000 a year with no benefits.

I can't believe Republicans on this board are fighting for low wages and no benefits and then saying, "But at least it's a job". Why do they aim so low?

rdean, you really don't want to go there. What are some of the other employers having to pay as a minimum there? Why is it Starbucks, et al are exempt from this increase? Where is your outrage over the exemptions within the bill? You can't have your cake and eat it too, bud. Sorry. And don't tell me those other companies don't also receive those subsidies, (which, by the way, isn't even true to begin with) so where is your outrage over them, rdean?

 

[Dot Com]

How about corporations invest in that Republican base? After all, with all that support, doesn't the base deserve to get something out of it?

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

Q W & Yurt are

 

[depotoo]

And why is it that when the ceo of starbucks is bringing home aboutr $30 million a year, no outrage. Nor is their outrage for Nike's ceo bringing home even more than that? Try $38 million.

 

[rdean]

Corperations are good
1. They employ a lot of workers
2. Supply and demand = cheaper prices for the good for the consumer
3. Big r@d department. I doubt we'd have the tech we have today if it wasn't for them.

Just a couple of things Matt, Republicans on the USMB don't believe that "demand" has anything to do with job creation. They have explained that to me many times.

Second, corporations mostly grow through acquisition, NOT R&D. Because R&D is expensive. And it doesn't have a good return. In fact, if you bother to check it out, most of the nations R&D is government funded at Government agencies like NASA or government funded at universities. OR even government funded at business through direct grants or in the form of tax write offs. I know that for a fact. I will be spending most of the next week filling out the paperwork.

So what is in the paperwork? They want to know every project you have worked on for the last three years. Not just the successful ones, but all of them. How they started. They want to know your research plan, your method, what you discovered, the tests you ran and data collection. They want meeting notes. They want diagrams and formulas and an itemized cost. They want the goal and the number of people who supported the project and what they did. Everyone who worked on it has to turn in a detailed job description. They want your level of education and ALL your experience. That's why it's going to take me better part of a week. Because all of that will be turned in for tax deductions.

And that's how R&D works.

 

[rdean]

Come on, that is not at all what they want to do. Trying to mislead is all you are doing.
And you do forget they actually do get benefits, dear. As well as a discount from Walmart & Sams Club for purchases. And DC already has one of the highest minimum wages in the country.

The city’s minimum wage is $8.25, a dollar higher than the federal minimum wage.

D.C. Council approves "living wage" bill - Washington Post

According to a recent report from the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, the low wages provided by a single Walmart store costs taxpayers upwards of $1 million in governmental support for those workers and their dependents. "The report finds that a single 300-employee Wal-Mart Supercenter in Wisconsin may cost taxpayers anywhere from $904,542 to nearly $1.75 million per year, or about $5,815 per employee. Wisconsin has 100 Wal-Mart stores, 75 that are Wal-Mart Supercenters."

The cost of Wal Mart

Someone making 8.50 and hour will make a little over 17,000 a year. If you have kids, that's not enough to live on. Food Stamps become a "business subsidy". Besides, companies like Wal Mart get around paying benefits by employing people "part time, or 35 hours a week. And that's nearly full time and only 15,000 a year with no benefits.

I can't believe Republicans on this board are fighting for low wages and no benefits and then saying, "But at least it's a job". Why do they aim so low?

rdean, you really don't want to go there. What are some of the other employers having to pay as a minimum there? Why is it Starbucks, et al are exempt from this increase? Where is your outrage over the exemptions within the bill? You can't have your cake and eat it too, bud. Sorry. And don't tell me those other companies don't also receive those subsidies, (which, by the way, isn't even true to begin with) so where is your outrage over them, rdean?

(sigh) no one is saying those companies are receiving subsidies. But food stamps and health care become "business subsidies" because people working at those companies don't make enough to survive. Someone has to make up the difference otherwise no one would take the job.

Try thinking of it this way, "Would you take a job you couldn't survive on?"

And I don't really know that much about "Starbucks". I usually go to Julius Meinl. But it seems some Starbuck employees have nice things to say:

Starbucks Salaries and Benefits | Glassdoor

I couldn't find any positive comments from employees of Wal Mart. Not saying they aren't there. I just couldn't find any unless they were published by Wal Mart.

 

[rdean]

And why is it that when the ceo of starbucks is bringing home aboutr $30 million a year, no outrage. Nor is their outrage for Nike's ceo bringing home even more than that? Try $38 million.

I don't care what the CEO makes. To me, it's more important what the employees make. That they make enough to live on. Rich people have their money to take care of them. The rest of us only have each other.

 

[whitehall]

What is the opposite of support for corporations? Fascism?

 

[freedombecki]

yeah, it's interesting they support GM, which its CEO got $11 million in 2011 and it had only 68,500 employees.
They hate Walmart, whose ceo got $20 million in 2012, with 2 million 1 hundred thousand employees.
2,100,000 vs. 68,500 livelihoods
GM paid $160 a year to the ceo per employee to make sure they continue to have a job.
Walmart paid $9.52 cents a year to the ceo per employee to make sure they continue to have a job.

I'm trying to figure out what you are saying. How many at GM are "skilled" workers with medical, dental and retirement benefits. What is it they do at GM?

Walmart is fighting to pay it's workers LESS than minimum wage and Republicans, want to hurt those workers by making sure they not only don't make enough to live on, they can't even get food stamps.

Ironic that you are giving those making a killing on employees your personal endorsement, but attacking those who don't make a killing on employees.

Destroy the good guys? I can't hear you, Deanie.

 

[rdean]

What is the opposite of support for corporations? Fascism?

Right wingers tend to be very "digital" people. Not much beyond "either/or".

If you don't agree with "this", then you must agree with "that". They don't see shades of gray. Their world is limited to "absolutes".

 

[OKTexas]

Gee, I thought they would be all over this telling us all the "benefits".

Yep, some companies are doing things like this, of course it's for their own good.

Shell Oil: Helping Power America’s Future Through Education

You can read about it here: Shell Oil: Helping Power America?s Future through Education | Politic365

 

[depotoo]

And why is it that when the ceo of starbucks is bringing home aboutr $30 million a year, no outrage. Nor is their outrage for Nike's ceo bringing home even more than that? Try $38 million.

I don't care what the CEO makes. To me, it's more important what the employees make. That they make enough to live on. Rich people have their money to take care of them. The rest of us only have each other.

So, then if that is the case, then why are you not raising cain over the exemptions? DO those folks that work at Starbucks, et al, not matter to you?

Or is it you realize that one should not expect to feed their family by running coffee from a machine?

 

[whitehall]

What is the opposite of support for corporations? Fascism?

Right wingers tend to be very "digital" people. Not much beyond "either/or".

If you don't agree with "this", then you must agree with "that". They don't see shades of gray. Their world is limited to "absolutes".

Left wingers beat around the bush more than Anthony Weiner. What happens when you attack corporations? You get socialism or fascism? Democrats created the tax laws just the same as republicans and then they complain that the laws they created have loopholes. There are a couple of axioms you need to consider before you go down the socialist road, corporate CEO's are smarter than politicians, every pension system is invested in corporate wealth and and there is no money in social security.

 

[Freewill]

All the support the Republican base has shown corporations and how is it "repaid"???? Unskilled family creating jobs shipped overseas. The money that's made there kept there because they don't want to pay taxes that would help those who have lost their jobs.

And when corporations need skilled labor, do they turn to the very base that has supported them?

U.S. Business Needs Immigrants With Advanced Degrees

U.S. corporations have complained for years that they can’t find enough qualified workers who are skilled in science, technology, engineering and mathematics — the so-called STEM fields.

Changing immigration law could solve the problem. Congress is considering legislation that would allow high-skilled foreign workers and students to work in the United States instead of taking their skills back to their homelands.

-------------------------------------------------------

Federal tax revenue by state

So right away, Republicans will say, "But what can they do about it? They need scientists and engineers and researchers. That's why they get immigrants with degrees".

How about corporations invest in that Republican base? After all, with all that support, doesn't the base deserve to get something out of it? Unless, education is "too hard". "We can't do it". "All that study". "And everyone knows, liberal education turns you into Democrats".

So why all the support for corporations and you get nothing back except minimum wage, food stamps and no health care? Cuz that's where it's heading.

Are you guys sure you've thought this through?

You have once again forgotten who has had all the power since 2006 so I will remind you once again, the democrats. Yes the Republicans have a little power with control of the house but basically that only means they can stop some stuff. None of their initiatives have had a chance since 2006. Obama and democrats have made it abundantly clear they do not wish to work with Republicans. So any aid to corporation has come from the democrat party. Matter of fact look at your own chart. Tax revenue for corporations was spiking until when? 2006 and the Democrat take over.

Yes, if there is fault to be placed it is at the doorstep of those who have the power, DEMOCRATS. So let's do something to solve 2/3s of that problem in 2014. You in?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How about corporations invest in that Republican base? After all, with all that support, doesn't the base deserve to get something out of it?

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

My logic doesn't make sense to you because I use common sense and satire.

 

[rdean]

Oh c'mon man, don't kill my buzz!

I think it's a hoot, the right jumps through hoops to defend an entity, that doesn't give a shit about them.

Not only that, look at QW from post 11:

the reason those businesses want to employ immigrants instead of hire Americans is not that there are no Americans with degrees, the proof of that is that you have a degree. If you can get one I am pretty sure my cat can get one, the problem has to be something else, like graduates from universities expecting to make enough money to pay off their student loans in a week.

Can you follow the logic? Business hires immigrants because American students want to pay off their loans faster????

Did I get that right? Is that what QW is saying? And it gets worse on post 14:

Why not ask yourself why corporations want immigration reform to allow a large number of unskilled workers to enter the workforce.

And Yurt is thanking QW for that useful post????

Do I have to explain that corporations aren't trying to get "unskilled labor" to come here? If they want "unskilled labor", they already have Republicans. Duh! Corporations want people with degrees who are already "skilled". If they felt they could get skilled workers by educating Republicans, the people who support them, I suspect they would. But clearly, that's not what they are doing.

My logic doesn't make sense to you because I use common sense and satire.

Sweetheart, the idea of you using "common sense" IS "satire".