McConnell and other Republicans should have just kept their thoughts to themselves on the next Supreme Court nominee.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
The pressure on senate republicans is going to be enormous. I just don't see how they can run the clock out for almost an entire year. Like you said it will only take 4 R's to give in to the pressure to get Obama's pick confirmed.
It already went away, it just needs to come back now. Look all these businesses moved their factories for cheap labor and to keep money away from US taxes. People just don't get it that if those companies had better tax systems here there would be more jobs!
But as it is we have grown very lazy and don't even want those jobs now because the govt pays decent enough to not work at all.
We need to get out of the big govt phase of our history and get back to being something as individuals and having some damn honor and respect.
My question was directed at Albany, so I am just curious as to what his vision of the direction he thinks this Country should be.
Remarkably ignorant and uneducated. Boy those packed appeal courts did a bang up job keeping his illegal amnesty and epa overreach in place!
you should read up some more in how the US Senate operates, doesn't seem like you are aware of the power of the majority
How would you even know what was argued when you didn't even read the posting you keep referring to?
It's interesting you mention Trump so much, considering you employ some of his same methods in using ad hominem as a discussion tactic.
Yeah, that's the dimwitted way to look at this. I guess you think public opinion won't matter? Republicans always cave to public pressure - as one failed government shutdown after another confirms.
Obama has an obligation/right to appoint a judge this year. Senate has an obligation/right to advise and consent to prevent him from appointing a liberal circus freak.
IMO, it IS his actions that have created what you say is the most obstructive congress in history. Thank goodness they've not gone along with him anymore than necessary. If/when hrjc becomes POTUS, hopefully they will really dig their heels in.
They are seeking lower labor costs as much if not more than lower taxes. The difference in paying $1.50/hr for labor vs $15/hr is infinitely more a driving force for moving manufacturing to low cost countries. But go ahead and think that it's all about the tax system. You can bet that the folks making the decisions to move won't be seeing their salaries lowered.
It doesn't matter what the tax rate is if the cost difference between labor here and there is greater than the total taxes paid. Nobody on the right wants to admit that it's more about labor costs because that might alienate those blue collar workers who have been fooled by the smoke-screen.
US industry has forgotten the lessons taught by Henry Ford. Good luck selling your product to those Mexicans who will be earning $10/day.
Ok Fuzz, yes labor helps, but it was easily more important that the tax system was a lot more of a driving force to get outside of the US. The reason was simply that as a country we were not increasing tariffs on foreign products to keep American products competitive.
Our corporate tax policies are awful and the payroll tax is a 100% match of the employee income tax.
So while you focus on thousands of dollars per year in labor difference, the tax difference was and still is in the millions. That isn't just in payroll tax but all taxes across the board. Which is why when democrats want to tax the rich really all your saying is you want to give the rich more reason to leave the country.
We are very close to losing 4-5 of the biggest American companies our country has ever known and democrats are still screaming tax the rich like a bunch entitled idiots as if the rich have to deal with I and have no alternatives.
Our corporate tax policies are awful and the payroll tax is a 100% match of the employee income tax.
So while you focus on thousands of dollars per year in labor difference, the tax difference was and still is in the millions. That isn't just in payroll tax but all taxes across the board. Which is why when democrats want to tax the rich really all your saying is you want to give the rich more reason to leave the country.
We are very close to losing 4-5 of the biggest American companies our country has ever known and democrats are still screaming tax the rich like a bunch entitled idiots as if the rich have to deal with I and have no alternatives.
I believe the problem is a combination of both. Taxing the rich will never be the answer. The wealthy business man will always be smarter than the politicians trying to take his money and will find increasingly creative ways of not paying taxes or passing taxes on to those the politicians were trying to help.
Tariffs might be the answer, but then again, how would it help the average Joe if the widget he buys at Walmart for a buck now costs ten bucks after tariff is imposed.
No. I read your so called distinction, which was idiotic. We're done here. Evidence exists where trump has made racist comments. This isn't an argument.
I like aspects of Trump. You said something stupid, I pointed it out. Ad hominem is used to distract from the argument, not just name calling. I'm calling you an idiot because facts directly contradict your claim, yet you persist onward. That makes you an idiot. When facts directly counter your argument, and you persist, that obtuseness is insane. Just like the dude who said Christians never caused any deaths.
That's fair and on point. It's crazy to think the President can't name a replacement with almost a year left.
That being said, you're right, if they need to pull a Bork to get a Kennedy, that is fine.
Evidence exists that the "dude" you refer to didn't say Christians never caused any deaths
.
It was something equally stupid. But sure.Evidence exists that the "dude" you refer to didn't say Christians never caused any deaths
From The Federalist:
Historically, most presidents select a nominee within a week of a Supreme Court vacancy. However, there have been several lengthy vacancies when the Senate refused to play ball with controversial presidents or controversial nominees.
President John Tyler had a particularly difficult time filling vacancies. Smith Thompson died in office December 18, 1943. His replacement, Samuel Nelson, was in office starting February 14, 1845. That’s a vacancy of 424 days. Henry Baldwin died in office April 21, 1844. His replacement, Robert Cooper, was in office starting August 4, 1846. This vacancy lasted 835 days because Tyler could not get the Senate to work with him. During Tyler’s presidency, the Senate rejected nine separate Supreme Court nominations!
Most recently, Abe Fortas resigned May 14, 1969. His replacement, Harry Blackmun, was in office starting June 9, 1970, making the gap just longer than a year.
Thousands vs millions? If you think that what it is there is no other term to describe that thinking other than "stupid". The difference is thousands per employee for labor. $4800/yr for an employee vs $42,000. The average Mexican manufacturing costs today is $2.30/hr vs $20.15/hr in the US. Moving 1400 jobs changes that labor line on the balance sheet from $57.7 million/yr to $6.7 million...I promise you they won't save $50 million in taxes.
Sure Mexican taxes are low...ever been to Mexico? Not to Cancun or some vacation resort but to real Mexico? Cities like Matamoros, Monterrey, Reynosa...to where they relocate these factories. Wonder why they're practically a third world country? Wonder why so many Mexicans risk their lives to come here and work?
And please excuse yourself for the other bit of stupidity you write. Yes, payroll taxes...ie Social Sec and Medicare tax are split between employee and employer...but that is far from being 100% of the employee's income tax.
If the 4-5 biggest US companies want to leave...see ya! If congress had any balls they would place tariffs on their products to effectively price them out of the US market. There'll be plenty of people stepping up to fill their void.
The Republicans have basically bent over for Obama the past few years. Maybe for once they will stand up to him and not allow him to ram another ultra liberal Justice down our throats.
No there won't, and congrats on your made up figures. Again it isn't just the payroll tax it's everything tax included. Yes companies save millions in taxes by moving to other countries. Why do you think there are so many offshore accounts just sitting and avoiding our ridiculous tax rates!
Our labor force doesn't stop American companies from being competitive is my point. A strong work force allows more people to buy products therefore American companies do not mind paying their employees good. However it can't come back to burn them on the tax end too, and it does because we have politicians making business decisions.
You can argue against it all you want, but your wrong just like the democrats you support. And it will all come to light eventually when there are no good companies left and America is void of any work force outside of a service producing community.
Bellieve what you want because I won't go on explaining other wise.
Good luck.
Our labor force doesn't stop American companies from being competitive is my point. A strong work force allows more people to buy products therefore American companies do not mind paying their employees good. However it can't come back to burn them on the tax end too, and it does because we have politicians making business decisions.
You can argue against it all you want, but your wrong just like the democrats you support. And it will all come to light eventually when there are no good companies left and America is void of any work force outside of a service producing community.
Bellieve what you want because I won't go on explaining other wise.
Good luck.
Sigh...
From this article...
Most of the country, though, is governed by appeals courts dominated by Democrats. The suit against Obama’s environmental initiative, which the Supreme Court just stayed, came from the liberal D.C. Circuit, which had unanimously refused to grant the stay. Now the Obama administration can simply have the Environmental Protection Agency come up with a slightly different new plan and run to the liberal D.C. courts to bless it and refuse to stay it. It’s unlikely the now-divided Supreme Court would come up with a majority to stay the new rules: The vote to stay the old ones was (naturally) 5 to 4.
"We're done here."
"I'm not going to indulge in your foolishness."
Then you proceed to do just that, multiple times.
My original point was whether one can label Trump's xenophobic position on immigration and Islam as racist. I think the distinction matters, because we live in a world that tries to carry over one attack to help promote another until the opposition has been portrayed incorrectly, particularly in a western society that is trigger happy when it comes to the word "racism". You tried to make a connection of Trump's xenophobia to racism, and have failed to do so, particularly since you haven't provided one solitary bit of evidence to support your claim that Trumps comments on immigration/Islam shade out from the xenophobic label and into the racist label.
And now, you insert an attack on my sanity, all while never adding any real support to your counter-claims.
Ad hominem, indeed.
Made up figures? That statement alone tells me that you're ignorant of the subject matter.
Let me ask a politically incorrect question.
I have read that the S Ct are all either Jewish or Catholic and all went to three Ivy League schools, Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. Is that statement essentially true? [Note: I just looked it up, the three Ivy League schools are a fact] Given that the last 27 years of US Presidents all went to Yale or Harvard, that is not hard for me to believe.
That doesn't sound very diverse to me, and hardly represents the real face of the nation, if you will.
So If the above is true, President Obama should really make the court diverse by appointing a Protestant that went to Vandy, Florida or Texas law school, or some other reputable non Ivy. Maybe actually a real live lawyer that tried some civil and criminal cases for a good part of his/her career.
I have read that the S Ct are all either Jewish or Catholic and all went to three Ivy League schools, Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. Is that statement essentially true? [Note: I just looked it up, the three Ivy League schools are a fact] Given that the last 27 years of US Presidents all went to Yale or Harvard, that is not hard for me to believe.
That doesn't sound very diverse to me, and hardly represents the real face of the nation, if you will.
So If the above is true, President Obama should really make the court diverse by appointing a Protestant that went to Vandy, Florida or Texas law school, or some other reputable non Ivy. Maybe actually a real live lawyer that tried some civil and criminal cases for a good part of his/her career.
Last edited:
One, your throwing averages out there is if it's accurate. I'm not saying the average is wrong, but the number isn't close. Here in Louisville you are a temp at Ford for 6 months at $12 and hour and must contribute to the union. After 6 months they may take you on full time at $14.81 and at that time your Union due goes up.
Basically your not close to realistic to beginning wages in America right now at $20.15.
So like I said it's made up and not accurate for the real comparison. As far as Mexico goes I don't have a clue because most jobs aren't going there yet.
great question. Maybe the excessive cost of the imported / tariffed widget can result in competitive marketing and production, such that the widget could be made in the US for competitive cost, and that "average Joe" can be helped, and perhaps even his offspring, through employment and wages. Or, here's another idea, maybe the inflated price of that useless widget will allow that average Joe to finally realize he never needed the piece of worthless shit to begin with, and he will chose to keep his money, which does have value, in his pocket, where it can do Joe some actual good. Where it can do all of us some actual good. Again, great question.
None of my business, but you guys are tragically about to walk away from a very good discussion. Please don't. He was talking about manufacturing costs per hour, which includes hourly wages. Hate to see y'all walking away from what was shaping up to be a good discussion. I'll back out.
The average Joe in that situation benefits from having a job here in the US producing competitive widgets. The problem before was they produced the same widgets but the foreign widget had every advantage and was cheaper on the shelf because our country wanted to do business with foreign companies.
Those same countries protect their products/companies by imposing tariffs on our products so that even on certain products where we were competitive we were priced out of the market.
Those are bad deals for us and we were so eager to jump into those deals because we wanted to offer our people those products.
Hindsight is 20/20 now though and we destroyed a huge working force of our nation.
Those same countries protect their products/companies by imposing tariffs on our products so that even on certain products where we were competitive we were priced out of the market.
Those are bad deals for us and we were so eager to jump into those deals because we wanted to offer our people those products.
Hindsight is 20/20 now though and we destroyed a huge working force of our nation.
The SCOTUS is immensely elitest. Not only are all the justices from Ivy League schools, but all the clerks working for the justices are from ivy league programs. With one exception. Justice Clarence Thomas hires clerks from public schools. For as Liberal as I am, I'm also a SCOTUS junkie. I have an immense amount of respect for all of them for different reasons, and I respect Thomas for hiring public school clerks. Not only that, I was legitmately sad when news broke about Scalia. He was my second favorite justice to RBG. His dissents were second to none.
^^^ can't disagree with that, krazy, and you could have added a focus on lost productive quality. Using the word widget always makes me think of something of marginal need. Regardless, everything you wrote about countries imposing / taxing our products while we just let theirs surf into our country without getting wet is a sad yet true reality - anguishing to ponder and I can tell it makes you angry as it does me as well. I've seen documentaries of how foreign merchants engage in a common practice of steering common patrons away from US made products and how their customers are accustomed to the practice. Personally, I can't say that I blame them at that level (their developing lower to middle class and consumer class), as it is simply equal to a shop keeper in this country encouraging his customers to buy American made. In the US, the merchant class cares only about selling the product that yields the best profit margin, using whatever marketing technique to do it. But what is the "merchant class" in the States? ugh. Wal-Mart and kin?
Do you know which public universities are represented by Justice Thomas' clerks? Reason for asking is baseless curiosity.
Why is diversity important in that context? The job is to decide what the law is - to act as umpire in the memorable phrasing of Roberts. If your task is to call balls and strikes, is it important to relate to the batter?
Similar threads
