SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 9:36:03 AM
From: TideGlider2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224744
 
yep, that 9-9-9 would mess with your income eh Kenny LOL



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 10:04:32 AM
From: joefromspringfield4 Recommendations  Respond to of 224744
 
That 999 plan would sure work a hardship on illegal aliens. They would have to pay a 9% sales tax on everything they buy. I wonder if it would be so onerous that they would consider moving back to Mexico.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 10:08:35 AM
From: chartseer2 Recommendations  Respond to of 224744
 
Does that upset you more than Drill Baby Drill?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 11:10:37 AM
From: longnshort5 Recommendations  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 224744
 
Wow - listen to this Chevy dealer Congress diss the Volt:

Chevy-Dealing Congressman: “There Is No Market” For The Volt

By Edward Niedermeyer on October 13, 2011



In addition to being a representative from Pennsylvania, Republican Mike Kelly is also a Chevrolet dealer whose family has sold Chevys since 1953. But in recent hearings on government fuel economy ratings, he laid into his brand’s green halo car, the Chevy Volt with surprising zeal. Or, not-so-surprising, when you realize that he decided to run for congress in the wake of the bailout-era dealer cull.

I’m a Chevrolet dealer… we have a Chevy Volt on the lot, it’s been there now for four weeks. We’ve had one person come in to look at it, just to see what it actually looks like… Here’s a car that costs $45,763. I can stock that car for probably a year and then have to sell it at some ridiculous price. By the way, I just received some additional information from Chevrolet: in addition to the $7,500 [federal] tax credit, Pennsylvania is going to throw another $3,500 to anybody foolish enough to buy one of these cars, somehow giving them $11,000 of taxpayer money to buy this Volt.

When you look at this, it makes absolutely no sense. I can stock a Chevy Cruze, which is about a $17,500 car and turns every 30 to 40 days out of inventory… or I can have a Volt, which never turns and creates nothing for me on the lot except interest costs… So a lot of these things that we’re seeing going on have a tremendous economic impact on people who are being asked to stock them and sell them. There is no market for this car. I do have some friends who have sold them, and they’re mostly to people who have an academic interest in it, or municipalities who are asking to buy these cars.

With dealers like that, who needs competitors? Seriously, Kelly even says he fired the guy who ordered a Volt for his dealership… which he then counts against the Volt’s job creation record. Hit the jump for the rest of his quote.

I can tell you… as far as job creation, the guy who ordered that Volt for my store is no longer in that job. So it actually worked against him. I was told that the reason that car is on our lot is that General Motors told him he had to stock it. I said “let me understand. I told you that under no circumstances were you to order a Volt,” and he said “yeah.” “So, why did you order it?” “Because General Motors told me.” “Is this the same General Motors that tried to take my Cadillac franchise from me? These are the guys you’re listening to, but the guy who signs your paycheck doesn’t have as much influence as the guys who tried to take away the franchise?”

So clearly Kelly has his reasons for disliking his business partners at GM, but bashing a car that Chevy managers insist is a brand-building halo is still surprising. In any case, this somewhat rambling but fascinating critique eventually led to question “do you see any market for this car at all?” directed at Edmunds CEO Jeremy Anwyl… who first took the opportunity to defend the Volt.

Well, there’s a little bit of good news. First, you mentioned that it did create some traffic for you, albeit one person. But that is something the car companies tout, that these vehicles do attract some interest, some traffic, not necessarily buyers. And let me also say, the Volt is actually a very nice vehicle. We actually bought one ourselves, it’s in the long-term fleet… people actually enjoy it.

But then came the bad news.

The problem that I think you’ve outlined is really twofold. One of them is that there are all sorts of inducements for people to be buying these vehicles… and yet when you look at whose been buying these vehicles, and there are people buying them, they are at the very high end of the demographic scale… Right now we’re seeing people who would have bought that vehicles anyway, without a tax credit, getting the tax credit at the expense of other taxpayers, and you have to wonder about the wisdom of that.

That's right ... these subsidies are welfare for the rich.

The second part of the Anwyl’s critique would have to wait, because after getting in one last knock at the Volt, Kelly was out of time. Rep Jackie Speier (D-CA) was next in line, and she jumped on Kelly’s Volt-bashing, telling him

First of all, to Mr Kelly, send that Volt to California! It doesn’t have to stay on your lot, because there is a waiting list in my district, at my Chevrolet dealership, of six months to get a Chevy Volt.

To which Kelly replied,

Give me the name of the dealer, and I’ll send it out there right away. If he’ll pick up the transportation cost, I’d love to do that.

The name was exchanged, and jokes were made about bipartisanship and “working together.” Then the partisan back-and-forth continued. You gotta love Congress.
thetruthaboutcars.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 3:27:40 PM
From: Ann Corrigan3 Recommendations  Respond to of 224744
 
OCare is nuts: illinoisreview.typepad.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 3:54:35 PM
From: longnshort2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224744
 
Shrink: Obama Suffers 'Father Hunger' October 14, 2011 RSS Feed Print
The abandonment by his father when he was an infant and by his stepfather at age 10 has left President Obama with a "father hunger" that influences everything from why he distances himself from pushy supporters, to his strong desire to compromise and bring people together, to his aggressive campaign to kill Osama bin Laden, says a psychoanalytic book out next week. In Obama on the Couch, George Washington University professor Justin Frank also reveals that Obama has spent much of his life seeking out father figures, but most, like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Vice President Biden, have disappointed him. "Obama searched for a father, for someone to relate to who could help him—a strong man who knew what to do," Frank writes.

[Check out photos of Obama behind the scenes.]

This is Frank's second psychoanalytical book about a president. While a sympathetic look at Obama, it follows Bush on the Couch, a sharply critical analysis that suggested then President George W. Bush was disturbed. In that book, he predicted that someone like Obama—"completely different," "someone not ... white"—would succeed Bush. What the nation ended up with, however, is "an almost tragic figure," Frank writes.

The general theme is that Obama has been affected both by being biracial and by the abandonment of his two dads during his childhood. The result is that he is overly protective of his own nuclear family, desires greatly to see national unity, and yet harbors anger that he took out on bin Laden. [ Vote now: Will Obama be a one-term president?]

Take for example Obama's earlier willingness to compromise with Republicans, upsetting his liberal base. Here Frank cites the negative influence of his parents, especially his mom, who often pressed him to do better in school. "He hates being pushed by supporters who want him to make good on his promises of universal healthcare and care for the poor, something that represents his mother and how she pushed him to study harder," Frank writes. And when he ignores his base, he is emulating his father, expressing annoyance but not worried they will desert him.

As for bin Laden, Frank writes that Obama's inner anger emerged: "He was able to pursue his action against bin Laden in part because bin Laden offered a displacement figure for Obama's rage toward his own parents." [ See a slide show of 10 issues driving Obama's re-election campaign.]

Frank also calls Obama scared of the type of radical change he advocated in 2008. "He wants to be the father who makes change safe, the person he has waited for his entire life."


Tags: Osama bin Laden, Barack Obama



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/15/2011 7:26:12 PM
From: Hope Praytochange1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224744
 
Distract From Dems' Failures By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

What do you do if you can't run on your record — on 9% unemployment, stagnant growth and ruinous deficits as far as the eye can see? How to run when you are asked whether Americans are better off than they were four years ago and you are compelled to answer no?

Play the outsider. Declare yourself the underdog. Denounce Washington as if the electorate hasn't noticed that you've been in charge for nearly three years. But above all: Find villains.

President Obama first tried finding excuses, blaming America's dismal condition on Japanese supply-chain interruptions, the Arab Spring, European debt and various acts of God.

Didn't work. Sounds plaintive, defensive. Lacks fight, which is what Obama's base lusts for above all. Hence Obama's new strategy: Don't whine, blame. Attack. Indict. Accuse.

Who? The rich — and their Republican protectors — for wrecking America. In Obama's telling, it's the refusal of the rich to "pay their fair share" that jeopardizes Medicare.

If millionaires don't pony up, schools will crumble. Oil-drilling tax breaks will cost teachers jobs. Corporate loopholes will gut medical research.

It's crude. It's Manichean. And the left loves it. As a matter of math and logic, however, it's ridiculous.

Obama's most coveted tax hike — an extra 3% to 4.6% for millionaires and billionaires (weirdly defined as individuals making more than $200,000) — would have reduced last year's deficit from $1.29 trillion to $1.21 trillion. Nearly a rounding error.

The oil-drilling breaks cover less than half a day's federal spending.

You could collect Obama's favorite tax loophole — depreciation for corporate jets — for 100 years and it wouldn't cover one month of Medicare, whose insolvency is a function of increased longevity, expensive new technology and wasteful defensive medicine caused by an insane malpractice system.

After three years, Obama's self-proclaimed transformative social policies have yielded only a weak economy.

What to do? Take the low road: Plutocrats are bleeding the country and I shall rescue you from them. Problem is, this kind of populist demagoguery is more than intellectually dishonest.

It's dangerous.

Obama is opening a Pandora's box. Popular resentment, easily stoked, is less easily controlled, especially when the basest of instincts are granted legitimacy by the nation's leader.

Exhibit A. On Tuesday, the Democratic-controlled Senate passed a punitive bill over China's currency. If not stopped by House Speaker John Boehner, it might have led to a trade war — a 21st-century Smoot-Hawley.

Obama knows this.

He has shown no appetite for a reckless tariff war. But he set the tone. Once you start hunting for villains, they can be found anywhere, particularly if they are conveniently foreign.

Exhibit B. Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin rails against Bank of America's $5 a month debit card fee. Obama echoes the opprobrium with fine denunciations of banks and their hidden fees — except that this $5 fee is not hidden. It's perfectly transparent.

Yet here is a leading Democratic senator advocating a run on a major (and troubled) bank — after two presidents and two Congresses sunk billions of taxpayer dollars to save failing banks.

Not because they deserve it or are virtuous but because they are necessary. Without banks, there's no lending. Without lending, there's no business. Without business, there are no jobs.

Exhibit C. To the villainy-of-the-rich theme emanating from Washington, a child is born: Occupy Wall Street. Starbucks-sipping, Levi's-clad, iPhone-clutching protesters denounce corporate America even as they weep for Steve Jobs, corporate titan, billionaire eight times over.

These indignant indolents saddled with their $50,000 student loans and English degrees have decided that their lack of gainful employment is rooted in the malice of the millionaires on whose homes they are now marching — to the applause of Democrats suffering acute Tea Party envy and now salivating at the energy these big-government anarchists will presumably give their cause.

Except that the real Tea Party actually had a program — less government, less regulation, less taxation, less debt.

What's the Occupy Wall Street program? Eat the rich. Then? Haven't gotten that far. No postprandial plans.

But no matter. After all, this is not about programs or policies. This is about scapegoating, a failed administration trying to save itself by blaming our troubles — and its failures — on class enemies, turning general discontent into rage against a malign few.

From the Senate to the streets, it's working. Obama is too intelligent not to know what he started.

But so long as it gives him a shot at re-election, he shows no sign of caring



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/16/2011 6:50:06 AM
From: JakeStraw6 Recommendations  Respond to of 224744
 
At least Cain has some new fresh ideas... More than I can say for Obama...
The U.S. tax code is way too complicated and too expensive to enforce...
It's refreshing to see a candidate realize that change is needed and overdue.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/16/2011 1:04:43 PM
From: MJ4 Recommendations  Respond to of 224744
 
Obamacare is nuts, nuts, nuts.

Cain is perceptive------he knows the tax system is broke. I take him as a genuine person who
sees the problem and has a partial solution with the 999 campaign idea. It may be 999-------it could become a 'flat tax' that many in America desire.

I see Cain as a man who can sit in a board room, as President, Vice President or on the President's Cabinet and work with others to swiftly change the laborious tax system that exists now and make it fair for all.

So which Republican Candidate will the Democrat Party's Talking Points focus on next?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/16/2011 6:43:31 PM
From: locogringo5 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224744
 
I wonder if kenny was leading the singing?

Occupy Portland: Protesters Sing F*ck the USA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeuGx8PplAo



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (115538)10/16/2011 8:46:41 PM
From: Ann Corrigan5 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224744
 
'Occupy' Prison: Hundreds of protesters arrested in Chicago, Phoenix, Raleigh, Denver...

It's actually a good thing the majority of them will have a roof over their heads now that their mothers have had the locks changed on their basement doors.