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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: combjelly who wrote (683800)11/8/2012 11:49:58 AM
From: i-node  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573213
 
How so? All of his competitors are in the same boat. Yes, it means prices will go up. But in a growing economy that doesn't hurt.

It isn't a growing economy and isn't going to be anytime soon. But that's beside the point.

It is essentially the same concept as the minimum wage, which is a proven job killer.

And it will help slow the spiraling cost of healthcare. Using the ER for primary healthcare is the most inefficient, ineffective and expensive way to do it.

This of course is not true on either point. There is absolutely no reason to think requiring employers to buy insurance will in any way reduce health care costs. That's silly.

As to using the ER for primary care, I explained this fallacy to pubo a few weeks ago and don't think I'll repeat it; suffice it to say that if you understood anything about the cost structure of running an ER you would know this is incorrect.

I would just point out that busy ERs like, e.g., Parkland, could put a free primary care clinic next door, staffed 24/7, for a relatively small amount of money -- if they chose to do so. But they don't. Why not? The reason, of course, is that there would be no savings to the ER operation.

And what taxes does he foresee? If he is taking more than $250k, that amount over that is likely to be taxed a little more. If that pays for 22 employees, then he takes home a lot of money. He shouldn't be hurting.

I think it is clear the guy was trying to hold on to his employees and see what happens in the election. He understand that with Obama being reelected, the economy is going to continue to slide, and he will be faced with tons of new operating costs.

It is common for people who have spent their lives as employees to think, if they make $20,000, that's what it cost the employer for them to be there. In reality, of course, that employee must bring some multiple of that in revenue or you can't justify having him around. If an employer can't reasonably anticipate revenue increasing, hiring must stop; if the multiple increases, as it will in the next four years, and revenue isn't increasing, some employees must go.

My BIL is an engineer for a supplier of Caterpillar and John Deere. They were told some months ago their design work would stop until after the election. My sister, at the same time, was told her job is on the line pending the acquisition of the hospital brought about by Obamacare (where she's a director of nurses).

No point in arguing it. Just watch what happens.



To: combjelly who wrote (683800)11/8/2012 11:50:29 AM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573213
 
I received this brief e-mail from a friend who, up until recently, has been an ardent Obama supporter (needless to say, our friendship has been hanging by a thread). He has worked as an engineer for Lockheed Martin Air Force Strategic Programs for almost forty years, which sets the scene for his sudden political epiphany:

Thank you for sending along the link to your commentary on the election. I think you hit the nail on the head. Lockheed is starting to send out Work Area Reduction Notices (WARN) thanks to Obama’s sequestration policy. 10,000 people across the corporation for the first wave. These are the dark days (no racial pun intended).


h/t simplicity



To: combjelly who wrote (683800)11/8/2012 12:03:19 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 1573213
 
Vote was astronomical for Obama in some Philadelphia wards


RON TARVER / Staff Photographer
Shakiena Williams with daughter Jahira in the 44th Ward: "I like what [Obama] talked about . . . the middle class, the economy, and schools."

MORE COVERAGE
How the Philly region picked the president After this election, is Pa. true blue? A look at Philly's presidential vote Payback for Phila.'s big turnout for Obama?
GALLERY: Vote was astronomical for Obama in some Philadelphia wards

[iframe id="dclkAdsFrameID_11298" name="dclkAdsFrameName_11298" src="about:blank" scrolling="no" width="160" height="600" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" style="border-width: 0px; "][/iframe]

Miriam Hill, Jonathan Lai, and Andrew Seidman, Inquirer Staff Writers

POSTED: Thursday, November 8, 2012, 3:01 AM
Some Philadelphia neighborhoods outdid themselves in Tuesday's presidential election.

In a city where President Obama received more than 85 percent of the votes, in some places he received almost every one. In 13 Philadelphia wards, Obama received 99 percent of the vote or more.

Those wards, many with large African American populations, also swung heavily for Obama over John McCain in 2008. But the difficult economy seemed destined to dampen that enthusiasm four years later.

Not to worry. Ward leaders and voters said they were just as motivated this time.

"In this election, you had to point out to the people what was at stake. And in many cases, they felt that the Romney doctrine was not going to favor the working man," said Edgar "Sonny" Campbell.

Campbell is leader of West Philadelphia's Fourth Ward, where Obama received 9,955 votes. Romney? Just 55. That's five fewer than McCain in 2008.

Campbell acknowledged that the odds are stacked in his favor in Philadelphia, where Democrats outnumber GOP voters by nearly 7-1.

"You are looking at black neighborhoods where you have 1,000 voters in a division and maybe seven Republicans," he said. "We are shocked if Romney got any votes."

Even so, Randall Miller, a history professor at St. Joseph's University, said politicians almost never get 99 percent of the votes anywhere except, perhaps, the towns where they were born.

He said the Democratic voter turnout effort deserved credit for the president's success.

"Ninety-nine percent is extraordinary, and it shows discipline as much as anything else," he said.

From the News Desk

Latest Videos

Latest News Stories

Chaput calls for special Sandy collection
M.E.: Delco baby's death by heroin a homicide
Republican reboot?
Pennsylvania’s swing-state status is up in the air
Philadelphia’s city commissioners oust Singer as chair

More News »

News Blogs
THE INSIDER:Weekend must-tries: Kosher on the Main Line; go hot in Chinatown4 minutes ago IN THE MIX:Ripping it up with Low Cut Connie53 minutes ago

Stay Connected

Get the latest news and events delivered to your email. Sign up now!

[iframe id="4f8740d700d2a" name="4f8740d700d2a" src="http://us-ads.openx.net/w/1.0/afr?auid=123994&cb=7562915" frameborder="0" framespacing="0" scrolling="no" width="300" height="250"][/iframe]

Philadelphia's numbers were tilted so far in favor of Obama that one incredulous Republican revived the specter of voter fraud.

House Speaker Sam Smith, musing over "staggering" turnout in some city precincts and reacting to wrong information that "90 percent of the precincts in Philadelphia County turned out over 90 percent of voters," called the ability to get such numbers "questionable."

Smith's math does not add up. Voter turnout in Philadelphia was around 60 percent, according to state election figures.

State Sen. Vincent Hughes (D. Phila.) responded swiftly. He said Philadelphians came out to vote because they were tired of the "hard-right" Republican agenda.

"If they believe there was a corruption of the process, then go to court and challenge it. Show the people of Pennsylvania," Hughes said. "Beyond that, shut up."

Nor was Philadelphia the only place in the region with such high numbers for Obama. Five Delaware County towns topped 90 percent, led by Yeadon at 96.3. Following were Chester City (94.8), Darby Borough (93.5), Chester Township (92.3), and Colwyn (90.3).

On Wednesday, Mayor Nutter, who doubles as leader of the city's 52d Ward, said voters of all races were offended by attacks on Obama and acted to defend the president.

"I think ultimately a lot of folks . . . wanted to express themselves in a very direct fashion and came out in droves yesterday to support someone who actually deserved to be reelected," Nutter said.

Nearly 96 percent of voters in his ward pushed the button for Obama.

In Campbell's ward and in the nearby 44th, people said that they believed Obama had done a good job and that they had little confidence in Romney.

Tim Bee, 51, of the 44th Ward, voted for Obama and would have not been happy with a loss. Sitting next to Bee, James Tharrington, a 46-year-old Community College of Philadelphia student from the Fourth Ward, praised the president for recognizing that the country is a "melting pot."

Standing a few feet away was Janean McGee, a 22-year-old supermarket supervisor, wearing an Obama/Biden pin. McGee, who voted for Obama in 2008 and Tuesday, said she opposed Romney because of his stance on abortion and other women's issues.

"There's more than a 'binder full of women' out there," she said, referring to Romney's remark during the second presidential debate about his efforts as governor of Massachusetts to hire women.

The presidential race was not even the subject of much discussion in her West Philadelphia neighborhood because "everyone said straight Obama."

When McGee mentioned Romney's name, a passerby jeered, tossing profanities in her direction.

Shakiena Williams, a 35-year-old mother of two, said it was unfair to blame Obama for the country's problems.

"It's all been a mess from before he was elected," Williams said of Obama, for whom she voted in 2008 and again in 2012. "I like what he talked about . . . the middle class, the economy, and schools."

Holding her 2-year-old daughter, Jahira, by the hand, Williams said she thought the community was less enthusiastic this time around.

"Everyone was so dependent on [Obama] for hope and change, it doesn't happen just like that," she said.

Barbara Martinez said she, too, went to the polls Tuesday because she believed Obama deserved a second term.

"I think he needs more time to get the job done," Martinez said. An 84-year-old who has voted for the Democratic candidate in every election, Martinez called Romney "more of a businessman than a politician."

Matt Wolfe said that as the Republican ward leader in the 27th Ward, also in West Philadelphia, he does his best to turn out GOP voters and rarely tries to convert the diehard Democrats who live near him.

"We tried to get all our Republican voters out to the polls," said Wolfe. In his ward, 13.5 percent of voters cast ballots for Romney.

He said he could not even count on his own committeemen to vote for the Republican. Committeeman are elected party officials who report to the ward leaders.

"I had one division with two [GOP] committeemen in it and only one vote for Romney," he said. He declined to identify the committeemen.



To: combjelly who wrote (683800)11/8/2012 12:14:35 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573213
 
CJ,
Yes, it means prices will go up. But in a growing economy that doesn't hurt.
If the economy really was growing, that guy wouldn't have to lay off employees.

Now that Obama is a 4-year lame duck and the Republican obstructionists in the House lost their mandate, taxes are going to go up, and not just for the super-rich.

If anything, we're gonna have a mini-recession over the next 12 months, because the political consequences thereof will be minimal.

Tenchusatsu