Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (133756)	5/2/2013 11:29:32 AM
From: koan	Respond to of 149317

That is it in a nutshell. Like I said, we need unions. <<Corporations born in America are global now, and being corporations, they have no sense of loyalty or moral conscience. They seek labor in the cheapest places where they can build the product, store the wealth in foreign banks and have only a marginal connection with the US economy. American market valuations used to coincide with good economic performance in the American economy, good news for American workers, but there's no reason for that to happen anymore, and it isn't happening. The investor class has been separated from the working class here.>>

To: bentway who wrote (133756)	5/26/2013 10:53:47 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

With regards to corporations leaving the US in search of cheaper labor, this is a good article which shows that these US capitalists/imperialists are learning their lesson. They ignored the adage "you get what you pay for" when they were migrating. Now they are experiencing the folly of their decision. There are many US corporations that are now slowing crawling back into the US and they want to do so in a big way. I am in favor for giving these corporations some tax breaks to repatriate their funds. But these breaks should be tied to the welfare of the workers wherein we mandate that these funds be directly used to open up jobs for US workers, create new facilities with the most advanced manufacturing techniques, good health benefits etc. If they do so then the Govt.'s loss of revenue from these breaks will be made up by way of increased revenues from income taxes etc. features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com

To: bentway who wrote (133756)	7/4/2013 2:50:17 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

The Egyptians have asserted themselves as the masters of their own destiny. They are giving new meaning to democracy where they along with their armed forces serve as guardians of the political system. Hats off also to their armed forces. I wish the armed forces in other military dictatorships take their cue from the Egyptian military. The Egyptians have also challenged existing laws for US aid. The Obama Administration and the Congress are scrambling to ensure that aid to Egypt is not cut off due to this situation. Our Govt. needs to revisit the law to accommodate situations like Egypt's that could possibly arise in future. ==================================================== July 4, 2013 3:24 am Egypt’s generals are not alone in setting back democracyBy David Gardner Inability to organise political representation remains a setback For all the more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger protestations, this coup d’état was about as retro as they come. Troops surrounded state broadcasting headquarters early on and, once the army commander had finished his televised announcement of the government’s demise, the plugs were pulled on the ruling party, silencing its television station But the choreography of this coup – ousting Mohamed Morsi, Egypt’s first democratically elected and only Islamist president – was unusual. General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the army chief of staff, mobilised extra divisions of no mean significance. As he replaced Mr Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood with a transitional government, he was flanked by the Sheikh of al-Azhar university, the leading Sunni Muslim authority; the Pope of Egypt’s sizeable Coptic minority; Mohamed ElBaradei, Nobel peace laureate and leader of Egypt’s liberals; and youthful activists who brought down the army-backed dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the high spring of the new Arab awakening. As the vast crowds in Tahrir Square erupted in joy every bit as spectacular as the way they greeted the toppling of Mr Mubarak, it is fair to ask who mobilised whom. Mr ElBaradei, speaking after Gen Sisi, greeted the coup as a reset for the Egyptian revolution and the Arab spring. Yet it is obviously an unhappy state of affairs when those who profess to be liberals need army bayonets to press their case. When the Assads took power in Syria in 1970 as a “corrective movement” after revolving-door coups and mayhem, or indeed when the legendary “Free Officers” of Gamal Abdel Nasser toppled the louche Egyptian monarchy in 1952, they were also greeted as saviours. The rest of the story Syrians and Egyptians know all too well. The Islamists did not hijack the Egyptian revolution, they were just far better organised than their liberal and leftist rivals in scooping up votes in the five electoral exercises that followed the fall of the Mubarak regime. The reasons have long been obvious. The Assads and the Mubaraks, the Gaddafis and the Saddam Husseins, all of them at different points bolstered by the west, laid waste to the entire spectrum of organised politics in their countries – with the exception of the mosque, around which Islamist dissidence regrouped. Of course, secular politicians are at a disadvantage. But polls show they have a big constituency. Under dictatorship they took it for granted. In a democracy they have to organise it. The Egyptian transition has been messy and instructive – and not just for Egypt. The spectacular failure of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt – the country of its birth 85 years ago, the most populous Arab country, which still presumes to regional influence – heralds a setback for mainstream political Islam across the broader Middle East. Arab despotism was good at manufacturing Islamists. But that did not mean the Islamists would be any good at governing. Mr Morsi, for example, while democratically elected, failed to behave like a democrat. His abortive constitutional coup last autumn, attempting to place his government above the judiciary, and his intolerance of criticism and attempts to pack Egypt’s institutions with his followers, alienated all but hardcore Islamists. Unable to meet the needs of ordinary Egyptians for jobs and security, electricity and services, he was accountable to the Brotherhood but not citizens of the republic. Even foreign governments and international institutions were dealing with Khairat al-Shater, deputy supreme guide of the Brotherhood, which in its paranoid secretiveness ran a parallel government. Is the fall of Mr Morsi a setback for democracy? Of course it is. But it cannot be taken in isolation. The spectacle presented by the first elected parliament after the fall of Mubarak – an Islamist-dominated assembly arguing about prayer times and obsessing over curtailing women’s rights – was a setback for democracy. Attempts to manipulate the judiciary by all sides – the generals, the Mubarak “deep state”, the liberals and the Brotherhood – were a setback for democracy. By no means least, the manifest inability of secular, urban and modern Egyptians to organise their political representation was – and remains – a setback for democracy. ft.com