In a sense, yes. That's because electorally Obama has more "paths to victory" that seem possible than Romney.It's all but a dead heat and you're saying he has only the slimmest of chances, LOL.
In a sense, yes. That's because electorally Obama has more "paths to victory" that seem possible than Romney.It's all but a dead heat and you're saying he has only the slimmest of chances, LOL.
You completely miss the point. Bain is another example of "to big to fail". I'm guessing that when the way Bain does "business" is broken down for people, even the ones working for companies that Bain saved will see how unfair it is. Again, it's not that they made money, it's how they made money.Ask the hundreds of workers whose jobs lasted several more years because Bain got involved.
People see that Bain made some money off of a company that eventually shut down it bothers them. They don't consider what would have happened had Bain not intervened, they're only concerned that Bain made money. This country has some serious dog in the manger issues.
It's not that Bain made money, it's how they stacked the deck to make that money.Ask the hundreds of workers whose jobs lasted several more years because Bain got involved.
People see that Bain made some money off of a company that eventually shut down it bothers them. They don't consider what would have happened had Bain not intervened, they're only concerned that Bain made money. This country has some serious dog in the manger issues.
In a sense, yes. That's because electorally Obama has more "paths to victory" that seem possible than Romney.
You completely miss the point. Bain is another example of "to big to fail". I'm guessing that when the way Bain does "business" is broken down for people, even the ones working for companies that Bain saved will see how unfair it is. Again, it's not that they made money, it's how they made money.
It's not that Bain made money, it's how they stacked the deck to make that money.
Consider the converse (or inverse, or reverse- I can't remember which). Bain visits the company that's set to close its doors soon. It takes a look around at whatever it takes a look at and reach the conclusion of "Thanks, but no thanks. We can't make any money from this deal. Sorry. Best of luck to all of you," and rides off into the sunset. The reaction is that these big rich guys are letting the livelihoods of these steelworkers slip away for no other reason than a lack of profit, they have no compassion, and so on.
In that sense, they can't win either way. If they don't make the effort to invest in the company and hopefully turn it around, they catch crap. If they do make the effort, they catch crap.
People are looking at the options of losing their jobs soon without intervention or keeping them (for the short-term, at least) with intervention.
What about the way that Bain does business is so inherently wrong?
And is Obama delivering living wage jobs?
Gridlock, nothing can happen.
Here is what is wrong and financially it goes from top down.Consider the converse (or inverse, or reverse- I can't remember which). Bain visits the company that's set to close its doors soon. It takes a look around at whatever it takes a look at and reach the conclusion of "Thanks, but no thanks. We can't make any money from this deal. Sorry. Best of luck to all of you," and rides off into the sunset. The reaction is that these big rich guys are letting the livelihoods of these steelworkers slip away for no other reason than a lack of profit, they have no compassion, and so on.
In that sense, they can't win either way. If they don't make the effort to invest in the company and hopefully turn it around, they catch crap. If they do make the effort, they catch crap.
People are looking at the options of losing their jobs soon without intervention or keeping them (for the short-term, at least) with intervention.
What about the way that Bain does business is so inherently wrong?
Exactly, and the Dems never had a 60 seat majority, they had 57.
Two independents were in their caucas, one (Lieberman), lost his last primary challenge and supported Mccain not Obama.
Specter fled the Republican party in the spring of that year and Ted Kennedy was ill and passed.
So quit the blabby republican lie that makes it sound like Obama had free will to be king of the world, the truth is the republicans have been able to keep most of their agenda intact by blocking everything.
I think this has been covered before, but I was talking to an Express driver earlier and he talked like Ground would be getting Verizon and an Ops manager at Ground confirmed it. Any idea when that might happen?
All they said was Verizon, no stipulation put on it.Verizon 2 day or all of Verizon?
Here is what is wrong and financially it goes from top down.
There was a time in this country when businessmen and women took risks. They invested and worked hard and tried to make a profit. It still happens, but not for a select few at the top and Bain is one of them. It is the "too big to fail phenomenon". How did this happen? Businesses have almost $2 trillion dollars sitting on the sidelines and the only thing they will say about not investing it is "uncertainty". WTF! There is nothing uncertain. Either taxes will go up or deficits will go up, two fundamental issues that any business can and should plan for. I believe that with smart stewardship of a company that could navigate that even with the possibility of taking a hit. When did business people in this country become a bunch of pusillanimous?
The lower taxes of the past decade have done nothing but drive up the deficit.
Well we could begin by discussing the fact that Bush never would put a couple insanely expensive bills on the ledger, namely wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.Bush'es worst deficit was $160 Billion. Obama's deficits zoomed to over a trillion a year. He's spending insanely and we're in danger of wrecking Social Security and Medicare much sooner, as opposed to tweaking them to last past the problems they're facing decades down the road.