Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal
GOP Primary/Debate Thread II: Just Another Democrats Bashing Republicans Thread
Why do the media seem to obsess over the wealth of Romney? Like being wealthy is somehow a bad thing? I saw an article today which criticized the man for owning multiple Cadillacs. How is that legitmate news? How does that effect his ability to govern? And don't give me the "he doesnt understand the common man's struggle" ********. FDR inherited tons of wealth (from opium trade) and is heralded as a deity on the left. Didnt seem like he had too hard of a time "relating" to the common man.
Because he pretends to be "everyman." When you make more money in a day off interest than most people make in a year, you are not everyman, no matter how often you roll up your sleeves, misquote Seinfeld, or talk about tree height. You can have all the money you want, but when you pretend that it doesn't put you into a drastically different position than most people, you're a liar.
If you're stupid enough to brag about your wife owning 2 Cadillacs then you might not be equipped to be President. And it's not just this one instance. It's the combined idiocy that makes him questionable.
__________________
History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
Because he pretends to be "everyman." When you make more money in a day off interest than most people make in a year, you are not everyman, no matter how often you roll up your sleeves, misquote Seinfeld, or talk about tree height. You can have all the money you want, but when you pretend that it doesn't put you into a drastically different position than most people, you're a liar.
Bush was incredibly wealthy too. He just pulled off the 'I'd like to have a beer with that guy,' sales job better. Romney being Mormon also hurts in the 'beer with that guy' category.
I personally don't care one bit that Romney is wealthy (he's a freaking politician after all), but from a "political strategy" point of view some of the stuff he has said comes across as dumb, especially for a guy who has effectively been running for president for the past 6 years. You'd think at this point his operation would be well-oiled enough to avoid talking about how he likes to fire people or bragging about owning Cadillacs. It's just providing unnecessary ammunition for his opponents.
And I say this as someone who thought the whole "Bain Bomb" thing was absolutely ridiculous and hypocritical on the part of the other Republican candidates.
Because he pretends to be "everyman." When you make more money in a day off interest than most people make in a year, you are not everyman, no matter how often you roll up your sleeves, misquote Seinfeld, or talk about tree height. You can have all the money you want, but when you pretend that it doesn't put you into a drastically different position than most people, you're a liar.
Every candidate pretends to be an everyman, and none of them are. But they are still humans, they still share the majority of human experiences with the rest of the country. Like laughing at jokes. Doesn't make him a liar. Believe it or not, rich people have problems just like the rest of us.
If you're stupid enough to brag about your wife owning 2 Cadillacs then you might not be equipped to be President. And it's not just this one instance. It's the combined idiocy that makes him questionable.
Should he not be proud of being able to provide for his family? It seems like part of his strategy is to push pack on the idea that there should be some level of shame associated with being wealthy. And its not like he's been selfish with his money. He gave 15% of his earnings to charity. Obama gave 1%.
I'm not even a Romney fan. I just don't understand the level of animosity and jealousy we have towards wealthy people. Wealthy people have done a great service for this country and continue to do so. The percentage of "lazy, corrupt" wealthy people is significantly lower than what the general populace believes. The overwhelming majority of wealthy people are very smart, hard working, charitable individuals with a passion for excellence. Their motivation is not to make money for themselves, but to provide for their family and community.
The hatred of the rich is a relatively new thing for this country.
I personally don't care one bit that Romney is wealthy (he's a freaking politician after all), but from a "political strategy" point of view some of the stuff he has said comes across as dumb, especially for a guy who has effectively been running for president for the past 6 years. You'd think at this point his operation would be well-oiled enough to avoid talking about how he likes to fire people or bragging about owning Cadillacs. It's just providing unnecessary ammunition for his opponents.
And I say this as someone who through the whole "Bain Bomb" thing was absolutely ridiculous and hypocritical on the part of the other Republican candidates.
I tend to agree with you in a way, though my main point of contention would be that he underestimated that disdain his opponents have for success.
Should he not be proud of being able to provide for his family? It seems like part of his strategy is to push pack on the idea that there should be some level of shame associated with being wealthy. And its not like he's been selfish with his money. He gave 15% of his earnings to charity. Obama gave 1%.
I'm not even a Romney fan. I just don't understand the level of animosity and jealousy we have towards wealthy people. Wealthy people have done a great service for this country and continue to do so. The percentage of "lazy, corrupt" wealthy people is significantly lower than what the general populace believes. The overwhelming majority of wealthy people are very smart, hard working, charitable individuals with a passion for excellence. Their motivation is not to make money for themselves, but to provide for their family and community.
The hatred of the rich is a relatively new thing for this country.
They are discriminating against him because he is a mormon end of story. They don't see him as their type of christian so he's fair game. Sometimes no matter what money you have you will never overcome discrimination.
The anti-intellectual strain in the Republican Party is really disturbing. It's gotten to the point that knowledge and intelligence and education are regarded as bad things. Snobbish. Elitist.
Quote:
Rick Santorum is working hard in Michigan to try and cast himself as the candidate of the working class. At a speech before a tea party audience here Saturday, he made his case by accusing President Obama of trying to turn America's youth into liberal drones by sending them to college.
Santorum said he knows the real reason Obama wants more Americans on college campuses.
"That's why he wants you to go to college. He wants to remake you in his image," Santorum said to more applause. "I want to create jobs so people can remake their children into their image, not his."
What a dangerous, paranoid lunatic. Them liberal professors are gonna to try to brainwash your kids with their fancy, hi-falutin' book-learnin'.
How the hell is this country going to compete in the 21st century global economy if people like this wind up in charge?
How far did Steve Jobs and Bill Gates go in college?
While you can't ignore the obvious liberal bias in the majority of Universities, at the same time you can't ignore the value of earning a degree (not just on paper, but the actual skills learned).
I'd like to see more logical, rational professors in colleges but many logical, rational people would prefer to make more money practicing than teaching. Those that prefer the comforts of teaching and pursuing intellectual accomplishment also tend to be more liberal. Its just a reality.
According to the Fair and Balanced Network, 55% of Republicans want a different candidate.
I suspect 99% of Democrats do not.
Ofcourse not, he's an incumbent. Doesn't change the fact that he's been a terrible president. I know of many liberals who have been extremely disappointed with him.
The anti-intellectual strain in the Republican Party is really disturbing. It's gotten to the point that knowledge and intelligence and education are regarded as bad things. Snobbish. Elitist.
What a dangerous, paranoid lunatic. Them liberal professors are gonna to try to brainwash your kids with their fancy, hi-falutin' book-learnin'.
How the hell is this country going to compete in the 21st century global economy if people like this wind up in charge?
Richard Santorum, who has a JD from U Pitts, does not want everybody to go to college. Santorum is the same person who complains about uneducated bums on welfare. How do you get a job in todays society without a degree? The day of working at the plant and making 80k are over. Santorum reminds me of the people in the black community who mock others for wanting an education.
Since Santorum believes this, are his kids going to college?
Ofcourse not, he's an incumbent. Doesn't change the fact that he's been a terrible president. I know of many liberals who have been extremely disappointed with him.
The study estimates that currently, only 60 percent of college graduates are in jobs that require a college degree. The odds aren't likely to improve for the 1.7 million new grads this spring.
Nationwide, there were about 1.94 million college graduates under age 30 who were mal-employed between September 2010 and and January 2011, according to Andrew Sum, director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University.
Though the economy is growing and new jobs are being created, Sum said, those graduating in June are not likely to see major improvements.
And the longer college graduates go without working in their field, the harder it is to land interviews for jobs where they would use their degree.
This discussion is what is being lost in the debate about going to college.
How far did Steve Jobs and Bill Gates go in college?
You're missing the point.
I wasn't saying everyone needs to go to college to be successful. (Though, the fact is that a generally well-educated population is going to be crucial to maintain America's global competitiveness going forward.)
I was mocking Santorum's paranoid rantings about higher education being some kind of nefarious liberal plot. This is a man who would be president?
I'm guessing that has less to do with going to college and more to do with what you go to college for.
I'm guessing that Science, Nurses/Doctors, Engineering, Math and particularly Computer Science/Engineering - are in relatively high demand.
Whereas a degree in many Liberal Arts areas such as English, History, PoliSci or even a less prestigious Law School - aren't in as high demand.
Sure. So people who are either not cut out for technical careers or don't wish to pursue those fields need someone to explain the facts of life to them.
Too many kids are just shoved into college. That's just the expectation, the assumption. If you're not a complete idiot, and maybe even if you are, you're "supposed to" go to college. When the reality is that many kids/families are needlessly going into substantial debt.
I am an example. When I graduated from high school, I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life. I needed someone to say, "hey, don't throw away your money on a four-year degree that doesn't interest you and might not even lead to a decent job. Find a two-year program in a computer-related field that will let you start making money. Then, down the line, you find something that interests you and you go back to school."
Instead, I did it backwards and here I am, 27, broke, and back in school doing what I should have in the first place.
Most 16-year-olds need guidance that amounts to more than "here's a list, pick a major."
How do you get a job in todays society without a degree? The day of working at the plant and making 80k are over.
Even the manufacturing jobs that remain tend to require a lot of training. I was reading an article recently on the state of manufacturing in the US. The type of people they need now are skilled labor. Machinists, people able to program and troubleshoot factory machines, etc. The days of unskilled labor (getting a lifelong job and a pension with a high school diploma only) are long gone.
Even the manufacturing jobs that remain tend to require a lot of training. I was reading an article recently on the state of manufacturing in the US. The type of people they need now are skilled labor. Machinists, people able to program and troubleshoot factory machines, etc. The days of unskilled labor (getting a lifelong job and a pension with a high school diploma only) are long gone.
Unless China somehow collapses in the next decade the US will become a major service economy. An importer and consumer.
Even the manufacturing jobs that remain tend to require a lot of training. I was reading an article recently on the state of manufacturing in the US. The type of people they need now are skilled labor. Machinists, people able to program and troubleshoot factory machines, etc. The days of unskilled labor (getting a lifelong job and a pension with a high school diploma only) are long gone.
That doesn't mean you have to get a bachelor's. Many of those jobs don't even require an associates.
Unless China somehow collapses in the next decade the US will become a major service economy. An importer and consumer.
You don't think the high cost of energy will eventually force multinationals to move factories back to America (or start them in America because China should eventually grow its own demand)?
If China keeps growing (I remember hearing on I think CBC news network China's oil consumption grows by as much as the entire oil consumption in Australia each year)... oil prices will get higher. Their imports will become more expensive.
The alternative to sucking up the high cost of transporting the raw materials and then transporting the finished goods to America is setting up in Mexico, America or Canada and importing or producing from one of the 3.
But even with that the trend in manufacturing is less manufacturing jobs, more machines/innovation to reduce the amount of labor needed.
