I am sending your link to everyone I can think of. Most people I know have already voted, but if this could change one mind, I'M ALL IN.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulane Skins Fan
Printable View
I am sending your link to everyone I can think of. Most people I know have already voted, but if this could change one mind, I'M ALL IN.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulane Skins Fan
Its a valid broader point. I don't know how accurate the article is, and I'll readily admit that Salon is one of the more biased websites out there. But, I think its probable given my personal beliefs that 1) we shouldn't do what is best for business 100% of the time; and 2) if you don't hold someone or something accountable for actions, they will continue to perform bad acts.Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsmarydu
Agreed that Salon is a little biased, but Joan Walsh doesn't ignore TRUTH on even a semi-regular basis that I know of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulane Skins Fan
Most of what I read and watch is biased left, I admit. But it doesn't report FALSEHOOD as truth. I have seen Rachel Maddow have to do a correction maybe 5 times in 5 years. But she admits it. Btw, every single night, she's got a "dig" story...something no one else is following.
Are you ****ing kidding me? If a right leaning member on this board posted an article from RedState with unconfirmed allegations, the flaming would have been immediate. Instead, we get a "thanks, I'll pass it along in hopes of influencing votes"? Seriously? Salon is saying things like "may have" and "repeatedly failed to meet accepted standards in 2004 — but a reprimand was withdrawn by the Romney administration in apparent deference to the company’s business interests". Pray tell, link the outbreak to this withdrawn reprimand. All this article does is make allegations. And in no way connects the outbreak to these "violations".Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulane Skins Fan
I think you missed the point of both my post and the article. What are the "unconfirmed" allegations you are struggling with?Quote:
Originally Posted by Popeman38
Do you disagree that lax regulation can lead to bad results? Or that failure to hold bad actors accountable allows them to continue performing bad acts?
The article wasn't saying that the meningitis outbreak can be directly linked to Romney. It was saying that letting companies off the hook for mistakes with no repercussions because you want to be "pro-business" CAN have bad outcomes. And while the meningitis outbreak cannot be directly linked to anyone in the government, the failure to regulate the company and hold it accountable can be a reason that the company continued despite its poor track record.
From one person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Popeman38
Take a deep breath.
I saw it live. It was rough. Cantor had just been talking about Romney being the one with a hopeful specific agenda and Obama was all about attack ads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monte51Coleman
Here's the transcript
GREGORY: The head of Chrysler said that that is deceptive, that they are opening production facilities to service to Chinese market while they’re also expanding production in Ohio. This from a business leader, Governor Romney, who apparently thinks its good business to outsource in order to make companies more competitive. Is this the hopeful specific agenda that Governor Romney has for the state of Ohio and the country?
REP. CANTOR: You know, I-- I think the point of-- of that ad is the fact we need a president who’s actually going to focus on increasing the competitiveness of America so that we can see plants openings here and we really need a president who’s going to focus on making things in America, so we can sell them abroad. And I think that’s why you have seen former Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca endorse Mitt Romney’s bid for the presidency. Again, we need somebody with some solutions. We need somebody with the demonstrated ability to work with all parties, all sides…
GREGORY: I understood, leader, you…
REP. CANTOR: …bringing them together with…
GREGORY: …don’t think that’s a deceptive ad?
REP CANTOR: …the single focus of getting this economy back on track. David, I’ve not seen the ad. I just heard it. Now, I’ve not seen the ad. They’re apparently not running it in Virginia. So I’ve not seen the ad. But I do think the point is Mitt Romney has demonstrated the ability of-- of building jobs, of-- of making it so that we can have more investment, more economic activity in America. He has a demonstrated track record and has provided an actual plan whereas all you’re getting from the president in these closing days of his campaign is more negativity, more attacks, and I just think that, again, Americans are looking to see how they can make their lives work again. Barack Obama is not providing any answers, and if you like the way things are now with nearly eight percent unemployment, that’s what you’re going to get if you re-elect the president.
:ols:
I'm not sure how much of a connection you can draw between Mitt Romney and meningitis... but I think at this point in history only a complete ignoramus could agree with a statement that the private sector always knows better and does better.
There are times when there is an obvious conflict between the profit motive and the public good. Dealing with such situations is one of the primary roles of the government. Any candidate that does not understand this basic fact is automatically disqualified from PUBLIC SERVICE.
:ols:Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsmarydu
If this changes someone's mind... god help us all.
Thanks, Corcaigh...debate going on here during MTP yesterday. (on who was gonna go get cigarettes, lol)
I think common sense is enough to show an indirect link between Romney's policies and the outbreak.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulane Skins Fan
I keep hearing what a great "manager" Romney is. Well... this is his track record.
Makes sense. He's not part of the public. He's part of the private "I gotta get alla mine" sector.Quote:
Originally Posted by alexey
God help us all if we're handed a liar-in-chief.Quote:
Originally Posted by GibbsFactor
It's not that the private sector knows better. We have history to show it does not and we also know we are all greedy ****s that will do whatever it takes to get a leg up. However, unlike with government, when a company screws up, that company is gone. There are real consequences. Gone are the days of Rockefeller and Vanderbilt monopolizing industries. This is a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by alexey
I also think it's worth while to point out that the Government doesn't know any better either. And more importantly, there aren't any real consequences when they screw up. The government is still here, doing their business. They will never be as efficient or careful because they have no competing brand and no pride of ownership(ironic isn't it).
So why saddle us with debt if the end result is no one gets punished? What happens when the government messes up? Like, say the SEC? We all lose.
---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 04:11 PM ----------
We've had 43 of em.Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsmarydu
I don't think you're totally correct with that, or at least I don't think you are appreciating the landscape of business v. politics as it exists today. You're 100% right that we don't have the capitalism of Rockefeller and Vanderbilt (I've been watching History Channel too :) ), but its also true that today big business is constantly lobbying and supporting elected officials that will make it easier for them to make a profit and harder for them to be held accountable for their wrongdoing. There's a reason the US Chamber of Commerce supports governors, congressmen, senators, and even JUDGES on the ballot. And no its not about taxes with most of those. They are lobbying for laws that increase their bottom lines and they don't worry about who it may hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by GibbsFactor
A corporation has a singular goal: make money for the stockholders. In some ways that is good. In other ways, it is bad. While there's nothing really wrong with the corporation having that goal, the laws should not make it unduly hard to hold bad companies accountable. And the executive branch should be committed to enforcing laws and regulations that were put in place to protect consumers/people.
Without a LOT more corroboration it shouldn't. But I'm curious as to whether you've posted the same about things like 'you didn't build that'?Quote:
Originally Posted by GibbsFactor