Comments on: Parsing Romney’s and Obama’s middle-class pablum http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/ Fri, 31 Jul 2015 03:37:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: JP007 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1984 Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:24:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1984 Let’s do a little fact check on Rohde to calibrate his slant and rant here. Quote he “In truth, only about 11 percent of American heads of household are self-employed.” This is not fact at all from his source, the Federal Reserve which said “income from businesses, farms, and self employment accounted for only 12.2 percent of income in 2010, down from 13.6 percent in 2007″. The Fed paper addresses incomes not quantity of groups, this is apples and oranges.
What is the implication for the “in truth”, that these people don’t count, that we should tax them out of existence like the Jews during WWII since they are a minority? Rohdes is intellectually bankrupt and he thinks others should be financially bankrupt.

Rohdes is a prime example of not being able to trust the messenger. The messengers have become criminal co-conspirators to Obama’s campaign of disinformation and propaganda.

PS From the Fed, income was down for the group on Ohama’s watch. (psst, blame Bush)

]]>
By: brotherkenny4 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1906 Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:40:35 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1906 Tax cuts to the wealthy do lead to greater employment in China and Mexico. Many of the companies we think of as american (there really are no american companies, you can’t have a country unless you are a human being) are investing huge amounts of capital in China. This is really good for the shareholders, at least in the short term, which is typically all anyone really cares about.

]]>
By: Benny27 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1899 Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:13:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1899 Birth control, among many other social issues, are rammed down our throats as an important issue because the large corporations that own the media don’t want the citizens to have the discussion that OneOfTheSheep refers to above. Problem is that the USA needs to decide if it wants to police the world still. Either that, or just go to a single payer health care system and become solvent in one fell swoop.

as for this disgrace:
“There is broad agreement that reducing taxes for the wealthy has led to increased deficits in the past, but there is disagreement over whether tax cuts for the rich spur economic growth. Some economists say it does not, while others insist that it does.”

Journalism is not supposed to be he said/she said. Find the truth and REPORT, rather than just scribbling down what powerful people pronounce as though it means anything at all.

When politicians say “jobs” they are pronouncing an unspeakable word, spelled p r o f i t s. They are not the same thing, but these business/commerce degree hacks all drank the kool-aid long ago. How much more proof do we need that corporate profits DO NOT translate into jobs for working people any more, and that perhaps corporate taxes are, in fact, the answer – and not the problem? (thanks Noam Chomsky for pointing out that jobs=profits in poli-speak, the single best analysis I have ever heard: one sentence makes the entire political system perfectly understandable)

]]>
By: Benny27 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1898 Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:58:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1898 Birth control, among many other social issues, are rammed down our throats as an important issue because the large corporations that own the media don’t want the citizens to have the discussion that OneOfTheSheep refers to above. Problem is that the USA needs to decide if it wants to police the world still. Either that, or just go to a single payer health care system and become solvent in one fell swoop.

as for this disgrace:
“There is broad agreement that reducing taxes for the wealthy has led to increased deficits in the past, but there is disagreement over whether tax cuts for the rich spur economic growth. Some economists say it does not, while others insist that it does.”

Journalism is not supposed to be he said/she said. Find the truth and REPORT, rather than just scribbling down what powerful people pronounce as though it means anything at all.

When politicians say “jobs” they are pronouncing an unspeakable word, spelled p r o f i t s. They are not the same thing, but these business/commerce degree hacks all drank the kool-aid long ago. How much more proof do we need that corporate profits DO NOT translate into jobs for working people any more, and that perhaps corporate taxes are, in fact, the answer – and not the problem? (thanks Noam Chomsky for pointing out that jobs=profits in poli-speak, the single best analysis I have ever heard: one sentence makes the entire political system perfectly understandable)

]]>
By: commun5 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1888 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 21:48:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1888 Summary of Rohde’s argument: some people say it is, some people say it isn’t. Where is the journal in your journalism?

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1887 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 06:07:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1887 This election won’t make much difference who wins, because the “big choices” are not before the voters. These are ever on the “back burner” because leaders of both major parties want to preserve their existing power and influence with little, if any, accountability.

Elected politicians have historically placed their own interests above those of “we, the people” they purportedly serve, living lives of ever-inceasing wealth and privilege. We see this same trend in unelected unionized government workers, whose lealders have brought state and local governments increasingly to bankruptcy.

More and more politicians at the federal, state and local level come from the legal field. They “look after their own”. Today I have heard it argued that our adopted laws mean nothing until interpreted by a judge, and every judge comes up with their own interpretation. These are the same people who look down from “the bench” on ordinary citizens in their courts and lecture them “ignorance of the law is no excuse”. One or the other, not both!

America is one of a small minority of nations whose economic productivity can provide it’s citizens everything they need. But our politicians have seen fit to have our government create more and more unsecured (backed by NOTHING) dollars from mere paper and ink, regularly increasing the national “debt limit” in the futile expectation that America can thus provide it’s citizens everything they want.

No country in the history of the world has succeeded in doing that. No country ever will; although each party understands all too well that when government takes money from Peter and gives it to Paul, that government can always depend upon the support of Paul. The “tipping point” has already been reached where, in America today, we have more Pauls than Peters. This does not bode well for America’s future.

This great country has lost it’s “common vision” as to the purpose of federal, state and local government. Only an honest “national debate” that defines a new “majority consensus” as to precisely WHAT government services “we, the people”, can afford in the long term can restore that “common vision”. Only then can “we, the people” together decide WHO gets HOW MUCH, WHEN and for HOW LONG from available government revenue.

If we then make the radical presumption that America can no longer spend more than it “makes”, the next step is one every politician HATES: agreement as to how much sustainable revenue America has. From that elected “representatives” must look at all continuing expenditures and separate “wants” from “needs” and prioritize associated funding. Of course that has been their job from the beginning, but, somewhere along the way they have completely lost sight of that fact.

Until America’s NEEDS are known, there can be no limit to the size of government and no limit to the amount of revenue government will seek from us. When a pipe breaks, most of us call a plumber. If then two fellows arrived, and proceed to squabble between themselves as to how to fix the break, we’d fire them immediately.

That’s precisely what we must do to our “representatives” in Washington. We have for too long allow them to divert our attention, like carnival magicians. They do not WANT us to decide, once and for all, what kind of country we want (that we can afford).

Instead, they get citizens squabbling endlessly over second or third-tier subjects like birth control, legislating success instead of access to opportunity, and providing ever more incentives for things America does not need. Specifically, America does NOT need more illegal immigrants.

It does not need more of the uneducated, the unmotivated, the unskilled, and the unproductive; and yet our tax “system” rewards ALL parents by the head for having more and more children. Guess which demographics win the “race” to produce more and more of themselves?

If “we, the people” do not insist on some say in what OUR country’s future will be, the future that arrives will be a “crap shoot” no one can predict. I don’t find that acceptable. Do you?

]]>
By: PCScipio http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1885 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 00:18:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1885 “But other experts have found that if job creation starts being counted one year after a president takes office – and his policies take effect – the numbers are more even.” Nothing like being fair and balanced. I guess Bush is then responsible for both the swoon as well as the 2009 beginnings of recovery from the current recession.

]]>
By: PCScipio http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1884 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 00:16:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1884 “But other experts have found that if job creation starts being counted one year after a president takes office – and his policies take effect – the numbers are more even.” Nothing like being fair and balanced. I guess Bush is then responsible for both the swoon as well as the 2009 beginnings of recovery from the current recession.

]]>
By: PCScipio http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1883 Fri, 07 Sep 2012 22:58:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1883 “…other experts have found that if job creation starts being counted one year after a president takes office – and his policies take effect – the numbers are more even.” So the GOP needs to reassess its view of Jimmy Carter, and Bush is responsible for both getting us into and beginning to get us out of this current recession? Oh, and do these “experts” kind of lean Republican?

]]>
By: PCScipio http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2012/09/07/parsing-romney-and-obamas-middle-class-pablum/#comment-1882 Fri, 07 Sep 2012 22:57:51 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/?p=1165#comment-1882 “…other experts have found that if job creation starts being counted one year after a president takes office – and his policies take effect – the numbers are more even.” So the GOP needs to reassess its view of Jimmy Carter, and Bush is responsible for both getting us into and beginning to get us out of this current recession? Oh, and do these “experts” kind of lean Republican?

]]>