Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Baptist in Richmond, Jul 10, 2008.
Really Graham is right to a point. Most are hurting but only because they have to give up some of their frills and whistles to buy gas and food for a change.
Yes, there are some that are in a real hurt but lots are only whinning cause they can't get the latest toys and right now :thumbs:
There is a fair sized group that is not hurting at all. The street of dreams this year in Portland has homes that are over 8 mill and they expect to sell them fairly easily and they expect tons of visitors as usual. They charge a fair price just to look.
Not the folks at these Chrysler plants:
What about these people at Northwest Airlines:
Or United Airlines:
Or American Airlines:
But don't worry, all these layoffs are good for the economy!!
Remember that if you are a victim of job cuts: by losing your job you are actually HELPING the economy.
I wonder if Gramm thinks that all those people who are now faced with trying to find a job in a bad job market are whiners.
Again, a great deal can be found by examining the company you keep.......
So now people who are layed off are victims? Good grief.
What else would you call them, Revmitchell - BENEFICIARIES?
Again, we sure can learn a great deal about someone by the company they keep..........
Just curious, BIR, which part of this is inaccurate? I am no economic expert (though I can balance my checkbook), but it seems to me that lower wages means a lower cost of doing business which means lower prices. Aren't wages one of the top business expenses? If a company can cut wages, aren't they more competitive? And if there are fewer jobs available, won't the wage go down?
I am not recommending any of that, though I think typically wages are too high. I am just curious about the economics of it.
The news today states that this is part of the way Graham talks, he once mentioned going after the democrats with dogs etc.
I did not say some are not hurting but a lot of people are not and they are whining.
I might also suggest a lot of those that lost jobs are also whiners. America is soft and prone to whine.
Oh and I know I don't speak for McCain
I hear people say they must spend less on food to pay for the ever rising price of gas - Now it that were true - ie had to buy less food - that would be valid complaint - but before you give up food, why don't we hear of people giving up cable TV, eating out at a nice restaurant, a vacation to Disneyland*, a new dress or suit, buying a new computer ect, ect, ect - if you refuse to give up those things - before food for the supper table than you are whining. This comes under L.E.F.T. Liberals will say we must say we have to spend less on food beacuse of gas - now that fits their agenda better
PS * My wife and I went to Disneyland and were somewhat frugal and still spent about $ 250-300. Since we stayed with some wonderful BB friends we had no hotel bill.
Well, for starters, lower wages do not necessarily translate to lower prices, especially in our economy. Wages represent a cost, and cost savings have more impact on the net profit more than they do with the price of a good.
Let's say that a company has a product that can be sold for $15, and it costs them $10 to make the product. Now, suppose that the company finds a company to outsource the manufacturing that can reduce their total cost to $7. This represents $3 that goes directly to the bottom line if the price stays at $15. If demand for the product is already established at $15 why would the company possibly want to lower the price? They just went from $5 profit per unit to $8 profit per unit without any change in current distribution of the product.
And let's not forget that wages actually go back into the economy. For example, think about the impact on the town of Fenton that will be a result of Chrysler closing down the plant. Now the restaurants will have fewer customers, property values could go down as people find jobs and move, there won't be as much dry cleaning business, and other businesses will suffer as well as these wages will not be spent in the town. Lower wages are good for businesses, but not necessarily good for the economy. UNLESS of course, we are in a race to the bottom.... but that's another debate.
Regards, hope you had a great Sunday at church,
This all reminds me of an episode from the show "Taxi" when Latka Gravas explains what is important in life. Watch it. Hilarious.
Since Obama kept company with a racist and someone who hates America what do we cal him? Since Obama as known terrorist associates what to we call him?
As far as the other goes it is not an either or situation.
Just curious, exactly why did you reproduce my direct question to you, and then neglect to answer it?
As for your comments about Obama, I guess you are reinforcing my point about the company you keep. Um, thanks, I guess. Sean Hannity has already made that point ad nauseum, so I am not really sure why you offered these statements about Obama. A point worth noting is that Obama has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
And what exactly is "not an either or situation?" What in the world are you referencing?
Victimology is a staple of liberalism.
Liberals will call him a patriot.:laugh:
Still waiting, Revmitchell..........
I hadn't seen you post in a while. I forgot you are incapable of any discussion with conservatives that doesn't lead to Hannity or Limbaugh said that. God Bless
Some sort of sick obsession, I think.
A point worth noting is that you took the time to respond and didn't answer a single question I asked you........
How many of you saw the article by Max Blumenthal about Phil Gramm at huffingtonpost.com?
Looks like Gramm is stepping down.