Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by simple

  1. There's absolutely no talk, information or evidence in Chrysler 'moving' jeep.... you're making up 'what ifs' now. This was spun from Mitt reading a story like he said, by Chrysler, and jumped on it with a twist. Why are you guys so afraid of this article? Negs for a gripe of words between Chrysler and Mitt Romney. Chrysler try to set him straight, and he keeps it coming. Supporting your candidate is one thing but you guys are impossibly overly protective.
  2. Thanks, I was referring to your first statement "As some have evidenced it is much easier to either blame others for ones personal circumstance or misdirect the conversation." However, you're correct for a large number of folks on welfare.
  3. “I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep—now owned by the Italians — is thinking of moving all production to China,” Romney told a crowd in Ohio. “I will fight for every good job in America. I’m going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it’s fair America will win.” It's the game of implicating jobs will be loss just as you stated in a post above. Romney twisting it and Chrysler is simply disappointed with his ads. Those words could perhaps damage their business.
  4. I don't know if they currently ship any jeeps to China. Chrysler announce hiring of another 1100 or so people here in the U.S. There's no reduction in workers. Chrysler’s intention is to sell Jeeps and possibly its entire model lineup in China. This may include production in China, but for the Chinese market, not the U.S. market. Output means production; production for China, not the U.S.
  5. Misinterpreted by Romney, corrected by Chrysler and Romney still interpret differently for votes. Romney should know better. Jeep in China by Gualberto Ranieri October 25, 2012 4:24 PM There are times when the reading of a newswire report generates storms originated by a biased or predisposed approach. On Oct. 22, 2012, at 11:10 a.m. ET, the Bloomberg News report “Fiat Says Jeep® Output May Return to China as Demand Rises” stated “Chrysler currently builds all Jeep SUV models at plants in Michigan, Illinois and Ohio. Manley (President and CEO of the Jeep brand) referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.” Despite clear and accurate reporting, the take has given birth to a number of stories making readers believe that Chrysler plans to shift all Jeep production to China from North America, and therefore idle assembly lines and U.S. workforce. It is a leap that would be difficult even for professional circus acrobats. Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation. A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.
  6. That's the point, Romney is twisting words and ignoring the truth. It's not outsourcing when they're manufacturing for that country. Manufacturing in-country makes it affordable to sell in-country. Just like Ford in other countries and just like Toyota does in the U.S. You know that Cris but Romney is implying differently to scare voters. Chrysler upset with the accusations but Romney doesn't back off. What a guy!
  7. The Romney campaign has jumped the lie shark with their new ad slyly building on the lie that Chrysler is moving Jeep jobs to China. Romney told this easily disproven falsehood to Ohioans at a rally last week. Chrysler pointed out that a “careful and unbiased” understanding “would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments.” When asked to comment on Romney’s claims, the Romney campaign at first refused to comment and then defended the lie with an already debunked Bloomberg article that everyone knows is wrong. The press is not impressed. It seems they have finally met a lie they can’t excuse. Here’s a roundup from OFA of the brutal reaction: Detroit Free Press: “Not only was the story wrong, Romney took criticism for not knowing better and repeating it without questioning it.” Toledo Blade: “‘The latest Romney ad, I will grant you, is a clever play on words to avoid saying things that are utterly false,’ Mr. Rattner said, referring to a new Romney ad out today. But he said the implication of the ad is ‘just not true. Chrysler is adding people. It’s made major investments in the Toledo Wrangler plant.’” Huffington Post: “Where the ad goes from misleading to something more nefarious is in the text it shows. At one point, it displays a line from a Bloomberg story stating that Chrysler “plans to return Jeep output to China,” the implication being that the company is moving operations there as opposed to expanding operations that are already there.” Wall Street Journal: “So far, the Romney campaign hasn’t issued a public statement on the flap.” My link Chrysler: Let’s set the record straight: Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. It’s simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world’s largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation. A careful and unbiased reading of the Bloomberg take would have saved unnecessary fantasies and extravagant comments. But even though Romney was caught with his pants down, he's now put up a new television ad that continues to push the Jeep-to-China lie. What a guy!
  8. That's basically what Ben Stein stated on Fox. However, Snots is leading an outcry over poverty and welfare instead of appealing to the root of the problems which is revenue and spending. His thread so let him have it.
  9. The cost for welfare in 2011 was 500B, 347B in Health Programs. I went through each line item to see where the payments were distributed. Only thing I can figure is the government is inefficient as usual. I also compared to the pass 4 years and noticed that welfare increased by approximately $200B. The numbers by the party are more or less another way to excite the public that more people receives welfare of some sort. We knew with a recession and unemployment that folks would have to ask for government relief. Let's hope they don't need any longer than a few months to a year. The average is about 7 months, although some people seem to live a lifetime on it. Some people make it sound like the poverty households received on an average 60k dollars.
  10. Isn't the topic U.S. Federal Spending and comparing with Welfare or don't you know? Don't try to start an argument! You speak in the article as all poverty households received $60,000 and welfare has now taken over defense spending. You post an article and look for cookies? Just stay on topic and quit crying...
  11. There are abusers of the welfare system! New data compiled by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee... "If the spending on these programs were converted into cash, and distributed exclusively to the nation’s households below the poverty line, the average spending per household in poverty was $61,194 in 2011." Read more: Spending Chart Defense is still the largest budget item then healthcare and pensions.
  12. A couple years ago, Ben Stein was dead set against any tax increases, which wasn't a surprise. The right-leaning pundit and actor, best known for his role as the teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, has long been out there expressing the sorts of opinions that get you booked on the Fox News Channel. "There is no known economic theory under which raising my taxes in the midst of a severe recession will help the economy recover. It isn't part of any well known monetarist or Keynesian theory. So if it does no good to raise our taxes, I assume we are being punished," he wrote in 2010. "But for what? I don't own slaves. I employ a lot of people full- and part-time and they are all happy with their pay. When charity calls, I almost always write out a check. I don't have a yacht or ponies or a plane. My wife doesn't wear a tiara. I don't gamble. What did I do wrong? I know I have often lost my temper with my wife and the cats, but that's not a crime, yet. I tried to be successful, which is what I thought I was supposed to do. When did it turn out that was a crime to be punished? Maybe when the economy recovers, raising my taxes makes sense,but for now, it's just punishment, and I can't figure out what for." The tone is that of a man who isn't ever going to decide he favors tax increases. But guess what? It turns out that Stein was being truthful when he said it may one day make sense to raise taxes. He favors it now, along with spending cuts, to balance the budget, which is his priority because he thinks prudence demands it. This used to be known as fiscal conservatism. Stein articulates his reasoning at greater length in this CBS video commentary. Save for exaggerating the degree to which raising taxes on multimillionaires alone can solve our budget problems, his analysis is sound. Basically, he says that our present fiscal course is unsustainable, and that it'll take tax hikes and spending cuts to remedy it. Again, fiscal conservatism ... which isn't so welcome on the Fox News Channel these days. What I find hilarious about that clip is how attuned Stein is to the gravity of the taboo that he is violating. For endorsing the Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction plan, urging some tax hikes, and noting the dearth of evidence that they would *********** economic growth, he jokes they might not let him out of the studio alive! It's the sort of joke that no one would think to make on a news network that valued intellectual honesty more than the vacuous repetition of ideological dogma.
  13. The Energy Department forecasts that U.S. production of crude and other liquid hydrocarbons, which includes biofuels, will average 11.4 million barrels per day next year. That would be a record for the U.S. and just below Saudi Arabia's output of 11.6 million barrels. Citibank forecasts U.S. production could reach 13 million to 15 million barrels per day by 2020, helping to make North America "the new Middle East." The last year the U.S. was the world's largest producer was 2002, after the Saudis drastically cut production because of low oil prices in the aftermath of 9/11. Since then, the Saudis and the Russians have been the world leaders. The United States will still need to import lots of oil. Americans use 18.7 million barrels per day. But thanks to the growth in domestic production and the improving fuel efficiency of the nation's cars and trucks, imports could fall by half by the end of the decade. The increase in production hasn't translated to cheaper gasoline at the pump, and prices are expected to stay relatively high the next few years because of growing demand for oil in developing nations and political instability in the Middle East and North Africa. Still, producing more oil domestically, and importing less, gives the economy a significant boost. The companies profiting range from independent drillers to large international oil companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, which increasingly see the U.S. as one of the most promising places to drill. ExxonMobil agreed last month to spend $1.6 billion to increase its U.S. oil holdings. Increased drilling is driving economic growth in states such as North Dakota, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana and Texas, all of which have unemployment rates far below the national average of 7.8%. North Dakota is at 3%; Oklahoma, 5.2%.
  14. We could stop importing today if we wanted to. Next year promises to set a record for domestic production and, at current rates, the good ol’ U.S. of A. will be the top oil producer in the world, surpassing Saudi Arabia, by the year 2020. This puts the lie to the Republican claim that the Obama administration has the desire, or the ability, to squash domestic production and leave us increasingly vulnerable to a dangerous dependence on foreign sources of energy. The bad news: Production of petroleum in the United States is soaring. The continuing high prices for raw crude, prompted by increasing demand from China, India and other rapidly industrializing nations, has encouraged drillers to invest in new methods and expand their exploration to areas previously thought too low-yield to bother with. The result is pressure to drill in places, and in ways, that threaten our environment, from the appearance of national treasures to the safety of our water. The most important thing to understand about this situation is that the price of oil, and thus the price you pay for gasoline, has little to do with any decision made in Washington. It has more to do with the world oil market, currently driven by the exploding demand of many nations.
  15. In reality, the President elect for 2009 was considered to have a difficult time with the economy. I hope to see hiring up like some other reports I've seen like this one: Job Outlook 2013: Hiring Up 13 Percent, Degrees in Demand Spotlight for Career Services Professionals September 26, 2012 Employers expect to hire 13 percent more new college graduates from the Class of 2013 than they did from the Class of 2012, according to NACE’s Job Outlook 2013 survey. Employers in pharmaceutical manufacturing; computer and electronics manufacturing; retail trade; finance, insurance, and real estate; management consulting; and professional services anticipate double-digit increases in hiring. Early projections show employers plan to target business-, engineering-, and computer-related degrees at the bachelor’s level during the 2012-13 college recruiting season. (See Figure 1.) The percentage of employers with firm plans in place for spring recruiting is also on the upswing. This year, 37.6 percent of survey participants indicated firm plans to recruit in spring 2013, while 34.4 percent of employers that participated in the Job Outlook 2012 survey indicated firm plans to recruit in spring 2012. My link
  16. Now you're being silly, you call this questioning me, I find it an attempt to insult someone you don't know because you disagree with him: And taxes, I'm no longer responsible for employee taxes but still may pay more personal taxes my man. I typically agree with a lot of what you say then you seem to just go rouge. I'll try to back off your comments and posts. Try to to do the same for me!
  17. Look it's clear, I'm not subscribing to fantastic cheap productions just to try to hate a candidate. Those uncertified stories do not deserve a discussion.
  18. Hilarious LOL, I probably pay more in taxes than you do in my absence from the 'workforce'. I don't need that environment any longer and should never have to return. LOL, hilarious but shouldn't be surprising that you would revert to an angry attack! You really wish I was in that 47%, NOPE, never had the dis-pleasure! Hijacked - you're either paranoid or blind, I responded to PattyAngel. Don't be afraid of answering/supporting your beliefs. You don't have to comment for my sake. You finding it tiring because your views are different than others is your personal problem. It's tiring to make up scenarios to suit your personal beliefs. So please seriously tell me, exactly what incidents over the pass 4 years have proven spineless without prejudices?
  19. Accepting someone's custom while visiting them is not lowering yourself. While removing your shoes is a custom in someone else's home, it's not lowering; bowing is salutation. But, I respect your definition for yourself.
  20. What's wrong with respect? Respect doesn't mean weakness or cowardice when you are the leader of the free world.
  21. Bama - can't equate customs to cowardice! Try again please!
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.