Republican Candiates for 2012 -Have they lost their bloody minds?

[Zakharra]

Domestically produced goods feed the economy in that it provides jobs for our citizens, thus circulating money into the economy.

But if it costs more, that's less spending money the consumer has to spend if they were able to buy a cheaper item for around the same quality. If it's priced too much, people won't necessarily buy it just because it's 'Made in America'. It has to be reasonable, not prohibitively expensive.

One reason companies moved  their factories out of the US is because it was cheaper to produce the goods. Material, labor and building costs are cheaper there. Regulations and taxes can also play a part in a company moving away. The yacht manufacturing in NY. The entire industry there pretty much left the state because of regulations and the taxes on them were raised a lot.

There's a airplane component company where I live that is going to be moving it's facility north to Canada real soon because the regulator agency for licensing airplane parts is dragging it's feet in authorizing the license to build a new safety part. The company wants to build it here, but if they don't get authorized, they -will- move to where they can build it.

[Capone]

Taxes do play a large role in it, but let's face facts. When you're paying labor in a foreign country, you don't have to worry about any sort of benefits packages or retirement plans like you do in America. Even if you dropped a lot of those taxes stateside, the company still has to pay so much money into each employee.

I feel that, in the long run, domestically produced goods could be better for America and the economy, but I'm not familiar enough with economics to say for sure. In addition, as I said, it could raise the prices on most products, which, in a time where cost of living is already high enough versus wages made, would be seen as a bad thing.

[gaggedLouise]

Torture someone long enough, I suspect they'll admit to anything you want them to in order to get you to stop. Of course, saying you're in favour of torture in a tv debate might give people the wrong idea about you.

Just ask old Joe Stalin's secret police guys about the fabulous confessions they could get from their guests: "I was a conspirator against the party all my life, even when we were an underground movement", "I've been planning to forge money on a large scale to use once I've helped the enemy invade us" and so forth. And it's not as if those questioners resorted to the really medieval stuff such as yanking bits of flesh out of people's chests, flogging them or threatening to gouge out their eyes. Sleep deprivation, face slapping, isolation cells topped with good cop/bad cop techniques can produce amazing results. Oh wait, those interrogators are all (long since) dead - some of them were taken care of by their own machine and were made to sign their own confessions of treason...

[JackWhite]

Bachmann Wants Iraqis To Pay ‘Several Million Dollars Per Life’ For Every American Who Died In Iraq

[Solstice]

Bachmann Wants Iraqis To Pay ‘Several Million Dollars Per Life’ For Every American Who Died In Iraq

I find this to be an excellent idea with no potential downsides.

I can think of no historical examples in which crippling a nation's economy for decades by forcing them to be exorbitant reparations has had negative or devastating consequences for other nations.

...In all seriousness, I'm... baffled, I guess, by the kind of all-eclipsing ignorance one must possess to seriously think that is a viable idea, discarding ideas of ethics, morality, and pragmatism. Unfortunately, I can't say I'm really surprised, it's about the same brand of absurdity I've come to expect from some of the loonier far-right politicians, which Bachmann certainly is.

Actually, on second thought, she may be on to something. We could start a global protection racket to get the economy back on track: We go invade a country, occupy them for a few years, then force the new government (which we install) to pay us money. If they don't pay up, we discover some kind of conspiracy there and invade them again!

Really, what's the worst that could happen?

EDIT: Just fixed a typo. Bit embarrassed I missed it before posting. :s

[Oniya]

Damn, I think my sarcasm filter needs an upgrade.

Well played.

[Callie Del Noire]

I find this to be an excellent idea with no potential downsides.

I can think of no historical examples in which crippling a nation's economy for decades by forcing them to be exorbitant reparations has had negative or devastating consequences for other nations.

...In all seriousness, I'm... baffled, I guess, by the kind of all-eclipsing ignorance one must possess to seriously think that is a viable idea, discarding ideas of ethics, morality, and pragmatism. Unfortunately, I can't say I'm really surprised, it's about the same brand of absurdity I've come to expect from some of the loonier far-right politicians, which Bachmann certainly is.

Actually, on second thought, she may be on to something. We could start a global protection racket to get the economy back on track: We go invade a country, occupy them for a few years, then force the new government (which we install) to pay us money. If they don't pay up, we discover some kind of conspiracy there and invade them again!

Really, what's the worst that could happen?

EDIT: Just fixed a typo. Bit embarrassed I missed it before posting. :s

Damn Sol.. you nearly broke my circuit too.. that is too subtle for political discussions.. go easy on us reactive types.

I remember a trip in the summer of 81 when I was growing up. We were visiting the family of the exchange students we had with us in Ireland (Yes, Americans living in the Republic of Ireland hosting German Exchange students.. I'm kind of sad I lost contact with them.)

Anyway, I got to meet one of the girl's father at their estate and he showed us some 50,000 mark coins from the time JUST before the 2nd world War.. they were put on a clear lexite door that he kept walking into. He told us about serving in a penal battalion with his father, who was an engineer, because they were politically opposed to Nazis. He told us of how it was a terrible time and recalled one event his father told him where the French, to collect the reparations they were due by that terrible treaty at the end of the first world war, came into the factory his father worked in and literally took all the machines out to collect 'owed' debts. He shook his head and said his father had told him 'That was when he knew things would turn out badly. When you do things like that, how can people like Hitler NOT get into power?'

Reparations are a STUPID move. Bachman is a foolish woman who is just a little more photogenic to the main stream than that idiot from Alaska (Palin) and just as dangerous to the course of diplomacy and statecraft.

[Missy]

The bad part is that people like this somehow get into office...

[gaggedLouise]

The bad part is that people like this somehow get into office...

And not just in the US either. We've had some terrible specimens this side of the pond, people who were both incompetent and dishonest but who got elected alright. Or whose bosses/friends were elected as presidents or prime ministers, and then the cronies went along as ministers. No mentioning any names here, you don't know most of them, Berlusconi was just the star example.

[Callie Del Noire]

You know.. I know who we should bill.. .

folks like Haliburton and whatever Blackwater is called this week. They made TONS of coin off of this.

[Missy]

And not just in the US either. We've had some terrible specimens this side of the pond, people who were both incompetent and dishonest but who got elected alright. Or whose bosses/friends were elected as presidents or prime ministers, and then the cronies went along as ministers. No mentioning any names here, you don't know most of them, Berlusconi was just the star example.

It's true everywhere, I don't remember his name but the Japanese Prime Minister after the 3/11 earthquake covered up that one of their nuclear plants had a reactor meltdown for a whole month after it blew. Know what happened? They called for a vote of no confidence in him, he didn't get voted out.

[gaggedLouise]

You know.. I know who we should bill.. .

folks like Haliburton and whatever Blackwater is called this week. They made TONS of coin off of this.

Agree!

[Capone]

I'm just going to jump back real quick...

He told us of how it was a terrible time and recalled one event his father told him where the French, to collect the reparations they were due by that terrible treaty at the end of the first world war, came into the factory his father worked in and literally took all the machines out to collect 'owed' debts. He shook his head and said his father had told him 'That was when he knew things would turn out badly. When you do things like that, how can people like Hitler NOT get into power?'

This. This is the real importance of History, or at least it should be. I don't know if it's American education, or it is just people in general, but people are so wrapped up in the "what" that they forget the "why". It's like someone asking if you'd go back and kill Hitler as a child. That just means Hitler won't rise to power. You don't know who would have, though, and that's the problem. Germany was ready to follow anyone with charisma and a plan to restore their country, all because the rest of the world was taking everything away.

Oddly enough, if I recall, the US President of the time was one of the politicians that was actually against reparations, but he and others were outvoted. Now, Bachmann lacks familiarity with her own history and is looking to undo any good we may have done in Iraq (as blundered a mess as it has been).

[RubySlippers]

If you want Americans to buy American then you have to hit the pocketbook, why a Federal sales tax excluding medical devices, medicines or food (not junk food but food) not made in the United States or a Territory of it. Say 17.76% extra so that Chinese Widget costing $100 would cost in Florida 24.76% more than an American Widget at only 7% more. Its not a tariff so should get around those pesky agreements on trade we signed.

[Oniya]

If you want Americans to buy American then you have to hit the pocketbook, why a Federal sales tax on non-medical devices, medicines or food (not junk food but food) not made in the United States or a Territory of it. Say 17.76% extra so that Chinese Widget costing $100 would cost in Florida 24.76% more than an American Widget at only 7% more. Its not a tariff so should get around those pesky agreements on trade we signed.

tar·iff/ˈtarif/
Noun:   
A tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of imports or exports.

Please explain how what you propose is not a tariff.

[RubySlippers]

I meant that those things should not be taxed at our end in the retail market apples and medicines and electric heart pumps are life preserving things that is tax exempt currently in most cases. Everything else would have a sales tax applied on good not a US made product at the point-of-sale at the endpoint.

Its a sales tax on buying things this includes corporations since they are now a "person". I worded that badly I should have said except for those three things everything else bought in the US made outside the US or its Territories (this includes Puerto Rico) will be taxed 17.76% extra at the Federal level. This money could fund health care perhaps its a vital need.

Its a national sales tax we can call it that and let other nations argue the nuances of it, since its not on the goods when purchased and imported it would have no impact on the exporters directly this again applies at the end of sale. Therefore a national sales tax.

[Missy]

I'm not an economist, but I think I would support this. We need to find a proper balance somehow.

[RubySlippers]

No balance for me made HERE good, made in CHINA bad - not hard at all. We just have to be Americans and define under law a legal definition we make up declaring a national end-point sales tax as not a tariff. For example under the American definition a Tariff is a direct tax or fee on an import or export affecting the wholesale price. Wording it all pretty and legaleze so we can say you call it a Tariff we call it a Sales Tax, as the US we don't recognize the trade courts juristiction and defer to our sovereign rights as a nation this is an internal tax matter.

[Zakharra]

I meant that those things should not be taxed at our end in the retail market apples and medicines and electric heart pumps are life preserving things that is tax exempt currently in most cases. Everything else would have a sales tax applied on good not a US made product at the point-of-sale at the endpoint.

Its a sales tax on buying things this includes corporations since they are now a "person". worded that badly I should have said except for those three things everything else bought in the US made outside the US or its Territories (this includes Puerto Rico) will be taxed 17.76% extra at the Federal level. This money could fund health care perhaps its a vital need.

Its a national sales tax we can call it that and let other nations argue the nuances of it, since its not on the goods when purchased and imported it would have no impact on the exporters directly this again applies at the end of sale. Therefore a national sales tax.

Ruby, that is still a tariff. And it does affect the manufacturer and exporter because it's suddenly now 17.76% harder to sell something in this country.

define under law a legal definition we make up declaring a national end-point sales tax as not a tariff. /quote]

Legalize bs aside, it's still a tariff because it fits the definition of a tariff. No matter what you'd call it, it's still a tariff and I believe that would violate several trade treaties we have signed.

[Jude]

An 18% sales tax isn't going to encourage people to buy American in most cases, because the difference in cost of producing something in the US is much more than 18%.  When our minimum wage is 7ish, and China's is non-existent, you need a pretty big tariff to make a difference (especially after you take in the differences in regulation and taxation).  In the end, you'll make people pay much more for the things they need just so Americans can compete, which may get us more jobs, but essentially means the dollar can buy a resident here much less when it comes to quality of life -- it's a self-defeating proposition.

The goal is to foster an environment with jobs here where we can buy cheap foreign goods and export our expensive, high-tech products to the world.  It doesn't take that much more effort to create an iPhone than it does the food to feed a person for a week -- it may even take less, but you know which sells more.  Affluent countries develop new goods to sell on the world stage before their products become a commodity.  That's the winning national business model, but it requires a hell of a lot of innovation, and with the anti-intellectual, anti-immigrant climate the US has, it's no surprise we're starting to falter there.

I actually saw a commercial against LEGAL immigration during the last Republican debate.  LEGAL.  LEEEEGAAAL immigration.

It's insane.

[Eldritch]

<.< >.> So what about Ron Paul?

I know he doesn't stand a chance, but I thought I'd ask.  There are several things I disagree with him about, but I probably agree with him more than I do with the other candidates.

Perry gets under my skin just because he's been my governor for too long.  I didn't know about his more moderate stance on immigration, though.

One thing I love about Texas: you can vote in whichever primary you want.  You don't have to be a registered party member.  I tend to vote in the Republican primaries regardless of how I vote in the actual election.

[Capone]

Ron Paul is starting to sound slightly senile, and as much as I agree with a lot of his ideas, he just has way too many extreme changes for anyone to support him. I don't think he'd be able to get enough of his ideas off the ground in just four years, either. He'd need Presidents to follow up on his ideas and keep them going.

Suddenly, the one limitation put on this country's leaders to keep them from becoming too powerful feels like, well, a limitation.

[Oniya]

I can't find the post, but someone recently said that the front-runner was now based on who hadn't said anything stupid recently.

Newt's out.

"This is something that no liberal wants to deal with," Gingrich said. "Core policies of protecting unionization and bureaucratization against children in the poorest neighborhoods, crippling them by putting them in schools that fail has done more to create income inequality in the United States than any other single policy. It is tragic what we do in the poorest neighborhoods, entrapping children in, first of all, child laws, which are truly stupid.

"You say to somebody, you shouldn't go to work before you're what, 14, 16 years of age, fine. You're totally poor. You're in a school that is failing with a teacher that is failing. I've tried for years to have a very simple model," he said. "Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they would have pride in the schools, they'd begin the process of rising."

Yeah - 'beginning' the process of rising that was started by putting in the child labor laws to begin with and allowing - no - insisting that children go to school and have time to learn.

[Capone]

Honestly, I'm not completely against that sort of idea. I don't think it would work in practice, and I know parents would be pissed, but when you get right down to it, so many kids lack a work ethic. Have you seen the snotty rich white kids working retail these days? It's a bit sickening to see the disdain these people have for me after asking them to, you know, do their job.

But in this day and age, where everyone wants kids to go to College despite a severe lack of jobs for those with degrees, being a Janitor (or any type of blue collar) is looked down upon, so no one will allow it. Hell, giving kids jobs as janitors (around the 14 or so age range) might actually teach them that, hey, SOMEONE has to clean up your mess, and teach them some level of respect.

But again, it's all nice in theory. In practice, it would probably be a disaster.

[Oniya]

Currently, kids are allowed to get a job at 14 under limitations.  (I was able to find a listing for the Connecticut Department of Labor for permitted jobs for 14 and 15 year olds.)  The idea that 'child laws are stupid' overlooks the reasons that they were put in place:

The federal child labor provisions, authorized by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938, also known as the child labor laws, were enacted to ensure that when young people work, the work is safe and does not jeopardize their health, well-being or educational opportunities. These provisions also provide limited exemptions.

- Source

Also, note that Newt suggested that employers get rid of the 'unionized janitors'.  So - the unionized janitor gets laid off, meaning that his (or her) kids are then 'totally poor' and have to take jobs as - I don't know - janitors! Hey, a bunch of those just opened up! - so the family can make ends meet.