US Elections 2012 Part I: The Primaries/Caucus

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

Granted, just because he wouldn't make it mandatory doesn't mean that many young child wouldn't be forced into taking these types of work, possibly at the expense of their schoolwork. Not all parents see the value of education, and if a family is really struggling economically, the children will probably be put to work.

So as with most things, it has the potential to be helpful or harmful, and the overall impact will vary from child to child.

Still, if a family is desperate enough that they actually NEED the child to earn some money for them all to get by, perhaps preventing the child from working isn't the answer. Ideally such families would be provided assistance. But if the government isn't going to help them sufficiently, then stopping the child from working isn't going to improve matters.

[Ledgem]

That's pretty perceptive of you. Perhaps Mr. Gingrich is thinking that allowing children to work will soften the blow of cutting back on social assistance programs?

[DonQuigleone]

Hmmm.... Personally I think it's the rich kids that will benefit most from doing a few rounds of janitorial work.

That said, it may be a good idea for students to look after their own schools more. It encourages a sense of ownership of the school. For instance in a lot of American Universities they have students manning the cafeterias, which is also a good thing.

Such a scheme though I feel shouldn't be limited to one group of students, all students should be involved. A bit like the Japanese system.

[ganbaru]

Help Wanted USA: Hiring hotspots emerge, but mobility an issue
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7AK1CX20111121

[solomon]

Considering a big roadblock on the congress is about taxes, I started thinking about the problem.

What is it that the American people want? Most say Jobs.

However, it's not as if we live in Greece where a lumbering pubic sector doesn't keep pace with a more balanced public-private ratio in other countries. Our job market is one of the most dynamic and vibrant.

However, buisnesses are loath to make a move right now. They're sitting on huge amounts of cash. This is attributed to "uncertainty" in the markets.

Naturally taxes are a non-starter for the middle class, and even the higher classes. So what's left to do? Cut social and entitlement spending? I understand that entitilements are a huge drag on the economy but I fail to see how just hack and slash at such programs are supposed to CREATE JOBS.

Red tape for job growth seems mainly a localized problem to me, I.E. Michigan vs. Texas due to "more favorable buisness climate" and so on and so forth.

I don't think nationally. we have real HUGE roadblocks to job creation and economic investment.

Am I wrong on this?

[Vexx]

However, buisnesses are loath to make a move right now. They're sitting on huge amounts of cash. This is attributed to "uncertainty" in the markets.

One problem is the uber-businesses have figured out how to "create money" without creating jobs. Those "huge wads of cash" are generating more "green pieces of paper" without requiring anyone actually produce anything.

Where the jobs are actually created .... small and medium business - the problem is they're being crushed by the uber-businesses and the costs of employing someone (*cough* HEALTH BENEFITS). If a small business is being ground up by taxing entities, its largely because the taxing entities are bypassing Large Corp as a revenue source.

[DonQuigleone]

I don't see how red tape prevents hiring. Red Tape can certainly cause lost revenue, but it probably increases employment as the company needs to hire people to navigate said red tape.

Actual employment is not really related, you hire employees if you want to increase productivity of your company. If your company is at the limit of it's size, you won't hire more. Companies may be at the limit of their size due to the low demand in the economy. There's no point in hiring more people to make more goods or services, if those goods and services can't be sold.

What the red tape will meaningfully do is reduce the companies capacity to grow and invest in itself. If the red tape is related to hiring or firing, it may also make companies more hesitant to hire due to the bureaucratic requirements involved. However I was under the impression that had already been focused on (with considerable tax breaks for new hires being offered...)

Red tape may also be making it harder for startups to get going.

But otherwise, I really think the Red Tape issue is a Red Herring. It will save money, sure, won't create any jobs though.

[solomon]

Originally Posted by Vexx

One problem is the uber-businesses have figured out how to "create money" without creating jobs. Those "huge wads of cash" are generating more "green pieces of paper" without requiring anyone actually produce anything.

Where the jobs are actually created .... small and medium business - the problem is they're being crushed by the uber-businesses and the costs of employing someone (*cough* HEALTH BENEFITS). If a small business is being ground up by taxing entities, its largely because the taxing entities are bypassing Large Corp as a revenue source.

It can't be that simple......can it?

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by solomon

It can't be that simple......can it?

Healthy competition usually squashes that kind of thing... drives all profits downwards.

[ganbaru]

Republicans bash Pakistan in debate
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7AL0EO20111123

[solomon]

That's just pandering. You have no choice BUT to deal with Pakistan.

[Bri]

Originally Posted by solomon

It can't be that simple......can it?

Almost. While the average figures tell us that corporations sit on piles of cash, this does not hold for small and medium businesses that have to get most of their external funding through banks. The financial sector prefers to loan to big co. which are considered safer investments. Big co. in turn uses it's cash reserves on the financial markets where it usually in part leaks away in to more profitable investment opportunities abroad. It doesn't end up in the real economy.

However small and medium business are the most important job creators. Add in the regulatory and competition problems Vexx mentioned, which makes small firms such unattractive investment targets for the financials and you have a jobless recovery.

[ganbaru]

Gingrich's stumble on immigration?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7AM0B920111123

[SaintessHeart]

Well, with regards to corporate America, here is something interesting that is worth reading :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...tc/script.html

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Well, with regards to corporate America, here is something interesting that is worth reading :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...tc/script.html

The hilarity is, teens are as likely to *troll* surveys and studies as they are to give legitimate answers (which I fully support ).

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Vexx

The hilarity is, teens are as likely to *troll* surveys and studies as they are to give legitimate answers (which I fully support ).

Not so sure, I just did performed a survey among college students (who are similiar enough to teens, if more tolerable). If found them on the whole very eager to answer. You have to go into it with the right manner though. Most people love to have their opinions heard.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Most people love to have their opinions heard.

Probably true, I read once than the subjet of conversation of most peoples is themself.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Not so sure, I just did performed a survey among college students (who are similiar enough to teens, if more tolerable). If found them on the whole very eager to answer. You have to go into it with the right manner though. Most people love to have their opinions heard.

Guess I and my friends were "bad teens".... or at least we held the marketeers in contempt. The questions were usually either loaded or just lame and it was difficult to take them seriously. My sons and their peers have pretty much the same attitude. Perhaps its that we're just so buried in this stuff here in the US.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Guess I and my friends were "bad teens".... or at least we held the marketeers in contempt. The questions were usually either loaded or just lame and it was difficult to take them seriously. My sons and their peers have pretty much the same attitude. Perhaps its that we're just so buried in this stuff here in the US.

I don't know, I don't think the average teen ever gets surveyed to around here. I think most would find it a novelty "what, you care what I think?"

I think the important thing to have a succesful survey is to connect with the people you're surveying. For instance my efforts at surveying college students were probably a hell of a lot more succesful then if a professional outfit came along. I was "one of them" and even a possible friend, not some guy in a suit. I was also surveying them about issues that effect their day to day lives more, and not products (I was surveying about participation in extra curricular activities).

If you wanted to get information that could be used commercially you'd need to approach it edgeways, you'd want to make sure you're asking questions about things they personally care about.

[Kyuu]

Debate? More like squabbling.

And 1973... that was 38 years ago... not 28.

Either way. The dialog and the animation. Just like the real thing.