McCain or Obama?

[GregBurch]

Pause the argumentation chain here. What purpose have workers? Can managers produce profits all by themselves?

A company is not there for the welfare of workers, that is absolutely correct. The workers have to do something for their salary. But can a company exist without workers?

No. But we old dinosaurs ask how one values a worker as a worker. We see the "social justice" point of view valuing workers as "whole human beings" when they say that it is "unfair" that workers don't earn more. It seems so kind and reasonable to say such a thing, that to disagree marks one as heartless, cruel, exploitative.

As the bumper sticker one sees in college towns here says: "Mean people suck." We old dinosaurs are such mean people. So unfair.

 

[David]

Pause the argumentation chain here. What purpose have workers? Can managers produce profits all by themselves?

A company is not there for the welfare of workers, that is absolutely correct. The workers have to do something for their salary. But can a company exist without workers?

Ummm...no? Maybe? What's your point?

 

[Urwumpe]

So, are you proud to accept a problem as status quo?

Do you really believe, that it is a good thing, that a CEO earns almost the same money as 100,000 workers of his company? This system of calculating the payment is really classical - short-lived pirates defined this way how to distribute the wealth. Smarter pirates paid a bit more and reduced their own share, to avoid mutiny.

Honestly, with all my ordo-liberal heart blood and vivid imagination, I don't even think that a free fall into Jupiter would be deep enough for a Wall street manager to fall these days.

David: My point is, that manager salaries should be even more stronger coupled to the long term development of a company. A worker deserves a bonus, when he exhausts himself and his workforce for a short time. But a manager is employed for the advancement of the company.

But currently, it is the other way around. Managers are rewarded for short term performance and workers are usually punished for the resulting long term performance - and can only hope for a reward for long term success.

 

[David]

Well, I do respect your regard for long-term vs. short-term concerns, but you're going to have to come up with a better plan than to transform the world into a "smarter" pirate ship (and with who as the sovereign captain?).

 

[Urwumpe]

We don't need a better plan. Capitalism is still the best plan we have. We just need to get back to it.

 

[fort]

An organization like nothing I have ever seen.

" Yesterday I wrote a photodiary summarizing my experience leading a group of young Democrats from California to canvass in Nevada. And while I described the experience in very positive terms, it wasn't until I read the HuffPo piece by Zack Exley (proudly linked by kos earlier today) that I myself paused to reflect on what I actually saw in Nevada.

After reading that article, the orgnizational and structural differences between the Obama operation and any other campaign I have ever worked on were immediately clear. And the only conclusion is this:

This campaign has an organization like nothing I have ever seen.

See, I wrote yesterday that after the rally with Justin Timberlake and Jessica Biel, we went..."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/14/172651/87/37/630505

 

[Andy44]

Actually, David, the purpose of GM is to make money and return on investement for the shareholders. Making cars and other products or services is the way in which GM does this. Providing jobs for the employees is an operating expense.

 

[David]

An organization like nothing I have ever seen.

If you want to be REALLY impressed by a political organization, you could perhaps Google "ACORN" and spend some considerable time, reading. They've registered ~1.5million new voters (specializing in Democrats), in the last couple of months - tens of thousands of which voter registrations, are fraudulent. The organization is under investigation in about a dozen States, particularly including Nevada, where an ACORN office was raided (by the FBI, iirc), last week.

ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), has been known for such problems, for years. It was also an employer of Barack Obama, during his early career, and a recipient of money (~$800,000) from his current campaign, as well as from the U.S. Federal Government (since it's arguably, y'know, helping to improve the democratic process by achieving greater voter participation).

Also, you can find some wonderously passionate political opinions on the DailyKos website, including death-from-disease wishes for U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney (who has a heart pacemaker) and former U.S. Presidential Press Secretary Tony Snow (now in fact dead, as I recall, from cancer), obscene and similarly unpleasant, personal characterizations of VP candidate Sarah Palin, and other such political arguments and happy sentiments pertaining to various persons associated with the Republican Party. It's political "discussion and debate" in its, hopefully, lowest form.

Actually, David, the purpose of GM is to make money and return on investement for the shareholders. Making cars and other products or services is the way in which GM does this. Providing jobs for the employees is an operating expense.

Fair enough, although I think that we're probably both right. I tend to think that Henry Ford started his company because he thought that automobiles were very cool devices, and he wanted to share his excitement (and make some money, too), and that General Motors was probably started for basically the same reason (and probably continues to exist, for the same reason: its operators/owners enjoy cars), although it is certainly a way to earn a living or perhaps otherwise acquire money, too.

 

[Urwumpe]

If you want to be REALLY impressed by a political organization, you could perhaps Google "ACORN" and spend some considerable time, reading. They've registered ~1.5million new voters (specializing in Democrats), in the last couple of months - tens of thousands of which voter registrations, are fraudulent. The organization is under investigation in about a dozen States, particularly including Nevada, where an ACORN office was raided (by the FBI, iirc), last week.

Actually, the number goes more into the thousands. The most conservative estimates say that only 1% of the registrations could be wrong (which is 15,000), but the real number seems to be less than 5000. And the problems of wrong voter registrations are a known problem of all such organizations. Even both political parties, which attract more new voters as ACORN, have the same problems, without the news getting blown up for political gains.

Also, the main problem is that all organizations have the problem to ensure voter registrations are correct. You have no central citizen registry in the USA, like many European countries have (I don't want to say that it is good to have one, but this is one of the cases, where it is useful), so you have only limited options to check the data.

ACORN has so far cooperated with the officials when such accusations arose and fired employees when the fraud was proved. There was also, as far as I can tell from German news, never a raid. When the police is invited it is no raid, but a investigation.

But anyway. When one of the candidate wins with more than 3% difference, you can be 100% sure, it was not the result of such voter registration fraud being abused.

ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), has been known for such problems, for years. It was also an employer of Barack Obama, during his early career, and a recipient of money (~$800,000) from his current campaign, as well as from the U.S. Federal Government (since it's arguably, y'know, helping to improve the democratic process by achieving greater voter participation).

It was also receiving donations from republican candidates and was also having republican politicians inside it's groups. I would remember it before you join the republican battle cry. McCain just attended one of their events this year. Obviously, the republican party had no problem with ACORN in the past.

And ACORN seems to be pretty old for a grass-root democratic organization inside the USA, as it is from 1970...

Especially, I would be careful if the primary source of the accusations is Ken Blackwell, who was himself involved in a election fraud investigation in 2004.

 

[fort]

David,

I write currently only few messages on this forum concerning this election and very rarely elsewhere, but I spend daily much time to inform me of all that relates to it.

I thus read a certain number of things concerning ACORN and I believe, although having read it only in diagonal, that what writes Urwumpe could summarize a response coming from me.

Certain small events on the Montana side, this day even, make me say that these businesses are simple only seemingly.

 

[David]

Actually, the number goes more into the thousands. The most conservative estimates say that only 1% of the registrations could be wrong (which is 15,000), but the real number seems to be less than 5000. And the problems of wrong voter registrations are a known problem of all such organizations. Even both political parties, which attract more new voters as ACORN, have the same problems, without the news getting blown up for political gains.

Also, the main problem is that all organizations have the problem to ensure voter registrations are correct. You have no central citizen registry in the USA, like many European countries have (I don't want to say that it is good to have one, but this is one of the cases, where it is useful), so you have only limited options to check the data.

I have read/heard reports of thousands to ten thousands of fraudulent registrations, per State, in some of the States in which investigations are proceeding. And the problem is most assuredly not predictable mistakes or logistical problems; among other things, there are reports of large numbers of registration forms including signatures all in the same handwriting, registration forms in the names of the Dallas Cowboys football team's players (in Nevada, iirc, and presumably reported with the understanding that it was not feasible for such registrations to have been accurately representative of those persons at that time and place) and many other obviously fictitious names (e.g. - Mickey Mouse, Dick Tracy), multiple (many multiple) registrations of the same person in different places, fraudulent other registrations in the name of already legitimately registered persons, registrations quite apparently representing a copying of lists of names and addresses from phonebooks, a considerable number of arrests and reported confessions, and even some TV interviews, of ACORN employees who participated in the fraudulent registrations. And that doesn't even include stuff like persons (many) registered with certainly fake (often, nonexistent) addresses, unconfirmable addresses, OR generally expected difficulties involved with confirming that a registration is legitimate.

ACORN has so far cooperated with the officials when such accusations arose and fired employees when the fraud was proved.

That's so nice of them, "cooperating when such accusations arose," among the massive fraud, with formal investigations of the organization, in about a dozen States.

Anyway, you can check this out, if you want:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=acorn+scandal&aq=3&oq=ACORN+sc

 

[GregBurch]

Actually, the number goes more into the thousands. The most conservative estimates say that only 1% of the registrations could be wrong (which is 15,000), but the real number seems to be less than 5000. And the problems of wrong voter registrations are a known problem of all such organizations. Even both political parties, which attract more new voters as ACORN, have the same problems, without the news getting blown up for political gains.

Especially, I would be careful if the primary source of the accusations is Ken Blackwell, who was himself involved in a election fraud investigation in 2004.

Excellent regurgitation of Obama's talking points. I'm sure some Republicans have given into the temptation to pander to ACORN. But to an old-time political junkie like me, it doesn't hold up. I've been following ACORN for a LOOONG time. They are a solidly far-left organization whose connection to political corruption has been long known:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_acorns_nutty_regime.html

That article dates from before Barak Obama gave his famous 2004 speech in which the light shown down from above and he was identified as The One. So exposing ACORN's systematic fraud isn't something cooked up by John McCain or Sarah Palin (oops, she couldn't be smart enough to think of something like that -- must be Karl Rove).

BTW, you'll see the name Rathke in that article, if you read it. It was his brother who last year was found to have embezzled a million dollars from ACORN. No criminal charges were brought.

ACORN is not a "run-of-the-mill" voter registration organization. but you absolutely positively will not learn that reading the NYT. For reasons I'm still trying to puzzle out, CNN has actually run a little bit with this story. They've explained how ACORN's line that "registration fraud doesn't result in voter fraud" isn't true in the era of large numbers of mail-in ballots, and an election cycle in which so many new legitimate voters have come into the process.

Also, ACORN is among the many leftist groups in America that oppose at every turn attempts to impose voter-identification procedures at polling places. They argue this is an effort at "right-wing voter suppression." I guess it's only a coincidence that these are the measures that would catch the registration fraud in which they have systematically engaged for decades.

 

[Eagle]

Also, the main problem is that all organizations have the problem to ensure voter registrations are correct. You have no central citizen registry in the USA, like many European countries have (I don't want to say that it is good to have one, but this is one of the cases, where it is useful), so you have only limited options to check the data.

I would think this would be the job of the local registrar's office. In more rural districts the registrar's office consists mostly of the registrar, but they have lots of other state officials above them to help.

I'm not sure exactly how its done in Europe, but I've seen the registrar go around to High Schools and events to register people to vote. (or at least get them the paperwork to).

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm not sure exactly how its done in Europe, but I've seen the registrar go around to High Schools and events to register people to vote. (or at least get them the paperwork to).

Well, here in Germany, when you are legally allowed to vote, you get a letter automatically with your voting registration and the right for voting by mail, as all citizens are allowed to vote, and registration happens over the citizen registry of the cities.

Works usually pretty well.

 

[David]

Just to provide some sense of the magnitude of the voter registration problem:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93R8IE00&show_article=1

CINCINNATI (AP) - Close to one in every three newly registered Ohio voters will end up on court-ordered lists being sent to county election boards because they have some discrepancy in their records, an elections spokesman said Wednesday.

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner estimated that an initial review found that about 200,000 newly registered voters reported information that did not match motor-vehicle or Social Security records, Brunner spokesman Kevin Kidder said. Some discrepancies could be as simple as a misspelling, while others could be more significant.

As you can see, the extent to which these voter registrations will turn out to be actually invalid, is yet uncertain, from the information provided in this report. Also, there is no specific mention of ACORN (or Ken Blackwell, who is a resident of Ohio), or the potential voters' political Party affiliations, in the article, although Ohio is one of the States in which ACORN's activities are especially being investigated. Ohio was also the State whose election result ultimately determined the outcome of the 2004 Presidential election.

 

[Yoda]

Yet another clear win for Obama during tonights debate.
McCain seemed generally irritated,unsure of himself and on the verge of a meltdown most of the time.

I'd rather have a president who can keep his cool during heated debates.

 

[tblaxland]

Due to compulsory voting here in Oz, if you don't enrol with the Australian Electoral Commission they will track you down (through the Australian Tax Office normally) and fine you. If you enrol and don't vote you also get a $20 fine. Maximum penalty is jail but you would need to go to great lengths to avoid the AEC and their fines in order to get thrown in the joint. Cool system, eh?

 

[Eagle]

Yeah, I've never understood why compulsory voting is ever a good idea. Sometimes people don't know or care. Statistically you would think these votes would be spread and cancel out each other, but the truth is always somewhat different.

I guess I'll watch the debate sometime later, I was busy at a group meeting. :-/

 

[tblaxland]

Yeah, I've never understood why compulsory voting is ever a good idea. Sometimes people don't know or care. Statistically you would think these votes would be spread and cancel out each other, but the truth is always somewhat different.

It was originally brought in (in 1924) to try and save money on election campaigns. Parties would not have to spend money trying to get people out to vote for them and they could instead concentrate their efforts on the swinging voters. Swinging voters and particular swinging seats (or bellwether seats) have a lot of power when it comes to policy making at election time. In an ironic twist, it was the political right that supported compulsory voting because they did not have access to an equivalent of the labour unions that the left used for drumming up votes.

Personally, I don't think compulsory voting is such a bad thing since it at least makes people think about who they want to have running the place. Informal votes run at about 4-5%*. I guess it could be considered enforced collectivism but it seems to work OK for us. In recent years, there has been discussion about re-introducing voluntary voting but it has not gone too far. Public polls consistently show greater than 70% public support for compulsory voting[1]. Clearly, most people here see voting as a civic duty rather than a right.

* At the 2001 election, of the informal votes only 22% were blank and only 6% had some form of mark or slogan on them[2], so about 1.5% electors submit "protest" votes (not counting donkey votes which are statistically very difficult to distinguish from the non-donkey votes). The rest were incorrectly completed, most likely mistakes, and would explain why informal votes are higher in areas with higher proportions of the population from non-English speaking backgrounds.

[1] Majority Of Australians Think Voting Should Remain Compulsory. However, Neither Party Would Benefit If Voting Were Voluntary - Roy Morgan
[2] Compulsory Voting in Australia - AEC

 

[replicant]

But currently, it is the other way around. Managers are rewarded for short term performance and workers are usually punished for the resulting long term performance - and can only hope for a reward for long term success.

Oh boy do I know the taste of that bitter little pill all too well. To add injury to injury, in the airline industry, if the long term success fails, you can't even laterally transfer what little success you do have elsewhere. It's start all over at the bottom baby.

Well, I do respect your regard for long-term vs. short-term concerns, but you're going to have to come up with a better plan than to transform the world into a "smarter" pirate ship (and with who as the sovereign captain?).

I love that Idea, Best democratic idea ever. If everybody isn't making money, then the CEO gets axed (pun intended). In addition, the CEO had better MERIT his share.

Actually, David, the purpose of GM is to make money and return on investement for the shareholders. Making cars and other products or services is the way in which GM does this. Providing jobs for the employees is an operating expense.

Andy, do you realize right here you have just made the most damning statement regarding McCain's campaign saw? I keep hearing how if you give tax breaks to the wealthy that out of the goodness of their hearts they will create jobs because they love the American worker. No business has "creating jobs" as its focus. Making money is any business' primary focus. Workers are a liability. If you can automate, outsource, and pay less or do more with less, you do it. I do not begrudge any business the necessity of profit. Ultimately they hurt themselves though, because someone invariably goes too far, and then the resulting regulation is TOO severe. (Yes I can concede that regulation often goes too far, as a result of deregulation that goes too far) The pendulum swing. Has anyone but me considered how infuriating it is to hear talk of "Give me money and I'll create jobs", when the first thing any business tries to do is increase profit by automation or outsourcing? DUH! What good did it do to give you a break? If I had been in a cave on Mars all this time and heard nothing else, Obama would get my vote for one statement:

"End tax breaks for corporations that send jobs overseas"

Amen and Amen

Fair enough, although I think that we're probably both right. I tend to think that Henry Ford started his company because he thought that automobiles were very cool devices, and he wanted to share his excitement (and make some money, too), and that General Motors was probably started for basically the same reason (and probably continues to exist, for the same reason: its operators/owners enjoy cars), although it is certainly a way to earn a living or perhaps otherwise acquire money, too.

I think Henry Ford also said "I want my employees to be able to buy what I make." A man who understood supply and demand, and that you can't take TOO much.

Yet another clear win for Obama during tonights debate.
McCain seemed generally irritated,unsure of himself and on the verge of a meltdown most of the time.

Certainly not the "Butt Whuppin" he promised was it?

I'd rather have a president who can keep his cool during heated debates.

Agreed. McCain and Palin are determined to turn this into "We are good people and they are bad people" I couldn't care less anymore. I am not ten years old. I do not want to see my children starve with no healthcare because you THINK you are "good and noble".

Apparantly, I am not the only one who thinks so.