jackson33

GM Janesville, was build in 1918 and later became one of the first Chevrolet/Fisher Body plants in the US and by 2008, was the oldest operating GM plant in the US. Talk of closing the plant had been persistent from the day's my Dad was Material Superintendent in the 50's in Janesville and while I worked for CNW RR, which supplied both Fisher and Chevrolet with most parts used, then building most all Chevrolet Models and Small Trucks, not pick ups. While media an people seem to ignore the similarity between lies and deception, for all practical purposes Obama deceived the people in South Central Wisconsin, who believed Obama WOULD save the impending closing of the plant, which several previous politicians had done over time, delaying the actual closing until after the 2008 elections, when it did closed in late December 2008. IMO, no one could have prevented the closing as it and was well beyond handling a structural retooling to the modern robotic manufactureing model or said another way would have had to be rebuilt from the ground up and cost prohibitive. As for who lies or deceives the ELECTORATE, most often for strictly political gains, historically Obama is the champion. Ryan's not even in the same ballpark on this issue. http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/ rigney, I'm posting to you while your still here and note I've seen many of your post, especially threads that have been distorted by the power to be here and want to commend you for you efforts. It's always a pleasure for me to see and read things from people that have been around the block, state what they feel and mean what they say. I saw where you "earned" a three day suspension for this and want you to know there are others that didn't agree then or do they now. While I won't any longer post here if you earn the ultimate reward for bothering to make 1600 post over a couple years, it's been my honor to read many of your thoughts.

amanda, I think your hearing about the weekly jobs report, which for some reason, have been lowered after the initial reports the following week, fairly consistently. GDP figures are commonly mixed up between, real quarterly GDP and Annually adjusted estimates, which for 2011 have been lowered several times, to my knowledge from every agency that makes such projections.

United Health Group, is the largest US provider with over 70 Million people covered and employing about 87,000 full time workers, in all 50 States and territories. In their mix of plans, a person, family or business can provide insurance coverage from Catastrophic (commonly meaning very high deductible) to full coverage (commonly meaning lower deductibles and extended, with dental, eye care and so on) and in most States, under group policy, they can't even ask for pre-existing conditions when covering an employee and his/her family. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=UNH By virtue of their policy holders and investors, they have a Market Cap of nearly 50B$, with reserve cash and assets on hand to cover most any major health care event, concerning only those involved. They as with most all larger providers or providers of any insurance, carry back up insurance, meaning they insure themselves from those potential events, Berkshire Hathaway being one major re-insurer. They do currently pay a dividend of 1.4% (.65/y) and have appreciated considerably, since starting out in 1990 as a penny stock. http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=UNH&ql=1 While there are hundreds of differences between how a Business/Corporation operates and a Government, IMO the major drivers are the incentive to MAKE A PROFIT and to successfully maintain and operated a service based organization and the continuity of management, driven by a concerned board of directors and CONSUMER participation. Now for those of you here, thinking the Federal Government can in some manner replace the current providers (single payer system) for 310 Million Americans, here is a partial list of what your trying to eliminate....

Phil; So you don't misunderstand, I've enjoyed (appreciated) our little debate and it's not possible to offend me. I know where I am and knowingly encouraged your adversary participation. Having said that, this thread is drawing few viewers, a waste of both our times and literally going nowhere. I'll give you a reply, asking you take an issue or two to a new thread, since I really don't have the time to follow up authoring new threads, myself....or frankly the popularity. On the NPR thing; Far too often, news outlets use edited sound bites or edit programming to promote some agenda. Limbaugh seems to be a prime target and often, his comments on air and the one quoted come off with the exact opposite meaning. Well since my first real business was a Coin Shop (1960), with a couple first (in store teletype and first in State "Coin Show") and I still have about 20K$ worth of Morgan Dollars, let me add a little to your NPR article. Minting coinage is the Federal Governments obligation, not the Federal Reserve and has long been used to produce a profit. Susan B Anthony Dollars, Eisenhower Dollars, Proof/Mint Sets, along with a host of Commemorative Coins, have been issued by Government, knowing whatever was charged (always above cost to mint) would show a profit and for the Federal. I'd agree the program was mishandled, probably because no numismatic was involved, but as your article indicates, the potential is there. In fact, if I was 20 years younger, I'd be buying up those already minted, feeling a full set when completed to Obama, if it continues (stopping when contract up would be foolish, IMO) could be extremely profitable, for some. For the nit-pickers, the Anthony Dollar was minted, in hopes it would be used, but never was... from your link;

pantheory; Although most of your definition/explanation, should already be known to argue or discuss the issue, I do thank you for your time. As said, in my first reply to you, you seem to have formed an opinion (model) contrary or based on the premise of BBT, which in my mind was never a stand alone, viable theory. There are many theory, including "String", "Multiple BB" or even a "Pulsating Universe", that have been used, but the folks in the OP Link, seemed to believe in some form of Steady State, generally what I think is probable. On time and your axiom (nothing can start from nothing), I've always had trouble separating the two, in that whatever that something is/was, has a time period of existence. Your BH's, the Singularity or even the Creationist God, in each case the only conclusion I can draw is an eternal existence, in turn meaning time in either direction, must be eternal. My own opinion, falls right in line with SSU or that the Universe (everything out there) has always existed, that everything we see or understand today, could have been argued if Planet Earth, humans and our rather primitive brains, had existed (as is) 100T/Y/A or in fact 100T/Y in the future. Again thanks, for your time and reply....

Phil; Juan was fired, over the phone, according to him, for his appearances on the "Bill O'Reilly" show. Head's of any concern, set the policy for that concern or might do so at the request or command of others, companies can fail or succeed on this alone. By choice, I don't watch or listen to NPR, therefore I can't speak to the journalistic integrity, but I do recall in my years of managing small business, I NEVER hired a person, I felt would not follow my policy or the policies of the company involved.

swansont; If a subsidy makes sense with gasoline at 2.00/G and if the subsidy help control cost, thereby the market price, while increasing usage, to my aging mind, it would be more important to subsidize at the higher price. Transportation is costly, if Government requires a Company to increase cost IMO, they should pay the cost, period. I do agree the consumer, in the end pays for everything, but Governments (State/Federal) might take regulation into consideration, BEFORE being imposed. As for water being easily absorbed, whatever the reason they don't build pipelines, for pure ethanol, would seem to be the cost or some unsure factor.

Reality; Look at it from an employers viewpoint...If you raise the cost to employ one person by 2%, say for SS, the employer would also need to add 2%. Regardless the amount, if you have 100, a 1000 or more, that end raised cost without question, will cost even more jobs. Taxes on everybody, in some manner will happen, out of necessity to meet future obligations, but this is simply not the right time, noting other programs that will cost much more...

Most "Ethanol Subsidies", actually go to oil refineries to blend ethanol into a final product. If you cut that subsidy, without changing the regulation, it would likely increase the cost up .45 cents per gallon, for the final product. Those involved in growing corn only wish to maintain the higher commodity price, the process increasing demand, which will not change.