There is an actual transcript of last night’s Republican debate, so I guess we should take a look at it. The host was Fox Business News and the topic was supposed to be the economy. As the poll leader, Trump commanded center stage and fielded the first question from moderator Neil Cavuto. Cavuto noted that there were picketers outside the venue and in other locations throughout the country who were demanding a $15 minimum wage. Did Trump support this?
Now, the optimal rate for the minimum wage is certainly open to debate, presuming you support any minimum at all. It wasn’t a shock that Trump argued against fifteen dollars (the liberal voters of Portland, Maine just rejected a $15 ballot measure), but it wasn’t exactly politically astute to get caught on tape saying that “the wages are too high” in this country. I don’t know too many voters who think that they’re overcompensated for their work. What Trump essentially argued is that we can’t compete with foreign labor if we pay our workers something approximating $30,000 a year. Maybe you agree with that or maybe you don’t, but it was jarring to listen to Trump argue that he’d make America great by making sure that people don’t get paid too much.
When Ben Carson was asked to respond, he immediately broke out the wrong statistic for black unemployment and argued that we shouldn’t make people “dependent” by paying them a decent amount for their labor. And, no, that does not make sense.
Rubio followed by saying that the big problem in this country is that people don’t get paid enough but we can’t pay them more or they’ll just be replaced by robots. His big solution was to encourage people to forego their majors in philosophy and instead pursue a more lucrative career in welding. The audience seemed to especially enjoy this policy prescription.
At this point, Kasich was asked to explain how he would tackle the national debt and proceeded to try to take sole credit for briefly balancing the federal budget at the height of the dot.com boom. He admonished his competitors on the stage for offering pie-in-the-sky tax plans and then asserted that he could lower everyone’s taxes, including businesses, and get the magic growth ponies and rainbows to balance the budget within eight years. If you doubt this, just go to his website and you’ll see.
When it was Ted Cruz’s turn, he quickly explained that his 10% flat tax would create 4.9 million jobs within a decade. When Kasich tried to interject that this was lunacy, he was cut off and Jeb was asked (seriously) what he’d do about the 40% of Americans who are unemployed and have given up on looking for work.
For some reason, Jeb didn’t balk at this ludicrous statistic. Instead, he offered his own, falsely claiming that more small businesses are closing than opening in this country.
And so we were off, with it being established that the moderators couldn’t be trusted any more than the candidates to offer a reality-based picture of the world.
From there, we would experience many fresh examples of the wondrous uses of the non-sequitur. The following came in an exchange between Carly Fiorina and moderator Gerard Baker:
BAKER: Ms. Fiorina, while you’ve all pointed out how weak the current recovery has been and how disappointing by any historical standards, in the general election, the Democrats will inevitably ask you and voters to compare the recent president’s jobs performance.
Now, in seven years under President Obama, the U.S. has added an average of 107,000 jobs a month. Under President Clinton, the economy added about 240,000 jobs a month. Under George W. Bush, it was only 13,000 a month. If you win the nomination, you’ll probably be facing a Democrat named Clinton. How are you going to respond to the claim that Democratic presidents are better at creating jobs than Republicans?
FIORINA: Well, first of all, I must say as I think about that question, I think about a woman I met the other day. I would guess she was 40 years old. She had several children. And she said to me, you know, Carly, I go to bed every night afraid for my children’s future. And that really struck me. This is America. A mother is going to bed afraid for her children’s future…
Hopefully, you can see how this was responsive to the question, because I can’t.
I could go on and critique the entire debate, but the whole thing was basically no different from what I’ve already described. The one thing I would like to highlight though is how Trump responded to Kasich’s charge that it would be impractical and inhumane to deport 11 million people. Trump said that it could be done and had been done under President Eisenhower’s leadership.
TRUMP: All I can say is, you’re lucky in Ohio that you struck oil. That is for one thing.
(LAUGHTER)
Let me just tell you that Dwight Eisenhower, good president, great president, people liked him. “I like Ike,” right? The expression. “I like Ike.” Moved a 1.5 million illegal immigrants out of this country, moved them just beyond the border. They came back.
Moved them again beyond the border, they came back. Didn’t like it. Moved them way south. They never came back.
(LAUGHTER)
Dwight Eisenhower. You don’t get nicer. You don’t get friendlier. They moved a 1.5 million out. We have no choice. We have no choice.
This was a reference to Operation Wetback. And Trump’s description was fairly accurate except that he failed to mention that it was instigated largely at the insistence of the Mexican government and that it didn’t work and that it was a humanitarian disaster. It also gave us the pejorative “wetback” which is hardly in favor today, and with which the GOP most definitely does not want to be associated.
Despite the incredibly vapid and depressing and basically delusional display put on last night by Fox Business News and the participating candidates, there was some valuable information. It came primarily from disagreements among the candidates about military spending and foreign policy. Jeb Bush, for example, was absolutely horrified to hear Trump argue that he’d welcome Russian intervention in Syria and that the Germans should man up and deal with Ukraine on their own. Cruz and Rubio were indignant that Rand Paul suggested that they couldn’t be conservative or fiscally responsible if they weren’t serious about drastically reducing military spending. There was also an interesting disagreement on trade between Trump on one side and Kasich and Bush on the other.
But noting some genuine philosophical fissures in the Republican façade was about the only enjoyment or genuine education an informed person could get out of last night’s debate.
On the whole, it was an embarrassment for everyone involved, and for our country.
We rewound the DVR like four times to make sure we heard this correctly. Where does this number come from? Everyone unemployed plus the retired and minors?
Link
Yep, looks that way: “Exaggerated Unemployment Figure Includes Children, Retirees, College Students, And Stay-At-Home Parents”
The spouse and I both work, but our children (both under 12) do not and neither are they looking for full time employment.
What is the government going to do to fix this terrible problem of underemployed pre-teens???
Might be in the champion’s league of the biggest lie with statistics. As a “business” reporter, isn’t she aware of EmPop? That not employed number, 32.6%, would sound scary enough to the rubes but would also be out of context. “Why is EmPop better in Germany, Sweden, and Japan than in the US?” would be an interesting question.
Well, it wouldn’t Fox News without some absurd, ginned-up phony statistic. They have a brand to protect, too, you know!
We make it up, You decide! ™
That’s approximately the number of Americans in the potential labor force, i.e. all Americans aged 16 to 65 IIRC. It includes students, prisoners, and the voluntarily unemployed such as stay at home moms (biggest group) and early retirees (many federal and state workers retire at 55).
A REAL moderator would have asked what the figure was when Bush was President.
The junior league debate wasn’t much better, with the moderators losing control of the candidates. But they all seemed to avoid major setbacks. I suppose that is something.
It’s probably the most truthful thing they said. The census reports that 27.3% of us are under 20, and 12.8% are 65 and older.
I’m definitely not looking for a job, and nobody I know is either.
From what I’ve been able to find, the US Census bureau doesn’t report the population under the age of twenty. No question that a population bubble larger than the Boomers is looming: US Census quick facts — under age 18 is 23.4% and over age 64 is 14.5%. But as these numbers aren’t that easy to collect, guess it’s okay for someone to cite percentages that are off by a couple of points.
This is the pathetic result we get when the Gooper candidates play the refs — the refs disappear and the event becomes a fact-free free-for-all. I would imagine most of the contestants prefer it this way — no tough follow-up questions, leaving their lies, distortions and non-responsive responses unchallenged.
Only Kasich and RAND Paul tended to ask appropriate and obvious follow-ups, though their own policies also needed close questioning.
Ben Carson — speaking on personal matters of lying about his past, and just about every issue of substance — was the most obvious example of a candidate standing up there unchallenged spewing nonsense. I suppose the other candidates’ strategy is to let enough time elapse to allow Gooper voters to come to their senses about this fraud. They all appear fearful of a backlash with a direct, real-time confrontation.
The absence of any attacks by anyone on this guy’s questionable credibility was one of the major takeaways in what was otherwise a non eventful evening of politicians lying and playing to the basest instincts of their party. Cut taxes, bash Hillary, confront the Russians and Chinese, bash Hillary some more.
I hope that Hillary has plenty of good SS protection going into the fall campaign. I mean the sober type of SS men, professional and well-trained, the ones who are supposed to take a bullet for the person they’re protecting, not stand down like they did in Dallas.
The stophillary password for the events media wifi was worth a chuckle however.
Rubio has the generalities right. We should encourage vocational careers if they are a better fit (especially compated i predatory for-profits) and higher costs do create an incentive to switch to automation which has been the primary driver of job loss in the last 40 years.
Where are the labor shortages (or projected labor shortages) in Voc-Ed jobs? Welders, Rubio’s example, only now earn just over $30,000/year. Train more welders and that wage will decline.
Got to be careful with projections. remember all the people trained as key punchers in the ’70s?
The folly of accepting current shortages and extrapolating out from that with no other considerations. On the plus side, it didn’t take long to train a keypunch operator and they did get jobs for a while.
Yes, but they kept training them long after the job was a dinosaur. Perhaps it had something to do with training contracts and kickbacks?
Who was training them? Employers, CCs, or for-profit “colleges?”
I know they were contractors to the Illinois Employment Service, because it was State funded but whether non-profit or for profit, I couldn’t say. I strongly suspect for-profit “training institutes” since real colleges already new that keypunching was becoming a dinosaur.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21137
It definitely varries by field, and the research is limited. However don’t forget to reckon that they’ll pick up less la debt.
I’m not dismissing nor denigrating Voc-Ed at all. In fact would expand it for high school students and raise its stature as a desirable course of study. Give those not academically inclined something to aim for, develop a degree of mastery in, and that they can take and get a job with after graduating and/or choose to advanced training at a CC. The last two years of high school are a waste for too many students and too many drop out.
When I was in high school, 1959 to 1963, there were definite vocation tracks and a college prep track. Now everyone is expected to go to college and the vocational track has been taken up by Community Colleges (some good courses, too). For those students, High School was largely a waste of time with absolutely no desire or need for Algebra, Geometry or English Lit. History and Economics have been dumbed down to satisfy flat-earthers, but that’s a different problem.
CCs have always had Voc-Ed programs. The major change is the proliferation of for-profit, Voc-Ed schools scarfing up government loans and grants. High cost-low value. The difficulty now is how to get those federal funds into the high schools.
Reduce the number of required high school academic courses for vocational track students, but also raise the standards on what they must learn/know to graduate. Add some prestige to vocational track by rejecting slackers. The messaging of course has to begin years earlier. Multiple tracks — not just vocational and college prep — would reduce the perception that voc-ed is for dummies, and being so labeled by self or others contributes to dropping out.
Didn’t pay much attention because I was hot to be an engineer or scientist, but I recall a secretarial track (shorthand and typing), wood working, metal working and drafting. I wanted to take some drafting courses but my schedule was too full.
Teaching all high school students critical thinking would help woth the dummies angle, but administrators desire social control and those two things dont mesh.
But Rubio’s actual program in voc ed is to be carried out by encouraging for-profit colleges, a scam ripping students off and leaving them in debt and jobless. Voc ed is another area where Germany and so many other places show a better approach: public education and respect for real work. But one reason it works in Germany is that the pay is decent.
Always check the fine print whenever a Republican says something that sounds reasonable. There’s always poison pills embedded or attached to it. These proprietary “colleges” are a blight on education, work, and the economy.
In Germany, I believe, the system is set up to divide kids (or track them) quite early, perhaps by age 11, into an academic or a vocational track. That kind of a system could not work in the US because people would feel that it was a set-up for prejudice. It might be interesting to ask Rubio (or others) whether they want to do that in the US when they seem so against things foreign.
The federal minimum wage is less now than it was in 1970 , measured in constant dollars. And these clowns think we can’t be competetive unless it is even lower? Germany seems to do OK in that regard, with an even higher minimum wage. Just maybe, turing the US into a third-world economy is not the way to go?
Im wary of using Germany as a comparisson because part of her success comes from beingable to instigate beggar thy neighbor policies thanks to control of the ECB without fiscal transfer like we do to the deep south.
True, but I doubt their entire success is built on that (not an economist though). Nevertheless, for Germany you may substitute almost any other Northern European country of your choice.
Until the last year Germany had no nation wage.
The traditional system of collective bargaining and/or works councils to set everybody’s wages is coming under some kind of pressure. Noplace I’m looking at says this is because of conservative government, but BBC noted that Merkel was forced to accept minimum wage law by the Social Democrats after the last electin forced into coalition with them..
….after the last election forced her….
Merkel will be out in about 2 months. Her absolute fuking disaster vis-a-vis the immigration debacle is setting up a no-confidence vote, and she is not going to survive that. I give her until Jan 15. Because what is going on now in Germany is a total disaster, and what will happen next year will be 2x worse.
She’s done.
I agree with the problem statement but not the solution.
The solution is not the race to the bottom, but scrapping Free Trade and re-instituting tariffs, tariffs that are designed not to protect the incompetent but to level wage costs. Yes, this means we should not have tariffs on German goods, but they should have tariffs on ours until we match their wages.
Turning America into a Third World country for the purpose of escalating billionaires into trillionaires should NOT be the trade policy of ANY major US party. Unfortunately it is the policy of BOTH major US parties.
It’s not just the price of goods that should be a determinate, but the quality as well. From a basic resource perspective, a good that lasts two to five or more times longer than what’s currently produced by “cheap labor” foreign manufacturers is preferable.
Recently went out with the Sis to get her a crepe pan comparable to my forty year old pan. (She was finally ready to give up on the teflon coated ones that produced inferior crepes and died within a few years and learn how to make real crepes.) The best we could find is somewhat flimsy and no way will it last forty years. But in constant dollars, she paid about 20% of what I had.
Socialist Europe has far lower tariffs than US as it is. They shouldn’t be necessary in a mature economy. What Europe has is industrial planning, state-run higher education, and union power.
Fact-checkers at MSNBC stated this morning that, contra Marco Rubio, Philosophers are actually better paid than welders, about 63K to 37K.
Nonetheless, I consider my welding class at San Francisco Vocational High School in ’75 a significant part of my philosophical education. If you’ve already signed up, I urge you to follow through. You’ll never be intimidated by an arc ever again…
Philosophers get funneled into law, unfortunately for them, so the high wage makes sense.
Didn’t watch but increasingly amused by Jeb’s superpac ads which keep trying to make him look more butch. He just sounds shrill.
It appears that in Late Capitalism or the Second Gilded Age (or whatever you want to call it), it is ever more essential that there be no means or methods to rationally evaluate or “fact check” the propaganda being spewed. Indeed, ideally the “moderators” should be injecting their own rightwing propaganda into the “debate”.
That they feel a desperate need to “defang” our already absolutely useless national media (including their own Fox Repub network!) is simply jaw dropping. Hitler, too, had his problems with the (very few) newspapers that attempted to cover him and his collection of political criminals as he rose to power–he called the these (actually heroic) papers the “poison kitchen”.
Trump’s outlying positions seemed to generate the real fissures or push-back, and mostly by the establishment boyz. As Brodie points out, Dr. Grandiosity, Surgical Savant, was handled with kiddie surgical gloves, and it does seem that the other “serious” (ha-ha) Klowns have decided to let him deflate or implode on his own via sepsis or something, without throwing many punches his way. But is this really likely to work in Fact Free Nation? Apparently the only permitted truth tellers are the declared Klowns themselves, certainly everyone else is the Lib’rul Media, etc etc. So ignore Dr Pyramid at your peril, Klownz.
As for the Big Picture, it’s all tax cuts all the time and (always unspecified) spending cuts, Wall Street philosophizin’ over ever lower wages and reverent deference to our heroic plutocrat job destroyers, er, sorry, JOB CREATORS(tm) and their wonderful global “economy”, which seems to be a force of (robot manufacturing) nature that humans apparently have no power to influence or reform (except via tax cuts, public sector de-employment and deregulation.) Or maybe through human sacrifice…an emerging Trump position?
Of course, all agree global warming is a junk science hoax that we can’t afford to do anything about in any event. And the chief problem with the world is not enough American troops and bombers and drones and close air support, that’s obvious. The fight over Mexican immigrants boils down to various levels of inhumanity, reprisal and rotting produce. In short, no rational policy proposal as far as the eye can see or ear hear.
One has to say that it will be fascinating to watch the self-retarded Rerube-lican base when they actually have to throw their votes at this braying collection of jackasses.
…Dr. Grandiosity, Surgical Savant, was handled with kiddie surgical gloves,..
The moderators were stumped as how to phrase any of Carson’s memes or talking points into a question that didn’t make the moderators look like even bigger asshats than Carson.
“Dr. Carson, would it behoove us to hire legions of unemployed young Black men to build pyramids to store our excess grain for the coming famine?”
We here in Reality land, non-pundits, may think the debate a collection of lies, gaffes, absurdities, and dreck, with every participant a clear loser, but Steve M. at No More Mister Nice Blog is finding a disturbing trend among media coverage:
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-press-is-falling-for-jebs-spin.html
He quotes multiple examples, thinks it through, and comes to some unsettling conclusions.
Jonathan Chait points out that the fundamental premise of Republicans is no longer argued persuasively:
Trenchant analysis. This is going to probably be a problem for them going forward.
Why a problem? They’ll just make up their own facts, ignore any contradictions, handwave away criticism, and accuse the Liberal Media ™ of trying to bring down America.
And the media won’t call them on it.
And at least 47 percent of American voters will buy whatever they’re selling.
But 47% remains a losing proposition as the system now stands.
Only so long as that 47 percent is a ceiling, not a floor. Between the feckless media, the widespread ignorance and apathy in the electorate, and the ever-present threat of some black swan, that 3 percent is not enough of a margin to give one comfort.
That feels too slender a thread on which to hang so dreadful a burden. Having said that, Republicans with the most to lose are probably watching the dial moving inexorably against them. Perhaps the first sign of abandonment of the supply-side fairy tale is apparent unwillingness to articulate it; ending unceasing repetition of that siren’s song now thirty-five years.
This is funny:
that was pretty amusing. Especially the illuminati stuff and the guy who wants to own the water.
I’m very late into this discussion with you all about vocational education, but I want to just say that Republicans seem to want to outsource the Post Office. That institution alone (ask John Kasich) has been a stepping stone for many, in particular for minorities, into the stable middle-class. What do you imagine they would say to that?
Let’s see – decent pay, good benefits including healthcare & pension, non-discrimination in hiring, sworn to serve the public and obey the Constitution. Yep, an organization like that has to be destroyed.
Yes, but the key is the postal unions. Combined, they are some of the largest unions in the country and world.
Destroy the USPS, sell of its assets and routes to private industry, AND destroy huge unions.
Win-win-win-win, all the way to the horizon, for the oligarchs.
Yes, I saw an essay “The Last Union” distributed one or two years ago. It pointed out that APWU is the biggest union now and the only one with any political power, so it is a prime target for the think tanks.
Their real goal, which they make no secret of, is to keep USPS for “the last mile”, the grittiest most expensive part. They want to take the sorting and mass distribution, the choicest part, then have postal carriers destroy their bodies carrying the last mile through “snow, hail …”.
At the plant where I worked. they can’t keep up with the mail stream yet sold 13 machines to private mailers for essentially scrap price. These were not the oldest machines, either.
On Fiorina, she did get around to answering the question in her second paragraph, agreeing with Baker that he said the opposite of what he said: “Yes, problems have gotten much worse under Democrats.” Nobody there seemed to notice, but my Twitter feed was startled.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF WELDING
W. Mattieu Williams, F.R.A.S., F.C.S.
From Van Nostrand’s Eclectic Engineering Magazine, Volume 11 (1874), pp.409-410.
In the address of M. Jordan, President of the “Societe des Ingenieurs” delivered at the annual meeting of the society in Paris, and reported in Iron, pp. 650 and 679, a novel explanation of the welding of iron is offered. M. Jordan says that welding “is a phenomenon exactly similar” to the regulation of water, the phenomena of re-gelation being these, that if two or more pieces of ice at a temperature not lower than their melting point, or preferably at a temperature much higher than their melting point, be pressed together, the liquid water adhering to their melting surface becomes solid at the places of contact, and thus the two pieces are refrozen into one. M Jordan very aptly illustrates the phenomena of regelation by the making of a snowball, telling us that this may be done “when snow is at a temperature not lower than 0 deg. centigrade, i.e. the freezing point of water. every man who has been a boy will confirm this, and remember that when the snow was very dry, and the temperature of the air below the freezing point, the snow-flakes would not cohere without the aid of much pressure and warmth from the hand, but that with sloppy snow during a thaw, he could make a hard icy snowball with ease. M. Jordan compares the making of the snowball by the children with the welding of the iron-ball by the puddler, maintains that the processes are identical, and applies Sir W. Thompson’s rather recondite explanation of regelation to the cases of iron and platinum welding.
It appears to me that this explanation is fallacious, as the conditions of solidification in the two cases are not only by no means alike, but are diametrically opposite, the welding of both iron and platinum being effected at a temperature considerably below their melting point, while the primary condition for the cohesion of two pieces of ice by regelation is that they shall be exposed to a temperature above, or at least, not below, their melting point. In order that regelation should be analogous to welding, it should take place at a temperature far below the freezing point. Now it is well known that under such circumstances regelation does not and cannot occur, and therefore it differs essentially and primarily from welding.
If it had been discovered that two or more pieces of iron, while in a furnace, raised above their melting point and streaming into fusion, would cohere when pressed together, and that this cohesion resulted from the solidification of their liquid surfaces, in spite of the melting heat of the furnace, we should then have an analogy with the regelation of melting ice, and M. Jordan’s conclusions would be justified. Regelation means the resolidifying of a liquid, or a special cohesion in spite of liquidity, welding means a special cohesion in spite of solidity, or apparent solidity. If M. Jordan had described them as examples of curiously opposite actions the comparison would have been more nearly correct. We might plausibly assume that, while the pressing together of two pieces of wet ice produces a solidification of the surface liquid, the pressing together of two pieces of heated iron has the opposite effect of momentarily liquefying the surfaces of contact, and thereby soldering them together. The plausibility of this explanation is increased by the fact that pressure develops heat, and thus the welding heat might, at the surface of contact, be momentarily raised to the fusing point, and then, on the removal of the pressure this liquid film might solidify and thus produce the welding cohesion. But even this theory is, in my opinion, too
learned. A far simpler explanation may be found, and we must never forget that when two or more explanations equally fit a given set of facts, the simplest is the best, and usually the true one.
In order to find a true analogy to welding we need go no further than the vulgar “sticking together” of two pieces of cobbler’s wax, pitch, putty, or clay. These are in a viscous or semi-fluid condition, and they cohere by an action similar to the transfusion or intermingling and uniting of two liquids. Iron and platinum pass through a viscous or pasty stage on their way from the solid to the liquid states, and the temperature at which this pasty condition occurs is the welding heat. Other metals are not weldable, because they pass too suddenly from the solid to the liquid condition. Ice, although it fuses so slowly, in consequence of the great amount of heat rendered latent in the act of fusion, passes at once from the state of a brittle crystalline solid to that of a perfect liquid. It passes through no intermediate pasty stage, and therefore is not weldable, or does not cohere like iron, etc., at a temperature below its fusing point.
It is usual to cite only iron and platinum, or iron, platinum and gold as weldable substances, but this. I think, is not correct. Lead should be included as a weldable metal. The two halves of a newly-cut leaden bullet may be made to reunite by pressure, even when quite cold. This is obviously due to the softness or viscosity of this metal.
Outside of the metals there is a multitude of weldable substances. I may take glass as a typical example of these. Its weldability depends upon the viscosity it assumes at a bright red heat, and the glass maker largely uses this property. When he attaches the handle to a claret jug, or joins the stem of a wine-glass to its cup, he performs a true welding process.
The chief practical difficulty in welding iron arises from the fact that at the welding heat it is liable to oxidation, and the oxide of iron is not viscous like the metallic iron To remedy this oxidation the workman uses sand, which combines with the oxide and forms a fusible silicate. If he is a good workman he does not depend upon the solidification of this film of silicate, as the adhesion thus obtained would be merely a soldering with brittle glass, and such work would readily separate when subject to vibratory violence. He therefore beats or squeezes the surfaces together with sufficient force to drive out from between them all the liquid silicate, and thus he secures a true annealing or actual union of pure metallic surfaces.
Cast iron or steel containing more than two per cent, of carbon cannot be welded. Why? I think I may venture to reply to this oft-repeated question by stating that the compound of iron with so much carbon is much more fusible than pure iron, or than steel with less carbon, and that it runs more suddenly or directly from the solid state into that of a liquid, and hence presents no workable range of weldable viscosity.
Lack of self awareness is one of the hallmarks of the conservative mind. Marco Rubio had a stunning display of that last night.
Marco Rubio mocked philosophy majors. He was a friggin Political Science major. Yes, he went on to law school but so do many philosophy majors. I have no problem with either major. I think the whole STEM majors are all that’s worth majoring in is horse shit.
But a Political Science major does not have the right to mock philosophy majors.
Treasury Secretary Lew – “…our tax code is broken and needs to be fixed,” Lew said. “We need to close the loopholes that contribute to inequality and inefficiency and inequality and lower rates on the business side. That’s why companies are moving offshore because our rates too high.
Sounds like he should be in the Republican debate. My disgust with the Obama administration and the Democratic Party in general continues to grow.
My gut agrees but, from what I understand the Europeans dont do the overseas taxing profits thing we do and they have less companies leaving and a more economically equitable society. So maybe there is something to the idea.