- This topic has 355 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 12 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 30, 2010 at 12:08 PM #585523July 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM #584491
Eugene
Participant[quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.
July 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM #584582Eugene
Participant[quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.
July 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM #585118Eugene
Participant[quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.
July 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM #585226Eugene
Participant[quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.
July 30, 2010 at 12:22 PM #585528Eugene
Participant[quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.
July 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM #584496beanmaestro
ParticipantFine point, but the writing is terrible. Which, unfortunately, undermines the point.
The stats in this article are sensationalistic and mostly unbenchmarked. Comparing numbers from the last three years just proves we’re in a recession. Give us a friggin’ long-term graph, and the data will speak even louder for itself. As it is now, I feel this icky feeling that the numbers were manipulated unnecessarily.
July 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM #584587beanmaestro
ParticipantFine point, but the writing is terrible. Which, unfortunately, undermines the point.
The stats in this article are sensationalistic and mostly unbenchmarked. Comparing numbers from the last three years just proves we’re in a recession. Give us a friggin’ long-term graph, and the data will speak even louder for itself. As it is now, I feel this icky feeling that the numbers were manipulated unnecessarily.
July 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM #585123beanmaestro
ParticipantFine point, but the writing is terrible. Which, unfortunately, undermines the point.
The stats in this article are sensationalistic and mostly unbenchmarked. Comparing numbers from the last three years just proves we’re in a recession. Give us a friggin’ long-term graph, and the data will speak even louder for itself. As it is now, I feel this icky feeling that the numbers were manipulated unnecessarily.
July 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM #585231beanmaestro
ParticipantFine point, but the writing is terrible. Which, unfortunately, undermines the point.
The stats in this article are sensationalistic and mostly unbenchmarked. Comparing numbers from the last three years just proves we’re in a recession. Give us a friggin’ long-term graph, and the data will speak even louder for itself. As it is now, I feel this icky feeling that the numbers were manipulated unnecessarily.
July 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM #585533beanmaestro
ParticipantFine point, but the writing is terrible. Which, unfortunately, undermines the point.
The stats in this article are sensationalistic and mostly unbenchmarked. Comparing numbers from the last three years just proves we’re in a recession. Give us a friggin’ long-term graph, and the data will speak even louder for itself. As it is now, I feel this icky feeling that the numbers were manipulated unnecessarily.
July 30, 2010 at 12:55 PM #584511blahblahblah
Participant[quote=Eugene][quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.[/quote]
And don’t forget that we’ll also have to get rid of all environmental protections. If we want to compete with China, Laos, and Burkina Faso our corporations will need to be able do dump toxic waste and heavy metals anywhere they want. Otherwise they will have to waste too much money conforming to environmental “nanny state” regulation.
July 30, 2010 at 12:55 PM #584602blahblahblah
Participant[quote=Eugene][quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.[/quote]
And don’t forget that we’ll also have to get rid of all environmental protections. If we want to compete with China, Laos, and Burkina Faso our corporations will need to be able do dump toxic waste and heavy metals anywhere they want. Otherwise they will have to waste too much money conforming to environmental “nanny state” regulation.
July 30, 2010 at 12:55 PM #585138blahblahblah
Participant[quote=Eugene][quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.[/quote]
And don’t forget that we’ll also have to get rid of all environmental protections. If we want to compete with China, Laos, and Burkina Faso our corporations will need to be able do dump toxic waste and heavy metals anywhere they want. Otherwise they will have to waste too much money conforming to environmental “nanny state” regulation.
July 30, 2010 at 12:55 PM #585246blahblahblah
Participant[quote=Eugene][quote]If that does not work, we will have to take away all benefits, such as food stamps, welfare and UE benefits to teach them the virtues of remaining competitive in a global market. [/quote]
and don’t forget OSHA and the 40-hour week … real globally competitive countries have no need for such nanny-state regs.[/quote]
And don’t forget that we’ll also have to get rid of all environmental protections. If we want to compete with China, Laos, and Burkina Faso our corporations will need to be able do dump toxic waste and heavy metals anywhere they want. Otherwise they will have to waste too much money conforming to environmental “nanny state” regulation.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.