How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 I wonder?   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

I wonder?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


0 posted 04-17-2010 08:27 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Are taxpayers funding Organizing for America? If they are they shouldn't be since it's nothing more than a campaign tool for Obama's never-ending campaign:


http://bigjournalism.com/jsexton/2010/04/16/turning-the-tables -on-organizing-for-america-aka-fun-with-astroturf/
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


1 posted 04-17-2010 09:37 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Are taxpayers funding Organizing for America?


Yes.

Are taxpayers funding the tea party events Denise?

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


2 posted 04-17-2010 09:42 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Only those who want to Grinch.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


3 posted 04-17-2010 10:24 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

I guess they're both the same then Denise.

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


4 posted 04-17-2010 10:49 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I don't see any taxpayer funds in Obama's budget going to Tea Party groups:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=125977
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


5 posted 04-17-2010 11:48 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


I don’t see it going to Organizing for America either – I guess they are the same Denise.

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


6 posted 04-17-2010 12:08 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Federal taxpayer money goes to support public schools.

quote:
Obama is using the public schools to recruit a private army of high-schoolers to "build on the movement that elected President Obama by empowering students across the country to help us bring about our agenda." We now know that Obama's "agenda" is to move the United States into European-style socialism.


I don't believe that schools that are funded by taxpayer dollars should be agents of propaganda like this. And time is money, the teachers' time and the students' time, that is being monopolized by Organizing for America.

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


7 posted 04-17-2010 12:26 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
I don't believe that schools that are funded by taxpayer dollars should be agents of propaganda


A lot of atheists would probably agree with you Denise.



So your gripe is that the Democrats are reaching out to kids and trying to get them involved in the political process through an organisation funded by the DNC. That’s wrong how exactly? I haven’t checked but I’d be absolutely amazed if the Republicans weren’t doing exactly the same – so what’s the problem and how exactly does the reference to taxpayers come into all this?

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


8 posted 04-17-2010 06:53 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

They are utilizing teachers' time (paid for by the taxpayer) and students' time (financed by the taxpayer) to propagandize for their political point of view.

Neither political party should be doing this.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


9 posted 04-18-2010 09:05 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2010/04/18/indoctrination-on-campus-seiu-arrests-give-new-meaning-to-cutting-class/
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


10 posted 04-18-2010 11:50 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     What do you know about the situation, Denise, other than what the "Liberty Chick" says?

     And why is it that you would take her word that what she says is the only and correct side of the story?

     You post it here as if it were a given that this is in fact the case.  Since I know nothing of the situation other than what I've read here and am left with significant questions, I wonder if you seem to have posted this way because you have decided against anything that has "union" and "college loan" attached to it.

     You certainly appear to be taking a position.

      I don't know if there's enough to decide one way or the other.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


11 posted 04-19-2010 05:48 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Just an example of SEIU thuggery at its finest. They've got those community organzing skills down pat!

I know Danny Glover got arrested the other day at one of their protests. Andy Stern said he wanted to get arrested but for some reason didn't, Maybe he changed his mind at the last minute.

I wonder if the new 'government only' student loans will only be given to kids who agree to attend colleges that allow these union and community organizing folks to recruit and brainwsh them?

I guess private colleges who don't accept government financed student loans will now have to rethink that or become a thing of the past, since kids won't be able to get any other kind of loan.  I also wonder how many people lost their jobs to the government take-over of the student loan industry.

So much for freedon.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


12 posted 04-19-2010 06:36 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

The government now has absolute control over student loans.
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


13 posted 04-19-2010 07:22 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

“Obama wants all federal loans to come straight from Uncle Sam, which would create a net savings of $62 billion through 2020, according to figures last week from the Congressional Budget Office. That's money that could go back into financial aid.

The current setup "wastes taxpayer dollars on subsidies to student loan companies," says Pedro de la Torre with Campus Progress, a youth advocacy group supporting the president's plan. "We think money should be going to student aid to help low- and middle-income students to afford college."
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-03-21/business/bal-bz.ambrose21mar21_1_direct-lending-student-loan-student-aid
JenniferMaxwell
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 09-14-2006
Posts 2275


14 posted 04-19-2010 07:23 AM       View Profile for JenniferMaxwell   Email JenniferMaxwell   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JenniferMaxwell

But what about Freedom Fries?  

"This week, at global food service company Sodexo's annual shareholder meeting in Paris, France, this mounting frustration will play out on a different stage. While Sodexo's top executives and investors celebrate record 2009 profits, hundreds of the company's front line food service workers, from across the United States and Europe, are gathering to share a very different story."

Sodexo: A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing is Still a Wolf
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mitch-ackerman/sodexo-a-wolf-in-sheeps-c_b_435688.html  


U.S. Union Plans to Serve Up a Protest at Sodexo's Annual Meeting
“Sodexo and its U.S. workers have clashed before. Sodexo initially fought a race-bias suit filed by thousands of black employees in the United States, who charged that they were barred from promotions and segregated within Sodexo; the company agreed to settle for $80 million in 2005.”
“Since 2000, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration has carried out at least 132 enforcement inspections arising from incidents at or complaints about conditions at Sodexo or its units.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/business/global/25iht-sodexo.html?pagewanted=1

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


15 posted 04-19-2010 06:00 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

quote:

Just an example of SEIU thuggery at its finest. They've got those community organizing skills down pat!

I know Danny Glover got arrested the other day at one of their protests. Andy Stern said he wanted to get arrested but for some reason didn't, Maybe he changed his mind at the last minute.



     The best our Pip dictionary Application would do was

quote:

thug   [thug]  Show IPA
–noun
1.
a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
2.
(sometimes initial capital letter) one of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who strangled their victims.
Origin:
1800–10; < Hindi thag lit., rogue, cheat

—Related forms
thug·ger·y  [thuhg-uh-ree]  Show IPA, noun
thuggish, adjective
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2010.
Cite This Source | Link To thuggery



     Apparently, Denise, you are again suffering from a case of language inflation.  Unions and community organization are now in your mind the purview here of people that are cruel and vicious and are ruffians, robbers and murderers.  I would suspect that you would have quite a few people who might give you a dispute about that.  I suspect that none of them were part of the Kali cult that was apparently wiped out in 1839, not even, in all likelihood, by extension.  You'd have to prove that.
    
quote:

I wonder if the new 'government only' student loans will only be given to kids who agree to attend colleges that allow these union and community organizing folks to recruit and brainwash them?



     This is an interesting an poisonous piece of speculation here.  Because of its structure, it appears to avoid libel while giving free reign for fantasy to build absurdity upon absurdity, unmortared by the cement of reality testing.  You leave out, Oh, so many things.

     First, you don't like government spending of taxpayer monies at all.  So any cutbacks should be welcome to you.

     Second, That the government was not giving the money to the kids, it was giving money to the banks, so the banks could make a profit on it.  That's corporate welfare, a taxpayer giveaway to people who don't need the money in the first place to underwrite loans so that the banks can't loose money on them.  That's anti-capitalist.  The banks should be taking the risk to make money; not doing so is what you should be calling socialism, isn't it?

     Third, the government loses money by doing so, so that's what you'd call "waste and fraud in Government," isn't it?

     Fourth, if the banks wish to make student loans, the government hasn't said that they can't.  They are still free to do so.  They are simply angry that now they must do so in a free market, with competition that says that it's in the interest of the country to have a well educated citizenry, and is willing to put its money where its mouth is.  Had the banks been less greedy about their lending rates in the past, and had they been more aware of "enlightened self interest" rather than simply "self-interest" then they wouldn't have created the conditions where it was in the interest of the government and the people to change policy.  Now they must actually compete.

     Fifth, the loans the government offers are not interest free loans.   The government should make a profit on them, enough to cover the defaults and to increase the loan pool that they have to operate with in the first place.  It should be a government program that may actually make money.

     Nobody says that private colleges have to accept government loans.  They can accept private bank loans or make whatever other arrangements they wish to make with the students.  They will need to compete for money and for students with other colleges in a competitive environment.

     Feel free to wonder how many people lost their jobs to the Government take-over of the Student loan industry.  While you think about that, think about how many people lost their jobs in the funeral industry when the government mandated seat belts and air bags and saved perhaps tens of thousands of lives a year.  

     I share your grief.

     If the banks wish to compete, the market is still there.  It simply won't be a subsidized market any more.  

     Unless you want to campaign for a heavily subsidized banking industry so we can be sure that those banks make sure they have big big profits without taking those risks.  That is what you say you want, now, isn't it?
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


16 posted 04-19-2010 08:41 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

LOL, I think you are the one engaging in language inflation, Bob. Just because I call someone a thug doesn't mean that I am calling that someone one of the more extreme definitions of that word.

The banks are no longer allowed, thanks to the tacked on takeover of the student loan business to the healthcare bill to make student loans. Only the federal government can make those loans now. Private loans will no longer be allowed.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


17 posted 04-20-2010 12:20 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Nonsense, Denise.

     Show me where it says that.

     The Government has stopped subsidizing banks loans to people who want to borrow money to go to college, yes.  Who says that banks can't make unsubsidized loans?  It's a free country.  Just because the government has stopped giving the banks a guaranteed profit on those loans doesn't mean that it can't make loans the same way it can make loans to anybody.

     I suspect that the banks wouldn't have made the loans in the first place if the government hadn't underwritten them.  Why should the govenment give taxpayer money away to banks as profit, when it's the students who need it?  The government can make a profit without the middlemen.  It's that socialism that you're always complaining about to give that money to the banks; it's what you'd call "a takeover of the banks," isn't it?

     This way, the banks can get out of the business they never wanted to be in in the first place or compete for student business with the government at a fair interest rate.

     I don't think the banks are interested in fair competition; I think they want the government give-away and subsidy.  That puts them in competition for people who are starving for government money.

     Are you actually telling me that you'd rather support the rich after complaining about the government bail-out, and then allow the impoverished to starve?  I have trouble believing that.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


18 posted 04-20-2010 08:17 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Tucked into the legislation President Obama signed Tuesday is an important change that didn't get near the attention of health care reform: a sweeping overhaul of the nation's student loan program.

The law changes how student loans are administered. Borrowers used to be able to get college loans from either banks or the federal government. In return for administering loans to students, private banks received federal subsidies to provide student loans.

Under the new law, private banks will no longer handle federally backed student loans. Instead, the federal government will be the only lender to students. Supporters say the overhaul eliminates the fees banks get to act as the middlemen, saving the government billions of dollars.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/30/student.aid.faqs/index.html
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


19 posted 04-20-2010 01:57 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     That's right, Denise.

     The Government no longer pays fees to the banks or subsidizes them for loaning money to students.  That's what I said, that's what the government said.

     That doesn't mean banks can't loan money to students.  It only means that the government isn't subsidizing its own competitors, and if the banks want to make the loans they will have to do so without getting money from the government to do so and without having the loans guaranteed.

     They wouldn't have to be paid to do business and make money by the government.

     They can still do business, if they choose.  The government thinks that it can not only do business, but also make enough money to fund the program in the process.  Apparently the banks want more.  They want to money without taking the risk by having the government guarantee the repayment and then, on top of that, get fees paid in addition.  Then they want to say that not getting things their way is an assault on Freedom.

     And you want to believe them.

     So far, you seem to have proven my point for me.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


20 posted 04-20-2010 03:04 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Do you call that fair competition between the government and the private banks, Bob? How could they possibly be able to offer competitive interest rates with the feds while having to be responsible for potential defaults on those loans, something the government doesn't have to worry about. The government can just print more money. Granting student loans under these conditions would be fiscally irreponsible for the private banks and lenders. The government has too much of an edge.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


21 posted 04-20-2010 05:52 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

quote:

Do you call that fair competition between the government and the private banks, Bob? How could they possibly be able to offer competitive interest rates with the feds while having to be responsible for potential defaults on those loans, something the government doesn't have to worry about. The government can just print more money. Granting student loans under these conditions would be fiscally irresponsible for the private banks and lenders. The government has too much of an edge.



     Having the power to print more money and doing so are two different things, Denise.

     When you do that, you get runaway inflation, like in the Weimar Republic.  A loaf of bread used to cost a wheelbarrow full of Reichsmarks, literally.  Granted, thinks feel expensive, but they aren't Weimar Republic expensive.

     How can they afford to compete with the government?  By offering loans at competitive rates if they feel that there is enough profit in there for them.  Private banks have to face the same issues of defaults that the government faces in their other business loan ventures, when they make other sorts of loans.  They simply want to make loans where the profit is higher and the risk is lower, as in credit card type investments, where the profits can be what was once called usury and was considered, literally, a sin.  They will tack on as many fees and charges and raise their rates as high as they can get away with, and they will weep very loudly if anything threatens their profit margins.

     It may be that they don't consider making student loans very profitable.  Maybe they won't want to make them.

     Did they make them before the government bribed them and underwrote their profits to do so?

     If they did, they should be able to continue now unless they feel there's a better use for their money.  They have the freedom to make that choice.

     Why should the federal government be forced to subsidize bank profits, costing the taxpayers money, when the government can provide more loans to more people more cheaply and still make enough of a profit to keep the program going on its own?  Are you campaigning for higher taxes and subsidizing bank profits?

     The government can only print more money if it wants to get in trouble with the voters about the economy.  That's a lot of what got the Republicans voted out of office in 2008, remember?  Not a smart idea.

     The government can offer the loans at less cost to taxpayers.  The banks are upset at not getting corporate welfare, and you're upset at not giving it to them.  If you want to get upset at p[potential layoffs in banking, why haven't you been screaming bloody murder every time there's a bank merger and substantial numbers of employees are laid off as cost savings in the consolidation?  The total number of layoffs have been likely far larger — most any redundant positions are gone as opposed to a few positions localized in the loan departments.  You haven't voiced any upset about that; why about this?

     This is a case of something the government can do more cheaply and better.  I suspect that's why.

      
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


22 posted 04-20-2010 09:24 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

So has the government stopped printing money since 2008?

I don't believe that banks should get corporate welfare. I also don't believe that the government should make themselves the only viable game in town either. And that's just what they have done with the student loan industry.

This administration seems intent on throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


23 posted 04-20-2010 11:17 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Why should the federal government be forced to subsidize bank profits, costing the taxpayers money, when the government can provide more loans to more people more cheaply and still make enough of a profit to keep the program going on its own?

Bob, you're assuming the government can do it well. Most people, I think, would suggest there's not a lot of history to support that kind of assumption. People out to make an honest profit always seem to do just about everything better than the government can.

Denise, the initial question is really pretty simple. Do you want what is best for the banking industry or do you want what is best for our college students? If you really intend to argue in favor of the banks, honestly, I don't think you're going to find a lot of support.

The initial question, of course, isn't just pretty simple; it's also too simple. It looks only at the short term benefits of the legislation and, like Bob, assumes the government can push those benefits into the long term. I'm skeptical, to say the least.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


24 posted 04-20-2010 11:47 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


  

     The treasury prints enough money to replace the money that's taken out of circulation through the process of wear and tear.  Old, worn-out money is returned to the Fed and destroyed and enough new money is printed to replace it and to keep roughly the same amount in circulation.  This is done year in and year out by the treasury department under the supervision of the Secret Service, one of whose duties is to keep track of counterfeiting and problems with the currency.  You don't want to overprint or underprint.

     Part of the problem with counterfeiting is that it is an attack on the economy, which is why it's taken so seriously.  It can have serious economic consequences for the country.  This is one of the reasons that the currency color was changed a few years back, because of successful counterfeiting attacks on the economy from the Becca Valley.  The change in currency was to counter the risk of inflation, among other things.

     The government never stops printing money.  It is also very careful about how much money that it prints to avoid some of these problems.  If you print too much, you devalue the dollar, right?

     You keep asserting that the government is the only game in town with student loans.

     The government makes policy; that's the business of government.

     The policy has been that an educated population is a desirable thing.

     The government thus set about building incentives to educate the people.  They offered loans to veterans, for example, who wanted to go to school.

     Where were the banks before this?  Were they offering low cost loans to veterans or to anybody who wanted to go to school?  Not that I know of.  

     Those loans paid off very well for the country.  It was a good government policy.  The banks could have offered loans to folks if they'd wanted to.  It probably would have saved the taxpayers money.  Were you yelling at the banks, demanding that they offer such a product?  I suspect you would have mentioned such a thing if it had been true.  Still, the banks were free to decide to offer or not offer, as they saw fit.

     When the government offered to subsidize bank loans, guarantee repayment to the banks and paid fees, then suddenly there was what you call "a student loan industry."

     There was no student loan industry.

     There was a welfare line of bankers standing in line in front of the Government offices with their hands out for taxpayer money.  Every time they could find a student to loan it to, they got money from the government and the taxpayers.  What sort of an industry is that, Denise?  It was a bloated hand-out program.

     Now the policy was that we wanted to encourage education, not that we bribe bankers, who were sucking a large part of the education money out of the pockets of the students and the universities and away from the use intended for it by the taxpayers.

     The government decided that it didn't want to pay the bribe any more.

     Now there appears to be enough money in the fund so that the government can loan the same money to the same number of students or more and actually make a good profit on that money, even with the expected rate of defaults.  If the government can make a profit on that money, even with the defaults, so can private bankers.

     It simply won't be the usurious rate of profit they like to get.  They won't be sucking your blood, my blood and the blood of students to get it.  They'll actually have to settle for the same amount of profit that the government will make.

     Considering that the government didn't have to let them be part of the business in the first place, I'd say they've had a mighty generous ride so far.  I'd also have to say that the government can't afford to keep them on the dole, and that people who are actually in need of money so that they can eat or have a roof over their heads would have to come first.  

     Exactly what you think is the baby and what you think is the bathwater in your analogy escapes me, so I can't really comment on that.

    
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> I wonder?   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors