GOP Apostasy at its best

[Ddrak]

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-re ... 1314907779

Both parties are rotten - how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election? Both parties are captives to corporate loot. The main reason the Democrats' health care bill will be a budget buster once it fully phases in is the Democrats' rank capitulation to corporate interests - no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers; and no negotiation of drug prices, a craven surrender to Big Pharma.

Interesting read.

Dd

[Minute]

Wow thanks Dd, one of the best reads I've seen in a while.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

Very nice. A long read, but well worth it.

[MeGusta]

I found the subject matter interesting and compelling. The section dealing with how Republican changed the debate through language use is most intriguing.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I found a lot of it misleading and false, and I quit about half-way through because it was an obviously biased attack.

Couple of notes - The guy cites Apple as an example of corporate greed, and asks where are the jobs? Well, last I checked, Apple added over 12,000 jobs in 2010.

He says that smnall businesses only account for a little over 7% of jobs. But he has to be counting ALL jobs, both government and private, which is misleading. Of the private sector jobs, which are revenue enhancing, not sucking up taxes like public sector jobs, according to the SBA, small businesses account for 99.7 percent of all employers, employ over half the US private sector workers, pay over 44% of the US private payroll, have generate over 64% of the net new jobs in the last 15 years, create more than half the non-farm US GDP (government workers produce zero GDP), hire 40% of the high-tech workers (those are "good" jobs), and include over 97 percent of EXPORTERS, producing over 30% of known EXPORT value.

For that hack to downplay small businesses and portray them as minimal side players was irresponsible and shows a definite bias towards a pre-conceived viewpoint.

Its a hack piece, nothing else.

[Minute]

The pre-conceived viewpoint of 30 years as a professional GOP staff member on Capitol Hill?

[Ddrak]

Couple of notes - The guy cites Apple as an example of corporate greed, and asks where are the jobs? Well, last I checked, Apple added over 12,000 jobs in 2010.

12,000 jobs for $65 billion in revenue. Are you seriously suggesting $5 million per employee in sales is the cost of one employee?

Most benchmarks consider $150k/employee as the target for the tech industry and $200k as doing well. $5m/employee... I think "where's the jobs" is perfectly reasonable.

He says that smnall businesses only account for a little over 7% of jobs. But he has to be counting ALL jobs, both government and private, which is misleading. Of the private sector jobs, which are revenue enhancing, not sucking up taxes like public sector jobs, according to the SBA, small businesses account for 99.7 percent of all employers, employ over half the US private sector workers, pay over 44% of the US private payroll, have generate over 64% of the net new jobs in the last 15 years, create more than half the non-farm US GDP (government workers produce zero GDP), hire 40% of the high-tech workers (those are "good" jobs), and include over 97 percent of EXPORTERS, producing over 30% of known EXPORT value.

Yes, he got the number wrong (7.2% is the number of self-employed). That doesn't change his argument, in fact your entire tirade seems to have, uh, missed the point? I'm glad you can cut/paste the SBA advocacy page though.

His point, which is entirely valid, is that increasing taxes on personal incomes over $1m would have a negligible effect on small business despite GOP lies to the contrary. I can't believe you can discount the entire story from a single wrong number (and the funny part is, when I saw it I knew it was wrong too and went out to find out where he got it and whether it ACTUALLY changed his argument instead of quitting reading).

So, if you found "a lot of it misleading and false", why can you only quote one number that's false and when you attempted to show something "misleading" you ended up trying to tell us $5m/employee was reasonable? I know it's uncomfortable reading from both sides of politics (Dems don't get a pass in there either) but it certainly is worth reading through and if you still don't like it, attempting to put together coherent arguments against the actual points made.

And of course it's a biased attack. He's a self-confessed GOP apostate. Bias doesn't mean falsehoods though, just limited counter-examples.

Dd

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Couple of notes - The guy cites Apple as an example of corporate greed, and asks where are the jobs? Well, last I checked, Apple added over 12,000 jobs in 2010.

12,000 jobs for $65 billion in revenue. Are you seriously suggesting $5 million per employee in sales is the cost of one employee?

Most benchmarks consider $150k/employee as the target for the tech industry and $200k as doing well. $5m/employee... I think "where's the jobs" is perfectly reasonable.

That number doesn't account for other businesses that hired more people to specifically handle iPad demand in their stores.

[Ddrak]

12,000 jobs for $65 billion in revenue. Are you seriously suggesting $5 million per employee in sales is the cost of one employee?

Most benchmarks consider $150k/employee as the target for the tech industry and $200k as doing well. $5m/employee... I think "where's the jobs" is perfectly reasonable.

That number doesn't account for other businesses that hired more people to specifically handle iPad demand in their stores.

True, but the revenue number doesn't account for the revenue of other businesses either. We're talking specifically about Apple here and the amount of money they are receiving per employee.

I should note I got the numbers wrong too. I used the increase in jobs instead of the total employed. It's closer to $1.2m/employee, which still puts them at a very poor showing when it is viewed in terms of labor value rather than shareholder value. Whether that's a valid viewpoint is up for debate, but Apple really doesn't generate very many jobs at all for the amount of money that flows through it.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

It was the entire tone and tenor of the piece, Dd (or at least the half I read). It was an attack on the GOP, masked as a critique of both parties. All boiled down, the piece was "Republicans are crazy, and Democrats are too stupid to take advantage of that."

[Jarochai Alabaster]

All boiled down, the piece was "Republicans are crazy, and Democrats are too stupid to take advantage of that."

And this is incorrect?

[Embar Angylwrath]

I think its an over-simplisitc and jaundiced view. One might alternatively catagorize the Republicans and shrewd, and the Dems ineffectual. Did anyone forget this is policitcs, and not the schoolyard sandbox?

Republicans were incredibly cohesive, disciplined and hard to split. They employed hard-nosed negotiation tactics. The Dems blinked, and couldn't get any momentum, and failed to manage the message of their policies. I just find it laughable that people continue to blame the Republicans, all the while forgetting that the Dems control one Congressional house and the Oval Office. The Dems as a whole squandered opprtunties to pass legislation that would have required just a couple Rep votes, and start to build legislative momentum. Obama has squandered the power of the Presidency, allowing himself to be out-manuverred on a simple thing as request to speak at a joint session. He's now boxed in after the Rep debate and before the kick-off of the NFL opener. How presidential is that? He reminds me of the captain on the Titanic, who thought his ship was indestructible. And then when the iceberg hit, this captain would rather give speeches, but has shown little capacity for change. Hell, even his base is openly calling him out now. Boxer is on record saying she hopes he gets sued over recent Clean Air shit.

This upcoming jobs speech is Obama's Hail Mary pass. He might as well go big on it, because if he doesn't succedd, and can't show some positive swing in the economy and unemployment, he may well find himself in the private sector next year.

[Lurker]

I think its an over-simplisitc and jaundiced view.

That's a perfect description for everything you post.

Take your latest screed, for example. If Republicans were "incredibly cohesive, disciplined and hard to split", how can it also be true that the Democrats "squandered opportunities to pass legislation that would have required just a couple of Rep votes"? We all watched it in real time as the Democrats spent months trying to compromise with Republicans, giving the few moderates left in the party literally everything they asked for, only to watch them join the filibusters anyways.

At every step Obama tried to do everything possible to get the Republicans on board, and the Republican's refused because they thought they would gain politically, country be damned. They even voted against legislation that had been proposed and supported by Republicans mere weeks or months earlier. We saw this time and time again.

On health care, it's pretty well understood that the Republican Party made a huge mistake. First of all, they publicly opposed reform on the grounds that it cut too much from Medicare. Nice job sticking to your principles Republicans! They also passed up the opportunity to meaningfully shape the legislation at a time when Obama was willing to do anything to get a few Republican votes. But again, political advantage was more important to the Republicans than principles or country.

And wouldn't you know it... here you go again attacking Obama for the economy. And when the Republicans block his proposed legislation and he "can't show some positive swing in the economy and unemployment", you'll blame the Republicans. Just kidding... you'll ignore that the Republicans are sabotaging the recovery for political gain and you'll attack Obama.

Over-simplistic and jaundiced indeed. That's Embar.

*** this link free post brought to you free of charge ***

[Embar Angylwrath]

I think its an over-simplisitc and jaundiced view.

That's a perfect description for everything you post.

Take your latest screed, for example. If Republicans were "incredibly cohesive, disciplined and hard to split", how can it also be true that the Democrats "squandered opportunities to pass legislation that would have required just a couple of Rep votes"? We all watched it in real time as the Democrats spent months trying to compromise with Republicans, giving the few moderates left in the party literally everything they asked for, only to watch them join the filibusters anyways.

Because they weren't as effective as the Reps, even when they had control of the Congress and the Presidency. One might ask.. how could they simply fuck up that kind of opportunity...

At every step Obama tried to do everything possible to get the Republicans on board, and the Republican's refused because they thought they would gain politically, country be damned. They even voted against legislation that had been proposed and supported by Republicans mere weeks or months earlier. We saw this time and time again.

I wouldn't call boxing out the Republicans from negotiations exactly an embracing stance. I understand the politcal necessity, but then again, its politics, and he didn't play that one too well, did he?

On health care, it's pretty well understood that the Republican Party made a huge mistake. First of all, they publicly opposed reform on the grounds that it cut too much from Medicare. Nice job sticking to your principles Republicans! They also passed up the opportunity to meaningfully shape the legislation at a time when Obama was willing to do anything to get a few Republican votes. But again, political advantage was more important to the Republicans than principles or country.

No, he wasn't willing to do anything. He was only willing to go so far. And again, the Dems had control of the House, Senate and Oval Office. Why wasn't he effective with that much power?

And wouldn't you know it... here you go again attacking Obama for the economy. And when the Republicans block his proposed legislation and he "can't show some positive swing in the economy and unemployment", you'll blame the Republicans. Just kidding... you'll ignore that the Republicans are sabotaging the recovery for political gain and you'll attack Obama..

I'm not attacking him for the econoomy, I'm attacking his response to the economy, something you seem unable to grasp.

[Lurker]

I'm not attacking him for the econoomy, I'm attacking his response to the economy, something you seem unable to grasp.

When Obama proposes legislation that you yourself say is critical to the recovery, the Republican's block that legislation, and then you attack Obama for "his response to the economy" (when "his response" was blocked by your party), that makes you a partisan tool, something you seem unable to acknowledge.

[Ddrak]

It was the entire tone and tenor of the piece, Dd (or at least the half I read). It was an attack on the GOP, masked as a critique of both parties. All boiled down, the piece was "Republicans are crazy, and Democrats are too stupid to take advantage of that."

Not really - I don't think he was saying there was anything crazy about the GOP. He was more saying that they're running a cold and calculating system designed to gain as much power as possible at any cost.

The biggest thing I hate about the GOP is actually linked to your criticism of the Democrats. No party should act in lockstep. A politician that forgets the duty of each member is primarily to their electorate and secondarily to the party they belong to does NOT belong in power. This is actually why I detest the Labor party over here.

Criticizing a party for not being able to ram through legislation despite having a narrow majority means that the opposition was operating in lockstep and the majority wasn't. I find that more a slight on the opposition than the party in power.

Dd

[Fallakin Kuvari]

The biggest thing I hate about the GOP is actually linked to your criticism of the Democrats. No party should act in lockstep. A politician that forgets the duty of each member is primarily to their electorate and secondarily to the party they belong to does NOT belong in power. This is actually why I detest the Labor party over here.

Dd

Both parties are guilty of it over here, its just a matter of who breaks with the party to save face on certain issues most of the time.

[Ddrak]

Both parties are guilty of it over here, its just a matter of who breaks with the party to save face on certain issues most of the time.

I know they're both guilty of it, but it's hard to say the GOP isn't far, far better at acting in lockstep.

Dd

[MeGusta]

If you are any kind of student of history you can note many instances of the terrible beauty and horrendous atrocity that results from such single minded focus.

The great irony is that they purport an idea that they and their ideology parallels that of the founding fathers, when in fact the founding fathers were the furthest thing from cohesive.