Help In These Times Survive the Recession and Reach Its 33rd Year! Please Donate Today.

All 16 comments by...

jeffc

    • 07 Aug 06
    • 1:26 pm

    "Who the heck can be on the side of charging 521 percent interest rates for people that are vulnerable and desperate?" I am, as someone who wants that vulnerable and desperate person to be able to get money he obviously needs very badly and immediately. If 521 percent is the best deal he can get (and if he could get better then why wouldn't he?) for money he needs badly and immediately, then all this legislation does is stop him from getting the money he needs. Don't kid yourself into believing this bill protects people from "predatory" lenders (ya know, those …

    Posted to Economic Populism Proves Popular
    • 07 Aug 06
    • 1:50 pm

    "It's been very exciting to show Democrats that when you get out there on an economic issue and show that you are on the side of everyday working folks, there's power in that nexus." That should be amended to, "It's been very exciting to show Democrats that when you get out there on an economic issue and show that you, on the surface anyway, appear to be on the side of everyday working folks, despite the fact that the policies you support, on balance, hurt the very people they were supposed to help, there's power in that nexus." "Politics is about …

    Posted to Economic Populism Proves Popular
    • 07 Aug 06
    • 1:42 pm

    "But if the service is so popular, why did lawmakers nearly fall over themselves to pass the interest cap?" Duh. Because the service is popular with the small segment of society that needs the service. Obviously, it's not used by most of the electorate that has, for example, credit card availability, and as such doesn't need the service. The legislators are accountable to the electorate as a whole, which is comprised mostly of people that don't use the service. To the broader electorate, this valuable service can be made to seem like a crime, and they don't understand the benefits of …

    Posted to Economic Populism Proves Popular
    • 15 Jun 06
    • 10:20 am

    ktkt, 1. You should look up the definition of "Ponzi Scheme." It's utterly hysterical of you to call "Corporate America" a Ponzi Scheme. There are examples of fraud, sure, but some fraud does not a Ponzi Scheme make. 2. "It has nothing to do with profits, good management, market share, products, or services." Actually, for the vast majority of corporations, it does have to do with those things you listed specifically because they are the only path to lasting success, which so many corporations have achieved. They certainly didn't achieve lasting success with "self-dealing, manipulating, and conning." Here is something about …

    Posted to Rot in the Barrel
    • 07 Jun 06
    • 9:58 am

    Delphi "proposed cutting workers' jobs and wages by roughly two-thirds." That just wouldn't work. All the workers would leave Delphi and go to other jobs that pay more than the lower wage that Delphi is offering. Either the workers would go to other higher paying jobs, or the fact that the Delphi job at the lower wage is still the best job available to the worker is evidence that unions lead to workers getting paid more than the economic value of what the workers offer the employer. That's what union-supporting legislation has done: It has led to a scenario in which …

    Posted to Delphi Dodges Union Contracts
    • 07 Jun 06
    • 10:07 am

    MORE... "And what about those 'legacy costs' for healthcare and pensions? Stover says that, starting in 1984, the union agreed to concessions and cost containment clauses in every contract to pay for those commitments to workers. 'Where’s that money now?' he asks. '[It’s] in China, Korea and other countries, making everyone else look profitable. What happened to the money and benefits I’ve been giving up every year?' ” He asks "where's that money now?" Then he answers his question with what is probably an incorrect answer. He is suggesting that the U.S. operations are hugely profitable, but the company has been …

    Posted to Delphi Dodges Union Contracts
    • 30 May 06
    • 2:59 pm

    After respectably acknowledging circumstantial evidence in the third to last paragraph, the author declines into nothing more than speculation and insinuation in the final two paragraphs. The anticipation in the author's writing is almost palpable: "Maybe this is the scandal that will finally kill them!" It's more of the desperate, never-ending search for the silver bullet.

    Posted to GOP Jams Democracy
    • 31 May 06
    • 10:03 am

    Actually, it's quite a bit more like having a passenger in the car who desperately hopes that any and every hint of any aroma whatsoever is a skunk.

    Posted to GOP Jams Democracy
    • 01 Jun 06
    • 10:27 am

    Had the Democrats done the phone jamming, you probably would have read about it in National Review. However, in all likelihood, the National Review piece would have avoided the speculation and insinuation.

    Posted to GOP Jams Democracy
    • 25 May 06
    • 2:10 pm

    johnny, I think your characterization of Republicans as Republiku**s is uncalled for. I bet you're going to deny you meant anything by it. Jeff

    Posted to Democrats Gear Up on the Ground
    • 26 May 06
    • 12:28 pm

    Johnny, As I predicted, you deny you meant anything by it. You're so predictable. Let's see if you're susceptible to my Jedi mind control: I'm just here to make sure Republicans are respected first and foremost in these discussions. They really appreciate my effort. You think that's nice. Jeff.

    Posted to Democrats Gear Up on the Ground
    • 25 May 06
    • 2:32 pm

    Mandy, "Why can’t our state education be free as it is in many other countries? Then I could be a contributing member of my local economy instead of paying student loans..." There's no such thing as "free state education." Even public K-12 isn't free. It is paid for out of the public treasury. If you weren't paying those bills, others would be. "...Then I could be a contributing member of my local economy instead of paying student loans." Don't worry about the economy. To the extent that you had to pay for your school, others didn't have to pay for your …

    Posted to Hey Millennials, Debt Becomes You
    • 25 May 06
    • 2:42 pm

    Mandy, "Inflation-adjusted numbers usually mean the numbers aren’t as good as they look. For example, families made $7,000 annually in 1960 and $30,000 annually in 1990. But inflation-adjustment takes into consideration the rise in living expenses that grew faster than income. So, the 1990 family actually has less spending/saving power than the 1960 family." Wrong. Did your Business-Marketing program include a finance class? Here's an inflation adjustment example. Let's say you made $30,000 in 2004. Let's say you get a raise so in 2005 you made $30,900. Let's say in 2005 inflation was 3%. Here is the inflation adjustment: in 2005 …

    Posted to Hey Millennials, Debt Becomes You
    • 25 May 06
    • 2:58 pm

    Wedontneedroads, "For service-sector employees who’d like to get paid ‘what they’re worth’, ‘in the now’, unionization (esp. of the minority variety) provides the best possible chance of this occurring." Actually, absent unions they are getting paid what they are worth. The wages they are earning are their best deal in the market (or they'd go somewhere else, right?). Unions and laws that support unions allow the 15% or so that are in unions to get paid more than they are worth. "Why do you twist history by blaming unions for the fall of auto manufacturing in America any more than you …

    Posted to Hey Millennials, Debt Becomes You
    • 26 May 06
    • 11:08 am

    Mandy, "I'm not going to spend my time searching for some article to reference, because I've read it many times and know it to be true." Should I be surprised that your faulty memory is the source of your unshakable certainty? "But if our leadership distributed money differently than paying for college for people wouldn't be any more of a burden than they already pay every April." If I'm correctly reading between the lines, you're saying "pay for everybody's college by taxing 'the rich' more." That is a position that you are free to take. You do know, of course that …

    Posted to Hey Millennials, Debt Becomes You
    • 26 May 06
    • 11:09 am

    MORE: "no you can't assume, based on free market idealism, that people get paid what they're worth." Well let's define terms. I mean we aren't taking about spiritual worth. We're talking about the economic worth of what they have to offer for trade vis a vis what is needed. (For example, a person may know philosophy inside and out, but it doesn't add to economic value if nobody needs it.) I'd say the market is paying them exactly what they're economic worth is, and if they think what they have to offer is worth more, they're certainly free to go get …

    Posted to Hey Millennials, Debt Becomes You