OK, why are so many government websites now redirecting to closed pages? Are we to believe that the servers have all been shut off and internet connections have been turned off?
It's posturing. I think they feel they need to get a message out there, since the GOP is undoubtedly doing so. I don't think this is the right way to do it, though. The language used to describe the shutdown yesterday on whitehouse.gov was borderline childish.
I predict that the shutdown will continue until the debt ceiling negotiations begin. At that time, I predict a similar impasse with higher stakes and deeper consequences.
In the end, I predict that the Democrats will hold firm, and the moderate Republicans will vote to end it all and resume normal government operations at the eleventh hour before a default (with minimal concessions unrelated to the ACA) from the Democrats.
The Tea Party will go apeshit, and primary challenges will spring up from the right for many moderate Republicans. The moderates in most urban areas, however, particularly in the northeast, will either survive or be displaced by Democrats (not Tea Party crazies).
Good grief. That's not funny it's just fucking sad. The minority page cites peer reviewed research and survey results and other actual measures of reality. The majority site reads like a tabloid front page.
How did they go from awesome sauce with chips to ... Well, I am not really sure what to call them today... The guy who asks if you want awesome sauce with your chips?
So they are going back to the founder's original vision?
I don't know what the founder's vision was, but it turns out a high-turnover temporary workforce creates a shitty shopping experience and you start losing customers to competitors.
So they are going back to the founder's original vision?
I don't know what the founder's vision was, but it turns out a high-turnover temporary workforce creates a shitty shopping experience and you start losing customers to competitors.
I wish all companies would figure this out. The company I work for does this, we don't hire anybody full time at first. They hire them in as temps, then make them full time 3-6 months later. I just doesn't work worth a crap.
A lot of this bullshit is plain and simple short-sightedness, a lot of it driven by the pressure of stockholders demanding quarter-to-quarter profit increases over any kind of long-term sustainability. A huge element of Ford's success was paying his employees enough money to actually buy his products, creating demand for his supply in the first place.
If companies who make their money off of selling products to the public keep shitting on their own employees, eventually people won't have the income left over to buy their products in the first place. They have to know this, it's super-basic economics, but it's much more profitable for them, personally, to go for short-term gains for the investors while themselves investing in other companies with similar strategies.
So they would have no problem with old people getting heat stroke? Really? As for the cell phones, they do realize that the program that gives people on food stamps subsidized cell phones was put into law by Reagan, don't they?
Filter it according to the source. CNN was willing to publish it and there is likely some truth in there even it is a truth not intended to be conveyed by the author.
I actually gave it spin just to see what it was. Fucking hell was that a terrible article. It was really nothing but name-calling, projection and useless anecdotes. It is breathtaking how he routinely blames Obama and the Democrats for failures the Republicans have caused and Obama hasn't been able to fix yet, mostly because the Republicans are blocking any attempt to do so.
The entire premise of the article is laughable. Essentially he is attempting to declare that only a splinter fraction of the Republican party is extreme right, but the entirety of the Democratic part is on the fringe left. This is of course absolutely ludicrous to anyone with half a brain and a more international view of politics. In Europe the Democratic Party would be a center-right party.
Yet, I think the most audacious statements are still him attempting to paint the Republican party as the party of "ffresh, natural, economic growth".
Comments
In the end, I predict that the Democrats will hold firm, and the moderate Republicans will vote to end it all and resume normal government operations at the eleventh hour before a default (with minimal concessions unrelated to the ACA) from the Democrats.
The Tea Party will go apeshit, and primary challenges will spring up from the right for many moderate Republicans. The moderates in most urban areas, however, particularly in the northeast, will either survive or be displaced by Democrats (not Tea Party crazies).
The aristocrats.
Holy shit.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/09/25/wal-mart-returning-to-full-time-workers-obamacare-not-such-a-job-killer-after-all/
Not that Disney is a shining example of responsible corporate personhood, but it's still a positive story.
If companies who make their money off of selling products to the public keep shitting on their own employees, eventually people won't have the income left over to buy their products in the first place. They have to know this, it's super-basic economics, but it's much more profitable for them, personally, to go for short-term gains for the investors while themselves investing in other companies with similar strategies.
I'm going to take my advise about the Democratic Party from a Republican Strategist.... Just saying...
I'd love to see some actual radical populism, Kingfisher style.
The entire premise of the article is laughable. Essentially he is attempting to declare that only a splinter fraction of the Republican party is extreme right, but the entirety of the Democratic part is on the fringe left. This is of course absolutely ludicrous to anyone with half a brain and a more international view of politics. In Europe the Democratic Party would be a center-right party.
Yet, I think the most audacious statements are still him attempting to paint the Republican party as the party of "ffresh, natural, economic growth".