The Right Scoop
No, I think the right '3rd door' would have been if OWS was camping out on steps of their local courthouse, because that is where the blame belongs.
And the media? The job of the media used to be keeping capitalism, AND government honest by doing their homework and putting up redflags to DAs when it was needed.
You can't have honest authority without accountability.
It won't take a liberal media outlet like Current TV to paint Romney as an over the top, unapologetic, amoral (yes, worse than immoral) greed monger with no soul. Romney hardly misses a chance to make the case for himself: "I like to be able to fire people that provide services for me." Outflanking Ted Kennedy on the left as to gay rights and abortion in Massachusetts, then outflanking Santorum to the right in a GOP primary, etc. The only hope for Mitt is the apathy and intellectual laziness of the voters.
Speaking as LDS, the thousands murdered by the US government, left us one choice, run for the hills, which we did. We burned all the crops between the USA and Utah. Until the USA accepted our right to exist, we were not USA. Still, I see the same old bunch, straining at the leash. I will not vote for Mitt, but not because of religion. If you knew more, I would tell you more. GBeck, feels a kinship with Israel, as I do. We have had simulair experiences. Focus on the election, please, and stop the religious hatred, please.
Hope you learned. I knew, and avoided all your peril. It took 5 crooked doctors, and a paid off Federal judge, to remove all the zeros, from my assets. Please pass it on, although I doubt you will get any more attention, than I got. Just look to the past to see the future.
I literally hate people who put other web sites for their proof. Use your own words, and logic, please.
I have not seen any news about other candidates, other than the three. Are you getting the message?
God bless you , Mike, but even a marine needs a squad, to really do business. A rebel marine is s dead marine. You know where lone heros end up.
42. might as well give up. If 12 years cannot wise this guy up, nothing will. Once a true DEM always a stupid DEM.
I agree with Rush, but I hope the attacks work because I'm not voting for Mitt - I'll be sitting at home, kissing my ass goodbye when you all vote for the new communist (light)- Mitt Romney - the US will never recover, Obama will be a smilin' all the way to the bank and George Soros' office of puppets.
Seems you neither believe in the USA, nor basic economy. You have so much to learn. I suggest you read, not on the net, of basic economy. So simple, you can get it. FYI you cannot never have enough money.
NO, I would not. And a lot of US people are just like me. You, sir, are the reason we have an Obama, and a bad government. And, if you invest against the USA, please leave it.
BB, lobbyist do not want liberty. Any money changing hands, has strings attached. Ask obama. $170,000 is enough for anybody, today. The USA used to hang those people. Long long ago,and far away.
This whole thread sounds like a bunch of big bankers aguing. Okay to foreclose, but must be nice about it. I know a great guy, a billionare. He farms out factories to poor countries to lower cost. Okay. but, when he hires illegals in the USA, he is wrong. If Mitt does this, he needs to be harsely reminded. Mitt is a socialist also. You want him elect him, Olay, but do not try to make him a patriot, he is a bad candidate.
Newt IS a "Frugal Socialist." Thank you Bachman. Thank you Beck. And thank you everybody that did their homework and stood up and spoke truth while Gingrich was surging.
Newt IS a "Frugal Socialist." Thank you Bachman. Thank you Beck. And thank you everybody that did their homework and stood up and spoke truth while Gingrich was surging.
As to the specifics, here, I believe there are whole markets for stuff that I find unethical. a lot of it is simply legalized gambling.
It takes all kinds. As soon as you set up an "honor system" to pay for snacks, someone is going to cheat. It's just human nature. That's also why "cells" are usually limited to three people in any conspiracy. You plan for human nature, you don't expect purity in people.
(Honor systems work well in very small groups)
Everyone I've ever met who accepted this fact has usually been a happy, well-adjusted person. I'd bet that most successful people in small business are the ones who know you can't expect folks to always play fair.
He's got a bias against Gingrich and he just can't hide it. I can't listen to him anymore but will probably go back after we get our nominee which I hope is Newt.
People like the image of a Lion, Hawk or Eagle for a reason. They don't usually use the image of a cow on their family crest.
I can live with Romney's capitalism. I just don't trust his statism.
This is the first time I've ever seen Rush have a blind spot about someone but he has one about Gingrich. Personally I think it's because they're so much alike.
If you watch one of Gingrich's speeches while he was speaker and compare it to how Rush talks you'll be amazed how similar they are. Not the voice per se but the content of the speeches. I love Rush but he doesn't take the place of my own research and opinion. No one does.
Bain is an investment company. They invest in businesses with the intention of the business doing better and then Bain making some profit from it. Similar to what every bank does with every loan to a business. Companies that go to Bain wouldn't be given money by the banks. Too high a risk. But Bain takes more risks than banks. 30% of the time Bain lost EVERY DIME they invested in companies. Venture Capitalist firms only invest in companies that they think are going to win big but it doesn't always work out that way. When they lose they lose everything and when they win they win big.
Yep. But you only have two cheeks. So you only have to turn it once (by my reckoning... I don't think Jesus meant for us to do a Three Stooges thing with back-and forth slappin', but maybe he had a sense of humor.)
First, you quote, if thine friend smote you on the cheek, offer the other. Then, you quote, suffer no fools.
Well, you only have to turn it once. After that, it's wide open how you proceed!
Golden Rule is not only a very moral way to behave, but it's far less complicated to maintain. I suspect that's why it works so well in every aspect of life.
Fine. But there's little to be gained from complaining about the sharks. You just prepare for them as best as you can.
That's what's behind Rush's thinking, as he says several times during the year. You keep plugging away despite the bad actors.
Obviously, taking things to extreme is usually a bad idea. Your sarcasm is your own concept here, not mine. I wrote what I meant, and I did not mean anything more.
You're right about that last part, but even Jesus recognized the reality of things. Turning the other cheek is that recognition.
This is no utopia. And those who want to make it so are usually to be found among the left.
Negative campaigning doesn't work. Going negative on your opponents does.
What does that mean?
It means the candidate cannot win by pointing out bad stuff. He has to articulate how he can make good things happen. It's tricky. you don't just say "I'm going to lower taxes." You have to say how you plan to remove obstacles to prosperity from the path of the average Joe. You have to make it positive, and make the actions positive. For example, a list of "I'm not gonna do's" doesn't stick in anyone's mind. You need a list of "Here's what we do's." This is why Herman Cain got the traction he had. He knew this trick, and played it well enough to attract a lot of attention.
It also means you can tell the people bad things about your opponent (as long as they are--mostly--true). I hate that aspect of politics, but that's the way it works.
Business is the same way. You cannot win at business by complaining and lawsuit (although some gain minor profits via lawsuit, and lawyers live on them). You win by providing the best product or service possible, for the least cost. You win by taking advantage of your opponents' weaknesses. You win by having a good public image--but only to a certain extent. The trick is to put as little effort into that public image as you can, while punishing people inside the business for unethical decisions that damage your efforts there. This allows a lot of grey area, and that is where the dancing happens. The truly unethical dance poorly. Like with ENRON. And this usually comes out in the open. But you play hard to win.
Wanting the government to "fix" things is how the mess only gets worse.
When I closed on my first house, the "closing packet" was only about an eighth of an inch thick. Nowdays, thanks to massive regulation, it's two packets, each about 3/4 to 1 inch thick. And we still had the (inevitable) mortgage mess. Government never makes things better without making them worse in several other ways.
I want a candidate who will stop demonizing Wall Street, and just get on with removing obstacles to prosperity.
Does anyone remember the push for quality in the eighties and early nineties? Six-Sigma, ISO-9000, the book "In Search of Excellence" and other ways business was trying to recognize a way to profitability through having an excellent public image?
Anyone, Bueller?
Well, a lot of lessons were learned. Some of them are still practiced as a matter of course (quality manufacturing is almost a given these days).
But the "Excellent Public Image" part didn't stick. Neither did the "First Class Customer Service" angle. The businesses that tried to lead in that area at the time were IBM, Hewlett Packard, Home Depot, and American Express. They've all pretty much dropped the bulk of that effort because it was killing them in the marketplace.
People want the most they can get, for the least money.
Say that to yourself a few times.
It's why WalMart became what it is, despite all the grievances levelled against them.
Business is not a charity. Neither is protecting your own family.
Here's the deal: Be the best you can be, and treat people as fairly as possible, but don't be a sap.
That's it. Sometimes you have to foreclose. Sometimes you have to put a lien on a struggling carpenter. Sometimes you have to shoot at people who are coming through your door in the middle of the night.
This is life. This is business. You can try to play nice, but you'd better be prepared to be a tough, mean SOB if you want to survive.
The government's job is to fight against fraud and deception wherever it can. When a drug company sells garbage that kills people, the prosecution should be swift and merciless. But government should stay away from trying to make everyone play like an angel. It won't happen. And making up more and more rules to attempt it damages the fair and moral businessmen more than it does the predators.
It's very much like gun laws.
Rush is correct. You don't win the argument by whining about the actions of capitalists. That's the way the left operates. You win by talking about how people can achieve prosperity. You win by telling them what you will do to remove obstacles from their path. You show them the obstacles put there by big government legislators and bureaucrats.
We should all strive to be honorable, fair-minded men. But the government cannot make us into honorable, fair-minded men.
The flaw of leftist thinking is the search for some ideal state where men are all kind to each other. Sadly that's exactly what leads to immoral, deadly totalitarian government. We don't live there, and we never will. So screw the textbook stuff, and face reality.
Business isn't some cushy set of problem solving. You have to watch your back, even from those closest to you. It doesn't mean you can't trust anyone, but it does mean you still have to be eternally vigilant.
Not necessarily. But Rush has been hitting Mr. Newt pretty hard from day one. Rush wants a conservative to win, and he's not very happy with Newt as the potential nominee. But with Romney, Rush is more fatalistic. He does not want Romney, but he thinks we're going to get him, deep, wide, and continuous.
All you have to remember about Rush is his mantra that "Conservatism Wins, Every Time." He gets totally disgusted whenever Republicans use the imagery or language of the left to win points in a campaign, because he knows it's a loser tactic. You simply can't beat a Dem at their own game.
Romney is being defended by everyone from Rush to Ron Paul because that is how foolish Newt sounds right now. Fannie/Freddie association, laughing with Pelosi on a couch for a global warming commercial... and now this from Newt? He (unfortunately) destroyed himself.
The same things happen through the government. The SBA is supposed to help small business. But when they decide you aren't doing as well as they'd like, THEY get to decide when you are done (even if you have finally broken even, and are starting to gain market share). There's no real appeal, either. And when they sell your assets, they sell very low (not needing the money), to get your problem off of their books, leaving you with even more debt than when you started. I speak from experience.
Never borrow money from the government.
Look, business is a tough game. There are so many ways to get legally screwed by banks, customers, government, and employees that no one can plan properly for all events. Not even with the best team of lawyers. But you do your best, and keep plugging away.
I don't call it evil at all. I call it the natural predation inherent in the system. You'll find it at every level, and the idea they have is always to stick it to the successful guy so you can get a piece of him. It's the Chicago way.
In a free market, it's very difficult to remove that sort of player. However government is responsible for making whole new categories of predator, thanks to EEO action, the EPA, the massive regulations in lending and loans, and the seriously negative effect of "government aid." The "politics of pull" makes business far more difficult today.
I've lived through exactly what you are talking about, and it sucked. But there's no crying in baseball, and you don't win by arguing about bad calls.
That's enough metaphor crammed into one comment, so I'm through.
Capitalism is like an ecosystem. It will have predators. No one can expect a setup that's generating money to last. It has to be fought for daily (the Bill Gates style of entrepreneur). If you believe in a free market, then you expect and "believe" in the predators that come with it. Predation isn't polite, it isn't nice, but I'm not willing to say it isn't ethical.
As I often say, the oceans would be in serious trouble if the sharks suddenly vanished.
What, like he was he born with full ownership of the dominant software company? No.
He wasn't always "a monopoly." He had to fight like hell, every step of the way. He didn't take any defeat lying down, and he pushed his employees to be the same way. He's a very good example of the kind of entrepreneur I'm talking about.
I'm not talking about really nice people, I'm talking about good business mentality. The lefties love Apple, but Steve Jobs was a real jerk to his people and folks he had business deals with. A lot of real superstars turn out to be very difficult people to be around.
But what if those jobs he created weren't all American jobs?
The theory that Romney's campaign is counting outsourced jobs among the 100,000 has been pushed privately by some of his critics. Bain & Company doesn't disguise the fact that outsourcing is part of its consulting portfolio.
Currently on its website, Bain has a section about strategies behind the outsourcing of information technology work.
We help clients ensure that IT offshoring and outsourcing decisions are based on business strategy and help set up deal structures, capability networks and sourcing agreements to deliver enduring results -- lower costs now and flexibility for the future.
Strategic sourcing is the process by which organizations determine how to access the right IT and business capability at the right cost. Sourcing must be managed effectively across the four key dimensions of management, resources, services and business processes.
Outsourcing of IT or business processes is just one option of sourcing strategies, often unleashing tremendous value.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.