Dan J

How low is it really. There is just way too many unknowns.

Occam's Razor

Long but interesting acticle. Question I have is how any president will be able to deal with this kind of Corporate mentallity. Does not sound like lower Corporate taxes alone will fix the problem.

http://www.msnbc.msn...ss-us_business/

Perhaps apple is also getting a bit too cocky? They almost sound anti-american.

Lower corporate taxes will not fix it.

The thing about globalization is that it has allowed supply chains to be globalized benefiting the corporation, but protections that give workers power against the corporation have not.

The workers that work at the factories owned by Apple contractors work 72 hours per week at least and live in dorms provided by the company. There are not too many people in the US that would do the same thing. At least not at the price Chinese workers are getting paid. Which is really what "Can't find enough workers in the US" really means.

But in the end, if worker protections such as unions made it to China, it would still mean that the jobs would not come back. At some point the cost of automating will get less than even what the Chinese workers can provide and factories will go that way.

Anyone who keeps making the argument that buinesses need to have special protection because they provide jobs had no idea what the sole responsibly of a corporation is. Hint: Its not to create jobs.

Science is not about belief. Its about being able to test and support any proposed theory. Sometimes the semantics throw people off. Gravity is still considered a "Theory", but even the most religious people accept that it exists.

Of course as we gain better understanding, we improve the theories. Evolution was proposed when we had no idea that DNA existed. But with DNA it gives us a more complete understanding of how Evolution works. Even our understand of gravity is not complete. While it works in large scales, it breaks down in atomic scales.

The union thugs want to try and steal it back and force union dues down everyone's throat.

I mean after all, legal extortion is what unions specialize in.

I'm all for private-sector unions if people have the balls to stand up to their company, but public sector unions should be 100% illegal in every way, shape, or form.

Oh and those signatures weren't gathered for free. Plenty of taxpayer dollars were wasted in clock time of gathering them on the backs of the taxpayer.

This is a republic administration, the verification of signatures will go to a no-bid private contractor that contributed the most the Walkers campaign. Most of it will be paid out as bonuses to management for securing a large contract and the work will be outsourced to India.

I believe some of the higher resolutions are interlaced, so a higher refresh rate would would allow you to see all that definition.

With everything coming in digital now, and highly compressed, I don't think anything will give you clean explosions, or all the detail you want to see in live sports.

Yes that is true, some broadcast formats are interlaced (1080i), (1080p as far as I know is not broadcast anywhere). For the most part, you would still be using content that is at a its base 24 or 30 fps.

I suppose if you had 3d and interlaced you could get up to 120hz.

Pretty much all content is going to be at 24 or 30 fps. Games are generally capped to 60 fps if they can get that high in the first place. 3d however does need to show two frames (one for each eye) so it will be working at a higher frame rate than other content.

The only possibility that you will actually have 120 frames per second is with games in 3d mode, but considering the CPU power needed to do that, I suspect games are dropping down to 30fps to deliver 3d.

If you have a 120htz monitor, you will just see the same frames rendered 2-3 times instead of getting an new frame.

We are over-regulated on a national, state, and local level. There is no denying that.

However even with regulation, businesses should be able to grow if other factors are taken car of.

You want to grow job in America? Tax the living hell out of Chinese/foreign products before they even hit our soil. Tariffs! We need them!

You're not going to be production back to America without that.

Politically that would be a non-starter. Most people are more concerned with the cost of products they buy at Walmart instead of the long-term economic stability of the US.

Actually, Republicans are addressing this problem. Democrats are just so clueless as to how to solve this problem they don't recognize the solution when Republicans suggest it.

Jobs are going to China, India, and elsewhere not only because of wage discrepancies. Taxes and regulation make the US an unattractive place to do business. Those are things that the government can actually fix. Further, we need to pressure China and others to protect their workers, control pollution, and not manipulate currency. This will take some time but is critical for creating a fair marketplace.

They are going because of cost and a large part of that is wages. Trying to do anything about that will just be a pyrrhic victory as it will drive business to further automate more jobs. The only reason why some of these jobs still done with manual labor is that the cost of automation is greater than the cost of labor. Over time the cost of labor will go up and the cost of automation will go down, and automation will ultimately win out.

The reason why the current recovery has been so slow is that we have reach a point of maturity in our economy where the only real internal growth is due to population growth and migration. But at the same time, increases in productivity are reducing the need to create jobs.

Really so medicaid has only 5% operating expenses? That would leave 10% for profit. Which insurance company is making 10% profit on revenue?

Private insurance company operating expenses are much higher. They pay for marketing, higher management salaries, sales people, etc. They will now be required to use 85% of their revenue on claims, which means that many companies were even less efficient than that.

The real question is if medicaid can achieve 95% efficiency why is it so hard for insurance companies to get to 85% as required by the new health care law?

Ron Paul will cut 1T in the first year.

Presidents dont write laws, congress does. I don't see congress going along with most of his ideas.

The point has nothing to do with Alaska's ability to pay, but how much public debt the state has. If they are being smart, most of the surplus should be dedicated to paying off debt. There is no guarntee that all the money that they are getting from oil companies will be around in 10-20 years. If they loose that oil revenue and the debt levels continue to stay as high as they are, state taxes in Alaska will get hiked quite a bit to pay off that debt.

There are so many people who make decisions on the future based on the good times and find themselves stuck with a lot more debt than they expected when things get worse.

If a woman decides to try to have a baby when she knows that she has a high probability of miscarriage, under this amendment would she be charged with manslaughter if she had a miscarriage?

Or what about a woman knowingly or not being pregnant decides to to drink or smoke (Or anything else that might harm the fetus), would she be charged with endangering the life of a child?

China has provided over 1 million parts that either have been used or will be used in American military technology and those parts have been found to be defective by the Senate Armed Services Committee. China sees an opportunity to flood the American market with defective technology which will degrade the US military machine. What is the cost of using defective Chinese hardware in American military technology? Should the DOD be buying military parts from China? How can America buy military hardware from a country that it could potentially be at war with? What do we really know about China’s nuclear arsenal? They have constructed up to 3,000 kilometers of underground tunnels to conceal military weaponry and that should cause concern as to what they are hiding and what it could be used for.

http://www.securefreedomradio.org/2011/11/08/u-s-military-buying-chinese-technology/

I don't think the DOD is buying anything directly from China, but instead through some less than reputable contractors that want to increase profits.

In response to the original post:

In regards to Cain's plan on a corporate tax, how is this different (other than the fact that it's 35% -deductions instead of 9%) than the current corporate tax which is also eventually passed on to consumers?

In regards to Romney's plan, how is it worse for low income than the status quo? It's the same rate as the Obama tax cuts. And it includes a capital gains tax cut for ordinary Americans, which means anybody saving for retirement can do so tax free. Isn't that a good thing?

Tax increases on corporations may get passed on to consumers if they are in an industry that is not price sensitive. There are industries in which passing on a price increase will definetly result in lower sales. Which may make paying higher taxes out of profit, better than dealing with losses due to lower sales.

At least they admited that they were wrong, I don't see very many religious groups doing the same thing if they make a similar mistake. (Like rewriting ideas proposed by the founding fathers to support a Christian theocracy)

For sure. Doom and gloom is all they know. I actually don't have a problem with trying alternative energy. What I do have a problem with is the huge subsidies it requires. No more subsidies at all. If it can stand on its own two legs then go for it. Want my tax money? Go away.

I am curious also to why all the wind farms I see usually not even half of the wind mills are even working. It is like we are paying heavily for something that doesn't even work.

Fossil Fuel production also gets subsidies. Gas prices that you pay at the pump, would be somewhat higher without them.

This is fairly typical 'peak oil' verbiage. And there have been geologists predicting that we are either at, or very nearly at, peak oil (or peak fossils) since at least the 1950s. And yet we keep discovering new deposits, new shale fields, new tar sands. I'm not saying we will or won't hit peak oil in 10 years or 20 or 100. I'm not a geologist, I really don't know. I do know that the question gets a lot of study and is considered an open and unresolved one by geologists.

We absolutely should be investing in a broader energy spectrum. Alternate sources are vital for future prosperity. But I don't see our carbon based energy vanishing anytime soon. We better keep drilling in the meantime.....

Technology has help us extract oil from less practical sources. We will never truly run out of oil, its just going to get more and more expensive to access.

I still pay federal taxes and part of that goes to medicare. I won't support it though, and that's why I won't vote for Obama or anyone else who tries to give away money they don't have.

You also pay for the uninsured anytime you go to the hospital. Since hospitals cannot turn away people at the emergency room, unpaid bills result in higher rates for those who can pay. It also costs much more to be treat a problem late, in the emergency room, than it does early through general care.

Thanks Obama the Socialist for another down grade.

Wasn't the main reason for the downgrade all the near government shutdowns caused by Republicans holding the government hostage? The ratings agencies take into account the political will as well as fiscal health. Recently the political will of the Republican has been to block the President no matter the cost to the country.

My insurance rates went up 40%. Everyone I know had their rates jump up

You rate increase is probably a combination of two factors. 1. Getting older makes you more of a risk and that will increase your premiums anyway. 2. The insurance company needs to make sure its profit margins keep to its shareholder expectations.

But if the guy who is President does not fix them he will not be re-elected. Unfair, I know.

The only thing he can do directly to create more jobs is hire more government workers. Bit of a catch 22 if people look to the president to create jobs, but look down at the government getting larger.

Since taking office Obama has actually accomplished a lot more than people think, let's review...

1. 140,000 NEW Federal jobs. The claimed "cuts" were simply reductions in planned increases, there are 140,000 more people collecting a paycheck from the Federal government since January of 2009

2. 2 Million people have lost their jobs

3. Health Insurance rates are UP 13%

4. 4.5 million small businesses closed

5. 2.5 million homes foreclosed upon

6. 42 million people living below the poverty line...the most ever

7. USA credit rating downgraded for the first time EVER

8. Gasoline prices increased 83%

9. Food prices up 26%

10. Increased federal deficit 4.2 trillion dollars.

With the exception of number 1, the real title should be the top 10 accomplishments of the american economic system. As most of these were already on track to happening regardless of who was president.

Innovation is what creates jobs and you dont have to be rich for that!

While this can be true for certian types of innovation, more often then not, innovation addresses inefficiencies in processes or markets resulting in a net loss of jobs once the adoption of the innovation is great enough.

Take factory automation as an example. While it will take people to design and engineer the robots, in the end, it will replace more manufacturing jobs than it creates to design and build the robots.

knowing that the uneducated are the fatest in america, i wish, they would randomly identify about 1000 of these folks for a weigh in.

Its also well known that the some crappiest foods are the cheapest.