Next best thing for the US (and perhaps the world)

[Tidus44]

otherwise there is rampant voter fraud taking place.

 

You have proof of this? Please post this proof of rampant voter fraud. Cite court cases and where and when all these people have been found to be involved in voter fraud.

 

these way overpaid union workers would have been forced to take some pay cuts or take a hike. That is too much money for non-skilled to semi-skilled labor jobs.

 

Post the pay scales for all these auto workers and show us all how they are over paid. Additionally post facts that demonstrate their pay scales are too much and how they are non-skilled or semi-skilled workers.

 

Easy to have opinions, please provide proof and evidence that verifies what you say is fact.

[colourwheel]

Voter ID has to be in place, otherwise there is rampant voter fraud taking place.

 

"Out of the 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud, according to a Department of Justice study outlined during a 2006 Congressional hearing. Only 26 of those cases, or about .00000013 percent of the votes cast, resulted in convictions or guilty pleas."

 

Thats the amount of rampant voter fraud taking place. In person voting fraud is basically non-existant concidering how the US electoral college operates.

 

Filing for bankruptcy isn't the end of the world. Its a process that a company can go through to turn itself around. If Ford filed for bankruptcy, these way overpaid union workers would have been forced to take some pay cuts or take a hike.

 

A company filing for bankruptcy is only good for a company when there is a way to turn itself around. At the time when the auto industry was falling even Ford had to turn to the government for $5.9 billion. At the time all this unfolded there was no one else to turn to but the government. Just imagine what our country would be like today if the government didn't help out the auto industry. to many jobs across the country would have been lost it would have been like 1929 again.

 

Some UAW working on an assembly line make more than a lot of engineers in my area make. That that isn't counting the pensions and benefits.

 

Here is how much "more" an UAW assembly line worker makes over engineers...

 

Average Ford Motor Research Engineer Salaries $93,184 a year

Average Base hourly wage of a UAW auto worker is $28.00 per hour

 

you do the math...

 

But I can tell you now the math doesn't add up even close to making more than the average Engineer.

 

First, the Republicans tell us getting pregnant after being raped is a "gift from God" to the woman

 

Can you specify which Republican said that?

 

 

Here is what Richard Mourdock said about rape....

 

""I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." - Richard Mourdock

 

This comment was in responce to a question about abortion. He basically believes under no circumstance should a female child or woman have an abortion even in cases of in insest, danger to life of mother, or rape.

 

Richard Mourdock is the only person Mitt romney has endorced this election running for office. Can give you an idea what a bad political choice he had made one day before Richard Mourdock made this statement of his on rape.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSbxBQhzk3M&feature=player_embedded

DSbxBQhzk3M

 

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/princesstb/motivator8bc1b4a076260ecdee7fce16c65c6b7af4c9cbd1.jpg

Edited October 28, 2012 by colourwheel

[Beriallord]

otherwise there is rampant voter fraud taking place.

 

You have proof of this? Please post this proof of rampant voter fraud. Cite court cases and where and when all these people have been found to be involved in voter fraud.

 

You can search for cases of voter fraud. I know they exist. There might not be that many people caught for it. But if you don't even have to show and ID, what is to stop someone from registering to vote under several aliases? Just because people don't get caught doesn't mean its not happening. Regardless, I still prefer a voter ID system be in place, even though it might be an inconvenience for some people. With a voter ID system, that means they would have to get an actual fake ID for each alias they register to vote under, and that extra hurdle would discourage most would-be cases of voter fraud. Assuming you can just trust everyone to play by the rules is foolish. There has to be a system in place to make sure the process remains as legit as it can be. If you think showing and ID is too much of a hassle, then I dunno what to tell you.

 

Post the pay scales for all these auto workers and show us all how they are over paid. Additionally post facts that demonstrate their pay scales are too much and how they are non-skilled or semi-skilled workers.

 

Easy to have opinions, please provide proof and evidence that verifies what you say is fact.

 

Entry level for engineers in my area is about $65,000 a year. This is fresh out of college with no experience. Someone making $28/hour @ 40 hours a week is making 58k, and that is before the market value of the benefits, and pension is included, plus any overtime they work. So yeah, a UAW worker could be making more than an Engineer. And by non-skilled or semi-skilled that means you don't need any education or prior training to land the job. Someone sitting on an assembly line operating a torque wrench tightening down the same part on vehicles on a line all day is not skilled labor. That is something someone can be trained to do in a couple days to a week. Skilled labor is something that takes YEARS to become proficient at. A carpenter, HVAC tech, welder, auto mechanic, machinist, electrician, etc are skilled labor jobs.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Beriallord

[Beriallord]

 

"Out of the 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud, according to a Department of Justice study outlined during a 2006 Congressional hearing. Only 26 of those cases, or about .00000013 percent of the votes cast, resulted in convictions or guilty pleas."

 

Thats the amount of rampant voter fraud taking place. In person voting fraud is basically non-existant concidering how the US electoral college operates.

 

I admit that using the word "rampant" was the wrong choice of words, but I otherwise stand by my position of requiring an ID to vote because it would stop a lot of would-be cases of voter fraud, as I explained in the post above.

 

A company filing for bankruptcy is only good for a company when there is a way to turn itself around. At the time when the auto industry was falling even Ford had to turn to the government for $5.9 billion. At the time all this unfolded there was no one else to turn to but the government. Just imagine what our country would be like today if the government didn't help out the auto industry. to many jobs across the country would have been lost it would have been like 1929 again.

 

Well that is the thing about a Capitalist system, is that where some companies fail, others will step in to fill the demand if there is any. A lot of former American auto companies have went out of business, and either merged, were bought out, or simply closed the doors. I believe a company like GM could have restructured itself if it filed for bankruptcy. Or it would have possibly merged with another auto company. Sorta like the recent merge of Daimler-Chrysler.

 

Here is how much "more" an UAW assembly line worker makes over engineers...

 

Average Ford Motor Research Engineer Salaries $93,184 a year

Average Base hourly wage of a UAW auto worker is $28.00 per hour

 

you do the math...

 

But I can tell you now the math doesn't add up even close to making more than the average Engineer.

 

I offered an answer to this in the above post. I said some engineers in my area make less than UAW workers. I know this because I worked for a company I know what their entry level wage for an Engineer was. $65,000/year for someone fresh out of college.

 

Here is what Richard Mourdock said about rape....

 

""I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen." - Richard Mourdock

 

This comment was in responce to a question about abortion. He basically believes under no circumstance should a female child or woman have an abortion even in cases of in insest, danger to life of mother, or rape.

 

Richard Mourdock is the only person Mitt romney has endorced this election running for office. Can give you an idea what a bad political choice he had made one day before Richard Mourdock made this statement of his on rape.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSbxBQhzk3M&feature=player_embedded

DSbxBQhzk3M

 

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b291/princesstb/motivator8bc1b4a076260ecdee7fce16c65c6b7af4c9cbd1.jpg

 

I absolutely don't agree with those comments under any circumstances. A woman that gets raped would be going through an enormous amount of emotional distress, for some prick to tell them that getting raped was a gift from God then that is just blatant ignorance.

[Tidus44]

You can search for cases of voter fraud. I know they exist. There might not be that many people caught for it. But if you don't even have to show and ID, what is to stop someone from registering to vote under several aliases? Just because people don't get caught doesn't mean its not happening. Regardless, I still prefer a voter ID system be in place, even though it might be an inconvenience for some people. With a voter ID system, that means they would have to get an actual fake ID for each alias they register to vote under, and that extra hurdle would discourage most would-be cases of voter fraud. Assuming you can just trust everyone to play by the rules is foolish. There has to be a system in place to make sure the process remains as legit as it can be. If you think showing and ID is too much of a hassle, then I dunno what to tell you.

 

The "I know..." declaration as proof of anything is pretty weak and meaningless, especially given the accusations have been investigated and demonstrated to be false. I have a hard time believing that hundreds of thousands of people are going from place to place across municipal, county and state borders in order to sway election results by fraudulently voting. The US system of voting is pretty good and while you are entitled to whatever opinion, the issue isn't about showing ID anyway.

The issue is what is "valid" ID and violating people's rights under the First, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-Sixth amendments. For example, Minnesota recently tried to deny the right to vote by stating Tribal ID was not valid and only a driver's license would be accepted. The idea that everyone has a driver's license is just ludicrous. These asinine rules only prevent primarily, the young, the disabled, the elderly and the poor - those who do not own cars and therefore do not have a license - from voting. One wonders why this is such an issue for mainly the Republicans and Republican states, when there is no proof any amount of voter fraud is occurring anyway.

 

Entry level for engineers in my area is about $65,000 a year. This is fresh out of college with no experience. Someone making $28/hour @ 40 hours a week is making 58k, and that is before the market value of the benefits, and pension is included, plus any overtime they work. So yeah, a UAW worker could be making more than an Engineer. And by non-skilled or semi-skilled that means you don't need any education or prior training to land the job. Someone sitting on an assembly line operating a torque wrench tightening down the same part on vehicles on a line all day is not skilled labor. That is something someone can be trained to do in a couple days to a week. Skilled labor is something that takes YEARS to become proficient at. A carpenter, HVAC tech, welder, auto mechanic, machinist, electrician, etc are skilled labor jobs.

 

Actually, as an engineer myself, someone coming out of college 3 to 5 years behind the technology, with limited drawing skills and can't do anything but watch someone else work and making 65k a year is pretty darn good. For every 5 I see hired, maybe 1 makes it and the rest I have practice saying, "Do you want fries with that?".

 

The average UAW salary as of October 2012 was $35k a year. Some workers make as little as $14.00/hr. As for your idea all they do is tighten a bolt all day, I have to ask if where you are is still 1940 and you have been stuck in a time warp. Entry level jobs in an assembly line may be tightening a bolt, but they are certainly not making $58K a year. Do you actually think the people assembling transmissions and engines just put part A on bolt B and tighten? People who assemble cars must have skills like welder, mechanic, machinist, in electronics or other technical skills or they don't work on assembling a vehicle. To be a supervisor on the line they have to have a degree. I have no idea where you got your idea of what an autoworker does, but its somewhat like your opinion on voter ID. It may be what you think, but it isn't fact.

[colourwheel]

 

"Out of the 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud, according to a Department of Justice study outlined during a 2006 Congressional hearing. Only 26 of those cases, or about .00000013 percent of the votes cast, resulted in convictions or guilty pleas."

 

Thats the amount of rampant voter fraud taking place. In person voting fraud is basically non-existant concidering how the US electoral college operates.

 

I admit that using the word "rampant" was the wrong choice of words, but I otherwise stand by my position of requiring an ID to vote because it would stop a lot of would-be cases of voter fraud, as I explained in the post above.

 

Logically these voter ID laws make no sense to have when they are in favor of a specific political party. If you really believe disenfranchising millions of people from voting I guess that is just your opinion. I personally think there is not enough evidence to support such legislation. it would be different if the actual amount of cases were extreme enough that would really put an election in disarray. Without real evidence it would be like making rediculous legislation to combat things like as an example: There are probably so many "would-be cases" of theft in american Mall so anyone who goes shopping at the mall should be stripped searched before leaving any mall.

 

You can search for cases of voter fraud. I know they exist. There might not be that many people caught for it. But if you don't even have to show and ID, what is to stop someone from registering to vote under several aliases? Just because people don't get caught doesn't mean its not happening.

 

The issue is what is "valid" ID and violating people's rights under the First, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-Sixth amendments. For example, Minnesota recently tried to deny the right to vote by stating Tribal ID was not valid and only a driver's license would be accepted. The idea that everyone has a driver's license is just ludicrous. These asinine rules only prevent primarily, the young, the disabled, the elderly and the poor - those who do not own cars and therefore do not have a license - from voting. One wonders why this is such an issue for mainly the Republicans and Republican states, when there is no proof any amount of voter fraud is occurring anyway.

 

I have to agree with Tidus on this. These new ID laws are totally disenfranchising too many voters leaning on one political side. In some republican States, you are not able to vote using a college ID yet let people use a fire arms license as ID. This is not trying to stop voter fraud it's plain and simple just disenfranchising voters.

 

A company filing for bankruptcy is only good for a company when there is a way to turn itself around. At the time when the auto industry was falling even Ford had to turn to the government for $5.9 billion. At the time all this unfolded there was no one else to turn to but the government. Just imagine what our country would be like today if the government didn't help out the auto industry. to many jobs across the country would have been lost it would have been like 1929 again.

 

Well that is the thing about a Capitalist system, is that where some companies fail, others will step in to fill the demand if there is any. A lot of former American auto companies have went out of business, and either merged, were bought out, or simply closed the doors. I believe a company like GM could have restructured itself if it filed for bankruptcy. Or it would have possibly merged with another auto company. Sorta like the recent merge of Daimler-Chrysler.

 

Do you even remember when all this stuff was happening? at the time the stock market was crumbling, Banks were closing thier doors other than for buisnesses to deposit their money. the realistate market was falling and peoples homes were becoming under half their original value. If all this wasn't going on then filing bankruptcy could have been good for a company to restructure. But historically this was not the case at all.

 

But as for GM they didn't even have enough money to even pay their electric bills. During 2009 no private company would have bought out any of the american auto companies. The merge of Daimler-Chrysler happened once things in our country got better and yet they still received government aid too.

 

This is the government bailout for the auto industry back then...

 

•$17.4 billion for General Motors and Chrysler.

•$6 billion for GMAC.

•$1.5 billion for Chrysler Financial

 

I am just trying to give you perspective of how bad the economy really was back in 2009 again and remember this was because of the fallout of republican policies that mitt romney wishes to go back to. there was literally no one else who could help the auto industry back then but the government.

 

 

Edit:

 

Going back to How i feel about bias news medias. Here is a recent video uploaded on youtube by LiberalViewer

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT4rrkNFcyg&feature=player_embedded

GT4rrkNFcyg

 

Speaking of legislation I honestly think something needs to be done about bias news networks reporting bad information to the public. Whether you are a straight news reporter or an opinion reporter politicizing news in a bias way I feel can have dire consequences even for ones own political agenda. It would be nice if legislation could be created to stop bad information being reported to the public and make reporters who keep reporting bad information have consequences and have to pay a huge price every time a news network totally and purposely repeatively mis-leads the public. This goes for any network ... Foxnews, msnbc, cnn, etc...

Edited October 29, 2012 by colourwheel

[ginnyfizz]

What is the problem with providing voter ID when in so many other aspects of life you may be called upon to produce ID? Here in the UK when there is an election, if you have registered in time on the register of electors, a few weeks before polling day, you will be mailed a polling card. You do not have to produce this in order to vote, but if you do not have your card you will be asked for your name and address and it will be ticked off on the register that you have been to vote, thereby preventing the same person from voting twice. Note that this does not mean that your actual ballot is seen by anyone but yourself. And it still does not prevent the problems of abuse of postal and proxy votes in certain cases where people have been known to tell others how to vote or even to fill in the ballot for them...

 

Beyond that I am unemployed, and I have to produce my passport as ID regularly to prove my right to work in the UK. If I am still out of work when my passport expires I will somehow have to find the £100 or so it costs to renew.

 

But it is your last paragraph that really scares me, you don't like Fox News so you think the First Amendment should be kicked into the long grass? Unless they are inciting actual criminal acts they are protected by the First Amendment no matter how much you detest what they say. Would you really like a situation like North Korea where you can get jailed for not bawling your eyes out at the death of the Great Leader, and any expression of opinion could be fatal? Thought not.

[colourwheel]

But it is your last paragraph that really scares me, you don't like Fox News so you think the First Amendment should be kicked into the long grass?

 

Do you really like any news media reporting bad information to the public acting as if it's fact? Say Fox New started covering a story saying you ginnyfizz has been found sending death threats to people in public office based only on opinion or speculation and they continue covering and pursuing this story for a political agenda spinning on what they report to the public as fact. Don't you think they should be held accountable for reporting bad information? Or since you say they are protected by the 1st amendment they have a right even if the information is not even true to keep reporting the same story everyday making everyone hate you based on bad info?

 

If companies can get into trouble for falsely advertising product info on TV why should bias news networks be protected from blantently lying to the public brainwashing bad info to the mass public as if it's fact?

 

If fox news is going to consistantly be reporting bad information they are not even really a real news network and shouldn't even advertise their network as news. In my opinion that in itself is widely false advertising...

Edited October 29, 2012 by colourwheel

[ginnyfizz]

But it is your last paragraph that really scares me, you don't like Fox News so you think the First Amendment should be kicked into the long grass?

 

Do you really like any news media reporting bad information to the public acting as if it's fact? Say Fox New started covering a story saying you ginnyfizz has been found sending death threats to people in public office based only on opinion or speculation and they continue covering and pursuing this story for a political agenda spinning on what they report to the public as fact? Don't you think they should be held accountable for reporting bad information? Or since you say they are protected by the 1st amendment they have a right even if the information is not even true to keep reporting the same story everyday making everyone hate you based on bad info?

 

If companies can get into trouble for falsely advertising product info on TV why should bias news networks be protected from blantently lying to the public brainwashing bad info to the mass public as if it's fact?

 

If fox news is going to consistantly be reporting bad information they are not even really a real news network and shouldn't even advertise their network as news. In my opinion that in itself is widely false advertising...

 

Then you use the defamation laws against them and challenge them to produce proof, which they obviously couldn't in my case, and you sting them for punitive damages. Such a serious allegation made by them would have to be worth millions at least. That would certainly hold them to account and pee on their strawberries. In my particular case since I am British and have a reputation in Britain to defend, I would find a nice no win no fee lawyer and sue them in the British courts - in the internet age this would be possible because Fox can be watched online here in the UK - where they would be crucified. I am not sure if I would get enough to financially ruin them but I'd get enough to give them a kick in the balance sheet and pay the legal fees.

 

Of course if said clever lawyer could find cause for them to be charged with a criminal offence in the USA it would be pretty sweet as well, but the defamation case alone would make them look even more like complete arses than they do already.

 

In short the First Amendment may protect free speech and in some ways you can say what you like, but it does not guarantee that there will be no repercussions, as we mentioned in another thread discussing hate speech.

[colourwheel]

But it is your last paragraph that really scares me, you don't like Fox News so you think the First Amendment should be kicked into the long grass?

 

Do you really like any news media reporting bad information to the public acting as if it's fact? Say Fox New started covering a story saying you ginnyfizz has been found sending death threats to people in public office based only on opinion or speculation and they continue covering and pursuing this story for a political agenda spinning on what they report to the public as fact? Don't you think they should be held accountable for reporting bad information? Or since you say they are protected by the 1st amendment they have a right even if the information is not even true to keep reporting the same story everyday making everyone hate you based on bad info?

 

If companies can get into trouble for falsely advertising product info on TV why should bias news networks be protected from blantently lying to the public brainwashing bad info to the mass public as if it's fact?

 

If fox news is going to consistantly be reporting bad information they are not even really a real news network and shouldn't even advertise their network as news. In my opinion that in itself is widely false advertising...

 

Then you use the defamation laws against them and challenge them to produce proof, which they obviously couldn't in my case, and you sting them for punitive damages. Such a serious allegation made by them would have to be worth millions at least. That would certainly hold them to account and pee on their strawberries. In my particular case since I am British and have a reputation in Britain to defend, I would find a nice no win no fee lawyer and sue them in the British courts - in the internet age this would be possible because Fox can be watched online here in the UK - where they would be crucified. I am not sure if I would get enough to financially ruin them but I'd get enough to give them a kick in the balance sheet and pay the legal fees.

 

Of course if said clever lawyer could find cause for them to be charged with a criminal offence in the USA it would be pretty sweet as well, but the defamation case alone would make them look even more like complete arses than they do already.

 

In short the First Amendment may protect free speech and in some ways you can say what you like, but it does not guarantee that there will be no repercussions, as we mentioned in another thread discussing hate speech.

 

But do you see where I am getting at? For their political agenda not reporting the truth using spectulation they are trying to make thier viewers hate the president based on bad information without ever acknowledging what they report as bad info or appologizing to the public. Fox News has been doing this for years without being held accountable for.

 

The irony about this is going back to the benghazi attacks constantly politicizing the incident trying to get down to who should be held accountable for what actually happened. When they are not even holding themselves accountable for the whole 1st two weeks politicizing the president not claiming it to be a terrorist attack when he actually did call it an act of terror the day after. They just refuse to believe that what Obama said the day after the attacks as if he didn't even mean it completely dismissing him his statements as fact. hypocrisy of politically bias media makes me sick.

Edited October 29, 2012 by colourwheel