Like Tree29Likes

Thread: Why are you voting for whoever for President?

  1. #26
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Again, just curious, but is there something wrong with a company focusing on government contracts? or is there something wrong with that company making profit from it?
    Not at all. Just know that when you write that check to the IRS every year there are folks making millions of dollars while cities have to lay off firefighters who won't make as much in five lifetimes as some execs will make in one year from the same pot of money.
    BigGriffC12 likes this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  2. #27
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Not at all. Just know that when you write that check to the IRS every year there are folks making millions of dollars while cities have to lay off firefighters who won't make as much in five lifetimes as some execs will make in one year from the same pot of money.
    Ya, and?

    1 works for a business who's purpose is to make a profit.
    1 works for a "business" who's purpose is to provide a service.

    I don't blame either one for making the choice to work at what they chose. And I don't blame the government for either.
    txgp17 and msalf like this.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  3. #28
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Ya, and?

    1 works for a business who's purpose is to make a profit.
    1 works for a "business" who's purpose is to provide a service.

    I don't blame either one for making the choice to work at what they chose. And I don't blame the government for either.
    Good for you!!! However, the reality is that conservatives have decided that public employees are overpaid and need to make significant givebacks in order to solve all those problems. I hope you don't mind taking even greater pay cuts. Because that is what is being proposed.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-14-2012 at 12:10 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  4. #29
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    SC,

    So glad you are here. I was hoping you would come over for a debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Can you point to a locale (with a population larger than 500K) that utilized private fire protection? Why do you think there are none?
    I cannot which goes towards my previous point that there is a lack of competition, part of the issue with public sector unions.

    That has nothing to do with why companies eliminated DB plans. They were eliminated to cut costs. A good number of all those mergers in the 80's were done so the acquiring companies could get their hands on the overfunded pension plans. It was one of the ways Romney's company made a lot of money (for the principal officers). In fact, defined benefit plans are very popular in the private sector amongst the prinicipal executives.
    Of course they were eliminated to cut costs! That was my point with saying that investments were a gamble. To make DBs work, they had to be overfunded. There were/are firms that take over companies then use their pension fund for profit. I dont like it, but it is perfectly legal. Which company did Bain raid the pension fund while Romney was there? They may have, it is just that there have been alot of horror stories about Bain and many are false.

    As far as defined benefit plans for private sector execs, public sector execs have better benefits than the grunts. The difference is that I could care less what some CEO has as a benefit. Good for them. However if a locality/state/nation is circling the drain financially, perhaps it is time to look at another retirement method to cut costs.



    The IAFF is there to support candidates that will be supportive of wages, hours, and working conditions for firefighters.
    How's that supporting Obama thing working out for them? Why should a diverse, public sector union, such as the IAFF, that has members who are both conservative and liberal, support a presidential candidate when doing so is not representative of their membership?


    Since you believe that public sector unions are not helpful, why do you take the benefits acquired by a politically active organization? How big a check do you write back to your parent agency every month to assuage your guilt over the compensation that was acquired by the union?
    Why should have any guilt over that? First, there is very little effect that the union has on Virginia salaries. A neighboring fire department recently added an ALS salary increase, but it wasnt because the union pushed it (they were certainly for it). It was pushed by management because they were losing medics to another locality because it paid more. COMPETITION IS GREAT! Second, even if union members fought for better salaries and benefits, they were aware that others who did not pay into the union would benefit from those same increases. It is a priority for those members to devote their money to that cause, just as others devote their funding to other things. Thanks to unions, we have many good things, but it should not be mandatory that someone has to be a member or they cant hold that job. Especially when the union decides to get knee deep in politics.

    Public employees and their benefits are being blamed for every issue plaguing the nation. I have to say I am amazed you would support a group whose desire is to gut you like a tuna.
    Come on now. That is a little dramatic, dont you think? Everything or just some of the economic woes of some localities? We have a conservative government in Virginia and the only thing they have done is changed the retirement system to defined compensation for new employees. They understand that the defined benefits system was underfunded and continuation of that same path would lead to a bankruptcy of the pension system. Additionally, if right to work or conservatism is so bad, how come states with these values are leading for jobs and economic stability? Virginia is #1 for business and has an unemployment rate at 5%. I know of some fire departments who are having a rough time, but hardly any (if any) that have laid off firefighters. Most are still hiring despite the poor economic times.

    I support conservatives/libertarians because the policies they want to enact will help the economy significantly more than the liberals. A strong economy is the best way to ensure public sector jobs.


    I'll be voting for Obama. I believe he has done an excellent job given the disaster he was handed by his predecessor while having to fight an opposition party that won't even vote for it's own economic legislation.
    Ok, so he has had no opposition party in power for 2 of the 3 years he has been president and the opposition only controls the House, not the Senate for 1 year. He got everything he wanted the first two years and still his plan has not worked. How about a little leadership. Clinton and numerous others had similar battles with Congress, but were able to make things work. I'm no fan of Clinton, but he was a leader. Obama is not.

    Romney has made it clear he wants to return to the policies of the Bush Administration.
    Which policies is Romney touting from the Bush days? Bush was a spender (aided by the Pelosi Congress). Romney proposes cuts. Please expand on that claim.
    Last edited by Spencer534; 06-14-2012 at 01:51 AM.

  5. #30
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post

    I cannot which goes towards my previous point that there is a lack of competition, part of the issue with public sector unions.
    Or it could be the private sector knows that providing fire protection to the level demanded by the public is not profitable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Of course they were eliminated to cut costs! That was my point with saying that investments were a gamble. To make DBs work, they had to be overfunded. There were/are firms that take over companies then use their pension fund for profit. I dont like it, but it is perfectly legal. Which company did Bain raid the pension fund while Romney was there? As far as defined benefit plans for private sector execs, public sector execs have better benefits than the grunts. The difference is that I could care less what some CEO has as a benefit. Good for them. However if a locality/state/nation is circling the drain financially, perhaps it is time to look at another retirement method to cut costs.
    I never said Bain Capital did anything wrong. However, when a private pension fund is looted by folks like Romney, the taxpayer gets left holding the bag after the fund has been looted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    How that supporting Obama thing working out for them? Why should a public sector union support a presidential candidate
    Because the alternative is worse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Why should have any guilt over that? First, there is very little effect that the union has on Virginia salaries. A neighboring fire department recently added an ALS salary increase, but it wasnt because the union pushed it (they were certainly for it). It was pushed by management because they were losing medics to another locality because it paid more. COMPETITION IS GREAT! Second, even if I union members fought for better salaries and benefits, they were aware that others who did not pay into the union would benefit from those same increases. It is a priority for those members to devote their money to that cause, just as others devote their funding to other things. Thanks to unions, we have many good things, but it should not be mandatory that someone has to be a member or they cant hold that job.
    You make one specific point. Has all compensation been offered by management? That wasn't the case in my department. Every negotiation always started off with either concessions being requested or zero raises.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Come on now. That is a little dramatic, dont you think? Everything or just some of the economic woes of some localities? We have a conservative government in Virginia and the only thing they have done is changed the retirement system to defined compensation for new employees. They understand that the defined benefits system was underfunded and continuation of that same path would lead to a bankruptcy of the pension system. Additionally, if right to work or conservatism is so bad, how come states with these values are leading for jobs and economic stability? Virginia is #1 for business and I know of some fire departments who are having a rough time, but most are still hiring despite the poor economic times.
    No. It's not being dramatic. You must not read much of the rhetoric from conservative outlets. If you did, you'd know that unions and pensions are being blamed for just about everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Ok, so he has had no opposition party in power for 2 of the 3 years he has been president and the opposition only controls the House, not the Senate for 1 year. He got everything he wanted the first two years and still his plan has not worked. How about a little leadership. Clinton and numerous other had a similar battles with Congress, but were able to make things work. I'm no fan of Clinton, but he was a leader. Obama is not.
    Not true. He only had control of the Senate till Sen. Kennedy died about eight months into his term. Since then the GOP has utilized the cloture motion more times in the last three years than was used between the end of WW I and Watergate. The GOP has made it clear they are willing to prevent any type of legislation that will aid recovery. They even vote against their own legislation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Which policies is Romney touting from the Bush days? Bush was a spender (aided by the Pelosi Congress). Romney proposes cuts. Please expand on that claim.
    Huh? Romney has stated he wants to give more tax cuts thereby cutting revenue. Your comment about Pelosi is a laff riot. The GOP controlled both houses of congress from 1994 to 2006, with six of those years being during the Bush Administration. BTW, Bush signed all those budget bills into law. So he is also to blame for effectively doubling the national debt while conservatives said nothing until a Dem won election to the White House. The American public believes (and rightfully so) that Bush is to blame for the current fiscal mess. He inherited a balanced budget with a surplus and handed off record deficits and a doubling of the national debt.

    Thanks for these softball questions.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  6. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    However, the reality is that conservatives have decided that public employees are overpaid and need to make significant givebacks in order to solve all those problems.
    Despite your dramatic accusation about solving all problems, the people have decided this. San Jose, California is more liberal than you are!

  7. #32
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    You make one specific point. Has all compensation been offered by management? That wasn't the case in my department. Every negotiation always started off with either concessions being requested or zero raises.
    Management has definitely not always been for compensation increases. Virginia unions have fought to get greater compensation. My point is, they do so and Virginia firefighters do well despite your claims that there has to be collective bargaining and non-right to work.


    No. It's not being dramatic. You must not read much of the rhetoric from conservative outlets. If you did, you'd know that unions and pensions are being blamed for just about everything.
    There is blame for public sector unions, but conservatives are more apt to blame Obama and liberal policies instead of the unions. The reality is that there is plenty of blame for republicans, democrats, etc. The issue is how to fix it. Another four years of Obama is not the fix.

    He can blame Bush all he wants, but he knew this was the largest depression since the 30s (he said so many times before becoming president). He said he could fix it. He got the things he said would fix it passed. It hasnt worked so now he blames Bush, Europe, Japan, Congress, etc. He asks for a commission to identify how to make things better (Bowles/Simpson) and then ignores their findings when the tax increases he wanted would have passed (this was when both houses were controlled by Congress).



    Not true. He only had control of the Senate till Sen. Kennedy died about eight months into his term. Since then the GOP has utilized the cloture motion more times in the last three years than was used between the end of WW I and Watergate. The GOP has made it clear they are willing to prevent any type of legislation that will aid recovery. They even vote against their own legislation.
    The Senate is comprised of more democrats than republicans plain and simple! The leader of the Senate is Democratic! Despite this, Obama cant even get his own party to vote for his budgets. The GOP has made it clear that they are unwilling to continue the failed legislation of the president.


    Huh? Romney has stated he wants to give more tax cuts thereby cutting revenue.
    Tell the whole story. Tax cuts along with a revamp of the tax system which eliminates many loopholes as well as significant cuts to the government and a reformation of entitlement programs which is long overdue. Obama's only plan is to raise taxes on the rich.

    Your comment about Pelosi is a laff riot. The GOP controlled both houses of congress from 1994 to 2006, with six of those years being during the Bush Administration. BTW, Bush signed all those budget bills into law. So he is also to blame for effectively doubling the national debt while conservatives said nothing until a Dem won election to the White House. The American public believes (and rightfully so) that Bush is to blame for the current fiscal mess. He inherited a balanced budget with a surplus and handed off record deficits and a doubling of the national debt.

    Thanks for these softball questions.
    You must have sucked at softball. Bush had a Democratic Senate 2000-2002. As I said, Bush was a spender. That was wrong and alot should be blamed on him. I do, but the fact is that Pelosi's Congress made things worse. At the beginning of Bush's presidency, our debt was 5.8 Trillion. When Pelosi took over it was 8.5 Trillion (2.7 Trillion difference). When Obama took office, it was 11.9. In those two years, Bush along with the Pelosi Congress incurred 3.4 Trillion in debt. In those two years, we added more debt than in the previous six.

    Republicans and Democrats both are to blame, but at least the conservatives are admitting they were wrong and are willing to change. Hell, even some Democrats are changing. We'd like to welcome Artur Davis to the Republican Party.
    Last edited by Spencer534; 06-14-2012 at 02:49 AM.

  8. #33
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Management has definitely not always been for compensation increases. Virginia unions have fought to get greater compensation. My point is, they do so and Virginia firefighters do well despite your claims that there has to be collective bargaining and non-right to work.
    They do well because of collective bargaining.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    There is blame for public sector unions, but conservatives are more apt to blame Obama and liberal policies instead of the unions. The reality is that there is plenty of blame for republicans, democrats, etc. The issue is how to fix it. Another four years of Obama is not the fix.

    How are public safety unions to blame for the Great Recession?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    He can blame Bush all he wants, but he knew this was the largest depression since the 30s (he said so many times before becoming president). He said he could fix it. He got the things he said would fix it passed. It hasnt worked so now he blames Bush, Europe, Japan, Congress, etc. He asks for a commission to identify how to make things better (Bowles/Simpson) and then ignores their findings when the tax increases he wanted would have passed (this was when both houses were controlled by Congress).
    You must have missed the record cloture votes being used by the GOP. It now takes 60 votes to get anything done in a timely manner. The Dems haven't had 60 votes since Kennedy died in Aug. 2009.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    The Senate is comprised of more democrats than republicans plain and simple! The leader of the Senate is Democratic! Despite this, Obama cant even get his own party to vote for his budgets. The GOP has made it clear that they are unwilling to continue the failed legislation of the president.
    See above response regarding cloture.


    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Tell the whole story. Tax cuts along with a revamp of the tax system which eliminates many loopholes as well as significant cuts to the government and a reformation of entitlement programs which is long overdue. Obama's only plan is to raise taxes on the rich.
    I'm good with Obama's plan. Romney's plan has already been tried by Bush and Reagan. It led to record deficits and debt both times.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    You must have sucked at softball. Bush had a Democratic Senate 2000-2002. As I said, Bush was a spender. That was wrong and alot should be blamed on him. I do, but the fact is that Pelosi's Congress made things worse. At the beginning of Bush's presidency, our debt was 5.8 Trillion. When Pelosi took over it was 8.5 Trillion (2.7 Trillion difference). When Obama took office, it was 11.9. In those two years, Bush along with the Pelosi Congress incurred 3.4 Trillion in debt. In those two years, we added more debt than in the previous six.
    Yes. It was Bush's SecTreas who demanded TARP be passed or face a global economic meltdown. The blame lies with Bush and conservatives for not submitting or demanding balanced budgets. Yes the Dems had a bare majority for those two years. So what was passed or not passed that would have made a difference? What's funny is watching conservatives pretend to complain about Bush now that he is out of office. They said nothing while he was approving record deficits and doubling the national debt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Republicans and Democrats both are to blame, but at least the conservatives are admitting they were wrong and are willing to change. Hell, even some Democrats are changing. We'd like to welcome Artur Davis to the Republican Party.
    Good for Mr. Davis. When have conservatives admitted they were wrong? They passed all the spending bills submitted by Bush during his administration. Now they don't even support their own legislation. You cited Simpson/Bowles. The GOP leadership is ignoring it like the plague.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-14-2012 at 10:58 AM.
    Dialed likes this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #34
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    And your point?
    I say that because collective bargaining does not directly impact my pay, job prospects, or rights as a worker. This seems to be one of your biggest reasons to be against conservatives / republicans. That is why I wanted to clarify so that you can see where I am coming from.

    You may not see it as a presidential issue. But conservatives have made breaking up unions a priority.
    And the thread is why each person would vote the way they will. As I do not see union issues as a presidential issue, I won't vote based on the candidates' views on unions.

    There are things my taxes pay for that I don't support but I pay them anyway. It's how our system of government operates. I'll trade you the amount of money you might have to pay for healthcare insurance for the amount of money I pay for government subsidies to private companies or to the mulit-million annual salaries enjoyed by executives whose companies have government contracts as their sole source of revenue.
    I do not have an issue paying taxes for things that I will never need or use either. What I am against is the government telling a private institution that their beliefs are incorrect and must accept the beliefs of the government. Something about the first ammendment rings there.

    I have worked for larger corporations. I agree that CEO salaries and benefits are out of whack. That is up to that company, stockholders, and employees to handle. They are a privately held company so their finances should be taken care of as such. If the mayor of a 10,000 resident city is making $500,000 a year, it is up to the city and voters to do something about it.

    Funny stuff. The only times conservatives care about debt and deficits is when a Dem is in the White House. You must have been asleep the eight years between Jan. 2001 and Jan. 2009 when the so called "fiscal conservative" doubled the national debt. Were you concerned about putting your kids in debt when Bush ran up about $5.5T worth of debt? As much as all of his predecessors combined. You claim Obama has missed the mark on recovery. Where is the GOP jobs plan they promised would be their priority on Day One when they took control of the House. Over a year later and no jobs legislation has emerged from that group. In fact, conservatives have become so dysfunctional they vote against their own legislation.
    You are making assumptions of who I have voted for in the past. I did not agree with the defecit spending then like I do not now. I vote based on the issues that affect me the most. public service wages do not affect me as much as national economic recovery and proper regulation, which sometimes means less, sometimes more, and almost always better.

    Ignoring who has a D or an R after their name, do you vote on what they have done versus what they say they will do? I heard many arguments against a Bush 2nd term based on failure to achieve some promises. Isn't the same true now?

    I look at it this way, President Obama said that he would lower unemployment to 8% and we aren't close. He said that we would be well on our way to recovery (not recovered, but making significant headway). He said that he would have passed health care legislation that would work for everyone and immediately exempted different groups in over 800 instances.

    President Obama is a very intelligent man that knows politics. He understood coming into the office the challenges he would face with an opposition controlled house and senate (even though only the congress has been truely opposition controlled and only for 1/2 the time he has been in). He also understood that getting unemployment and the economy turned around would be difficult and dependent on international economic situations. So either he:
    1) Failed - no harm no foul, just no second term
    2) Knowingly promised what he couldn't follow through with (lied) - some will say that is just politics
    3) Wasn't smart enough to see how difficult things would be
    Any one of the three is reason for me to give someone else a chance. And yes, the same was true 8 years ago.
    txgp17 likes this.

  10. #35
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I say that because collective bargaining does not directly impact my pay, job prospects, or rights as a worker. This seems to be one of your biggest reasons to be against conservatives / republicans. That is why I wanted to clarify so that you can see where I am coming from.
    Thank you. Then you should also have no problem with an individual casting their vote based upon an individual's beliefs on collective bargaining and the potential impact to their pay, job prospects, or rights as a worker.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    And the thread is why each person would vote the way they will. As I do not see union issues as a presidential issue, I won't vote based on the candidates' views on unions.
    Then you should also have no problem with individuals who do see union issues as a presidential issue and who vote based upon a candidate's views on unions, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I do not have an issue paying taxes for things that I will never need or use either. What I am against is the government telling a private institution that their beliefs are incorrect and must accept the beliefs of the government. Something about the first ammendment rings there.
    I would have no problem were it not for the fact that many (if not all) of those institutions petition that government they want to ignore for non-profit status. Thereby ensuring they receive all the benefits of the government they want to ignore. They want to be able to function independently, they should have no problem giving up their non-profit status.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I have worked for larger corporations. I agree that CEO salaries and benefits are out of whack. That is up to that company, stockholders, and employees to handle. They are a privately held company so their finances should be taken care of as such. If the mayor of a 10,000 resident city is making $500,000 a year, it is up to the city and voters to do something about it.
    Not the issue. The issue is there are corporate executives earning millions of dollars per year via the checks you write to the IRS every year. That encompasses individuals other than the stockholders. Especially given the sudden concern conservatives have for deficits and government spending.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    You are making assumptions of who I have voted for in the past. I did not agree with the defecit spending then like I do not now. I vote based on the issues that affect me the most. public service wages do not affect me as much as national economic recovery and proper regulation, which sometimes means less, sometimes more, and almost always better.
    So you voted for someone other than Bush? I'll be up front. I proudly voted for Kerry.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    Ignoring who has a D or an R after their name, do you vote on what they have done versus what they say they will do? I heard many arguments against a Bush 2nd term based on failure to achieve some promises. Isn't the same true now?
    Who in the conservative movement was making that argument for a candidate other than Bush in 2004?

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I look at it this way, President Obama said that he would lower unemployment to 8% and we aren't close. He said that we would be well on our way to recovery (not recovered, but making significant headway). He said that he would have passed health care legislation that would work for everyone and immediately exempted different groups in over 800 instances.
    Given that unemployment is 8.2%, that's pretty close.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    President Obama is a very intelligent man that knows politics. He understood coming into the office the challenges he would face with an opposition controlled house and senate (even though only the congress has been truely opposition controlled and only for 1/2 the time he has been in). He also understood that getting unemployment and the economy turned around would be difficult and dependent on international economic situations. So either he:
    1) Failed - no harm no foul, just no second term
    2) Knowingly promised what he couldn't follow through with (lied) - some will say that is just politics
    3) Wasn't smart enough to see how difficult things would be
    Any one of the three is reason for me to give someone else a chance. And yes, the same was true 8 years ago.
    I agree, the fact that we continue to lose over 500,000 jobs a month, the Dow Jones is at 8,000, Bin Laden has not been killed or captured, Libya and Egypt are still in the hands of dictators, and there is no exit strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan proves Obama is a failure. Romney will have a lot of work to do if he wins.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2012 at 09:08 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  11. #36
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I agree, the fact that we continue to lose over 500,000 jobs a month, Bin Laden has not been killed or captured, Libya and Egypt in the hands of dictators, no exit strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan proves Obama is a failure. Romney will have a lot of work to do if he wins.
    Do you care to elaborate, clarify or correct your statement?

  12. #37
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Or it could be the private sector knows that providing fire protection to the level demanded by the public is not profitable.

    This is a true statement and, one in which you could add EMS. There are many places that place private ambulances on the streets to do EMS but, there is no way that a private carrier can do it without massive support from government.

    There is no profit in that kind of service. Those companies are dependent on government for at least first response by fire, ALS help from fire or, they are dependent on city/county/state government to provide the 9-1-1 assistance/service.
    The private companies will also pretend that they are providing a cost saving level of service while making full use of the local/state/federal government for all of the help they receive.

    Never mind the fact that there is not one private ambulance company alive that does not in some way, shape or form perform inter-facility transports. The majority of those, which is the pay day they all seek, is paid out by medicare, in some way.

  13. #38
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasper 45 View Post
    Do you care to elaborate, clarify or correct your statement?
    It's a sarcastic comment.

    Conservatives now claim Obama is doing a poor job because the train wreck left by the president they supported hasn't been fixed fast enough.

    In the meantime, they have yet to put forth any ideas that have been proven to work, while doing everything possible to prevent recovery. The delay of the Transportation Bill is the latest in a long string of actions.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2012 at 08:44 AM.
    Trkco1 and Jasper 45 like this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  14. #39
    the 4-1-4
    Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    It's a sarcastic comment.
    Gotcha...blurry eyes and some long work days slow down the brain, just a wee bit.

  15. #40
    Forum Member
    JayDudley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1,273

    Default Vote for President

    There are two reasons I will not be voting for the "O" man for president.

    !. He was not born in the U.S. but Kenya. Say all you want but Grandma even said so....

    2. Can you honestly say we are better off then we were four years ago???? It's not George Bush's fault either.....

    I think not.......

    This is the main reason Politics should not be discussed in the Fire House......
    msalf likes this.
    Respectfully,
    Jay Dudley
    Retired Fire
    Background Investigator
    IACOJ-Member
    Lifetime Member CSFA
    IAFF Alumni Member

  16. #41
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDudley View Post
    There are two reasons I will not be voting for the "O" man for president.

    !. He was not born in the U.S. but Kenya. Say all you want but Grandma even said so....
    Ummmm.....okay. Facts don't support you, but it's obvious you don't little things like that get in the way.

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDudley View Post
    2. Can you honestly say we are better off then we were four years ago???? It's not George Bush's fault either.....

    I think not.......
    I disagree. I cited my reasons earlier.

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDudley View Post
    This is the main reason Politics should not be discussed in the Fire House......
    Fair enough. Just know that the conservatives you embrace have their sights set on your pay and your benefits. So ask yourself how much your beliefs will you be willing to pay for having those beliefs.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2012 at 09:11 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  17. #42
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    How are public safety unions to blame for the Great Recession?
    I definitely dont think that and please find where Romney said that with a link to that quote.

    You must have missed the record cloture votes being used by the GOP. It now takes 60 votes to get anything done in a timely manner. The Dems haven't had 60 votes since Kennedy died in Aug. 2009.
    Perhaps I am completely ignorant of the cloture rule. It is to end filibuster or the threat of filibuster for certain bills. Obama's budgets were not subject to cloture, but even so Dems didnt support them. Why wouldnt his own party support his plan? Because he is not a leader.

    I'm good with Obama's plan. Romney's plan has already been tried by Bush and Reagan. It led to record deficits and debt both times.

    Yes. It was Bush's SecTreas who demanded TARP be passed or face a global economic meltdown. The blame lies with Bush and conservatives for not submitting or demanding balanced budgets. Yes the Dems had a bare majority for those two years. So what was passed or not passed that would have made a difference? What's funny is watching conservatives pretend to complain about Bush now that he is out of office. They said nothing while he was approving record deficits and doubling the national debt.
    So you are against Romney because you dont want deficits and debt? Are you familiar with who our president is? Our debt has grown exponentially under Obama. Even if you are right that Bush was the cause of all the troubles of the world, Obama has increased the debt by over a trillion each year. Hell, the largest increase in debt, 1.9 trillion was by Obama.

    Let me see if I understand Obama's message:
    1) He will help the public sector unions. Im sure the guys in Wisconsin felt he really helped there. But he was too busy with Sara Jessica Parker, so it is understandable.
    2) He wants to get stuff done, but those nasty Republicans in congress block everything. Even if your position were true, basically what you are saying is "I want to get stuff done, but I cant." That is a wonderful stance to take!
    3) He will help lower the deficit. Just like he did since he started? No thanks.
    4) He will raise the taxes on the wealthy just slightly to pay for the needed policies to bring the economy around. Even if he passed his tax increase it would only bring in $453 billion over 10 years! He is putting us into debt at over a trillion dollars a year. His "Jobs" bill is $447 billion. You claim to want a balanced budget like Clinton (he was forced to do it by the Republican Congress, but ok), but Obama has no intention of doing that.


    You cited Simpson/Bowles. The GOP leadership is ignoring it like the plague.
    Of course they are ignoring it. You have different republicans in now. Ones that believe spending cuts, not tax increases are the way to financial stability. His window of opportunity passed. He missed it. He does not lead. He only blames.
    Last edited by Spencer534; 06-15-2012 at 09:57 AM.

  18. #43
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    I definitely dont think that and please find where Romney said that with a link to that quote.
    Please point me to where I stated Romney made that statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Perhaps I am completely ignorant of the cloture rule. It is to end filibuster or the threat of filibuster for certain bills. Obama's budgets were not subject to cloture, but even so Dems didnt support them. Why wouldnt his own party support his plan? Because he is not a leader.
    The president doesn't approve budgets in the Senate. The president submits budgets to the congress who then changes and amends them accordingly. The president has no control over the individuals in the legislature. The Founding Fathers created the legislature as a co-equal branch of government.


    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    So you are against Romney because you dont want deficits and debt? Are you familiar with who our president is? Our debt has grown exponentially under Obama. Even if you are right that Bush was the cause of all the troubles of the world, Obama has increased the debt by over a trillion each year. Hell, the largest increase in debt, 1.9 trillion was by Obama.
    Yes, I am against Romney because the economic plan he has released so far will only include larger deficits. And I am right that Bush and his policies continue to plague the fiscal policy of the current administration.


    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Let me see if I understand Obama's message:
    1) He will help the public sector unions. Im sure the guys in Wisconsin felt he really helped there. But he was too busy with Sara Jessica Parker, so it is understandable.
    Better than Romney who has stated he wants to end collective bargaining on a national level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    2) He wants to get stuff done, but those nasty Republicans in congress block everything. Even if your position were true, basically what you are saying is "I want to get stuff done, but I cant." That is a wonderful stance to take!

    Which is true given how they have made it their policy to block and slow down everything using procedural rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    3) He will help lower the deficit. Just like he did since he started? No thanks.
    See above response regarding the inheritance of Bush policies that continue to cause deficits.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    4) He will raise the taxes on the wealthy just slightly to pay for the needed policies to bring the economy around. Even if he passed his tax increase it would only bring in $453 billion over 10 years! He is putting us into debt at over a trillion dollars a year. His "Jobs" bill is $447 billion. You claim to want a balanced budget like Clinton (he was forced to do it by the Republican Congress, but ok), but Obama has no intention of doing that.
    Yes, they forced Clinton to balance the budget after Clinton raised the marginal tax rate in 1992. Something all of the GOP voted against claiming it would devastate the economy. Of course just the opposite happened. Since it was a GOP congress that enabled Bush to effectively double the national debt during his administration, we can conclude it wasn't because of their being fiscally responsible. Especially given the record deficits those GOP congressional members approved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Of course they are ignoring it. You have different republicans in now. Ones that believe spending cuts, not tax increases are the way to financial stability. His window of opportunity passed. He missed it. He does not lead. He only blames.
    And you believe Romney will do that? Based on what? His track record as governor of MA? More importantly, why do you believe conservatives will do that if the Romney gets elected and they gain control of the legislature? They had ample opportunity to do exactly that during the Bush administration and never even came close. So what should be cut? Romney isn't very specific on that. Your last four statements are opinions that are unsubstantiated by any facts. Which is common of the conservative mindset these days.

    BTW, how much of your pay and benefits are you willing to give up? Because Romney and his supporters are very clear on their desire to go after what they consider "overpaid" public servants. Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh stated that firefighters don't contribute anything to society. So keep embracing that group as you are slowly driven to the poor house.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2012 at 01:21 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #44
    Forum Member
    HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Thank you. Then you should also have no problem with an individual casting their vote based upon an individual's beliefs on collective bargaining and the potential impact to their pay, job prospects, or rights as a worker.
    You are correct. I wish that everyone in this great nation would pick one issue that means the most to them, get to know where the candidates stand on that issue, what they can do about the issus (if anything), and vote accordingly. I absolutely detest that we are now a nation where over half of the voters cast their ballot based on whose commercial influenced them the most rather than what the candidate actually stands for.


    Then you should also have no problem with individuals who do see union issues as a presidential issue and who vote based upon a candidate's views on unions, right?
    Again, absolutely! I applaud you for taking the time to get to know the candidates and their stance on this issue as you feel it is the most important. I have nothing negative to say about that and if something was interpretted that way I do fully apologize.


    I would have no problem were it not for the fact that many (if not all) of those institutions petition that government they want to ignore for non-profit status. Thereby ensuring they receive all the benefits of the government they want to ignore. They want to be able to function independently, they should have no problem giving up their non-profit status.
    My wife works for a branch of the Salvation Army that deals with domestic violence. They are only tax exempt on supplies directly related to their performing that role. They still pay unemployment, social security, medicaid, and all other income based taxes. They are only sales tax exempt for the purchases I described. The same is true of the church I attend other than the allowable purchases being different. Both entities are still paying taxes, just not to the state. They still pay federal taxes and the issue is with federal mandates.

    Not the issue. The issue is there are corporate executives earning millions of dollars per year via the checks you write to the IRS every year. That encompasses individuals other than the stockholders. Especially given the sudden concern conservatives have for deficits and government spending.
    Whether the company sells you an item or the federal government, it is still the company that is paying the executive. The federal government has every right, and the mandate, to limit the amount paid on any item to a competitive value. It is more an oversight on spending issue than a pay issue as the company is still privately held and not government funded. The government is just a customer.

    So you voted for someone other than Bush? I'll be up front. I proudly voted for Kerry.
    I felt that he had not followed through on his promises and was performing deficit spending. He eliminated a positive balance and lead to a record (at the time) deficit. That is not sound economic policy, nor one I supported.

    Who in the conservative movement was making that argument for a candidate other than Bush in 2004?
    No one made a serious contention to Bush, just as no one has seriously contended President Obama's running. Nor would I have expected them to do so under our current system.

    Given that unemployment is 8.2%, that's pretty close.


    I agree, the fact that we continue to lose over 500,000 jobs a month, the Dow Jones is at 8,000, Bin Laden has not been killed or captured, Libya and Egypt are still in the hands of dictators, and there is no exit strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan proves Obama is a failure. Romney will have a lot of work to do if he wins.
    I get the sarcasm, and actually appreciate it, but I also disagree with your numbers as I have been able to find 4 different figure reported by 4 different "independent" agencies.

    Again, I am thankful that you are willing to look into the issues before voting. I disagree with your numbers and do not feel that the issues most relevant to me are properly addressed by our current President. Also note that as much as I disagree with him, he is still our President and deserves the respect that comes with the position. I do not tolerate people addressing him as the "O man, Obumma, BHO", or anything other than President Obama. It is respect you show for the position, and the country.

    Now that the discussion has lowered to this level (no by SC, Jasper, or some others) including birth issues, name calling, and other childish acts, I will leave. If you would like to continue, please feel free to PM me.

  20. #45
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Just thought I'd throw a toon in.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  21. #46
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    You are correct. I wish that everyone in this great nation would pick one issue that means the most to them, get to know where the candidates stand on that issue, what they can do about the issus (if anything), and vote accordingly. I absolutely detest that we are now a nation where over half of the voters cast their ballot based on whose commercial influenced them the most rather than what the candidate actually stands for.
    I have faith the majority of the electorate does exactly that.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    My wife works for a branch of the Salvation Army that deals with domestic violence. They are only tax exempt on supplies directly related to their performing that role. They still pay unemployment, social security, medicaid, and all other income based taxes. They are only sales tax exempt for the purchases I described. The same is true of the church I attend other than the allowable purchases being different. Both entities are still paying taxes, just not to the state. They still pay federal taxes and the issue is with federal mandates.
    Then I wasn't referring to them. FWIW, I've heard nothing but good things about the Salvation Army as it relates to the services they provide. I live near a "church" that should be an embarrassment to all religious organizations in general and Christians in particular. Google "Trinity Broadcast Network" and you'll see what I mean.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    Whether the company sells you an item or the federal government, it is still the company that is paying the executive. The federal government has every right, and the mandate, to limit the amount paid on any item to a competitive value. It is more an oversight on spending issue than a pay issue as the company is still privately held and not government funded. The government is just a customer.
    I agree, however, as I pointed out, the taxpayer is ultimately footing the bill if 100% of that company's revenue is from government contracts. It's not like there is a separate pot of money for contractors and another pot for the rest that funds government programs and services. The same folks who negotiate the contracts for private companies are the same folks who negotiate the contracts for public employees. Which many conservatives believe are too generous.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I felt that he had not followed through on his promises and was performing deficit spending. He eliminated a positive balance and lead to a record (at the time) deficit. That is not sound economic policy, nor one I supported.
    I believe he is doing a good job given the mess he was handed. The GOP has yet to put forth an alternative that has been shown to work.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I get the sarcasm, and actually appreciate it, but I also disagree with your numbers as I have been able to find 4 different figure reported by 4 different "independent" agencies.
    I use the ones from the BLS that have been used for decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    Again, I am thankful that you are willing to look into the issues before voting. I disagree with your numbers and do not feel that the issues most relevant to me are properly addressed by our current President. Also note that as much as I disagree with him, he is still our President and deserves the respect that comes with the position. I do not tolerate people addressing him as the "O man, Obumma, BHO", or anything other than President Obama. It is respect you show for the position, and the country.
    Again I have to take into consideration the train wreck he was handed and where we are now. That to me has been progress. What do you believe should be case right now as it relates to recovery and economic productivity.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    Now that the discussion has lowered to this level (no by SC, Jasper, or some others) including birth issues, name calling, and other childish acts, I will leave. If you would like to continue, please feel free to PM me.
    I have no problem keeping this in the open.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-15-2012 at 09:26 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  22. #47
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialed View Post
    Just thought I'd throw a toon in.
    Thought you would appreciate this one.

    Name:  Stealing Pensions.jpg
Views: 191
Size:  75.0 KB
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  23. #48
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Another reason I'm voting for President Obama.
    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...#ixzz20G3r5HG4

    The Republicans seem to be doing the opposite.
    scfire86 likes this.

  24. #49
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialed View Post
    Another reason I'm voting for President Obama.
    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...#ixzz20G3r5HG4
    Excellent

    Quote Originally Posted by Dialed View Post
    The Republicans seem to be doing the opposite.
    True.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  25. #50
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    28

    Default

    Another good read:
    http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/18...campaign-swing

    ...On June 8th in Council Bluffs, Iowa, Romney made comments disparaging Barack Obama for wanting more fireman, policeman and teachers. Romney also opposes both the SAFER Act and the FIRE Act, which provide personnel and equipment for local fire departments across the country. Since 2010, Republicans have cut the federal firefighting budget by more than $200 million, and the Ryan budget would accelerate that process at the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA), the United States Forest Service, and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. membership voting
    By FF7679 in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-31-2010, 04:00 PM
  2. Voting compromise
    By fyrmed in forum Career/Paid Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-15-2009, 05:00 PM
  3. Even though Im voting for....
    By BCmdepas3280 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2004, 10:19 AM
  4. Voting for Officers
    By thoskin in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-05-2002, 11:29 AM
  5. Juniors Voting
    By HF&R_H28 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-21-2002, 11:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register