Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 352
Like Tree29Likes

Thread: Why are you voting for whoever for President?

  1. #21
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    And I utilized the point of public servants not suffering at all either. And I know you don't want to consider other unions, but many teachers in NJ ain't suffering either thanks to their union.
    I'm betting the 600K public servants who have lost their jobs since the beginning of the Great Recession would disagree with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    How much am I willing to pay? I took a 20% paycut to work where I am now. Why? Pay was only 1 factor. Other things outweighed that 1 factor.
    A paycut from where? Regardless, the current conservative mindset is that you're overpaid. They don't care about your sob story.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."


  2. #22
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,783

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Were the alternative candidates better who supported firefighter issues?

    Well, I guess that comes down to perspective. My opinion, and that of many others in my local are yes, there was.
    Politician "A" is a known "enemy" of fire service staffing, having their actions speak much louder than words. Any of the other four candidates in a recent race would have been better. In fact, the IAFF endorsed the only candidate that stated firefighters should lose the ability to collectively bargain and, actively lobbied for it.

    The politician we chose to endorse, as a local, has an actual known history of standing up for firefighters and police officers.

    Go ahead and spin it, I know you're just dying to. That won't change the fact the IAFF does not live up to what we pay them to do. I stand with my local 100%, no question about it. However, the current IAFF and other state level associations...here...leave a lot to be desired. The "brotherhood" exhibited here over the past eighteen months is in that same category, as well. Had the international offered up even 1/10th of what they threw out in Madison, in record setting times, I have no doubt that many of our cuts would have been prevented.
    How many times did both Obama and Biden ride thru this state over the past five years? All those trips thru and our general president didn't make one effort to whisper in the ear of our mayor or, have either Biden or Obama make a phone call to help. All that was given was a cursory appearance by the fifth district VP, several years ago...once...

    Actions speak louder than words. One candidate cuts firefighters; makes firefighters' jobs more difficult by wasting money and providing ineffective communication devices. The other stands up and actually takes action to support firefighters and police officers...

    I know this topic is off track as the thread seems to deal with presidential politics, but it's a good topic.
    Last edited by Jasper 45; 06-13-2012 at 12:18 PM.

  3. #23
    Forum Member HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    442

    Default

    I guess I should have clarified. I am not a paid firefighter. I am a civil engineer working in the private sector.

    I understand that there are the underlying tones of kill the unions, but I do not see that as a presidential issue. Nor do I believe that either candidate would undertake a large scale attack or defense of unioins whether they be private or public sector. Again, this is more of a congressional if not state issue.

    I do understand that under the Affordable Healthcare Act, my family must get our insurance through my job rather than my wife's because the religious organization she works for would rather pay the penalties than offer services counter to their beliefs to employees as mandated by the legislation. I also see where many of Bush's policies and programs that were protested in the past have not been repealed or have even been extended.

    I have 2 boys under the age of 3. President Obama promised a recovery and gains economically that have been missed so badly, that I cannot take the risk of more of his failed policies and spending putting my kids more in debt. I would rather have that burden than trying to spend our way out of things so that future generations are left with the bill. I would rather suffer through a recession / depression than have my children or grandchildren go through one.
    txgp17 and msalf like this.

  4. #24
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I guess I should have clarified. I am not a paid firefighter. I am a civil engineer working in the private sector.
    And your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I understand that there are the underlying tones of kill the unions, but I do not see that as a presidential issue. Nor do I believe that either candidate would undertake a large scale attack or defense of unioins whether they be private or public sector. Again, this is more of a congressional if not state issue.
    You may not see it as a presidential issue. But conservatives have made breaking up unions a priority.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I do understand that under the Affordable Healthcare Act, my family must get our insurance through my job rather than my wife's because the religious organization she works for would rather pay the penalties than offer services counter to their beliefs to employees as mandated by the legislation. I also see where many of Bush's policies and programs that were protested in the past have not been repealed or have even been extended.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by HuntPA View Post
    I have 2 boys under the age of 3. President Obama promised a recovery and gains economically that have been missed so badly, that I cannot take the risk of more of his failed policies and spending putting my kids more in debt. I would rather have that burden than trying to spend our way out of things so that future generations are left with the bill. I would rather suffer through a recession / depression than have my children or grandchildren go through one.
    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.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-13-2012 at 02:53 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  5. #25
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,570

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    ...executives whose companies have government contracts as their sole source of revenue...
    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?
    txgp17 likes 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?

  6. #26
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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."

  7. #27
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,570

    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?

  8. #28
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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; 06-13-2012 at 11:10 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #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 12:51 AM.

  10. #30
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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."

  11. #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!

  12. #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 01:49 AM.

  13. #33
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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 09:58 AM.
    Dialed likes this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  14. #34
    Forum Member HuntPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northwest PA
    Posts
    442

    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.

  15. #35
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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 08:08 AM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  16. #36
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,783

    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?

  17. #37
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,783

    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.

  18. #38
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,974

    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 07:44 AM.
    Trkco1 and Jasper 45 like this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #39
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,783

    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.

  20. #40
    Forum Member JayDudley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1,251

    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

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, 03:00 PM
  2. Voting compromise
    By fyrmed in forum Career/Paid Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-15-2009, 04:00 PM
  3. Even though Im voting for....
    By BCmdepas3280 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-28-2004, 09:19 AM
  4. Voting for Officers
    By thoskin in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-05-2002, 10:29 AM
  5. Juniors Voting
    By HF&R_H28 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-21-2002, 10:47 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