Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

[10ac]

Don Anderson · Top Commenter
We saved Big Bird but killed the Twinkie. 18,000 people lost their jobs, but Big Bird and free birth control are safe. Good job.

[innocentbystander]

Dr Hanson says the GOP must do for Latinos what the GOP did for Italians, that is nothing. Harp on the melting pot and wait until the Latino culture is fully integrated into mainstream, middle-class, Amercian society.

http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson111512.html

Imagine, for a minute, that the Republican leadership did attempt to negotiate the “grand bargain,” a platitude as constantly voiced as it is never defined. If Republicans were willing to grant Dream Act–like amnesty, what exactly would they ask for in exchange? The completion of the border fence? Employer fines? E-Verify? Deportation of millions of “unDream” illegal immigrants who do not meet the above criteria?

For all practical purposes, “comprehensive reform” means granting amnesty but also leaving the border fence uncompleted, having a guest-worker program, and issuing green cards to millions of illegal residents. If we were to deport the tens of thousands of Mexican nationals in our prisons, or the hundreds of thousands on some form of public assistance, does anyone believe that would win over the Latino leadership? The Reagan-era (1986) Simpson-Mazzoli Act (which required employers to verify immigration status, and which also amnestied about 3 million illegals) led to greater influxes from Mexico, did not stop calls for more amnesties, and certainly did not swell Latino support for Republicans.

Among most Mexican-Americans that I know there may have been just as much outrage at Romney for advocating legal immigration based on skills and education rather than family ties, as there was furor for his talk of “self-deportation.” Is it not hurtful (and seen as racist) to prefer that someone immigrate from Slovakia with an engineering degree and some capital rather than from Oaxaca with no money and without a high-school diploma? Under the present system, a Mexican national who is an unskilled worker can massage citizenship far more easily by virtue of ethnic clout and kindred ties to a Mexican-American than can a South Korean dentist or Greek doctor or Hungarian capitalist. Why would Mexican-Americans not favor such a system, and why would they not resent Republicans who advocated legal immigration based on higher education and specialized skills? Are the new Republican centrists to win the Latino vote by avoiding talk about basing legal immigration largely on criteria other than ethnic and family affiliations?

There are other, rarely spoken, reasons for Latinos to prefer Obama that have little to do with Republican positions on border enforcement. One is a sort of minority solidarity, in which the president, by virtue of his liberal and African-American profile, is seen as somehow more sensitive to other minorities, or at least in some vague mindset representing a shared challenge to the so-called white status quo.....

....The model for Republicans should be the Italian immigration experience. Italian-Americans were once a monolithic Democratic pool of millions. But, as immigration from Sicily and the rest of Italy greatly slowed down, and as the natural course of American capitalism brought Italian-Americans into the middle class and differentiated them into subclasses of higher and lower incomes, “Italian” ceased to be an ethnic straitjacket. Today, Italian-Americans may vote partly on the basis of tribal pride, but not in any predictable political pattern. Italian conservatives have no problem voting against Andrew Cuomo or Nancy Pelosi, while liberal Italians did not particularly rally to Rudy Giuliani. The 30 percent of Latinos who opposed Barack Obama may suggest that we are seeing the beginning of such a phenomenon.

What, then, should Republicans do? Stick to their melting-pot principles and apply them across the board, regardless of race and tribe, emphasizing the content of our characters rather than the color of our skins. Of course, avoid gratuitous polarization and loose talk. Close the border, and invest in the formidable powers of American assimilation, integration, and intermarriage to achieve for a soon-to-be-closed pool of Latinos what it has already done for Japanese and Italians. Consider the Dream Act only if it is coupled with deportation of many of those who do not meet its requirements and with employer sanctions and border enforcement. A particular Italian-American may sometimes be indistinguishable to the eye from a particular Mexican-American, but the former does not qualify for affirmative action, does not take Italian Studies courses, is not labeled a victimized minority because of ethnic affinity with millions of poor Sicilian newcomers — and is not beholden any longer to the Democratic party.....

If Republicans do not believe in a society in which race is to be incidental, not essential to our characters, and if they cannot stand on such principles, then why should anyone else?

Basically, what it boils down to is this: the more education Latinos get, the more they get access to the middle class (instead of being servants to the middle class), the more likely they are to vote GOP.

[Johnette's Daddy]

Don Anderson · Top Commenter
We saved Big Bird but killed the Twinkie. 18,000 people lost their jobs, but Big Bird and free birth control are safe. Good job.

The problem with Hostess is/was the vulture capitalists who "loaned to own" the company when they emerged from their first BK in 2009. The company should have been sold to Bimbo Bakeries, but was "restructured" by firms that specialize in breaking up companies and selling off their assets.

When Hostess declined to sell to Bimbo, Sara Lee did, and Bimbo now has a megashare of the market (Sara Lee, Ballpark, Thomas' English Muffins, Entemann's, Oroweat, Roman Meal, Boboli, Cinnabon, et. al.) and Hostess' sales are down almost 30% from when they 1st went into bankruptcy in 2004.

Even worse - the "deal" that the vulture capitalists gave Hostess in their 1st bankruptcy was criminal - they went into BK owing $450 million and came out in 2009 owing $650 million!

Meanwhile, the unions made HUGE concessions in the 1st BK, giving back a ton in pension and health benefits along with layoffs and salary cuts.

So yeah, blame the big, bad unions. A declining market share and predatory lenders had nothing to do with it.

[10ac]

So yeah, blame the big, bad unions. A declining market share and predatory lenders had nothing to do with it.

They were the straw. It was their choice.

[innocentbystander]

Don Anderson · Top Commenter
We saved Big Bird but killed the Twinkie. 18,000 people lost their jobs, but Big Bird and free birth control are safe. Good job.

The problem with Hostess is/was the vulture capitalists

What is the definition of "vulture" capitalists and how are they differenciated from any other kinds of "capitalists?" While you are at it (Pastor) what are the possible kinds of "capitalists?" Which ones are good and which ones are bad (and why?)

[Johnette's Daddy]

Basically, what it boils down to is this: the more education Latinos get, the more they get access to the middle class (instead of being servants to the middle class), the more likely they are to vote GOP.

Please listen to Dr. Hanson! In another 50 years, the gap will be almost even.

Seriously, he completely ignores the race-based white-brown politics that have defined the western US pretty much since the Mexican-American War. The primary political objective of whites in Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, California and Oklahoma for the past 120+ years is to make sure that Central-Americans don't become the major voting block in the region.

Shoot, the whole reason marijuana was first outlawed was because Texans felt that it would curb Mexican immigration, since a lot of Mexicans with native heritage used mj for medicinal purposes (in teas, etc.).

Hanson does not acknowledge that European immigrants and central american immigrants are treated in vastly different ways. Even though most Mexicans consider themselves "white"," they have to self-identify as such. Italians, Poles, Spaniards, Brits, etc., do not.

[innocentbystander]

Basically, what it boils down to is this: the more education Latinos get, the more they get access to the middle class (instead of being servants to the middle class), the more likely they are to vote GOP.

Please listen to Dr. Hanson! In another 50 years, the gap will be almost even.

Seriously, he completely ignores the race-based white-brown politics that have defined the western US pretty much since the Mexican-American War. The primary political objective of whites in Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, California and Oklahoma for the past 120+ years is to make sure that Central-Americans don't become the major voting block in the region.

Shoot, the whole reason marijuana was first outlawed was because Texans felt that it would curb Mexican immigration, since a lot of Mexicans with native heritage used mj for medicinal purposes (in teas, etc.).

Hanson does not acknowledge that European immigrants and central american immigrants are treated in vastly different ways. Even though most Mexicans consider themselves "white"," they have to self-identify as such. Italians, Poles, Spaniards, Brits, etc., do not.

There are no Italian-American studies programs in the UC program. There are no Polish-American Studies, no Spanish-American studies, and no British-American studies in the UC program. None. There is Latino-American studies.

In order for Latinos to NOT feel marginalized in the UNited States, the term "Latino-American" needs to go away and never come back. And that will only happen when Latinos are better educated and are equally represented in the middle class. As Calculus teacher Edward James Olmos/Mr Escalante said to his Latino students in the movie Stand and Deliver...

"...mathematics is the Great Equalizer."

He's right. And so is Dr Hanson. Latinos will STOP being treated "differently" when they are educated. Latinos stop voting Dem but ONLY when they educate themselves and when that happens, they stop identifying themselves as Latino-American. This is all on them and what they can do for themselves, not what government can do for them. Everything else you have to say (Pastor) is hooey.

By the by, what is a "vulture" capitalist and what makes them different than all oter "capitalists?" What are good capitalists and what are bad capitalists?

[Toemeesleather]

The best part is that unions just voted for 4 more yearzzz!!!! of declining wages/malaise....welcome to the new normal....

[innocentbystander]

The best part is that unions just voted for 4 more yearzzz!!!! of declining wages/malaise....welcome to the new normal....

They were just doign what they were told.

[THE_WIZARD_]

No more Twinkies? WTF? What's next...McD's pulling the plug on the McRib?

This is bullshit!!

[Johnette's Daddy]

Don Anderson · Top Commenter
We saved Big Bird but killed the Twinkie. 18,000 people lost their jobs, but Big Bird and free birth control are safe. Good job.

The problem with Hostess is/was the vulture capitalists

What is the definition of "vulture" capitalists and how are they differenciated from any other kinds of "capitalists?" While you are at it (Pastor) what are the possible kinds of "capitalists?" Which ones are good and which ones are bad (and why?)

I'm all for capitalism - my retirement fund is managed by cold-eyed, flinty-hearted puritans who vomit blood at the thought of paying one extra nickle in taxes or giving up a single penny in profit. They also, however, follow the Rotary code and don't get involved in shady deals just to make a buck.

"Vulture capitalists" are those who jeopardize the system by making predatory deals with the idea that they're going to screw someone and it doesn't matter what the fallout is.

Perfect case in point - the sub-prime collapse. From 2004-2009, I pastored in one of the fastest growing communities in southern California with a housing market that was meteoric. During testimony time, I would invariably have a member testify about how they were able to buy a beuatiful new home despite having no job/low income/monumentally awful credit.

In one case, a member who had no job came to me to get my opinion on the deal she was offered: for $12K down (which she would borrow from her parents), she'd get a 4 bdrm/4 bath house in a gated community across from the golf course for $975/month (which she could swing with SSI and her grown kids who lived with her chipping in). The note would balloon in two years to $2,900, but the realtor and home mortage guy would help her flip the house in 12-18 months and she would make 50K-75K on the deal and buy another house. Of course she had to lie about her income etc, but she was told that several church members had worked with these guys and had been very successful over the past 3-4 years.

I advised her against it - betting on the market staying hot was risky after so much sustained growth - and I confronted the loan people, one of whom was an officer at my church. Long story short, I asked him not to market his services at the church, he got pissed at me, bad mouthed me and left the church to go to the big non-denominational church where all the white folks attended. The lady I was advising left the church and bought the house, too. A year later, the market crashed and a year after that, she lost the house. I get a visit from the FBI asking about the loan guy, who the SAC tells me they have on tape talking about how he knows his clients are going to get screwed but he didn't care as long as he was getting his 20-30K in monthly commissions. They put a federal colonoscopy on the guy, raided his business, etc., but from what I was told couldn't prosecute him because he had not technically broken the law.

The same sort of thing happens with Investment Banking, only at a larger scale and with less scrutiny because of the politicians on the bankers' payrolls.

[Toemeesleather]

"Vulture capitalists" are those who jeopardize the system by making predatory deals with the idea that they're going to screw someone and it doesn't matter what the fallout is.


Sooooo, they're sort of the flip side of a union....now it all makes sense.

[innocentbystander]

What is the definition of "vulture" capitalists and how are they differenciated from any other kinds of "capitalists?" While you are at it (Pastor) what are the possible kinds of "capitalists?" Which ones are good and which ones are bad (and why?)

I'm all for capitalism - my retirement fund is managed by cold-eyed, flinty-hearted puritans who vomit blood at the thought of paying one extra nickle in taxes or giving up a single penny in profit. They also, however, follow the Rotary code and don't get involved in shady deals just to make a buck.

"Vulture capitalists" are those who jeopardize the system by making predatory deals with the idea that they're going to screw someone and it doesn't matter what the fallout is.

Perfect case in point - the sub-prime collapse. From 2004-2009, I pastored in one of the fastest growing communities in southern California with a housing market that was meteoric. During testimony time, I would invariably have a member testify about how they were able to buy a beuatiful new home despite having no job/low income/monumentally awful credit.

In one case, a member who had no job came to me to get my opinion on the deal she was offered: for $12K down (which she would borrow from her parents), she'd get a 4 bdrm/4 bath house in a gated community across from the golf course for $975/month (which she could swing with SSI and her grown kids who lived with her chipping in).

Full stop, that is on her. What happened to her is HER FAULT. She is to blame, you don't get a house if your income is SSI and room-and-board payments from your adult children. She is responsible. It is NOT the fault of the home mortgage guy. Stop it Pastor, stop blaming them.

I don't care what the note would balloon to, I don't care what they said about flipping it or re-financing it. A mortgage broker is nothing more than a salesman. That is it. That is ALL that they are, just a salemen. They get paid commission, nothing else. And salesmen do not make money by NOT selling to people who can't afford what they are selling. They only make money by making the sale. They are not loan officers who are paid (by a bank) to say "no" to people they know can't afford the payment. A Loan Officer is paid to be a prick, a mortgage broker needs to sell.

What ever happened to Caveat Emptor?

I advised her against it -

Okay good, you did right.

betting on the market staying hot was risky after so much sustained growth - and I confronted the loan people, one of whom was an officer at my church. Long story short, I asked him not to market his services at the church, he got pissed at me, bad mouthed me and left the church to go to the big non-denominational church where all the white folks attended.

Going off topic, don't care what a salesman does when you confront them. If I was the mortgage broker I would have told you to mind your own business and I'll say whatever I want to the members of your church. If they don't want what I am selling, they can say no. And you can even tell them to say no to me. But that is it.

The lady I was advising left the church and bought the house, too. A year later, the market crashed and a year after that, she lost the house.

That is HER FAULT. She signed on the dotted line. No one pointed a gun at her head, her fault. Pastor, if the house went UP in value, and she did flip it, would she have gone to the bank that loaned her the money to SHARE the profit she made in the sale of the house?

OF COURSE NOT!

Your anger is with capitalism, NOT with "vulture" capitalism. In your definition of vulture capitalism, you have not defined ANYTHING other than the fact that you hate that irresponsible people are just as greedy as anyone else and the irreponsible people aren't FORGIVEN their debts because they are irresponsible. If she was dealing with a Loan Officer at a bank that had to keep the loan under management instead of selling it (something the Democratic Party would NEVER agree to because she would never have been approved, never-EVER) then she would not have gotten herself into trouble and (I'm guessing) you would be irrationally pissed at WHITE REPUBLICANS who DENIED HER the loan that she was entited.

We can go back and forth on this all day long. But you get the picture.

You are pointing fingers at the wrong person. They gave her the money. THEY GAVE HER THE MONEY. You recommended against it (kudos to you) but she did exactly what you told her NOT to do and now you are angry at a sales person? You call this whole process (that is nothing more than buying and selling) vulture capitalism? That is ludicrous.

-IB

[Jungle Rat]

Romney = Vulture

[innocentbystander]

Romney = Vulture

According to the Pastor's screed, a coutergirl at Budine's selling marked up perfume to an elderly person on Social Security is a vulture capitalist. Basically, anyone who sells anything to anyone that shouldn't be buying it (because they can't afford it) is a vulture.

[bluetick]

Give it up, JD. This guy doesn't know anything about how certain private equity firms work. Outfits like Bain operate on a corrupted form of capitalism calculated not so much to produce more revenue for the corporations it takes charge of as to transfer their assets into the pockets of those who've taken them over. You can call it vulture capitalism but it's really a form of self-enrichment. Togh shit - for the Bain's to achieve their mercenary purpose, workers have to be fired or have their pension voided, or just as likely the business itself must be driven into the ground. Hey - it's just business.

[innocentbystander]

Give it up, JD. This guy doesn't know anything about how certain private equity firms work. Outfits like Bain operate on a corrupted form of capitalism calculated not so much to produce more revenue for the corporations it takes charge of as to transfer their assets into the pockets of those who've taken them over. You can call it vulture capitalism but it's really a form of self-enrichment. Togh shit - for the Bain's to achieve their mercenary purpose, workers have to be fired or have their pension voided, or just as likely the business itself must be driven into the ground. Hey - it's just business.

You are being a stupid ass. I know exactly how private equity firms work. Think about what you just typed and how it makes no sense in the world of reality.

Just like math and science, capitalism is AMORAL. It is not "corrupt" the way a cop is "corrupt" if he or she takes a bribe not to arrest a criminal. That is corruption. What a Gov in Illinois did was corruption. I don't even want to see you use the word "corrupt" describing capitalism ever again because it makes no sense. You don't "buy off" capitalism. Your rhetoric is meaningless DNC talking points.

If a company was doing fine and could pay all its bills, then they don't have to have anyone come in and take them over to make them profitable. That company would not be vulnerable now would it? And in fact, the companies that Bain took over, many of them (perhaps all of them) would have gone out of business and disappeared had Bain not stepped in to save their asses. And then no one would have a job or a pension or anything. Bain made them whole by removing fat at the top (overpaid executives.)

Pensions? Get the fuck out of here Tick. Pensions at companies are not bribes given to civil servants to do bullshit, brain dead state work, in exchange for a vote for the Democratic Party. A pension at a company is very different. If the pensions are "funded" (by the employee paying in with their own money) then that is their money. They are going to get their money whether they company goes out of business or not provided it isn't ALL sunk into one company's stock and that company goes out of business. Three times I have lost a job because the business went out of business but my 401K money went with me to my next job because I funded it. If it is an UNFUNDED pension (ie: just a promise made by the company that you are going to get a check, someday) then is is entirely up to the company if they are going to keep their promise. And only IF the company is still there! They have no obligation to fulfill that promise. Shame on you for being the fool to think they must. Shame on you for not saving for your own retirement. Who are you going to "sue" because someone a a company didn't keep a promise when the company goes out of business?

That is why I am very angry about the GM and Chrysler bailout. All that is, is this President trying to get votes in Michigan by propiong up unfunded pensions at the expense of the taxpayer.

[Jungle Rat]

This is the one SW Ohio was bombarded with

[youtube]oLo0Jwj03JU[/youtube]

[sardis]

The pastor did the right thing by advising both members as to the error of their ways even though they would move their membership to the froo-froo latte churches that promote wealth as God's purpose for their life. I wonder when the world came crashing down on the two did that pastor of the froo-froo church minister to them or was he too busy on his book tour?

[Jungle Rat]

Three times I have lost a job because the business went out of business but my 401K money went with me to my next job because I funded it.

Sure ya did. And what does it say about you being hired at 3 different companies that went belly up?