Second most powerful Lobby in DC endorses Fiorina

[Brian4Liberty]

The Queen of outsourcing and in-sourcing backed by the single biggest lobby group for outsourcing and in-sourcing cheap labor? Shocking! :rolleyes:

The dream corporatist candidate...or as they call her, the "rock star candidate".


U.S. Chamber of Commerce backs Carly Fiorina

By Maeve Reston, Los Angeles Times

August 10, 2010

Republican U.S. Senate nominee Carly Fiorina locked down the potentially key endorsement Monday of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as she and her opponent, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, clashed long-distance over their competing plans to create jobs in the state.
...
In the wake of a Supreme Court decision that corporations have a free-speech right to spend money to elect or defeat candidates, the U.S. Chamber has signaled that it intends to play a major role in this year's midterm elections and that it has been rapidly expanding its grass-roots network.

The group is expected to more than double its spending on congressional elections from $35 million in 2008 to $75 million this year. The Fiorina-Boxer race is one of at least 10 Senate races that the group is focused on, along with about 40 House races.
...
William C. Miller, the U.S. Chamber's national political director who was traveling with Fiorina Monday, would not say how much the group plans to spend in Fiorina's race. But he praised Fiorina as a "rock star candidate" and said Boxer had been "consistently pro-tax, pro-lawyer, pro-unions and anti-growth and anti-small businesses."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fiorina-20100810,0,6836251.story

[Jeremy]

What's wrong with outsourcing and in-sourcing cheap labor?

[ChaosControl]

What's wrong with outsourcing and in-sourcing cheap labor?

Takes away good paying jobs and makes people more dependent on government for their welfare.

[Brian4Liberty]

What's wrong with outsourcing and in-sourcing cheap labor?

It's the best thing in the world to a corporatist. Not so good for the people who are unemployed in California.

[oyarde]

It is in the best interest of the people of California for Boxer to be defeated.

[Jeremy]

Takes away good paying jobs and makes people more dependent on government for their welfare.

So we should oppose companies laying off people to stay within their means so the former employees don't go on welfare?


It's the best thing in the world to a corporatist. Not so good for the people who are unemployed in California. Corporatists use government to support companies/monopolies. I'm talking about the free market. Does anyone here support the free market?

[phill4paul]

My only concern is with the Supreme Court decision that corporations have a free-speech right to spend money to elect or defeat candidates.

That and governmental regulations that incentivise the outsourcing of jobs in the first place.

[Brian4Liberty]

It is in the best interest of the people of California for Boxer to be defeated.

Yep, and now we are stuck with the lesser of two evils. It's like a Presidential Race between Dick Cheney and Nancy Pelosi.

[WaltM]

What's wrong with outsourcing and in-sourcing cheap labor?

nothing, unless either you believe in the broken window fallacy, or you're against unemployment.

[silentshout]

It is in the best interest of the people of California for Boxer to be defeated.

Hmm, not sure about that. Trading Boxer for Fiorina? Can't stand either of them.

[Brian4Liberty]

My only concern is with the Supreme Court decision that corporations have a free-speech right to spend money to elect or defeat candidates.

That and governmental regulations that incentivise the outsourcing of jobs in the first place.

You must have missed the memo. Corporations have all of the benefits of an individual (plus more), but none of the restrictions or liabilities.

[ChaosControl]

So we should oppose companies laying off people to stay within their means so the former employees don't go on welfare?

We should oppose American companies outsourcing, yes. Not everything a company does is about its survival. Sometimes it'll be about just making an extra percent profit so the shareholders are happy while the workers get screwed.

[Jeremy]

We should oppose American companies outsourcing, yes. Not everything a company does is about its survival. Sometimes it'll be about just making an extra percent profit so the shareholders are happy while the workers get screwed.

It means their products become cheaper. And according to John Stossel, companies that outsource end up employing more people here.

[phill4paul]

You must have missed the memo. Corporations have all of the benefits of an individual (plus more), but none of the restrictions or liabilities.

Nope didn't miss it just commenting on it. Read about it in depth right here on RPFs.:D

[Brian4Liberty]

It means their products become cheaper.

That is one possibility, but by no means the only option.

For instance, at HP, Carly Fiorina used the extra money to buy several corporate jets for her own use, as well as the most luxurious (shopping?) trips for herself and her rockstar posse. She also purchased a "competitor" (Compaq) for a premium price. A competitor that was probably only one quarter away from going out of business (and if you wait until they go out of business, you can get their best assets and personnel for cheap). Then you have to spend a ton of money on integrating the two companies. All of that merger and acquisition activity requires quite a few Wall St. firms, lawyers, advisers and consultants (very, very expensive). And in the end, golden parachutes aren't free for the company either.

You see, there are many ways for a company to spend money other than reducing prices or paying (or hiring) employees.

[00_Pete]

Its a very complicated issue no doubt.

Its one of those things that makes the philosophy of libertarianism a very complicated one in real life.

On one hand we have the issue of protectionism and all negative things that come with it...on the other hand it is very unfair and downright morally wrong when we have a country that is run by scumbag government that let corporations engaged in modern slavery and "our" corporations take advantage of it.

[michaelwise]

LMAO at the damage done by NAFTA, CAFTA, and GAT. No more consumer manufacturing jobs! Now go get a job at McDonalds you American peasants.
I just thank God for the complete and total economic collapse to teach the sheeple a lesson they will never forget.

[Jeremy]

That is one possibility, but by no means the only option.

For instance, at HP, Carly Fiorina used the extra money to buy several corporate jets for her own use, as well as the most luxurious (shopping?) trips for herself and her rockstar posse. She also purchased a "competitor" (Compaq) for a premium price. A competitor that was probably only one quarter away from going out of business (and if you wait until they go out of business, you can get their best assets and personnel for cheap). Then you have to spend a ton of money on integrating the two companies. All of that merger and acquisition activity requires quite a few Wall St. firms, lawyers, advisers and consultants (very, very expensive). And in the end, golden parachutes aren't free for the company either.

You see, there are many ways for a company to spend money other than reducing prices or paying (or hiring) employees.
Business have the right to make bad decisions.

[YumYum]

Fiorina wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Rich Republicans wanted these wars that are bankrupting this nation. I would like to see the taxes on the rich people who wanted war to increase, not be cut.

[oyarde]

Fiorina wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Rich Republicans wanted these wars that are bankrupting this nation. I would like to see the taxes on the rich people who wanted war to increase, not be cut.

At this point , expiring tax cuts or tax increase will keep unemployment where it is.People just will not hire in the face of uncertainty.

[YumYum]

At this point , expiring tax cuts or tax increase will keep unemployment where it is.People just will not hire in the face of uncertainty.

If you give the rich tax cuts, they can go out and buy another yacht.

[Brian4Liberty]

Business have the right to make bad decisions.

Of course they do. That's why Fiorina was eventually fired. Let's not forget that at many corporations, the executives are not the majority shareholders (there are a few notable exceptions). So the money a CEO might "waste" is not their money at all, it's the shareholders (owners) money. But it's good to be King (or Queen) of a corporation, especially when you can use "excess" corporate money for executive compensation. That's another good way to "utilize" the savings from sending jobs overseas: a variety of tasty bonuses for executives.

[Brian4Liberty]

If you give the rich tax cuts, they can go out and buy another yacht.

Back when Fiorina was running a corporation, Greenspan probably recommend that companies not give wage increases to the peons. That might create price inflation. Can't have that. They had to get creative with ways to dispose of excess cash. Yachts are a good option.

[YumYum]

Back when Fiorina was running a corporation, Greenspan probably recommend that companies not give wage increases to the peons. That might create price inflation. Can't have that. They had to get creative with ways to dispose of excess cash. Yachts are a good option.

True, but if they tax the hell out of the rich, they won't tax me. The rich need protection from criminals, and protection cost money. The rich need to pay more taxes to be protected when the shit collapses, and to pay for these wars they started.

[Brian4Liberty]

True, but if they tax the hell out of the rich, they won't tax me.

That's hard to do. They just create loopholes. And corporations work pretty good for that. Create a corporation, spend the money (expenses). The corp shows zero profits. You pay no taxes. (An oversimplified example).

[CryLibertyOrDeath]

Protectionists need to take some courses.

[daviddee]

...

[cindy25]

is Boxer vs Fiorina the new definition of race to the bottom?

still, better a CoC stooge than an AIPAC stooge

[Brian4Liberty]

is Boxer vs Fiorina the new definition of race to the bottom?

still, better a CoC stooge than an AIPAC stooge

Both will cater to both...

[07041826]

If you give the rich tax cuts, they can go out and buy another yacht.

Why does it matter what people do with their money/ property? If you think "the rich" will buy more yachts then start selling yachts and take advantage of the new market.

[ChaosControl]

Why does it matter what people do with their money/ property? If you think "the rich" will buy more yachts then start selling yachts and take advantage of the new market.

If we create a corporatist society that sets up laws and regulations that benefit the rich and corporations at the expense of everyone else, can you really say it is their money at all?

[07041826]

If we create a corporatist society that sets up laws and regulations that benefit the rich and corporations at the expense of everyone else, can you really say it is their money at all?



How does raising the taxes of all "rich" people solve the problem of government subsidies to some large companies? Why not fight to end the benefits the government provides to corporations while fighting for low/no income tax for all (including the rich)?

[james1906]

Send all the manufacturing jobs overseas. We can build an economy based on serving coffee and building websites. We'll also make money by selling our homes to each other. It can't fail!

[YumYum]

Why does it matter what people do with their money/ property? If you think "the rich" will buy more yachts then start selling yachts and take advantage of the new market.

Taxes are going to go up across the board on everybody next year. The rich Republicans do not want Bush's tax cuts to expire; they want them to be permanent. Yet, it was the rich Republicans who wanted the wars that have finally bankrupted this nation. Let the rich Republicans pay for these wars by taxing them at 90%. When the SHTF, the rich Republicans will be targets fro kidnappings and other crimes. We will have to increase police protection for the Rich Republicans, and this cost more money, which they should pay for.

As far the yachts, I don't believe in trickle-down economics. When you cut taxes for the rich, they don't hire more people or give them raises, they spend it on themselves. If they hadn't started these wars, I wouldn't care.

[YumYum]

How does raising the taxes of all "rich" people solve the problem of government subsidies to some large companies? Why not fight to end the benefits the government provides to corporations while fighting for low/no income tax for all (including the rich)?

The rich are the enemy. Why defend the rich? They are the ones who have got us into this mess. They should pay for their crimes by paying higher taxes.

[YumYum]

send all the manufacturing jobs overseas. We can build an economy based on serving coffee and building websites. We'll also make money by selling our homes to each other. It can't fail!

lol!!!

[oyarde]

How does raising the taxes of all "rich" people solve the problem of government subsidies to some large companies? Why not fight to end the benefits the government provides to corporations while fighting for low/no income tax for all (including the rich)?

This is correct. One of these evil rich people provides me with a job.I do not want his taxes raised.If they are , it will have an adverse effect on me and all others that work at my company.

[ChaosControl]

How does raising the taxes of all "rich" people solve the problem of government subsidies to some large companies? Why not fight to end the benefits the government provides to corporations while fighting for low/no income tax for all (including the rich)?

Well taxing them or not, is up for the local community or state to decide in my opinion. But I certainly support abolishing all such things at the federal level.

[YumYum]

This is correct. One of these evil rich people provides me with a job.I do not want his taxes raised.If they are , it will have an adverse effect on me and all others that work at my company.

No, it won't. If you are a valuable employee, you will be fine. Your rich employer will have to scale down a little and go from driving a Rolls Royce to a Mercedes Benz.