Langston Hughes

Exactly how does this work? One person from Michigan say there are reskill opportunities at Buffalo and another from Buffalo says there aren't any in zone. I'm confused, because its my understand that there are no available steam people in the system so it would be a reskill.

Would it surprise you to know that i came here to see the carnage? I don't know if you realize but your famous or quite possibly well on your way to being famous. The internet is fickle and there's no way of knowing if his "Cal50 has a you know what" blog will go viral, or if it will just be the other hourly UAW employees that follow it. See originally some of the other followers and myself were going to come her and have some fun, but instead we just decided to forward his blog and try to see if we can get it on Redditt or Digg. Now if i could turn the topic from me, why is it that you couldn't see the inherent flaws in the argument presented. It's a pretty hard thing to ignore, they are that obvious. But that is why after a friend went all avengers on you, I wrote what i did. He was out of line but it's hard to blame him when people are so brazenly duplicitous only desiring to show up others.

The simple problem that ljcdad and even Krugman have in defending the stimulus is that they not only have to defend the results but there is questionable application, timing and the theory itself. However unfair that might be, it’s not their fault that policy is a mixed bag at best, it still comes down to the fact that there were serious indicators that it would not work to the extent hoped for from the beginning. Even the possible explanations for its failures are hindered by the actual policy. Obama’s stimulus policy was unforgivable. He over extended himself and the country without effectively managing the situation. Contrary to accusations that he didn’t do anything it’s my contention that he attempted too much consecutively, while neglecting to get resolution on one thing prior to switching topics and working on this. As they attempted to manage the housing crisis, the war, the auto bailouts, the banking collapse and healthcare all at the same time, the Whitehouse over thought nearly everything and held no standard position on much. It’s a miracle the auto bailouts worked as well as they did. Healthcare and the stimulus package became these grandiose inventions barely resembling the premises they were based on. You can feel the manic energy and self-congratulations in the bills that eventually got passed. As we look to the actual premise the stimulus was based on, the multiplier effect of government spending on consumption, the answer to why that would fail is due to many factors, economic, societal and philosophical. Yes, the stimulus put some people back to work eventually but it was inefficient at best. And if we took a look at Keynes and the way he saw the world I am certain he didn’t see our society. I can’t recall if Keynes saw aggregate demand as large a percentage of the GDP in a modern free market society although I’m certain he could not have seen the extreme personal debt to maintain that consumption in the US. In comparing the US and Canada, one economist notes that consumption is almost 70 percent of GDP on average for the US and growing, while the percentage of consumption to GDP for Canada was around 60 and only slightly increasing. Most liberals like Ljcdad would argue that increased consumption is a good thing, but in a world vastly different from the early 1900’s when most goods and services came your area if not your country, this is not effective policy let alone theory. That is to say that as we lose jobs and wages to productivity and global trade it’s a safe bet that although there was some increase in jobs due to infrastructure work in the stimulus that would only have a multiplier effect if there was little to no personal unsecured debt and more available US products at a similar price to imports. Add in all the potential products they could buy that have no real effect on employment, such as a better cable package or more online games and the premise behind the stimulus fails completely. Ljcdad was stuck in theory that failed to fit the real world circumstances.

It is entirely fitting for this area of the forum that Ljcdad was wrong about the stimulus and yet the reasoning behind the criticism of his position are many times without merit. So you have one side wailing away with seriously convoluted and often time directly contradictory explanations to the posters previously stated beliefs and the other hanging on to premises that have mixed results at best. Immawhosure, did I miss something in your statement that you retired from Ford co? Were you perhaps salary? I ask this because it would be unseemly for you to excoriate another poster for being a union protected worker in your words and offering up his beliefs if you were also a union protected worker at one point and are offering up your beliefs. If I might make another suggestion also, I have seen a post on this very area by a business man that makes the exact opposite case as you say others did. I believe it was the Ted Talk post, but I only mention it because there is no one single accepted belief among all business people as to what the single best solution is. You prop up those that believe as you do and he props up those who believe as he does. It doesn't make either of them correct, it's only more information to like at and eventually discard. You would be wise to take the most extreme views of both sides cast them out and then look for the mean. I do wonder how you can attack tenured professors who had never run a business and yet believe strongly in the premises and theories of the same. If i could take a minute to compare and contrast the two major economists of our time, Milton Friedman and John Keynes, you would see that neither had any significant private business experience. Both spent a majority of their working life either in government or academic service. In fact, Friedman was I suspect a tenured professor at the University of Chicago as he taught economics for 30 years there. The contrast is the fact that they influenced the policies of opposite parties. I think it will come as no shock to the more moderate and independent posters that if we accept your criticisms of Ljcdad and ultimately Keynes himself that you have effectively offered up a scathing indictment of accepted conservative theory. Of course you will reject this, and we shall see other conservatives come to your defense and liberals take advantage of it to criticize you. The factual reality of governmental policy is that it mostly derives from the theoretical work of scholars, a majority of whom have never truly engaged in business, but in the study and presentation of academic models. This would be the various advisers that our politicians have gathered around, the consulting firms they employ, think tanks and academics who's works come across their desk. The number of academics that receive appointments to major governmental positions by both parties also points to a disconnect in your theory.

Would it be okay to point something out in what looks to me like a morally questionable battle between posters here? It seems that you are all out of your minds, scrambling around to attack each other and make this place look like a bunch of drunk homeless people fighting over a refrigerator box. I've been to premier league soccer games where there is more class and respect for the other side. As I go back and read through the pages of name calling and incident after incident of shocking disrespect towards each other by both sides I don't see how the section hasn't been closed. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves. The liberal posters for the reactionary judgments towards everyone you felt were not on the same page. The conservatives for the way you became a roving gang of apologists for each other. And independents failed as badly because they could have, should have called bullshit on both sides equally. There has been a serious failure to dialogue, to exchange ideas and thoughtfully look at the contradictory view with an open mind. All i see was people arguing for the purpose of strengthening the entrenched beliefs they brought here. Not one of you gets a pass.

Your skill is vastly understating the obvious.

May i ask what reskilling you have been offered?