Third Debate

Flyer5 wrote:

jpete wrote:y are.

I've asked many Romney supporters and as yet haven't got an answer.

How do you know WHICH Romney you'll get?

I already know what Obama will do. Romney understands economics. One statement that really stood out was when Romney stated to Obama about giving money to these solar and wind companies selectively doesn't give other companies any incentive to develop the same technology on there own dime. They figure how could they compete when other companies get the money for free.
That happened with us 2 yrs ago, all the wood and pellet stoves had these taxpayer paid rebates that I helped pay for with my taxes. And coal had none. I understand it was for renewable energy but the federal government should not be subsidizing private industries unless it is done fairly and across the board. Personally i feel they should stay out of it. I feel Romney understands this as well.
The other is Romney is for coal and domestic energy. That will create JOBS here in the US and good paying ones at that,which this country needs. Obamas plan of taking from the rich and giving to the poor is a lousy thought process that should not be enforced at the federal level. I am not opposed to people who need it getting help but I am opposed to the people who don't even try to help themselves.
Romney has proven himself as gov of Mass and even while working at Bain. If you really look into his record with a open mind he does know how to get things done and working.

But how do you KNOW the guy you are describing will show up at the White House?

I can easily post video of Romney saying one thing in front of one group and saying the total opposite at some other time.

Romney isn't opposed to using taxpayer money, that's how he "saved" the Olympics. And he recently said if he thought a program was worth borrowing money from China for, he'd keep it.

If your yardstick is that Romney was a good governor because he was in charge during the good times, then that must mean Clinton was a good president because everything was going up during his tenure.

When I look at ALL the information in front of me, I still can't conclude Romney should get my vote.

I'm in the same position as your are jpete. No specifics, promises that down seem to be possible math wise, loads of flip/flops. It's no wonder the contest is so close.

ONEDOLLAR wrote:... how much money do you think a person that stocks shelves in a retail store should make? How much in your world is that job worth?

Therein lies the problem that no one discussed in the debate, and in fact is it way too big to discuss here. Both candidates want to bring manufacturing back to the US. But more and more manufacturing is done these days by robots -- continuing the long trend of replacing labor by machines, so the income goes only to those who own the machines. So let's say we have lots of educated citizens, they will not all be engineers and scientists or skilled labor like plumbers or carpenters, and where will they find jobs?

Even before the bust four to five years ago, you had college graduates whose best job prospect was to stock shelves or fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. What WILL we do with whole generations of educated people, willing and eager to work, whose only opportunity in a rich country is minimum wage work? Will they be relegated to a marginal existence for their whole lives? And if so, where will be the middle class that can afford to buy all those machine-made products, or to provide jobs for the plumbers and carpenters? It is a serious question for the future of our country.

But, the economy is what it is right now You say these educated kids are ready & willing to WORK--that's a laugh. I've had some up here to help hay & they're some of the laziest sissy's I've ever had the misfortune of meeting. Most just want to sit on their ass's & collect the big bucks. When my family was starting out, there were a couple times I washed dishes, dug ditches--yes, that's with an Associates Degree in Human Services, and I did those jobs with pride knowing it was keeping food on the table & the bills paid. Just my thoughts, but most of these college grads today don't deserve much more then a shelf stocking job. My kids were raised with the philosophy that, you get in accordance with what & how you do things.

rberq wrote:Even before the bust four to five years ago, you had college graduates whose best job prospect was to stock shelves or fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. What WILL we do with whole generations of educated people, willing and eager to work, whose only opportunity in a rich country is minimum wage work? Will they be relegated to a marginal existence for their whole lives? And if so, where will be the middle class that can afford to buy all those machine-made products, or to provide jobs for the plumbers and carpenters? It is a serious question for the future of our country.

Tell that to the college drop outs Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. Only in a free market will there be opportunity. Our current mutt is doing his best to kill the market. Competition is hard work and stressful, those not willing belong in the shelf stocking job regardless of their finger painting degree. Education is the next big government scam that is getting ready to explode. I thought the Luddites were discredited years ago. There are undreamed of opportunities out there if only government will keep its dead hand off.

So the question is still unanswered.... Sam I am very curious as to what you think..

"How much money do you think a person that stocks shelves in a retail store should make? How much in your world is that job worth?"

Don't know what part you don't understand ONEDOLLAR so I'll try again it's whatever min. wage is, I don't know off hand what that is now but IMO it's too high. Every time they raise Min. Wage your big mac & everything else goes up & the people at the bottom just sink deeper & everyone else has to pay more. Hate to say it but Nixon had a good idea at that time in wage & price controls but before the ink was dry there were ways around it built in for some but both have to be done together. In the old days a person stocking in a retail store had the opportunity to move up but I don't think it works that way too often now.

samhill wrote:Don't know what part you don't understand ONEDOLLAR so I'll try again it's whatever min. wage is, I don't know off hand what that is now but IMO it's too high. Every time they raise Min. Wage your big mac & everything else goes up & the people at the bottom just sink deeper & everyone else has to pay more. Hate to say it but Nixon had a good idea at that time in wage & price controls but before the ink was dry there were ways around it built in for some but both have to be done together. In the old days a person stocking in a retail store had the opportunity to move up but I don't think it works that way too often now.

Really Sam? Wage and price controls? If that worked, people would be swimming INTO Cuba instead of out of it!

jpete wrote:

But how do you KNOW the guy you are describing will show up at the White House?

I can easily post video of Romney saying one thing in front of one group and saying the total opposite at some other time.

Romney isn't opposed to using taxpayer money, that's how he "saved" the Olympics. And he recently said if he thought a program was worth borrowing money from China for, he'd keep it.

If your yardstick is that Romney was a good governor because he was in charge during the good times, then that must mean Clinton was a good president because everything was going up during his tenure.

When I look at ALL the information in front of me, I still can't conclude Romney should get my vote.

1: How do I know who will show up? I guess I don't really, but I do know what is there now and I feel he had his four yrs and needs to be fired. No plan and no budget he has proven he cannot work across the isle without strong arming to get what he wants.
I do agree with you, we really don't know but Romney has to be better. We need him to be and I feel he can be. I really don't feel Obama can be better but he can get a whole lot worse.
I talk to a lot of people if it wasn't for coal heat they would not be able to heat there house and pay there mortgage and eat. And Obama is trying to rid us of coal. That right there is a very bad thing. Coal mining are very good paying jobs as well.

2: Romney isn't opposed to using taxpayer money, that's how he "saved" the Olympics. And he recently said if he thought a program was worth borrowing money from China for, he'd keep it.

Actually Romney said the only way he would borrow money from China to keep a program was it really had to be proven to be worthy of keeping it otherwise it would be gone. He does not want to keep any unnecessary programs.


3: If your yardstick is that Romney was a good governor because he was in charge during the good times, then that must mean Clinton was a good president because everything was going up during his tenure.

I don't think Clinton was a bad president I actually would prefer him or Hillary over what we have now. Although a lot of his programs put us where we are now so hind sight I am not to sure how I feel about Clinton. He is past and it really doesn't matter anymore anyway. I want to look forward,and the last 4yrs don't give me any hope so we need to put someone else in.
People I have spoken to in Mass really did like Romney. His Bain career wasn't perfect but it was pretty good if you read beyond the media hype. I don't think we can look for perfection this election but we can vote for the better of the candidates. And I know Obama is not it.

Flyer5 wrote: I do agree with you, we really don't know but Romney has to be better. We need him to be and I feel he can be. I really don't feel Obama can be better but he can get a whole lot worse.

Your vote and you can do with it as you wish but this seems too close to the philosophy that got us Obama.

The "anybody but...." or "lesser of two evils" approach has been in force for several decades and what has it gotten us?

The thing is, Romney is WAY lesser of two evils. your parents, your grandpartents, their parents, all had a higher standard of living under the free enterprise system. A lot of people are afraid Romney is in bed with all these "rich people". So what, he intends to get the economy going again and he knows how to do it.
Obama is an anti-colonial, socialist idealoge and if you look at what he has promised and what he has done, it just doesn't make sense that four more years of his policies will better our way of life for anybody. He put us 6 trillion more in debt and has no intention of any austerity anywhere. Obamacare is a tax, and I will have to unconstitutionally buy a product that is forced on me against my will. Or I'll have to pay a tax for not buying health insurance. Obamacare has stifled new business ventures.
Obama has proven himself to be bad for the country and the economy. He promised all of the above energy, and has been stifling our energy production. solyndra, A123, and a bunch of other green companies have gone under and millions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted. Go to youtube and type in "Obama's lies" or Obama's broken promises" and you'll see him for what he is. Benghazigate is a massive blunder and it's becoming apparent this administration is screwing up foreign policy badly.
And on and on, Romney never associated with Chigago criminals, dirty politicians, commies, radicals, radical anti American preachers. He wouldn't disgrace the honor of the office by schmoozing around with a long list of Hollywood celebrities, or bow down and apologize for America across the world. The NRA endorses Romney/Ryan, they are working feverishly to preserve our 2nd ammendment. Obama, Holder, and The UN have the determined intent to disarm the population.
The choice is clear to me.

There's just as much on you tube (if you believe all that) on Romney lying and flip/flopping too. He pissed off our strongest ally (Britain) and while Gov of Mass, banned assualt rifles. Soooo.......Not sure he's such a savior? Just sayin.

Jpete, if you'll notice I said at that time, inflation was running rampant & the dollar was in bad shape. Wouldn't be any good now but might have helped then, you'll also notice that there were so many exclusions added that we will never know if it had a chance or not. At the very least it was a plan, unlike the secret 5 point plan that says what it will hopefully do but fails to mention any hows. Now today I heard he had a secret meeting with a group of gays ( log cabin somethings) & walked away with an endorsement from them for a promise of a future draft pick, the man is good at promising everything to everyone.

SteveZee wrote:He pissed off our strongest ally (Britain) and while Gov of Mass, banned assualt rifles. Soooo.......Not sure he's such a savior? Just sayin.

Steve,

Romney had mentioned that Britain wasn't quite ready to host the olympics, a slight gaffe.
If you want to know who hates Britain, see the movie 2016, or read The Roots of Obama's Rage by Dinesh D'Souza. One of the first things Obama did after the election was to return a bust of Churchill that was in the White House. Obama's father hated Britain and Churchill for their rule of Kenya. When they left, Kenya fell to pieces.
Obama was a bumbling idiot when he went to England, he did not know how to observe protocol, Moosechelle put her hand on the Queen's back, etc.
If you want to see your kid inherit a bankrupt economy due to Obama's rampant spending, with no concern for the future of this country other than gutting our wealth and greatness, to redistribute to the welfare crowd and create a majority class of government dependant citizens, then vote for Obama.

Every politician flip-flops, I don't think Romney will injure this country anywhere near as badly as Obama has and intends to do.
He knows how to restore the economy and support energy independance.
If you're concerned about the 2nd ammendment, just remember Fast and Furious scandal, the utube video of Eric Holder saying "We have to brainwash people into giving up their guns"; and the fact that the NRA endorses Romney/Ryan. Just sayin'.

In the 2nd debate it was Obama the said that he wanted to renew the old ban on "assualt type weapons. Romney said a ban was not needed.