Coming February 6, 2024 . . .
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
Coming February 6, 2024 . . . MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Pre-order at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
He has been busy in Iowa stumping and is back in Maryland to meet with supporters.
O’Malley is aggressively trying to position himself as a progressive and forward-looking alternative to Hillary Rodham Clinton, the presumptive frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, who could make her candidacy official as early as next month.
In Iowa, O’Malley sounded at times very much like a Democrat loved by the party’s liberal base -- Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) -- calling for Wall Street reform and an array of policies to help an increasingly pinched middle class.
Comments
This is from New Hampshire before he went to Iowa.
by trkingmomoe on Tue, 03/24/2015 - 9:00pm
Empty promises and more empty promises?
@ 10: 26 give everyone a raise?
Sounds great, until the rubber meets the road and reality sets in.
When the cost of Labor goes up, prices go up
Higher wages leads to inflation
Inflation threatens the aged and retirees on fixed income.
Higher wages leads to American goods costing more in the trade arena
Giving the people money to put into their pockets and yet at the same time the government has their hands in your pocket; at the end of the day what will you have left?
$ 40.00 in the workers pocket
- $ 20.00 for Uncle Sam
- $ 20.00 For inflation
Zero, Nada……….. More empty promises in order to get elected.
Tell the suckers what they want to hear.
by Resistance on Tue, 03/24/2015 - 10:49pm
Your tax and inflation numbers are completely made up. If you have any data to support your fantasy, please provide links.
by rmrd0000 on Tue, 03/24/2015 - 11:25pm
.
by Resistance on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 12:41am
What ever happened to common sense?
If all of the workers, in the industries mentioned above, get a raise, the costs get passed on to the consumer.
The aged and the retirees don’t get enough of a raise, to keep up with the increased costs “of things that are necessary for humans to live and enjoy life, such as ….”
If the raise the workers get, drives the worker into a higher tax bracket, the government takes more money from the worker.
If industries that rely on exports pay more for labor, these costs must be passed on to the consumers of other countries, especially third world countries; who don’t buy our goods, because they can’t afford to.
The whole cycle is lunacy.
So is an 18 trillion dollar debt.
by Resistance on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 12:49am
It's not common sense at all. Sometimes wages will rise faster than inflation, sometimes inflation will rise faster than wages. There is no law in economics that states that the rise in wages will match inflation. There are many factors that influence both wages and inflation. Strong competition between companies can cause prices to rise more slowly or even drop. Strong unions can force wages higher than the corporation can raise prices. In both of these scenarios the managers and stockholders take a smaller potion of the profits. Over zealous patent protections, monopolies, and weak unions can cause corporations to raise prices faster than wages. Managers and stock owners use their power to extract a larger portion of profits.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 12:58am
Particularly at issue can be the price we pay for key consumables or our major expenses - for example, health care or auto costs incl insurance or gas or clothing shipped from China (though there are limitations to substitution effects, as not everyone wants to shop at Walmart).
The Warren paper I cited earlier pointed to the extra costs families often felt having that second "breadwiinner" - extra car, insurance, gas, child care, business wardrobe, higher tax bracket, etc. so that extra income quickly disappeared.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 2:49am
Could you please provide me the link to the Warren paper you cited?
by Resistance on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 3:35am
I think he is talking about this. It is a good read.
http://www.yale.edu/law/leo/052005/papers/Warren.pdf
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 3:55am
trkingmomoe; thank you, I'll read it later tonight
by Resistance on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 9:54am
O'Malley is worth a close look at what he brings to the Democratic Party's bench. Those issues are the issues that most people are wanting addressed. The conversation about these issues are what the country is starving to hear. The GOP has made this country insecure with their deep cuts and made us poorer. Instead of letting the GOP define this election cycle with cuts and dog whistles the Democratic Party can open up a new playing field of ideas.
It is refreshing not to have to listen to wedge issues but to have family issues addressed.
I post these videos so all can have an unfiltered look at candidates
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 3:49am
This shows how he handles the press. It is another look at what he defines as important issues that he is running on.
http://www.dailyiowanepi.com/2015/03/24/martin-omalley-the-nations-new-jfk/
by trkingmomoe on Tue, 03/24/2015 - 9:39pm
O'Malley's been making the rounds for awhile now. I first heard him speak at a labor dinner in New York about six months or so ago. Hit all the right notes then, although it wasn't a very difficult crowd. Sigh, stayin' tuned.
by Bruce Levine on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 7:45am
It appears to be a well thought out campaign. He has a team in place and is organized. They have put most of his speaking engagements on video and posted them on you tube.
We have to see if Jim Webb and Bernie Sanders makes some serious moves. It would be nice to have a full bench to keep the some of the spotlight focused on the Democratic Party. GOP and their nutty sound bites always suck up the media time.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 8:11am
I don't know - having the nutjobs rant on the air might be the most effective advertising the Democrats can do. Sometimes keeping your mouth shut is the slickest policy. I can't recall a positive soundbite from Hillary that the press has printed. Have there been any Sunday roundtables focused on what a wonderful job a Democrat's done with this that or the other?
I'm still leaning towards my "Hillary Antoinette" line - "let them eat shit".
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 9:48am
You made me laugh. I still like her any ways. There are times when I feel like saying that, "let them eat ......"
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 10:00am
I meant it in a positive way.
While not thrilled about some of her stances, overall positive.
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 3:34pm
Maybe a couple more will jump in the fray this summer for the Democratic Party. I personally think they start campaigning too early. I don't know if I can tolerate all the GOP nonsense like they did through their 2012 primary. That primary was a national embarrassment.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 6:43pm
PP, you know, It's not a bad Idea this "Hillary Antoinette" line
"Let them eat shit" has a "Give em Hell" Trumanesque tone "
Give em hell Hillary"
by Resistance on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 10:23am
Great quote. It is still true today.
by trkingmomoe on Wed, 03/25/2015 - 10:26am
Well O'Malley blew it with the Clinton crown comment. A snippy slight he didn't need to offer up, and rather insulting to women at the same time.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 1:22pm
It's to early to tell what could happen. Hillary could screw up. O'Malley could recover from this faux pas. Obama survived his clinging to guns comment and then survived a lackluster first debate against Romney. It is still Hillary Clinton's race to lose though.
by rmrd0000 on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 2:36pm
"Let's be honest here, the presidency is not some crown to be passed between two families."
At most, that's a feather-finger push at both Clinton and Bush. If he's serious about running for the nomination he's going to have to get a whole lot tougher than that.
by barefooted on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 3:11pm
From my side it just makes him a simplistic ass. I'm happy to listen to someone with something intelligent to say, and I'm pretty incredulous that it's 2015 and still Hillary-on-the-scene since 1988 or 1992 is the only reasonable contender. But the last thing I want is a return to the moronic Hillary-slamming of 2008. She has enough real flaws - if this guy wants to be serious, let him start there.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 5:08pm
Of course it's a simplistic remark, but it doesn't come close to "moronic Hillary slamming". Be patient, I'm sure there will be plenty of that to complain about before long.
Why there are seemingly no other truly competent Democratic leaders is an excellent question. The so- called inevitability may have begun in 2008 and is simply being fulfilled - a rather depressing possibility. If Hillary was not running, would the Democrats have a stronger roster than the Republicans?
by barefooted on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 6:31pm
Yes, if that's the worse thing said by any democrat about the other democrats it will be the sweetest kindest primary in the history of America.
Democrats have a very strong roster that could run for president and in every way be better than all the possible republican candidates. They're not well known because most have decided not to run or to run not very publicly active campaigns. Most of the dems prominent enough to run have decided they can't win. I agree with this Klein article"
Hillary Clinton isn’t running unopposed. She’s just crushing the competition.
by ocean-kat on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 6:46pm
That's a somewhat misleading headline. Klein argues that Clinton has been essentially drafted through an invisible primary by the "Democratic Party elites" and "powerbrokers", thereby rendering even strong opposition unnecessary. So ... the bench may be deep but they're not being called on to play. That may not be the best plan, as his last sentence states -
by barefooted on Sun, 03/29/2015 - 8:52pm