PDA

View Full Version : Eclectic trio of candidates considered for Obama deficit panel


mj278
02-23-2010, 02:02 PM
Eclectic trio of candidates considered for Obama deficit panel (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022003493_pf.html)

Republican David M. Cote, the chief executive of Honeywell International, has emerged as a top contender for a slot on President Obama's commission to bring the nation's soaring debt under control, a senior administration official said Saturday.

The White House is also considering appointing two Democrats: Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, and Alice M. Rivlin, a budget expert and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve who recently launched a separate, independent effort to draft a bipartisan plan to stabilize government borrowing.

Obama has given himself six appointees to the 18-member panel, which is tasked with producing a plan to balance the primary government budget -- outside interest on debt -- and deliver it to Congress by Dec. 1. Obama has already named former Clinton chief of staff Erskine B. Bowles and former Republican senator Alan K. Simpson to co-chair the panel. Cote, Stern and Rivlin could be appointed in the coming days, the official said, leaving one slot to be filled. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

The other 12 seats are apportioned to sitting lawmakers, three from each party in each chamber. Those appointments could come as soon as this week, when lawmakers are to return from the Presidents' Day break.

Cote has been CEO since 2002 at Honeywell, a technology and manufacturing firm with about half its products linked to energy efficiency, one of Obama's top priorities. According to Federal Election Commission records, he contributed to George W. Bush's presidential bid in 2000, but did not support Obama's GOP opponent, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).

The White House recently listed Cote among the four CEOs Obama admires most, and Cote was among a dozen executives who appeared with Obama shortly after he took office to promote a massive economic stimulus package then pending in Congress.

"We need to get this thing done," Cote said at the time. "The business community has great confidence in our president to provide the direction and the leadership that is needed."

The stimulus package has since been reviled by Republicans as wasteful government spending that did little to lift the nation out of recession, and GOP leaders are unlikely to consider a stimulus supporter as representative of the party's views.

Stern and Rivlin are well-known in Washington. Stern is president of the 2.2 million-member SEIU and an ardent supporter of Obama's health initiative. Rivlin was founding director of the Congressional Budget Office and White House budget director under Bill Clinton. She has long called for a mix of new taxes and changes to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to bring budget deficits under control.

The three did not respond Saturday to requests for comment.

So, we may have an SEIU thug on the deficit reduction panel. That's nice. We recently learned that this panel wouldn't rule out higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Who better to have on the panel to push for this than Stern? This whole panel is one big joke.

Bok_Tukalo
02-23-2010, 02:05 PM
Eclectic trio of candidates considered for Obama deficit panel (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022003493_pf.html)



So, we may have an SEIU thug on the deficit reduction panel. That's nice. We recently learned that this panel wouldn't rule out higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Who better to have on the panel to push for this than Stern? This whole panel is one big joke.

Are all working people thugs or only those that collectively bargain? And do working people by virtue of working not get a say?

Shiva
02-23-2010, 02:25 PM
Eclectic trio of candidates considered for Obama deficit panel (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022003493_pf.html)



So, we may have an SEIU thug on the deficit reduction panel. That's nice. We recently learned that this panel wouldn't rule out higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Who better to have on the panel to push for this than Stern? This whole panel is one big joke.

A joke would be if it were all one-sided. I don't think there'd be any benefit of having all CEO's and no one representing blue-collar workers. And no, Joe the Plumber wouldn't count.

Michael
02-23-2010, 03:28 PM
So, we may have an SEIU thug on the deficit reduction panel. That's nice. We recently learned that this panel wouldn't rule out higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Who better to have on the panel to push for this than Stern? This whole panel is one big joke.

I was against the panel from the second it was announced, but, there are three ways to reduce deficits. Now how does it make any negotitiating sense to take two of the options off the table before it starts?

Grizz
02-23-2010, 03:43 PM
So, we may have an SEIU thug on the deficit reduction panel. That's nice. We recently learned that this panel wouldn't rule out higher taxes to reduce the deficit. Who better to have on the panel to push for this than Stern? This whole panel is one big joke.

Let me understand - if the corporate bosses screw over employees, that's just good business practice, but if the employees push back, that the act of thugs. Sure, that makes sense.

As for higher taxes, if you mean the end of the Treasury raid by Mr. Bush's "base", then yeah, that really should happen. As for any other additional taxes, some of those are in the works (the health care bill) and others might be considered if needed.

Golfboy
02-23-2010, 04:30 PM
Are all working people thugs or only those that collectively bargain? And do working people by virtue of working not get a say?

The idea presented that unions represent "working people" is a joke. Unions exist SOLELY to make sure unions exist.

Unions are obsolete instituions who's funcitonality is no longer required, and exists only as a parasite, sucking the life from the companies they infect, and off the workers they pretend to represent.

Bok_Tukalo
02-23-2010, 04:38 PM
The idea presented that unions represent "working people" is a joke. Unions exist SOLELY to make sure unions exist.

Unions are obsolete instituions who's funcitonality is no longer required, and exists only as a parasite, sucking the life from the companies they infect, and off the workers they pretend to represent.

*




































* Offer void in Poland

TowardLiberty
02-23-2010, 05:05 PM
The idea presented that unions represent "working people" is a joke. Unions exist SOLELY to make sure unions exist.

Unions are obsolete instituions who's funcitonality is no longer required, and exists only as a parasite, sucking the life from the companies they infect, and off the workers they pretend to represent.

Quite correct.

And to add to your list, they also enjoy higher pay at the expense of non-union workers.

They also weaken the ability of the private sector to allocate resources to their most useful ends, as some of the resources have to be diverted to pay union members above their discounted marginal value product.

Grizz
02-23-2010, 05:17 PM
And to add to your list, they also enjoy higher pay at the expense of non-union workers.


:lmao:

Let's see - take an electrician - gone through years of union sponsored training and a lengthy apprenticeship to become qualified in his trade PLUS has passed state tests in his profession. He also belongs to a union that insures he is paid top dollar for his work. Yet, somehow, you manage to see that as being at the expense of non-union workers. I do wonder where you get your information.

TowardLiberty
02-23-2010, 05:20 PM
:lmao:

Let's see - take an electrician - gone through years of union sponsored training and a lengthy apprenticeship to become qualified in his trade PLUS has passed state tests in his profession. He also belongs to a union that insures he is paid top dollar for his work. Yet, somehow, you manage to see that as being at the expense of non-union workers. I do wonder where you get your information.

A swing and a miss!

Your statement implies that unions are necessary for a worker to get his DMVP, and that simply is not true.

Grizz
02-23-2010, 05:29 PM
A swing and a miss!

Your statement implies that unions are necessary for a worker to get his DMVP, and that simply is not true.

I never said unions were necessary for that, only that they provide supervised training over many years. In so doing, they also provide employers with a skilled employee whose credentials are readily available.

Shiva
02-23-2010, 06:40 PM
*




































* Offer void in Poland

Nice one. Seriously. :thumbsup:

mj278
02-23-2010, 10:11 PM
Are all working people thugs or only those that collectively bargain?

No...all working people are not thugs, and I never implied such.

And do working people by virtue of working not get a say?

Again...I made no such implication. I am referring to Stern in this instance. I'm not sure who Obama thinks he is trying to kid with wanting to appoint Stern.

mj278
02-23-2010, 10:13 PM
Let me understand - if the corporate bosses screw over employees, that's just good business practice, but if the employees push back, that the act of thugs. Sure, that makes sense.

Where did I state this?

As for higher taxes, if you mean the end of the Treasury raid by Mr. Bush's "base", then yeah, that really should happen. As for any other additional taxes, some of those are in the works (the health care bill) and others might be considered if needed.

Well, Obama made a promise that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class. I'm glad you have no problem if he doesn't follow through on that.

Bok_Tukalo
02-23-2010, 10:19 PM
Well, Obama made a promise that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class.

Which was damn stupid on his part for many reasons.

Michael
02-23-2010, 10:33 PM
Which was damn stupid on his part for many reasons.

Yep. I'm quite okay with that vow falling through.

CdrMike
02-23-2010, 11:55 PM
Which was damn stupid on his part for many reasons.
Not the first time a politician has made a stupid promise. "No New Taxes," anyone?

william the wierd
02-24-2010, 12:21 AM
It strikes me as likely that Obama will pull his usual gaffe and the Rs will be able to walk out on his panel with public support. Revisiting his healthcare failure is probably good enough by itself to make it look like he is trying to dictate and bully.

TowardLiberty
02-24-2010, 06:03 PM
I never said unions were necessary for that, only that they provide supervised training over many years. In so doing, they also provide employers with a skilled employee whose credentials are readily available.

So you admit that a worker would be paid his DMVP without a union?

So what is the point of paying someone more than their DMVP, which is what unions do?

Is that not a divergence from the wishes of the consumer?

If they had really valued that workers labor at the level the union is paying them, they would have bid up the price of the good or service, thus translating to a higher DMVP and a higher wage. Since they did not do this on their own, the union is actually mis-allocating resources away from the consumers most valued ends and the result is higher wages, but less jobs.

Given the wasteful redirection of resources in the economy, utility has been lost all the way around.