So can someone explain to me why it appears they have not performed drug or alcohol tests on the Amtrak engineer in the first 24 hours after the crash. No blood tests. Nothing, according to some media reports. He was allowed to leave the police station with his union supplied lawyer after refusing to cooperate whatsoever.
Senate Democrats Defeat The President: Why Obama Is Rushing To Fast-Track The TPP
- Thread starter Tsing Tao
- Start date
"Bostian, of New York City, handed over his cellphone to East Detectives and gave a blood sample, investigators told NBC10."
Read more: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...nt-Amtrak-Deadly-303693711.html#ixzz3aEB5I0xk
They deny anyone the right to see the treaty, or comment on it if they have seen it, and then he says this.
"“You need to tell me what’s wrong with this trade agreement, not one that was passed 25 years ago,” a frustrated President Barack Obama recently complained about criticisms of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). "
This all could have been avoided if he republicans had just required him to show his actual birth certificate, proven that the ssn he uses was issued to him, and examined his selective service registration. But no........
"“You need to tell me what’s wrong with this trade agreement, not one that was passed 25 years ago,” a frustrated President Barack Obama recently complained about criticisms of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). "
This all could have been avoided if he republicans had just required him to show his actual birth certificate, proven that the ssn he uses was issued to him, and examined his selective service registration. But no........
Hundreds of tech companies line up to oppose TPP trade agreement
Letter signed by more than 250 companies demands greater transparency and says ‘dangerously vague’ language would criminalise whistleblowers
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/20/hundreds-tech-companies-oppose-tpp-trade-agreement
Letter signed by more than 250 companies demands greater transparency and says ‘dangerously vague’ language would criminalise whistleblowers
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/20/hundreds-tech-companies-oppose-tpp-trade-agreement
Passes the Senate. Same people that laughed at Ross Perot still don't give a damn. Ten million plus jobs gone and they look to give away more jobs. A uniquely bi-partisan effort to destroy American industry.
http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-trade-allies-scramble-line-60-senate-votes-073012992--finance.html
http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-trade-allies-scramble-line-60-senate-votes-073012992--finance.html
I find it interesting that no libtards have commented on this thread. They are obviously very confused. They are clearly all mindless sheep. For example, Fraud has stated on many occasions everything libtard is great. So what are they to think when Obama is pushing for TPP and senate dems are trying to kill it.
One of the better posts I've read.
Let’s get a few things straight. If something is good for American corporations, that is not the same thing as being good for American workers. Proponents of these trade deals love to gloss over this point.
The Keynesian/supply-side (“trickle-down”) economics has been irrefutably debunked by several decades of empirical evidence. So while one could very well argue that NAFTA (and other corporate-friendly trade agreements/laws/regulations) did wonders for corporate profits, it(they) did not benefit—but rather, actually hurt—the average worker and the economy as a whole. The earning power (adjusted for inflation) of the average worker is actually less than it was 40 years ago!
Even if one wanted to give Obama the benefit of the doubt that he genuinely believes the TPP will be good for the country, one should take a moment to consider that the advice he received to arrive at that conclusion was in all likelihood by individuals whose allegiance is heavily weighted in favor of corporate interests, not the people's. Access is everything and, as we all know, money/power grants you access (at the very least).
I am confident that if a vote were put to the general public, the overwhelming majority would be opposed. Yet, those voices have little chance of being heard, because no one in that horse-trading Washington cesspool truly represents the people anymore. So we can bloviate all we want on these comment boards, without equal access to decision-makers’ ears, our voices will remain unheard and interests unrepresented.
Prediction: This will ultimately pass (albeit with some laughably toothless revisions to give the illusion of appeasing opponents’ concerns). Why? As a testament to the interests “our" government truly serves.
Let’s get a few things straight. If something is good for American corporations, that is not the same thing as being good for American workers. Proponents of these trade deals love to gloss over this point.
The Keynesian/supply-side (“trickle-down”) economics has been irrefutably debunked by several decades of empirical evidence. So while one could very well argue that NAFTA (and other corporate-friendly trade agreements/laws/regulations) did wonders for corporate profits, it(they) did not benefit—but rather, actually hurt—the average worker and the economy as a whole. The earning power (adjusted for inflation) of the average worker is actually less than it was 40 years ago!
Even if one wanted to give Obama the benefit of the doubt that he genuinely believes the TPP will be good for the country, one should take a moment to consider that the advice he received to arrive at that conclusion was in all likelihood by individuals whose allegiance is heavily weighted in favor of corporate interests, not the people's. Access is everything and, as we all know, money/power grants you access (at the very least).
I am confident that if a vote were put to the general public, the overwhelming majority would be opposed. Yet, those voices have little chance of being heard, because no one in that horse-trading Washington cesspool truly represents the people anymore. So we can bloviate all we want on these comment boards, without equal access to decision-makers’ ears, our voices will remain unheard and interests unrepresented.
Prediction: This will ultimately pass (albeit with some laughably toothless revisions to give the illusion of appeasing opponents’ concerns). Why? As a testament to the interests “our" government truly serves.
Actually, Keynesianism is "demand-side". But you're right about the failure of supply-side economics (for the most part, it has its place and time).
Tomato, tomatoe.
I just agree with the basic premise of the post. What's good for corporations, good for the market, isn't necessarily good for the economy, and the past 40 years is proof of that. I would argue that there is now a complete and total disconnect between what the market reflects and the general economy.The only thing Perot got wrong was he said jobs would go south instead of east.
He even hit on the lobbying issue.
He even hit on the lobbying issue.