OT: GE pays no income tax

Page 7 of 8  
wrote

Largely, I'd agree, but almost nothing is ever "always" and this economy, you know that when a school board is making firing decisions, it's awfully tempting to replace a 50 year teacher with a high salary with two 25 year olds making half that. I see it in almost every other business that I've ever been familiar with. Even though it's allegedly illegal, it's done all the time. I worry that it's too easy to "stack the deck" against older, more costly and more experienced teachers. Not only does their higher salary make them a target, so does their higher health care costs.
I keep reading news articles about well-qualified people in their late fifties and early sixties that have been looking for work for over a year without so much as a nibble. There are lots of factors that cause that, but mostly it's cost and the feeling that "why should we train this person up if they've only got a few years of workability left?"
There are a lot of pressures on managers to do more with less, and that's what worries me (and my teacher friends). There has to be some protection against dumping older people. In the military, for example, they prize experience and by the time you reach bird colonel or Navy captain (O6) you're a valued asset, proven by many, many "culls" and competitive evaluations. There are few evaluations as tough as an OER (Officer Evaluation Report) and as damning as a bad one. My boss (then a AFR - Air Force Reserve -major, now a full colonel) *demanded* that we keep a log of everything good we had done through the year so that he could pull for more of the raise pool available for that year. It was excellent and monetarily valuable advice.
I've seen friends in their 50's and 60's offered "golden handkerchiefs" (because of their small size compared to Wall St.'s golden parachutes!) to go away voluntarily without subjecting the company to any age discrimination suits. Do some teachers "retire in place?" Yes, that happens in every sector of the economy and it seems to particularly affect the tenured. Is tenure a bad idea? Maybe for all except college profs who are often vastly underpaid and subject to political attack if they teach the "wrong things." I don't really know the answer to the tenure question other than it can be abused.
The bottom line is that bad teachers usually show their "badness" early on in their career. That's the best time to separate them from the herd, not when they're fifty and there's no other work for them. The evaluations should also be as concise and unwavering as the military's Officer Evaluation Reports and should be able to stand up to rigorous review for fairness. They should also be examined for potential age bias as well.
Just my two cents.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

daily evaluated on what I do, why shouldn't they be? I never have understood why teachers are so deathly afraid of having their work evaluated.

SS in business is that the rich support it, too, because they get their cut. Never have understood the reasoning, but I guess it could be a concern.

My guess would be the next time. And there will be a next time.

about buying a house in FL when I read an article in one of the papers when I was in Boca. They were talking about how even the Realtors in the area wished they did not have so many houses to sell and would be happy if things cooled off for awhile. When a bunch of money-grubbers like your average Realtor start wishing for less business, you know the end is near (grin).
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote Re Re: GE pays no income tax:

+1 on that.
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Rather like Obummer, and company.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
harry wrote:

I think you may be coming around.
Consider our current president's cabinet. Only two or three have had experience in the field for which they are responsible or have even had a recent real-world job. Here's a list:
Experienced: Justice - Eric Holder who once worked in private practice Defense - Robert Gates had at least four or five years on the job training. Treasury - Tim Geitner once worked on Wall Street
The rest: State - Hillary Clinton. No experience in foreign relations. Several decades since she held a real-world job. Interior - Ken Salazar, former governor Agriculture - Tom Vilsack, former governor Commerce - Gary Locke, former governor Labor - Hilda Solis, former House member from L.A. Health - Kathleen Sebelius, former governor HUD - Shaun Donovan, arguably experienced, former NYC head of Housing Preservation Transportation - Ray Lahood, Illinois congressman Energy - Steven Chu, academic Education - Arne Duncan, arguably experienced as a Chicago school superintendent Veteran's Affairs - Eric Shinseki, former Army Chief of Staff, arguably experienced as a military leader Homeland Security - Janet Napolitano, former governor
NONE of the above 15 were promoted from within the departments they now lead.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

However, NOT ONE of those have been involved in anything as ridiculous as George Bush putting the failed head of an Arabian horse association in charge of FEMA or have you forgotten the infamous "Heck of a job, Brownie!" comment that became so well known after Katrina? I would rather have a smart academic than a dud with "real world experience" - especially if that dud had NO experience in the field he was appointed to.
Shinseki has plenty of experience and was not cowed by strong opposition. He basically got sacked during Bush's adminstration for daring to tell Rummy and the Congress that we didn't have enough boots on the ground in Iraq for the war to come to a swift conclusion. Guess he was right.
Is this enough "arguable" experience for you:
"Shinseki served in a variety of command and staff assignments in the Continental United States and overseas, including two combat tours with the 9th and 25th Infantry Divisions in the Republic of Vietnam as an artillery forward observer and as commander of Troop A, 3rd Squadron, 5th Cavalry Regiment. During one of those tours, he stepped on a land mine, which blew the front off one of his feet."
That made him a customer of the VA, which he now heads. He rose from squadron commander to the Army Chief of Staff, too.
Much more can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Shinseki
What credentials are missing IYHO?
Now I've got to dust off my Bush cabinet list and all of their foilbles. Is there no end to your evil HeyBub? (-: I guess the price of freedom is eternal vetting of your posts for "yabbuts." Is not your evil-doing great? and there is no end to your sins?
The cord may curl long, but an end will appear - Colonel Alexi Vaselov (-:
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

A fair assessment of FEMA would disagree with the progressive meme. First, FEMA had never in its history encountered a disaster of the proportions of Katrina. Second, most investigators place the vast majority of what went wrong during Katrina with state and local governments (contrast Louisiana and Mississippi). Third, FEMA was never designed to be a first responder.
Further FEMA is NOT a cabinet position and not part of my critique. Although the current director, W. Craig Fugate, seems admirably suited to the position, starting out as a volunteer fireman and rising to the position of director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management.

Shinseki had virtually NO private sector experience nor any experience dealing with veteran's affairs. You are correct in that he got sacked for not only bucking the chain of command and doing so in public, but by guessing wrong. For the second Gulf War, he wanted a minimum of 200,000 troops (a la 1st Gulf War). Rumsfeld managed to accomplish the task with one-quarter that number.

News Flash! Bush is no longer president.
I'm not comparing the Bush Cabinet to the Obama cabinet; I'm suggesting that the current cabinet is chock-a-block full of incompetents. Whether the Bush cabinet was stocked with Nobel laureates, dishes from China, or ventriloquist dummies is irrelevant -- unless you're claiming that good people cannot be found by ANY president.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

in an advisory capacity and to offer assistance only (the mission statement on their website said that as of last month. The main problem with Katrina is that the followed the hurricane disaster plan to the letter. The La SEMA plan in effect specifically stated that the Superdome was not to be used, stocked, or staffed as a shelter. People were supposed to go the Dome, ride out the storm and then be parceled to shelters as needed. Nobody (over multiple years) every got around to thinking about what might happen if the other shelters weren't available, which they weren't. The general corruption and stupidity built into the governments of La and NOLA did not help.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Accomplish the task? ARE YOU FOR REAL???? We're still THERE! Gawd, can you pour on the BS. Maybe you're not as smart as I think you are and you really believe the codswallop you're writing. Shinseki was right and there's not very many people left who doubt it, especially since when we finally DID get around to following his advice and sent a huge surge of additional troops, things immediately improved. What COLOR is the sky on your planet? We can't be talking about the same person:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Shinseki
If you bothered to read that item, you would have learned: "On November 15, 2006, in testimony before Congress, CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid said that General Shinseki had been correct that more troops were needed. Who should we trust to evaluate the truth of Shinseki's statement: You or the CENTCOM Commander? I would say "you lack the real world experience to make the call."
You'll just say anything to make a point, won't you? Truth seems hardly relevant.

So what? I didn't notice that anyone had died and made you King of Thread Breadth. That horsecrap might work for M. Dufas (it doesn't!) but it carries no weight with me. You can't scare off a comparison between the two most recent presidents with a worn-out half-watt witticism. Bush appointed people that were obviously more to your liking with the real world experience you seem to think so valuable to a cabinet secretary. That make it completely valid to examine how well that worked out since you're so critical of Obama's different metrics but provide very little proof of what you're saying.

Irrelevant to you because it easily demonstrates the fallacy of your contention that having some ill-defined "real world job" previously makes for better cabinet members. When you denigrate someone like Shinseki and label his real world experience as "arguable" you're engaged in pure, unbridled bullshit. I'm just calling you out on it, just like I promised.
What should I use to compare cabinet appointments? Abe Lincoln from over a century ago? Bush, as you've argued in the past, apparently did a better job in your mind, picking cabinet secretaries because he chose "real world" people (read: businessmen). I intend to show that's erroneous, and easily proved to be. We won't even have to examine Bush's dubious record in other appointments, such as toying with nominating his personal lawyer Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, a nominee lacking in both academic and real world credentials, at least as far as the Federal Judiciary is concerned.
""The only sexism involved in the Miers nomination is the administration's claim that once they decided they wanted a woman, Miers was the best they could do. Let me just say, if the top male lawyer in the country is John Roberts and the top female lawyer is Harriet Miers, we may as well stop allowing girls to go to law school." -- Ann Coulter" http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/miersquotes.php
Oh, but this wasn't a "cabinet" appointment. It was 10 times more important and it was naked cronyism that even Bush supporters couldn't swallow. She was never is a judge. So what were you saying about the importance of real world experience? Sounds like "It counts when I want it to and doesn't when I don't."
Bush may no longer be president, but I'm sorry to report, his actions are now a legitimate part of US history, subject to comparison to the current president our presidents from the past, despite how apparently uncomfortable it makes you to revisit his record. Trying to make discussion of Bush somehow off-limits to the subject of presidential cabinet secretaries only indicates you're fearful. We both know that if we actually look at the record, the record is bad.
Worse still, you know that your labels are wholly inaccurate regarding Obama's cabinet. To say Shinseki's "real world" experience is arguable is to lie through your teeth. Who, then IS qualified if not a man with his credentials? Why on earth should a man have to have private sector experience to run a government organization that concerns the US military? Why isn't being Chief of Staff of the Army not good enough for you? What past VA Secretaries do you think had qualifications more suited?
There are others on your list that are as woefully mischaracterized. I'll go through them one by one as we compare Bush's "real world" secretaries and their performance with those of Obama's "academics" you so thoroughly disdain. I predict we'll quickly see that what you're claiming as some essential quality of a cabinet member really means squat and in fact, it could mean less than squat: it could be the exact reverse of the truth. Having business ties and experience might actually cause a Secretary to act in the best interests of his former associates and not the President and by extension, the citizens of the United States. I am sure you know where I am going with this.
The best comparison to the roster you've listed as somehow less than competent is the *last* president's cabinet, selected in a way you think is superior to the current administration. Of course you don't want to explore that because a number of them left under serious clouds. The trouble they found themselves in puts serious doubt to your implication that only captains of industry should serve in cabinet positions. That's nonsense, and it needs debunking. The best way to chip away to the truth would seem to be comparing the most recent ex-president, Bush, and his cabinet, which was to clearly more business oriented that Obama's.
Comparing experienced cabinet members who have been egregious failures seems to me the perfect rebuttal to your implication that lack of something you nebulously define as "lack of real world experience" has a serious impact on a cabinet secretary's performance or competence.

No, I am claiming that your assertion that an alleged "lack of real world experience" somehow results in inferior secretaries. You're implying Obama's made bad choices because they are academics. I'm merely pointing out that in the past that ex-businessmen have done very, very poorly, often resigning under a cloud like FEMA's "Heckuva Job Brownie." I realize that having your parade rained on is unsettling, but your alleged facts aren't really facts and need to be exposed as simply your unsubstantiated opinion (I'm being charitable).
So here's a serious newsflash for you. No one with even half a brain would respond to "Bush is longer president" with anything other than a big SFW? That statement in no way means he's off limits in a discussion of presidential cabinet appointments, no matter how much you try drawing that imaginary line around your comments. A line meant to deflect criticism of your basically erroneous contentions.
Ever hear a judge admonishing an attorney "But you opened the door to this line of questioning so I will rule it admissible"? Well, that's exactly what you did: opened the door to discuss ALL cabinet secretaries, not just the ones you want to gore with you "short on facts" classification of Obama's cabinet.
I feel for you, though, HeyBub. It's got to be painful to try to kick dirt on Obama's cabinet when Bush's was so much worse, only starting with "Heck of a Job Brownie" the Arabian Horse Assn. executive. That's the subject of a followup post. This one's run over and we haven't even gotten to those Bush Secretaries and their various ill-fortunes. (-"
And lest you think this is partisan, at least neither Bush nor Obama tried to pull perhaps the most dubious appointment of all time: JFK making his brother AG. Ouch! Was he the best qualified in the nation? Very, very doubtful. I suspect JFK's appointment eventually cost RFK his life. Sirhan Sirhan was just another patsy. RFK violated life's number one rule: "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate."
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nah. We had plenty to bring the war to a swift conclusion. It is the peace that is giving us so much trouble.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I got to watch C-Span's televised hearings basically about AARP. It's pretty disturbing to watch government at work. But I was heartened by the sight of the Republicans overplaying their hand. Going after AARP pretty much equals going after seniors in the minds of many voters, members or not.
It was interesting because I had been involved in 501(c)3 organizations but had been away from it for a long time. AARP is actually a 501(c)4 which allows limited lobbying. It was funny and sad to watch Wally Herger (R-CA) try to stampede the likes of old pros like senior members Pete Stark and Charles Rangel. It was very entertaining. I've had BOD meetings for puny non-profits run with more attention to Robert's rules. One of the Reps asked if we should also look at why GE paid no income tax instead of focusing on AARP. The worm turns.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

AARP (which gets over half of its budget from the royalties paid to it by their AARP-okayed health insurer) got involved as a third party in the healthcare debate.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's an interesting story. They use those royalties, they allege, to keep membership dues low. But it's more likely to maintain good "feeder pools" into their "sweetheart" insurers. But they have been statistically forgetting their public service mission more and more as the profits grew. Their boss is no great shakes but he draws a big salary. It was pure political theater. I don't think Chairman Wally's day in the sun will end up being a good thing for him. I was unimpressed by members on both sides of the aisle. There was a lot of rancor about the origin of the report the chairman wanted in the record.
It was painfully clear this was payback for supporting the health care bill. As one rep pointed out, there are casinos that have 501(c)4 exemptions but no one is going after them. CSpan racked back the zoom in order to catch Wally using his handkerchief-covered finger to root out buggers or scratch the bottom of his brain. It wasn't clear which. (-: The chairman was playing the "when did you stop beating your wife game" and the AARP CEO (Barry Rand?) played right along like a simpleton. God knows what they pay him, but if it's over $5K a year, they wuz robbed!
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<So, they reckoned on perpetual war? There was no peace to follow it?>
Methinks Kurt is pulling your leg by using a political speak. Like Clinton's definitions of "sex" and "it."
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

is killing people and breaking things. The peace is when you are trying to put things back into some manageable form. We did a bang up job (so to speak) of the first part. We have had troubles with the second. Failing to win the peace in WWI (for example) pretty much made WWII inevitable. We did a better job with the peace in WWII. Not great, but better. If we had had an Iraqi version of the Marshall Plan in place, maybe it would have gone better.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

As you may know, Caterpillar sent a letter to the governor of Illinois citing the recent 66% increase in the state's corporate income tax as a BIG incentive to move 23,000 manufacturing jobs to a different state. The governors Indiana, Ohio, Texas, and several other states immediately sent letters to the CEO of Caterpillar saying "We'd be honored to host your company right here."
Moving one's operation from Illinois to Kansas is conceptually not much different from moving from the U.S. to the Lesser Antilles.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually easier. I-65 is much easier to transverse than the Caribbean Sea (grin).
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except that Peoria is on I-74 and neither go anywhere near Kansas. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Still easier. Peoria is only around a 4 hour drive to Indy. Boring drive, Lord knows I made it often enough before the riverboats opened in Indiana (g).
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I know. I lived half-way between, until I graduated college. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.