Why get your news from newspapers? Look at what Kerry is busy doing.
Love this quote from the article. From Yahoo (note not a newspaper)
Without newspapers, Kerry and other lawmakers said at a Senate subcommittee hearing Wednesday, there will be too few journalists investigating governments, companies and individuals.
“I think there are definitely some things we can do to encourage, to help the situation without stepping over any line,” Kerry told Reuters after holding a hearing on the future of journalism.
Kerry, chairman of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, was referring to the idea that federal, state and local governments should not offer subsidies or other financial help to newspapers because it would make them beholden to politicians. This, in turn, could discourage critical stories or investigations.
Kerry, why don’t you look forward and realize that it could be that we are no longer getting our news from papers. Even the free newspaper junk mail goes directly in the trash. If I want to find out the news, I just use the internet. They are stuck in the 19th century and need to look at moving into the 21st century rather than looking for a handout. If I don’t pay the money for a paper, why do I want MY tax dollars going to the newspapers.
As we have seen, if a business isn’t meeting the needs of the buyers they need to figure a new business plan not to look for a handout from the government.
Has anyone heard that the classes that are now being required in ethics actually teach people how to get around being ethical? What do you think about ethics in our society? Do you feel like greed has taken us over to the point where we have let ethics be a thing of the past? A few years ago when I worked with people from various parts of the country, I made a joke one day that I felt that some people see politeness as a sign of weakness and go in for the kill. Do you feel like you have to put on a coat of armor to be able to deal with people and not be polite or be distrustful in order to survive in society?
Well, here is the article that brought up my questions?
Oh, one other thought, I believe that company culture starts at the top and how people act are based on what comes from the top. If you look at the CEO, you can really get a snapshot of the entire company culture. Do you agree?
Okay this is going to be a post where I don’t post a link to back up my statements. If I do, then you will find out more about me than I am willing to share on this site. Anyway, I read this news story about a multi-use development that includes condos. The price of the condos go from some that are for low income buyers to some that are in the $500,000 range. What was interesting about the story was that they noted how many condos had been under contract and said that about 30% had fallen through because the buyers had probles securing a mortgage after the problems on Wall Street. I can’t believe that that many people really were unqualified for mortgages but got them. I figure a few people may have bailed on their own, but that many people now can’t qualify for loans. I didn’t get the feeling that it was due to losing jobs or such that caused so many to be unable to secure mortgages. Remember also that most buyers tend to find out how much they can qualify for before they begin their home searching. But, 30% who qualified prior to the Wall Street troubles no longer qualify. So, basically we can take that number and figure that we are spending big bucks to bail out at least 30% of the population. Wow! I want to know where my bailout is since I worked hard to be able to live paycheck to paycheck within my means.
I just want to add something. I think a lot of the problem isn’t just that Congress (democrats) pushed through measures to ease restrictions on qualifying for loans. The other problem is good ole supply and demand. The builders and developers have created so many new developments that they need to sell them…the problem is that there really isn’t the demand for as much as they are building. So, the supply is huge, qualifying demand is low so unqualified demand is allowed, thus creating the big over supply we have now.
So, I will say it again. How much of the low spending of money is being blamed on the downturn of the economy and how much of it is supply and demand. I keep going shopping and I want to spend money and I can’t find anything to buy. To top it off, when I was at the big name department store I noticed a sweater on a rack. It happened to be the sweater I wore on Christmas Day and it was not a Holiday sweater and I bought it at least a year or so ago. So, why was it still there, was it a really late return or was it something that has been in the inventory for a year or so. It just struck me that pretty much the only thing I really really liked at the store was something I have worn so much for a year or so. If the stores don’t have things people want to buy then how do they expect to sell them. I mean, come on, if people won’t buy things on massive sales, could it be that you aren’t selling what the people want? Personally, I think this is the problem with the economy to a degree… people need to spend money so that the money gets passed to others, if there is nothing to buy then how can that money be spent so it can be passed on to others? The other thing about spending money so that it can be spent by companies to pay employees… it is good way to redistribute the wealth rather than tax people to pass it on to people that the government thinks will vote for them.
I love the comments on this story. It is sad that liberals run the taxes up in one state and then leave in disgust…just to run to another state with lower taxes…until they force their liberal ideals on that state…and the cycle continues. I like the comments at the end of the article that say the same thing I did.
The other thing that is interesting is that wasn’t it under Carter that the federal government tried the luxury tax. You know it failed miserably because people just refused to buy items that were being taxed. So, the industries that provided products that were being taxed ended up not selling the products because taxpayers refused to spend the money on the products. Then, the businesses affected paid less business taxes and some probably went out of business.
So do you think it might start crossing their minds that there is not the demand for the product they are supplying? Do they not realize that a lot of people don’t subscribe to their paper because they don’t agree with the liberal slant that they give the news?
Yes NYT, conservatives do exist. Believe it or not we are not the backwoods, illiterate people that you try to convince yourselves and your liberal friends that we are. I would hold my credentials against any of yours. For a quick look at them go back to my first post.
NYT needs some bucks
I know that this story doesn’t really have to do with the NYT’s story. But, it is somewhat connected. It is about how Obama’s liberal supporters aren’t happy. Rather than being the savior they thought he would be, they are seeing him as more of the same. Hmm, that could be good news for those of us who thought he would lead from the far left. Of course, everyone needs to remember that whoever is elected president governs all citizens not just those who elected him or her. It doesn’t matter what the party wants, as McCain said, it is country first. Now, if only his economic advisers could convince him that he needs to continue Bush tax cuts rather than let them go away in 2010… Just so you know, if you are middle class your taxes will pretty much double when the tax cuts fade away in 2010. Don’t believe the hype that you will end up paying less taxes!
Liberals voice concerns that it is more of the same
Okay, one last update… I’m on a roll today. I forgot to post this yesterday and it just seems like the perfect story to end the post. Remember how Obama swore he quit smoking, but we all knew he was sneaking puffs in the bathroom, just like a teenager, well he finally admits it.