When it comes to hope for the future, Maine ranked worst in the nation for standard of living, according to a new Gallup poll that combines a cross-section of metrics to determine a state’s livability.
Gallup surveyed 530,000 people over 18 months, ending June 2012, on 13 metrics such as full-time employment, economic confidence, health, standard of living optimism and how optimistic people were about their life in five years to determine their rankings.
On the overall score, Utah came out on top, followed by Minnesota and Colorado. Maine ranked 40th overall, with the bottom three West Virginia, Mississippi, and Kentucky.
Utah surpassed nearly every state for having low smoking habits, access to clean water and the perception that the area is improving. Minnesota prevailed in economic confidence and access to a safe place to exercise, while North Dakota led the job creation index and those employed full-time.
On the other hand, West Virginia ranked at the bottom in five of the 13 categories: economic confidence, safe places to exercise, obesity, smoking habits and learning new information on a daily basis. Mississippi bottomed out in three indexes of its own: dentist visits, full-time employment and having a supervisor who treats you like a partner — not a boss.
On sheer standards of living, Hawaiians were most likely to say theirs were getting better, while Maine’s residents were tops in being likely to say theirs were getting worse.
A pretty pessimistic crowd alright….
As Maine goes, so goes the Union.
No, not at all.
That might have been true in 1870.
Now not so much.
Chronic pessimism is a consequence of being a welfare state. Optimism won’t return until jobs do. More & more & more welfare imposed by progressive democrats is not the solution, encouraging businesses to move to Maine is.
You don’t think it has anything to do with the fact that, while the number of rich continutes to grow, 30% of the Middle Class fell below the poverty line last year. Maybe we should throw more tax dollars into corporate welfare so they might throw the huddled masses another fish. I am sure our Governor-turned-Dictator would agree with that! Of course, you believe that those who fell below the line were lazy and just don’t work hard enough.
Are those national stats or Maine stats?
Are you more concerned about one than the other?
It’s important if you are making the argument gs made.
Why?
Um, you should check your facts, the number of rich is in decline.
http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Rich-Poorer-Number-Millionaires/2011/08/18/id/407774
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2012/06/19/report-number-of-rich-americans-fell-in-2011-but-rich-chinese-increased
Spare us the class warfare meadow muffin rhetoric coming from the white house. It’s done to divert attention away from the failure that is the current ‘presidential’ administration.
Who are you trying to kid? This is class warfare! Maybe there arn’t an increase of the number of millionaires, but the rich just saw an increase in wealth for the last year of an average over a million dollars while the average for the working man was $80 a week! Don’t tell me there’s no class warfare while you got your hand in my back pocket. Tell the truth without exageration. Show some honor.
You must be right. Certainly LePage caused our pessimism over the past two years, while one-party domination in Disgusta over the past forty years would have NOTHING to do with our standings.
I learned in the Legislature that if we’ll pay you to stay home and do nothing… you’ll not let us down.
And, of course, it’s the 1% who’re forcing Washington County to have the highest illegal prescription abuse rate east of the Mississippi.
It’s thinking like yours that makes me so happy I’ve moved outside Savannah, after four generations of Maine residency, where they praise God, love our military, and support small businesses… just the opposite of what Maine’s turned into.
Businesses and Maine just don’t jive.
Are you possibly putting the cart before the horse? In a nutshell you seem to think that less welfare will lead to more jobs and more welfare will result in fewer jobs. How does that compare with fewer jobs leads to more welfare and more jobs will result in less welfare?
OK, I see the logic. Reduced welfare leads to lower taxation which leads to more jobs. So if we look at unemployment rates around the country, we have a way to check this out. Maine’s unemployment rate is 7.5. Florida has had Republican governors for awhile, and if they are true to their creed, then they must be anti-welfare. Florida’s unemployment rate is 8.6. Georgia is another red state. The unemployment rate is 9.0. South Carolina is as red as you can get and has an unemployment rate of 9.4. Even New Jersey with Chris Christie at the helm comes in at 9.6. And Texas, that beacon of progress? – 7.0, a little better than Maine. Of course, I am cherry-picking to some extent. I know California is 10.7. Maybe things are a little more complicated than just lower welfare leads to more jobs.
Temperate is correct. If you build a dependent society (and we have built a good one here) you have no feeling that you will be able to climb out of it. Pessimism prevails.
Pessimism prevails when you have a Stain on the Blaine.
Still can’t get those spaghetti stains out, eh?
When LePage says things like “Kiss my butt” to organizations that approach him respectfully, isn’t that a problem?
If you are referring to the NAACP organization to whom LePage directed that comment, you picked a wrong example. This organization was anything but respectful when it tried to impose its will on a new governor. The governor then made it plain he would not kowtow to anyone organization as he had promised during his campaign. Regrettably the NAACP decided to test the governor’s will and deservedly got mud in its face for doing so.
So you approve of LePage’s statement “Kiss my butt” ? You think governors should talk that way.
“Kiss my butt”. What a horrible inhuman thing to say! Oh, I think I am going to faint! The governor needs to be crucified for speaking that way to a liberal organization whose only guilt was its attempt to railroad the governor.
Of course I’m ridiculing you to illustrate what I feel is your lack of perspective on this issue. Really, this is a small issue in most people’s mind. It’s all part of a calculated political move. I mean, can’t you see what’s going on? Dirty politics, which Mainers are fed up with, me no less.
…..
Plenty of elected public officials use just as salty language, many of them Democrats. Eliot Spitzer, Rahm Emanual, Barney Franks; back to President Lyndon Johnson have all made even worse utterances.
Grow up and stop impressing us with your moronic, yet politically correct world.
Jerry Brown(D) governor of California just dropped another F* bomb when he echo’ed Gov. LePage’s urgent agenda and said :
“I just want to get sh*t done,”…
.
Brown was discussing his recently announced plan to build two controversial tunnels that would distribute water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta down to the increasingly thirsty (and perpetually arid) southern portion of the state.
“At this stage as I see many of my friends dying…I want to get sh*t done,” he told reporters. “I want to get this thing done the best I can. You give me your analysis, I’ll read it, but we’re going to make stuff happen and that’s why I’m here. We’re going to take into account the opposition, but we’re not going to sit here and twiddle our thumbs and stare at our navel. ”
….sounds just like LePage doesn’t he?
My point stands regardless of your rhyming skills.
Do you think Canadians have a “dependent” system? Do they have low self-esteem?
Of course you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Given all the speeches and impromptu talks LePage makes, entirely all his rhetoric is mild and polite, with a few exceptions the liberal press likes to accentuate over and over and over ad nauseam. It’s all about character assassination by those who can’t stand seeing others but themselves in power.
This is a different argument. You are making an assumption that people on welfare settle for that even when the opportunity exists for a better economic life. Some may. I think that most do not. Humans are complicated. I think that opinions have to be backed up with some degree of evidence. Otherwise, they are just opinions, and you know what “they say” about opinions compared to certain parts of human anatomy.
For my side, I would say look back to America in the 1930’s. There was at the beginning of the decade very little in the way of a social safety net. And what was America like? Think of those pictures of the Great Depression. Turn the clock ahead to the early 1960’s. In 1959 22% of Americans were considered to be in poverty. By 1974, that figure had dropped to 11%. Remember Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty? He put into place programs which were not just welfare but national programs to target poverty. They apparently worked. At least that’s what the data shows. Of course, Johnson is not looked back upon with particular fondness now, but the figures show a change, and if you think a lower rate of poverty is an improvement, then it was a change for the better.
And there is another aspect, even if you are extremely attached to your money and not particularly concerned with the poor. The United States became a spectacularly rich nation in the years following World War II while our national mindset reflected FDR’s New Deal. Remember the old saying, “A rising tide floats all the boats.”?
How in heck do you know what I assume?
You think I have not experienced deep poverty first hand?
All you have is what your sociology professor told you.
Please supply some kind of argument, anything, or at least a reference or link, instead of simply casting insults and playing your own violin.
Did you know that Forbes Magazine says the happiest countries in the world all have strong welfare nets:
http://www.forbes.com/2011/01/19/norway-denmark-finland-business-washington-world-happiest-countries_print.html
Poster made assumptions about my opinions. I didn’t know that required a link to an old Forbes article that is irrelevant to the discussion in order to respond. I’ll check in with you next time.
In the meantime… here is another happiest countries poll. They are a dime a dozen. Doesn’t look a bit like yours.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/happiest-countries-world-2012-happy-nations-complete-list-2946693.html
I appreciate your link and I encourage readers to compare my Forbes Magazine link (a trusted source) to yours.
It’s true there are a lot of lists from a lot of sources, but Forbes magazine has a good solid reputation. For instance, Canada is in their happiest top ten, a country with a booming economic and strong welfare rights
I checked your list. Vietnam is #2 and Haiti is #78 while the USA is #105. Did you check who made those rankings and how they did it? They factored in the “ecological footprint”. Countries using less energy were ranked higher because of their smaller “ecological footprint”, a measure that comes from the World Wildlife Fund. I’ll make another assumption. You don’t seem like someone who would be particularly concerned with wildlife habitat or other “green” issues.
I understand. Cuba is near the top also, I only posted the link to let people know that surveys only tells what the group doing the survey wants to say.
The thing I found interesting was that “happy” people was a self-measurement based on self perception. The Forbes article had some other metric determined by some other person if they were happy or not and ranked them accordingly. I think it would be more reasonable for the people themselves to decide if they were “happy” or not.
Assumption can get you into trouble. Besides some posters like t0 divide people into neat little categories. It makes it easier for them to depersonalize someone and demonize.
I missed that one. Cuba is #12 and Venezuela is #9. Syria came in at a respectable #47. That survey sounds like something out of The Onion.
The Forbes magazine went to some group called the Legatum Institute for its ranking. The indicators were, according to Forbes – the ingredients of prosperity: economy, entrepreneurship, governance,
education, health, safety, personal freedom and social capital. It is not enough to simply dismiss a study (or survey) as telling only what the group wants the survey to say. It is important to say what the survey measured and how it was done. In other words, not all surveys are equal.
Here is the link. Everyone (and this article certainly seems to have drummed up a lot of interest, well, at least comments) should check it out for him/herself.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2011/12/07/the-worlds-happiest-and-saddest-countries/
I saw it. Like I say the determinations were made based on their criteria and the other based on how the people felt about themselves.
And Forbes is hardly left wing.
are you anti science or simply anti intellectualism?
Not sure what your point is.
I think Cheesecake is anti-ignorant.
It’s easy to see what you assume. I read what you wrote – “If you build a dependent society (and we have built a good one here) you have no feeling that you will be able to climb out of it.”
You are implying that you have experienced deep poverty first hand. Now I assume that you no longer are in deep poverty and did not receive welfare or any other kind of assistance because if you had been in deep poverty and had received assistance, you would have succumbed to pessimism and remained in deep poverty.
I did not say that people do not escape poverty. I suggest that the feeling of overwhelming dependence makes it very hard to escape poverty.
Generally people escape on their own merits. Not because of some government program but sometimes despite it.
The Canadian system proves national healthcare can coexist with self-determination.
The US became a spectacularly rich nation in the years following World War II because we had an industrial base built up during WWII and most of the rest of the world’s industrial base was damaged or destroyed. We made things and the world bought them.
There were other major factors as well but considering you think our wealth was caused by FDR’s policies I’m not going to waste time going over them.
Our industrial base was centered around government spending. It was build around Jeeps, tanks, weapons, bombers, fighters, warships, etc. So it was government spending on the war effort that got us out of the great depression, once the war was over there was no more need for the numbers of tanks, planes, and ships we were churning out. Then to add a few years onto the financial up post WWII you had hundreds of thousands of servicemen coming home with pockets full of government pay with which they bought homes, which by the way were built with more government monies. The “Industrial Base” was a creation of FDR’s government.
The industrial base built up during WWII came through government money, government stimulus. That’s exactly what we need now to get out of our recession. Government stimulus. For instance, the US electricity infrastructure is crumbling. And also, other countries have advanced monorail systems, while our transportation network is failing apart.
You insist that people remain poor out of choice. They don’t. When given the opportunity people will choose to succeed.
This governor has provided nothing but angst for people.
Where is your evidence that people do not choose to remain poor?
The fact is that the present system supplies incentives for being poor and puts up barriers to doing better for oneself.
What is your evidence that rich greedy people care about workers and don’t try to cheat the system?
Wouldn’t you if you were rich and greedy?
No different than poor and greedy.
The poor lack much, but the greedy lack more.
There isn’t many a human being who hasn’t had the desire for more in their lives. Wanting more and wanting more than a person can use/need are different.
Do you have more than you can use or need?
How many sq feet is your house? Do you own a second or vacation home? How many cars? What models? Any jewelery? Designer clothes? How many pairs of shoes do you own? More than 1 TV? How big?
The ultra-wealthy have quadrupled their wealth while the rest of slip or tread water. Even if we doubled their taxes now, it would still mean they double their wealth compared to the rest of us.
That’s not a free market econonmy. That’s corruption.
…..
It is different, because a single greedy corrupt billionaire can buy off a whole bunch of politicians. A single one.
Poor people, even the ones who are like you say–and they are a minority–can’t buy off a single politician.
Like George Soros? (Obama, Reed, Pelosi)
Maybe Soros, if you have evidence. Thanks for agreeing with my point.
The Supreme Court decision in Citizens United opened up the door to unlimited attack adds by anonymous sources.
How do you know he/she isn’t?If anyone is defending LePage the likelihood that they got a fat tax break or have otherwise benefited from the current admin is pretty high.
….
When GIVEN the opportunity.
How about if they WORK and EARN that opportunity.
You’re missing the point. We don’t live in a free market anymore. We live in a corrupt plutocracy.
Are you against corrupt plutocracies? Or do you think people should just keep their heads down and toil even when the system is incredibly unfair?
A corrupt plutocracy created by 100 years of progressive government.
Thanks for agreeing that we have a corrupt plutocracy. Rulership by the rich.
There aren’t any.
You know what? It is damn hard to live a decent life while being poor. I’ve been both. I know. Yes, one has more time if one is a ‘slacker’ but most of that time is spent figuring out how to pay the bills. Not good for the heart, mind or soul believe me. Throw in a couple of kids and now you’re talking real stress.
It ain’t easy being poor. Stop the myth now.
I did not say that. Cut and paste please.
You claim.
You cut and paste where I said….”You insist that people remain poor out of choice.”
I’m sorry. I don’t understand what you’re saying at all. I didn’t cut and paste anything.
Yes you do that often.
Post please.
Do you think that Canada has a “dependent” society and that they have low self-esteem? In fact, do all countries with universal healthcare have low self-esteem? That would be every democratic industrialized country except the US, by the way.
Canada does have a dependent society. They have a different experience with their rulers as a part of the Commonwealth, and that probably makes them very comfortable with the role of their government.
You do understand that pessimism and self-esteem are two different things don’t you?
The article and I are discussing pessimism. You are the one talking to your self about self-esteem.
There’s no reason to be rude. I urge you to try and stay civil. It advances the discussion.
Your argument: welfare leads to “pessimism”
Counterargument: All democratic countries in the world have national healthcare except the US (for instance, Canada). They don’t seem pessimistic.
So, your argument is wrong.
Is it uncivil to point out that you are using the words pessimism and self-esteem interchangeably? Those two words are not even synonyms.
Please do not frame my statements in your twisted way. Either accept them or don’t.
See there you go calling me “twisted.” It really doesn’t speak to your maturity if you can’t argue rationally and critically without insult.
Now, my point is that Canada has a strong welfare system, but they don’t appear to be pessimistic–and therefore, your point that welfare systems lead to pessimism is wrong.
In fact, governments all over the world have national health care, and the people are not pessimistic because of it.
You are twisting my statements to reflect your bias and if i point it out I am insulting. Right.
Hey, Sprucie. Since you are all about the rules, I assume you will be calling Tinserblic out on all of his/her name calling right? Oh that’s right, people only have to be civil to you. Sorry about that.
If I ever get in a back-and-forth with Tinserblic, I will encourage that person to focus on good reasoning.
Oh what a bunch of right wing talking point hogwash. “Welfare welfare welfare…” Just like LeBUFFOON’s silly chirpings day in and day out. Yet you TeaRadicals don’t bat an eye at the budget-busting job-killing corporate WEALTHFARE you people chuck out night and day, such as tax breaks for the costs of moving jobs offshore, oil corporation subsidies, no-bid military industrial complex contracts, tax havens for the super rich in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands (ask your pal MittTwitt RobMe about that), corporations paying zero taxes, and on and on and on. You love to bash the poor, but then you turn around and kiss the toes of those who do everything they possibly can to help the rich and destroy the middle class. (How UNPATRIOTIC AND UNCHRISTIAN the right wing is. Just sickening.) People are not going to locate jobs to this state with a TeaRadical in the Blaine House and TeaRadicals in the legislature who don’t believe in investing in education, alternative energy development, and infrastructure in the ways we need. Your ultra-FAILED trickle down theory does not work and never has. Come November, we are going to toss out the TeaRadicals and put the breaks on LeBUFFOON until we can get rid of him in two years. That ignorant gasbag won’t be able to get elected as dog catcher.
Yours is truly a maniacal rant. Apparently, when you have nothing to add, name calling is the only thing you have left.
Businesses don’t come to Maine because of a poorly educated, union-biased workforce, high taxes, high utility rates & suffocating / anti-business state regs.
Socialism = Fail. Communism = Fail. Tyranny = Fail. But yet, the left keeps pushing further along these failings every day. Now that’s unpatriotic & unchristian.
It’s so easy to blame the poor and repeat the Tea Party chant … ad nauseam.
Let us assume that everything you have said is 100 percent correct. If you were an employer and were considering investing a large amount of your company’s resources would you really look at Maine as a place to invest? Maine is not centrally located, the political situation in the State is unstable, and for the past year and a half Maine’s Governor has been telling anyone who would listen how lazy and stupid Maine people are. Like it or not The Governor has been shown to be less then truthful. Would you want to make a deal with a person you couldn’t trust? Most successful business people wouldn’t. If you wanted to buy a new car and you went to a dealership and all the salesman did was tell you how terrible the car you were looking at was, would you buy it? That is exactly what is happening in Maine. Paul LePage since the day he took office has not said one positive thing about Maine or her people.
How does this explain all those business who left or did not locate in Maine during all those years of progressive democrats, (and independents who were really democrats), ?
Any possibility it might have to do with high energy costs, extreme environmentalism, over regulation, high taxes, and a general anti business political climate?
In answer to your statement let me ask you this. If you had to make the decision to invest your company’s money in The State of Maine would you do it under the current circumstances? We are not talking the last 40 or how ever long years you want to blame on someone else. We are talking about today, NOW.
Conditions now are a direct result of the last 40 years. Give real conservatives a chance to institute real change for 5 to 10 years and companies may be willing to look at us again.
We’ve been dropping taxes for the wealthy for decades, and also dismantling our welfare system for decades. All conservative policies. And by now it has been shown, and even Republicans admit, that
Trickle down does not work.
We just had 8 years of a “compassionate conservative” administration in Washington. How did that work out for us?
Yes that sign did wonders.Show me the jobs.Every week someone else lays off people or folds.Nice work Paulie.
There are plenty of jobs out there. Just jobs that people aren’t willing to take as the sense of entitlement grows larger by the day. Not all of us are going to be able to have an air conditioned office job in our lifetime. Accept what you have or work harder, get educated, etc.
If you want to look at the complete list, go to: http://www.livescience.com/22152-best-states-future-living.html. Florida is #46. I guess the snowbirds should be looking for some place else.
I would have to agree. I don’t even like visiting Florida.
Yup. And look who their governor is. The Florida version of LeBUFFOON.
Of course we’re pessimistic … look what we’ve got in our governor’s mansion. That’s enough to depress anybody!
Being told you’re worthless by your governor isn’t great for self esteem.
It also dosen’t say a lot about the State’s economic outlook or the value that Maine’s Governor put’s on the workforce. This is one of the major reasons why Maine keeps getting the ‘red-neck, beer guzzling hunter and fisherman’ image put out there. It also encourages and maintains that attitude for our kid’s. And LePage wonders why the kid’s have such a tough time breaking thru these artificial barrier’s. Open mouth, insert foot and chew vigouresly, right up to your you know what. Then maybe you’ll understand. The rest of us do and can’t wait ’till Nov.6 and we clean house in Augusta.
We should put those liberal rose colored blinders back on so we don’t see the cliff we are going over. (Sarcasm)
Just like those cities in California having to declare bankruptcy.
Did you know that a couple months after Bush office, the DOW bottomed out at around 6000?
March 2, 2009 DOW: 6626.94
Did you ever figure out that the collapse was the culmination of 50 years of progressive driven policies by both republicans and democrats? And mostly due to congress rather than any one president?
Spruce cheered when it hit 6000. Seeing it as some sort victory against capitalism. I saw it as a buying opportunity, not a bad thing.
As I’ve told you before, lying and whining, while supplying no argument or evidence or link, does not make you appealing in independent readers. Please try to be civil.
Did you know that Romney only paid 13.9% income tax?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/a-tough-new-obama-ad-that—-surprise—-is-accurate/2012/08/02/gJQAuigQSX_blog.html
Don’t respond then.
The reason I respond is (a) to try and improve the quality of discussion in here, and (b) to reach out to undecided readers. Honestly, we should all strive to make our arguments better. Including me. And also including you. You seem to willfully try to be cruel sometimes, and it really doesn’t help you look like a serious thinker.
Lectures to other posters are not likely to elicit the response you desire.
Thank you for your polite response, exactly what I’m after.
I’m with you. I did not have any spare cash at the time and couldn’t take advantage of it.
2 wars on the cuff, now that’ll wreck aneconomy real fast.
Bank deregulation didn’t help either.
WWII cost much more than Iraq or Afghanistan and it didn’t wreak our economy. It saved it.
By the way, it wasn’t the wars in either Iraq or Afghanistan that we spent all the money and blood on. It was the nation building that has been a waste. Republicans thinking we could create democracies and democrats demanding we “fix” what we “broke”.
Yea, and the 90% tax rate that the rich were paying during WWII to pay for it did not wreck our economy either.
Except that hardly anyone paid that rate.
I’m sorry Cheese, refresh my memory. During WWII, did everyone get a tax cut like ya boy GWB gave out (without corresponding spending decreases) during the Afghan and Iraq wars? Or were taxes raised dramatically because of the realization that when a country goes to war, all must sacrifice in some way to make it a successful endeavor?
The truth is, taxes were raised dramatically during WWII because that was the responsible thing to do, and people paid them. Also, it worked.
OPf course all your patriotic statements are unequicically true. Except that not very many payed that rate. . First of all…. In 1944 the highest tax rate was 94%. That rate began at $200,000. Today the same purchasing power would be $2.6 million +/-. fI today we started the top tax bracket at $2.6 million you wouldn’t find too many paying that rate either.
Look at all these big corporations that pay no taxes now:
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ad-lib/2011/apr/10/tax-evaders-wall-shame/
Now, do you have any solid evidence for your assertions?
Sure, How about…..Tax Policy Center of The Brookings Institute.
Any inflation calculator can give you the $2.6 million figure.
Link? Argument? Source?
Anyway, your focus on 94% and how few people paid that rate (a) ignores corporations, (b) ignores rates like 80%, 70%, and so on that are relevant to the argument.
Basically you have no solid evidence for your claims about high taxes when rates were high.
Oh God!! How about you doing some work?
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/index.cfm
Just like I thought. Not a single source to cite.
Nothing but obfuscation. And again, please try to be polite.
Bye
Plenty of big corporations pay zero taxes now:
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ad-lib/2011/apr/10/tax-evaders-wall-shame/
And Romney only paid 13.9% tax:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/a-tough-new-obama-ad-that—-surprise—-is-accurate/2012/08/02/gJQAuigQSX_blog.html
———-
Do you have a link or reference for your claim?
The difference between WWII and Iraq/Afghanistan is one of time periods.
At the end of the 1940s, the US had by far the highest oil, coal, and iron production of any country in the world and all the resources laid close to the surface in easy and cheap-to-access deposits. By the 1990s, our oil production had peaked over 20 years previously and we were a net debtor nation.
Our prosperity of the mid Twentieth Century owned mainly to copious oil fields, iron pits, and coal mines, all of which are largely exhausted now, relative to demand anyhow. It all has very little to do with Democrats vs. Republicans, Bush vs. Obama, really.
Back then we had quite a bit of material wealth in the ground but had fairly low expectations in our lives and now of course, the situation is largely reversed and that has caused much dissatisfaction.
The Allies, thanks to the US, had tremendous energy and metal wealth, not so much German, Japan, and Italy. Despite all the patriotic breast beating about how the US was and is, so morally superior (ha!), this energy and material wealth was the main reason we did so well in WWII without bankrupting ourselves. We actually did quite a bit of rebuilding in Japan and West Germany after WWII as well.
You should see the Oscar-winning documentary Inside Job, which validates your point, yet emphasizes that Wall Street’s immoral and reckless behavior, unpoliced, was the moment of the murder of our economy.
You still don’t get it that Wall Street’s immoral and reckless behavior, unpoliced, was entirely due to policies of congress.
I understand that decades of government corruption led to the problem (read, for example, the book Winner Take All Politics). But you are trying to say Wall Street isn’t to to blame.
Just because someone else hands a murderer a gun, and effectively says “do it,” it doesn’t relieve the murderer of responsibility.
And that’s exactly what Wall Street did–murdered our economy.
Hand the murderer a gun with 1 bullet in it. Then take another gun and stick it in his ear and say “do it or else”…. And promise him that he will not be blamed….
I’d love to see some evidence for that! “Here make a lot of money, get rich, or we will harm you.” Come on…
Who’s your source?
My evidence is the Oscar-winning movie Inside Job, just for starters. And also the inveterate greed and constant lust for more profit that is built into Wall Street.
It’s a good movie. You can quit beating your drum. It explains very well how and why the crisis became as big as it did. Notice that it was congress that passed laws allowing most of this.
But the bubble that started the crash would never have happened if all those bad loans had not been made. And again, federal government policy to force banks to loan to people who should not have those loans was the root cause.
Did you also know that gas has almost doubled and food prices are through the roof with portion sizes also being shrinked at the store? But there is no inflation….the dow doubling means nothing when you pump trillions into the economy, the money has to go somewhere….obama and bernanke will get the dow back over 14,000 before the election to try to save their jobs but it’s all fake…..
And Stewart had to put the Redneck games on last night just to make things worse.SIGH.
If you saw all those toothless morons in 2008 whooping it up for Todd Palin it’s enough to make smart people give up hope.LePage makes it worse.
I gave up on your rant after about your tenth grammar mistake. But good try!
Do you fools think this started with him?
It did not.Nearly everyone is culpable to one degree or another.Congress is the worst ever-enjoying their month long vacations that we pay for.
Still crying over your loss, I see. They are having a sale on Kleenex at Walmart. We hope you can pull through.
depression starts in the white house….
You cannot make this stuff up!
” having a supervisor who treats you like a partner — not a boss”
“Learned something new yesterday.”
As a professional I was lucky to have most of my bosses more like a colleague than as a tyrant (a little tough to evaluate this one in absolutes). Again, as a professional (semi-retired), I typically learn several things every day, in a variety of fields. May you have such a rewarding career (although it sounds like you don’t).
I worked for one of those tyrants once. Got a new job and quit in less than 2 weeks.
On the other side I have worked for some of these new age , feel good, boss as friend people. Nothing gets done, little supervision, slacker employees get away with murder, (when they even show up), frustration level high, moral low….
All things in balance. A good employer treats the workers well and is fair but has high expectations too. The right balance can be struck through proper orientation into the organization and proper supervision, communcation, and evaluation going forward.
Sounds like you’ve had bosses on the extremes. My sympathies. Mine were all some where in between, with a couple of ems and a couple of clunkers.
Most of my bosses were somewhere in the middle as well. Only one really bad tyrant. Several of the feel good types. The peter principle explains most of those.
Good companies get rid of those at both ends. Best experience I ever had at a large company was working at a Sam’s club. Not in Maine so I cannot speak for the local managers. Best overall was a local Bangor company built from scratch by a local man who grew up in poverty. Worst tyrant was a small, (unnamed), company here in Bangor, since changed hands.
Unfortunately, The bad bosses in government tend to survive. The worst that seems to happen is that they get moved around.
That is something that’s pretty rare in Maine! I have met several that think workers are there to abuse.
And the workers see every change as a slight to be resisted. It’s a great cycle.
Some employers are CONSTANTLY initiating “changes” such that the organization becomes unstable to the point of being unbearable. And many “changes” are often not based on sound reasoning nor involve any input from employees, as should be the case in many instances. It is natural to expect some “resistance” if you are subjecting people to constance streams of “changes” and new mandates. Not that there should never be changes. But it should be a thoughtful process, and changes have to be reasonable, purposeful, and doable. You need some buy in. Organizations are made up of human beings, not robots.
I completely agree. And changes in business, including work conditions, need to have input from folks who do the work. The flexibility to improve a business has to be shown by both managers and workers.
Businesses are in business for profit, as they *should* be. They are needed for the stability of a society. Laws need to help provide that balance.
For the last 2 + decades of my 8-5 life, I never supervised anyone (OK with me, I was on the technical ladder). In efforts to improve working conditions and mission, to which we had some input, I developed the following motto: Never make it easy for a supervisor to make and arbitrary decision not in your favor. In other words, snow them with relevant information to aid their decision. If it still goes against you, you tried.
How do you judge whether a decision is “arbitrary?”
Dilbert lives!
Don’t stereotype.
Too many worker today thing that being asked to do their jobs, show up every day, and actually work a few hours constitutes abuse.
With incompetent Le Buffoon as Governor, all Mainers know it is a race to the bottom for the poorest, worse off state in the Union.
Most of our population is elderly and five years doesn’t look very rosy.
Public confidence is very much a reflection of state leadership. Look at what we have. An absolute disgrace in the Blaine House who constantly tells us how bad we are and then parrots ALEC/Koch Brother/TeaRadical solutions that are hurtful, harmful, divisive, and nowhere near our shared values. He is an arrogant, ignorant bully of the worst order, and his legislative cronies who rubber stamp his nonsense are nearly as bad. Watch for the good people of Maine to CRUSH the TeaRadicals in November thus putting the breaks on that horrid fool in the Blaine House, and then we’ll suffer through two more years of him and kick him right out on his backside where he belongs and get someone who actually respects the state and our values.
Interesting – a poll looking back over 18 months. ‘Bout the same amount of time we’ve had to put up with our current governor. No wonder some of the respondents are feeling pessimistic…
I wonder what the headlines will be tomorrow. Maybe, “Governor LePage Announces Formation of State Cheerleading Squad!”
A direct result of the lousy governor of Maine.
Based on those measures, is it a surprise to anyone? And having lived in Utah, there is no surprise they are Number 1…the LDS Church notwithstanding.
As I recall, more than 50% of the state is LDS.
Oh yeah…it’s around 60%, tho it is dropping. Around 80%+ of the legislature is LDS, and most of the reps/senators who aren’t are from Salt Lake City.
Nothing new. Life should be tough in Maine; and if you aren’t into the ‘elite’ and have to work for them, the struggle is worth the traits and character it develops. Work ethic…damn straight, 4 diff. jobs depending on what work is going around; high school diploma ain’t worth squat except to get into SMCC where I can become a licensed electrician or framer.
Pessimism is one of our great assets, so get to work, things ain’t getting better on their own.
Bill Nemitz: It’s not easy to save Guv from himself
By Bill Nemitz bnemitz@mainetoday.comColumnist
I’m not sure what the protocol is for this sort of thing, so I’m just going to go ahead and do it:
I hereby proclaim today Adrienne Bennett Appreciation Day.
I’m not kidding. After all she’s been through, first as Gov. Paul LePage’s
press secretary and now as his director of communications, Bennett
deserves at least one day when all of Maine pauses to thank her for her
willingness, day in and day out, to explain the man who defies
explanation.
Just ask a few of her predecessors.
“I worked for a governor who would listen,” recalled David Farmer, who served for four years as Gov. John Baldacci’s
communications director, in an interview Tuesday. “I’m not sure the
current governor does that — and I think that makes Adrienne’s job
very difficult.”
If not downright impossible.
Bennett’s latest travails stem from LePage’s claim on July 25 that
Maine students are “looked down upon” by colleges and universities
throughout the United States. And that the College of William &
Mary in Virginia will not look at an application from Maine without
first requiring “a placement exam to see if you qualify.”
The latest in a long line of “say what?” moments came during a news
conference intended to spur LePage’s education agenda. That objective,
like so many before it, got swept away in the stream of consciousness
that runs unchecked from LePage’s perpetually closed mind to his
ever-open mouth.
Still, lest we digress, our focus today is not on the Big Guy. It’s
on the poor woman we pay to stand between us and LePage and, like a
loyal soldier in a losing battle, stand her ground even while the
general beats a hasty retreat.
In an email Tuesday, Bennett politely declined comment on just how
tough a summer this has been. She didn’t need to — her attempts to
contain the damage from LePage’s latest gaffes demonstrate the futility
of speaking for a guy who sees facts as a luxury that his
administration simply can’t afford.
Late last week, after officials at William & Mary stated not
once but twice that they treat Maine students just like everyone else,
Bennett bravely stepped up and told Kennebec Journal reporter Susan
McMillan that “someone at the school” told LePage about the nonexistent
exam way back in 2005 … or maybe it was 2006.
Someone from the college?
“That’s my understanding,” said Bennett.
Then, on Monday, Bennett told the Bangor Daily News that the “looked
down upon” quote came not from any single experience or empirical
evidence after all. Rather, it sprang from Guv’s own “life experience.”
“He’s a businessman. It’s from his life experience of talking to
people,” Bennett told the newspaper. “While it’s anecdotal, he believes
it.”
Note that Bennett no longer claimed it was true — because it isn’t.
All she could do was draw a line between reality and LePage Land and
infer, with the poker face that’s now familiar to all of Maine, that
her boss prefers the latter.
The diss of his entire state, of course, came right on the heels of
LePage’s now-infamous description of the Internal Revenue Service as
“the new Gestapo” during a radio rant last month against the Affordable
Care Act.
Even as that one lit up the national news wires, a clearly
frustrated Bennett told the Maine media that when she wrote the radio
remarks for LePage, the Gestapo reference was not included. It came,
she said, after “healthy dialogue” about whether it was on-message and,
more importantly, an appropriate thing for Maine’s chief executive to
say.
Put more simply, Bennett tried to talk LePage out of uttering
something that was as moronic as it was offensive. He then went ahead
and said it anyway.
And therein lies Bennett’s dilemma.
As former Baldacci spokesman Farmer observed, “You can only do so
much to protect someone from themselves. And I think this governor is
much different in form and function than at least the other governors
I’ve known.”
Talk to Farmer and other past gubernatorial mouthpieces and a
palpable sympathy for Bennett emerges, along with a sense that her
place in front of the media is not augmented by a much-needed spot in
the governor’s inner circle.
Dennis Bailey, who was spokesman for Gov. Angus King, said he took the job on the condition that he have unfettered access to the man at the top.
“If I didn’t have access, I didn’t feel like I could do my job,”
said Bailey. In Bennett’s case, he said, “I get a sense that she’s not
in on the ground floor.”
Worse yet, Bailey said, Bennett doesn’t appear to play a big role in
crafting a message even after LePage’s foot-in-mouth moments hijack the
news cycle. Rather, he said, LePage “changes his story from day to day,
so she has to too.”
“You want to be in there while they’re cooking up that story so you can say, ‘Wait a minute, I’m not sure that’s going to work,'” Bailey said. “But I don’t think that’s her job.”
Even Dan Demeritt, who ran LePage’s communications operation for
just over a year and now writes an op-ed column for this newspaper,
noted that LePage’s “communications mishaps” made the press office “a
challenging environment to work in.”
Doubling back to clarify a policy statement or fix a flawed
statistic is one thing, Demeritt said. But when a governor tells his
own state that it’s “looked down upon” by the rest of the country,
well, that’s quite another.
“You can’t fix that,” Demeritt said. “You can’t go back and explain that away.”
Yet that is what Bennett tries, time and again, to do. And in the
process, her name becomes interchangeable with that of the governor who
seems hell-bent on turning his home state into a national punch line.
I know, I know, nobody forced Bennett to take the job. And she’s free to walk away anytime it becomes unbearable.
But I can’t help but feel sorry for the woman as she looks into the
camera and takes one hit after another for a governor who has done
nothing to earn such loyalty.
“She’s shown a toughness that cannot be denied,” said Farmer, who
remembers Bennett as a competent Bangor-based television reporter who
once covered the Baldacci administration. “I mean she’s tough as nails,
buddy, and she’s taking it.”
Unlike the buffoon hiding behind her.
Isn’t there a BDN limit to how much tripe a single post can contain?
Tripe or Truth? They both hurt when you’re smacked with a big old bucket of it, huh Wayne?
Tripe? – Yes! Truth? – I will know when I see or hear some of it! It is pretty rare on this thread!
Notice that the “worst state” category has all Tea Party governors. Pessimism is high in Maine not because our people are negative by nature but because we see the damage occurring in our schools and communities.
If you haven’t yet figured it out, the Tea Party is not who they say they are. They are not concerned citizens who want to make America better for workers and families. The Tea Party is an activist pro-corporate movement made to look like a populist movement while it is entirely funded and beholden to corporate interests. Whether we are talking about Christie in NJ or LePage in Maine, Scott in FL or Brewer in AZ, the situation on the ground is pretty much the same. Our essential services are being decimated to pay for corporations and wealthy individuals to get tax breaks.
We are pessimistic because we see the destruction of the institutions we counted upon to advance the common good and general prosperity. We are pessimistic because we know that our government of the people has been usurped and now big money runs the show. We are pessimistic because these highly unpopular ideas are contagious and the good ideas that civic minded people can rally around are never advanced.
There is a reason for optimism, though. America has been here before. We were comparably corrupt and dysfunctional in the late 1890s and early 1900s. Then came anti-trust laws and the new deal that brought about spectacular progress. Hang in there neighbors. We are a broken society today but we will find our way through this. At the end of the day, unless things start looking up for workers, there is little to be optimistic about. Instead of the old meme “it’s the economy, stupid” we need to rally around a new one: “it’s our wages, stupid”.
The US has squandered it’s wealth on welfare, toys, nation building, environmentalism, and progressive programs.
The wealth is gone, the industrial base that created it is gone, and the bill for all the waste and corruption is coming due.
Progressives are either in denial or depressed and pessimistic.
And don’t forget the costs of two wars.
Squandered on environmentalism? toys? what does this even mean?
We squander, yes, mostly on military and nation building. As for welfare, do you realize how small what we spend on welfare really is?
You have been lied to and shame on you for believing it without researching to figure out why none of it makes any sense.
You forgot Wisconsin.
I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t like higher wages, so that’s an appealing fantasy you have there, but if the economy doesn’t improve first, where do you suppose the money to improve wages will come from?
From the corporations themselves. Understand that never in the history of this nation have corporations made more profits. Have you read the news the last decade?
Fantasy it is as long as people like yourself continue to make excuses for the poor corporations and their CEOs who earn, on average, 400 times what they pay their workers.
As soon as labor is paid more, corporations will see increased demand and will need to hire more people. The problem is that we have killed the goose that lays the golden eggs, the productive wage earner who loves to consume but no longer can afford to.
But short of a government takeover of all major corporations, what might persuade them to pay out a higher percentage of profits to workers? It seems to me that labor is subject to the forces of supply and demand. If you have a skill that’s in limited supply, then someone will be willing to pay you well for it. If you don’t have a valuable skill that’s in limited supply, then why should anyone pay you well? I’m not making excuses for fat cat ceo’s as you seem to assume, but just prefer to have a discussion grounded in reality to hopefully arrive at a real solution. If you want to get paid more, learn a valuable skill. Sorry, but that’s what it comes down to.
The answer to that is so simple I am a bit shocked you do not know. The answer is organized labor unions.
Without them, you, your children and the generations to come will be pitted against the most inhumane labor conditions to make a buck.
As we weaken unions more and more, wages for all earners fall. This is where we are being misled by our leaders. They tell you to rail against the unions because they are corrupt and that they are only benefiting “others” when in fact they benefit you and your wages.
Corporations can and should pay the most productive workforce more but choose obscene profits instead.
CEOs have proven that they are the most despicable Americans by impoverishing workers so they personally can have more than they could possibly ever spend.
I have valuable skills and so do a hundred million other American workers, but none of us are getting ahead.
How convenient that these CEOs can buy the media and convince you to help them keep you poorer. What a deal for them. Why are you so easily duped? Don’t you care about your kids having a future?
I do hope you’re over your shock by now, but get ready for an even bigger one, I’m a member in good standing of a labor union and have been for over 27 years, so just possibly you’re making a few wrong assumptions. I support labor unions that engage in collective bargaining to ensure a safe workplace and get workers a fair hearing before they can be fired without cause and even to get workers what they are worth in pay and benefits from big, powerful corporations who otherwise might abuse the power they have over them. But I’m NOT for labor unions getting barely skilled or unskilled workers more in pay and benefits than their employment benefits their boss and I feel that way for the simple reason that it’s just not sustainable over time so you’re soon back to square one when your employer goes out of business or exports the jobs to somewhere else where there are no labor unions. That’s reality.
But labor unions aren’t the answer to Maine’s economic problems. Skilled workers like licensed electricians and plumbers and even contractors are doing OK without a labor union. Those who are good at what they do are in high demand and making a good living even in this downturn. Maine doesn’t have a lot of large groups of workers who are being abused or held down by the greedy corporations making obscene profits, as you say and with all our over-regulation and high costs, that’s not going to change. The vast majority of jobs in Maine just aren’t conducive to labor unions doing the workers much good. What do you think the effect on Maine jobs might be if the people who work at grocery store registers or at WalMart or waiters and waitresses or as lobstermen, were all unionized and their pay was significantly increased. Can YOU afford to pay significantly more every time you go out to dinner or go pick something up at a store? I can’t either. Lots of us Mainers are jacks of all trades and before we’ll pay a union scale wage to someone, we’ll choose to do it ourselves or just do without. The bottom line is that for anyone to be able to receive good pay over a long period of time, their employment HAS to earn their employer more than he is paying them AND there has to NOT be hordes of other people all clamoring and able to do that same job for less money than he will. So, whether you like it or not, if you live in Maine and want to make more money, you need to make yourself valuable at doing something that not everyone else is able or willing to do and you need to do it well.
I love that Mississippi is at the bottom of a bunch of the categories but also thinks things will be so much better in 5 years. When you’re at the bottom, nowhere to go but up, I guess!
As Maine goes…..so goes the nation!!
Of course you didn’t.That would have been after 8 years of Bush.Your name explains it.
Pessimistic, in Maine?? How tell?? Well in the 60’s we got the coyote. The rich got all the sardine factories closed by taxes and quota’s, so they would not get their boat hulls dirty. They put corrosive salt on the roads and up the requirements of an inspection on autos. We travel long distances to work, for usually under 10.00 a hour. The out of staters have bought up most homes and the real estate people have worked to get prices as high as they can for better fee for them. We have one hundred percent taxation on property, I think it is closer to one hundred and fiftypercent of value. We are called lazy, un-educated, fat, ignorant, un-healthy , wanting something for nothing welfare bums, and the Gov is ashamed that a man of his importance has to represent us. But, pessimistic why would we be??
Rechannel your pessimism into optimism for next November by vowing now to vote against all republicans and LePage sycophants.
Clearly you are a believer! However, the people in Jim Jones’ Guiana colony were believers also – until they drank the coolaid!
It’s been this way for 30 years don’t fool yourself
I have read enough of the posts on this thread to reinforce my opinion that I should never move the electronics manufacturing company I own to Maine (even though it is now in the “peoples republic of New York.”)
Maine – the “you owe me state!”
I’m happy with ny section 8, food stamps, free babysitter, free car, free car repairs,Heep-The way life should be.Romney said I had to work for my welfare he not getting my vote
Today a rubric in the newspaper reads, “Maine is most pessimistic among states for standard of living, Gallup poll finds.”
Nothing can be done about it. Let’s sit around and blame the other guy for this sorry state of affairs.
But then, in the article, we read that “North Dakota led the job creation index and those employed full-time.”
This is neither a fluke nor an economic miracle. You have read elsewhere that North Dakota has its own state bank. North Dakota money stays in North Dakota to circulate and help small businesses in North Dakota and is not siphoned off to the Cayman Islands by international banks.
You might have heard that if you are a Maine businessman with borrowing habits up in the millions, by law you must do business with a big out of state bank (that is too big to fail) and not with a local bank. Guess who lobbies for these laws?
If we had a Maine state bank would not Maine also be up there at the top with the job creators and residents who are employed full-time?
If you have read about the North Dakota state bank you know that it is denigrated by Republicans as an example of Socialism.
If it takes Socialism to keep money in a state, create jobs and employ people full-time, could we not compromise our standards just a little and establish a Maine State Bank?
To lend it an aura of respectability we could call it the Credit Suisse Me II.
The humble Farmer
With a state full of liberal cry babies, how did you expect us to fair in this type of poll. Especially with a Governor who holds them accountable for their robbery of tax-payers pockets, and doesn’t kiss their whiny little butts.
This comment defies rebuttal.
The humble Farmer
well yah Maine is clear up here in the US and the jobs are not here and no one is doing anything about getting those jobs back that can and have the power to.. but what do we know? Right we only LIVE here! And it don’t end with jobs either.. but the taxes and the things we get billed for on our billings and just this state in general.. it is turning into nothing more then a tourist state.. come see Maine during the season.. then there is nothing..
An organization often reflects its’ leadership.
I can’t see how anyone would blame us for being pessimistic we have the worst Governor in the history of our great State of Maine, and probably the worst legislature as well. The Teaparty movement is proving to be a flash in the pan, so if we are lucky things will get better. They certainly can not get any worse.
LiveScience.com named Maine as the 25th happiest state in 2011. (http://www.livescience.com/13107-happiest-states-2010-list.html) Happy and pessimistic, what does that mean? I’m happy know, but I don’t think it will last?
We’re just more realistic than the Pollyannas of other states. We know the future isn’t going to be better, so why fool ourselves?
Success breeds success, which breeds optimism. From my vantage point there are lots of great entrepreneurs doing interesting things in Maine. We’re close to a tipping point where the community of innovators is going to be able to tell a very different story about this state. Extremist loud mouths, please let those who are actually doing something to create Maine’s future get their important work done.
It’s not the Governor, it’s not politics….It’s the lack of progression mentally and socially that Mainers have.
It is fact that Maine has an older population and only natural that they may feel insecure about their future. I know I do. Generally, I don’t perceive Maine as being on a slide, but as an older person, I personally feel like I am on a slippery slope. I consider myself an optimistic person, but I am not optimistic at this stage of the game at having a better standard of living in the future. But, that feeling is more due to my age than anything else. I’d like to see how the responses break down demographically. I know one thing for sure, though, and it is that negativity breeds more negativity and pessimism. So, those of you that like to complain are part of the problem.