October 18, 2017
Business Latest News | Poll Questions | Haunted Maine | Obamacare | Anthony Sanborn

Comments for: Votes are tallied, but uncertainties for business community remain

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Well..when cost get to high and cuts need to be.made to survive..business people should let o ba ma voters go first…they voted for it!

    • Anonymous

      And how are you going to determine that?

      • Anonymous

        Guess, and look at their bumpa stickers.  I would fire a liberal way before I would a Republican or Democrat

        • I am making a list….like Santa!

          • Anonymous

            ….so are corporate lobbyists — they’ll get everything, too. Dens throw crumbs to keep the poor in line; Republicans mobilize a police state for the same purpose.

        • Anonymous

            First, look for anyone driving a Prius…

          Second, look for those with family leave who always miss either a Monday or Friday….

          I could go on, but the gist of it is that Obama voters are distinguished
          by their poor work ethics in general.  that makes them easy to
          identify.

          • Anonymous

             Agree for most part Trickle, the majority of Mainers have voted that they prefer the welfare state where government says they do not really have to work at all. They express much hatred for those that think otherwise. I am a fairly conservative military person that does drive a Prius and like it. I find Obama liberals more prefer Volts, til running out of power 40 miles down road.

          • Anonymous

            LOL, Yes, a few conservatives do drive a Prius. You are right, the Volt would have been a better choice in my post!
            Thinking of the Volt, did you see that other opinion piece about reducing CO2 emissions? The writer promoted the idea that in a few years the majority of Mainers would own at least one electric car.
            Yep, like most Mainers can AFFORD a Volt or ever will be able to. Never mind that in the winter when it is cold I think you may get 15 miles out of that battery. I could go on about the total pie in the sky thinking in that piece.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t agree with that item either in the piece you mentioned.  However, many of the other points are well taken and we do have to continue to reduce CO2 emissions.

          • Anonymous

            Haven’t you heard?  If you are wealthy enough to afford a $40,000 car, the government will pay $7000 of the sticker price.  Just one of many handouts to the middle class and wealthy…..

          • Anonymous

            So how is it that Americans log more paid hours than anyone on this planet? We are also pretty complacent about low, welfare- subsidized wages for our wealthiest corporations. Heaven forbid business should have to pay the actual cost of labor it needs! ….or pay for anything, for that matter. Working families on the other hand had better pony up for those subsidies to relieve delicate “job creators” of taxation ’cause that’s theft. And if you ” don’t want to work for less than it costs you to survive, then you are lazy…. ….you don’t want to work!” Here is a news flash for you: people don’t work for the joy of servitude; happily enduring working poverty for their betters. They work to take care of their families and lives.

          • Anonymous

             “So how is it that Americans log more paid hours than anyone on this planet?”

            That might have something to do with our prosperity and why in general even the poor here are better off than many of those in other parts of the world who are considered “rich” there.

          • Anonymous

            Checked out the demographics in California lately? so much for that dream, it’s buried under all the grifters and corrupt crony capitalist liberals.

          • Anonymous

            Wealth is not measured in hours of work! Half of Americans are poorer than a generation ago in spite of their long work days! The total wage base is much smaller even though productivity is sky high. We are working harder for less, and “the market” won’t end it — only self governance.

          • Anonymous

            Our hard work, today, is contributing to the “prosperity” of very few — 93% of the income gains have gone to the 1%.  

            The productivity gains are not going to wages; workers are not “prospering” from their hard work.

          • Anonymous

             “don’t want to work for less than it costs you to survive, then you are lazy” So what do you do? Not work at all (cause they don’t pay enough) and live totally of the government or work and make what you can (with some help from the government) still you get raises or find a better paying jobs?  The latter was what I did in my younger years, till I finally worked my way up to where I could earn enough on my own to support my family. I didn’t sit home hoping someone else would support me and my family.

          • Anonymous

            When some of us were young, waves were higher. That was not an accident of the market, but public policy.

            There was a concerted effort in then’70s to discipline labor and enrich shareholders. Today, our largest private employer gobbles up a half million dollars PER STORE in welfare wage subsidies. Is this O.K with you? Why should parents subsidize the labor costs of the companies their children work for but cannot live on the proceeds?

            “An honest days pay for an honest days work”. Now THAT’s how you value hard work!

          • Anonymous

             My point was, it’s better to work and get some help from the gov. then stay home and be totally supported by the gov. At least out working……opportunities may come along. Sitting at home all ya get is a welfare check.

          • Anonymous

            I resent subsidizing the labor costs of those employers.  If I’m going to pay them to work, I’m happy to give them a job, but NOT for Wal-Mart!  

            Even a robber baron, like Henry Ford understood, that good wages were needed for consumer spending to run the economy”…no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By “business” I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.” ~FDR

            “The issue isn’t jobs; slaves had jobs, the issue is wages.” ~Jim Hightower

          • Anonymous

            See my response to Trickle.  Also, Obama voters are in the majority.

          • Anonymous

            Shooting blanks again?

            “The biggest vote loser was Barack Obama, who received 10 million fewer votes than 2008, but Mitt Romney also received almost 3 million fewer votes than John McCain.

            John McCain’s votes in 2008 would have beaten Barack Obama this time…. Only 51.56% of L.A. County voters cast their votes in 2012, compared to 65.6% in 2008, and 67.9% in 2004. Barack Obama received 700,000 fewer votes in 2012 than 2008, and got 300,000 fewer votes in the county than John Kerry did in 2004.”

            Gary Johnson, the libertarian, received more than twice the number of votes in this low-turnout election than Bob Barr did in 2008, for a total of 1,139,562. The Ron Paul movement is real and they didn’t vote for Obama.

            The millenium voters who turned out in such large numbers in 2008 for Obama are aging and now in the grip of systemic unemployment, higher taxes, crushing student loans, inflation, and unsustainable wages…..they DID NOT turn out for Obama in large numbers this election and won’t in the future. 

            Why did they disengage from voting this time?

            The engagement of voters of all ages in 2008, based in Barack Obama’s positive, simple message of hope and change, has changed to cynicism, pundit-based partisanship and a confused, fragmented society. This is a country where today, the most-reported fact about a candidate like Tammy Baldwin is that she is the first “out” lesbian to be elected to the U.S. Senate, even though Tammy has many qualifications in addition to her sexual preference. It is also a country where in many people’s minds, the most notable thing about Barack Obama is that he is the nation’s first black president.”
            ….by Amy Sterling Casil

          • Anonymous

            What’s your point? His win was a landslide. 

          • Anonymous

            His point was that total turnout was lower by about 13 million voters from 2008. (still waiting for final totals)  Something yet to be analyzed happened.
            Maybe these were conservative voters disappointed by Romney running. There were fewer white voters than can be explained by demographic shifts.

          • Anonymous

             One other thing. Even with a low white voter turnout it was not a landslide. It wasn’t in 2008 and was less so this time around. At least 35% of previous election winning margins were higher than both Obama victories.

          • Anonymous

            LOL 332 is a landslide. 

          • Anonymous

             Nope, Not even close.

            Wki:
            Electoral votes

            James Monroe’s 231 electoral votes to John Quincy Adams’s 1 electoral vote in 1820. (99.2% margin)Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 523 electoral votes to Alf Landon’s 8 electoral votes in 1936. (97% margin)Ronald Reagan’s 525 electoral votes to Walter Mondale’s 13 electoral votes in 1984. (95.2% margin)Richard Nixon’s 520 electoral votes to George McGovern’s 17 electoral votes and John Hospers’s 1 in 1972. (93.3% margin)

            These are landslides:

            1912: Democrat Woodrow Wilson
            defeats Progressive Theodore Roosevelt by 2.2 million votes (Republican
            incumbent William Taft finished third) and wins Electoral College 435 to 88.(asterisk)
            1920: Republican Warren G. Harding defeats Democrat James Cox by 7 million votes and wins Electoral College 404 to 127.
            1924: Republican incumbent Calvin Coolidge defeats Democrat John Davis by 7.3 million votes and wins Electoral College 382 to 136.(asterisk)
            1928: Republican Herbert Hoover defeats Democrat Al Smith by 6.4 million votes and wins Electoral College 444 to 87.
            1932: Democrat Franklin Roosevelt defeats Republican incumbent Herbert Hoover by 7.1 million votes and wins Electoral College 472 to 59.
            1936: Democratic incumbent Franklin Roosevelt defeats Republican Alf Landon by 11 million votes and wins Electoral College 523 to 8.
            1940: Democratic incumbent Franklin Roosevelt defeats Republican Wendell Wilkie by 5 million votes and wins Electoral College 449 to 82.
            1944: Democratic incumbent Franklin Roosevelt defeats Republican Thomas Dewey by 3.5 million votes and wins Electoral College 432 to 99.
            1952: Republican Dwight Eisenhower defeats Democrat Adlai Stevenson by 6.6 million votes and wins Electoral College 442 to 89.
            1956: Republican incumbent Dwight Eisenhower defeats Democrat Adlai Stevenson by 9.6 million votes and wins Electoral College 457 to 73.(asterisk)
            1964: Democratic incumbent Lyndon Johnson defeats Republican Barry Goldwater by 15.9 million votes and wins Electoral College 486 to 52.
            1972: Republican incumbent Richard Nixon defeats Democrat George McGovern by 18 million votes and wins Electoral College 520 to 17.(asterisk)
            1980: Republican Ronald Reagan defeats Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter by 8.4 million votes and wins Electoral College 489 to 49.
            1984: Republican incumbent Ronald Reagan defeats Democrat Walter Mondale by 16.9 million votes and wins Electoral College 525 to 13.
            1988: Republican George H.W. Bush defeats Democrat Michael Dukakis by 7.1 million votes and wins Electoral College 426 to 111.

          • Anonymous

            LOL! 332 to 206 is a huge. This is pathetic. You lost and it was bad. Get over it. 

            What wasn’t close was this election. Not at all. 

          • Anonymous

             332 to 206  is fewer Electoral Votes than he received last time and historically is pretty run-of-the mill.

          • Anonymous

            It’s a massive win and you don’t have the integrity to admit as much. 

          • Anonymous

            And the hyperbolic, sweeping generalizations and labeling keep coming.  However, why did I expect them to quit?  I could make some equally sweeping generalizations about Romney voters but I’ll refrain from being dragged down into the mire.  At least I hope these responses are not typical of ALL Romney voters.

          • Anonymous

            Satire. I know, liberals had their funny bone surgically removed….

            However, regardless of party affiliation, those with a poor work ethic should be fired. call it a life lesson, learning event, kick in the pants, etc….

          • Anonymous

            “poor work ethic” are the people the unions usually protect. As an ex-union member, this is what I saw. I also saw for twenty years the good employees never need the unions protection.

          • Anonymous

            The right to bargain collectively is a basic human right; outlined in the U.N. Declaration we signed in 1948.  

            Our recent history has seen more abuses from organized capital — or corporations. Why aren’t their rights to form corporations panned in the same way as unions are?  Oh, right, there is no right to form a corporation.  

            Wages have fallen for good employees and bad, because they are not tied to productivity; just what disproportionate power can leverage.  

            I dare say your working conditions/wages were better than those of today, and FAR better than during the so-called “Golden Age” before labor standards…. You have unions to thank.

        • Anonymous

          Oh my.  I guess we know who not to work for.  Knowing that, displaying bumper stickers would not be wise move.  Also, those vindictive business practices could get them on improper firing policies.

      • Anonymous

         First, look for anyone driving a Prius…

        Second, look for those with family leave who always miss either a Monday or Friday….

        I could go on, but the gist of it is that Obama voters are distinguished by their poor work ethics in general.  that makes them easy to identify.

        • Anonymous

          …..so how is it that red states more heavily rely on welfare programs?

        • Anonymous

          See my previous comment to your similar/identical post.  I don’t drive a Prius, when working my company finally realized that personal time was more fair to all than sick time  (and I didn’t take Mondays and Fridays off, either).  I worked long hours with good work ethics, thanks very much.  I did vote for Obama and although not a registered Democrat, have not voted for a Republican for President in some time (if ever).

          • Anonymous

            I know of a department in a company with 5 employees. 4 have FMLAs, (family leave and as soon as one runs out they reapply for another), 2 of which are highly questionable but by law CANNOT actually be questioned. Those 2 seem to coordinate quite well and consistently take off Mondays or Fridays but never the both of them on the same day. The department works on a rotating 4 day workweek so all 5 days are staffed. At least 1 and often 2 days a week only 1 person actually shows up for work.

          • Anonymous

            Sounds like you are an IINO.
            Independent In Name Only.

        • trisailer

           Is this some new racial profiling you’ve worked out? Prius…? 

          The facts show that there are huge productivity increases while wages are dropping. You are wrong.

    • Anonymous

      When costs of doing business get too high and cuts need to be made to survive business owners will do exactly as they’ve done in the past…flee the State of Maine.

      • trisailer

         …and go where? Where would you go that is a better business environment?

        • Anonymous

          “Business friendly” is code for authoritarian regime with an enormous corporate nanny states that knows how to keep labor cheap and under control. That’s why our economy is so dependent on that sort of thing. If business were so interested in “small gummit ‘” then it would be flocking to, say Somalia rather than Communist China.

          • Anonymous

            TIF me baby!

          • Anonymous

            TIF’s… ….part of the conservative nanny state

        • Anonymous

          Right now, Tennessee and British Columbia, heck, even Quebec are looking pretty good as are some places in Brazil and even S.E. Asia.  Businesses move to where their markets are, or where their raw materials and other resources are; which means a forest products business will nearly always stay in Maine, but say a Web design or infotech firm will move to where it’s labor pool is deepest and potential buyers are. 

          • Anonymous

            Business moves to where it is subsidized. Look at China. “No industrialist ever faced a free market”.

          • trisailer

             Your correct of course. Managing a business well is about keeping all your options open. I live in SE Asia and there is opportunity here, but there is also corruption and political instability. If you can find a honest partner in Thailand you might do ok, but there are risks to be weighed.

            I’ve been looking at value added crops that can grow in tropical environments. There is a steady increase in demand for blueberries and avocados and my wife’s aunt has a organic farm. Avocados are through the roof over here.

            Maine has tremendous opportunity for exploiting natural gas if the governor would get off his duff. Maine could lead the way with CNG infrastructure and conversion for vehicles while supplying homes.

    • Anonymous

      Of course all businesses have a God given right to “survive”, but actual human beings? ….a perversion of Darwin.

      I worked in the corporate nanny state — shocking.

      • Anonymous

        Me too.  Not exactly a bed of roses.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry about the employee making the statement they made to the unemployment office. That is just the justice system in general and not pointed towards businesses. Anyone can go in and spout out things about anyone true or not, and suddenly they are in power and the accused is on the blacklist, and good luck getting a court date. . . .

    Another reason I think that there should be two witnesses to the same overt act before one can hurt someone else’s life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but making such comments. Not just for counts of treason. Actually, these are counts of treason too, just not geared towards the United States government.

  • Anonymous

    Said it once already America voted for a Status quo We have the government we deserve

    • County Escapee

      Thursday’s AM news mentioned that as soon as the victory celebration was over, Wall Street took a nosedive. I suppose there was some disappointment on their part, too.

      • Anonymous

        Yes, and anyone with a 401K and/or other investments they have worked and saved for must be disappointed, too.  Start likin’ it.

        • Anonymous

          The investor class has done remarkably well, thank you very much, with Obama in office. The lives of people working harder and harder for less and less? ….are nearly as insecure as they would be under the rule of Mittens the Romneytron.

          • Anonymous

            I’m afraid you’re totally wrong. Portfolios have barely recovered their lost value after 2008, if at all. Investment strategies now include many foreign holdings, further weakening the US economy at the expense of a viable portfolio.

            People like Sussman, who run tax shelters in the Virgin Islands are doing well; but that isn’t the only tax shelter in the world that is welcoming the flight of capital from the U.S. 

            Industrial America has been largely replaced by a land of automated machines run by technicians with technical degrees; not from ‘make work’ programs crafted by the White House. The unemployed are also uneducated and there are fewer and fewer places in the new economy where they have a role to play, so the underground illicit economy is alive and well, and the jails full of thieves. 

            Name calling like your stupid ‘mittens the Romneytron’ label, won’t correct the death spiral of the Obama economy; nor will a return to the tax policies of tax, borrow, spend and get the future generations to pay it all back.

            The only song the ‘timbered choir’ will sing will be whining for more food supplements and other government benefits…and unless you’re in Obama’s Black ‘choir’ you’re getting leftovers for dinner.

          • Anonymous

            Investors have, in fact, done just fine. Of course there is a world of difference between retired working people and the wealthiest shareholders like Romney. I was referring to the latter.

            One reason I am not a Democrat (I voted for Jill Stein) is this: instead of standing for an honest days pay for an honest days work; livable wages, Democrats believe organized capital is entitled to whatever it can leverage….then throws humiliating crumbs at ” the working poor” — welfare is, for them, an instrument of control rather than investment. For example: 2 people, same job: one is paid a living wage the other uses food stamps. Their view of themselves is very different. Not good for self governance.

          • Anonymous

            I voted for a local Green, Fred Horch….who lost. The ‘victory’ party was a mish mosh of ideologues and practical politics, and you could have probably heard the same complaining at a Romney gathering. 

            “Democrats believe”…love to see what they really believe and how it governs their voting behavior…they are hyperemotional and easily stimulated by racist, sexist, and class warfare appeals…the metaphors are only fluff floating out of their mouths. 

            Def. agree on your observation about organized labor(you said ‘capital’) believing they are entitled to whatever they can leverage, sat in on too many teacher union contract negotiations to realize how many different ways a person’s wages can be supplemented and subsidized with union bargaining. 

            Retired working people and those having to pay for their pension plans are in fear of losing all they have saved for; and that fact is underling by the plunge in the markets over the past two days and the mess in Europe.

            Turning everyone into a ward of the state is not a good plan; neither is duplicating Haiti or Nigeria in Maine.

          • Anonymous

            When I said organized capital – I meant capital.  Wal Mart is doing a great job of turning everyone into a ward of the state.  If we taxpayers have to pay their wages, then, I would rather they worked for us; for the common good.  Heck, it may be more fulfilling.  Neither hard work nor education gets people into the middle class — you must negotiate you way in.  I’m too young to remember labor union corruption, and see plenty of abuses on the part of “organized capital”.  If you want to deny the right to bargain collectively (part of the U.N. charter of human rights), then, to be fair, we should start yanking corporate charters.  Retired workers have everything to fear; working people fear never having a pension at all because of falling wages.  Self governance is the solution; not prostration to the “free market” and corporate rule.

          • Anonymous

            If you believe that the Obama administration is responsible for the contuniuing effects of the 2008 economic crisis, you have a point only in that he hired Clinton Third Way holdovers like Larry Summers and Wall Street executives like Bernake and Geitner who helped create the conditions of the crash. While working stiff porfolios have yet to recover, large corporations that have no allegiance to U.S. interests and the uber-rich have prospered from the policies of the past thirty years of financial deregulation. Also, crime is down. But thanks for bringing race into the equation. It really shines the turd of your argument against the poor who bear the brunt of these policies.

      • Anonymous

         They made a bad decision and  backed the wrong horse  and are afraid of the potential consequences.

         In 2008 they saw the shift in the wind and changed their contributions accordingly  to minimize the  political damage. They hedged their bets.

        This year they placed all their bets on ONE horse  and  never shifted and that horse lost. What we saw yesterday was a collective gasp…OMG we backed the wrong horse.

        • County Escapee

          In a nutshell, yes.

      • Anonymous

        Would have happened no matter who won.  Investors are spooked because of the  impending “cliff”.

        • Anonymous

           Buy on the dips. Obama/Bernanke have been artificially supporting the market. There is no real reason cliff or no cliff that would change.

        • Anonymous

           and who created and fabricated “the cliff”?  thsjould have and still can just lift the debt ceiling like they have done millions of times before  without batty an eye.

    • Anonymous

      well no,  we didn’t get to vote the Gov out, but did vote everyone else out..

  • Anonymous

    Sequestration would have been an issue either way.

  • trisailer

    I would think that Mr. Huntington would be glad to see democrats take power in Augusta. One of the pressing issues for Maine is heating costs. Democrats are much more likely to support conservation and him being in the insulation business would benefit. I think we’re going to see more attention given to global warming at the national level and we will need a stimulus at some point to kick the economy in gear.

    I’m glad Mr. Huntington mentioned business regulation. I know several small business owners in Maine. They are crafts people who are very good at their craft, but not such good managers or professional businessmen. For decades during the boom times, they did very well in spite of their flaws at managing a business. There is no question that bookkeeping and organizational stuff is a PITA but it is so for everyone including their competitors. It seems to me that when times get tough the one area of opportunity is to grab market share. You get that by getting better at the business aspects of the job.

    The issues of employees is a well developed business science. Employees have rights as they should, but business can learn the laws and practices and still be able to make hiring and firing decisions if they have the proper paperwork. Another area where you can get a competitive advantage over your competition who does not know the rules. I’ve hired and fired a lot of people in my career and it was never a problem to give the employee every chance to correct their deficiencies and if I had to fire them I had the proper paperwork. It is simply professional management. One party or the other is not going to change giving employees basic job protections. If you want to save the cost of paying his unemployment than do the job of management.

    What businesses need is customers. When the economy declines it is actually the best time to out compete your competition by becoming better at business. Tax cuts and all that may help in the short run, but your competitors are getting them too.  I’ve bought businesses that were on tough times and everyone of them was do to poor management.

    • Anonymous

      I think Mr Humtington was speaking about the bias in the state agencies. That bias would exist whether there was documentation on the employee or not.

      • Anonymous

        But he didn’t provide real evidence of the bias. 

        • Anonymous

           You can only prove bias if you are a liberal. ;-)

          • Anonymous

            You said he was speaking about bias — if he doesn’t prove it, then all it is is talk and not reality. 

          • Anonymous

            Perhaps the author of the piece in his liberal bias chose not to expound on Huntington’s comments. We will never know. Or perhaps if had then you would say the evidence is only anecdotal.

      • trisailer

         What bias? The state agencies role is to see to it that workers rights are respected which is not in conflict with a professional managers role. Employers who understand the process and what is expected of them will not have a problem. There is a requirement to document performance and a progressive process of warnings and review of objectives that gives an employee the chance to correct their deficiencies. If the process is followed there is no room for bias.

    • Anonymous

      I just negotiated a consultant’s fee down to $100/hr; primarily because that’s all Eff. Maine is allowing for this contract. 

      No one I know ‘hire’s employees’. We hire part time workers and consultants who are self employed and self insured. Fortunately my labor pool is almost world wide; and using the WEB I can engage a far off consultant in on-site analysis using video conferencing technology. Slick and about as cheap as it gets. 

      Customers are another matter; and by subsidizing immigrants you make their exclusive businesses thrive, i.e. little Mogadishu on Lisbon Street or Home Depot; not much left for the rest of us. 

      • trisailer

         The other side of the coin is some are adapting and making the best of the technology. I also know people who are making the best of the changing economy by staying flexible and utilizing all the tools and information available.

        I think it boils down to skill and excellence and there is always an opportunity to gain a edge on your competition. It sounds like your doing it and you might agree that your business could not thrive if you didn’t.

        We as a country have to understand the issues of the macro and micro economies, long term and short term investment. Maine is well suited to community based markets that keeps money in Maine, but has global reach. The government has a role in facilitating small business by supporting the development of community based business that has a global reach.

        In the larger picture the government has a role in attracting and sustaining investment. That 25 trillion parked offshore is not contributing to our economy and the fact that it accumulated so quickly is evidence of a back door drain sucking the life out of the economy.

        I think the government also has a role in assisting people to achieve some kind of success that makes life more fulfilling. A lot of people can do this on their own and that’s great because they will be the leaders, but some people have to be exposed to ideas and opportunities that they can be attracted to and motivated by.

        I think we had our fling with greed so now maybe we can settle in for the long run.

  • Anonymous

    After $60 BILLION spent on political advertisements, the stadium was full and the confetti was flying at President Obama’s Chicago “victory” party.  

    IF one didn’t know better you would think the Democratic party had just WON the Super Bowl and everything was wonderful in the United States.

    Great high paying Congress jobs, Congress staff jobs, media jobs and tax exempt “think tank” organization jobs in DC and Virginia.

    Several hundred thousand jobs.  People living the good life,  speculating daily on CSPAN about the priorities ahead.  Abortion vs pro life, the benefits for eleven (11) million illegal citizens, unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and a sharp cut in reimbursements for doctors participating in Medicare.

    _____________________________

    National debt / “fiscal cliff” article from today’s AP:

    “fiscal cliff” that has the financial markets rattled and economists and policymakers alike in a tizzy over the potential for sending the economy into another tailspin?

    It’s a one-two punch of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and major across-the-board spending cuts to the Pentagon and domestic programs that could total $800 billion next year, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates.

    The cliff is the punishment for previous failures of a bitterly-divided Congress and White House to deal with the government’s spiraling debt or overhaul its unwieldy tax code.

    The largest component of the cliff comes with the expiration of tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 and extended two years ago in the wake of President Barack Obama’s drubbing in the 2010 midterm elections.

    It also includes sharp spending cuts imposed as a consequence of the failure of last year’s deficit-reduction supercommittee” to reach agreement. There are other elements, chiefly a 2 percentage point cut in payroll taxes orchestrated by Obama and unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless that would disappear.

    Specifically, the fiscal cliff includes:

    _The expiration of Bush-era tax cuts on income, investments, married couples and families with children and inheritances.

    _A $55 billion, 9 percent cut in defense spending next year and another $55 billion in cuts to domestic programs, including a 2 percent cut to Medicare providers.

    _The expiration of unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and a sharp cut in reimbursements for doctors participating in Medicare.

    _The expiration of Obama’s temporary 2 percentage point cut in payroll taxes.

    _The imposition of the alternative minimum tax on some 26 million households, which would raise their taxes by an average of $3,700.

    _A variety of smaller taxes cuts for both businesses and individuals collectively known as tax “extenders” in Washington-speak. They include a tax credit for research and development and a deduction for sales taxes in states that don’t have an income tax.

    A Congressional Budget Office study in May estimated that the fiscal cliff would force tax hikes and spending cuts totaling over $600 billion in the first nine months of next year — or perhaps $800 billion or so over the entire year if allowed to stay in effect.

    __________________

    My position:

    No budget and NATO (No Action, Talk Only) for the past four years.  What lies ahead is the LAST DEPRESSION.  Not a recession as Congress and the media discuss the nation’s financial woes and the “fiscal cliff”, but a Depression.

    The “quality of life” is funneling around the drain.  Olympia couldn’t stand it any longer and retired.

    The #1 priority should be sequestration and the nation’s ELEVEN (11) TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT.  

    I remember well my grandfather educating me about the Depression.  Born in 1880, a man who was doing well until the Depression.  Grandpa, like many hard working Americans, lost but didn’t give up.  He worked until he “retired” at the age of 72.   He didn’t care much for politicians, particularly FDR.

    One morning when I was four & Grampy was 82 I asked him why.

    ” Figures don’t lie but liars sure can figure ” followed by “talk is cheap but it takes money to buy rum.”  This from a man who never drank.

    Politicians in the Maine & United States Congress are professional speakers that smile for the cameras daily.  The question is whether they will wake up and smell the coffee.  Whether they study history and realize the nation is near the point of no return.  

    The people that work for a lving are tired of their “act” .

    • Anonymous

        R’s created and fabricated  a fiscal problem . They could have simply raised the debt ceiling  as they had done  6 million times before. Instead they decided  to  play  a dangerous game of chicken.

       It was all a part of a strategy  to  make Obama fail.  Well they lost and now they have to face the consequences of their OWN behavior. They CREATED and fabricated this fiiscal cliff..  all on their own.  Raise the debt limit –and  this  fabricated “crisis”  and cliff is  over!!! It’s political drama that is all.And it didn t have the intended effect—- making Obama one term President.  OOOPS . Time to pay the4 piper and face their OWN consequences . rasie the darned debt ceiling period Enough with all the political drama and show-man-ship and one-ups- manship and EGO  They lost;  get on with it !

       They need to start working on making american succced;  instead of making obama fail. They need to GROW UP and act like adults,  .instead of ticked off kids  throwing a temper tantrum ENOUGH!!!

      • Liberals on both sides put us in debt

        • Anonymous

          Oh really? How so, as Republicans have not only spent more, and expanded the government more, but also grown the debt far more in my lifetime than Democrats?

          • Anonymous

             You might want to reduce the level of acid in that Kool-Aid.

          • Anonymous

            You need to read more. The figures are out there. Distinctions between Republicans and Democrats are of little consequence, as they are one party — the “business” party. I am not a member.

          • My.point..liberals in Both parties!

          • Anonymous

            The Kool-Aid thing isn’t funny or clever. It’s really overdone. Come up with some other stock criticism, will you?

          • Anonymous

            Truth never gets old.

          • Anonymous

            Maybe…but under Obama, we are now being scrutinized by the IMF as a possible ‘basket case’ economy:

            …a recent reportshows that the IMF is now targeting the United States because of its fiscal health.

            The IMF report argues that government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac threaten the U.S. balance sheet and increase fiscal risk…..

            In 2008, the U.S. government placed both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship after both entities were hit with massive losses stemming from the housing crisis.

            While the entities are still privately owned, this legal status allows the government to run them on behalf of their shareholders.

            As a result, according to the IMF report,  ‘The crystallization of the federal government’s implicit guarantee [through conservatorship of] Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008 increased the federal deficit by US$291 billion (2 percent of GDP) and gave rise to cumulative commitments of around $100 billion over the following decade.

            What is most alarming about this is that the government does not factor this implicit guarantee into its official accounting. This hides the true cost of this government backing from American taxpayers—the ones who end up footing the bill. ” http://blog.heritage.org/2012/11/06/imf-fannie-and-freddie-threaten-u-s-fiscal-health/

          • Anonymous

            Fannie// freddy is  where thee private banks dumped their BAD debt.  It helped them “clean their books ” so it wouldn’t fully crash… and had a softer landing  The US gov is trying to get that money back.

          • Anonymous

            The IMF has zero credibility.  Their very definition of the economy is all about shareholders. People are simply inputs to be discarded rather than what the economy is supposed to serve.

          • Not very old.then huh?

      • trisailer

         Absolutely perfect!

  • Anonymous

    when voters are more concerned about social issues then economic concerns this is the government we get both a the state level and national level.

    • Anonymous

       ODD—  IF the R’s had focused on the economic issues instead of the social issues in the last 2 years , maybe that would be a legitimate statement.

       They focused on an anti woman, anti immigrant,  anti worker, anti voter — agenda across the land.  And they  left  their clarion call of “JOBS,JOBS, JOBS ” on the sideline like a broken promise .

       They lost fair and square they didn’t deliver on  their promise.  They were more concerned about abortion and birth control  than anything else, especially jobs and the economy. 
      maybe if THEY hadn’t focused on social issues;  your comment would be legitimate .

      seriously,  think of ANYTHING they did for the economy.  Heck their actions down graded our credit rating!!!

      • Anonymous

        stock market has really rallied the last 2 days since the election.  when are you going to stop blaming R for the failed economy?  4 years from now it’ll still be GWB fault.  that material is getting old.

    • Guest

      ☆ミ

      • Anonymous

        There is no Tea Party. There are only individual tea partiers, each with his or her own approaches to governmental issues.

        Who specifically are you accusing of “attacking the poor” and what exactly is his or her quote?  

        • Guest

          So the Tea Party doesn’t exist? Sarah Palin is just a figment of the imagination?

          • Anonymous

            There is no Tea Party. There are only individual tea partiers.

          • Anonymous

            See my other response to this urban myth.

          • Anonymous

            Direct us to the authoritative link for the officially held national party Tea Party platform.

          • Anonymous

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus
            No one was claiming it was a political party — but nice try. 

          • Anonymous

            A movement is not a party.
            Also from your Bible of choice: “A caucus is a meeting of supporters or members of a political party or movement…”

            From wbt30’s above post: “Romney made a severe mistake as well as the tea party in attacking the poor.”

          • Anonymous

            No one called it a political party. You’re arguing a really stupid and irrelevant point right now. The Tea Party is a group — you can deny that all you want, but it doesn’t make it suddenly not so.

          • Anonymous

            Tea partiers constitute a movement…not a party. Some like-associate with other tea partiers and others associate with still others. This is not an argument. These are facts. You are free to deny, discredit, deflect or dismiss any or all of the facts as presented.

          • Anonymous

             Can you find even one election with the “Tea Party” listed beside the candidate’s name.

          • Anonymous

            Ah, a phantom Party (come out in daylight?).  There’s plenty of material out there to establish that it is a Party.  They’ve even had meetings in Maine and probably elsewhere.

          • Anonymous

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus

            There you go, there is your list sweetheart. No one is claiming it is a political party. 

        • Anonymous

          EJP (strangely silent of late) would not agree with you.  What urban myth are you promoting?

          • Anonymous

            EJP was a paid blog warrior. His work is done.

        • trisailer

           That might have been true when the tea party began as a grass roots movement. I actually kind of admire their spunk and their willingness to get out into the street and protest. The movement could have informed decision making in Washington along with all the other movements, but it was bought up by the right and used as a political club by the republican’s. It is wholly owned by the Koch brothers.

          • Anonymous

            Tea partiers are not for sale and cannot be bought. They are not responsible for that which is beyond their individual control.

      • Anonymous

        we should be concerned about social programs.  but when we run out of money for them then we will see a magic show.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry but did Charlie Huntington have ANY documentation demonstrating that the employee was unproductive and uncooperative? Any written warnings? Or does Huntington think that it should be okay to fire someone because he doesn’t like how he parts his hair, or the style of work boots he wears, or the church he goes to? Maybe had he had even a written reprimand or some documentation of a verbal warning, he wouldn’t have lost his unemployment case. My suspicion is, too, that there were others who had been laid off from Huntington’s company which only bolstered the employee’s claim.

    • Anonymous

      It’s entitled whining. They’re the one who scream about the entitlement generation, scream about a lack of personal responsibility — and yet they exhibit all those behaviors themselves. 

    • Anonymous

      Of course not. If he had, the employ ee wouldn’t have been able to collect. Most of these cowboys have no idea how to run a business, are willfully arrogant about the law, and then plead ignorance when they’re caught.

  • Anonymous

    New health care cost for small businesses will put them out of business.. The wal-mart exemption is interesting,

    • Anonymous

      ….as if WalMart didn’t already enjoy a competitive advantage there. I view “employer based” healthcare not only as unfair, but rather paternalistic and condescending. Citizens using THEIR tax money either for Medicare for all, or hiring private companies to provide universal care — THAT is what self governance looks like.

    • Anonymous

       Total myth ….depends on how you defiine “small business”. Most small busineses will benefit IF they want to provide health care for their employees.

  • Anonymous

    Today as I review new Obamacare procedures I see I will have to list insurance benefits payments  I made on behalf of my employees on their W-2. I can only assume that they will soon be paying income tax on that. The average employee just received a $4k pay raise that they in the future will be paying income tax on.

    • Anonymous

      Less take out pizza for you :(

      • Anonymous

        Its not only me paying the tax but the workers on that part of insurance I pay for them. The same as if I paid them that $4k in their paycheck.

        • Anonymous

          You sure?

          • Anonymous

            Yep.

             

            Q2. When will employers have to start reporting the cost of health care coverage on the Form W‑2?

            A. Reporting for the 2011 calendar year (meaning the Form W-2
            generally required to be furnished to employees in January 2012) was
            optional. For years after 2011, employers generally are required to
            report the cost of health benefits provided on the Form W-2. Transition
            relief is available for certain employers and with respect to certain
            types of coverage, as explained in Q&A-4, below. Reporting for the
            employers covered by the transition relief, and with respect to the
            types of coverage covered by the transition relief, is not required
            until future guidance is provided, and in no event will reporting by
            these employers and with respect to these types of coverage be required
            on any 2012 Forms W-2 (generally required to be furnished to employees
            in January 2013).

            http://www.irs.gov/uac/Employer-Provided-Health-Coverage-Informational-Reporting-Requirements:-Questions-and-Answers

            As I said above you will not be paying income tax on it right away. The mechanism is now in place though.

          • Oh..he has no comment on facts??

          • Anonymous

            But it’s extra compensation from you. I don’t get what your point is then? You’re finally being decent and providing health insurance, so yeah, that is an additional benefit? 

          • Anonymous

            It is nothing I haven’t been providing for decades.  It is not extra. The government is now treating it like I am suddenly giving all my employees a $4k raise.  Previously it did not appear on an employees W-2. Now it does. The only reason to do that is to tax it at the employee level.

          • Anonymous

            Where are you getting this implementation information from anyway? There are
            credits for small businesses that provide healthcare benefits to their
            employees (lowering taxes for YOU) and the only healthcare benefits that are
            taxed are the ones that exceed a threshold (referred to as Cadillac plans). 

        • Anonymous

           you (or the black backgrounded web site you are using for “info” )  are making things up

          • Anonymous

             Sorry. I did not make this up or get it from a “website”.  A mailer from the IRS was my source.

  • Anonymous

    Bush has not been in the “OFFICE” for the last four (4) years.

    Can you spell ??  A trillion is one more letter than a billion.  A trillion is also a 100 billion.  Since the national debt is eleven (11) trillion dollars, that’s 1100 billion dollars.
    The Congressional Budget Office is projecting out ten (10) years and your President is predicting the national debt will decrease a trillion a year.

    Eleven minus four gets us to seven trillion by January, 2017 IF things go well.  But the last four years, Obama has increased the national debt 7 trillion dollars, the econony is awful and 8 million people are still out of work.  Not counting the several million that have been on the Obama “lifetime” unenployment program.When the stock market crashes, the interest rate goes to 18% ala Jimmy Carter and the terrorists attack again, the party will be officially over.

    • Anonymous

       Maybe they shouldn’t have passed those Bush Tax cuts. Maybe they should eliminate some of them now.  They were supposed to be short term  and temporary, post 9111 stuff.

      • Its not a revenue problem…its a spending problem..figure it out.

  • Anonymous

    Now that the credit card crowd is back in Augusta.All the entitled voters can go back in their parents basement until someone else honestly try’s to make them earn it. Yahoo ben and emily are back in charge let the spending and pocketing tax money begin again.

    • trisailer

       To call the democrats the credit card crowd ignores the fact that Maine’s economy has expanded a hundred times what it was in the 60’s. It is exploiting more economic opportunities and it’s economy is better balanced to deal with the economic challenges. This is the product of thousands of hours of hard work by Maine leaders to do the peoples work. Lepage wants you to panic and make short sighted knee jerk decisions that will send Maine back to the 60’s.

      Maine made hay while the sun shone. Nobody disagrees that it has to adjust to the bottom dropping out of the national economy. There are intelligent ways to do that, but Lepage and the tea party want to throw the baby out with the bath water and use this adjustment hardship for political purposes to throw thousands of Mainer’s under a bus.

      There is a smart way to deal with these challenges and make the adjustments without putting it all on the people who are the products of the economic decline, not the cause.

      Lepage is not the guy to do this. He has no patience for intelligent process and he’s being driven by outside forces. Democratic process is slow and messy. Great leaders can accelerate the process, but Lepage is not one of them.

  • Anonymous

    “You run a business and you’re following a lot of laws and regulations and paying a lot of taxes. You’re doing all you should be doing,” Huntington said. “You have employees that come and go and when [an issue such as that occurs] business owners are treated like criminals out of the box. With more Democratic control, I’m concerned that attitude could continue at the state level.”

    Talk about self-victimization.

You may also like