NYTimes: The Texas Unmiracle (unemployment, public schools, income tax)

[Vascodagama]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Would Perry be any better or different than Bush? If so how/why? The reason I ask is that I think Obama did a better job than Bush and I voted for both as a Republican! Both were/are far from perfect. But I think Bush caused more harm overall to the nation and the economy. I don't see Perry as being much different in his ideolgies of Gov't and the way he would 'try' to get things done.

Derek

Bush is not running for President. Bush was demonized by the mainstream media for political reasons and I don't believe Bush was half as bad as the media makes him out to be. I'm not saying Bush was a great President and I have complaints on his leadership, or lack of, but I can separate the truth from the media lies. The economic crisis was not directly caused by Bush ... he was just late to try and do anything about it but he did try ... a little ... with his attempts to reign in Freddie and Fannie and other economic problems. Obama was also not directly responsible for the economic crisis initially. His actions and the resulting impacts on the economy since he became President is his responsibility. Those actions and impacts are making the economic crisis much worse. He has taken no actions that could result in solving the economic crisis ... his actions are obviously designed to make conditions worse. If he didn't design the actions to make conditions worse then he is the stupidest President our country has ever had ... but I don't believe that ... he is intelligent and he knows exactly what he is doing. He is driving our economy off a cliff and its intentional.

Perry is an unknown for me. I know little about him at this point but I am willing to learn more. What I see so far I like. I could care less if he is "Bush like" ... what I care about is what he will do for our country. Texas's economy is in pretty good shape so he can't be all that bad ... and that's 1000 times better than what we have experienced over the past 3 years.

[.highnlite]

According to all I have read about Bush, he is a heck of a lot brighter and more knowledgable than Perry., and that is scary.

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by Don9

...
Perry is an unknown for me. I know little about him at this point but I am willing to learn more. What I see so far I like. I could care less if he is "Bush like" ... what I care about is what he will do for our country. Texas's economy is in pretty good shape so he can't be all that bad ... and that's 1000 times better than what we have experienced over the past 3 years.

The main things I have seen from Perry so far are his bragadocious comments about how he stole companies from CA, offering companies all kinds of incentives to move from CA to TX. If his main claim to fame is job creation using similar methods how will he create jobs on a national level? He seems quite puffed up about these accomplishments. I think that's the point of this thread and the article. Did he truely achieve something great or was it moslty smoke and mirrors? Did he achieve this on the backs of the American worker (cheap labor) and other states (cheaper land, taxes, loose or no regulation)? Because if so Mexico does the same thing and American companies are moving there as well. Maybe America should become more like Mexico. Then we can steal those cheap labor jobs back.

Derek

[Vascodagama]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

The main things I have seen from Perry so far are his bragadocious comments about how he stole companies from CA, offering companies all kinds of incentives to move from CA to TX. If his main claim to fame is job creation using similar methods how will he create jobs on an international level? He seems quite puffed up about his accomplishments. I think that's the point of this thread and the article. Did he truely achieve something great or was it moslty smoke and mirrors? Did he achieve this on the backs of the American worker (cheap labor) and other states (cheaper land, taxes, loose or no regulation)? Mexico does the same thing and American companies are moving there as well.

Derek

Isn't that exactly what our country needs? Job creation! If he can bring back jobs to the USA than I'm all for it. If it takes incentives than so be it. As the gov of Texas he should have been trying to attract jobs to his state. That's what the voters of Texas should have wanted. Don't you think California should be trying to get jobs back ... using any means possible?

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by Don9

Isn't that exactly what our country needs? Job creation! If he can bring back jobs to the USA than I'm all for it. If it takes incentives than so be it. As the gov of Texas he should have been trying to attract jobs to his state. That's what the voters of Texas should have wanted. Don't you think California should be trying to get jobs back ... using any means possible?

Yes and no. I mean you make a good point which I think most would agree upon at least initially. Yes, we need jobs and job creation should be # 1 on a state and national level. Yet at what cost? Do we throw out environmental protection, start logging our national forests again, deregulate onshore and offshore drilling, provide tax free business operations, free and next to free land? Reduce minimum wage? Throw our workers comp? Its the using any means possible that I part ways with the far right approach to this problem. The ends justify the means. So basically we end up selling our souls to get those jobs? That doesn't cut it for me. Remember the oil spills along the coast in the South Bay growing up? How about raw sewage spewed into the ocean? Do you really want that to go unregulated to get more jobs?

Derek

[Vascodagama]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Yes and no. I mean you make a good point which I think most would agree upon at least initially. Yes, we need jobs and job creation should be # 1 on a state and national level. Yet at what cost? Do we throw out environmental protection, start logging our national forests again, deregulate onshore and offshore drilling, provide tax free business operations, free and next to free land? Reduce minimum wage? Throw our workers comp? Its the using any means possible that I part ways with the far right approach to this problem. The ends justify the means. So basically we end up selling our souls to get those jobs? That doesn't cut it for me. Remember the oil spills along the coast in the South Bay growing up? How about raw sewage spewed into the ocean? Do you really want that to go unregulated to get more jobs?

Derek

No, we should not create jobs if it means doing everything on your laundry list but no one is proposing we do all that. The left is using that scare tactic talking point to push the liberal socialist agenda and if you don't recognize that then this conversation is pointless. There is a balance between reducing unnecessary regulations for economic growth and maintaining real and needed regulations for true environments concerns. The liberals don't agree with that thinking and would rather see our economy and society suffer ... and keep us dependent on foreign energy ... than being realistic and do what makes sense.

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by Don9

No, we should not create jobs if it means doing everything on your laundry list but no one is proposing we do all that. The left is using that scare tactic talking point to push the liberal socialist agenda and if you don't recognize that then this conversation is pointless. There is a balance between reducing unnecessary regulations for economic growth and maintaining real and needed regulations for true environments concerns. The liberals don't agree with that thinking and would rather see our economy and society suffer ... and keep us dependent on foreign energy ... than being realistic and do what makes sense.

Well, I don't really think its a scare tactic when you look at both the words and actions of the far right. Michele Bachmann thinks the EPA should be should be shut down. Shutting down or as a minimim greatly slashing social services for the poor and elderly seems like pretty fair game as well -an easy target. I think there are enough blatant agendas proposed by the candidates as well the the extreme right on the Hill that no one needs to add more to their own words and actions.

BTW, you said using any means possible athough I'm glad you clarified that. Keep in mind the Drill Baby Drill mantra coming from the far right even during the BP spill.

Derek

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

According to all I have read about Bush, he is a heck of a lot brighter and more knowledgable than Perry., and that is scary.

I'm not all that familiar with Perry's background but what have to guess he was not a Yale undergrad and Harvard MBA!

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Well, I don't really think its a scare tactic when you look at both the words and actions of the far right. Michele Bachmann thinks the EPA should be should be shut down. Shutting down or as a minimim greatly slashing social services for the poor and elderly seems like pretty fair game as well -an easy target. I think there are enough blatant agendas proposed by the candidates as well the the extreme right on the Hill that no one needs to add more to their own words and actions.

BTW, you said using any means possible athough I'm glad you clarified that. Keep in mind the Drill Baby Drill mantra coming from the far right even during the BP spill.

Derek

Thought experiment. What if the US EPA did not exist and there were only ones in the states? This is, BTW, a little bit tricky. The initial thoughts about this are usually made in error.

[MtnSurfer]

Originally Posted by BayAreaHillbilly

Thought experiment. What if the US EPA did not exist and there were only ones in the states? This is, BTW, a little bit tricky. The initial thoughts about this are usually made in error.

I'm all for revamping regulatory agencies making it easier for businesses to operate in both CA and the nation. But if you abolish one then something else better, more effective/efficient, needs to take its place. And yes, there should be a rigerous process to go through before drilling, building, manufacturing, etc... The enviromental impact needs to be considered among other things. Of course there has to be a balance because things can go hog wild in either direction (over regulation vs. loose/minimal regulation).

Derek