The Audacity Of Arrogance

Several strategists of both parties sense that Americans want to vote for Obama, but something is holding them back.

Perhaps it's simply that Americans are listening to the disastrous policies that Oboma espouses and sees them (and him) for what they are.

I can't figure why his supporters don't see him for the cult of personality that he is. They could just as easily be supporting Prince or Michael Jackson. Except that they at least have talent in their field of expertise.

I can't support any candidate even, for dog catcher, that flip flops like Obama has. The guy is like a fish on a hot pier, at noon, in August, at the Equator. Flip flopping for all he's worth.

but the fact that it is so close in the summer, when Dems are usually far ahead, has to be very worrisome to the Obama campaign.

Do you actually have any data to support this, or is this one of those "facts" you throw around a lot?

A quick Googling shows that in the last 2 elections, where the Democrats lost the election, the July polls were showing pretty much a dead heat or at least within the statistical margin of error.

Obama has a slim lead and a huge cash advantage which makes this interesting. As I understand the 2004 election, or at least as the reportage reports it, Kerry was deadlocked and, by the autumn, was pretty much out of cash.

AnonymousAnonymous (Post #3)

It's rather ironic that you post a "correction" to an uncited statemen by Simberg with your own uncited statemen
Next time include the links you found after googling it.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not saying Rand is either. As it stands now you've only advanced a "He said / She said."
And to be blunt, I know more about Rand than I do about "Anonymous".

For only a tiny bit extra work, you end up with a much stronger argument. (Post #3)

"We have sort of become a nation of whiners," he said. "You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline." That's what Phil Gramm, former Senator and current vice chairman of Swiss bank UBS had to say about his fellow Americans. He joins a host of other McCain lobbyists in selling out his country. 5 of his fellow McCain campaign team mates work for Airbus and helped orchestrate the tanker debacle.

Phil Gramm, as McCain's chief economic advisor tells us, "Mr. McCain also will pursue immigration reforms that would start with effective border enforcement but include a possible doubling of legal immigration, including no limits on scientific and technical workers and a generous sized guest worker program," he said. Thing is, engineering salaries have been flat to declining for about a decade, yet suddenly we need to throw open the borders to unlimited immigration of scientists and engineers? There goes our raise for the next decade too. I'm sure all these immigrants and their supply side effect of lowering wages will do a lot to encourage kids to want to study hard so they can be a pauper engineer or scientist.

Gramm goes on to note "that Albert Einstein was one prominent immigrant who might have been excluded under an anti-immigration regime." The message we are supposed to take away from this is that US engineers are morons. It is foreign engineers that made this country great, not American ingenuity and enterprise. I guess that's what passes for "patriotism" in the Republican party these days?

By the way, here's the kind of bank Phil Gramm represents in his day job:

"I don't think that any bank that goes to the extent that UBS has gone through to avoid doing what their agreements with the United States require them to do, should be allowed to continue to do business unless they clean up their act," Levin said.

UBS's role in arranging "undeclared" accounts for an estimated 19,000 US citizens was one focus of a hearing by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Levin today.

It's a bank that's all about helping the rich to keep from paying taxes. That's the bank Phil Gramm works for. Obviously the rich in this country aren't rich enough, and all Gramm has for the rest of us unwashed minions is "quit whining"!? That maggot! So who are all you aerospace dudes going to vote for, the guy who's going to put you out of a job?

I would think that if US firms can't import engineers they're likely to employ more engineers abroad. And that if they can't do either then those able to will move.

Where are the increased salaries or new jobs in that? Tell me where I went wrong.

McCain's 10% tax rate rebate/cut on research and development wages looks like an approach that at least heads in the right direction (not that I understand how that will be implemented efficiently, easier and better to just do it on all wages).

There could be a list of reason 10 miles long as to my we shouldn't elect Obama. Unfortunately, the press, the liberals, and the Europeans who support him will simply wave there hand and say, "America is too racist to elect Obama." It is possible that Obama feels like he can use this to his advantage. He can say or do nearly everything he wants and in the end just pull the race card and say, "Come on, it is time to show ourselves and the world that we can elect a black person instead of yet another old, white, fuddy-duddy." I have no doubt that Hillary would have done the same thing in a sexist tone. This is what the Democrats have denigrated themselves too -- Moral Hijacking.

I would much prefer McCain over Obama. It still seems likely to me that Obama will win, although I have been pleasantly surprised by the strength McCain has in current polls.

Rand I'll tell you in advance, in case I forget to give kudos later. If McCain wins you have been a very far-seeing political prognosticator. You've been saying Obama couldn't win for a long time, even earlier when it looked like the country was simply ready for any Democrat rather than a Republican, and even after they nominated a charismatic (but very left wing) senator.

Also, I definitely remember Dukakis being way up in the polls over the first Bush back in 1987, only to lose in a landslide. I think that was true during the summer. No citations, but that's my recollection.

I honestly don't know how anyone can vote for Obama at this point on rational grounds. It's not clear at all that any of his opinions are more deeply held than political expediency. Anyone who thinks that Obama believes this or that on a particular issue are merely projecting their preferences on a tabula rasa of "Change".

A campaign based on Hope indeed. The Hope that your candidate will actually do what you want him to do when push comes to shove. And he must act; because when you're President you can't vote merely "Present."

If you're an engineer or scientist and you vote for McCain, you're too stupid to have a job and you deserve to be replaced by a $8/hr engineer from Pakistan.

Dfens, if you think import substitution works for engineering services any more than it does for steel production, you're the stupid one. The fact is that if you don't provide more than $8/hr in value to an employer, you're going to get replaced by a Pakistani in Islamabad no matter who the President is.

It's called competition. It's an iron law of economics, and its just as hard to avoid as any law of thermodynamics. No one is immune to it and no legislation can make it go away. Certain (communist/socialist) laws and help you hide from it for a decade or two (or four, in North Korea's case), but eventually all debts must be paid. You can't opt out of economics any more than you can opt out of physics or evolution. Get over it.

You dumbass! You think the bean counters give a damn how much "value" you add? If you've got a pulse and an "engineering degree" and you work for 1/10th the cost, guess who they're going to hire? This is a Darwinian issue anyway. If you're stupid enough to vote for McCain, then you're stupid enough to deserve what you get.

If you have a few active neurons, you might want to check out this video and see what the Republicans are already doing for engineers and scientists.

"Dfens wrote:
If you're an engineer or scientist and you vote for McCain, you're too stupid to have a job and you deserve to be replaced by a $8/hr engineer from Pakistan."

...and if you or anyone else and vote for Obama, you deserve to be unemployed and likely will have a good chance of it. Lets soak the rich by doubling capital gains taxes, that will create jobs!

Dfense, do the terms capital flight and fungability mean anything to you?

Not sure why my name didn't appear but I wrote #3 and posting reams of links from Google when a simple "Kerry Poll Numbers July 2004" brought up lots including:

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

Where the margin between the two was paper thin pretty much the whole time.

There were lots of others and "Gore Poll Numbers July 2000" also brought up a lot of similar data points where the margin between them really was within the statistical margin of error of the polls.

This article was one of many which talked about the difference in funding between Kerry and Bush (http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/the_hanna_project/election_year/2004_bush_vs_kerry/)

The interesting stuff appears to have happened after the Swift Boat ads hit and the Kerry Campaign was effectively out of cash to do anything other than sit quietly and watch. I must admit I was surprised at the time that he didn't hit back with anything. Turns out he couldn't.

I'm also interested to see what impact a 50 state campaign strategy has on an election at the end of the day.

Dfens, you're a natural Democrat, with your concern for the wages of individual engineers already here, and blithe unconcern for the future competitivity and general economic success of the nation.

The reason you allow immigration by scientists and engineers is because you want to skim off the best of the world's talent, bring 'em here, because that is what the future economic power of the US depends on.

Your post also demonstrates the unconscious inferiority complex of the natural Democrat. You fear the competition of those immigrant engineers. You think they're going to take your job, because they'll do the same job for less dough. But you know what? If that's true, it means you're being paid more than you're worth right now, more than the market says you should be paid, and you're relying on a weird artificial constriction on supply (immigration barriers to scientists and engineers in the rest of the world) to keep your salary high.

In that case, immigration restrictions only make sense for you personally. For the rest of us, who want top-notch engineering talent to build the competitive products that will keep us dominant in the next century, the best result is actually if you get fired and go work flipping burgers, and an engineer who is really worth what you're presently paid gets hired from India or something.

Now, those of us who are confident we're worth every penny we're paid, because we know we can leave employer X any time and get a similarly good job with employer Y, whether here or abroad, we're not afraid of competition from immigrants. Not at all. Bring it on. It will help clear out some of the deadwood time-serving chair polishers with whom we have to deal.

Spoken like a moron bean counter who couldn't cut it in engineering school but has lived nose to ass so long he doesn't know he's absolutely worthless.

Spoken like a moron bean counter who couldn't cut it in engineering school but has lived nose to ass so long he doesn't know he's absolutely worthless.

Spoken like an economic ignoramus who I wouldn't trust to do engineering, either, even at eight bucks an hour.

They turk our jerbs! /southpark

I have no idea what qualifications Dfens has, but what I do know I don't rank high. Phil Gramm was fired after the speeches Dfens quotes. Such action isn't a sign that McCain agrees with Phil Gramm.

Obama apparently has given up on engineers of this generation, particularly those involved in space (this is a space blog after all). Instead, he wants to cut all funding to NASA (not necessarily something to disagree with, except...) and give it all to education to develop knew engineers.

US public education is abysmal. Throwing more money at it from the federal bureaucracy on down is a bad idea. Better to leave NASA alone, and cut the entire Department of Education budget. Take the DeptEd money and give it back to the state governments. From the department's website:
ED currently administers a budget of $68.6 billion per year?$59.2 billion in discretionary appropriations and $9.4 billion in mandatory appropriations?and operates programs that touch on every area and level of education.

This doesn't even begin to discuss the disaster an Obama presidency will have to healthcare.

Carl made me smile when he wrote:
Now, those of us who are confident we're worth every penny we're paid, because we know we can leave employer X any time and get a similarly good job with employer Y, whether here or abroad, we're not afraid of competition from immigrants. Not at all. Bring it on. It will help clear out some of the deadwood time-serving chair polishers with whom we have to deal.

Gramm was fired for his "nation of whiners" comment. Show me where McCain has ever distanced himself from the "no limits on [visas for] scientific and technical workers" comment. He has only ever voted for increasing H-1b visas. Good to see Rand is as "independent" as always. If we really had a shortage of engineers and scientists it would be reflected by rapidly rising salaries, which are not in evedence. Well, that's what you'd think if you were an actual capitalist and not a Republican apologist.

Dfens wrote:
"If we really had a shortage of engineers and scientists it would be reflected by rapidly rising salaries, which are not in evedence. Well, that's what you'd think if you were an actual capitalist..."

Only if there was a global shortage and you didn't already outspend most of the global competition when it comes to high wages and/or other assorted perceptions of benefit (which the US and a lot of the western world in general does).

Of course there are artificial barriers in place so you do get a shortage. According to you we should see rising wages right now due to that but in general there's no such. Want to know why? Because more often than not it simply isn't worth it for the companies. If they can't avoid the problem (establishing themselves in other locations, partially or completely, outsourcing, contracting abroad etc.) they'll instead prioritize the work that is the most profitable for those resources they have available. You seem to have a very black and white and distorted perception of what capitalism is and how it works, it's not a particularly dogmatic ism.

So differentiate between shortages in engineer "creation" from a local population and overall availability. Choosing artificial barriers to overall availability in order to stimulate a higher output of local engineers is an inefficient attempt at treating the effect (too few in-country engineers) rather than the cause (cultural indifference to or scorn for the importance of the hard sciences and the traits required for it and quality of excellence in general and thus/also generally lacking quality in education and particularly at lower educational levels).

By the way not all engineers are created equal: neither in capabilities or areas of expertize nor experience or for that matter vocational interests. In addition to that we're talking about humans here, not Lego bricks. Hell in this country "engineer" (ingeniør) isn't even a protected title but a purely descriptive one, anyone can claim to be one --no idea if the same holds true in the US but I suspect it does.

All the same goes for scientists.

And/or maybe Dfens thinks capitalism is for increased barriers to trade of capital (a contradiction in terms really), his post kind of reads like he does and it doesn't seem out of character for him.

Nice doublespeak, comrade.

Show me where McCain has ever distanced himself from the "no limits on [visas for] scientific and technical workers" comment.

Why should I waste my time, Dfens? You have failed to explain how limiting work force and tighter immigration controls are good for the economy. Instead, you try to imply that easing restrictions on immigration workers is marxist/communist.

I'm fairly confident that your salary concerns are real but on a very personal level.

Don't try to show that you're not full of crap for my sake. I called you out, and you wimped out. Par for the course. You've shown yourselves for the losers you are.

I called you out, and you wimped out.

No, you made a bunch of bogus claims, and several people, including me twice now, pointed out the folly of your thought process. Your last two responses has been direct personal character attacks rather than any effort to back up your claims.

I didn't do what you asked, because doing so is a waste of time. I don't disagree with you on McCain's position. I disagree with you on the effects it has. Habitat Hermit did an excellent job of explaining the same economic principles I see at play here. Instead of explaining where we are wrong, you have reverted to flinging poo.

I'm unimpressed, and again have no doubt you have salary issues. If you continue to act as you do, those problems will remain regardless of who is President.

fucking Ivy League. Move it to France. We need more real Americans like Bush!