Democrats Stimulate the Chinese

[Butters 0]

Wind at their backs: Powerful Democrats help Chinese energy firm chase stimulus money

Quote

Top Democratic fundraisers and lobbyists with links to the White House are behind a proposed wind farm in Texas that stands to get $450 million in stimulus money, even though a Chinese company would operate the farm and its turbines would be built in China.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[matthewcline 0]

I forget, is msnbc a Liberal or Conservative News agency?

Of course this would be better if we could have an all American owned and operated deal going on here. Then at least most of the Stimulus Money would go in a full circle here.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[jgoose71 0]

So much for green jobs stimulating the american economy.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[johenrik 0]

I guess you can't borrow billions of dollars from China year after year without expecting they want something more back than the tiny interests on the loan.

-Jo Henrik

[Butters 0]

Very few comments from the vocal Democrats amongst us ...

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

I guess you can't borrow billions of dollars from China year after year without expecting they want something more back than the tiny interests on the loan.

If they are asking for more than what was agreed to when the loans were made, then that would be called a bribe or possibly extortion.

I don't know of any loans made where the lender can come back at a later point and ask for a bonus or something "extra" that was not specifically written into the loan agreement.






________________________________
"1981 to 1988 is 7 years"-Kallend (oops, it's actually 8 years Kallend)

The decade of the 80's was from 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you remove 1980 and 1989 you have 1981 to 1988. 8 years.

[Darius11 12]

We will never have a fair democracy unless we can get big corporate money and interest out of our government.

People tend to forget that every right that we have, the 40 hr work week the, healthy work conditions, etc were things people had to fight for very hard. No company was just willing to do the right thing without force or the threat of force.

Unfortunately we are still heading full speed towards the cliff, we have not hit the breaks to even begin making the U turn we so desperately need to make.

Both parties are guilty of this, and the people who blindly or knowingly support polices that hand over more power to the corp. instead of the people are responsible.

Do I sound disillusioned? I am. When it comes to fiscal pollicies both parties are the same. When it comes to social issues; that’s when the republicans lose me every time.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[johenrik 0]

Quote

If they are asking for more than what was agreed to when the loans were made, then that would be called a bribe or possibly extortion.

I didn't mean that they directly get contracts or money as exchange for the loans. What I meant was that what they would get back was an understanding that China and the US are "friends" and that Chinese companies should be able to compete on the open American market. The fact that they are Chinese should not be a deciding factor when it comes to getting a contract or not.

Although when it comes to bribes and extortion, a lot worse things has happened in the American government so who knows if it's happened here too. Just look at the "relationship" between US and the Maldives during the Copenhagen climate summit: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,733630,00.html

-Jo Henrik

[Butters 0]

I have two problems with this:

1] The stimulus is suppose to stimulate the American economy.

2] This does not help energy independence. It shifts it from the Middle East to the East.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,471]

>2] This does not help energy independence. It shifts it from the Middle
>East to the East.

So a US oil well means energy dependence on the East, because the wellhead contains Chinese components? Would you be opposed to US drilling in that case?

[johenrik 0]

Quote

I have two problems with this:

1] The stimulus is suppose to stimulate the American economy.

2] This does not help energy independence. It shifts it from the Middle East to the East.

I totally agree and I see your problem. But as long as the US haven't been able to pay their own bills for 30 years, little is saying that will change soon. How do you think the next loan negotiations with China will go if China looses contracts where they have the best offer, on the only basis of they being Chinese? In the longer run it might be cheaper to give them these kind of contracts.

I'm not saying I like it, nor that this is the kind of politics I want the world to evolve around, but seeing all the Wikileaks lately it's obvious that this is a game the US government knows very well. Although this time they're on the other side of the table.

-Jo Henrik

[billvon 2,471]

>People tend to forget that every right that we have, the 40 hr work week
>the, healthy work conditions, etc were things people had to fight for very
>hard. No company was just willing to do the right thing without force or the
>threat of force.

And employees aren't willing to work without the threat of firing.

Employment is a contract between a person and a company that benefits both. Of course both are going to want to get the best deal they can. History has shown that employees are out for themselves, and will switch jobs at the drop of a hat - which makes them very much like employers.

>We will never have a fair democracy unless we can get big corporate
>money and interest out of our government.

Corporations cannot vote. All they can do is spend money. Given that we regulate them, that's skewed _against_ corporations.

>Unfortunately we are still heading full speed towards the cliff, we have
>not hit the breaks to even begin making the U turn we so desperately
>need to make.

Tell me what direction we'd be going after that "U turn" you describe.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>2] This does not help energy independence. It shifts it from the Middle
>East to the East.

So a US oil well means energy dependence on the East, because the wellhead contains Chinese components? Would you be opposed to US drilling in that case?

Did you read the article? A Chinese company would operate the farm (and manufacture the turbines).

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,471]

>Did you read the article?

Yes.

>A Chinese company would operate the farm (and manufacture the
>turbines).

Yes. From American wind, feeding into the American grid.

If your objective is economic independence from China this is a bad idea. If your goal is energy independence, it's a good idea.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>Did you read the article?

Yes.

>A Chinese company would operate the farm (and manufacture the
>turbines).

Yes. From American wind, feeding into the American grid.

If your objective is economic independence from China this is a bad idea. If your goal is energy independence, it's a good idea.

Energy independence is about who controls and profits from the energy. It may be American wind but China controls and profits from it in this scenario.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Yes. From American wind,

I'm disgusted, you american's think you even own nature now.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 2,471]

>Energy independence is about who controls and profits from the energy.

Energy independence is about who gets the energy and from where. Economic independence is about who profits from the energy. Unless the Chinese have a VERY long extension cord - we will get the energy.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>Energy independence is about who controls and profits from the energy.

Energy independence is about who gets the energy and from where. Economic independence is about who profits from the energy. Unless the Chinese have a VERY long extension cord - we will get the energy.

You're still dependent on me if I own and operate the wind mill that supplies you energy even if it's your wind ... if you can't understand that.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,471]

>You're still dependent on me if I own and operate the wind mill
>that supplies you energy even if it's your wind . . .

Yes - economically dependent.

But if you were getting all your power from a windmill down the street, and you told someone "I depend on foreign power" - you'd be wrong. If you can't understand _that_, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>You're still dependent on me if I own and operate the wind mill
>that supplies you energy even if it's your wind . . .

Yes - economically dependent.

But if you were getting all your power from a windmill down the street, and you told someone "I depend on foreign power" - you'd be wrong. If you can't understand _that_, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

What if the foreign power closes temporarily or permanently the windmill down the street?

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[billvon 2,471]

>What if the foreign power closes temporarily or permanently the windmill
>down the street?

Same thing that happens if the local owner closes temporarily or permanently the windmill down the street. Same thing if there's a storm and it's destroyed. Your local power source goes missing. At that point you might decide to purchase local power from a coal power plant instead. (And no, that power is not foreign even if the coal comes from a Trinity-operated mine in West Virginia.)

This is a really stupid argument. There are plenty of domestic power sources that are operated partially or completely by organizations outside the US. No one but you considers them 'foreign power sources' for that reason.

[Butters 0]

Quote

>What if the foreign power closes temporarily or permanently the windmill
>down the street?

Same thing that happens if the local owner closes temporarily or permanently the windmill down the street. Same thing if there's a storm and it's destroyed. Your local power source goes missing. At that point you might decide to purchase local power from a coal power plant instead. (And no, that power is not foreign even if the coal comes from a Trinity-operated mine in West Virginia.)

This is a really stupid argument. There are plenty of domestic power sources that are operated partially or completely by organizations outside the US. No one but you considers them 'foreign power sources' for that reason.

Really, no one but me ... Guess I'll just have go about my business knowing I'm right and everyone else is wrong.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Darius11 12]

Quote

And employees aren't willing to work without the threat of firing.

There is a huge difference between deciding you no longer want to do a job, then forcing people to work in unsafe environments, for extremely low wages, where the workers health is of no concern.

It was not THAT long ago where people simply had no choice starve to death or work in horbble conditions and endanger your self. I am talking early 1900s conditions. Every progress made to working conditions was fought for.

Quote

Corporations cannot vote. All they can do is spend money. Given that we regulate them, that's skewed _against_ corporations.

Are you suggesting money in the proportions spent by corporations does not influence the results?

I think the millions of dollars spent definitely effects the laws of this land.

Quote

Tell me what direction we'd be going after that "U turn" you describe

Maximum allowed donation of no more then $20 . Full prosecution of anyone who breaks that rule.
Prosecution and closing of loop holes of slanders laws, and the prosecution of those who blatantly lie.

Simple take the liars to courts, or force them to start anything they say that is not based in truth and facts with a huge warning that states this is not the truth this is for entertainment only.

Only then will the power be in the peoples hands.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 2,471]

>There is a huge difference between deciding you no longer want to do
>a job, then forcing people to work in unsafe environments, for extremely
>low wages, where the workers health is of no concern.

Agreed. If there are thugs preventing people from physically leaving their jobs, by all means, arrest them and shut down the company. Fortunately, nowadays that is extremely rare.

>It was not THAT long ago where people simply had no choice starve to
> death or work in horbble conditions and endanger your self. I am talking
>early 1900s conditions.

Also agreed. But again, that is no longer true. (Although it certainly _is_ true that you can choose to starve to death if you want.)

>Are you suggesting money in the proportions spent by corporations
>does not influence the results?

Oh, they can certainly try to _influence_ the results. But they cannot make people vote any way they like, and they cannot vote themselves. That means they have much less power than you or I.

>Maximum allowed donation of no more then $20.

If you apply that rule to any organization that tries to influence government for their own purposes, then OK. However, you'd be talking about either shutting down or greatly altering organizations like unions, USPA, the Audubon Society, the ACLU, many veteran's organizations etc. You sure that's what you want?

>or force them to start anything they say that is not based in truth and facts

So if a union was campaigning against a company that was exposing their workers to dangerous chemicals, the union would be required to say "our position is not based in truth or on facts?"

>Only then will the power be in the peoples hands.

It is now. You just don't like how they are using it.

[Butters 0]

Nope, I'm right and everyone else is wrong.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch