It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Wins - Layoffs Starting

page: 17
72
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by HairlessApe
reply to post by ararisq
 


If your company is laying off employees because Obama won, and that's the sole reason they're giving you, then you have no one to be angry at but the *****y company you work for, and it's board of director's/ceo/supervisors/etc..


No, you miss the point. They are not laying people off because of Obama's winning. They are laying people off in anticipation of an increasing tax and regulatory structure that Obama and his party promised if they retained power. They were standing pat the last year because they did not know where the wind would turn. Now they know, they have to act to preserve their businesses. The action is just a reflection of economic reality.




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


OBAMA TOOK MY JOB!

tkkkk rrrr jrrrrr!



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
reply to post by ararisq
 


This argument is nothing more than financial terrorism from the right. Such slime, they are.


You see financial terrorism from the right...I see financial terrorism from the left.

I was planning on starting a business next year...but now I am going to wait to see how the cards fall.

Obama loves Wall Street, but seems to hate those who want to make their own way in life.


It should be easier for you. You will be able to have an affordable healthcare policy for yourself/family while trying to get your business off the ground, without the fear of potentially bankrupting your family if something were to go bad health-wise.

Same goes for everyone else who've been too stuck to take a risk. This will do what the Republicans claim to love to do so much -- encourage new/small business, the "next Apple", etc.
edit on 11/8/2012 by AkumaStreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by ldyserenity
I don't know about anybody else here but I for one think cutting the defense budget down to the bones is something of a good thing, no? This may mean the war machine won't be chugging along at fullspeed anymore...that to me is a good thing because wth do we need to police the other nations for? We need defense most of these budgets pay for wars we didn't ask for, all we need to know is we're safe on our land WTH cares about some people in the desert of Africa, and why should it be us, let the UN handle it, it's THIER JOB anyway!


I for one agree with you. We should not be the world's police. If there is another Bosnia type conflict, NATO should take care of it, not us. South Korea and Japan can afford to take care of their own defense. The only thing I would disagree with is "the bare bones." We don't want to cut so far back as to be too weak. If you look at some of the major wars in the 20th Century, they happened after we cut our defense to the bare bones. We still need enough of a capability to act as a deterrent.


Yes it could be redirected to intel some of that money, intel would be to find out about oncoming threats, By bare bones I meant just what we need to keep us safe within our borders not to cut so far back we're weak, I guess it may have sounded like that but that's not what I was trying to say.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ararisqI work for a company that has been on a hiring spree all year, adding 50+ jobs this year alone.


Hey, nice! Glad to hear your company's been thriving under Obama. He thanks you for the endorsement.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! small businesses will fail, but big companies always can move oversea where is not regulation against them from the US standpoint actually outsourcing is very well encouraged within our own government.

But small businesses do not have that choice to avoid taxes.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
There is a clear message we are all recieving it If you're some big whig fat cat on Wall Street it's quite alright for you to get free gubbment monies when you fall on your Anus, it's ok to be propped up by the little peons that bust their hump to make you that grand living, however it is not ok if we peons fall on our rump and get a tidbit (Really chickenscratch) to pull our butts out of the sling, it's not okay for us to be able to survive if we fail, we gott "suck it up and take personal responsibility" The hypocracy is mind blowing. It really is. Boo hoo, these companies should fail and they will, you know why? Because their aint gonna always be the money for them I hope the gubbment wises up real soon and cuts these companies off from their drug of choice.
edit on 8-11-2012 by ldyserenity because: spelling



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPACEYstranger
reply to post by ararisq
 


OBAMA TOOK MY JOB!

tkkkk rrrr jrrrrr!


Lol...



Dey turked er jerbs!



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Fear mongoring because your guy lost. This is all a bunch of BS. The company I work for is hiring over 1000 people right now and giving us incentive to help them find good people!!



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by MaurinQuina
Wow, really it does not take rocket science, to understand many corporations, and small companies are going to have layoffs
is it really that hard to understand? We re-elected a liberal who is going to let the bush tax cuts expire,


Because they were supposed to be temporary. And are now being abused.
edit on 11/8/2012 by AkumaStreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity
There is a clear message we are all recieving it If you're some big whig fat cat on Wall Street it's quite alright for you to get free gubbment monies when you fall on your Anus, it's ok to be propped up by the little peons that bust their hump to make you that grand living, however it is not ok if we peons fall on our rump and get a tidbit (Really chickenscratch) to pull our butts out of the sling, it's not okay for us to be able to survive if we fail, we gott "suck it up and take personal responsibility" The hypocracy is mind blowing. It really is. Boo hoo, these companies should fail and they will, you know why? Because their aint gonna always be the money for them I hope the gubbment wises up real soon and cuts these companies off from their drug of choice.
edit on 8-11-2012 by ldyserenity because: spelling


Obama is surrounded by wallstreet bankers in his administration he selected them - wake up!! Wallstreet owns the white house and has for many many years ...
edit on 8-11-2012 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ninjamikec
reply to post by ararisq
 


scare tactics, if they do layoff people then spread the word for people not to buy their product. if i ever hear someone got layed off from a job i would never support their product ever, and i think most americans would do the same


Ok, here on planet earth - we have to deal with reality. If you are not going to buy a product from anyone who's ever done a layoff, then you essentially will have to run around naked and starve - because they all have.

Jesus this is the problem with our nation. You morons voted Obama in based on a fictitious illusion of reality thinking that if you "want" it bad enough, you can just make Utopia happen.

Companies across America did a collective groan on election night because America is about to become the 3rd strongest economy in the world.

Mark it down - write it on a napkin and put that crap on your refrigerator - in 4 years read it and weep.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirric
Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs.

Boeing announces layoffs

Boeing and other top weapons makers like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon have focused heavily on cutting costs and drumming up foreign sales to maintain profits as they prepare for a sustained period of weaker defense budgets.


This is the start of the defense complex shedding it's payroll that Obama asked them to hold off until after the elections. Nope, no collusion between Government and privet enterprise here...

I am really sick of the joke that is our "freest country in the world"



edit on 8/11/12 by sirric because: (no reason given)


You fail to mention that these lay-offs were for executive-level jobs in the company. My job actually has me working with Boeing/NASA as well as foreign-body space industry companies on a daily basis (I'm a satellite controller, or "ground network operator") Most companies in the space industry are going through lay-off periods at the moment. Mine personally chopped it's entire California branch about 7-8 months ago, because Californian workers were too expensive to pay for. The functionality of my company is in complete disarray because of it. The reason they fired California was to save the executive's jobs on the East Coast, and it's now coming to light that the executives don't do ****. Our parent company (a foreign body) is now looking to fire our executives in mass. WORSE YET - because we didn't fire the exec's but did fire the low-paid essential people, our company is doing so poorly that our parent company is thinking about liquidizing us. So no one would jobs at all.

This is not Obama's fault. And Boeing is not Obama's fault either. The government has not stopped funding them, or NASA. In fact, I've been supporting new spacecraft almost every month, and spacecraft that were supposed to have been turned off years ago are in many cases still receiving extended funding.

But that's what you get when your source is NBC.... A story that makes you feel sorry for the high-class, lazy, free-loading, coat-tail-riding, fortune/status/power-inheriting executives and fails to even mention the lower-income jobs that are being saved because of it. You used to have to work for the American dream. Nowadays you just have to convince the poor people that you deserve the everything you were given for nothing.

DEEYYYY TTTKKKK IZ JEERRRRRRR!


edit on 8-11-2012 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-11-2012 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Maybe they were just waiting until after the election to do planned layoffs and let the blowback land on the president. If Romney had been elected and they did layoffs there would have been rationalization instead of criticisms. After all if you have an "R" by your name you can do no wrong. Well at least they will have some semblance of a safety net under the president. Romney couldn't care less about anyone who's bank account has less than 10 zeroes in it.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


You failed to see it in the heading that 30% of management is right there.

You also fail to grasp the real problem that this article is implying. Obama asked for no layoff announcement prior to the election and even said that he would pay any legal fees for breaking the law required to announce layoff prior to so many days, and sure as S%it, here are the announcements.

NBC, FOX, ABC,...They all work for the same people. Get a clue dude...Really



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


But a study by The Commonwealth Fund show that Romneycare would cost even more money and cover less people ...


A new study released by the private foundation, The Commonwealth Fund, has revealed that 72 million Americans would be uninsured by 2022 if Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney wins the election and has his health care plan enacted. That compares to 27 million uninsured by the same time if President Barack Obama's Affordable Health Care Act (ACA) was kept in place with his reelection.

The study also found that Romney's plan would cost Americans more money. People who choose to buy health insurance on their own would pay 14 percent of their income, compared to only 9 percent under the ACA, The Commonwealth Fund stated. The Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation added that repealing the ACA would cost a federal budget deficit of $109 billion between 2013 and 2022.

Source

How is that better? I must be missing something here ...



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirric
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


You failed to see it in the heading that 30% of management is right there.

You also fail to grasp the real problem that this article is implying. Obama asked for no layoff announcement prior to the election and even said that he would pay any legal fees for breaking the law required to announce layoff prior to so many days, and sure as S%it, here are the announcements.

NBC, FOX, ABC,...They all work for the same people. Get a clue dude...Really



Again, I have a clue because I work for the companies.
You don't because you get your facts from NBC, FOX, and ABC.

Also




He said Boeing would cut the number of executive jobs an additional 10 percent by the end of 2012, bringing overall cuts in its executive team to 30 percent for the past two years, a move that would result in a 10 percent cut in management costs.


They're cutting 10% of executive jobs, not 30%. Also, they're cutting 0% of anyone's job who is not an executive.

Also




Obama asked for no layoff announcement prior to the election and even said that he would pay any legal fees for breaking the law required to announce layoff prior to so many days,


That was never even hinted at in the article.
edit on 8-11-2012 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tazkven
reply to post by marg6043
 


But a study by The Commonwealth Fund show that Romneycare would cost even more money and cover less people ...


A new study released by the private foundation, The Commonwealth Fund, has revealed that 72 million Americans would be uninsured by 2022 if Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney wins the election and has his health care plan enacted. That compares to 27 million uninsured by the same time if President Barack Obama's Affordable Health Care Act (ACA) was kept in place with his reelection.

The study also found that Romney's plan would cost Americans more money. People who choose to buy health insurance on their own would pay 14 percent of their income, compared to only 9 percent under the ACA, The Commonwealth Fund stated. The Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation added that repealing the ACA would cost a federal budget deficit of $109 billion between 2013 and 2022.

Source

How is that better? I must be missing something here ...


Because at least then it's a White "Christian" man giving me my healthcare.

I don't know why you're dancing around trying to find an excuse for bigotry. That's what it is. And no matter how many people tell you they're just for "Traditional Values, Traditional Families, or Traditional White Presidents" it doesn't change the fact that it's bigotry. At one point there were people who were just for "Traditional Gender Roles" and "Traditional Slavery" too.
edit on 8-11-2012 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Companies that do that are just not worth having.. You lay off your work force and then you cut your capability to do your work.. which means lower sales.. which means lower income..

If the management is silly enough to do that then they shouldn't have a company.

With that said.. my company just hired additional people yesterday and this morning.. Other businesses around here are doing quite well .. ( I work in the IT industry... web design, programming, video and animation ) ..

I am almost thinking that these business owners are staunch republicans and are trying to deliver a message ... sort of stomping their foot in protest.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Our present society has Marxism incorporated into it. It is a combination of Capitalism, Socialism, and some Marxism. If you think you own your land, just don't pay the taxes for three years and it belongs to the government. I can't say Obama is Marxist or socialist. All his stimulus money was given to the businesses, not the common people. It would have been better to give every taxpayer ten grand to apply to their debt than to pass that stimulus bill. The banks would have got money to fix their problem and the people would have lowered their debt. That would have stopped the freefall of the housing market and our country would have recovered already. I suppose it would have been abused by the crooked people in society. That would be socialism or maybe Marxism, what Obama did was protect the banks and businesses so they could survive. That is Capitalism in my book. Obama is for the middle class, not for the rich or poor.



new topics




 
72
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join