Mitt Romney's policies as President
 

It's not the release of his tax returns or how he treats his dog,
but his philosophy and specific plans that can be examined and evaluated.

I'm assuming that the first topic should be: Jobs, jobs, jobs....
OK, what does Mitt officially say about how he will deal with jobs and economic growth ?

The official Mitt Romney website says this about Romney's "Human Capital Policy":

I read Mitt's first action (Personal Reemployment Accounts)
as a give-away of government $ to companies that say they are "re-training" the unemployed.
Others have said that re-training is now free to the unemployed,
and this will be undermined by funding cuts, so the workers
will have to pay for their own training and (temporary) employment.

I read the second action as an immigration policy of bringing CEO's
from foreign companies into the country to run/control US businesses.
I find it hard to believe there is a true shortage of US men and women
who can manage or start up a new company, or invent something worth patenting.

You can argue that we have shortages of Americans in the "science and engineering" field. A lot of professors and Ph.D. graduates start up their own companies.

I don't fully believe that though. I wouldn't be able to tell unless I have national statistics.

So, if the US were to put more effort into innovation-related degrees...

Continues??? :eyebrow: :right:

Yeah, I know, it's bad politics to openly criticise your own country, but come on. Maybe something like "restore our position as a world leader"

Well, strictly speaking, if they legally immigrate, become citizens, and run their companies from America... they are Americans, and thus "America" is still leading the world. That's always been our gig, skimming the cream of the crop off other countries. We're the charter school of the developed world! ;)

People who attain an advanced degree and relocate to a foreign country have the personal tools to excel at anything they care to.

How do you retrain American workers when you keep cutting education funding and calling it necessary for budget balance?

Considering his history of outsourcing as a business man, this isn't surprising. If a foreigner comes here on his own for a chance to work as a high level exec and he manages to get the job, fine. If the function of that part of the policy is that of an idea exchange, like an 'exchange student' program for executive level people, fine. But both of those are different than our President essentially putting up job notices in other countries and insisting they come here to lead.

Osama’s in 2010 wanted exports to double in five years. Already American exports have increased by over 50%. American industry is doing quite well oversea in some industries. For example, skyscraper architecture by Americans firms was once only done in America. Now, 15-20% of American skyscraper design is overseas. Large numbers of Shanghai skyscrapers are American designs. Is immigration partly responsible? Probably.

Eventually the demand for more employees occurs. Always long after a recession ends. But unfortunately, Cyber Wolf describes the problem. America desperately needs immigrants due to an America so entrenched on "No child left behind" as to reduce science taught to school children. For example, only 25% of teachers in math have a math or science degree. In middle school, the 25% who do have math training are mostly from the worst rated schools for math and science. Something like over 50% of the middle school math teachers never took courses in linear algebra or calculus.

A survey of prospective elementary and middle school mathematics teachers in 16 countries discovered that, without doubt, the worst trained prospective math teachers were American. Cited were problems created at the highest levels of education. No standards for what a math teach should know. No defined preparations program. Nothing from educaton management (ie "More Childs Left Behind") that would define quality or provide proper teacher training. But then America, especially in the past 15 years, has demonstrated a contempt for science. As demonstrated by the so many who know mankind is not creating global warming. And the so many who entertained stupidity such as Man to Mars, the destruction of America's space program, and drving quantum physics research from this nation.

Silicon Valley complains about the problem. Over 50% of the new engineers are ICs - Indian and Chinese. Number would be higher. But a xenophobic Congress foolishly wants less immigrants in America - stifling innovation in the Valley. America desperately needs immigrants.

Obama's?

Even *I* let that one slide. A few cites would be nice though.

Oh, that's easy....maybe we will just open up some camps. ;)

Good idea Joe, everybody knows Homeland Security has already built the camps. :haha:

I heard a report that Mr Romney that he intends to increase defense budget by an additional two trillion dollars over a decade.

What the hell?????

Because why? Because we're... unsafe? Because we're going to be invaded? How much education could two trillion dollars produce? How much economic value would be returned for an investment of two trillion dollars in the young people (and less young) of our nation?

Here's your cite.

At least its based upon ... something?

I dunno, thats all I got.

yes, it's based on "4% for Freedom". It's based on a bumper sticker.

**I** believe it should be based on our security needs instead. For that matter, how do you think the Def Dept (or the congressional vultures hawks) would respond to FALLING budgets during recessionary times?

It's dumb, also because we don't need MORE money put into defense.

Furthermore, it's based on what the economy produces, GDP. Not related in any way to the government's revenues. Not based on, you know, taxes. But hey, our net worth is x dollars, therefore, 0.04x must be spent on defense. Completely asinine.

Pretty much. Whats the number based upon now, PFA?

How about: need vs want ?

Why? Because he has buddies in the defense industry. What smokescreen he'll try to use on the American public to sell this process, I have no idea.

"I've never been in the army, but I have a friend who owns an army"

:lol:

Ahh, that line has stuck, hasn't it.

He may have one in January then Mitt and Bibi can invade Iran... woot.

There was a time when another Republican was running for the Presidency.
He too had a personality that did not connect well with the average voter.
He too campaigned on a "I have a plan".
The slogan was in most of his campaign speeches.
But when asked about specifics, he was silent or very vague.

He was elected to the Presidency, and then re-elected four years later.
His inauguration was on Jan 20th..
Six years later, his secret plan finally came to fruition on April 29th.

The Nixon tapes, still slowly being transcribed at U of Maryland, revealed his secret plan. In conversations with Kissinger just after taking office, Nixon admitted the war was not winnable. But that a loss must not occur on Nixon's watch. His legacy - not America - was always most important.

He had plenty of secret plans he just could not share with Americans. So many that the US Supreme Court took precautions when they ruled unanimously against Nixon and the subpoena for his tapes. Too many secret plans (and expletives) might be revealed.

Another secret solution was a message to N Vietnam to not accept Johnson's peace proposals because Nixon would offer them a better deal. Sound like treason? Yep. Best kept secret.

Well, his campaign now claims, repeatedly, the US Navy is smaller than it was before WWI. And its all Obama's fault. He has a secret plan to massively increase the military while cutting spending.

Recycled from the graphs and charts thread

Attachment 37942

Uhh, the bit in the middle suggests you're already spending 4.91% of GDP on defense. Uh?


And seriously, no nation comes even close to the US defense budget. And of the also-rans, about half of them are allies (Britain, France, for what that's worth ;) ) or cooperative states (Germany, Japan, kinda Saudi, although I wouldn't trust them) or mostly neutral (India, Brazil). Only China and Russia could be considered even potentially belligerent. IMHO, you're defended enough already.

Watch those damn Canadians, though. Anyone that friendly must be up to something.

They have water, and are just defending themselves from becoming the 51-60th stars in the US flag.

Water of Mineral Dissolution?

:shock: