Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

MO: 2010 Sen (Rasmussen 5/2)

Topics: Missouri , poll

Rasmussen
5/2/10; 500 likely voters, 4.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

Missouri

2010 Senate
45% Blunt (R), 44% Carnahan (D) (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Roy Blunt: 54 / 38
Robin Carnahan: 52 / 40

Job Approval / Disapproval
Pres. Obama: 46 / 54 (chart)
Gov. Nixon: 61 / 37 (chart)

 

Comments
tjampel:

This is a real shock. Did Ras leave its LV screen in the bathroom yesterday?

____________________

rdw4potus:

I agree. VERY shocking. Even Obama's net -8 is a shock. He'd be competitive in a reelection bid with that number...

____________________

iVote:

Well that's interesting. +7 point swing for Carnahan... in a Ras poll.

____________________

Speedo Bandit:

tjampel,

Why don't you just admit that Rasmussen is an honest pollster? Just look at the tracking polls for Obama and the Kentucky poll of Paul.

____________________

iVote:

Rasmussen is only an honest pollster when they have to be.

____________________

Uchenna Oguekwe:

Uh Oh...Looks like the Dems have a fighting chance this year after all. With it being this close in a Rass poll, I wouldn't be celebrating if I were a Repub.

____________________

rdw4potus:

Personally, I don't think Rasmussen is dishonest, just incompetent. They're so far from the rest of the pack on everything they poll this year, I just can't get myself to think that they're right.

Either their model is correct and they'll prove the world (and some much more skilled pollsters) wrong, or they're going to fall into the abyss when election results disprove their model. I think the latter is more likely.

____________________

LordMike:

It's time for Scott Rasmussen to reboot his computer... these numbers do not fit into his media narrative!

____________________

sjt22:

People please, this shift could easily be a normal product of statistical chance, especially given the small sample sizes that Rass uses.

The election is a long way off, and we're sure to see plenty of bouncing around from now till then. Not ever shift is a surge, especially when its only one data point.

____________________

Stillow:

Geeez, when is recess over you liberals? Everyday, all day,k its the same thing from you libs....bash Rass, bash Rass. Bash any and all polls that do not conform to your desires.

Let us know when recess is over so the grown ups can actually discuss the polling.

MO, its no surprise its thsi close. MO is almost exactly a 50/50 state with a solid balance between urban and rural. This race will probably be one of the closest we have in 2010 with Blunt probably squeaking out a 1 or 2 point win.

____________________

sjt22:

Rasmussens models do have some bias. We all know this. My other problem with him is the insistence on these 500 person sample sizes. For god sake man, you're using automated calls! Can it be that much harder to get 1000 or 1500 responses?

That said, even with his faults, he's still a good pollster, and his greatest contribution is that he consistently polls and thus gives us a series of data points to work with. Whatever his faults, that's a plus. A clock that's 5 minutes fast may not be totally accurate, but it can still be useful if you understand its limitations.

____________________

Bob in SJ:

@ Stillow,

How do you explain two 15+ point shifts away from Republicans by Rass in the last two weeks (Kentucky and COnn). I find it unlilely that something like that oculd happen in this environment.

Anyway, go Carnahan. Blunt is the connsumate DC insider. It's gonna cost him.

____________________

Paleo:

Things are not moving the Republicans' way in some of these senate races. MO, PA, NV, CT, OH to name a few. I would expect Kirk's numbers in IL to take a hit in the next poll. And since it looks like Campbell won't be winning the primary in CA, Boxer looks a lot safe. Dems might be able to hold their net losses to 2 or 3.

____________________

rdw4potus:

"Geeez, when is recess over you liberals? Everyday, all day,k its the same thing from you libs....bash Rass, bash Rass. Bash any and all polls that do not conform to your desires."

Yeah, but, see...That's kind of the problem. All of the other pollsters conform to each other, and Rass is WAAAAY out on an island. Maybe they really are correct, but it's surely much more likely that all of the other top flight pollsters (who are also grouped together in their results) are correct.

I guess I don't trust Rass for the same reasons that I don't trust Fox News or MSNBC. The crap they spew is just way too far off from what every other comparable outlet is putting out.

____________________

Stillow:

For the billionth time, Rass uses a different model than most pollsters. rass uses a LV model. Pollster like gallup or Pew, or whomever use various types of other models, adults perhaps, registered voters, etc. We have various models that are used. rass uses a LV model. Haven't you noticed everytime Rass dips in his daily tracker of Obama, Gallup almost always follows suit a little while afterward? if Rass goes back up, then gallup will follow suit.

LV samples will give you different results than an adults only sample. We are months away from election day...races can take huge swings back and forth. Various factors can impact polling too...like in NV for example you have a contested GOP primary so hwile they beat eachother up, it makes sense there numbers would dip for a while against reid, once a winner is declared, you will see anohter shift, probably to the GOp primary winner.

This constant Rass bashing and whining about his resutls because they don't give you what you want everytime is getting old and boring.

Try to analyze the results taking into consideration all pollsters use different models and sample sizes....depending on those details, you will get various results in the polling.

Its ok to poke a little fun at some pollsters, but this whiny crap about Rass every single day all day long is just getting old and boring.

____________________

CHRIS MERKEY:

Paleo:

Not sure there is going to be a net loss anymore. AR, ND seem like the only sure things in 2010. IN might be next. It seems like the hopes the Reps had for the other states are fading faster by the day.Sestak seems to have the lead now. Reid is closing his gap. Kos shows Reid in the lead but would rather see a poll from Quinn or other non-biased pollsters. CO will be a squeaker but hopefully it's Bennett. He's a likeable guy and think he wil won once Coloradans know who he is. Kirk seems to be self-destructing in IL plus he voted against DADT which could be troublesome in IL. Pretty good chance to take OH and even KY. Blumenthal seems to be doing ok against Ms. Mcmahon. Boxer will be a squeaker too especially if it is Campbell but she can do it even with him as the candidate. Dems have the best candidate in MO that they could have possibly wanted. Blunt not so much. I think she can overtake Rep's advantange in MO. At the most, they pick up 2-3 seats like you said but I could see it staying even also especially with OH, MO, NC, KY and even FL ( Crist might caucus with dems).

____________________

rdw4potus:

Stillow,

You're right. We're months away from the election. And an LV model is idiotic this far out. It over-samples enthusiastic voters, and in this election that's conservative republicans. The problem (to me, the error in the Rass methodology) is that by election time, the effect of the enthusiasm gap will be much smaller.

Also, might I suggest that if you find discussions of polling methodologies "old and boring," you might be in the wrong place?

____________________

Lt. Cmdr. Walrus:

@tjampel

"This is a real shock. Did Ras leave its LV screen in the bathroom yesterday?"

Not shocking at all actually, at least to an MO resident. Carnahan has a lot of advantages working in her favor that would probably make this seat a lock for her if this wasn't such an anti-majority party year. Roy Blunt on the other hand has a ton of baggage, namely his association with the previous Rep majority and his son's previous term as governor.

@Stillow

"MO, its no surprise its thsi close. MO is almost exactly a 50/50 state with a solid balance between urban and rural."

MO isn't really dead even anymore. Reps hold commanding majorities in the state legislature, and our statewide Dems (Nixon, McCaskill, Carnahan, etc.) are considerably more conservative than national Dems. I don't have trend or demographic numbers in front of me but I imagine that MO will not be considered a swing state for too much longer.

____________________

Shannon,Dallas,Texas:

@Field Marhshal

I just wanted to get back to your response. I was out all morning and didn't see your post on the "US: Health Care (CNN 5/21-23)" thread.


"I would be against [a modest tax on profits derived in the US for companies who do not meet a minimum ratio of labor to profit]. Number 3 is just a fast track path to socialism."

A tax on corporate profits is a fast track path to socialism? Please, explain. Silly me, i thought socialism was about ownership, more specifically ownership of everything by the public working class.

You're fine with private companies using foreign resources (sometimes state owned resources) to harvest domestic resources such as oil and then selling that to the American public at a premium and paying no taxes (check out Exxon).

You're fine with Apple, Dell, and other tech companies designing products using limited US staffs, then manufacturing those goods in China, before shipping it to American consumers which constitute their biggest market.

But, you're against taxing them if their profits dwarf their US domestic payrolls. You're against taxing them period EVEN THOUGH their 18 wheelers cause the most damage to public roadways.

I guess your solution is to privatize all roadways. Get rid of the minimum wage. While you're at it, you might as go all the way and open the borders to all workers. If labor is just a resource in the free market, why wouldn't you have them come here and pay taxes on their slave earnings. As it stands, their paying foreign taxes.

Let just come back to reality. Taxes are not a path to socialism.

So, the question is how do you control offshoring?

Is offshoring in our national interest?

Is Sestak still in the lead in PA over Toomey? Is Blumenthal still leading over McMahon? How do the races look in California?

Say whatever you will about Rasmussen's polling or any of the other so called generic ballots, the head to head match ups indicate that the Republicans gains are going to be limited.

If the Republicans couldn't take PA-12, what can they take?

I just want to get what you're saying straight:

1). Any tax is a path towards socialism.
2). Offshoring is good for the free market and good for the American economy.
3). You're fine with companies that pay zero in federal taxes, such as Exxon, using the public roadways to transport goods in 18 wheelers.

____________________

Stillow:

rdw4potus - Just stop whining. Make your points, sto pthe bashing. Everyday all day its the same whiny crap from you lefties. at the least, come up with new stuff to whine about Rass with and not the same stuff everyday.

CHRIS MERKEY:
I see a minimum of 6 senate pickups for the GOP...but am leaning to 7 pickups.

IMO I see: NV, CO, ND, AR, DE, IN, as GOP pickups.

I see: WA, IL, PA, CA, WI as within sriking distance and the GOp can probably win a couple of these races.

The GOP holds NH, FL - I beleive Crist already said he would not caucus with Dems.

The only two seats I see the Dems can really steal are MO and OH...and they will be tough to steal in btoh states.

Out of all that mesh I see a solid 6 or 7 seat gain for the GOP....maybe 8. Early predictions are fun, but meaningless....but its fun to tinker wti hthe races.


____________________

Porchnik:

If Scott Ras wants to keep his spot on the National Review booze cruise to the Bahamas this November, he better deliver better numbers than these.

____________________

Xenobion:

Tell me why Ras went with a 25% swing in Kentucky then 9% two days later...

The fact is Ras knows how to poll Missouri, the quintessential bell weather state. Ras credentials don't expand beyond your Iowa's, NH's, ect.

____________________

rdw4potus:

Stillow,

I'm not sure why you assume that I'm a lefty just because I think Rass sucks. I assure you that there is no correlation (let alone causation) there. I'm a moderate. I live in MN where the Independence party is both active and middle-of-the-road. To date, I've voted for members of both major parties, each about 45% of the time (10% independence party voting). I voted for Barkley for Senate and McCain for President. Liberal? Really? Bite me.

____________________

Juan Chin:

Hmmm... This race is starting to follow the same path as the last 3 or so Senate races in Mo. For Carnahan, it comes down to Kansas City and St. Louis/St. Louis County Democratic turnout. McCaskill won only after the last remaining precincts in St Louis were counted back in 2006. Like Ohio, Missouri has an establishment Republican running for Senate who has big ties to big bad Washington DC. The Dems in both of these states are outsiders and are making these real races for a real reason. If Rassy has Blunt up by one, then Carnahan might be doing better than we think. I sure wouldn't count her out!

____________________

Field Marshal:

Tell me why Ras went with a 25% swing in Kentucky then 9% two days later...

The same reason he showed a huge swing for Sestak; the primary win bounce. Then Paul had the bogus news stories come out and his popularity fell back down to Earth.

It will be interesting to see the next PA senate race polling to see where Sestak has fallen to.

____________________

Huda:

MO is one of those unique states like Virginia that mainstream political argument always assumes its too conservative than it is. In fact they tend to vote for Dems more on national elections than its surrounding neighbors like Kansas, Arkansas and Kentucky.

I would say this to everyone, its June....let's talk about which party is in collapse or should panic around August/Sept.

____________________

Field Marshal:

A tax on corporate profits is a fast track path to socialism? Please, explain. Silly me, i thought socialism was about ownership, more specifically ownership of everything by the public working class.

I'm all for corp profit taxes but the government telling how much a company can pay its employees i'm not for. You are thinking of the old definition of socialism. I'm thinking of the contemporary definition- which i equate to interventionalism.

You're fine with private companies using foreign resources (sometimes state owned resources) to harvest domestic resources such as oil and then selling that to the American public at a premium and paying no taxes (check out Exxon).

This has been a big bone of contention and misinformation. XOM pays huge amounts of US taxes, just not in the traditional corporate form because of our tax laws. XOM pays royalties based on the oil and gas it extracts from our land and then it can take a deduction of the tax paid in royalties off its federal tax bill. In other words, the taxes were paid, just to the states it extracted the resources from, not the federal govt.


You're fine with Apple, Dell, and other tech companies designing products using limited US staffs, then manufacturing those goods in China, before shipping it to American consumers which constitute their biggest market.

Yes i am. If a PC were made here, it would cost 3 or 4 times as much which would mean only the rich would own them. Same goes for most products. In addition, the mfg jobs are low-skill jobs.


I guess your solution is to privatize all roadways. Get rid of the minimum wage. While you're at it, you might as go all the way and open the borders to all workers. If labor is just a resource in the free market, why wouldn't you have them come here and pay taxes on their slave earnings. As it stands, their paying foreign taxes.

I wouldn't privatize ALL roadyways but i would privatize a lot of them. CO recently privatized E- 470. The benefits here are that they received nearly $200 million which they can now use to fund other highway and transit projects. In addition, a report recently stated that the road was kept in better condition than when it was run by the state and the operator (a Spanish company) may even lower the toll.

I would get rid of the minimum wage for some industries and jobs. As it stands now, teenagers are being priced out of jobs because of minimum wage.

In regards to the open borders and "slave wage", that is just silly hyperbole.

So, the question is how do you control offshoring?Is offshoring in our national interest?

You don't. Offshoring is in our interest because free trade, free movement of labor, and free movement of capital is in our national interest.

1). Any tax is a path towards socialism.
2). Offshoring is good for the free market and good for the American economy.
3). You're fine with companies that pay zero in federal taxes, such as Exxon, using the public roadways to transport goods in 18 wheelers.

1) No, anytime the govt tells what businesses can do it a path towards socialism. HIGHER taxes also can be a path as well if you morph into a welfare state. 2) Yes. 3) I'm fine with them paying zero fed taxes along as they are paying their share of total US taxes. Lasst year, XOM tax rate was 45%. XOM paid more in taxes to the US than a quarter of all Americans combined. The Dems have been in charge of congress for many years now and this law has been on the books since 1986, so if they didn't like it, i'm sure by now they would have altered it.



____________________

Field Marshal:

A tax on corporate profits is a fast track path to socialism? Please, explain. Silly me, i thought socialism was about ownership, more specifically ownership of everything by the public working class.

I'm all for corp profit taxes but the government telling how much a company can pay its employees i'm not for. You are thinking of the old definition of socialism. I'm thinking of the contemporary definition- which i equate to interventionalism.

You're fine with private companies using foreign resources (sometimes state owned resources) to harvest domestic resources such as oil and then selling that to the American public at a premium and paying no taxes (check out Exxon).

This has been a big bone of contention and misinformation. XOM pays huge amounts of US taxes, just not in the traditional corporate form because of our tax laws. XOM pays royalties based on the oil and gas it extracts from our land and then it can take a deduction of the tax paid in royalties off its federal tax bill. In other words, the taxes were paid, just to the states it extracted the resources from, not the federal govt.


You're fine with Apple, Dell, and other tech companies designing products using limited US staffs, then manufacturing those goods in China, before shipping it to American consumers which constitute their biggest market.

Yes i am. If a PC were made here, it would cost 3 or 4 times as much which would mean only the rich would own them. Same goes for most products. In addition, the mfg jobs are low-skill jobs.


I guess your solution is to privatize all roadways. Get rid of the minimum wage. While you're at it, you might as go all the way and open the borders to all workers. If labor is just a resource in the free market, why wouldn't you have them come here and pay taxes on their slave earnings. As it stands, their paying foreign taxes.

I wouldn't privatize ALL roadyways but i would privatize a lot of them. CO recently privatized E- 470. The benefits here are that they received nearly $200 million which they can now use to fund other highway and transit projects. In addition, a report recently stated that the road was kept in better condition than when it was run by the state and the operator (a Spanish company) may even lower the toll.

I would get rid of the minimum wage for some industries and jobs. As it stands now, teenagers are being priced out of jobs because of minimum wage.

In regards to the open borders and "slave wage", that is just silly hyperbole.

So, the question is how do you control offshoring?Is offshoring in our national interest?

You don't. Offshoring is in our interest because free trade, free movement of labor, and free movement of capital is in our national interest.

1). Any tax is a path towards socialism.
2). Offshoring is good for the free market and good for the American economy.
3). You're fine with companies that pay zero in federal taxes, such as Exxon, using the public roadways to transport goods in 18 wheelers.

1) No, anytime the govt tells what businesses can do it a path towards socialism. HIGHER taxes also can be a path as well if you morph into a welfare state. 2) Yes. 3) I'm fine with them paying zero fed taxes along as they are paying their share of total US taxes. Lasst year, XOM tax rate was 45%. XOM paid more in taxes to the US than a quarter of all Americans combined. The Dems have been in charge of congress for many years now and this law has been on the books since 1986, so if they didn't like it, i'm sure by now they would have altered it.



____________________

Field Marshal:

Apologies for the dupe...

____________________

melvin:

Rasmussen is under tremendous pressure from the Democrats,am waiting for his poll on the illinois senate race,because 1 day after the Bloomenthal contvsy he had Bloom lead cut from 30pts to 3.nt good.

____________________

Xenobion:

If you believe Rasmussen polled a bounce that effectively withered up in 2 days without any sort of internal adjustment of their polling methodology then you're naive.

____________________

melvin:

Xenobion go check it out,2 months ago bloomenthal was up by 30pts in most polls,but 2days after that contvsy Rasmussen had him only leading by 3,the proof is in the pudding.

____________________

tjampel:

Speedo Bandit:

"tjampel,

Why don't you just admit that Rasmussen is an honest pollster? Just look at the tracking polls for Obama and the Kentucky poll of Paul."

OK...he's honest and his polling firm has house effect...HONESTLY!. I like his summaries and writing style etc. I find his polls useful. There are lots of them show they show trends in individual races and national issues, generic ballot, Pres approval, etc. It's all great stuff.

Having a house effect isn't the result of being a liar; it's caused by the method used to determine who's likely to vote. Ras' method for determining likely voters just happens to screen out more Dems than other methods, on average so that their results skew 2-3% Republican compared to other polling firms; thus the house effect.

Scott may honestly believe that his likely voter screen is the correct one so this has nothing to do with Scott being an honest man. He may also be correct and everyone else wrong.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"I would get rid of the minimum wage for some industries and jobs. As it stands now, teenagers are being priced out of jobs because of minimum wage."

You tend to make decent points but other times you say crazy stuff.

Do you know how much Wal-mart or fast food places would pay if there was no minimum wage? I'd guess about $3.00 an hour for fast food, maybe $4.00 at a retailer like Wally World. That was the minimum wage back in the 1980s. At that low wage the jobs would be almost useless even for a teenager. It might help middle class teenagers that don't really need jobs, but anyone trying to help their family would be contributing next to nothing. I know exactly what they would do...do less hiring and start working people longer hours. They currently pay far less that what minimum wage should be because they hire a lot of people for minimal hours.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

This is pretty encouraging actually. I know that Missouri is still at best a long shot in 2010 for the Democrats, and even if Blunt ultimately wins, it means the GOP won't have an easy ride to victory.

I still don't believe the GOP will retake the senate. I think they are reaching too high and contesting too many seats. I think if they decided to not spend tons of money in CA, WI, WA or CT and focused on PA, OHIO, MI, NV, CO and settled for that their odds would be better. It is just like Icarus who tried to touch the sun and died as a result; I think it may be a reach for them to win all the competitive races.

They may win a surprise state, but I predict that KY, NC and maybe even Lousiana with Vitter may be closer than they think.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I do think the GOP has weaker candidates this year than they did in 1994. Contract with America had a clearer message than I am getting this year; the GOP seems split in their different philosophies. They had some socially conservative candidates, like Santorum and some who were a little like the tea partiers like Spencer Abraham in Michigan, but in MIchigan for Gov. the front runner is a washington person running for governor, in CA, they have fiorina who has no elective experience, with ideas that are way out of the mainstream for a Democratic leaning state like CA, Toomey's whose voting record is worse than senators from Alabama and Louisiana. Nevada has 3 oddballs in that primary. It doesn't make sense.

____________________

Field Marshal:

All polling has a house effect.

____________________

Shannon,Dallas,Texas:

@Field Marshal

Ok. I understand that you're ok with offshoring. In my opinion, offshoring to the extent that it's being done is not in out national interest. In fact, it's a national security problem.

I should explain the tax that I proposed. Let's say you're Exxon and you make $6.3 billion in profits for the quarter and you've got 30,000 US employees. Based on an analysis of the oil industry, the federal government has set a domestic staffing standard of 60,000 employees given the amount of Exxon's profit. Since Exxon is below the minimum, they would be taxed $15,000 times the number of employees that they fall below the minimum. In our example, Exxon would be charged a tax of $450,000,000. Exxon would be paying $60,000 per year for each employee that they fall below the minimum.

____________________

Xenobion:

I can't feasibly believe people would change their mind that quickly only to then change it back to what it was before said controversy began without any new information or controversy to throw things back in place.

____________________

Field Marshal:

@shannon,

Ok. I understand that you're ok with offshoring. In my opinion, offshoring to the extent that it's being done is not in out national interest. In fact, it's a national security problem.

I disagree. We manufactured more goods last year than in any other year in the history of the country. Losing low-skilled jobs only makes us better.

I should explain the tax that I proposed. Let's say you're Exxon and you make $6.3 billion in profits for the quarter and you've got 30,000 US employees. Based on an analysis of the oil industry, the federal government has set a domestic staffing standard of 60,000 employees given the amount of Exxon's profit. Since Exxon is below the minimum, they would be taxed $15,000 times the number of employees that they fall below the minimum. In our example, Exxon would be charged a tax of $450,000,000. Exxon would be paying $60,000 per year for each employee that they fall below the minimum.

I don't know what the unintended consequences of such a plan would be. I'm thinking significant.

I would much rather see a flat corp tax based on all source profits and an elimination of subsidies for the energy and agricultural sectors of the economy. I think you're plan would just add tons of red tape and added costs that would drive more jobs overseas.

@aaron,

Why is that crazy stuff? The unemployment rate for teenagers was the highest it has ever been in our history. Do you think that's a coincidence? If a teen wants to work for $4 an hour, part-time, let them. If not, then WMT or whomever would need to increase their pay in order to garner workers. Its called the free market and its not that crazy.


____________________

Farleftandproud:

I don't pay any attention to Rasmussen on Obama's approval. Obama is a charismatic figure who can get the most uninformed and unlikely voters. It is midterms that are more of a concern because the turnout in the US for anything other than a presidential elections usually sucks.

____________________

Shannon,Dallas,Texas:

@Field Marshall

"We manufactured more goods last year than in any other year."

That's only because global consumption is increasing. A few more Indians and Chinese are able to afford Trane A/C units outside their new homes.

We are quickly losing our dominance. Like I said, it's a national security matter.

"Losing low-skilled jobs only makes us better."

The unemployment rate is a structural problem. We have many people who are unemployable in today's economy. We need those low skilled jobs. Since when has losing anything in a capitalist nation made anyone better?

"I would much rather see a flat corp tax based on all source profits"

A flat corporate tax doesn't encourage employers to hire. It's just a tax that's going to be passed on to the consumer (right wing logic at its best).

At worst, it would drive companies to do more business overseas. Who would do that? Would you leave the world's most lucrative consumer market? No.

Do you really think that a company is going to shell out $60,000 annually in taxes in lieu of hiring a $30,000 - $40,000 employee?

____________________

Farleftandproud:

A key reason for this change in the poll is Blunt has been a huge power-player in Washington and was one of the biggest recipients of funds from Haliburton and other companies like them. Of course most politicians other than Bernie Sanders or Dennis Kucinich get money from greedy corporations, but Haliburton is just a reminder of the past and a human rights violator.

____________________

Field Marshal:

That's only because global consumption is increasing. A few more Indians and Chinese are able to afford Trane A/C units outside their new homes.We are quickly losing our dominance. Like I said, it's a national security matter.

Disagree. We are no even coming close to losing our dominance. We have higher productivity and higher gains in mfg than most other countries. China doesn't even come close to mfg goods. We just don't need very much labor to mfg all those goods anymore because of increases in technology and productivity.

A flat corporate tax doesn't encourage employers to hire. It's just a tax that's going to be passed on to the consumer (right wing logic at its best).

Competition and growth encourages hiring. The government can encourage it the most by getting out of the way. Believe me, as soon as they create something like you suggest, the companies will be around it in two seconds.

All corp taxes are passed onto the consumer anyway. I think a flat income tax and sales taxes are the way to go eliminating corp taxes.

@farleft-

I don't pay any attention to Rasmussen on Obama's approval. Obama is a charismatic figure who can get the most uninformed and unlikely voters.

That's for sure.

____________________

seg:

Field Marshall:
I agree with you on American manufacturing. It is actually increasing and we are still the number one mfg in the world by any reasonable measure except employment. Employment is declining and has been for about 70 years. That is due to mechanization and other efficiency improvers, not lower production. Our liberal friends seem to have little experience with blue-collar work (it is part of their endearing naivete), but even you would be very surprised at how many mfg jobs are still very low tech, so there is plenty of reason to think the shrinkage will continue.

Several years ago a major mfg (I think Caterpillar, but I am not sure) endured a 14 months strike. The salaried employees not only kept the company running, but actually increased production. The company ran heavily in the black until the strike ended. That was an indicator not only of massive union featherbedding, but that the company actually need far fewer workers than even they had believed.

I personally have seen massive reductions in workforces in hundreds of companies over many years with similar results (I do a fair amount of engineering and environmental and other consulting). Where strong unions have successfully resisted this process, the company and sometimes the whole industry shrank dramatically by plant closures (e.g., steel mills, many types of refining, auto). In fact, I think you can make the case that nearly every old-line industry with strong unions but is not a monopoly (e.g., trains, planes) or protected by backdoor government protection is dead or dying.

Coal mining is an exception for reasons with a lot of history to them. Obama has his sights on them, so I really wish all those hard-working miners a lot of luck (yes, I really have a bit of experience with mines, too).

I think NewGeographic is the most recent to try to sweep back the tide of sometimes deliberate misinformation on the mythical decline in American industry. They also made the point that the number employed in Chinese factories has declined at a far faster rate in the last 10 years than in the U.S. even as Chinese production has greatly increased.

It is very similar to what happened in agriculture over the last 100 years or so. The fraction of Americans working in agriculture has declined from well above 70% to much less than 5% (probably less than 1/2% if your remove those doing it as a hobby or tax write-off or for government subsidies for not planting.) None of these statistics are exact, but I think they are each in the right ballpark. That is why we have to import all of our food today, I guess.

There are many myths propagated by unions and politicians and swallowed whole by the willfully mis-informed naifs among us.

PS I guess I could be accused of passing along insider trading (I don't care) because I was telling everyone I knew to run away from GM stock back in the 1980s. I doubt I could make even you understand just how dysfunctional every plant was. The employees were taught by the UAW to hate the company, and workers often would forthrightly tell me that they wanted to see it fail (they thought they would be paid forever, regardless). They also had incredible problems with employees stealing from each other. I could never get used to that. I saw very similar problems at Easter Airlines long before their final demise.

____________________

Bigmike:

Wow, FM, taking it easy on Shannon I see.

In my own not-so-humble opinion, the biggest argument against Shannon's proposed tax is the "domestic staffing standard." I am not seeing that in my copy of the constitution. I know the Feds get to REGULATE interstate commerce, but I don't think they get to MANDATE it. A standard like that is not a "fast track path to Socialism," it is moving there overnight. Next thing you know the govt will want to tell companies what they can pay execs and they will be taking away my double whoppers, gas guzzler, and Marlboros.

____________________

Paleo:

"You are thinking of the old definition of socialism. I'm thinking of the contemporary definition- which i equate to interventionalism."

There is only one definition of socialism, and yours isn't it. Why don't we just start changing the definitions of words in the dictionary to fit political demagoguery? Governmental intervention in the economy is not socialism. Government ownership of the means of production is socialism.

____________________

Shannon,Dallas,Texas:

@BigMike

There already are staffing standards. Look at what the staffing standards are for running a hospital or even a home health agency.

"I am not seeing that in my copy of the constitution."

I'm laughing.

On the subject of manufacturing, if you don't believe me about global consumption, take a look at some of the information put out by the Heritage Foundation:

http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/453F2087DC900CE57FB479934F3E4C05.gif

This just shows cars. There's a housing boom going on in China and India. I was recently over in Asia and I noticed that all of the A/C units were either American or Korean made.

I can't believe that the right wingers are clinging to something as un-American as offshoring jobs to foreign countries.

It's ok to agree sometimes. We can all agree that sending jobs to China is a bad thing. Maybe those coal workers you all feel so badly for can find jobs in other industries if the jobs weren't offshored.

____________________

Thaddeus:

This one made me laugh: FM-"Last year, XOM tax rate was 45%. XOM paid more in taxes to the US than a quarter of all Americans combined."

Seeing that something like 45% of people paid no taxes to the Feds, why only a quarter of all Americans combined? XOM wasn't the only company to pay $0 or almost $0 to the Feds, Fortune did a piece on the companies paying almost nothing, after the oil companies, I remember GE. The feds let them write off foreign taxes, so all the money that Exxon gets taxed by Nigeria for pulling oil, something like 80% gets written off their taxes here, bring them to $0.

____________________

Thaddeus:

Sorry for the double, but just thought about the argument against taxing dividends as a double tax. So Exxon pulls down 30-40 Billion in profit. No fed income tax, because of write-offs, so that means the money paid out in dividends hasn't been taxed yet...

____________________

Rasmussen is an honest pollster, and the likely voter model seems to work well in traditional turnout patterns. The Obama effect in 2008 and the excitement/exposure of the Democratic Senate fight in Pennsylvania likely threw off the model. My thinking is that a Dem who can get within 5 points in a ras poll, and has a strong gotv (especially in young/minority) voters should win. Normal (read, uninspired) minority and youth turnout in a mid-term and ras numbers will be spot-on.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR