Is Bush weaseling out?

[Silent_One]

Anyways, no, we don't know the productivity of the factory......

Good, you finally admit that

........However, I'd rather let the Iraqis spend $80K of their money to get the factory up to decent production rather than $15 Million of our money to build a completely new plant that could get bombed out the day after the opening ceremony.

Yet there you go again hanging on to some assumption that the production is "decent". And as for bombing out newly bulit factorys or anything elce, by that logic we should just let them sit in ruins.

 

[Natoma]

Anyways, no, we don't know the productivity of the factory......

Good, you finally admit that

Finally? I made a supposition for example purposes and reiterated that we don't know the productivity. So yea.... :?

........However, I'd rather let the Iraqis spend $80K of their money to get the factory up to decent production rather than $15 Million of our money to build a completely new plant that could get bombed out the day after the opening ceremony.

Yet there you go again hanging on to some assumption that the production is "decent". And as for bombing out newly bulit factorys or anything elce, by that logic we should just let them sit in ruins.

Actually that was epicstruggles comment from that CNN article he read. Check page 1.

And as for the bombing part, my point is to let them use their own money. They spent $80K of the confiscated Hussein funds. If the plant gets blown up and they have to rebuild it, let them rebuild it with their own money. If the plant gets blown up after we put in $15 million of our money, what are we going to do, dump another $15 million into the country? Please.

If they can pay for this rebuilding process in any way shape or form with their own money, let them. Especially when it's far cheaper than we could do the job, in large part because of our wage levels and insurance costs of doing business in a middle east hot zone.

 

[epicstruggle]

........However, I'd rather let the Iraqis spend $80K of their money to get the factory up to decent production rather than $15 Million of our money to build a completely new plant that could get bombed out the day after the opening ceremony.

Yet there you go again hanging on to some assumption that the production is "decent". And as for bombing out newly bulit factorys or anything elce, by that logic we should just let them sit in ruins.

Actually that was epicstruggles comment from that CNN article he read. Check page 1.

What the hell are you talking about, I never talked about bombing a new cement/concrete factory, i did mention that there might be a difference in output. All my post was about is that your usually full of [insert waste product-like material], usually making things up, and that what the iraqis did and what the americans were going to do were 2 completly different things.

later,
epic

 

[Natoma]

........However, I'd rather let the Iraqis spend $80K of their money to get the factory up to decent production rather than $15 Million of our money to build a completely new plant that could get bombed out the day after the opening ceremony.

Yet there you go again hanging on to some assumption that the production is "decent". And as for bombing out newly bulit factorys or anything elce, by that logic we should just let them sit in ruins.

Actually that was epicstruggles comment from that CNN article he read. Check page 1.

What the hell are you talking about, I never talked about bombing a new cement/concrete factory, i did mention that there might be a difference in output. All my post was about is that your usually full of [insert waste product-like material], usually making things up, and that what the iraqis did and what the americans were going to do were 2 completly different things.

later,
epic

Ahem. I was talking about the comment regarding decent production. Learn to read your own post and mine. I addressed the production aspect with the sentence you quoted, then I addressed the bombing aspect in that part that you snipped. Directly after I might add. And you accuse my posts of being made up and full of it.

As for the iraqis and the americans, you are still missing the point. What is the end goal of rebuilding? To get the infrastructure up and running. What should be the primary means of reconstruction? The billions confiscated from Hussein. Key difference? We were going to spend $15 Million of our own money. They spent $80K of the confiscated money. Tremendous difference in source wouldn't you say?

There is no difference save for the fact that we were going to spend $15 Million, and they spent $80K. I could care less if we were going to raze the ground site and build it from scratch for $15 Million, or merely give it a paint job and call it a day for $15 Million. The point is the end result of getting the factory up and running was achieved for $80K of their money, not US taxpayer funded money. And that is what is most important to me as an american citizen who is bankrolling this thing.

 

[Silent_One]

If they can pay for this rebuilding process in any way shape or form with their own money, let them. Especially when it's far cheaper than we could do the job, in large part because of our wage levels and insurance costs of doing business in a middle east hot zone.

While I agree with you that if they can pay for some of the rebuilding of their country then let them, what you are doing is trying to compare different costs with different results. How do you know its far cheaper for them to do the job? How do you know if they could build a cement plant for less than $15 million? How do you know we couldn't get the old plant up and running with so-called "decent" output for less than $80K? You don't. Your just assuming so for the sake of your argument and to pormote your beliefs.

We *could* have spent $800 and bought a complete system from Dell or Gateway or Compaq. No the parts wouldn't have been top of the line and it wouldn't have been as fast, but it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper and it still would have been a useful and fast computer. You said that the Iraqis could build the thing and get some decent output whereas the americans would have spent $15 Million to build a whole new one with up to date technology. Lets say the Iraqis could get 50% throughput for 80K and the Americans could get 100% throughput for $15 Million. Economies of scale suggest that on a percentage basis, dollar for dollar, the 80K Iraqi built plant is a FAR better bargain does it not?

It does not. You have no basis to assume such scale. If you want to compare computer ability vs. costs to cement plants output vs. costs you should at least start with a proper cost comparison. A $80K factory upgrade is to a $15 million factory as a $18.60 computer upgrade to a $3,500 computer. Your $800 Dell is equal to a $3.428 million dollar brand new facotory (their factory is probably equal to an old 286 anyway).

There is no difference save for the fact that we were going to spend $15 Million, and they spent $80K. I could care less if we were going to raze the ground site and build it from scratch for $15 Million, or merely give it a paint job and call it a day for $15 Million. The point is the end result of getting the factory up and running was achieved for $80K of their money, not US taxpayer funded money. And that is what is most important to me as an american citizen who is bankrolling this thing.

Again, your assuming there is no difference between an old factory and a new one.

What is the end goal of rebuilding? To get the infrastructure up and running.

The end goal of rebuilding is not to just get the "infrastructure up and running" Just slaping some band- aids on the place will not help in the long run (see Afghanistan). Indeed it might be wise to still build a new factory while the old is still limping along. That could help termendously in getting the infrastructure up and running, which would help the Iraqi economy, which in turn would help the Iraqi people.

But then you don't care. You only see it as a waste of taxpayers money.

 

[Natoma]

If they can pay for this rebuilding process in any way shape or form with their own money, let them. Especially when it's far cheaper than we could do the job, in large part because of our wage levels and insurance costs of doing business in a middle east hot zone.

While I agree with you that if they can pay for some of the rebuilding of their country then let them, what you are doing is trying to compare different costs with different results. How do you know its far cheaper for them to do the job? How do you know if they could build a cement plant for less than $15 million? How do you know we couldn't get the old plant up and running with so-called "decent" output for less than $80K? You don't. Your just assuming so for the sake of your argument and to pormote your beliefs.

One of the major reasons is that the cost of doing business for iraqis in the region is far less than the cost of a western company doing business there. For instance, an average Iraqi wage is roughly $100 a month in that region whereas an average western wage would be roughly $3000 a month. For that 1 average western employee, you could hire 30 average Iraqis. And lets not even mention the sky high insurance costs associated with western companies working in Iraq

A company like Haliburton isn't all of a sudden going to start paying its employees Iraqi wages. This situation is akin to companies who take their operations to countries like china where they can hire workers for far cheaper, and get materials far cheaper, than if they went through western channels.

No assumption required. Merely basic economics of the region.

We *could* have spent $800 and bought a complete system from Dell or Gateway or Compaq. No the parts wouldn't have been top of the line and it wouldn't have been as fast, but it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper and it still would have been a useful and fast computer. You said that the Iraqis could build the thing and get some decent output whereas the americans would have spent $15 Million to build a whole new one with up to date technology. Lets say the Iraqis could get 50% throughput for 80K and the Americans could get 100% throughput for $15 Million. Economies of scale suggest that on a percentage basis, dollar for dollar, the 80K Iraqi built plant is a FAR better bargain does it not?

It does not. You have no basis to assume such scale. If you want to compare computer ability vs. costs to cement plants output vs. costs you should at least start with a proper cost comparison. A $80K factory upgrade is to a $15 million factory as a $18.60 computer upgrade to a $3,500 computer. Your $800 Dell is equal to a $3.428 million dollar brand new facotory (their factory is probably equal to an old 286 anyway).

First, you're thinking in western scale of costs. An $80K factory to an Iraqi is not like an $18.60 computer vs a $3500 computer is in a total western scale. Why? Because of the cost of doing business in Iraq.

You are making the erroneous assumption that the Iraqis would purchase their material at prices that a company like Haliburton would deem appropriate when in fact they purchase materials mainly from other muslim nations in the region. For instance, the Iraqis can import oil for roughly $0.70. Haliburton imports that same oil for $1.35. You can guess why.

The people who put that factory back together are no doubt competant businessmen who know what they're talking about. If they say they can get the materials together to make the factory work, who's to say they can't? Are we so condescending that we don't believe they could possibly get that factory working for $80K USD by going through cheaper channels that we don't have access to?

Before the Gulf War in 1991, Iraq was one of the bastions of economic output and intellectualism in the middle east. It's not like all that talent just doesn't exist anymore.

There is no difference save for the fact that we were going to spend $15 Million, and they spent $80K. I could care less if we were going to raze the ground site and build it from scratch for $15 Million, or merely give it a paint job and call it a day for $15 Million. The point is the end result of getting the factory up and running was achieved for $80K of their money, not US taxpayer funded money. And that is what is most important to me as an american citizen who is bankrolling this thing.

Again, your assuming there is no difference between an old factory and a new one.

And you're assuming that the Iraqis can't get the factory working with any modicum of success for $80K.

What is the end goal of rebuilding? To get the infrastructure up and running.

The end goal of rebuilding is not to just get the "infrastructure up and running" Just slaping some band- aids on the place will not help in the long run (see Afghanistan). Indeed it might be wise to still build a new factory while the old is still limping along. That could help termendously in getting the infrastructure up and running, which would help the Iraqi economy, which in turn would help the Iraqi people.

But then you don't care. You only see it as a waste of taxpayers money.

Again, you're assuming that all the Iraqis could do is rebuild the plant with matchsticks, playing cards, and silly putty. The Afghanistan situation is far far different. Afghanistan had absolutely no infrastructure in place. They have an illiteracy rate of over 80% and there is no middle class. Iraq has all of that and more. The only reason Iraq is as rundown as it is now is because of the last 10 years of sanctions and Saddam abusing the oil-for-food program.

And yes, I do care about what happens in Iraq. But if they come to us saying that they can take care of the factory for $80K, we should listen to them and not try to ram a $15 Million factory down their throats. If they come to us saying they can import their own oil for $0.70, why are we doing it for them at $1.35?

I care about what happens because we can't fail. But I also don't want Iraq to become a black hole for our money either.

 

[Silent_One]

First, you're thinking in western scale of costs.

Duh...your the one who compared $800 Dell computers to factory upgrades.

And you're assuming that the Iraqis can't get the factory working with any modicum of success for $80K.

Not at all. I believe that they can get their old factory going with some modicum of sucess for the $80K. I question if that is enough, as I really don't know, nor do I presume to know. You, on the other hand, assume it is good enough. Your the one who makes assumption after assumption regarding factory output, scale of economic returns, power plants ( ), costs, available labor, skilled labor, available materials, ect. You make statements as if their facts, whne there is no factual basis in them. If you started your posts with "In my opinion...." then I and others would probably agree with you

 

[Natoma]

First, you're thinking in western scale of costs.

Duh...your the one who compared $800 Dell computers to factory upgrades.

You're missing the point. You're trying to compare $80K in Iraqi costs to $15 Million in US costs. That $80K would stretch far more in Iraq in the hands of Iraqis than you think it would, especially when the costs of doing business in Iraq are a fraction of the costs for a US firm.

I compared $800 US costs to $3500 US costs for purpose of the analogy to show that a computer could be purchase for far cheaper and do everything a more expensive computer needs to do. No it won't have all the bells and whistles, but it works. That is all the analogy was meant to display. The latest and greatest is not always necessary, nor appropriate.

And you're assuming that the Iraqis can't get the factory working with any modicum of success for $80K.

Not at all. I believe that they can get their old factory going with some modicum of sucess for the $80K. I question if that is enough, as I really don't know, nor do I presume to know. You, on the other hand, assume it is good enough. Your the one who makes assumption after assumption regarding factory output, scale of economic returns, power plants ( ), costs, available labor, skilled labor, available materials, ect. You make statements as if their facts, whne there is no factual basis in them. If you started your posts with "In my opinion...." then I and others would probably agree with you

Again, you're thinking in US costs. An Iraqi can live comfortably on $100-$300 a month. Does it not stand to reason that the reason for that level of comfort is because of the reduced costs of doing business in Iraq? A family of four in the US is considered poor if they make $25,000. Yet take that family of four with that income and put them in Iraq, and they're living like Bill Gates.

The Iraqis, who I assume are competant businessmen and women, said they could get the factory up and running, and did so, for $80K. That in and of itself is where I base what I stated on wrt labor, costs, materials, given the economic clime in the middle east.. The power plant information was taken directly from a Businessweek article and the NEI, though obviously it wasn't relevant to this situation, and I corrected that mistake earlier. One wonders why you're shocked regarding the information anyway.

And as for factory output, yes I did make an assumption of 50% productivity, which I clearly stated as such for the purposes of the example.

 

[epicstruggle]

look natoma, everything that comes out of you mouth or that you type is either completly fabricated or biased beyond imagination. You hate bush as a rabid dog. Youll skew any and all facts to suit your needs. Its hopeless.

Lets just state some very clear facts:
-we dont know the out put of the repaired cement factory compared to the old factory.
-the output of a new $15 million dollar plant is also unknow.
-We know that $15mill would NOT be spent on building the cement factory in the USA and shipped to iraq.
-There have been many cases where US commanders have improvised cheap solutions for major problems over there. Like irrigation, water treatment, trash removal. All examples shown on CNN, MSNBC,...
-MOST (about 80-90+%) of iraqis want to make sure the US does not leave early, and that they appreciate the job the US is doing. source poll conducted in iraq and reported on chris mathews show.

If you have any doubts about the sucesses in iraq watch the chris mathews show on msnbc, although he is a liberal democrat. He is by far one of the most candid, honest reporters on tv right now. Last week they had a segment dedicated to the sucessess over there. Hope they continue this week.

later,
epic

 

[Natoma]

Biased? Well Duh. Took you that long to realize that? What's next.....

I've admitted my bias against the administration's policies and political stances on many occassions, just as I'm doing now. Fabricated? Most certainly not. You talk about backing up my claims with proof. Lets you see back that one up.

There is no need to skew facts whatsoever. It's plain as day. You seem willing to apologize for anything and everything that this administration does wrong, so it's equally hopeless. Bush could come out tomorrow and say "Saddam killed my mother" and you'll believe it or apologize that somehow it's a liberal conspiracy to misrepresent the truth.

But let's get down to details and state some clear "facts":

-we dont know the out put of the repaired cement factory compared to the old factory.

Well gee the it's the same factory. And not only that, but it wasn't working before it was repaired. So I'd say the productivity rate is near infinite wouldn't you say?

But in all seriousness, what does this have to do with anything? If you get 80% productivity out of a factory today and the productivity when it was new was 100%, does that change the fact that it is 80% today? Your "fact" isn't exactly relevant.

-the output of a new $15 million dollar plant is also unknow.

One would hope it would be capable of coming close to matching the productivity levels of similar factories in the United States if we're building it.

-We know that $15mill would NOT be spent on building the cement factory in the USA and shipped to iraq.

Whoever said that? I said that the american companies who are building these factories and power plants import their material through their normal channels which end up being far more expensive than the channels the iraqis take.

And here's a fact for you. The "low level" employee from any of the western companies is making at least 10x what an Iraqi would make doing the same job. Not to mention all of the executives who get their slice. There's a big chunk of your cost differential right there.

-There have been many cases where US commanders have improvised cheap solutions for major problems over there. Like irrigation, water treatment, trash removal. All examples shown on CNN, MSNBC,...

Then maybe the US commanders that you speak of need to speak to the executives at these firms that think importing oil into Iraq for $1.35 is a great idea when the Iraqis can do it themselves for $0.70.

Because it seems those US commanders of yours have far more business sense than the executives at Haliburton.

-MOST (about 80-90+%) of iraqis want to make sure the US does not leave early, and that they appreciate the job the US is doing. source poll conducted in iraq and reported on chris mathews show.

I've never said that we should leave early. In fact if you read my statements on the matter, I think it'd be a complete and utter disaster if we DID leave early. What I have a serious disagreement over is how our money is being spent in Iraq.

I disagreed with going to war without bringing our allies on board when I knew that they would be the ones who could ease the burden on us in terms of shouldering the military and the financial weight. Of course now we're finding out just how alone we truly are since no countries have been willing to offer up any substantial sums of money or troops, in stark contrast to the first gulf war when I believe we spent $3-$5 Billion total. Not per month as we're doing now. Total.

I also disagreed with the evidence that was presented to the american public. If we knew where the WMD was, why didn't we share that info with the weapons inspectors in order to try and avert a war that has cost the lives of hundreds of americans and british, and thousands of iraqis? If there was incontrovertible evidence, why did the IAEA and the CIA come out saying that it was flaky? Why was evidence good enough for the american public, but not good enough for the UN Security Council?

It has been mishandled since day one.

If you have any doubts about the sucesses in iraq watch the chris mathews show on msnbc, although he is a liberal democrat. He is by far one of the most candid, honest reporters on tv right now. Last week they had a segment dedicated to the sucessess over there. Hope they continue this week.

No doubt there are successes in Iraq. Getting power up and running was one of them, along with restoring water flow and new businesses opening up in the markets where none existed before.

However, basking in the glow of success does not take away from the monumental blunders that are being committed every day, ESPECIALLY when those blunders do not need to occur, such as the $0.65 surcharge we're forcing upon our own coffers and that of the Iraqis for importing oil.

Now going through all of these points, I've seen at least two that you've stated or alluded to me making, that I haven't made at all. Who's the one fabricating now?

p.s.: I don't hate Bush. I hate his policies. I don't know the man. How can I hate him? When Bush does things that I agree with, and they are rare, I praise him. Such as his unwavering stance that "muslim" terrorists are not true and faithful representatives of Islam, even in the face of people in his own party and administration and faith.

That is one of the few things that I am proud to call him my president over. Unfortunately they are few and far between.

 

[Ty]

Concerning the Cement factory IF true - what happened to the Republican mantra of letting a person help themselves? It's a GREAT belief so why are we committing corporate welfare on a national level?

 

[Joe DeFuria]

..Such as his unwavering stance that "muslim" terrorists are not true and faithful representatives of Islam, even in the face of people in his own party and administration and faith.

Um...

Who in his party and/or administration, or his faith.....thinks or has said that terrorists ARE the true and faithful representatives of Islam?

 

[Natoma]

Buchanan and Reverend Falwell and Reverend Phelps and especially Pat Robertson, who called Islam a religion of the devil (all right after 9/11 btw), and General Boykins' recently exposed comment regarding his god being bigger than the god of islam, even though they're one and the same, for starters.

 

[Natoma]

Concerning the Cement factory IF true - what happened to the Republican mantra of letting a person help themselves? It's a GREAT belief so why are we committing corporate welfare on a national level?

What? Republican hypocrisy? Never!

 

[epicstruggle]

Buchanan and Reverend Falwell and Reverend Phelps and especially Pat Robertson, who called Islam a religion of the devil (all right after 9/11 btw), and General Boykins' recently exposed comment regarding his god being bigger than the god of islam, even though they're one and the same, for starters.

None of these people are in his administration. Again more fabrications and lies. Please name me one member of his administration. See you just love to strech the truth to the breaking point and then some.

Lets see if you can come up with a name.
later,
epic

 

[ByteMe]

Concerning the Cement factory IF true - what happened to the Republican mantra of letting a person help themselves? It's a GREAT belief so why are we committing corporate welfare on a national level?

What? Republican hypocrisy? Never!

Name ONE president in the last 10 that was more honest? You seem like a cry baby to me. It appears his ideals are working and it seems to tick you off.

 

[epicstruggle]

i think what bunches his shorts, is the fact that with dean to run against, there is a very strong possibility that the republicans might not only win the presidency but have close to if not more than 60 senators. If my memory serves me correct they have to defent 4-5 open democratic seats. 2004 COULD see bush become one of the most powerful presidents in history. Ahh wouldnt that piss natoma to no ends.

later,
epic

 

[Legion]

If that were to happen i hope that Bush and co do all that is in their power to undermine late term abortion legislation and afirmative action (legislated racism).

 

[epicstruggle]

If that were to happen i hope that Bush and co do all that is in their power to undermine late term abortion legislation and afirmative action (legislated racism).

didnt the president sign legislation banning late term abortion this month?
Affirmitive action will only be reversed with a new supreme court justice. Hopefully a few of the more liberal elements retire.

later,
epic

 

[RussSchultz]

even though they're one and the same, for starters.

You should leave the determination of who's who in religion to people who actually are involved. If a group of people want to say Allah is not the same as Yahweh, G-d, or the holy trinity, well...that's their perogative. You cannot define somebody's faith for them.