The NUMMI folks got the extra deal because there were so many of them at once, it is an economic as well as a political issue (yes, I realize politics is involved). When there is a big lay-off in the Valley, you will sometimes hear about deals like this for electronics workers, though most companies try to avoid such large reductions all at once. Once back in the 80′s my company had a big lay-off, they had to give 3 months notice and provided packages to satisfy the labor laws. Most companies try to stay under the threshold.

I think this type of help should be more widely available, it is an investment not just a give-away. There are risks, a lot of trade schools are over-promoting the opportunities that they provide. Even so, investing in skills directly stimulates the economy and has long term benefits for individuals and for the community. Much better than spending it on Iraq for instance.

First – you argue a definition of “conservatism” which you want to suggest somehow has something to do with resource ownership (your post #19).

Choosing to overlook that minor mis-step – you need a new strategy and now claim “ignorance” of the discussion –

Hmmm – looking over the “Marty Playbook” – it seems like timing is ripe to exit this thread and get busy somewhere else fanning the flames of discourse for discourse’ sake.

Who benefits ?

I am sure obscene amounts of money will start flowing into Brown’s coffers soon enough. I guess it’s a matter of who you want to “own” the candidate. Meg will be her own biggest contributor, I suspect the unions will be Gerry Brown’s. But big money is not ideal in any sense. I wish it were different.

There’s a cozy little conclusion to this thread for me, as it’s come full circle: No doubt about it, Meg Whitman bought the Republican nomination with her own money. But, Obama and Stark are buying votes with China’s money. I’ll let you decide which is better for America. That’s pretty much all I have to say.

I am by no means a cheerleader for Whitman, but I have no issue whatsover with her campaign funding. The lady hasn’t been sitting by her mansion fireplace tossing stacks of $100 bills into the fire. $85M, much of it her own money has been circulated into the CA economy by way of campaign staff, advertising, media production, etc, etc. Probably 10% ($8.5M of that has been funneled into the CA general fund from income taxes alone. This is not a bad thing.

Anyway, your somewhat petty complaints against Whitman (campaign finance over policy) is a bit strange, since her opponent, Gerry Brown is the Godfather of CA public employee unions, a facet of our government of which you’ve been very much against.

Are you yet another textbook case of a brainwashed California Democrat voting against their best interests?

But you knew that – right ?

Please – tell me you knew that already

- didn’t you ?

Please – tell me you completed an elementary school education and you were taught the meaning of conservatism, long ago – and you’ve just. .. . forgotten (?)

You and Meg.

Perhaps an Obamaphile can chime in with their opinions on campaign spending, breaking spending records and all that.