TÌM HIỂU VỀ Tranh luận bầu cử ( Debate ) ở Mỹ và kết quả các cuộc tranh luận 2012

[QUOTE=Vân Nương;166533]List of colleges and universities in metropolitan BostonFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
Map of the land owned or leased by colleges and universities in the Boston areaThis is a list of colleges and universities in metropolitan Boston. Some are located within Boston proper while some are located in neighboring cities and towns, but all are within the 128/95/1 loop. This is a somewhat narrow definition of Metropolitan Boston, and it excludes colleges and universities along the North Shore, South Shore and in suburbs to the west. Although larger institutions may have several schools, some of which are located in cities other than that of the main campus (such as Harvard Medical School and Tufts University School of Medicine), each institution is listed only once and location is determined by the site of each institution's main campus.

[B]There are a total of 52 institutions of higher education in the defined region, including 7 junior colleges, 14 colleges that primarily grant baccalaureate and master's degrees, 8 research universities, and 23 special-focus institutions[/B]. Of these, 50 are non-profit organizations while 3 are for-profit businesses, and 48 are private ventures while 5 are public institutions (4 are run by the state of Massachusetts and 1 is operated by the city of Quincy).

In 2007, enrollment at these colleges and universities ranged from 108 students at the Episcopal Divinity School to 32,053 students at Boston University. The first to be founded was Harvard University, also the oldest institution of higher education in the United States, while the most recently established institution in the area is the Urban College of Boston. All but four of these schools are accredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC), the oldest regional accrediting body in the United States, and all but one are recognized by the United States Department of Education.

Vân Nương[/QUOTE]

Tôi nhớ ra rồi, ông Tour Guide có nói Boston được gọi là College Town, cái con số trên là chính xác, vậy cái con số trong cái trang này là gì? hỏi thì hỏi vậy, nhưng tôi xin miễn tranh cãi ai chính xác hơn ai, tôi có dịp sẽ hỏi chính dân Boston, không phải 1 người mà độ chừng chắc cả chục, mà cũng chưa chắc chắn, vì cũng còn tuỳ là hỏi đúng người sanh đẻ ra ở Boston, cùng đi học ngay tại Boston, may ra rành rẽ hơn, riêng tôi thì bây giờ không nhiều thì ít tôi vẫn tin cái ông Tour Guide hơn. Nói chung chung thì đối với cả nước thì Boston có cái tên gọi là College Town. [url]http://www.citytowninfo.com/places/m...setts/colleges[/url]

Vụ này là sao ? Nhờ quý cao thủ giải thích dùm :


Hãng General Motor, sau khi nhận tiền Bail Out cua Obama, thi đã mang tat cả Hãng GM qua China . Nhu the, Obama là AI ? Số tiền Bail out kia, tai sao Obama lai "cho khong, bieu khong cho China ? " OBAMA LA AI ?


[CENTER][video]http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo[/video][/CENTER]

[QUOTE=Hoa Biển;166536]Vụ này là sao ? Nhờ quý cao thủ giải thích dùm :


Hãng General Motor, sau khi nhận tiền Bail Out cua Obama, thi đã mang tat cả Hãng GM qua China . Nhu the, Obama là AI ? Số tiền Bail out kia, tai sao Obama lai "cho khong, bieu khong cho China ? " OBAMA LA AI ?


[CENTER][video]http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo[/video][/CENTER][/QUOTE]


One time for all, xin nói 1 lần, nếu có ghét Obama, thì trước khi đồn 5 đồn 10, xin check qua Fact Check cái tin không thì mang tiếng nói xấu ông Obama đấy, xin xem tin dưới đây về cái 4 nghi 10 ngợ trên:

[url]http://www.factcheck.org/tag/chain-email/feed/[/url]

Is GM Becoming ‘China Motors’?
‎Friday, ‎June ‎08, ‎2012, ‏‎11:34:42 AM | Brooks Jackson
Q: Is General Motors becoming ‘China Motors’ using taxpayer dollars?

[b]A: No. The restructured GM is still based in Detroit and is still one-third owned by the U.S. government. But it sells nearly as many cars in China as in the U.S. and has continued expanding operations there. [/b]


FULL QUESTION
How much of this is true? Subject: Video – No more GM cars for me!
WHAT AN EYE-OPENER! No more GM cars for me. Even if this were only half true it would light a fire under you. Trouble is, it’s ALL true !!!
CLICK ON the LINK below and open up your eyes… [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo[/url]
YES, YOUR TAX MONEY AT WORK, THANKS TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION !!!!!



FULL ANSWER

Several readers have asked us about the claims stated in a viral video that criticizes General Motors’ expanding operations in China. The video has received more than half a million views on YouTube since it was posted May 4. The narrator, a man who gives his name as Vince Wade, asks: “Did we bail out GM so that it could become a Chinese company?”

[b]It’s a fair question. The short answer is, “No.”

Still American

GM is still a U.S.-based multinational auto company, incorporated in Delaware and headquartered in Detroit. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, about 33 percent of the stock in GM is still owned by the U.S. Treasury as a result of a taxpayer-assisted bankruptcy and downsizing in 2009.

But the company sells cars in more than 120 countries and accounted for nearly 12 percent of all car and truck sales worldwide last year (11.9 percent, according to GM’s annual report). It’s also true that China is now the largest market for car sales on earth. Total car sales in China surpassed those in the U.S. in 2009. China retained the lead in 2011, and that lead is expected to grow in the future.

So like it or not, the world’s automakers have been drawn to this huge and growing market, and GM has been particularly successful there. The video’s narrator clearly doesn’t like it.

His video asks, “Was the bailout a mistake?” And he goes on to quote an account criticizing GM’s Cadillac brand for supposedly currying favor with “the underworld mob that runs China.”

We won’t offer opinions on whether or not GM or any other company should be doing business in China, or on other controversial issues on which the narrator takes a stand. Our job is to look at the facts.

Overall, the video gives a one-sided picture. And on a couple of points it misleads. Here we offer a more complete and accurate picture, so readers may decide for themselves how they feel about GM’s dealings in China.[/b]

GM Expanding

Narrator Wade states that “GM has been shrinking its U.S. operations, while it’s aggressively expanding and investing in the People’s Republic of China.” But the fact is GM is currently expanding in both places.

It’s true that GM shrank much of its U.S. operations — shedding old brands and dealerships and many workers — when it went through bankruptcy in 2009. The alternative was to go out of business entirely.

But since then, the “new” GM has enjoyed expanding sales and operations. For example, it announced in January that it is building a new, $200 million stamping plant in Arlington, Texas. And it states: “Since June 2009, the company has announced more than $6.9 billion of investment to upgrade or expand operations in 12 states, creating or retaining more than 17,600 jobs.”

It’s true that GM also has been expanding in China — but that was true long before the bailout. The “old” GM (the one that went bankrupt) was the largest foreign car maker in China in 2008, battling for supremacy there with Volkswagen.

The “new” GM has continued that overseas success. It sold a record 231,183 vehicles in China in May, up 21 percent from a year earlier, for example. That compares with 245,256 vehicles sold in the United States, up 11 percent from a year earlier and the highest in 33 months.

Cost to Taxpayers

[b]The video is also misleading [/b]as to the cost of taxpayer support. It cites a figure of $80 billion, which actually covers the government’s peak disbursements for both GM and Chrysler, as the narrator mentions in passing. But the net cost of the entire bailout is currently estimated to end up being $19 billion (by the Congressional Budget Office) to $22 billion (by the U.S. Treasury).

Most of that $80 billion has been recovered through interest payments, loan repayments and sale of government-owned stock. And of course, some portion of that is attributable to bailing out Chrysler.

Taxpayers still own about 33 percent of GM stock, according to CBO (other calculations put the total closer to 32 percent). Either way, the final cost of the bailout depends largely on whether the price of GM stock rises or falls between now and when the government decides to sell its shares.

So the better GM does, the less U.S. taxpayers will be hurt. And a key part of GM’s global business strategy is selling and manufacturing cars in China. As then-GM CEO Rick Wagoner said in 2008: “The automaker that gets China right will be the future leader of the industry.”

Global Auto Realities

Much of the video is devoted to showing GM Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Daniel F. Akerson explaining GM’s overseas operations to reporters in Shanghai in February 2011. Akerson noted that almost “seven out of 10 of our vehicles were made outside the United States” and that “we have 11 joint ventures” with government-owned Chinese companies (which the narrator later describes as partnerships with the “autocratic, anti-Democracy, Communist government of China”).

Akerson goes on to say, “We’re involved in vehicle manufacturing, sales, distribution, engineering design” and other auto-related businesses. He also said GM operates 11 assembly plants and four power train plants in eight cities in China.

That may sound surprising to some viewers, but the fact is that building and selling cars outside the home country is standard for multinational auto firms today. Japanese and German firms have many manufacturing facilities in the U.S., for example.

In fact, the top 10 “American-made” cars as ranked by Cars.com include three made by Toyota and two made by Honda (plus three made by GM, one by Ford and one by Jeep, a division of Chrysler, which is still U.S.-based but mostly owned by the Italian auto firm Fiat.) The single most “American” car made and sold in the U.S. today is the 2012 Toyota Avalon, with 85 percent domestic content (meaning parts made in either the U.S. or Canada), according to ratings published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Two GM passenger vans are tied for second, with 82 percent domestic content. (Toyota’s Matrix has 95 percent domestic content, more than any other vehicle sold in the U.S., but is assembled in Canada.)

GM’s facilities sprawl across the globe. Besides its plants in the U.S. and China, it is the third-largest car maker in Korea. It makes cars in Brazil, has owned Britain’s Vauxhall brand since 1925, and still owns the troubled Opel brand, manufactured in Germany, Poland and Britain, to cite a partial list.

Other Issues

Some of the more than nine-minute video is devoted to flaying Cadillac for its sponsorship of what the narrator describes as “a propaganda film, celebrating the anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China.” That much is true enough, and the video includes shots of the premiere with the Cadillac logo sharing the stage with the party’s hammer-and-sickle symbol.

But then the video quotes extensively from a story in the Epoch Times newspaper, in which the reporter cites a “suspicion” that GM was marketing Cadillacs to top party officials to curry their favor. But the full text of the story shows the reporter prefaced that by saying, “I have no proof.” So that speculation may or may not be accurate.

A statement that China’s leaders constitute an “underworld mob” — also quoted — is the opinion of the Epoch Times writer, Matthew Robertson. As the video narrator mentions, the Epoch Times leadership has numerous ties to the dissident Falun Gong movement. Followers were widely persecuted by the Chinese government, and that may color the newspaper’s reporting.

Another issue raised by the video is the sale of the Saginaw, Mich.-based GM supplier Nexteer to a Chinese firm. But the Wall Street Journal reported in February that the deal has turned out pretty well for U.S. workers: “Today, few people in town are wringing their hands about the Chinese. Inside a 59-year-old factory at Nexteer’s sprawling complex, contractors are ripping out antiquated machine lines and installing new equipment to produce an electronic steering system for the next generation of GM’s large pickup trucks and SUVs. The company, for years known as Saginaw Steering Gear, has hired more than 100 engineers in Saginaw last year and is looking for 80 more this year.”

The narrator is critical of both President Barack Obama and the probable Republican nominee Mitt Romney. He states that two big Romney supporters profited from the bailout. That’s based on a report by freelance investigative reporter and author Greg Palast. We can’t vouch for its accuracy. Palast is a veteran fraud investigator with an MBA from the University of Chicago. But as a journalist, he also has his critics.

[b]We of course take no position on whether GM’s operations in China are a good thing or a bad thing, or whether the GM bailout should have been handled differently, or at all. We also take no position on whether car buyers should boycott GM, as the writer of one version of an email suggests in the headline. We only note that there are far fewer “tax dollars at work” than this video suggests, and that — like it or not — the auto business is global, China is the biggest market for cars on the planet, and if GM doesn’t build and sell cars there then others will. So the things this video finds distressing are happening with or without the bailout.[/b]

– Brooks Jackson

[QUOTE=Hoàng Nguyên;166537]One time for all, xin nói 1 lần, nếu có ghét Obama, thì trước khi đồn 5 đồn 10, xin check qua Fact Check cái tin không thì mang tiếng nói xấu ông Obama đấy, xin xem tin dưới đây về cái 4 nghi 10 ngợ trên:

[url]http://www.factcheck.org/tag/chain-email/feed/[/url]

Is GM Becoming ‘China Motors’?
‎[B][COLOR="#0000CD"]Friday, ‎June ‎08, ‎2012, ‏‎11:34:42 AM[/COLOR][/B] | Brooks Jackson
[COLOR="#A9A9A9"]Q: Is General Motors becoming ‘China Motors’ using taxpayer dollars?

[b]A: No. The restructured GM is still based in Detroit and is still one-third owned by the U.S. government. But it sells nearly as many cars in China as in the U.S. and has continued expanding operations there. [/b][/COLOR]


FULL QUESTION
How much of this is true? Subject: Video – No more GM cars for me!
WHAT AN EYE-OPENER! No more GM cars for me. Even if this were only half true it would light a fire under you. Trouble is, it’s ALL true !!!
CLICK ON the LINK below and open up your eyes… [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo[/url]
YES, YOUR TAX MONEY AT WORK, THANKS TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION !!!!!



FULL ANSWER

Several readers have asked us about the claims stated in a viral video that criticizes General Motors’ expanding operations in China. The video has received more than half a million views on YouTube since it was posted May 4. The narrator, a man who gives his name as Vince Wade, asks: “Did we bail out GM so that it could become a Chinese company?”

[b]It’s a fair question. The short answer is, “No.”

...

– Brooks Jackson[/QUOTE]

Phần quote trên của T/V Hoàng Nguyên - về article tháng 6/2012 -nói về GM .

Hôm qua : [B]Oct 25th ,2012[/B] - Ứng cử viên Romney "phán" 1 câu xanh rờn ( không chịu kiểm chứng , hoặc cố tình XẠO ) về Chrysler:

On Thursday, Romney told a rally in Defiance, Ohio, site of a General Motors plant, "[B]I saw a story today[/B] that one of the great manufacturers in this state Jeep -- now owned by the Italians -- is thinking of moving all production to China. I will fight for every good job in America. I'm going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it's fair America will win."

[B]Facts / Sự thật [/B]

[I][COLOR="#0000FF"]A Chrysler spokesman scorned the misinterpretation as "a leap that would be difficult even for professional circus acrobats," explaining, "Jeep has no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China. It's simply reviewing the opportunities to return Jeep output to China for the world's largest auto market. U.S. Jeep assembly lines will continue to stay in operation."[/COLOR][/I]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[B]CBSNews.com[/B] emailed the Romney campaign to ask whether they knew the blog reports were inaccurate and whether Romney will continue using the inaccurate story on the trail. The campaign did not respond to those questions but insisted that "the larger point that the Gov. made is that rather than creating jobs here, the foreign owner, handpicked by President Obama, is planning to add jobs overseas - which is still true." Romney did not mention the report at a campaign event in Ames, Iowa this afternoon.

Meanwhile, President Obama's campaign, which has sought to put Romney on the defensive regarding the auto bailout and sees the issue as key to its success in midwestern manufacturing states, slammed Romney for the misfire.

"Mitt Romney shamelessly tried to scare voters into thinking Jeep was moving to China and taking American jobs with it," said Obama campaign spokesman Matt McGrath. "That is blatantly false, and speaks to how Romney will say absolutely anything to win votes."

Mr. Obama and his campaign used the kerfuffle to segue to a broader indictment of Romney's stance on the auto bailout. "President Obama has fought on behalf of U.S. auto workers by challenging unfair Chinese tariffs on U.S. auto exports to China, including Jeeps, while Romney would have let the American auto industry and a million jobs go under," said McGrath.

It's a charge that the president himself has leveled, both at the final presidential debate and on the stump this week. "If Mitt Romney had been president when the auto industry was on the verge of collapse, we might not have an American auto industry today. We'd be buying cars from China, instead of selling cars to China," said Mr. Obama in Cleveland on Thursday.

Romney has disputed this characterization, arguing that while he would not have provided government money to the auto industry, he would have provided government guarantees to encourage private financiers to loan money to the companies during a managed bankruptcy.

At the time of the auto bailout, however, many analysts identified the government as the auto companies' lender of last resort. Private credit markets were frozen enough to prevent private lenders from extending a helping hand to the ailing companies, regardless of the insurance provided by a government loan guarantee.

Without private or public money, a managed bankruptcy could have more closely resembled a liquidation process in which the companies were subdivided and sold, piece by piece, to the highest bidder.

[COLOR="#808080"]CBSNews.com's Lucy Madison contributed to this report.[/COLOR]

Taị Mỹ, có một vài thành phố trong đó toạ lạc đông đảo các trường đại học mà sinh hoạt do đa số các sinh viên chủ động thì ngoài cái tên chính thức của thành phố, người ta còn gọi là College town. Nghĩa đơn giản chỉ có thế. Ví dụ như Boston của tiểu bang MA, hay Ithaca của New York, nơi toạ lạc cuả trường Cornell. Trái lại tại thành phố New Haven, Connecticut, campus cuả trường Yale nằm rải rác khắp thành phố mà không được đặt tên là college town. Lý do là tổ chức của trường Yale khác hẳn các trường đại học lớn khác. Dưới chương trình under graduate, trường chia làm 12 colleges với tên riêng và sinh hoạt độc lâp với nhau, tương tự như tổ chức quân sự một sư đoàn có 12 tiểu đoàn. Cái ý nghiã colege town ngoài dân chúng chỉ có nghiã vậy.

Xin yêu cầu trở lại chủ đề. Một hai cái posts về college town thì không sao, cứ miên ma mãi sẻ làm derail the topic. Nghe các vị giải thích về college town mà cười no bụng.

[QUOTE=TuongLaiVietNam;166541]Xin yêu cầu trở lại chủ đề. Một hai cái posts về college town thì không sao, cứ miên ma mãi sẻ làm derail the topic. Nghe các vị giải thích về college town mà cười no bụng.[/QUOTE]
Người ta cố tình chuyển đề tài một rõ ràng mà ông không thấy sao? Vào VL để cười chơi thì rõ ràng diễn đàn nầy là nơi để thư giản cuối tuần. Chỉ cần viết sai một dấu hỏi, dấu ngã là đề tài cho thể chuyển qua tranh luận hào hứng kéo dài tới cả mấy ngày về dấu hỏi dấu ngã, rồi "ngu", rồi "óc heo","đầu bò", "tâm thần", "dốt như VC" .....VVV.. Đánh trúng cái tâm lý nầy nên bọn phá hoại, cũng có thể là mấy tên thất nghiệp, rãnh rỗi suốt ngày vào VL để chọc phá rồi cười chơi. Eo ôi! Boston có 1000 trường đại học hay không có trường nào thì đã sao? Vậy mà cũng tranh nhau cải vả mất hết 3 trang rồi mà sẽ còn cải tiếp nữa để cố tình xoá đi cái chủ đề bầu cử , quan trọng và hào hứng nầy. Chửi nhau chơi âu cũng là trò giải trí vậy. Ai cũng là ma hết thì có chết ai đâu . Hãy chửi nữa đi em , chửi sao thành professitional như "con mẹ mất gà" Hồng Vân mới là hay.
Cũng như cái nghề nổ, cũng có tay cao tay thấp. Romney cũng là tay nổ có hạng. Nói về nổ thì Obama chưa xứng đáng học trò của Romney . Nói láo mà hể lặp đi lặp lại nhiều lần thì nghe riết rồi người ta cũng tin. Trên diễn đàn VL có một tay nổ thuộc loại super là cái nick Dr. Tran. Tay nầy là cao thủ nổ thuộc hàng sư phụ trong môn phái nổ thuộc môn phái "cộng hoà chống cọng"

Hôm nay 2 bên bằng nhau, +- 4%, nằm trong sai số thống kê.

[QUOTE=Cao Cầu;166550]Người ta cố tình chuyển đề tài một rõ ràng mà ông không thấy sao? Vào VL để cười chơi thì rõ ràng diễn đàn nầy là nơi để thư giản cuối tuần. Chỉ cần viết sai một dấu hỏi, dấu ngã là đề tài cho thể chuyển qua tranh luận hào hứng kéo dài tới cả mấy ngày về dấu hỏi dấu ngã, rồi "ngu", rồi "óc heo","đầu bò", "tâm thần", "dốt như VC" .....VVV.. Đánh trúng cái tâm lý nầy nên bọn phá hoại, cũng có thể là mấy tên thất nghiệp, rãnh rỗi suốt ngày vào VL để chọc phá rồi cười chơi. Eo ôi! Boston có 1000 trường đại học hay không có trường nào thì đã sao? Vậy mà cũng tranh nhau cải vả mất hết 3 trang rồi mà sẽ còn cải tiếp nữa để cố tình xoá đi cái chủ đề bầu cử , quan trọng và hào hứng nầy. Chửi nhau chơi âu cũng là trò giải trí vậy. Ai cũng là ma hết thì có chết ai đâu . Hãy chửi nữa đi em , chửi sao thành professitional như "con mẹ mất gà" Hồng Vân mới là hay.
Cũng như cái nghề nổ, cũng có tay cao tay thấp. Romney cũng là tay nổ có hạng. Nói về nổ thì Obama chưa xứng đáng học trò của Romney . Nói láo mà hể lặp đi lặp lại nhiều lần thì nghe riết rồi người ta cũng tin. Trên diễn đàn VL có một tay nổ thuộc loại super là cái nick Dr. Tran. Tay nầy là cao thủ nổ thuộc hàng sư phụ trong môn phái nổ thuộc môn phái "cộng hoà chống cọng"[/QUOTE]

Washington DC đã sản sinh ra 1 "Bomb lady" đang làm việc cho Navy- Gần đây lại cho ra thêm 1 "Bomb man" nữa... đang hoạt động trên Vietland !

Giởn chơi thôi...đừng wa'nh em nhá ! :D:D:D

Tôi từng viết bài này:
[url]http://www.hienphapvietnam.org/index.php/thubanbientap/1181-drtran[/url]

Sau này Obama nghe lời các Think Tank, mà các nơi này nhận tiền rất nhiều của các cty Mỹ, nên nịnh bợ Việt Cộng quá đáng.

Nay tôi không ủng hộ Obama nữa, vì đối với tôi cho dù ông ta đúng trong 100 việc, nhưng chỉ SAI 1 việc trong vấn đề VN, thì không đáng để tôi ủng hộ.

[B][COLOR="#0000CD"]Bởi vì, tôi là người VN trước khi là người Mỹ. Tôi là công dân Mỹ, nhưng là con cái của Tổ Quốc Việt Nam. [/COLOR][/B]

Trong passport vẫn ghi "Nationality" là Việt Nam.

Nếu phải chọn giữa Mỹ và VN, tôi chọn Việt Nam. Lợi ích của VN, theo tôi, quan trọng hơn lợi ích Mỹ.

----------

Obama ngược đãi phái đoàn VN hôm 5/3, mối NHỤC này tôi sẽ phải trả.

Phe tôi mà thắng thì sẽ ngược đãi phái đoàn quốc gia nào đó của Mỹ lại, để trả mối hận, mối NHỤC này

Ví dụ, TT Mỹ qua, tôi cho 1 đứa trẻ VN 22 tuổi ra sân bay đón, không vào thì thôi, cút về Mỹ ngay.

Trước hết, sẽ lấy lại Tòa Lãnh sự Mỹ tại SaiGon, giao lại 1 miếng đất nhỏ xíu bên Củ chi, không làm thì thôi.

Tân VN nếu thành công sẽ thân Liên Âu, chứ KHÔNG THÂN MỸ.