Obama to Small Business Owners

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
There are plenty of legit arguments out there to make. This is just propaganda stuff. [/quote]

There is a link to his speach in the beginning of the thread.

“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”

It isn’t propaganda, it is actual quotes from the horse’s ass, oops I mean mouth.

No, they don’t. But not doing any work and the people who do supporting you shoudln’t either.

I feel like you are missing the point.

Next time you are awake at 3am, laying in bed, going over the numbers, over and over and over again, wondering how on Earth you are going to make payroll on Thursday… Just remember, all that worry, all that stress, it doesn’t mean shit to Obama. Because the people who are sound asleep living off your tax dollars, are more important than you and your problems, because other people worked really hard to give you the opportunity to not sleep and worry about the families of the people you employ.

Think about that. You are worth less for doing more. You take all the risk, and get no reward. Sure sounds like comrade Lama has it right.

82

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
The same can’t be said about the company I run. A more fair comparison would be my company to a moderately high risk stock. There’s a potential for profit there, but also a significant potential for zero return. [/quote]

Hey and guess what, Obama wants to take away the return and give it to people who never took the risk.

Is that really okay in any way shape or form?

83

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
An extra 5 percent tax is not a big deal.[/quote]

LOL.

Speak for yourself homie. I would much rather that 5% went into my daughter’s 529, my son’s 529 or my 401k.

Fuck giving it to people that are going to piss it away, without at least bitching about it.[/quote]

You don’t understand he inherited his business, 5% is no big deal to him. [/quote]

You know, I’ve seen it both ways.

I’ve seen the “jr” who came up, worked in the trench and is respected. I’ve also seen the “jr” who was handed the key to the kingdom.

I recommend making your child work for it.[/quote]

yay common ground!!! I’m absolutely for everyone carving their own place in life through hard work. It’s what draws me to lifting. Hard work is rewarded directly in my own physical presence.

That’s why I’m not a fan of the concept of inherited wealth/generational money. If you take the steps to earn your place in life, you just don’t need it. Inherited wealth, in so many cases, is a substitute for character.
[/quote]

But that doesn’t give the government the right to take 55% of your wealth when you die. They are in essence saying we (the government) are more important than your natural heirs.

84

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
The same can’t be said about the company I run. A more fair comparison would be my company to a moderately high risk stock. There’s a potential for profit there, but also a significant potential for zero return. [/quote]

Hey and guess what, Obama wants to take away the return and give it to people who never took the risk.

Is that really okay in any way shape or form?[/quote]

He wants to do more than that with it. He wants to give it to people who can’t even hold down a job!

85

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
There are plenty of legit arguments out there to make. This is just propaganda stuff. [/quote]

There is a link to his speach in the beginning of the thread.

“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”
“You didn’t build that”

It isn’t propaganda, it is actual quotes from the horse’s ass, oops I mean mouth.

No, they don’t. But not doing any work and the people who do supporting you shoudln’t either.

I feel like you are missing the point.

Next time you are awake at 3am, laying in bed, going over the numbers, over and over and over again, wondering how on Earth you are going to make payroll on Thursday… Just remember, all that worry, all that stress, it doesn’t mean shit to Obama. Because the people who are sound asleep living off your tax dollars, are more important than you and your problems, because other people worked really hard to give you the opportunity to not sleep and worry about the families of the people you employ.

Think about that. You are worth less for doing more. You take all the risk, and get no reward. Sure sounds like comrade Lama has it right.[/quote]

I fully understand I don’t reap the full fruits of my labor, and that a good chunk of money I’ve made, and others like me, has gone to lazy, stupid people. I also believe that people who work hard and aren’t fairly compensated benefit from tax money. The overflow that gets dispersed among the lazy is unfortunate, but to me it’s a ‘don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater’ kind of thing. Don’t take away from the deserving because a bunch of those who don’t deserve are in your pocket too.

The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are my two favorite books. They’re incredible treatises on the human condition. That probably surprises you, but it shouldn’t because I haven’t actually talked much about my own political leanings in here in the first place. Everyone assumed I’m a democrat, and everyone assumed I’m on Obama’s nuts, when my OP was just referring to a specific situation that my company benefited from. I told the story in the first place because this was the first time that something the government did had an enormous effect on my business. It happened to be something that occured through Obama’s administration.
I love these books because they bring to light a huge flaw with how we treat the real movers and shakers (the truly important people) of the world. The people who are putting in the hardest work get shitted on, and it’s a problem the democrats face. MY problem with the Republican party, is that they don’t solve the problem either. I don’t necessarily think any political party, as they are currently comprised, solves the problem. The plight of the world’s geniuses, and truly hard working people, has been going on in this country for decades if not longer, and neither political party has made a dent. I’m not on Obama’s nuts, and I’m not on Romney’s nuts. I don’t like nuts.

86

Another aspect of what Obama said is that many of his points are just plain wrong. For example on road building. In Michigan and probably all the other states many of the major roads are former Indian trails that are ancient. Government didn’t initially build them they just paved what was there. The oversea highway running down the Florida keys to Key West was originally built upon Flagler’s railroad, which was a private venture.

Hospital’s have been built by private philanthropy, schools, etc… There is a lot of infrastructure that was built or started through private initiative without the government. When the frontier was settled people went out into a wild hostile wilderness far away from the government and provided their own, security, food, housing, clothing, etc…

Obama is trying to rewrite history and I think he is going to get away with it because the media won’t challenge him.

87

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
The people who are putting in the hardest work get shitted on, and it’s a problem the democrats face. MY problem with the Republican party, is that they don’t solve the problem either. I don’t necessarily think any political party, as they are currently comprised, solves the problem. [/quote]

Well, that is because they are all getting rich as fuck putting it in our collective asses. Why would they change anything, lol?

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.

88

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.[/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head my friend!

89

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.[/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head my friend![/quote]

Both political parties are evil money suckers…but the GOP is the lesser of the two.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

90

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.[/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head my friend![/quote]

Both political parties are evil money suckers…but the GOP is the lesser of the two.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.[/quote]

I don’t really understand this. If both parties are evil shouldn’t we be working to create a new system?

91

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.[/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head my friend![/quote]

Both political parties are evil money suckers…but the GOP is the lesser of the two.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.[/quote]

I don’t really understand this. If both parties are evil shouldn’t we be working to create a new system?
[/quote]

I don’t have enough bullets.

I mean, look, the only way “the people” can fix this, and “the people” are the only ones who can requires us to vote with our dollars.

Stop fucking shopping at Wal-Mart, and Wal-Mart has to change. It is that simple.

But, you have to organize the masses. And the masses are largely idiots and/or too happy with their iLife to both to care, I mean Scrubs is on tonight, I couldn’t be bothered to pay attention to real life. Or my government check is so small, I can’t afford my 32 scratch tickets, qucikpicks, 3 packs of smokes, case of beer and bag of weed, so I have to shop at Wal-Mart, how else would I afford all this material shit that is largely useless and I really don’t NEED to survive.

The change would be hard, and require sacrific. Not enough people would be willing to do it. So fuck it, play with-in the current rules and hope you make enough to have “fuck you money”.

92

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

They are all slimy bastards. I just prefer the bastards that steal less of my money.[/quote]

You have hit the nail on the head my friend![/quote]

Both political parties are evil money suckers…but the GOP is the lesser of the two.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.[/quote]

I don’t really understand this. If both parties are evil shouldn’t we be working to create a new system?
[/quote]

I don’t have enough bullets.

I mean, look, the only way “the people” can fix this, and “the people” are the only ones who can requires us to vote with our dollars.

Stop fucking shopping at Wal-Mart, and Wal-Mart has to change. It is that simple.

But, you have to organize the masses. And the masses are largely idiots and/or too happy with their iLife to both to care, I mean Scrubs is on tonight, I couldn’t be bothered to pay attention to real life. Or my government check is so small, I can’t afford my 32 scratch tickets, qucikpicks, 3 packs of smokes, case of beer and bag of weed, so I have to shop at Wal-Mart, how else would I afford all this material shit that is largely useless and I really don’t NEED to survive.

The change would be hard, and require sacrific. Not enough people would be willing to do it. So fuck it, play with-in the current rules and hope you make enough to have “fuck you money”.

[/quote]

Isn’t Wal-Mart the embodiment of the American Dream though? At one time Sam Walton was a small business owner was he not? So in order to change the system that quite frankly sucks we have to eliminate businesses that were created by hard working men and women? So instead of paying more to the governement (taxes) we have to pay more for goods?

Also is it really the masses that create change? I feel like real change occurs because a select group pushes the change and the ignorance or ineptitude of the masses allows the change to happen. Sometime the change is good (American Revolution) sometimes bad (Nazi Germany). In both cases the masses just followed.

Beans what do you think of moving from the earned income tax to a comodity based tax? That might be for a differnt thread though.

93

“…They are all slimy bastards…”

Period.

( I don’t know how to do the “fixed” thing…)

I’m with you 100%, flipcollar. This is NOT a “DEM/GOP” issue…or one in which the President somehow created the dysfunctional Government we have now . There is for damn sure PLENTY of blame to go around on BOTH sides of the isle.

And yes…1) government CAN have a place in our lives and 2) every business person in the U.S. does not hate the President.

Mufasa

94

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Isn’t Wal-Mart the embodiment of the American Dream though? At one time Sam Walton was a small business owner was he not? So in order to change the system that quite frankly sucks we have to eliminate businesses that were created by hard working men and women? So instead of paying more to the governement (taxes) we have to pay more for goods? [/quote]

Wal-Mart was just a good fit in my example. Replace it with Dunkin’ Donuts or GM if you want. My point being the dollar in your had is more powerful than the ballot in November.

Lol yeah, once the masses follow change has occured. You’re getting too caught up in the details.

[quote]Beans what do you think of moving from the earned income tax to a comodity based tax? That might be for a differnt thread though.
[/quote]

You mean a sales tax? Eh… I don’t like it, but then again it would kind of eliminate my job, lol.

I like the IRC just like it is, in fact make that shit MORE complex please. (No worries there.)

But if anything a flat tax works, with 100% of people who work more than 20 hours a week paying. And if you work less than 20 hours and want welfare, you have to pass a drug test twice a month. And now that healthcare is “free” thanks to Obama, you have to follow a diet to keep your fatness in check to.

People want to live off the government’s dime? Say good by to freedom of choice.

95

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

And yes…1) government CAN have a place in our lives and 2) every business person in the U.S. does not hate the President.

Mufasa[/quote]

The current clown in office isn’t all bad. Shit we are out of Iraq and he ordered the sniping of Osama, I will give him that.

I also don’t have a problem spending money on highways and shit. But after working with construction companies, god is there a ton of waste on those projects.

96

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

And yes…1) government CAN have a place in our lives and 2) every business person in the U.S. does not hate the President.

Mufasa[/quote]

The current clown in office isn’t all bad. Shit we are out of Iraq and he ordered the sniping of Osama, I will give him that.

I also don’t have a problem spending money on highways and shit. But after working with construction companies, god is there a ton of waste on those projects.[/quote]

Our company has a civil construction division…and you are quite correct.

And yes, construction companies who suck stimulus monies from the fed’s live quite high on the hog…with little to no impact on the local level.

97

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
you misunderstood. Bill Gates doesn’t actually have that wealth UNTIL he cashes it in. I don’t actually have the money that my company’s worth unless I sell it. Which I haven’t.[/quote]

LOL. By that logic, money is also not wealth until you spend it. Money is just the potential for wealth. Money in your pocket isn’t doing you any good. It isn’t wealth in and of itself.

No, I’m sorry, that’s not how the rational world thinks of wealth.[/quote]

Well, to an extent that’s really pretty true. No real guarantee that money will be worth anything in the future. But that’s not an argument I want to pursue, because it’s not necessaqry to make my point. I’m talking about a volatility issue. We can assume Bill Gates’s company will hold a high value. We can also assume american currency will retain value. The same can’t be said about the company I run. A more fair comparison would be my company to a moderately high risk stock. There’s a potential for profit there, but also a significant potential for zero return. Does that make sense?[/quote]

Comparison fail. Owning stock is wealth.

All wealth caries the risk of losing it. Part of the valuation of that wealth is the risk of losing it.

20 dollars in junk bonds and 20 dollars of Microsoft stock is â?¦ wait for itâ?¦. 20 dollars of wealth, either way. Future risk is part of present value. Tomorrow the junk bond could be worthless, but today, it is 20 dollars of wealth.

A ferrari is wealth, even though today it could be worth a quarter million and tomorrow it could be wrapped around a tree.

98

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are my two favorite books. They’re incredible treatises on the human condition. That probably surprises you, but it shouldn’t because I haven’t actually talked much about my own political leanings in here in the first place. Everyone assumed I’m a democrat, and everyone assumed I’m on Obama’s nuts, when my OP was just referring to a specific situation that my company benefited from. I told the story in the first place because this was the first time that something the government did had an enormous effect on my business. It happened to be something that occured through Obama’s administration.
I love these books because they bring to light a huge flaw with how we treat the real movers and shakers (the truly important people) of the world. The people who are putting in the hardest work get shitted on, and it’s a problem the democrats face. MY problem with the Republican party, is that they don’t solve the problem either. I don’t necessarily think any political party, as they are currently comprised, solves the problem. The plight of the world’s geniuses, and truly hard working people, has been going on in this country for decades if not longer, and neither political party has made a dent. I’m not on Obama’s nuts, and I’m not on Romney’s nuts. I don’t like nuts.[/quote]

Not to discredit anything you just said – I have my own collection of Rand books – but are you familiar with her obsession/idolization of a serial killer? When I learned that, it added some weird context to her fairly one-dimensional characterizations.

Even discounting the spin and bias of that article, it’s still quite interesting.

99

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
you misunderstood. Bill Gates doesn’t actually have that wealth UNTIL he cashes it in. I don’t actually have the money that my company’s worth unless I sell it. Which I haven’t.[/quote]

LOL. By that logic, money is also not wealth until you spend it. Money is just the potential for wealth. Money in your pocket isn’t doing you any good. It isn’t wealth in and of itself.

No, I’m sorry, that’s not how the rational world thinks of wealth.[/quote]

Well, to an extent that’s really pretty true. No real guarantee that money will be worth anything in the future. But that’s not an argument I want to pursue, because it’s not necessaqry to make my point. I’m talking about a volatility issue. We can assume Bill Gates’s company will hold a high value. We can also assume american currency will retain value. The same can’t be said about the company I run. A more fair comparison would be my company to a moderately high risk stock. There’s a potential for profit there, but also a significant potential for zero return. Does that make sense?[/quote]

Comparison fail. Owning stock is wealth.

All wealth caries the risk of losing it. Part of the valuation of that wealth is the risk of losing it.

20 dollars in junk bonds and 20 dollars of Microsoft stock is â?¦ wait for itâ?¦. 20 dollars of wealth, either way. Future risk is part of present value. Tomorrow the junk bond could be worthless, but today, it is 20 dollars of wealth.

A ferrari is wealth, even though today it could be worth a quarter million and tomorrow it could be wrapped around a tree.
[/quote]

That’s fine, all wealth caries risk, sure. My point was that small businesses are more fragile than large corporations such as Microsoft. I don’t understand why this has become a point of argument. Until I sell my business, I’m carrying a much larger risk than I would be if I had the current value of the company in cash. They same CAN’T be said of Microsoft. It’s nearly certain that Bill Gates can sell his company at any point in his lifetime for a massive influx of cash.

100

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
you misunderstood. Bill Gates doesn’t actually have that wealth UNTIL he cashes it in. I don’t actually have the money that my company’s worth unless I sell it. Which I haven’t.[/quote]

LOL. By that logic, money is also not wealth until you spend it. Money is just the potential for wealth. Money in your pocket isn’t doing you any good. It isn’t wealth in and of itself.

No, I’m sorry, that’s not how the rational world thinks of wealth.[/quote]

Well, to an extent that’s really pretty true. No real guarantee that money will be worth anything in the future. But that’s not an argument I want to pursue, because it’s not necessaqry to make my point. I’m talking about a volatility issue. We can assume Bill Gates’s company will hold a high value. We can also assume american currency will retain value. The same can’t be said about the company I run. A more fair comparison would be my company to a moderately high risk stock. There’s a potential for profit there, but also a significant potential for zero return. Does that make sense?[/quote]

Comparison fail. Owning stock is wealth.

All wealth caries the risk of losing it. Part of the valuation of that wealth is the risk of losing it.

20 dollars in junk bonds and 20 dollars of Microsoft stock is �?�¢?�?�¦ wait for it�?�¢?�?�¦. 20 dollars of wealth, either way. Future risk is part of present value. Tomorrow the junk bond could be worthless, but today, it is 20 dollars of wealth.

A ferrari is wealth, even though today it could be worth a quarter million and tomorrow it could be wrapped around a tree.
[/quote]

That’s fine, all wealth caries risk, sure. My point was that small businesses are more fragile than large corporations such as Microsoft. I don’t understand why this has become a point of argument. Until I sell my business, I’m carrying a much larger risk than I would be if I had the current value of the company in cash. They same CAN’T be said of Microsoft. It’s nearly certain that Bill Gates can sell his company at any point in his lifetime for a massive influx of cash.[/quote]

And I assume you also carry a much higher reward than cash under your mattress.

And this started because you obtusely refuse to admit you inherited your wealth.

I’m still waiting on my 5% check in the mail.