Does Obama actually understand business?

@McGentrix,

Quote:

A lower tax rate does not equal less paid.

This doesn't matter at all to voters. If you are a millionaire, you should be paying a tax rate that is at LEAST the equal of those who have less than you. Progressive taxation is a long-accepted reality of life in America and the vast majority of our citizens believe it's fair for it to be that way.

You also didn't respond to the fact that Romney likely manipulated the system to pay no taxes at all for several years. I'm sure you think that's fair as well?

Quote:

I am all for a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage of their income.

This is a massively regressive tax scheme you are proposing. You don't seem to realize that 1/5th of Romney's income is meaningless to him, whereas it would be devastating to someone who is much lower on the ladder.

Romney sees LITERALLY no change in his status of living if you take 1/4, 1/3, or 1/2 of his income in taxes every year. His family faces no hardship, he can afford no less luxury items, can still make business investments all day. It's simply foolish to claim that such a scheme would be fair. It's not just about what you pay, it's about how what you pay affects you.

Quote:

I am not sure how you can read "If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." and not be shocked in some small part.

Try reading the sentence before that - he was talking about a bridge or highway that you drove your trucks on. Seriously - read the whole quote and tell me that's not what he meant.

Or, yaknow, just parrot whatever you think will be an effective attack line against him, that you read in NRO this morning, I believe my point has been made either way.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Linkat,

But it's still not just the guy (or gal) at the helm that makes things successful.

You're obviously a valuable, hard-working employee, but you don't run the company.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

Quote:

The owner - is the one who puts their neck out there - provides the capital and risk - the owner is the one who has everything to lose if it isn't successful. If this business fails, the person building the road will still get paid and have a job, the people this person hires will not lose all their savings invested - they may temporarily not have a job (but will at least get unemployment if they fold) - and they will have the opportunity to look for other employment.

Of course, in the case of many of the companies Romney and Bain took over, the investment used to purchase the companies in question was the value of the company itself. So, if it folded, Romney lost nothing at all.

He and his group risked practically nothing and took steps to guarantee them a payoff no matter whether the company succeeded or failed. In many cases, they applied and got large tax breaks, which they then turned around and paid straight to themselves in dividends and 'management fees.' That doesn't really match up with the account you are giving here.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You also didn't respond to the fact that Romney likely manipulated the system to pay no taxes at all for several years. I'm sure you think that's fair as well?

You want to reply to speculation? Ok. It's likely he didn't.

Quote:

Quote:
I am all for a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage of their income.

This is a massively regressive tax scheme you are proposing. You don't seem to realize that 1/5th of Romney's income is meaningless to him, whereas it would be devastating to someone who is much lower on the ladder.

Romney sees LITERALLY no change in his status of living if you take 1/4, 1/3, or 1/2 of his income in taxes every year. His family faces no hardship, he can afford no less luxury items, can still make business investments all day. It's simply foolish to claim that such a scheme would be fair. It's not just about what you pay, it's about how what you pay affects you.

Sorry, I forgot you were a liberal. Taxes are only fair when other people pay them.

Quote:

Quote:
I am not sure how you can read "If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." and not be shocked in some small part.

Try reading the sentence before that - he was talking about a bridge or highway that you drove your trucks on. Seriously - read the whole quote and tell me that's not what he meant.

Or, ya know, just parrot whatever you think will be an effective attack line against him, that you read in NRO this morning, I believe my point has been made either way.

Cycloptichorn

Did NRO post something about this? Let me go see. I don't see anything on their front page about it. I am only discussing what I read on the post in the OP here.

The tone of Obama's speech is that successful people owe the govt for their success. If you read it differently, then that's fine. I believe you're wrong, but whatever. That's usually the case anyways.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Washington Times, NRO, HotAir - they're all the same Wingnut Welfare, news organizations that lose money badly every month, and are only kept alive in order to provide a house organ for the right-wing. It doesn't matter to me where you parrot your views from.

Quote:

Sorry, I forgot you were a liberal. Taxes are only fair when other people pay them.

No, they are fair when EVERYONE pays them. You seem to be reduced to parodying arguments that you can't effectively respond to.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
The owner - is the one who puts their neck out there - provides the capital and risk - the owner is the one who has everything to lose if it isn't successful. If this business fails, the person building the road will still get paid and have a job, the people this person hires will not lose all their savings invested - they may temporarily not have a job (but will at least get unemployment if they fold) - and they will have the opportunity to look for other employment.

Of course, in the case of many of the companies Romney and Bain took over, the investment used to purchase the companies in question was the value of the company itself. So, if it folded, Romney lost nothing at all.

He and his group risked practically nothing and took steps to guarantee them a payoff no matter whether the company succeeded or failed. In many cases, they applied and got large tax breaks, which they then turned around and paid straight to themselves in dividends and 'management fees.' That doesn't really match up with the account you are giving here.

Cycloptichorn

Obama and Linkat weren't discussing Romney and Bain. They were discussing me and other business owners.

2 Replies

@McGentrix,

That's immaterial to the point I was making, but if it makes you feel better to point it out, then I agree with you. Obama was, of course, correct in his statement: your business was built with a lot of help and assistance from others, and you should be thankful for that.

Now, I'm quite sure, in real life, you recognize this and are. You've always seemed like a nice and respectful guy towards others. But it's hard to square that with the politician you are trying to defend.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Washington Times, NRO, HotAir - they're all the same Wingnut Welfare, news organizations that lose money badly every month, and are only kept alive in order to provide a house organ for the right-wing. It doesn't matter to me where you parrot your views from.

Quote:

Sorry, I forgot you were a liberal. Taxes are only fair when other people pay them.

No, they are fair when EVERYONE pays them. You seem to be reduced to parodying arguments that you can't effectively respond to.

Cycloptichorn

Well, I don't read those places. I do admit to reading Drudge though. A good aggregate of some of those places most likely though. Surely you recognize by now that I do not parrot anyone. I am quite capable of having my own opinions.

Flat tax IS a fair tax. But, that is a discussion for a different thread. I have discussed it previously in other threads.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Surely you recognize by now that I do not parrot anyone. I am quite capable of having my own opinions.

Surely I do? No, I wouldn't be sure of that. You sure seem to post arguments the same day as I see them show up in the right-wing media.

Quote:

Flat tax IS a fair tax. But, that is a discussion for a different thread. I have discussed it previously in other threads.

Nobody agrees with your statement, on either side of the fence. But, I'm fine with letting it drop.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
Surely you recognize by now that I do not parrot anyone. I am quite capable of having my own opinions.

Surely I do? No, I wouldn't be sure of that. You sure seem to post arguments the same day as I see them show up in the right-wing media.

Cycloptichorn

He made the speech Friday. It certainly seems topical.

I wonder how much thanks Robert owes the government for his business of A2K? He has to thank them for the Internet of course, And all the wonderful moderators and coding help he receives and certainly all of us who use his service. But, without him and his tireless work, would A2K exist? Would it be as successful as it is were it not for his work and lack of sleep and frustrations? Obama seems to discount that effort because of roads and bridges. (Yes that last bit was sarcasm and does not need to be nitpicked Drewdad. I understand that A2K does not use roads and bridges.)

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

Well, the roads (and security, and system of laws, and banking system) provided us by our functional gov't help everybody. Nobody is claiming that businesses are ONLY successful because of these things - certainly, Obama didn't say that. But your business couldn't be successful WITHOUT those things.

Well, the roads (and security, and system of laws, and banking system) provided us by our functional gov't help everybody. Nobody is claiming that businesses are ONLY successful because of these things - certainly, Obama didn't say that. But your business couldn't be successful WITHOUT those things.

Excellent point, Cyclop. I suspect those who want to minimize that essential aspect of most commercial success will simply dismiss it.

Too bad, because you hit a nail squarely on its head in that comment.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

are you familiar with the small business administration?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Thanks for being sure we can read that Frank. Wink

No one here is disputing it.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

thank you - yes, the average business owner. For example I was thinking of a close family member who is and has until just recently been a succesful business owner. He bought a particular business with his own money and spent years making it a success.

He always had considered his employees valueable (those that were and those that weren't didn't last long) and rewarded them with his capital and earnings via a paycheck and benefits.

He risked his money to start the business, he risked his credit, etc. He worked usually 7 days a week - he worked harder than any of his employees.

He used roads to deliver his products and like the rest of us saps used other services of the government.

But it was his money, his gamble and accordingly he should be well rewarded for his efforts and risk.

1 Reply

@Linkat,

Nobody, to my knowledge, is arguing that he shouldn't be rewarded for his risk. Only that the people who successfully run businesses should be held to the same laws and standards as everyone else.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Slave song

Old Johnson is a hellva man.
Built this 'tation with just his hands,
chopped all the cotton,
hoed all the corn,
then he blowed the dinner horn.
Old Johnson is a hellava man.

~~
I was always stunned as a child that someone as busy as George Washington could build a place like Mt. Vernon, then I found out he had help.
~~

We all have help. Everyone running their own business ought to look around every once in awhile to see just how much of that business and the tools to run it were created by the efforts of others.

Joe(That's why we call it civilization.)Nation

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Actually I think these were a few of the points being made -

Quote:

I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

When most or many business owners were successful because of this - because of their hard work and because they were a lot smarter. Believe me I look at my family member and I wouldn't know a harder worker, and/or some pretty damn smart in his field. Some one that worked less hard (his sons and his employees) and not as smart (his employees and those that built the roads) - yeah I think it was because of these exact traits that typically will make a business owner (especially they typical small business owner) successful.

0 Replies

@Linkat,

And this:

Quote:

If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

Yes - the owner pretty does build it - he has help, but the business owner is who makes it happen.

1 Reply

@Linkat,

Linkat wrote:

And this:

Quote:
If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

Yes - the owner pretty does build it - he has help, but the business owner is who makes it happen.

Just as I told McG, I would invite you to read the sentence Obama said directly before that one, and tell me you still believe he was referring to the small business, and not the bridge a truck just drove over.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

What he understands is that he wants to do what he wants to do when he wants to do it and screw everyone else.

0 Replies

Does Obama actually understand business?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know