15
   

How do liberals guage success?

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 01:51 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Do you guys know more about his business then the blurb posted? I sure don't. I will freely admit that I have no idea how he started his business. \

But, from the ABCNews story...
Quote:
“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 01:52 pm
@revelette,
revelette wrote:

Quote:
You mean his business had the government as a customer? Good for him. Lots of businesses have the govt as a customer. Doesn't change the how the business was made t enable it to get the govt as a customer though. I am also very glad for his business that he was able to get loans and grants to expand and create new jobs. Was probably an earmark from a legislator he gifted through a lobbyist at some point. Doesn't change the fact that he and his dad created the business and got it to a point where he could do those things.


I don't know if you are just confused or just wanting to make a point despite the facts.

The point is that Obama said in his speech that when we succeed, we succeed through our own initiative and help from someone, the government or past teachers. If Gilchrist didn't receive 800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds, he might not have been able to build his company "with his own hands".


Seems like his business was already established at that point.
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 01:57 pm
@McGentrix,
“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”



and how is this different from when poor folks receive assistance, except that the conservatives assign an "entitlement'" label to it...

except that they are not incorporated.
parados
 
  4  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 01:58 pm
@McGentrix,
If you are going to use the government to help build your business, then don't claim you built it all on your own without government help.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 01:58 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:

“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”



and how is this different from when poor folks receive assistance, except that the conservatives assign an "entitlement'" label to it...


That you need that explained is not shocking.
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 02:06 pm
@McGentrix,
because I'm a simpleton, or because I'm not a conservative.*



*because if I were a conservative, I would know and understand that the poor are all lazy, evil, and greedy...
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 02:15 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Do you guys know more about his business then the blurb posted? I sure don't. I will freely admit that I have no idea how he started his business. \

But, from the ABCNews story...
Quote:
“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”



This is the exact same attitude Romney uses to justify his manipulation of the tax code for his own profit. The hypocritical part is that neither he nor the dude in question admit that they ARE profiting and expanding because of gov't intervention. They both pretend that they did it 'all on their own.' They clearly did not. I don't know how you reconcile those points in your head without coming to the conclusion that Romney's argument point is incorrect.

Any commentary on Romney's business practice of manipulating tax code using LBO's to increase Bain's profits and take money out of local and federal tax coffers? Do you consider that to be 'successful' behavior? Is someone who learns how to manipulate the system for their own benefit - tremendously so - someone we consider to be a success, or someone that should be emulated and celebrated for doing so?

When we discuss Romney's business past in these terms, do you think this is something voters would see as a positive? As a sign that someone 'knows how to make the economy work?' Do you think that Obama will fail to attack Romney exactly along those lines later on in the election, and it will be effective?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  4  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 02:18 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

But, from the ABCNews story...
Quote:
“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”


But most of his tax money went to pay for roads and the military and service the debt so he only got back a very little of his own money and a lot of ours and that's the point. All of the people of the US made an investment in his success and apparently it was a good investment. The question is how much return we should get. Gilchrest wants it to be minimal and Obama wants it to be minimal plus a little.

His comments remind me of interviews with traders right after the financial bailout. All of them justified their high salaries because of their unique skills and their importance in supporting the economy. When asked why they didn't see the collaspe coming they consistently said "no one could have forseen that" (except that some did) and were completely unappreciative that the US public swooped in to save their jobs.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 02:27 pm
@Rockhead,
It's another cognitive dissonance moment when they demonize individuals who get "something for nothing" government assistance, but still want roads, military protection, police, fire fighters, well-regulated banking, etc. all without paying a dime in taxes.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 02:35 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Seems like his business was already established at that point.


He received the tax free bonds to establish a second manufacturing plant and to purchase newer high tech equipment.

Quote:
In 1999, Gilchrist Metal received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority “to set up a second manufacturing plant and purchase equipment to produce high definition television broadcasting equipment,” according to a New Hampshire Union Leader report at the time.


source

So his hands, plus government tax free bonds helped to build his company.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 03:58 pm
@revelette,
So you agree that you nothing more about his business beyond DiStaaso's article. Neither do I.

To argue over seems pointless as it's being used as nothing more then a foil and no one knows anything about it beyond what an Obama supporting reporter has published.

Even with this, it has been posted what, 10-12 times already on these forums? Crazy.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:05 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:

But most of his tax money went to pay for roads and the military and service the debt so he only got back a very little of his own money and a lot of ours and that's the point. All of the people of the US made an investment in his success and apparently it was a good investment. The question is how much return we should get. Gilchrest wants it to be minimal and Obama wants it to be minimal plus a little.


How much has his business returned since these loans in the form taxes? Has anyone investigated that? How much did he pay before any loans? When you find that out, let me know so we can have a fair back and forth about it. Gilchrest hasn't been heard to be complaining about how he pays too much in taxes, nor has he been heard denying that he has had help. He said that he and his father built his business, not roads, bridges or the govt.


DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:11 pm
@McGentrix,
Doesn't change the fact that the guy in the ad who's saying that he built the business with his own hands actually benefited from the government helping his business.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:17 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
He said that he and his father built his business, not roads, bridges or the govt.


And, he's clearly wrong about that. Just plain incorrect. He and his father built his business with the assistance of the government. You don't need to know a single other fact about the guy than has already been reported in order to know that this is true, so the requests for more info are just a dodge.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  4  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:19 pm
@McGentrix,
This whole meme that the Romney campaign is trying to push is just such a non-starter. It's ridiculous.

They have to quote one little tiny line from an entire speech, because if you hear that one line, and nothing else, it makes Obama look bad.

Never mind that by quoting that one line, and nothing else, they're completely and deliberately distorting what Obama actually said in the rest of the speech.

That ad is a lie, and any honest person has to acknowledge that it's a lie.

Then, when they're trying to push the message that people make business succeed, not the government, the guy they picked to push the message is someone who benefited from direct government assistance.

It's freaking hilarious that the Romney team is so inept. Disgusting that they're that dishonest, too, but hilarious.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  3  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:19 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
To argue over seems pointless as it's being used as nothing more then a foil and no one knows anything about it beyond what an Obama supporting reporter has published.


He had government help in his business which was Obama's point all along. When it was pointed out to him, he did not deny it but said that he would have been crazy not to take it.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:27 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

Doesn't change the fact that the guy in the ad who's saying that he built the business with his own hands actually benefited from the government helping his business.


According to their website, Gilchrest Metal Fabricating was started in 1979. In 1999, Gilchrist Metal received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority “to set up a second manufacturing plant and purchase equipment to produce high definition television broadcasting equipment,” according to a New Hampshire Union Leader report at the time.

So, how in the world did the company possibly exist for that first 20 years? What were they doing while waiting for the govt to help them build their business?
Rockhead
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:30 pm
@McGentrix,
you are attempting to put out a forest fire with a garden hose, mcG.

you guys sure don't vet your examples very well.

all hail joe the plumber...
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:33 pm
@McGentrix,
I'm not saying the guy isn't a good businessman, or that his father wasn't a good businessman. They're probably very smart, hardworking people.

I'm saying he wasn't a good choice for a spokesperson.

It was a dumb move by the Romney team.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  5  
Reply Tue 24 Jul, 2012 04:34 pm
@engineer,
McGentrix wrote:

But, from the ABCNews story...“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”



by my definition - this is part of what makes Mr. Gilchrest a success.

He saw government money to be taken and used for his own benefit - and did so.

People are going to disagree about what government monies should and should not be available, but I think it's smart to get the money that's available - whether it is business grants or loans or medicaid or welfare.

The same standards should apply for everyone.

If you're ok with businesses taking advantage of government funds then I think you should also be ok with people getting welfare.

I think Gilchrest's statement makes a lot of sense - changing his name to any person in receipt of any government benefit and it doesn't make any less sense.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 12:57:06