Presidential Race - Are We United?

t.nie
Read the below very very s-l-o-w-l-y

I read every post and totally understand what I read. You just don't get it. Nobody said rich people make jobs (according to Biden that is a three letter word).Rich companies create jobs. Rich people get rich running companies successfuly.
There is nothing wrong being rich.

t.nie said:
If you read Bopper's post before that, I think you will pick up the thread of the conversation and my post will make sense to you.

And I will try and make it simple for you.

Build one house for $5 million. Employ some people to build the house. Total cash flow, $5 million.

Build 100,000 houses at $100,000 each. Employ thousands of people to build the homes. Total cash flow, $100,000,000,000.

So which one works better for our nation's economy? One guy building a mansion, or 100,000 smaller new homes? Which scenario generates more business for more businesses? Which scenario creates more jobs?
Click to expand...
 
hey dipshyt, lose the attitude. Patronizing arrogant a $ $. If you could follow the conversation, you just might have a clue.

t.nie said:
Who says I am jealous? I was just posting that so that there would be, in addition to the comparison of poor Americans and the poorest of the poor in the world, a comparison of what our richest enjoy as well. All I was saying was that in third world nations, poor is starving in a grass hut, but rich might be a car and a tv in your home and food on your table. If you are going to start comparing people at the bottom in our country to other countries, then make the comparison at the top, too.

Why is it that whenever someone comments on extravagant wealth, the right always accuses them of jealousy?

Give me a list of the jobs that person creates, Bopper. I want to see what you are thinking in terms of job creation based on that list.
Click to expand...
 
t.nie said:
If you read Bopper's post before that, I think you will pick up the thread of the conversation and my post will make sense to you.

And I will try and make it simple for you.

Build one house for $5 million. Employ some people to build the house. Total cash flow, $5 million.

Build 100,000 houses at $100,000 each. Employ thousands of people to build the homes. Total cash flow, $100,000,000,000.

So which one works better for our nation's economy? One guy building a mansion, or 100,000 smaller new homes? Which scenario generates more business for more businesses? Which scenario creates more jobs?
Click to expand...
......................................................Each person in the chain spends the money somewhere else and the dividends multiply. If it is taxed away the govt does what it wants. That may be the global poverty act or the war in Iraq, but the point is the more we give them the better chance they will spend the money on something we don't want them to.
 
Phoenix 2
Dear Clueless,I didn't know you were a PhD in psychology or mind reading. The fact of the matter is, I was never satisfied so I got ahead on my own and I am pretty well off even though the market ripped me a new one. Unlike you, I can probably survive the current downturn for two or three years without going hungry or begging mommy for help. Can you do that? Wise up.

Phoenix 2 said:
Weejawhill:

Your posts tell me more about you than you may realize, and what you have told me is that you know your place and that you are content to stay there.
Click to expand...
 
You could't be more right, there is NOTHING wrong with being rich,

what is wrong is that the republican administrations feel that the rich deserve special consideration, as in not paying their fair share.
 
t.nie said:
No problem, I didn't make it clear what I was referring to either.

My point with the job creation question is just how many jobs can one wealthy person create through their personal spending? Not how many jobs do the corporations they lead, etc, create, but how many jobs does 1 billionaire create through personal purchases? And the answer you gave pretty much illustrates my point, and that is a very limited amount.
Click to expand...

And this, you arrogant patronizing jerk. Follow the entire conversation, you keep posting stuff accusing other people of not being able to understand stuff, get a clue. I asked Bopper SPECIFICALLY WHAT A SINGLE BILLIONAIRE CREATES AS FAR AS JOBS THROUGH PERSONAL PURCHASES. He answered, and I responded with what you quoted the first time around.

Then you took off into some other galaxy accusing me of stringing words together for the hell of it.

At this point, I'm not even sure what conversation you are in. It sure as hell aint this one.
 
wehjawhill said:
Phoenix 2
Dear Clueless,I didn't know you were a PhD in psychology or mind reading. The fact of the matter is, I was never satisfied so I got ahead on my own and I am pretty well off even though the market ripped me a new one. Unlike you, I can probably survive the current downturn for two or three years without going hungry or begging mommy for help. Can you do that? Wise up.
Click to expand...

Oh look, another patronizing A $ $ hole remark from the patronizing A $ $ hole. :rolleyes:
 
bopper said:
......................................................Each person in the chain spends the money somewhere else and the dividends multiply. If it is taxed away the govt does what it wants. That may be the global poverty act or the war in Iraq, but the point is the more we give them the better chance they will spend the money on something we don't want them to.
Click to expand...

But the basic point I'm trying make Bopper, is giving a tax cut to the middle class gives them more money to spend, ergo, they spend it in our economy and the dividends multiply. The more people that benefit from a tax cut, the more money there is for them to spend. Cutting taxes on a few will not generate as much cash flow as cutting taxes on the majority. The downside is that the money still has to come from somewhere. That somewhere I believe should be the people who have gained the most, not those that earn the least.
 
t.nie said:
But the basic point I'm trying make Bopper, is giving a tax cut to the middle class gives them more money to spend, ergo, they spend it in our economy and the dividends multiply. The more people that benefit from a tax cut, the more money there is for them to spend. Cutting taxes on a few will not generate as much cash flow as cutting taxes on the majority. The downside is that the money still has to come from somewhere. That somewhere I believe should be the people who have gained the most, not those that earn the least.
Click to expand...
....................we definatly agree here. Tax cuts help the economy. The govt needs to cut spending. I think where we disagree is that a tax credit to someone who paid no taxes is welfare and fundementally wrong. Obama's 95% tax cut will go to the people who have earned nothing (that probably will be the people he owes if he wins) That is what makes it socialism. I make far less than $250,000 but anyone who supplies me that makes $250,000 will charge me more for that product. When minimum wage went up in Illinois it added 5 cent per gallon to gas. I also added 5% to all my beer and soda sales. The big winner in any inflationary device like raising minimum wage is the govt. They get more sales tax, unemployment tax, ssi tax, medicare tax etc. Obama says he wants to raise minumum wage by $4 that is nothing but a disguised tax hike. Again big govt is the only winner.
 
understood....

wehjawhill06835 said:
I can't believe you don't understand.
Click to expand...
The libs understand. You just have to understand that liberals say its ok to disagree, just not with them.
 
bopper said:
....................we definatly agree here. Tax cuts help the economy. The govt needs to cut spending. I think where we disagree is that a tax credit to someone who paid no taxes is welfare and fundementally wrong. Obama's 95% tax cut will go to the people who have earned nothing (that probably will be the people he owes if he wins) That is what makes it socialism. I make far less than $250,000 but anyone who supplies me that makes $250,000 will charge me more for that product. When minimum wage went up in Illinois it added 5 cent per gallon to gas. I also added 5% to all my beer and soda sales. The big winner in any inflationary device like raising minimum wage is the govt. They get more sales tax, unemployment tax, ssi tax, medicare tax etc. Obama says he wants to raise minumum wage by $4 that is nothing but a disguised tax hike. Again big govt is the only winner.
Click to expand...

I never heard anything about Obama wanting to raise the minimum wage by $4 an hour. If that is true, that isn't very smart economically. A drastic increase will hurt, not help. Smaller incremental increases over a number of years may be of some benefit. I think many people think the minimum wage should be set at a level that makes them comfortably able to afford a nice standard of living. It's not. It's supposed to be protection for part time employees, people with second jobs or in unskilled menial labor positions to prevent abuses.

By the way, did you know McCain proposes to eliminate tax on unemployment benefits? And am I mistaken in thinking you would be ok with a tax cut on the middle class as long it did not include an increase in welfare spending?

And I don't mean to be awkward, but how could a person who paid no taxes get a tax cut? Unless you mean giving them more in welfare, I'm not sure what you are driving at.

Oh, another thing I would like to hear your thoughts on is a point I read elsewhere, and that is that corporations already make enough money to create jobs, so why do they need another tax cut?

And JPR, Bopper and I are about as opposite on some issues as you can get, but we still discuss things. And disagree. The difference is, Bopper isn't a condescending A $$. So much for your sarcastic remark.
 
Bopper:

I'm puzzled

Why just because the minimum wage went up, did you have to increase the price of every 6 pack of soda $.20

And gas by $.05 per gallon
 
I keep hearing let's tax the top 5 to 10% more and give the middle class (I still haven't heard who exactly the middle class is) a tax cut. You people that think a tax hike on the top 5 to 10% is going to have any effect on them are wrong.

What will happen is they will start moving more manufacturing out of the country, to make up for the tax increase. As to the middle class tax cut remember what someone else said on this board" how can you give a tax cut to the unemployed?" or something like that.

I know the next answer will be we will regulate it so they can't move more manufacturing out of the country, then they will move the whole company out of the country.

Then the next answer will be if they move out of the country we will increase tariffs on there imports. Since we won't single out the company that moved for tariffs, we will increase tariffs on a commodity. Then the country's that had businesses effected by these tariffs will start inplementing ther own tariffs on our exports.
 
The only problem with your point is : they have already been doing that anyway, under the republicans that have given them everything they have wanted.

The thing about greed is that it feeds on itself, the more they get the more they want.

As far as our exports, the only thing we export anymore are things the rest of the world has to have, like weapons
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top