# Big Business Got Greedy



## WhatTheHell2

BIG BUSINESS GOT GREEDY

Big business got greedy and wanted to get bigger and make more money and in the process got corrupt.
First they took full advantage of sending jobs out of the country so they could produce more for less. For the jobs that were left, they got an unlimited supply of cheap labor from Mexico by way of illegal aliens. This took jobs from Americans and lowered their wages so they did not have money to put back into the economy.

Then they gave loans, home and cars, to people who they knew would eventually default and they did not care about anything but the short term dividends where they made lots of money but did not see the eventuality of the end scenario. The money would stop coming in and they would be left with houses that were not longer bringing in money and they could not resale because no one had money to spend because they were not working.

Auto industries got greedy and built bigger and more expensive gas guzzling cars that sold, short term, but eventually people could no longer afford to buy them and they stop selling and auto industries stop making money.

Corporations got too big for their britches and so did Americans. All of America got too big and need to come down a notch and start living within their means. Consumers cannot spend money they do not have and government is spending money they do not have.

Big businesses are not the only ones that got too big. There are all levels of business that have had to downsize after expanding. Here is Reno, Mervyns, K-Mart, Circuit City, Target, to name a few.

Obama has to put Americans back to work rebuilding American for Americans. No cheap foreign laborers need apply that will send earned money out of the country to go into Mexicos economy instead of back into our economy. Mexicans send 20 billion back to Mexico each year contributed to our economys failure.

I AM RETIRED ON A SMALL RETIREMENT AND I LIVE WITHIN MY MEANS AND MANAGE TO HELP MY FAMILY WHO IS IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THEY LIVED LARGE AND I STILL MANAGE TO SAVE.
THERE ARE NEEDS AND THERE ARE WANTS.


----------



## sealybobo

WhatTheHell2 said:


> BIG BUSINESS GOT GREEDY
> 
> Big business got greedy and wanted to get bigger and make more money and in the process got corrupt.
> First they took full advantage of sending jobs out of the country so they could produce more for less. For the jobs that were left, they got an unlimited supply of cheap labor from Mexico by way of illegal aliens. This took jobs from Americans and lowered their wages so they did not have money to put back into the economy.
> 
> Then they gave loans, home and cars, to people who they knew would eventually default and they did not care about anything but the short term dividends where they made lots of money but did not see the eventuality of the end scenario. The money would stop coming in and they would be left with houses that were not longer bringing in money and they could not resale because no one had money to spend because they were not working.
> 
> Auto industries got greedy and built bigger and more expensive gas guzzling cars that sold, short term, but eventually people could no longer afford to buy them and they stop selling and auto industries stop making money.
> 
> Corporations got too big for their britches and so did Americans. All of America got too big and need to come down a notch and start living within their means. Consumers cannot spend money they do not have and government is spending money they do not have.
> 
> Big businesses are not the only ones that got too big. There are all levels of business that have had to downsize after expanding. Here is Reno, Mervyns, K-Mart, Circuit City, Target, to name a few.
> 
> Obama has to put Americans back to work rebuilding American for Americans. No cheap foreign laborers need apply that will send earned money out of the country to go into Mexicos economy instead of back into our economy. Mexicans send 20 billion back to Mexico each year contributed to our economys failure.
> 
> I AM RETIRED ON A SMALL RETIREMENT AND I LIVE WITHIN MY MEANS AND MANAGE TO HELP MY FAMILY WHO IS IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THEY LIVED LARGE AND I STILL MANAGE TO SAVE.
> THERE ARE NEEDS AND THERE ARE WANTS.



I came in to work today with the intention of posting almost exactly what you posted.  Thanks for saving me the time.  Let me see what else I may add.  But great post.

This is to all the people I argue with on these boards.  SO WHAT!  That's my answer the next time you say, "but that will raise costs" or "corporations will just pass that on to the consumer".  SO WHAT!  First of all, they'll jack up the price on anything if they can get away with it.  Look at gas.  No one did anything to cause gas prices to go up.  It didn't go up because of demand, China or any of that.  It went up as far as they thought they could get away with.  Then it trashed the economy because no one was spending money on anything else.

Anyways, we need to bring manufacturing jobs back home and we need to get the illegals out.  Before Reagan got into office, we had 2 million illegals here.  Today, 12 million.  And in 1999 the Big 3 made profits.  What's changed?  Toyota, Honda and every other foreign car manufacturer that's selling cars in America, when their countries won't sell American made cars?  

I don't begrudge Honda and Toyota manufacturing here in America, but NO IMPORTS!  If it's made in Mexico, sell it in Mexico!!!

It's all about lowering our wages.  Google CORPORATE PROFITS in 2007.  You'll see corporations were doing fine.  I believe this horrible economy was done on purpose by the super rich.  And I know people who made a million dollars a year who thought they were on the right side of the HAVES vs. HAVE NOTS and they are finding out that they weren't.  

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this was done on purpose by the top 1%.  And look, they won't even suffer, because they're bailing themselves out.

So I can't be against the Big 3 bailout because millions of Americans are depending on their survival, but ultimately, they're still going to lower our wages.  And notice how the Southern Republicans want the Big 3 to fail?  That's because Honda and Toyota are in their states.  They want to benefit from our failure.  Only they don't understand it'll take the entire economy down.

And what if we are attacked again?  In WW2, we had the Big 3 build Tanks, Planes, Bombs and Ships.  Who'll build them if we don't have a manufacturing base?  Will we have China build our war machine after they attack us?

We need to kick ever illegal out of this country.  If American's won't do it for $5 hr, pay em $10.  We work in coal mines for the right money, so I'm sure we'll pick fruit if you pay us right.  It'll raise the cost of fruit?  SO WHAT!!!  Turn the $1 Store into a $2.  We can't send jobs overseas.  It used to be wrong to work with slave laborors.  What happened to those days?

This is the end of Bush Capitalism.  Free Trade.  Unfair trade practices.  Tax breaks to overseas companies.  

You wonder why countries go socialist or communist.  They're cutting our wages and CEO's are making $20 million a year???  

I heard Honda's CEO makes $1 million a year and they profitted last year.  Then Ford's guy made $20 million and they lost billions?  Unacceptable.

That doesn't mean break the unions and send more jobs overseas!!!  For God sakes!!!  It means cut Ford's CEO's pay to $1 million dollars a year.  When they profit, he can get a million dollar bonus.  $2 million is plenty.  If there is any more money to go around, it goes to the shareholders and labor!!!  

Wake up America!!!  You want cheap products, but soon your job will be affected by this never ending quest for more and more PROFIT!!!  Soon your company will ask to cut into your wages so they can make more profit!!!


----------



## catzmeow

Anyone who has done their homework gets this stuff.  But, so many Americans (and a few who post on this board) are intellectually lazy.  Go into your local Walmart and you can see exactly what is wrong with America.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003660.html

http://www.pulitzer.org/works/2004,National+Reporting


----------



## editec

Hmmm...looks like I came to the right thread.

So, comrades, how exactly do we fix this problem?

Here's a clue...guns won't fix it, votes will.


----------



## sealybobo

catzmeow said:


> Anyone who has done their homework gets this stuff.  But, so many Americans (and a few who post on this board) are intellectually lazy.  Go into your local Walmart and you can see exactly what is wrong with America.
> 
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003660.html
> 
> The Pulitzer Prizes | Works



I'm inside sales.  They could send my job to India.

Indian IT Technicians & Engineers can take those jobs.

They screwed manufacturing because many of us don't work in manufacturing.  

I've read articles about people in other industries where they thought they were safe but they were not, like archetech's.

And even my pharmacutical rep buddies who won't ever lose their jobs to an illegal and their job can't be send out of the country.  Their companies are raising their quotas and demanding more for less.  They're experiencing layoffs and the new people they hire are not getting as good a deal as my buddy who entered the company 15 years ago.  And their companies are being sold to foreign investors.  

They're now hitting us from all sides.  Reagan started this movement and Bush accellerated it.  I don't know if Bush and the GOP let 9-11 happen so they could push their radical agenda, but if you read books like Shock Doctrine and/or Desaster Capitalism, you'll see it sure does look like this is all by design.  Bankrupt the treasury so you can end social security and social programs.  Flood the market with illegals and send jobs overseas so you can lower wages.  Create a crisis, like this Depression, and get away with anything.  They control the money, so they control us.  

And we are sheep!  The fact that any middle class American is arguing with us any more tells me American's are really dumb.  

$20 million to CEO's and they can't afford to pay us $35 hr.  HA!  They can afford it, but why afford it when you can pay slave labor wages?  

Remember the saying:

When the Nazis came for the Communists, 
I remained silent; 
I was not a Communist.


When they locked up the Social Democrats, 
I remained silent; 
I was not a Social Democrat.


When they came for the Trade Unionists, 
I did not speak out; 
I was not a Trade Unionist.


When they came for the Jews, 
I remained silent; 
I wasn't a Jew.


When they came for me, 
there was no one left to speak out.


----------



## sealybobo

editec said:


> Hmmm...looks like I came to the right thread.
> 
> So, comrades, how exactly do we fix this problem?
> 
> Here's a clue...guns won't fix it, votes will.



We already voted.  Obama is going to run his presidency the same way he ran his campaign.  He's going to use the internet.  

Will he kick illegals out?  Will he bring manufacturing home?  Will wages continue to go down in first 4 years?  

I hope and expect him to take on Corporate America and the Rich.

Did you know the two Adam's and the two Bush presidents roots trace back to the mayflower?  Do you get the feeling the rich feel like this is their country and they own us?  They've done this before.  The Guilded Age and the Great Depression.  That's when the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

So Obama will have to come up with his own NEW DEAL.


----------



## Care4all

sealybobo said:


> We already voted.  Obama is going to run his presidency the same way he ran his campaign.  He's going to use the internet.
> 
> Will he kick illegals out?  Will he bring manufacturing home?  Will wages continue to go down in first 4 years?
> 
> I hope and expect him to take on Corporate America and the Rich.
> 
> Did you know the two Adam's and the two Bush presidents roots trace back to the mayflower?  Do you get the feeling the rich feel like this is their country and they own us?  They've done this before.  The Guilded Age and the Great Depression.  That's when the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
> 
> So Obama will have to come up with his own NEW DEAL.



Sealy...I have less faith that obama is change....

His picks for his administration are bigtime FREE TRADERS....and are wall streets big guns in the financial arena....

Basically....with the guys he picked, there is going to be the same ole same ole....there was no Change....


----------



## sealybobo

Care4all said:


> Sealy...I have less faith that obama is change....
> 
> His picks for his administration are bigtime FREE TRADERS....and are wall streets big guns in the financial arena....
> 
> Basically....with the guys he picked, there is going to be the same ole same ole....there was no Change....



He's picking people that know what they are doing, but ultimately they all work for him.  

Bill Clinton did sign NAFTA, but it was the GOP that abused NAFTA.  I don't think Obama will abuse it.  

If they are not acting on behalf of the American people, then they'll be replaced.  

I would reserve my judgement if I were you and wait to see what they do.

I heard today on Fox he might not end those tax breaks to the rich.  That would be bullshit, but I guess in this economy, raising taxes on anyone is not an option?  I say that's bullshit thought.  Maybe I wouldn't raise taxes on the top 10%, but I would for sure on the top 1%.  But then they're the ones who are holding us hostage with this bank bailout shit.  That's why I think Obama is going to try to work with the establishment to see what he can do without rocking the boat too much, and that's why he's hiring people who know the inner workings of the Federal Reserve, but make no mistake, Obama is not going to be duped by the super rich.  He's going to take back America for us. 

If not, he'll be gone in 4 years.  

And someone last week said there is no class warfare.  Who was that again?  Jsanders.  That's right.  What a dope to think this isn't class warfare.  

If Obama is no change, then we are powerless.  What are you suggesting is going to happen?  I do agree that he might not raise wages overnight and bring all the jobs back overnight, but Clinton added jobs and the BIG 3 were profitable in 1999.  

The big difference now is that they have to compete now with Honda and Toyota.  But competition is good for consumers, right?  Just as long as it's an even playing field.  The union is going to have to stop being such a drag on their companies so they can be competitive.  And we need socialized medicine so we can take that off employers plates.


----------



## Care4all

sealybobo said:


> He's picking people that know what they are doing, but ultimately they all work for him.
> 
> Bill Clinton did sign NAFTA, but it was the GOP that abused NAFTA.  I don't think Obama will abuse it.
> 
> If they are not acting on behalf of the American people, then they'll be replaced.
> 
> I would reserve my judgement if I were you and wait to see what they do.
> 
> I heard today on Fox he might not end those tax breaks to the rich.  That would be bullshit, but I guess in this economy, raising taxes on anyone is not an option?  I say that's bullshit thought.  Maybe I wouldn't raise taxes on the top 10%, but I would for sure on the top 1%.  But then they're the ones who are holding us hostage with this bank bailout shit.  That's why I think Obama is going to try to work with the establishment to see what he can do without rocking the boat too much, and that's why he's hiring people who know the inner workings of the Federal Reserve, but make no mistake, Obama is not going to be duped by the super rich.  He's going to take back America for us.
> 
> If not, he'll be gone in 4 years.
> 
> And someone last week said there is no class warfare.  Who was that again?  Jsanders.  That's right.  What a dope to think this isn't class warfare.
> 
> If Obama is no change, then we are powerless.  What are you suggesting is going to happen?  I do agree that he might not raise wages overnight and bring all the jobs back overnight, but Clinton added jobs and the BIG 3 were profitable in 1999.
> 
> The big difference now is that they have to compete now with Honda and Toyota.  But competition is good for consumers, right?  Just as long as it's an even playing field.  The union is going to have to stop being such a drag on their companies so they can be competitive.  And we need socialized medicine so we can take that off employers plates.



If he has picked BIG TIME free traders, along with the head of the Federal Reserves as his new treasury secretary....HOW IS THERE going to be any change?  These ARE the inner circle people that have ruled us for generation upon generation.

Yes, i understand they are experienced, but experienced at what?  Being BIG TIME free traders?

Our only hope is that Obama advises them and they dont advise him....at this point....

I still think that Obama can make some changes that could be good for us, with other things, but as far as his financial picks....they are buddies with the ones that BROUGHT OUR COUNTRY to its KNEES.

Care


----------



## Ravi

GOT greedy? They've always been greedy. Companies don't exist to make you happy, they exist to take your money.


----------



## sealybobo

Care4all said:


> If he has picked BIG TIME free traders, along with the head of the Federal Reserves as his new treasury secretary....HOW IS THERE going to be any change?  These ARE the inner circle people that have ruled us for generation upon generation.
> 
> Yes, i understand they are experienced, but experienced at what?  Being BIG TIME free traders?
> 
> Our only hope is that Obama advises them and they dont advise him....at this point....
> 
> I still think that Obama can make some changes that could be good for us, with other things, but as far as his financial picks....they are buddies with the ones that BROUGHT OUR COUNTRY to its KNEES.
> 
> Care



True.  This won't be all out revolution, but at least we have a new president that acknowledges that the middle class has a problem.  Bush and the GOP said the economy was great last year.  Last year corporate profits were up and they said the economy was strong.  They also said oil companies should be able to charge whatever they want.  And they gave the banks $350 billion no questions asked and the banks still aren't borrowing.  It was nothing more than a bank robbery.  

Just remember that when you discuss this with our conservative friends on these boards that last year they were saying the economy was fine and we need more free trade and less regulations so prices would go down.  They never acknowledged that many of our wages went down too.  And that their greed crashed the economy.  

Hell, last week they suggested it was poor people who ruined the economy.   

And I don't think any of us should expect free trade to end.  We want cheap shoes.  We want cheap fruit.  But there is a limit, and THEY went too far.  I expect Obama to make trade fair, not free.  

But Bush and Tom Delay for 6 years went too far.  Let's pray  that Obama and Hillary and Pelosi & Reed can right the wrongs that were done to us for 8 years.  Get the illegals out of the country today!!!

Should we undo NAFTA?  Probably not an option.  But does it need fixing?  Hell yes.  

So let's hope the top 1% haven't gotten to Obama like they sure as hell owned Bush.  I don't think they will.  

But for sure lobbyists and special interest groups are working on our new government as we speak.  But now it will be construction companies that benefit, not defense contractors/war mongers.  We're going to rebuild our roads and levy's.  We're going to invest in Green and mass transit.  Etc.

PS.  My brother asked me this yesterday.  Why would Americans go to school to become engineers when there is no manufacturing in America?


----------



## Skull Pilot

Big Government got greedy.

Government used to be concerned with very few things, now it wants to control what we eat what we drive, how we heat our homes how much money we make how much money we keep........

Government now confiscates the earnings of more than 75 day's labor from all of us and wants more.

Government takes our money and allows politician to give it to people and companies who do them favors. Government establishes redundant agencies, offices and employees that answer to no one and exist only to prolong their own existence.

Government uses our young men and women who serve in the military to advance policy through force that has nothing to do with our national security

Shall I go on?

But you all think business are the cause of all evil in the world


----------



## sealybobo

Ravi said:


> GOT greedy? They've always been greedy. Companies don't exist to make you happy, they exist to take your money.



This has been 30 years in the making.  First they slowly started sending jobs overseas and letting illegals in, but only to pick fruit and make shoes.  

Before Reagan it was 2 million illegals here, now it's 12 million.  

And before GW, we had millions more manufacturing jobs here than we do now. 

Yes Corporations will move all their labor to 3rd world countries, if the government allows them.  That's why FREE TRADE is a thing of the past.  The conservatives made a good argument, but ultimately they were dead wrong.

This Big 3 possible bankruptsy is the ultimate verdict on Bushanomics/GOPanomics, or whatever you want to call it.

Now I will laugh at anyone who calls me a socialist.  GOD DAMN right I'm a socialist.  If it's either or, I'll take socialism.

Now we can put things back to the way they were in the 90's.  That would be a compromise.  Not socialism, but certainly not Bushanomics.  

And if anyone tells you that we can't, just tell them YES WE CAN!  And yes we will.  

Yes unions got fat, corrupt and lazy, but so what?  I don't want to here any of you worker bees bitching about union greed when we see CEO's getting $20 million dollar retirements.  

And remember, you aren't in a union, yet still you are strugging and your CEO is making $20 million too.  

I almost applaud the unions.  If the CEO's and VP's want to make a fortune, even when the company is failing, why shouldn't the workers too make a great wage/living?

PS.  Toss out the illegals and watch wages go up.  It's supply and demand.  If companies need help, they'll pay more.  And that trickles up to people like me.  Illegals can't do my job, but they are affecting my wages just the same.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Big Government got greedy.
> 
> Government used to be concerned with very few things, now it wants to control what we eat what we drive, how we heat our homes how much money we make how much money we keep........
> 
> Government now confiscates the earnings of more than 75 day's labor from all of us and wants more.
> 
> Government takes our money and allows politician to give it to people and companies who do them favors. Government establishes redundant agencies, offices and employees that answer to no one and exist only to prolong their own existence.
> 
> Government uses our young men and women who serve in the military to advance policy through force that has nothing to do with our national security
> 
> Shall I go on?
> 
> But you all think business are the cause of all evil in the world



During the last 8 years, and since Reagan to be honest, government has been in collusion with Big Business.  Lobbyists/special interest paid the government to pass laws that gave tax breaks to companies going overseas.  

This is about corporations and the rich becoming too powerful in our democracy.  Bush and Chaney are good old boys.  Defense, energy.  We thought it would be a good thing to have Defense and Energy boys in charge, but we found that they sided with corporate greed.

Government confiscates 75 blablabla.  What did Bush do about that?  If I make a million dollars, let the government confiscate half of it.  What do I care?  I still have $500k!!!  People like you say the rich pay too much in taxes and that we don't pay enough.  Go fuck yourself.  If we're making only $50k, we shouldn't pay shit in taxes.  The rich should pay it all!!  Since they have it all.  

And it's funny you are so observant now that the Democrats are in power.  You seemed to turn a blind eye until the Dems took control.  

Hey everyone, Skull is using a very old and tired GOP argument.  He's basically saying the government is the enemy.  Here is a great rebuttal to that:

'You Can't Govern if You Don't Believe in Government'


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Big Government got greedy.
> 
> Government used to be concerned with very few things, now it wants to control what we eat what we drive, how we heat our homes how much money we make how much money we keep........
> 
> Government now confiscates the earnings of more than 75 day's labor from all of us and wants more.
> 
> Government takes our money and allows politician to give it to people and companies who do them favors. Government establishes redundant agencies, offices and employees that answer to no one and exist only to prolong their own existence.
> 
> Government uses our young men and women who serve in the military to advance policy through force that has nothing to do with our national security
> 
> Shall I go on?
> 
> But you all think business are the cause of all evil in the world



And Skull, they were saying on all the Sunday talk shows that the GOP has to give up on pretending that they are for smaller government.  Whether you/they like it or not, the government is necessary.

Now should we streamline it and maybe do away with the beurocracy Bush created in the Dept. of Homeland Security?  For sure.  Should we cut half of the defense spending we spend?  Hell yea.  Should the government stop borrowing $10 billion a month from China to fight the war in Iraq?  Hell yea!!!


----------



## Skull Pilot

Not just since reagan BoBo

And don't think BHO is going to change it

Government has grown under every president in the past 60 years and will continue to grow unless we say 'ENOUGH"

It's not a GOP or Democratic phenomenon.  Our federal and state governments need an enema.

Take an axe to government before taking a tax from the people.

But keep denying it and keep calling for higher and higher punitive and confiscatory taxes in the name of fairness.  Keep allowing the government to control your life because you're too afraid to control your own but don't whine to me when it's your turn to pay.


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> And someone last week said there is no class warfare.  Who was that again?  Jsanders.  That's right.  What a dope to think this isn't class warfare.



It is indeed class warfare, and it was declared BY THE SUPER RICH.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Not just since reagan BoBo
> 
> And don't think BHO is going to change it
> 
> Government has grown under every president in the past 60 years and will continue to grow unless we say 'ENOUGH"
> 
> It's not a GOP or Democratic phenomenon.  Our federal and state governments need an enema.
> 
> Take an axe to government before taking a tax from the people.
> 
> But keep denying it and keep calling for higher and higher punitive and confiscatory taxes in the name of fairness.  Keep allowing the government to control your life because you're too afraid to control your own but don't whine to me when it's your turn to pay.



Remember Reagan broke the air traffic controllers union?  And before Reagan, we had 2 million illegals and now we have 12.  Yes, Reagan started this.  Reagan and his montra of less government.  Reagan said the government wasn't the solution, it was the problem.  Well if you don't believe in government, then you shouldn't govern.  

Yea, we know you don't think Obama will fix anything.  That's why you voted the way you did.  Of course you are a skeptic.  We all know that.  Just watch.

Now please explain what you mean by this, "higher punitive and confiscatory taxes in the name of fairness.".

Of course the government spends too much.  We spend more than the rest of the world on defense COMBINED!  

But what I think you mean are social services.  You want to gut the government of all the good it does because you don't approve of giving to poor inner cities, for example.  But you defend the excessive defense spending, correct?  

Since I know that our government is going to spend one way or the other, then I say I want my taxes to go to poor people and to fix America's infrastructure.  Where as you want to feed the military industrial machine.  

So I think you are making an argument against raising the top 1%'s taxes.  Sure, if the government can find a way to stop spending a lot of money, then fine, cut the rich people's taxes.  But until that day comes, America works best when you take the burden off of the middle class.  That includes slapping what we spend onto the debt.

And the rich will get along fine even if we take away their unfair tax breaks.  We'll give them incentives/tax breaks when they hire people.  Not just give them the break and keep our fingers crossed.  

Because isn't that what the bankers are doing?  We gave them $350 billion and they aren't doing what they said they would do with the money.

So don't talk free markets when the banks need $750 billion of our tax dollars.  That's not free.


----------



## dilloduck

catzmeow said:


> It is indeed class warfare, and it was declared BY THE SUPER RICH.



Who have no party affiliation I might add !!!


----------



## catzmeow

dilloduck said:


> Who have no party affiliation I might add !!!



hell, they are more likely to vote for Obama.


----------



## dilloduck

catzmeow said:


> hell, they are more likely to vote for Obama.



only until the wind starts blowing in another direction. Since many in the money cartels aren't even Americans they can't vote. ( They just buy "stock" in Obama. )


----------



## Skull Pilot

sealybobo said:


> Remember Reagan broke the air traffic controllers union?  And before Reagan, we had 2 million illegals and now we have 12.  Yes, Reagan started this.  Reagan and his montra of less government.  Reagan said the government wasn't the solution, it was the problem.  Well if you don't believe in government, then you shouldn't govern.
> 
> Yea, we know you don't think Obama will fix anything.  That's why you voted the way you did.  Of course you are a skeptic.  We all know that.  Just watch.



Yeah I'll watch but I won't just watch.  I will actively work against any and all of BHOs proposed tax raises and spending increases



> Now please explain what you mean by this, "higher punitive and confiscatory taxes in the name of fairness.".



Self explanatory.  But let's see, increased capital gains taxes increased income taxes, increased social security taxes, new carbon taxes, taxes designed to "bankrupt" certain industries.



> Of course the government spends too much.  We spend more than the rest of the world on defense COMBINED!
> 
> But what I think you mean are social services.  You want to gut the government of all the good it does because you don't approve of giving to poor inner cities, for example.  But you defend the excessive defense spending, correct?



Get our military out of the rest of the world and put them on our borders while supplying our troops with the best most advanced weapons in the world.  Update and modernize our nuclear stockpile and make our country impervious to attack.

And you're right, if that kind of defense costs more than what other countries spend so be it.  I don't care.



> Since I know that our government is going to spend one way or the other, then I say I want my taxes to go to poor people and to fix America's infrastructure.  Where as you want to feed the military industrial machine.



The government wastes more in a year than it would take to fix a dozen roads.  Don't ask me for a dime more until all that waste is gone.



> So I think you are making an argument against raising the top 1%'s taxes.  Sure, if the government can find a way to stop spending a lot of money, then fine, cut the rich people's taxes.  But until that day comes, America works best when you take the burden off of the middle class.  That includes slapping what we spend onto the debt.



Don't be so naive.  taxes will not be raised only on the top 1%.  Taxes will be raised on businesses and will be passed on to you.  States will raise property and sales taxes which you will pay



> And the rich will get along fine even if we take away their unfair tax breaks.  We'll give them incentives/tax breaks when they hire people.  Not just give them the break and keep our fingers crossed.



You still seem to think that someone who achieved success did it by taking it from someone else and the successful person is somehow guilty while the unsuccessful are somehow innocent victims.

I find it sad you think so little of people.  Did you ever stop to consider that people are where they are because that's where they want to be?



> Because isn't that what the bankers are doing?  We gave them $350 billion and they aren't doing what they said they would do with the money.
> 
> So don't talk free markets when the banks need $750 billion of our tax dollars.  That's not free.



We shouldn't have given them anything.  And this is not a free market argument.  It's a who's more evil, business or government.

I say government.


----------



## sealybobo

dilloduck said:


> Who have no party affiliation I might add !!!



The corporations that are sending jobs overseas are GOP.

The people who like illegals coming here and lowering wages are typically GOP.

The Defense companies like Haloburton and Blackwater that raped the treasury are gop.

Tom Delay got into politics because of regulations that were imposed on his company.  

He spent three years working for Redwood Chemical. This work was the source for his nickname "the Exterminator". In the 11 years DeLay ran the company, the IRS imposed tax liens on him three times for not paying payroll and income taxes.[2] The United States Environmental Protection Agency's ban on a certain pesticide that was used in extermination work led DeLay to oppose government regulation of businesses, a belief that he has carried with him throughout his political career.[3]

Allowing corporations to pollute so they can save a buck is a GOP thing.


----------



## sealybobo

dilloduck said:


> only until the wind starts blowing in another direction. Since many in the money cartels aren't even Americans they can't vote. ( They just buy "stock" in Obama. )



Why did you guys ignore/deny/defend Bush and the GOP the 6-8 years they were in power and this shit was happening?

And now we're supposed to listen to you when you say Obama will be no better?  

You've been wrong about everything else.  Let's hope you are wrong about this too.


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> The corporations that are sending jobs overseas are GOP.
> 
> The people who like illegals coming here and lowering wages are typically GOP.
> 
> The Defense companies like Haloburton and Blackwater that raped the treasury are gop.
> 
> Allowing corporations to pollute so they can save a buck is a GOP thing.



Hardy har har.  This is a greed thing, and the only color that matters in that world is green.


----------



## dilloduck

sealybobo said:


> The corporations that are sending jobs overseas are GOP.
> 
> The people who like illegals coming here and lowering wages are typically GOP.
> 
> The Defense companies like Haloburton and Blackwater that raped the treasury are gop.
> 
> Tom Delay got into politics because of regulations that were imposed on his company.
> 
> He spent three years working for Redwood Chemical. This work was the source for his nickname "the Exterminator". In the 11 years DeLay ran the company, the IRS imposed tax liens on him three times for not paying payroll and income taxes.[2] The United States Environmental Protection Agency's ban on a certain pesticide that was used in extermination work led DeLay to oppose government regulation of businesses, a belief that he has carried with him throughout his political career.[3]
> 
> Allowing corporations to pollute so they can save a buck is a GOP thing.



Money Cartels----not corporations----think bigger, dude !!


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> .



1.  You guys said Clinton would ruin the economy the same way you say BHO will.  HA!

2. If that is how Bush spent with military spending, I'd be all for it, but it isn't, and you know it, so 8 years later we are no safer.  You like defense spending and you ignore the fraud/theft that has gone on thru military spending.  See, you don't care that they ripped you off, as long as it was in the name of defense.

3.  I'm done being scared that corporations will pass the costs on to us.  I know that under Bushanomics, the burden has fallen on us, so you are wrong.  Your economics are flawed because the system was corrupted.  They used supply and demand to lower our wages.  Must not have happened to your job yet.  

4.  Here we go with the liberals hate people that work hard and achieve.  And you talk about being naive?  You are a house slave.  You keep arguing for the super rich when we have class warefare going on.  Tons of millionaires who only made a million a year thought they were republicans too.  Now they yearn for the Clinton years.  YEARN!!!!

5.  You arrogant bastard.  All of us are where we are because we want to be here?  You arrogant fuck!  Clearly you make $100k and so you can be such an arrogant fucker.  

6.  Corporate America is more corrupt than Government.  Example.  Corporate America would never ever in a million years raise minimum wage.  But Government will.  That's because the Democrats work for We the People.  

And in every situation we see the GOP argues for the Corporations and the Rich and the Democrats argue for the middle class.  Sure the Dems aren't perfect, but the GOP is in on it with the Corporations.

So now you can shift your argument back to "the democrats are just as bad", which is utter bullshit.  If it isn't obvious to you by now, it will NEVER BE!

All my Republican friends understand what's going on now.  Almost no one is clinging on to the crap you are still clinging to.  To me, what you are saying now is just a joke.

Yes, raise the taxes on all the rich.  If they don't like it, they can go to another country.  And if they do, Obama will give business loans to younger people who are willing to take their place.  They'll stay in America, hire Americans and pay American wages!!!


----------



## sealybobo

catzmeow said:


> Hardy har har.  This is a greed thing, and the only color that matters in that world is green.



That's right baby!  Rich vs. Poor. 

If corporations are allowed/encouraged, yes they will go overseas and work with people who only ask for $3 a day.

It doesn't have to be that way. 

Eventually, they'll make it so you are only worth $3 a day.

You are defending the people/corporations/politicians who are working hard to lower your worth.  Corporate profits are not more important than the American middle class.  It's what makes America great.  Do you think profits are more important than your standard of living?  What do you do?


----------



## sealybobo

dilloduck said:


> Money Cartels----not corporations----think bigger, dude !!



And for awhile I thought oil was fucking the Big 3 but now I think the big three want out of Michigan and out of the unions too, so they are purposely bankrupting themselves.  

Now if they can get $25 billion and prolong failure for a few more years, they'll go that route too.  That's why I'm glad we're asking them for a business plan.  I don't want to reward the Big 3 CEO's, but I do want to save auto manufacturing.  

But the oil and car companies were in collusion with each other on CAFE standards.  We could get 65 miles per gallon but then people would buy less gas and then they wouldn't buy the gas guzzling SUV's.

But even if the Big 3 succeed, they've already lowered wages.  New people do not have the same benefits that the old timers do.  And the Big 3 have cut pensions for retired salary and they keep charging retiree's more and more for their healthcare, etc.  

And you are right, it's probably much bigger than I know/think.  I do not suggest I know what the hell is going on.  I can only tell you what it looks like to me, from where I sit.

But the days of asking us to make less when the CEO makes $20 million a year has got to be over.  Unfortunately, it is not.

The only way to increase wages is for supply and demand/the economy to get better.  Step one is get rid of the illegals.

I have a neighbor who lays brick.  3 whites, the rest mexicans.  No insurance, $14 hr., no benefits.  If the union gets sent home because of rain, they get paid.  If my buddy gets sent home, he does not get paid.  Get rid of the illegals doing that work!  We used to do that work before they were allowed in!!  And if companies can't find enough good help, they'll pay more.  Yes it will cost the consumer more, but that's the breaks here in the good old USA!!!  We don't have a slave labor class here, nor should we.

His company is an outsourced labor company that the union company subcontracts.  The company itself charges the same as a union employee would make, only no healthcare.  So my buddy makes $14, the company he works for gets $8 hr. for his work, and the main company doesn't pay healthcare to the outsourced company.  In the end, the employees suffer.  Unacceptable.


----------



## sealybobo

catzmeow said:


> Hardy har har.  This is a greed thing, and the only color that matters in that world is green.



I told people that before the election.  It's not about black white, jew muslim, gay straight, woman man, it's rich v poor.


----------



## dilloduck

sealybobo said:


> And for awhile I thought oil was fucking the Big 3 but now I think the big three want out of Michigan and out of the unions too, so they are purposely bankrupting themselves.
> 
> Now if they can get $25 billion and prolong failure for a few more years, they'll go that route too.  That's why I'm glad we're asking them for a business plan.  I don't want to reward the Big 3 CEO's, but I do want to save auto manufacturing.
> 
> But the oil and car companies were in collusion with each other on CAFE standards.  We could get 65 miles per gallon but then people would buy less gas and then they wouldn't buy the gas guzzling SUV's.
> 
> But even if the Big 3 succeed, they've already lowered wages.  New people do not have the same benefits that the old timers do.  And the Big 3 have cut pensions for retired salary and they keep charging retiree's more and more for their healthcare, etc.
> 
> And you are right, it's probably much bigger than I know/think.  I do not suggest I know what the hell is going on.  I can only tell you what it looks like to me, from where I sit.
> 
> But the days of asking us to make less when the CEO makes $20 million a year has got to be over.  Unfortunately, it is not.
> 
> The only way to increase wages is for supply and demand/the economy to get better.  Step one is get rid of the illegals.
> 
> I have a neighbor who lays brick.  3 whites, the rest mexicans.  No insurance, $14 hr., no benefits.  If the union gets sent home because of rain, they get paid.  If my buddy gets sent home, he does not get paid.  Get rid of the illegals doing that work!  We used to do that work before they were allowed in!!  And if companies can't find enough good help, they'll pay more.  Yes it will cost the consumer more, but that's the breaks here in the good old USA!!!  We don't have a slave labor class here, nor should we.
> 
> His company is an outsourced labor company that the union company subcontracts.  The company itself charges the same as a union employee would make, only no healthcare.  So my buddy makes $14, the company he works for gets $8 hr. for his work, and the main company doesn't pay healthcare to the outsourced company.  In the end, the employees suffer.  Unacceptable.



Bankers--financial policy makers--lending institutions--- Federal reserves---cmon think big and think global.


----------



## Skull Pilot

sealybobo said:


> 1.
> 5.  You arrogant bastard.  All of us are where we are because we want to be here?  You arrogant fuck!  Clearly you make $100k and so you can be such an arrogant fucker.



What's the matter boo boo did I hit a nerve?

You don't want to take the credit for where you are in your life?

It's someone else's, some "rich" person's fault not yours right?

And yes I do make over 100K but I will bet I risked more than you and worked longer and harder than you to get it.  But you think that if I want to keep what I earn because I risked every dime I had to open a business I am somehow arrogant?

How about you?  You lazy fuck wanting to take money other people earned so you can feel better about yourself and your government because you didn't have the stones to risk it all on your own?

So yes asshole you are exactly where YOU want to be and it's no ones fault but your own if you don't like it.


----------



## sealybobo

dilloduck said:


> Bankers--financial policy makers--lending institutions--- Federal reserves---cmon think big and think global.



Oh you don't have to convince me.  I saw Freedom to Fascism.

On one of my talk radio shows, they were floating the idea that maybe we/the government, could buy back the Federal Reserves from the bankers that own it now.  We should have never turned our finances over to them in the first place.  Damn corrupt government of 1913!!  

They have way to much power in our lives.  

And socialize oil/energy/healthcare.  

Oil companies should charge as much as they can on the world market but here at home, we should not pay $4 a gallon.  And the oil men for years have put a cabosh on alternative fuels.  

A Texas inventor who demonstrated a water-fueled car to reporters over the weekend has been found dead on a highway.

A severed head belonging to Douglas Chadbury, a 47-year-old professional mechanic and part-time inventor, was found along a stretch of highway in Texas yesterday. Chadbury made news locally after driving around in a car that could run on ordinary tap water.

Man who invented water-powered car found dead « Sir Satire&#8217;s New World Order News Service


And they should not be gouging us to heat our homes either.  That should be government run.  You allow corporations to run our electricity/energy and you see what they did every winter the last few years.  

Healthcare too.  It only makes sense.  If we are all in the pool together, then we should get a great rate.  And then it won't break us when someone gets cancer.  Spread the risk.  This is what insurance is all about.  And then the pharma's won't gouge us either.  I don't have all the answers, but basically, we have universal healthcare right now, and we are all paying for it.  It's called Emergency room's can't turn anyone away.  And this is costing us tax payers regardless, so might as well fix the system because it too got out of control.


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> You are defending the people/corporations/politicians who are working hard to lower your worth.  Corporate profits are not more important than the American middle class.  It's what makes America great.  Do you think profits are more important than your standard of living?  What do you do?



Where have I defended these corporate bandits?  Show me the post.   I've attacked these bastards for years.  I like business people, especially small businesses, but I despise most multinational corporations for the soul-sucking leeches that they are.

But, trust me when i say that corporate greed transcends politics.  The Dems pander to them just as much as the Reps do, they just cloak their pandering in populist rhetoric.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> 5.  You arrogant bastard.  All of us are where we are because we want to be here?  You arrogant fuck!  Clearly you make $100k and so you can be such an arrogant fucker.



Sorry to pick on this one as well but it's one of those nerve touching issues.  I DON'T make 100k a year or anywhere even close to that.  The notion that you are (or aren't) responsible for you position in life is not that radical and not a right or left issue.  It's a human nature issue.  People tend to give themselves credit for their successes and blame others for their failures.  

I really encourage to take step back and think about this in a different manner.  This have and have not thing is not rich vs. poor thing or a right vs. left thing.  It is predominantly a result of human behavior and a change in our cultural atitude.


----------



## catzmeow

Bern80 said:


> The notion that you are (or aren't) responsible for you position in life is not that radical and not a right or left issue.  It's a human nature issue.  People tend to give themselves credit for their successes and blame others for their failures.
> 
> I really encourage to take step back and think about this in a different manner.  This have and have not thing is not rich vs. poor thing or a right vs. left thing.  It is predominantly a result of human behavior and a change in our cultural atitude.



We don't all start out in the same place, dude.  I started out in a 3,000 sq ft. home on a farm, in an area with no crime, with two parents who taught me to work hard and save my money, and a dad who did very well working very hard in a small business that he started and ran for more than 30 years.

I was given the opportunity to attend good schools all my life, to eat good food, to have a stable home life, to have good medical care, and to go to college.

My hand of cards was stacked.

And, I've spent the last almost 20 years working with poor inner city kids who grow up with a dad in prison, mom addicted to crack, in shitty schools, in filthy homes where meals are hit/miss and gnereally unhealthy, living in a crime-infested neighborhood where it is dangerous to go outside after dark.  Kids who've never been to the dentist in their life, who will never be given a hand in paying for college tuition.  In the card game of life, these kids got nothing in their hand.

I agree, a lot of success in life is due to hard work, personal motivation, being thrifty, all of that.

But, we don't all start out with the same hand in the card game of life.  To pretend otherwise is simply self-deception.

If the playing field in the U.S. were flat and equitable, then we could all make these claims.  And yeah, I've seen plenty of people throw away their lives through making bad choices.  But don't ever kid yourself and think that life is fair, because it sure as hell isn't.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> What's the matter boo boo did I hit a nerve?
> 
> You don't want to take the credit for where you are in your life?
> 
> It's someone else's, some "rich" person's fault not yours right?
> 
> And yes I do make over 100K but I will bet I risked more than you and worked longer and harder than you to get it.  But you think that if I want to keep what I earn because I risked every dime I had to open a business I am somehow arrogant?
> 
> How about you?  You lazy fuck wanting to take money other people earned so you can feel better about yourself and your government because you didn't have the stones to risk it all on your own?
> 
> So yes asshole you are exactly where YOU want to be and it's no ones fault but your own if you don't like it.



It's my fault sales are down?  I'm in sales.  I used to make $85k, now I make $75k.  I have friends like you.  Right place at the right time.  LUCKY.  And anyone new into their industry does not make what they make.  If you lose your job, know this.  Know you will not make as much in your next job.  FACT.  No matter what you do.  So everyone's at fault.  

And I tried starting a new business, then 9-11 happened.  And I worked for a lazy owner.  

Yes you did strike a nerve, because all the companies that bought last year are not buying this year.  

The idea that I made a mistake choosing to get into corporate sales?  I see the top 3 salespeople making over $200K and the rest of us are all making a little less than we were before.  We're not starving, but we aren't making as much.

And neither are you, because your home value went down, your 401K took a dumb, and the cost of living went up.  When you think of all the money you spent on $4 a gallon, how much of GW's tax break do you really think you kept?  LOL.

And again Skull, if you are making over $100k, then you can't really relate to the rest of us, now can you?

I can relate to the people making $50k though, because when you start over in a new company, which I did 5 years ago, you start off making $30k salary with zero commission until you start selling.  And by the way, before the GOP sent all the jobs overseas and brought in all the illegals, companies were paying $40K plus.  That's a $10K cut right there.  

And my buddies making over $100k?  those are auto supplier jobs.  If the Big 3 go under, it'll be their fault that they only find jobs making $50k?  Really?

You honestly think if you lost your job that you would find one just as good?  HA!  That's what I mean about you being an arrogant ignorant bastard.  

And if you can, you are the exception.

I worry every day/month about losing my job.  Sales are getting TIGHT!!!  I guess that's my fault too.

So I guess you don't see what's going on because it hasn't happened to you yet.  

And I guess if my brother, who makes $400k, I guess if his company (which by the way already went chapter 11), but I guess if they fail again and he loses his VP job, I guess that was his fault too?  

Or if he can only find a job that pays $100K because the market is FLOODED with guys who used to be VP's, then that'll be his fault too?

I hate to wish anything bad on anyone but man are you asking for it.  

And again, I'm making about $75K and my condo is almost paid off, so I'm not hurting.  At least not as bad as I see others hurting.  So please don't suggest that I'm just a whiner.

All your sad/tired arguments are so old.  It's bullshit.  

Now you should tell the bankers that it's all their fault and it's all in their head.  And the only way to get out of this is for them to go out and SPEND SPEND SPEND!!!  Isn't that what the GOP told us in 2007?  

PS.  I just told a guy what we are discussing and in the end he said, "the unions got too corrupt and it's all about profits", and I said, "we're not in a union and still our jobs are going to india and our wages are being lowered"

So I hope you see that they just started with the unions.  It was easy because they were corrupt and most of us are not in unions.  Now that they  have broken the unions, YOU'RE NEXT!!  

Not you Skull, because you have some magical specialty that can't be outsourced.  And, you work hard even though you suggest Americans don't work hard.  I'd be willing to bet a Chinaman, Indian or Mexican would do it for less and work harder than you.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> Sorry to pick on this one as well but it's one of those nerve touching issues.  I DON'T make 100k a year or anywhere even close to that.  The notion that you are (or aren't) responsible for you position in life is not that radical and not a right or left issue.  It's a human nature issue.  People tend to give themselves credit for their successes and blame others for their failures.
> 
> I really encourage to take step back and think about this in a different manner.  This have and have not thing is not rich vs. poor thing or a right vs. left thing.  It is predominantly a result of human behavior and a change in our cultural atitude.



IF you made $75k a year or better, I would encourage you to quit your job and go try to find a job that pays the same or better.  Get back to me with your results.  And read my previous post.  

I have explained over and over how the GOP allowed illegals to flood our country, they allowed companies to get away with hiring them, and they have sent all our manufacturing overseas.  Now there are more people than there are jobs.  That's supply and demand baby!!!  That's how they have lowered your worth.  

All in the name of PROFITS!!!!  In corporate Americas eyes, why pay you $10 hr when they can get it for $3 hr. overseas?  

This has affected people who made $1 millon dollars a year and this is certainly affecting you.  How much do you make and what do you do?


----------



## sealybobo

catzmeow said:


> We don't all start out in the same place, dude.  I started out in a 3,000 sq ft. home on a farm, in an area with no crime, with two parents who taught me to work hard and save my money, and a dad who did very well working very hard in a small business that he started and ran for more than 30 years.
> 
> I was given the opportunity to attend good schools all my life, to eat good food, to have a stable home life, to have good medical care, and to go to college.
> 
> My hand of cards was stacked.
> 
> And, I've spent the last almost 20 years working with poor inner city kids who grow up with a dad in prison, mom addicted to crack, in shitty schools, in filthy homes where meals are hit/miss and gnereally unhealthy, living in a crime-infested neighborhood where it is dangerous to go outside after dark.  Kids who've never been to the dentist in their life, who will never be given a hand in paying for college tuition.  In the card game of life, these kids got nothing in their hand.
> 
> I agree, a lot of success in life is due to hard work, personal motivation, being thrifty, all of that.
> 
> But, we don't all start out with the same hand in the card game of life.  To pretend otherwise is simply self-deception.
> 
> If the playing field in the U.S. were flat and equitable, then we could all make these claims.  And yeah, I've seen plenty of people throw away their lives through making bad choices.  But don't ever kid yourself and think that life is fair, because it sure as hell isn't.



And people who did everything they were supposed to do are getting fucked.   My cop friend is a great example.  He'll for sure get his pension and he will for sure never be laid off.  Sure his 401k took a dump and his home is worth less, but he'll get by.  So he happens to have a job that allows him to be cocky, and a conservative, and judgemental.

And if it were just people who didn't go to college that were getting fucked, I might be more inclined to agree with these arrogant bastards.  But it's not.  It's EVERYONE!  

And we are practically in a great depression.  How are you going to blame people for failing when it's a great depression?  And who do you blame for the great depression?  And who's fault is it when Tyson Chicken hires illegals and lays off American workers?  Is it that workers fault?  Even though it's happening all across America?  

Even if they all went out and got college degrees, that would still lower our wages.  That was actually the plan.  So now I'm competing with people who used to work in factories.  There are no more factory jobs so those people went out and got degrees.  Now there are more of us white collar people than there are white collar jobs.  And that too lowers wages.  

What is going too far?  If a corporation wants to sell products in America but they don't want to pay Americans to make that product, so they send those jobs overseas because that's how they can make more profits, then that's going too far.  At least giving them tax breaks is going too far.  And if that country isn't taking any of our exports, that too is going too far.  And then if we find out that the ceo of that company paid himself $20 million, that's going even farther.


----------



## Bern80

catzmeow said:


> We don't all start out in the same place, dude.  I started out in a 3,000 sq ft. home on a farm, in an area with no crime, with two parents who taught me to work hard and save my money, and a dad who did very well working very hard in a small business that he started and ran for more than 30 years.
> 
> I was given the opportunity to attend good schools all my life, to eat good food, to have a stable home life, to have good medical care, and to go to college.
> 
> My hand of cards was stacked.
> 
> And, I've spent the last almost 20 years working with poor inner city kids who grow up with a dad in prison, mom addicted to crack, in shitty schools, in filthy homes where meals are hit/miss and gnereally unhealthy, living in a crime-infested neighborhood where it is dangerous to go outside after dark.  Kids who've never been to the dentist in their life, who will never be given a hand in paying for college tuition.  In the card game of life, these kids got nothing in their hand.
> 
> I agree, a lot of success in life is due to hard work, personal motivation, being thrifty, all of that.
> 
> But, we don't all start out with the same hand in the card game of life.  To pretend otherwise is simply self-deception.
> 
> If the playing field in the U.S. were flat and equitable, then we could all make these claims.  And yeah, I've seen plenty of people throw away their lives through making bad choices.  But don't ever kid yourself and think that life is fair, because it sure as hell isn't.



I agree totally, the best way to summarize is that you have no control really over how you're life starts, the end(s) however is up to you.

people talk about the benefits of good schools or working for daddy's company.  those benefits are reaped (or not) based your choices.  You may have the opportunity to go to Harvard, your grades are up to you.


----------



## dilloduck

Bern80 said:


> I agree totally, the best way to summarize is that you have no control really over how you're life starts, the end however is up to you.



And that grass that always looks greener may not be.


----------



## WillowTree

WhatTheHell2 said:


> BIG BUSINESS GOT GREEDY
> 
> Big business got greedy and wanted to get bigger and make more money and in the process got corrupt.
> First they took full advantage of sending jobs out of the country so they could produce more for less. For the jobs that were left, they got an unlimited supply of cheap labor from Mexico by way of illegal aliens. This took jobs from Americans and lowered their wages so they did not have money to put back into the economy.
> 
> Then they gave loans, home and cars, to people who they knew would eventually default and they did not care about anything but the short term dividends where they made lots of money but did not see the eventuality of the end scenario. The money would stop coming in and they would be left with houses that were not longer bringing in money and they could not resale because no one had money to spend because they were not working.
> 
> Auto industries got greedy and built bigger and more expensive gas guzzling cars that sold, short term, but eventually people could no longer afford to buy them and they stop selling and auto industries stop making money.
> 
> Corporations got too big for their britches and so did Americans. All of America got too big and need to come down a notch and start living within their means. Consumers cannot spend money they do not have and government is spending money they do not have.
> 
> Big businesses are not the only ones that got too big. There are all levels of business that have had to downsize after expanding. Here is Reno, Mervyns, K-Mart, Circuit City, Target, to name a few.
> 
> *Obama has to put Americans back to work rebuilding American for Americans. No cheap foreign laborers need apply that will send earned money out of the country to go into Mexicos economy instead of back into our economy. Mexicans send 20 billion back to Mexico each year contributed to our economys failure*.
> 
> I AM RETIRED ON A SMALL RETIREMENT AND I LIVE WITHIN MY MEANS AND MANAGE TO HELP MY FAMILY WHO IS IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THEY LIVED LARGE AND I STILL MANAGE TO SAVE.
> THERE ARE NEEDS AND THERE ARE WANTS.






you should have thought of that before you let you party sell it's soul for the Hispanic vote.. It's too late, you owe them now. Welcome your new neighbors the 30 or 40 million new Americans..


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> And we are practically in a great depression.  How are you going to blame people for failing when it's a great depression?  And who do you blame for the great depression?  And who's fault is it when Tyson Chicken hires illegals and lays off American workers?  Is it that workers fault?  Even though it's happening all across America?



I have to say... I'm pretty fucking sick of hearing that I'm a "racist" for not wanting another couple million illegal immigrants in our country.  I've been watching this happen in poor communities for the past 20 years, and now it's finally starting to reach the top of the food chain (those of us who make 70K+).  We're just now starting to feel what a lot of folks were feeling ten years ago, and it sure as hell doesn't feel good.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> I came in to work today with the intention of posting almost exactly what you posted.  Thanks for saving me the time.  Let me see what else I may add.  But great post.
> 
> This is to all the people I argue with on these boards.  SO WHAT!  That's my answer the next time you say, "but that will raise costs" or "corporations will just pass that on to the consumer".  SO WHAT!  First of all, they'll jack up the price on anything if they can get away with it.  Look at gas.  No one did anything to cause gas prices to go up.  It didn't go up because of demand, China or any of that.  It went up as far as they thought they could get away with.  Then it trashed the economy because no one was spending money on anything else.
> 
> Anyways, we need to bring manufacturing jobs back home and we need to get the illegals out.  *too late to think about that, welcome you new neighbors they will soon be legal not illegal*  Before Reagan got into office, we had 2 million illegals here.  Today, 12 million.  And in 1999 the Big 3 made profits.  What's changed?  Toyota, Honda and every other foreign car manufacturer that's selling cars in America, when their countries won't sell American made cars?
> 
> I don't begrudge Honda and Toyota manufacturing here in America, but NO IMPORTS!  If it's made in Mexico, sell it in Mexico!!!  *too late your party sold it's soul for the Hispanic vote,, you owe them*
> It's all about lowering our wages. *and buying votes  *Google CORPORATE PROFITS in 2007.  You'll see corporations were doing fine.  I believe this horrible economy was done on purpose by the super rich.  And I know people who made a million dollars a year who thought they were on the right side of the HAVES vs. HAVE NOTS and they are finding out that they weren't.
> 
> Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this was done on purpose by the top 1%.  And look, they won't even suffer, because they're bailing themselves out. *and obamalama made noises today like he wasn't going to raise taxes on these 1%*
> So I can't be against the Big 3 bailout because millions of Americans are depending on their survival, but ultimately, they're still going to lower our wages.  And notice how the Southern Republicans want the Big 3 to fail?  That's because Honda and Toyota are in their states.  They want to benefit from our failure.  Only they don't understand it'll take the entire economy down.
> 
> And what if we are attacked again?  *We are not going to be attacked again, the obamalama will make the whole wide world love us so there will be no reason for us to be attacked..* In WW2, we had the Big 3 build Tanks, Planes, Bombs and Ships.  Who'll build them if we don't have a manufacturing base?  Will we have China build our war machine after they attack us?
> 
> We need to kick ever illegal out of this country. *too late, you sold your soul for votes  *If American's won't do it for $5 hr, pay em $10.  We work in coal mines for the right money, so I'm sure we'll pick fruit if you pay us right.  It'll raise the cost of fruit?  SO WHAT!!!  Turn the $1 Store into a $2.  We can't send jobs overseas.  It used to be wrong to work with slave laborors.  What happened to those days?
> 
> This is the end of Bush Capitalism.  Free Trade.  Unfair trade practices.  Tax breaks to overseas companies.
> 
> You wonder why countries go socialist or communist.  They're cutting our wages and CEO's are making $20 million a year???
> 
> I heard Honda's CEO makes $1 million a year and they profitted last year.  Then Ford's guy made $20 million and they lost billions?  Unacceptable.
> 
> That doesn't mean break the unions and send more jobs overseas!!!  For God sakes!!!  It means cut Ford's CEO's pay to $1 million dollars a year.  When they profit, he can get a million dollar bonus.  $2 million is plenty.  If there is any more money to go around, it goes to the shareholders and labor!!!
> 
> Wake up America!!! *It's too late, the votes have been counted, very costly  *You want cheap products, but soon your job will be affected by this never ending quest for more and more PROFIT!!!  Soon your company will ask to cut into your wages so they can make more profit!!!











You told us for years we were bigots and racists for wanting to curb illegals, "they are only here to better their lives" you said,, you said "who will pick your tomatoes?"  someitmes you just gotta watch what you wish for as jeramiahbullfrog is so fond of saying "your chickens have come home to roost."


----------



## catzmeow

Bern80 said:


> I agree totally, the best way to summarize is that you have no control really over how you're life starts, the end(s) however is up to you.
> 
> people talk about the benefits of good schools or working for daddy's company.  those benefits are reaped (or not) based your choices.  You may have the opportunity to go to Harvard, your grades are up to you.



Yes, but...it's a far bigger climb from the crack den in East Cleveland than from my farmhouse outside of Kansas City.  So, it takes a lot longer to catch up, if you ever do.

You know that kids who fall behind in literacy in the elementary years usually DON'T catch up, statistically speaking...So, you tell me.  When we have millions of Americans growing up poor, in substandard schools, when do they get the chance to catch up?


----------



## Care4all

WillowTree said:


> You told us for years we were bigots and racists for wanting to curb illegals, "they are only here to better their lives" you said,, you said "who will pick your tomatoes?"  someitmes you just gotta watch what you wish for as jeramiahbullfrog is so fond of saying "your chickens have come home to roost."



i don't have a problem at all with imprting migrant workers.....they just need to be LEGALLY brought in....

Same with other businesses that are TRUELY SHORT of workers, they just need to bring them in on visas, LEGALLY....


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> you should have thought of that before you let you party sell it's soul for the Hispanic vote.. It's too late, you owe them now. Welcome your new neighbors the 30 or 40 million new Americans..



Did you read my Thom Hartmann article last week?  The GOP is split on this issue too.  It's the racists vs. the ones who want to use illegals for cheap labor.

On the Democratic side, it's the bleeding heart liberals vs. our racists.

And I don't really want to call them racists, because I'm one of them.  They are illegal because that's how you get them for really cheap!  I don't even want them here legally.  We don't need 10 million new poor people flooding are markets.  Do we?  If fruit farmers want to have a deal with immigrants, so be it, but those illegals are doing jobs Americans will do.  Just they're doing them for a lot less $.

When times are good, we always take advantage of immigrants.  When times our tough, they gotta go.  It's us or them.  

And i can't just go to Mexico and work.  You should see their immigration policies.  They are really strict.  

But screw the Mexican Americans who defend illegals.  They got to realize that it's hurting them too. 

Just like cuban Americans are anti Cuba.  Mexicans have to realize Mexico is hurting America.  

Maybe Mexico has to figure their own economy out.  The way things are now, they're turning us into Mexico.  A few have a lot and the masses don't have shit.

Soon we'll be sneaking across the border to do jobs Canadians won't do.  LOL.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> The corporations that are sending jobs overseas are GOP.
> 
> The people who like illegals coming here and lowering wages are typically GOP  *Ahhhh but you Democrats get their votes, so you owe them big time. Don't cross them now, now that they have voted for you.*
> The Defense companies like Haloburton and Blackwater that raped the treasury are gop.
> 
> Tom Delay got into politics because of regulations that were imposed on his company.
> 
> He spent three years working for Redwood Chemical. This work was the source for his nickname "the Exterminator". In the 11 years DeLay ran the company, the IRS imposed tax liens on him three times for not paying payroll and income taxes.[2] The United States Environmental Protection Agency's ban on a certain pesticide that was used in extermination work led DeLay to oppose government regulation of businesses, a belief that he has carried with him throughout his political career.[3]
> 
> Allowing corporations to pollute so they can save a buck is a GOP thing.


----------



## WillowTree

Care4all said:


> i don't have a problem at all with imprting migrant workers.....they just need to be LEGALLY brought in....
> 
> Same with other businesses that are TRUELY SHORT of workers, they just need to bring them in on visas, LEGALLY....






that's all past history,, care, the dems bought the hispanic vote,, there will soon be 30 or 40 million legal hispanics,, then we sit and wait for the next wave of illegals.. those votes are very costly.. are they not?


----------



## Care4all

WillowTree said:


> you should have thought of that before you let you party sell it's soul for the Hispanic vote.. It's too late, you owe them now. Welcome your new neighbors the 30 or 40 million new Americans..



do you think the LEGAL hispanics, that can vote, are the problem, or that they want the illegals to be allowed in quicker than what they had to go through?  I know quite a few hispanics who are here LEGALLY and they in no way, want amnesty for these people.

ILLEGALS CAN NOT vote, so who's vote are you talking about?

Besides the fact that hispanics were primarily republican and voted for Bush in previous years, now they went with Obama, but before this, they tended to be more conservative, with conservative values....though i could be skewed because i primarily know legal Cuban americans from the Florida region....who are mostly republicans....


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> Did you read my Thom Hartmann article last week?  The GOP is split on this issue too.  It's the racists vs. the ones who want to use illegals for cheap labor.
> 
> On the Democratic side, it's the bleeding heart liberals vs. our racists.
> 
> And I don't really want to call them racists, because I'm one of them.  They are illegal because that's how you get them for really cheap!  I don't even want them here legally.  We don't need 10 million new poor people flooding are markets.  Do we?  If fruit farmers want to have a deal with immigrants, so be it, but those illegals are doing jobs Americans will do.  Just they're doing them for a lot less $.
> 
> When times are good, we always take advantage of immigrants.  When times our tough, they gotta go.  It's us or them.
> 
> And i can't just go to Mexico and work.  You should see their immigration policies.  They are really strict.
> 
> But screw the Mexican Americans who defend illegals.  They got to realize that it's hurting them too.
> 
> Just like cuban Americans are anti Cuba.  Mexicans have to realize Mexico is hurting America.
> 
> Maybe Mexico has to figure their own economy out.  The way things are now, they're turning us into Mexico.  A few have a lot and the masses don't have shit.
> 
> Soon we'll be sneaking across the border to do jobs Canadians won't do.  LOL.





Look bobo,, we had a US congressman's son from Florida caught sneaking illegals including a 6 year okd, drugs, guns whatever, he went to drug rehab.. you can forget about the illegals they will soon be your fellow citizens..


----------



## Skull Pilot

sealybobo said:


> It's my fault sales are down?  I'm in sales.  I used to make $85k, now I make $75k.  I have friends like you.  Right place at the right time.  LUCKY.  And anyone new into their industry does not make what they make.  If you lose your job, know this.  Know you will not make as much in your next job.  FACT.  No matter what you do.  So everyone's at fault.



I did sales for years.  Commission only.  Sales is a numbers game.  So see more people, get new accounts make more money.  You're in sales so you basically work for yourself and you're blaming other people for your drop in income.  Just another excuse.



> And I tried starting a new business, then 9-11 happened.  And I worked for a lazy owner.



If you worked for the owner, you didn't start a business.



> Yes you did strike a nerve, because all the companies that bought last year are not buying this year.



Then find companies that buy from someone else and get their business.  Be better than your competition.



> The idea that I made a mistake choosing to get into corporate sales?  I see the top 3 salespeople making over $200K and the rest of us are all making a little less than we were before.  We're not starving, but we aren't making as much.



Because you aren't selling as much and that's not the other salesmen's fault.




> And neither are you, because your home value went down, your 401K took a dumb, and the cost of living went up.  When you think of all the money you spent on $4 a gallon, how much of GW's tax break do you really think you kept?  LOL.



Actually I bought pretty low and have made some huge improvements to my house.  New kitchen, bath, heating and central air.  besides, I am not looking at selling for at least 15 years so I plan on recouping a nice sum. Hell I might not sell at all because this place could easily generate 5K a month in rent.



> And again Skull, if you are making over $100k, then you can't really relate to the rest of us, now can you?



Yes I can.  I worked 2 jobs and earned a total of 60K for 6 or 7 years before we opened our business.  I saved every dime didn't buy shit, didn't go on vacations or buy a new cell phone every 6 months I brow bagged and brought my coffee from home.  Bought clothes at the Salvation Army all so I could open my own business.

We put our life's savings and a good chunk of our IRAs on the line.  If we failed, we literally were going to be living in our car.  BTW we STILL only have one car.

So don't give me that whiny baby shit that, no one who makes more than you can relate.  It is utter BULLSHIT.



> I can relate to the people making $50k though, because when you start over in a new company, which I did 5 years ago, you start off making $30k salary with zero commission until you start selling.  And by the way, before the GOP sent all the jobs overseas and brought in all the illegals, companies were paying $40K plus.  That's a $10K cut right there.



So, you make up the difference.  Work nights to earn a little more while you build your new customer base, hit the strets man and do what sales dogs do.



> And my buddies making over $100k?  those are auto supplier jobs.  If the Big 3 go under, it'll be their fault that they only find jobs making $50k?  Really?



It will be their fault if they don't rise above the setback and blame everyone else for their situation.



> You honestly think if you lost your job that you would find one just as good?  HA!  That's what I mean about you being an arrogant ignorant bastard.



The only way I will lose my job is if my business fails.  Quite frankly, my customer base is pretty deep and I'll lay people off and work 100 hours a week to stay open if it comes to that.  It seems you are not prepared to do that so you wouldn't understand that mindset would you?



> And if you can, you are the exception.
> 
> I worry every day/month about losing my job.  Sales are getting TIGHT!!!  I guess that's my fault too.
> 
> So I guess you don't see what's going on because it hasn't happened to you yet.



Sales are tight.  tell me how many extra hours a week have you spent finding new people to sell to?  Have you looked for a night job to make up the slack from slow sales?  Are you prepared to do whatever it takes or are you going to whine?



> And I guess if my brother, who makes $400k, I guess if his company (which by the way already went chapter 11), but I guess if they fail again and he loses his VP job, I guess that was his fault too?



If he stays and the company goes under, it was his choice so ultimately it is his fault.



> Or if he can only find a job that pays $100K because the market is FLOODED with guys who used to be VP's, then that'll be his fault too?


 Yes because he is utterly incapable of doing anything else right?



> I hate to wish anything bad on anyone but man are you asking for it.
> 
> And again, I'm making about $75K and my condo is almost paid off, so I'm not hurting.  At least not as bad as I see others hurting.  So please don't suggest that I'm just a whiner.



Too late



> All your sad/tired arguments are so old.  It's bullshit.
> 
> Now you should tell the bankers that it's all their fault and it's all in their head.  And the only way to get out of this is for them to go out and SPEND SPEND SPEND!!!  Isn't that what the GOP told us in 2007?



This isn't about government.  Government not any one party is at fault to the extent that BOTH parties allowed the real estate bubble to grow because of poor policies.  It never would have got as bad if the market was truly free.



> PS.  I just told a guy what we are discussing and in the end he said, "the unions got too corrupt and it's all about profits", and I said, "we're not in a union and still our jobs are going to india and our wages are being lowered"
> 
> So I hope you see that they just started with the unions.  It was easy because they were corrupt and most of us are not in unions.  Now that they  have broken the unions, YOU'RE NEXT!!



That's where you're wrong as usual.  Unions need to evolve or die and I hope they die.  The UAW needs to be broken just like the ATC's were. Government needs a slap in the face and needs to get out of our lives and our wallets.



> Not you Skull, because you have some magical specialty that can't be outsourced.  And, you work hard even though you suggest Americans don't work hard.  I'd be willing to bet a Chinaman, Indian or Mexican would do it for less and work harder than you.



My clients aren't going to fly to India to get their services so you're right, I can't be outsourced. And really some uneducated immigrant can't do what we do so no worries there either.

And I'll bet if push came to shove BooBoo, I would work longer and harder than most.  I know what it's like to work like a dog and sleep standing up because there was no time to lay down.  Do you?  Have you ever put in 100 plus hours a week and gone 30 or more hours at a stretch without sleep to get what you want? Have you ever denied yourself even the smallest of luxuries for years to save for a goal?  I have and now I am seeing some reward for my work and sacrifice and dipshits like you have the balls to tell me I don't deserve it and that I should be glad to give my money to people who didn't work as hard or sacrifice as much as I did. 

IMO your attitude that people should be punished for work and sacrifice is the problem with this country.  NOT people who succeed


----------



## WillowTree

Care4all said:


> do you think the LEGAL hispanics, that can vote, are the problem, or that they want the illegals to be allowed in quicker than what they had to go through?  I know quite a few hispanics who are here LEGALLY and they in no way, want amnesty for these people.
> 
> ILLEGALS CAN NOT vote, so who's vote are you talking about?
> 
> Besides the fact that hispanics were primarily republican and voted for Bush in previous years, now they went with Obama, but before this, they tended to be more conservative, with conservative values....though i could be skewed because i primarily know legal Cuban americans from the Florida region....who are mostly republicans....






did you notice the abject silence during the election about illegals???? Did you notice the ACORNS regesitering millions of voters who were not legally voters? including the dead??? how can you be sure illegals did not vote??? I'm not sure at all, all I'm saying is this down and dirty election is over, the dems paid a high price for the hispanic vote and you will soon have 30 or 40 million new citizens,, that's the price of those votes,,


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> You told us for years we were bigots and racists for wanting to curb illegals, "they are only here to better their lives" you said,, you said "who will pick your tomatoes?"  someitmes you just gotta watch what you wish for as jeramiahbullfrog is so fond of saying "your chickens have come home to roost."



I never defended illegals.  It's one of those issues I agree with conservatives on.  Remember how many Americans called Congress before the 06 election to demand they do something about this?

So Bush and the GOP controlled Congress passed immigration reform, and guess what?  It was not the solution to the problem.  But they milked a few more billion dollars from the treasury.  They may have hired a few more border patrol agents.  They may have some high tech cameras on the border now, but it's not going to stop illegals.

Before you go blaming bleeding heart liberals, I want to remind you that I already forecasted that you would try to blame bleeding heart liberals for this, when you know the real culprits are illegal employers.  We could fix this problem tomorrow if we would just pass a law saying any owner caught with an illegal will spend one year MANDATORY in prison.  I'm talking about ass rape prison!!!  Then you'll see them lined up at the borders.  

Because now, it's just a small fine.  It's actually worth the risk of getting caught.  

These people have the power, not the bleeding hearts.  The bleeding hearts are paying these people, conservative illegal employers are.  And you know it.

And it was you pricks that said, "who would pick our fruit" and it is your side that came up with, "jobs Americans won't do".

We can give a special visa to migrant fruit pickers.  If that's all it was, this would be no big deal.  But these people are doing jobs American's used to do.

ThomHartmann.com - Illegal Workers: the Con's Secret Weapon


----------



## Care4all

WillowTree said:


> did you notice the abject silence during the election about illegals???? Did you notice the ACORNS regesitering millions of voters who were not legally voters? including the dead??? how can you be sure illegals did not vote??? I'm not sure at all, all I'm saying is this down and dirty election is over, the dems paid a high price for the hispanic vote and you will soon have 30 or 40 million new citizens,, that's the price of those votes,,



all of the acorn registrations that they could not verify, they grouped together and gave this info to the elcections boards, whose job it is to filter out those not legally here or legally able to vote....or bogus registrants....WHICH THEY DID.....this is their job.

so, no, i do not think any of the acorn employee shennanigans made it to the voting booth....i think the election boards did their jobs and what they always do and verified each new voter registrant, as they LEGALLY are required to do....  if any illegals made it thru, it was rare....

though in California, just via their registration process being weak imo, i suppose there could be alot of them, but again, this is just suspicion of such....


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> I did sales for years.  Commission only.  Sales is a numbers game.  So see more people, get new accounts make more money.  You're in sales so you basically work for yourself and you're blaming other people for your drop in income.  Just another excuse.



What does your business sell?

How many people are starting new business' during Bushanomics.  Hell, you can't even get a loan.  

The company I work for increased our quotas and our customers aren't buying like they used to.  And my industry is supposedly immune from the recession we are in.  LOL.  

Like I said, "i'm not complaining for myself".  I don't have kids.  If I make $85 or $75, it's no sweat off my balls.  I'm just pointing out the obvious.

This is happening to millions of people all across the country.  

Even Honda and Toyota are now strugging.  Even plants in China are closing.

If your business is doing well, then you are the exception.  And I bet you don't pay your employees dick.  How much do they make?

Anyways, you are clearly an owner and we are clearly the labor.  Of course you are never going to agree with us.  It was your kind that crashed this economy and you still won't admit it.  No one's buying anything.

Except your products of course.  I can't wait to hear what this miracle product is.


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> did you notice the abject silence during the election about illegals???? Did you notice the ACORNS regesitering millions of voters who were not legally voters? including the dead??? how can you be sure illegals did not vote??? I'm not sure at all, all I'm saying is this down and dirty election is over, the dems paid a high price for the hispanic vote and you will soon have 30 or 40 million new citizens,, that's the price of those votes,,



Did you hear that what you are saying turns out to be all lies and bullshit?

They didn't register millions of voters who were not legal.  They did register millions of new voters, and maybe thousands of them were bad.  Those registrations were not processed.  Mickey Mouse was never registered to vote.  

Why don't you go learn the process before you spew your bullshit?


----------



## sealybobo

Care4all said:


> all of the acorn registrations that they could not verify, they grouped together and gave this info to the elcections boards, whose job it is to filter out those not legally here or legally able to vote....or bogus registrants....WHICH THEY DID.....this is their job.
> 
> so, no, i do not think any of the acorn employee shennanigans made it to the voting booth....i think the election boards did their jobs and what they always do and verified each new voter registrant, as they LEGALLY are required to do....  if any illegals made it thru, it was rare....
> 
> though in California, just via their registration process being weak imo, i suppose there could be alot of them, but again, this is just suspicion of such....



Exactly.  Willow is a spewer of propoganda.  Nothing more or less.  It's like listening to Rush Limbaugh's stupid parrot.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> I never defended illegals.  It's one of those issues I agree with conservatives on.  Remember how many Americans called Congress before the 06 election to demand they do something about this? *Yes! I was one of them.. and you do remember us being tol we were racists?? you know who I remember saying that on tv?? McCain/Graham /B]
> 
> So Bush and the GOP controlled Congress passed immigration reform, and guess what?  It was not the solution to the problem.  But they milked a few more billion dollars from the treasury.  They may have hired a few more border patrol agents.  They may have some high tech cameras on the border now, but it's not going to stop illegals. Nope, it's not, that's why I had hope that McCain finally got the point that we Americans wanted the border shut down.
> Before you go blaming bleeding heart liberals, I want to remind you that I already forecasted that you would try to blame bleeding heart liberals for this, when you know the real culprits are illegal employers.  We could fix this problem tomorrow if we would just pass a law saying any owner caught with an illegal will spend one year MANDATORY in prison.  I'm talking about ass rape prison!!!  Then you'll see them lined up at the borders.  I'm not just blaming liberls, I blame both parties. But you remember the obamalama went down to the border towns and said "McCain is against immigration."  you do remember that doncha?  Yep, your party bought the Hispanic vote and now you owe them.. it's inescapable.. you know doncha that the Hispanic bar has already sent a letter to the obamalama telling him to put a hispanic on the Supreme court doncha?
> Because now, it's just a small fine.  It's actually worth the risk of getting caught.
> 
> These people have the power, not the bleeding hearts.  The bleeding hearts are paying these people, conservative illegal employers are.  And you know it. Yep, the companies get cheap labor, Democrats get votes, and you know that..
> 
> And it was you pricks that said, "who would pick our fruit" and it is your side that came up with, "jobs Americans won't do".  nope, not me,, but democrats told me that, and told me not to be racist about it..
> We can give a special visa to migrant fruit pickers.  If that's all it was, this would be no big deal.  But these people are doing jobs American's used to do.
> 
> 
> 
> they are doning the jobs "Americans won't do" Remember??? both parties are guilty of telling you that..
> 
> ThomHartmann.com - Illegal Workers: the Con's Secret Weapon*


*




all the crying against illegals is over, it's a done deal.. just sit back and watch..*


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> Before you go blaming bleeding heart liberals, I want to remind you that I already forecasted that you would try to blame bleeding heart liberals for this, when you know the real culprits are illegal employers.  We could fix this problem tomorrow if we would just pass a law saying any owner caught with an illegal will spend one year MANDATORY in prison.  I'm talking about ass rape prison!!!  Then you'll see them lined up at the borders.



We would also need a standardized federal system of identification as right now, the onus of verifying a worker's immigration status is on the employer, and if she/he asks too many questions (or the wrong sort), the prospective employer can sue him/her for discrimination.  The deck is stacked even against employers who WANT to police their hirings.


----------



## WillowTree

Care4all said:


> all of the acorn registrations that they could not verify, they grouped together and gave this info to the elcections boards, whose job it is to filter out those not legally here or legally able to vote....or bogus registrants....WHICH THEY DID.....this is their job.
> 
> *so, no, i do not think any of the acorn employee shennanigans made it to the voting booth..*..i think the election boards did their jobs and what they always do and verified each new voter registrant, as they LEGALLY are required to do....  if any illegals made it thru, it was rare....
> 
> though in California, just via their registration process being weak imo, i suppose there could be alot of them, but again, this is just suspicion of such....





I think that's naive of you,, ACORN dosen't got to the extreme that they went to for no payoff..


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> Did you hear that what you are saying turns out to be all lies and bullshit?
> 
> They didn't register millions of voters who were not legal.  They did register millions of new voters, and maybe thousands of them were bad.  Those registrations were not processed.  Mickey Mouse was never registered to vote.
> 
> Why don't you go learn the process before you spew your bullshit?





call it bs if you want to,,, they went to a massive effort to register millions of voters,,, dead people, people from other states, same people over and over and over... but then you are prefectly free to call it bs.. you, just like me have to live with the consequences, and the consequences are welcoming 30 or 30 million new Americans. so smile..


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> We would also need a standardized federal system of identification as right now, the onus of verifying a worker's immigration status is on the employer, and if she/he asks too many questions (or the wrong sort), the prospective employer can sue him/her for discrimination.  The deck is stacked even against employers who WANT to police their hirings.






You do remember the ACLU doncha???


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> You do remember the ACLU doncha???



Oh, I'm very familiar with who is responsible for this situation, and also, what must be done to fix it.  I don't blame all employers, some are definitely between a rock and a hard place, legally.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> Oh, I'm very familiar with who is responsible for this situation, and also, what must be done to fix it.  I don't blame all employers, some are definitely between a rock and a hard place, legally.





and you do agree that the ACLU is a liberal organization doncha??? send that memo to bobo..


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> and you do agree that the ACLU is a liberal organization doncha??? send that memo to bobo..



I think the ACLU is valuable in some ways, and has also been detrimental to society in other ways.  You realize, of course, that the ACLU has also defended the rights of social conservatives.


----------



## sealybobo

And Skull.  I just talked about you with some co workers.  You are like the Ford CEO who makes $20 million.  Of course you don't think you make too much.  And of course you are going to try to cut into your employees pay to max your own profits.  It's human nature.  

To assume the rest of us are greedy and lazy but you aren't is insane.

But as far as whether or not you are a greedy or stupid republican, you are not stupid.  You just happen to be the greedy type.

Anyways, this is why I like to know who I'm talking to.  What you do for a living gives me great insite on what kind of person I'm dealing with.

I expect you to fight for yourself.  But, I expect the majority of us to push back.  That's why I never get mad at Republicans/Libertarians/Conservatives like you.  I get mad at the Willow's who think they are on your side but will one day find out they are not.  

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist. 
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.


----------



## sealybobo

catzmeow said:


> I think the ACLU is valuable in some ways, and has also been detrimental to society in other ways.  You realize, of course, that the ACLU has also defended the rights of social conservatives.



They demonized the Unions, ACLU and ACORN.  That's what they do.  Those groups do more good than bad.  

Besides, Willow sits on her ass all day and earns zero income.  Of course she is a know it all.  She has all day to ponder.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> I think the ACLU is valuable in some ways, and has also been detrimental to society in other ways.  You realize, of course, that the ACLU has also defended the rights of social conservatives.





they are and always will be the biggest impediment to controlling illegal immigration..


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> they are and always will be the biggest impediment to controlling illegal immigration..



Oh, I think we'll have to totally disagree on this one.  I think the biggest impediment to controlling illegal immigration comes from those who have the most to gain from it:  multinational corporations and their ever-important bottom line and stock incentives.


----------



## Care4all

WillowTree said:


> I think that's naive of you,, ACORN dosen't got to the extreme that they went to for no payoff..



they had some employees, temps at that, doing it, to appear like they actually were working....ACORN itself FOUND mickey mouse, FOUND all the same name registrations etc and TOLD the election boards about the ones they found....per law, they could not throw them out....

the election verification boards are the ones who have the gvt paid jobs to verify EVERY NEW VOTER REGISTRANT, ACCORDING TO LAW AND RULES....

they do this with every new registration, as THEY SHOULD.....

so no, i don't think any of the bogus ones got thru, because there are steps taken by the election boards processing new voter registrants that eliminates them, as has always been the case....

if someone filling out a registration application  EQUALED someone getting a voters registration card then i might agree with you willow, but it simply doesn't....

also, acorn registered under 2 million voters....the difference between obama and mccain was a near 6 million.

care


----------



## catzmeow

sealybobo said:


> They demonized the Unions, ACLU and ACORN.  That's what they do.  Those groups do more good than bad.
> 
> Besides, Willow sits on her ass all day and earns zero income.  Of course she is a know it all.  She has all day to ponder.



I'm not a fan of the UAW (I've had several friends who were UAW negotiaters, and I know what they did to cripple the American auto industry).  I'm also not a fan of ACORN.  Or, for that matter, the ACLU.  I just think it's almost always a mistake to paint organizations as solidly black or white.  Like human beings, they are far too complex for that.  I agree with the unions on some issues, and disagree on others.  Ditto the ACLU.  ACORN, though, I consider essentially worthless.  I watched a few paid ACORN folks signing up voters at the Warped Tour in Jacksonville this year and was completely unimpressed by their mission and professionalism (almost non-existent).  They were purely in it for the numbers, whether people could vote or not, whether they were already registered or not.  Totally unimpressive.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> They demonized the Unions, ACLU and ACORN.  That's what they do.  Those groups do more good than bad.
> 
> Besides, Willow sits on her ass all day and earns zero income.  Of course she is a know it all.  She has all day to ponder.





Is yer azz up running around??? somehow I don't think so,, you are too brain dead to see that I agree with everything you have said about illegal immigration. I'm just telling you now it's too fricking late. the deal with the devil has been done.. and if you don't think the ACLU is the biggiest opponent of controlling illegal immigration then you positively flat out don't think.


----------



## Ravi

sealybobo said:


> Exactly.  Willow is a spewer of propoganda.  Nothing more or less.  It's like listening to Rush Limbaugh's stupid parrot.


That's not very nice, Bobo. Rush's parrot is much smarter.


----------



## WillowTree

Care4all said:


> they had some employees, temps at that, doing it, to appear like they actually were working.. *that's what they, ACORN uses as an excuse every election cycle. this year they spouted the same excuse even after it became know that they hired people who had felony records for ID theft. they have been proven to falsify and change information.. but you keep believing in their innocence if you want to I don't *..ACORN itself FOUND mickey mouse, FOUND all the same name registrations etc and TOLD the election boards about the ones they found....per law, they could not throw them out....
> 
> the election verification boards are the ones who have the gvt paid jobs to verify EVERY NEW VOTER REGISTRANT, ACCORDING TO LAW AND RULES....
> 
> they do this with every new registration, as THEY SHOULD.....
> 
> so no, i don't think any of the bogus ones got thru, because there are steps taken by the election boards processing new voter registrants that eliminates them, as has always been the case....
> 
> if someone filling out a registration application  EQUALED someone getting a voters registration card then i might agree with you willow, but it simply doesn't....
> 
> also, acorn registered under 2 million voters....the difference between obama and mccain was a near 6 million.
> 
> care


----------



## Skull Pilot

sealybobo said:


> And Skull.  I just talked about you with some co workers.  You are like the Ford CEO who makes $20 million.  Of course you don't think you make too much.  And of course you are going to try to cut into your employees pay to max your own profits.  It's human nature.



So tell me how much income is not "too much"  what if I told you, a single person with no kids making 75K was too much.  you could easily live on 35K so you are one of the no good rich people.  Now smile and give up your income to someone who only makes 20K.

And I haven't laid off anyone.  We are simply not forced to at this time.  but if my revenue failed to meet at least my operating costs what should I do BooBoo? Keep paying out more than I take in to my employees, stop paying my suppliers and run my business into bankruptcy? Or should I lay someone off take up the slack myself and keep my doors open and hopefully rehire them in a few months?

You're not too business savvy are you?



> To assume the rest of us are greedy and lazy but you aren't is insane.
> 
> But as far as whether or not you are a greedy or stupid republican, you are not stupid.  You just happen to be the greedy type.



To want to take what you do not earn from those that earn more than you is what then if not greed?  To covet the wealth and success of others while at the same time abhorring those that have the wealth and success you desire is what?

Greed and envy that's what.

Is it greedy of me to want to keep what I earn, what I,not you, sacrificed and saved for?  Is it greedy to want to be beholden to no one and self sufficient in retirement?

See I was taught that hard work, sacrifice and thrift were virtues, you see them as sins. 



> Anyways, this is why I like to know who I'm talking to.  What you do for a living gives me great insite on what kind of person I'm dealing with.



As I said before, we supply services and products of a medical nature to people in 3 states. We provide a quality service at a very fair price and pride ourselves on customer service.  So if you think that's a bad thing BooBoo you are just proving what an idiot you are. 



> I expect you to fight for yourself.  But, I expect the majority of us to push back.  That's why I never get mad at Republicans/Libertarians/Conservatives like you.  I get mad at the Willow's who think they are on your side but will one day find out they are not.



Push back against what? I earned what I have.  I did the work, I sacrificed and saved, I used all my own money, no federal loans, no small business association help.  We took a personal loan because we have excellent credit, we used our credit cards to buy supplies and equipment.  Like I said we risked everything we had.  You didn't, WE did.  So why should I be happy to fork it all over to you or anyone else?



> When the Nazis came for the communists,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a communist.
> When they locked up the social democrats,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a social democrat.



So now I'm a Nazi
Well IMO the government is out to take what's mine.  Why aren't you railing against that?  Is it because YOU think YOU will get what is taken from me?



> When they came for the trade unionists,
> I did not speak out;
> I was not a trade unionist.
> 
> When they came for the Jews,
> I remained silent;
> I was not a Jew.
> 
> When they came for me,
> there was no one left to speak out.



Well BooBoo when "they" come after you because your 75K a year is considered too much money to earn, no one will be left to fight for you because you liked the idea of taking other people's money when you thought it was going to benefit you.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> Oh, I think we'll have to totally disagree on this one.  I think the biggest impediment to controlling illegal immigration comes from those who have the most to gain from it:  multinational corporations and their ever-important bottom line and stock incentives.





Have you run down the list??

Does the ACLU support a national ID card??

Does the ACLU support asking a person's legal status?

Does the ACLU support the ban of renting or selling property to illegals?

Does the ACLU support ferreting out employers who hire illegals?

Does the ACLU support tracking and finding the legitimacy of social security cards used by employees?

Does the ACLU support the deportation of illegals?


What would probably make this quest easier is for you to tell me which effort to stem the tide of illegals entering the country the ACLU supports.. I'll wait.


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> Have you run down the list??
> 
> Does the ACLU support a national ID card??
> 
> Does the ACLU support asking a person's legal status?
> 
> Does the ACLU support the ban of renting or selling property to illegals?
> 
> Does the ACLU support ferreting out employers who hire illegals?
> 
> Does the ACLU support tracking and finding the legitimacy of social security cards used by employees?
> 
> Does the ACLU support the deportation of illegals?
> 
> 
> What would probably make this quest easier is for you to tell me which effort to stem the tide of illegals entering the country the ACLU supports.. I'll wait.




It isn't the ACLU's job to support these things.  The ACLU exists ONLY to promote civil liberties.  And, not necessarily those of only Americans.

Let me ask you:  Does big-time corporate America support any of these things?  Of course they don't.  It might cut into their profit margins.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> It isn't the ACLU's job to support these things.  The ACLU exists ONLY to promote civil liberties.  And, not necessarily those of only Americans.
> 
> Let me ask you:  Does big-time corporate America support any of these things?  Of course they don't.  It might cut into their profit margins.


 *and the democrats voter bloc.. end of story..*



now you want to parse the arguement, not only do they not support these actions they actively fight to abolish them the ACLU is the biggest impediment to stemming the tide of illegal immigration,, so, it you don't object to that practice get used to living with illegals,, it's just that simple.


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> Is yer azz up running around??? somehow I don't think so,, you are too brain dead to see that I agree with everything you have said about illegal immigration. I'm just telling you now it's too fricking late. the deal with the devil has been done.. and if you don't think the ACLU is the biggiest opponent of controlling illegal immigration then you positively flat out don't think.



The ACLU has no control/power over this.  They may fight for the rights of illegals, but they can't stop us from throwing them out if they are hurting the American way.  

The ACLU sure didn't have any power the 6 years the GOP ran the government.  And I'll bet you this illegal problem multiplied under Bush.  

Enough of us want them gone.  Fuck the ACLU on this issue.  

Yes, this is one thing a lot of us agree on.  Remember before the 06 election all of us called our Senators to tell them to fix this problem?  And they passed a bullshit bill that didn't fix anything?  

Sure the ACLU and Latino's had some power during the election, but now we have 2 years to do what needs to be done.  Who are the hispanics going to vote for if we all kick out the illegals?  I think we'll be ok as long as Republicans don't try to come out looking like the good guys in this.  Or they don't try to make the dems look like the bad guys in this.  But of course they'll make it a wedge issue.   

Now Bush and the GOP that have been in cohoots with the companies that hire these illegals, they actually had the power to do something about this problem but instead they passed a crappy law that didn't fix anything.

Actually, I hear some companies are being raided and some illegals are being sent home, so that's better than nothing.  But I also here those illegals come right back.  So it's an illegal employer problem.  

The ACLU doesn't pay these illegals when they come here, corporations do.  

They turned a blind eye.  They even defended hiring illegals, saying they were just doing jobs Americans won't do.  I can even provide you a utube moment where John McCain said it during his campaign.  Well they do a lot more than jobs we won't do.  

PS.  The miners that died in those mine collapses?  Non union mines.  Illegals were working those mines.  No protection for the workers.


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> *and the democrats voter bloc.. end of story..*
> now you want to parse the arguement, not only do they not support these actions they actively fight to abolish them the ACLU is the biggest impediment to stemming the tide of illegal immigration,, so, it you don't object to that practice get used to living with illegals,, it's just that simple.



No.  What's simple is your thinking here.  Clearly, you are one of those black/white thinkers that wants to play a simplistic blame game where you can lay the responsibility for illegal immigration at the feet of an organization that represents the great satan in your mind, an entity that you fear and villify, without even understanding how their actions often protect YOUR rights, as well.

And, for some really odd reason, you don't want to even touch on the culpability of the main group profiting from illegal immigration:  corporate america.

In short, your thinking is oh so Rush Limbaugh, circa 1997.

Whatever floats your partisan boat, sweetie.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> The ACLU has no control/power over this.  They may fight for the rights of illegals, but they can't stop us from throwing them out if they are hurting the American way.
> 
> The ACLU sure didn't have any power the 6 years the GOP ran the government.  And I'll bet you this illegal problem multiplied under Bush.
> 
> Enough of us want them gone.  Fuck the ACLU on this issue.
> 
> Yes, this is one thing a lot of us agree on.  Remember before the 06 election all of us called our Senators to tell them to fix this problem?  And they passed a bullshit bill that didn't fix anything?
> 
> Sure the ACLU and Latino's had some power during the election, but now we have 2 years to do what needs to be done. *All I can say is good luck to you. I'm pulling for you on this issue but I still think it's dead in the water*.  Who are the hispanics going to vote for if we all kick out the illegals?  I think we'll be ok as long as Republicans don't try to come out looking like the good guys in this.  Or they don't try to make the dems look like the bad guys in this.  But of course they'll make it a wedge issue.   *Are there good guys and bad guys?? The Republicans want illegals for cheap labor, the Democrats for their votes.. You tell me. It looks like a win win for both parties*
> Now Bush and the GOP that have been in cohoots with the companies that hire these illegals, they actually had the power to do something about this problem but instead they passed a crappy law that didn't fix anything.
> 
> Actually, I hear some companies are being raided and some illegals are being sent home, so that's better than nothing.  But I also here those illegals come right back.  So it's an illegal employer problem.
> 
> The ACLU doesn't pay these illegals when they come here, corporations do.  *No but they are the biggest impediment to stop the tide of illegals..Those and the so called sanctuary cities*
> 
> They turned a blind eye.  They even defended hiring illegals, saying they were just doing jobs Americans won't do.  I can even provide you a utube moment where John McCain said it during his campaign.  Well they do a lot more than jobs we won't do. * Yep, and I can show you just as many with the Democratic leaders saying the same thing.*
> PS.  The miners that died in those mine collapses?  Non union mines.  Illegals were working those mines.  No protection for the workers.


*No arguement there not from me.*


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> No.  What's simple is your thinking here.  Clearly, you are one of those black/white thinkers that wants to play a simplistic blame game *where you can lay the responsibility for illegal immigration at the feet of an organization *that represents the great satan in your mind, an entity that you fear and villify, without even understanding how their actions often protect YOUR rights, as well.
> 
> And, for some really odd reason, you don't want to even touch on the culpability of the main group profiting from illegal immigration:  corporate america.
> 
> In short, your thinking is oh so Rush Limbaugh, circa 1997.
> 
> Whatever floats your partisan boat, sweetie.





nope,, didn't do that. no laying at the feet the responsibility,, what I said was, now listen carefully,, The ACLU is the biggest impediment to stemming the tide of illegals. they oppose every single solitary effort to seek out illegals, identify them, identify employers of them and to deport them. That is what I said. Now if you have no objection to the actions of the ACLU then be prepared to live with illegals. It's just that simple.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> You're not too business savvy are you?
> Is it greedy of me to want to keep what I earn, what I,not you, sacrificed and saved for?  Is it greedy to want to be beholden to no one and self sufficient in retirement?
> 
> See I was taught that hard work, sacrifice and thrift were virtues, you see them as sins.
> 
> 
> 
> As I said before, we supply services and products of a medical nature to people in 3 states. We provide a quality service at a very fair price and pride ourselves on customer service.  So if you think that's a bad thing BooBoo you are just proving what an idiot you are.
> 
> 
> 
> Push back against what? I earned what I have.  I did the work, I sacrificed and saved, I used all my own money, no federal loans, no small business association help.  We took a personal loan because we have excellent credit, we used our credit cards to buy supplies and equipment.  Like I said we risked everything we had.  You didn't, WE did.  So why should I be happy to fork it all over to you or anyone else?
> 
> 
> 
> So now I'm a Nazi
> Well IMO the government is out to take what's mine.  Why aren't you railing against that?  Is it because YOU think YOU will get what is taken from me?
> 
> 
> 
> Well BooBoo when "they" come after you because your 75K a year is considered too much money to earn, no one will be left to fight for you because you liked the idea of taking other people's money when you thought it was going to benefit you.



Whatever Joe the Plumber.  

And if you are who you say you are, I doubt you will wait till things get bad before you lay people off.  In non union companies, they lay people off just so the books look good.  Or so you can increase profits.  

See, you paint a picture that I can't disagree with.  But I never forget the fact that you are painting a picture.  

Why don't you ask me, "so bobo, if you owned a business, and you could make an extra $10k right before xmas but all I had to do was let go of a couple good employees, wouldn't you do it"?   

Now that would be a more honest question from you.  

Sorry Joe, but the guy making $20 million dollars will never convince me he's worth it and he'll never convince me it is ok to pay his employees $10 hr.  They are worth more, you aren't worth $20 mill. 


I never said hard work, sacrafice and thrift were bad things.  I owned a home before any of my other friends.  I had $100k in a 401K before any of them too.  And I was making $85k before any of them too.  

You may choose to believe I'm a whiner, but I am not.  You act like this economy is booming.  I am fascinated that you are still arguing. 

I need to go read Rayboymarine's latest post.  It was something like, "conservatives are still arguing".  I assume he's talking about people like you.  

How you can watch the news and still talk your shit is beyond me.  And how anyone is listening is insane.

People used to say that my crazy talk was driving people away from the democratic party.  Now, everyone I know sounds like me.  And no one is calling me a conspiracy theorist anymore.

No one except you and willow.  LOL.

But beleive it or not, I do see your points.  I don't begrudge you and your success.  I'm more about ending the federal reserve and ending the corrupt government we have and no i don't like lazy union workers.  But you corporations are fucking more than just union workers.

But a guy like you?  I say you deserve what you earn.  But I also don't think you should pay your employees sub par wages.  If you don't, god bless you.  You are one of the good ones. 

But it is true.  People who get too rich and powerful are dangerous to democracy.  I don't want to change the subject, but I say if you have less than $20 million, you should not pay a death tax.  But anyone who is willed or enherits over $20 million dollars, they should have half of that money taxed.  

I know you won't read it but maybe someone else will.

ThomHartmann.com - How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> *No arguement there not from me.*



I think I made a very good point.  

The ACLU can invite as many illegals as they want to come to America anytime they want.  Just like you and I can go to Canada and Mexico anytime we want.  

BUT, If there is no one to hire them, they won't even come let alone stay.  

Also, the corporations that don't provide these illegals with health insurance know that our emergency rooms will take them when they get sick.  

You'll hear me say this a lot.  The GOP like to socialize the losses and privatize the profits.


----------



## Bern80

catzmeow said:


> Yes, but...it's a far bigger climb from the crack den in East Cleveland than from my farmhouse outside of Kansas City.  So, it takes a lot longer to catch up, if you ever do.
> 
> You know that kids who fall behind in literacy in the elementary years usually DON'T catch up, statistically speaking...So, you tell me.  When we have millions of Americans growing up poor, in substandard schools, when do they get the chance to catch up?



Here's where a major distinction comes into play.  Most everybody on the right or left is going to be all for equal opportunity.  That is what many _say_ they are after.  In reality they are after equal outcomes.  Get real for a second.  Are you going to conisder this problem solved if the inner city ghetto kids are afforded all of the same opportunities as the more priviledged?  What if they still come up short?

While we all believe in equality of opportunity it does not garuntee equality.  After an opportunity is presented it is up to the individual to decide whether or not the most is going to be made of said opportunity.  This is why I say the have/ have not debate is more about behavior than anything.  Think about it.  Opportunities aren't going to play much of a role in a child who's atitudes and behaviors have been shapped by drug addict abusive parents.  Their behavior and atitudes literally need to be rewired.


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> I think I made a very good point.
> 
> The ACLU can invite as many illegals as they want to come to America anytime they want.  Just like you and I can go to Canada and Mexico anytime we want.
> 
> BUT, If there is no one to hire them, they won't even come let alone stay.
> 
> *Also, the corporations that don't provide these illegals with health insurance know that our emergency rooms will take them when they get sick.*
> 
> You'll hear me say this a lot.  The GOP like to socialize the losses and privatize the profits.






you have some studying to do doncha? The ACLU sued and went all the way to the Supreme Court.. It is because of them that we the American Taxpayer have to  under law provide for the emergency medical care of illegals.. Corporations don't provide health insurance.. so again,, as long as you support the actions of the ACLU who advocate more rights for illegals than Americans get then learn to live with the illegals,, think about it bud,,,, you can't ask an illegal for ID, but you as an American have to show your id to cash a friggin check..  boy what a DUmmie. I think you are plugged into the mainframe too.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Whatever Joe the Plumber.
> 
> And if you are who you say you are, I doubt you will wait till things get bad before you lay people off.  In non union companies, they lay people off just so the books look good.  Or so you can increase profits.
> 
> See, you paint a picture that I can't disagree with.  But I never forget the fact that you are painting a picture.



Translation: You are banking on the fact that he is liar because that's all your left with.  Pathetic.


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> you have some studying to do doncha? The ACLU sued and went all the way to the Supreme Court.. It is because of them that we the American Taxpayer have to  under law provide for the emergency medical care of illegals.. Corporations don't provide health insurance.. so again,, as long as you support the actions of the ACLU who advocate more rights for illegals than Americans get then learn to live with the illegals,, think about it bud,,,, you can't ask an illegal for ID, but you as an American have to show your id to cash a friggin check..  boy what a DUmmie. I think you are plugged into the mainframe too.



No, I agree with you on those things.  Those things are wrong.

But remember, two groups are protecting the illegals.  Bleeding heart liberals and illegal employers who want the cheap labor.

And again, if no one would hire them, the ACLU could invite every illegal to come for as long as they want.

They wouldn't come.  They only come for the work.


----------



## Skull Pilot

sealybobo said:


> Whatever Joe the Plumber.
> 
> And if you are who you say you are, I doubt you will wait till things get bad before you lay people off.  In non union companies, they lay people off just so the books look good.  Or so you can increase profits.



Again you show your lack of business savvy.  If I lay off an employee, it will cost me money because I won't be able to provide the level of service my customers are used to.  The only time I would even consider laying anyone off was as I said before when revenues failed to meet my expenses. 



> See, you paint a picture that I can't disagree with.  But I never forget the fact that you are painting a picture.



Ah yes there it is, I'm lying right.  Because we've done well this year, I'm lying. And of course your statements here are beyond refute.

See there's another difference between us, at least for the purpose of this discussion I am willing to assume you are telling the truth.



> Why don't you ask me, "so bobo, if you owned a business, and you could make an extra $10k right before xmas but all I had to do was let go of a couple good employees, wouldn't you do it"?



Again your prejudice shows.  I value my employees and I have a degree of loyalty to them.  And let me tell you, you won't save 10 grand by firing someone in December. All you'll save is a months salary and the taxes involved. But what will firing someone cost in lost efficiency and service to my customers.

Again not too business savvy are you?



> Now that would be a more honest question from you.
> 
> Sorry Joe, but the guy making $20 million dollars will never convince me he's worth it and he'll never convince me it is ok to pay his employees $10 hr.  They are worth more, you aren't worth $20 mill.



I don't make 20 mill. but if my company did make 20 mill because I supplied products and services to the community that the community valued as worth 20 mill then I did indeed earn it.



> I never said hard work, sacrafice and thrift were bad things.  I owned a home before any of my other friends.  I had $100k in a 401K before any of them too.  And I was making $85k before any of them too.



But you're all for penalizing those that do succeed because somehow they don't deserve it.  Somehow those that attain wealth only have done it by holding other people down and screwing the little guy so they should PAY DAMN IT!



> You may choose to believe I'm a whiner, but I am not.  You act like this economy is booming.  I am fascinated that you are still arguing.
> 
> I need to go read Rayboymarine's latest post.  It was something like, "conservatives are still arguing".  I assume he's talking about people like you.
> 
> How you can watch the news and still talk your shit is beyond me.  And how anyone is listening is insane.



This is not about this economy.  The argument is a philosophical one where you believe the government should be punishing the successful because other people aren't successful



> People used to say that my crazy talk was driving people away from the democratic party.  Now, everyone I know sounds like me.  And no one is calling me a conspiracy theorist anymore.
> 
> No one except you and willow.  LOL.



Yeah I think you're a whacko commie pinko and we will never agree on the virtues of small government and true libertarianism



> But beleive it or not, I do see your points.  I don't begrudge you and your success.  I'm more about ending the federal reserve and ending the corrupt government we have and no i don't like lazy union workers.  But you corporations are fucking more than just union workers.



And yet you stump for larger government, more government control and more restricted trade.  You want to end the fed but you do not believe in a free market.

Do you not see these are opposing positions?



> But a guy like you?  I say you deserve what you earn.  But I also don't think you should pay your employees sub par wages.  If you don't, god bless you.  You are one of the good ones.



I have 2 people on my payroll that make MORE than I do because they are extremely skilled professionals in high demand. My support staff gets paid better then the industry standard for their positions and I provide 100% health insurance.  But you assume I mistreat my employees because thats what ALL businesses do.

Again not too savvy



> But it is true.  People who get too rich and powerful are dangerous to democracy.  I don't want to change the subject, but I say if you have less than $20 million, you should not pay a death tax.  But anyone who is willed or enherits over $20 million dollars, they should have half of that money taxed.
> 
> I know you won't read it but maybe someone else will.





ThomHartmann.com - How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?[/QUOTE]


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> No, I agree with you on those things.  Those things are wrong.
> 
> But remember, two groups are protecting the illegals.  Bleeding heart liberals and illegal employers who want the cheap labor.
> 
> And again, if no one would hire them, the ACLU could invite every illegal to come for as long as they want.
> 
> They wouldn't come.  They only come for the work.





true,, (oh god it hurt to say that) but my point is the ACLU is preventing us from acting against the employment of illegals..


----------



## catzmeow

Bern80 said:


> Are you going to conisder this problem solved if the inner city ghetto kids are afforded all of the same opportunities as the more priviledged?  What if they still come up short?



Then it's on them.  I can't fix people's families, and I can't fix their houses, but at a least, we can fix their schools, and we can clean the crime out of their neighborhoods.  Having worked with these kids for years, I've seen how much good a school that provides a proper education can do in the lives of kids.  And, I'm a huge fan of volunteer mentoring programs, because they provide kids with alternatives...pro-social influences.


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> true,, (oh god it hurt to say that) but my point is the ACLU is preventing us from acting against the employment of illegals..



And, as people have repeatedly told you, they aren't the only obstacle.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> And, as people have repeatedly told you, they aren't the only obstacle.





nobody said they were the only obstacle,, I said the biggest! not the only,, can you not read english????   hello mama!


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> nobody said they were the only obstacle,, I said the biggest! not the only,, can you not read english????   hello mama!



They aren't even the biggest.  Without the jobs, the flow of immigrants into this country slows to a miniscule trickle.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Again you show your lack of business savvy.  If I lay off an employee, it will cost me money because I won't be able to provide the level of service my customers are used to.  The only time I would even consider laying anyone off was as I said before when revenues failed to meet my expenses.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah yes there it is, I'm lying right.  Because we've done well this year, I'm lying. And of course your statements here are beyond refute.
> 
> See there's another difference between us, at least for the purpose of this discussion I am willing to assume you are telling the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Again your prejudice shows.  I value my employees and I have a degree of loyalty to them.  And let me tell you, you won't save 10 grand by firing someone in December. All you'll save is a months salary and the taxes involved. But what will firing someone cost in lost efficiency and service to my customers.
> 
> Again not too business savvy are you?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't make 20 mill. but if my company did make 20 mill because I supplied products and services to the community that the community valued as worth 20 mill then I did indeed earn it.
> 
> 
> 
> But you're all for penalizing those that do succeed because somehow they don't deserve it.  Somehow those that attain wealth only have done it by holding other people down and screwing the little guy so they should PAY DAMN IT!
> 
> 
> 
> This is not about this economy.  The argument is a philosophical one where you believe the government should be punishing the successful because other people aren't successful
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I think you're a whacko commie pinko and we will never agree on the virtues of small government and true libertarianism
> 
> 
> 
> And yet you stump for larger government, more government control and more restricted trade.  You want to end the fed but you do not believe in a free market.
> 
> Do you not see these are opposing positions?
> 
> 
> 
> I have 2 people on my payroll that make MORE than I do because they are extremely skilled professionals in high demand. My support staff gets paid better then the industry standard for their positions and I provide 100% health insurance.  But you assume I mistreat my employees because thats what ALL businesses do.
> 
> Again not too savvy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ThomHartmann.com - How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?


[/QUOTE]


All I know is i worked for a guy who owned a New Horizons Computer Learning Centers franchise in Michigan.  He paid VERY WELL.  But, every December he would lay off 5% of his staff so he would go into the next year lean and mean.

And I know many many many companies that do that.  That's mean.  LOL.  

Ever read up on Jack Walsh from GE?  He fired x amount of employees every year, even though the company was doing great.  But if you were a salesperson or engineer or maintenence worker or secretary, it didn't matter.  If you were at the bottom of what you do, you were let go.  Everyone's job performance was rated, and every year the people at the bottom were let go.  If you were a janitor and you got the worst review of all janitors, you were fired at the end of the year.

I actually don't disagree with Jack Walsh.  This way no one ever wants to finish at the bottom of his/her job.

But the callous companies do sometimes makes me say, "no wonder Unions came to be."

I almost said, "they shouldn't be able to", but then it's their business so they can do whatever they want.  I understand that.  

I'm going home.  We'll talk tomorrow.  Nice talking with you today.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Do you not see these are opposing positions?
> 
> ThomHartmann.com - How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?


[/QUOTE]

If you go out and make $20 million, i don't want to penalize that.  I'm more talking about the CEO who got $20 million from Home Depot when he retired.  He didn't earn that.  That money should have gone to the employees and sharholders.  

Yes, i do see how parts of me are libertarian and the other parts don't like their every man for themselves approach.

And we already do what you are saying.  We tax the rich more and don't tax the poor at all.  You do realize that we already do that, right?  

And I just think that from Reagan to Bush they took too much away from us and gave too much to the rich.  


And I called you Joe the Plumber because it seemed like you were painting a perfect picture for me.  Like Joe just happened to be making $250, and he just happened to be on the edge of who would get penalized if Obama won.

But I do beleive you are a business owner and you sound like a great business owner.  If they were all like you, I don't think we'd be having this discussion to be honest with you.

My boss at New Horizons used to say, "you aren't going to find many companies that pay as well as we do", and he was right.  16% commission, STRAIGHT commission.  

By the way, I worked there back in the 90's.  They have since cut down on how much they pay too.  Increased quotas, asking more and paying less.  No one buying like they used to.

One of the guys I worked with back then now works here at the company I'm with now.  He made over $500K a year at New Horizons.  Now I make more than him.  But, he's in a new department and if it takes off, he started at the ground level, so he is hoping to make it back to where he use to be.  Our company just started a payroll service to compete with ADP & Paychecks.  


Anyways, the economy needs to improve before we see 75% of the sales staff doing great again.  Right now it's 5 people making a forture, 20 of us doing pretty well and 20 others who are struggling.  Most of them are new or really not that good in sales.  You know how it is.  Anyways, when the economy is good again, I'll start making more money and the people who don't make as much as I do will get to where I'm at.  

And $75K just doesn't seem to go as far as it used to.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> They aren't even the biggest.  Without the jobs, the flow of immigrants into this country slows to a miniscule trickle.






which won't do jack shit about the 30 or 40 million already here..


----------



## catzmeow

WillowTree said:


> which won't do jack shit about the 30 or 40 million already here..



Haven't you read the news reports?  As our economy tanks, they're bailing.  So much for loyalty, eh?


----------



## Ravi

Why would they be loyal to a country that just demonizes them like Hitler did with the Jews? The main reason they come is to make money. 

Sometimes I think the majority of Americans are idiots and you don't help dissuade me, Kitty.


----------



## sealybobo

Ravi said:


> Why would they be loyal to a country that just demonizes them like Hitler did with the Jews? The main reason they come is to make money.
> 
> Sometimes I think the majority of Americans are idiots and you don't help dissuade me, Kitty.



The shit they want to argue about is amazing.  It's like they tune in to Rush before we wake up and he tells them what shit to say and how to spin it.  They always control the conversation.

And it isn't like these foot soldiers know what's going on or benefit from it.  Much like the soldiers Bush sent into harms way.  Eventually you think they'd realize they're all fighting for a bullshit cause.  Or someone else's cause.  

Did you see the special on Hilter on the History channel last night?  It was about the 5 guys who tried to kill Hitler.  And they talked about how Hitler came into power and made himself the almighty.  People swore allegence to him, not Germany.  Sort of reminds me of those partisan girls from Regency U that slipped up and said they swore allegance to the president when they testified for congress.  Was that a slip of the tongue or a Freudian slip?  

But to even challange or question Bush, I mean Hitler, was treason.  Sound familiar?  Reminds me of 2002-2006.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> If you go out and make $20 million, i don't want to penalize that.  I'm more talking about the CEO who got $20 million from Home Depot when he retired.  He didn't earn that.  That money should have gone to the employees and sharholders.
> 
> Yes, i do see how parts of me are libertarian and the other parts don't like their every man for themselves approach.
> 
> And we already do what you are saying.  We tax the rich more and don't tax the poor at all.  You do realize that we already do that, right?
> 
> And I just think that from Reagan to Bush they took too much away from us and gave too much to the rich.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the record the Bush tax cuts were across the board tax cuts.  EVERYBODY got them.  So what are you really complaining about?
> 
> This is based on a faulty assumption.  You are essentially complaining about the reverse that we are.  Do the math for god's sake bobo. taking from the poor and giving to the rich?  What miniscule dent is that going to make for the rich?  Whatever money you think got taken from the poor and given to the rich is going to be pretty minimal.  It's pretty hard to take something from almost nothing.  It certainly wouldn't be enough to make a difference to the rich.
> 
> You would also have to actually show this perceived transfer of wealth in some measureable.  Other then the poor buying goods from the rich of course.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I called you Joe the Plumber because it seemed like you were painting a perfect picture for me.  Like Joe just happened to be making $250, and he just happened to be on the edge of who would get penalized if Obama won.
> 
> But I do beleive you are a business owner and you sound like a great business owner.  If they were all like you, I don't think we'd be having this discussion to be honest with you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And if you can show he is the exception rather than the rule you might have the semblance of a case.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> My boss at New Horizons used to say, "you aren't going to find many companies that pay as well as we do", and he was right.  16% commission, STRAIGHT commission.
> 
> By the way, I worked there back in the 90's.  They have since cut down on how much they pay too.  Increased quotas, asking more and paying less.  No one buying like they used to.
> 
> One of the guys I worked with back then now works here at the company I'm with now.  He made over $500K a year at New Horizons.  Now I make more than him.  But, he's in a new department and if it takes off, he started at the ground level, so he is hoping to make it back to where he use to be.  Our company just started a payroll service to compete with ADP & Paychecks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Listen to yourself bobo. There isn't a more quintessential example of the type of people that piss people like me and skull of then you.  We look at the tone of your posts and just as I said 99% percent of the reasons you give for where you are external to you.  Your boss this, your boss that, my friends comapny.  And that is the big differentiator between the haves and have nots.  It all boils down to the fact that you are letting someone else dictate your future and use it as the excuse for where you are in the present.
> 
> To have a real discussion about this we obviously have to determine what is accurate or not.  Some of what I'm getting from you is that you don't really have a problem with Skull or his views _if_ you believed the majority of business owners were like him.  Well what makes you think they aren't?  Our wonderfully biased media?
> 
> The real differences between the haves and have nots isn't government policies or corporate policies.  It is the behavior of individuals.  Most of the rich figured out that, one, they probably weren't going to get rich working for someone else. Most of the rich take proactive measures to insulate themselves from haveing their futures dictated to them.  Read some books on the rich sometime.  You will find most of them are completely void of any political perspective at all and focus mainly on the behaviors of people.
> 
> And at the end of the day whether you are actually right or not about people being somehow held down by this mysterious force, it makes no difference to the argument that your position is based on your behavior, because quite clearly even if some barrier does exist many, many people have overcome it.  Those people essentially decided to say fuck this system, i'm doing it my way, I'm taking the risk.  When that's the case is it any wonder what the real reason is for the few haves and many have nots?  Do you think risk like that is something many people would want to take on or few?
Click to expand...


----------



## WillowTree

Ravi said:


> Why would they be loyal to a country that just demonizes them like Hitler did with the Jews? The main reason they come is to make money.
> 
> Sometimes I think the majority of Americans are idiots and you don't help dissuade me, Kitty.





you convinced a large part of the population just now!


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Fine!  It was all Clinton's doing.  So if that's true, what did Bush and Tom Delay do in 6 years to fix what Clinton did?
Click to expand...


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Fine!  It was all Clinton's doing.  So if that's true, what did Bush and Tom Delay do in 6 years to fix what Clinton did?



What are you even quoting here?  It's a little annoying (and a little telling) when you pick one sentance out of a post to respond to.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> What are you even quoting here?  It's a little annoying (and a little telling) when you pick one sentance out of a post to respond to.



I didn't pick any sentence.  Just assume you guys are right about EVERYTHING.  Please tell me what Bush and Tom Delay did from 2000-2006 to avoid the financial mess we are in right now.

Or is the economy STRONG again.  Now that the election is over, you can go back to pretending everything is alright again.

Because that's what you guys are doing.  You're arguing as if everything is fine and I'm just a whiner looking for a hand out.


----------



## Andrew2382

sealybobo said:


> I'm just a whiner looking for a hand out.




admiting it is the first step


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> admiting it is the first step



I think my question backs you bullshitters into a corner you can't argue your way out of.  

You would love to argue with me all day that I'm where I am in life because of choices I made, because that allows you to avoid the question, what the fuck happened to this economy.

If we talk about that, then you guys say it was Clinton/Freddy.

So if that's true, then I want you to show me that from 2000-2006, the GOP tried everything they could to fix this problem, only the obstructionist Democrats would not allow/permit them to fix this problem.  I follow the news faithfully.  To be honest, I don't remember them even admitting this might be a problem.

But Obama went to Wallstreet in 2006/07 and warned them, but they told them to fuck off.  Free trade bitch.  

This isn't about me, or you guys.  Skull sounds like a great business owner who treats his employees right.  That doesn't  mean every other company in America is doing the same.  They are asking us to work more and make less.  It's class warfare.  And many of you think you are on the other side when in fact you are one of us.  And it's only a matter of time before it happens to you clowns too.  Then who will you turn to?  

And all the small business' that are struggling right now because of Bushanomics, it isn't your fault either.


----------



## dilloduck

sealybobo said:


> I think my question backs you bullshitters into a corner you can't argue your way out of.
> 
> You would love to argue with me all day that I'm where I am in life because of choices I made, because that allows you to avoid the question, what the fuck happened to this economy.
> 
> If we talk about that, then you guys say it was Clinton/Freddy.
> 
> So if that's true, then I want you to show me that from 2000-2006, the GOP tried everything they could to fix this problem, only the obstructionist Democrats would not allow/permit them to fix this problem.  I follow the news faithfully.  To be honest, I don't remember them even admitting this might be a problem.
> 
> But Obama went to Wallstreet in 2006/07 and warned them, but they told them to fuck off.  Free trade bitch.
> 
> This isn't about me, or you guys.  Skull sounds like a great business owner who treats his employees right.  That doesn't  mean every other company in America is doing the same.  They are asking us to work more and make less.  It's class warfare.  And many of you think you are on the other side when in fact you are one of us.  And it's only a matter of time before it happens to you clowns too.  Then who will you turn to?
> 
> And all the small business' that are struggling right now because of Bushanomics, it isn't your fault either.



America and Americans were given a credit card with no maximum. They went out and spent it all on shit they didn't need and couldn't afford. ooops.
Now what ?


----------



## Andrew2382

plus, everyone desevres a beautiful home to live in even though they couldn't afford it.

Don't worry banks, hand out those mortgages, we will guarantee them, this is the pitch we got from pricks like frank and dodd

ie- read my sig


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> plus, everyone desevres a beautiful home to live in even though they couldn't afford it.
> 
> Don't worry banks, hand out those mortgages, we will guarantee them, this is the pitch we got from pricks like frank and dodd
> 
> ie- read my sig



What did Bush and Delay do in return?


----------



## Andrew2382

sealy, please be quiet

The republicans are controlling the conversation


----------



## Andrew2382

For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.  President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.  Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.  

Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.  President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.  Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
> 
> Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs



So Bush failed?  I thought he had nothing to do with this or the economy?


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> I didn't pick any sentence.  Just assume you guys are right about EVERYTHING.  Please tell me what Bush and Tom Delay did from 2000-2006 to avoid the financial mess we are in right now.



Where the hell did I even comment on the financial crisis at all?  Are you purposselly being obtuse?  The little you choose to comment on is just more evidence that you aren't even close to getting it yet.



sealybobo said:


> Or is the economy STRONG again.  Now that the election is over, you can go back to pretending everything is alright again.
> 
> Because that's what you guys are doing.  You're arguing as if everything is fine and I'm just a whiner looking for a hand out.



The argument applies regardless of the state of the economy.  I am well aware that things are not fine for an awful lot of people.  There are people that become motivated to do something about it and there are people who whine about it and are apparently content to simply be passengers.  there are people that get that there position was not dictated by which President was in office or which policies were past.  You obviously don't get that.  You are obviously the later.  That you continue with your incessant blaming of everything not you is only helping to further prove our point.


----------



## Ravi

Andrew2382 said:


> plus, everyone desevres a beautiful home to live in even though they couldn't afford it.
> 
> Don't worry banks, hand out those mortgages, we will guarantee them, this is the pitch we got from pricks like frank and dodd
> 
> ie- read my sig


How's the koolaid chugging going? I hadn't realized how stupid you really are.



> In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.
> 
> In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.
> 
> Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.


USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership


----------



## Ravi

sealybobo said:


> So Bush failed?  I thought he had nothing to do with this or the economy?


What didn't Bush fail at?


----------



## Andrew2382

And I am defending that?  That was a stupid move, I remember it and was totally against it then and am still against it now.  Sorry, but to buy a home, there should be 3 qualifications, credit, steady income, downpayment. End of Story. However it doesn't change the fact he also tried to reform the GSE and have a regulatory body oversee fannie and freddy which got blocked by cocksuckers (no pun intended) barney frank.


----------



## catzmeow

Ravi said:


> Why would they be loyal to a country that just demonizes them like Hitler did with the Jews? The main reason they come is to make money.
> 
> Sometimes I think the majority of Americans are idiots and you don't help dissuade me, Kitty.



I never assumed they were loyal.  If they were, they would repect our immigration laws, which clearly, they do not.


----------



## WillowTree

catzmeow said:


> I never assumed they were loyal.  If they were, they would repect our immigration laws, which clearly, they do not.






ring a ling a ding  ring a ling a ding!


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> Where the hell did I even comment on the financial crisis at all?  Are you purposselly being obtuse?  The little you choose to comment on is just more evidence that you aren't even close to getting it yet.
> 
> 
> 
> The argument applies regardless of the state of the economy.  I am well aware that things are not fine for an awful lot of people.  There are people that become motivated to do something about it and there are people who whine about it and are apparently content to simply be passengers.  there are people that get that there position was not dictated by which President was in office or which policies were past.  You obviously don't get that.  You are obviously the later.  That you continue with your incessant blaming of everything not you is only helping to further prove our point.




I'm not unemployed. I didn't lose a home.  I got a damn good job.  Lucky to have it.  My boss says, "our industry is immune from this recession".  So I could very easily be arrogant like you guys. 

You are just defending Bush and the GOP because you are Republicans/Conservatives.  That's the fact.  And I'm busting your balls because the conservatives/gop/republicans fucked all this up.  And you know it.  Expect decades of this baby!


And are you listening to Obama's press conference!  He's going to do it!!!  Mark my words.  This government now works for the people.  That's a good thing whether you understand that or not.

He said he hired that Peter guy and some other guy because they know wher the bodies are buried.  He said, "mark my words, just because some bullshit is buried in this years budget, doesn't mean it will survive next year."

All you nay sayers, I hope you all apologize when you finally figure out this guys is for real.  I worry about his safety.  

Literally, as far as politics are concerned, the Messiah has arrived.  Finally someone with the courage to change the system.  Will they kill him?  Depends on how far he tries to go.  

But one things for sure, he isn't ignoring/avoiding his campaign promises.  He's going head on with his agenda.  And he'll fix this mess.

You don't realize how lucky you/we all are.  Not yet.


----------



## Andrew2382

dude, 

no industry is immune to recession.

I am in insurance, and it is suppose to be "recession proof" as well, it's not.

There are soft markets and hard markets.  It's a soft market right now


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> dude,
> 
> no industry is immune to recession.
> 
> I am in insurance, and it is suppose to be "recession proof" as well, it's not.
> 
> There are soft markets and hard markets.  It's a soft market right now



I know, but in my industry, I work for one of the Big 2, and companies need what we sell.  Taxes, Sarbanes Oxley, SEC Guidelines, State taxes, Estate Planning.

Sales might be down, but CPA's and Attorneys will always need to keep up on the tax laws.  

And he's the Director.  He runs my office.  Probably makes over $100k.  Doesn't realize that back in the 90's that job paid $200.  LOL.  He wants to be a Republican, but more of a Rudy Republican because he hates the GOP's social positions.

He's gay.  And he and his husband adopted a boy from Guatamala.  He is a great person.  I hope your heads explode from hearing that.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> I'm not unemployed. I didn't lose a home.  I got a damn good job.  Lucky to have it.  My boss says, "our industry is immune from this recession".  So I could very easily be arrogant like you guys.
> 
> You are just defending Bush and the GOP because you are Republicans/Conservatives.  That's the fact.  And I'm busting your balls because the conservatives/gop/republicans fucked all this up.  And you know it.  Expect decades of this baby!



More proof that you aren't listening at all.  Where did I defend Bush?  In fact this will be the third time I have told you that your wealth HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO THE PRESIDENT IS.  

I am not debating politics here bobo.  And I am not arrogant.  I'm simply a person who acknowledges what he has control over and is responsible for.




sealybobo said:


> And are you listening to Obama's press conference!  He's going to do it!!!  Mark my words.  This government now works for the people.  That's a good thing whether you understand that or not.
> 
> He said he hired that Peter guy and some other guy because they know wher the bodies are buried.  He said, "mark my words, just because some bullshit is buried in this years budget, doesn't mean it will survive next year."
> 
> All you nay sayers, I hope you all apologize when you finally figure out this guys is for real.  I worry about his safety.
> 
> Literally, as far as politics are concerned, the Messiah has arrived.  Finally someone with the courage to change the system.  Will they kill him?  Depends on how far he tries to go.
> 
> But one things for sure, he isn't ignoring/avoiding his campaign promises.  He's going head on with his agenda.  And he'll fix this mess.
> 
> You don't realize how lucky you/we all are.  Not yet.



WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR MALFUNCTION?  What in god's name does this have anything at all do with what I posted back in #102 (which you have been avoiding the substance of like the plague)?

If you want to quote me respond to that.  But what the hell this rant has to do with or how it is  somehow an accurate reflection on what I said is beyond me and thus didn't require you quoting me at all.


----------



## Andrew2382

my head is fine, I am sure your head hurts after the afternoon blowjobs you probably give him.

Also, when the guy they adopted from Guatamala is 22 year old fruit picker, thats not their son.  It's their Friday night entairtainment


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> More proof that you aren't listening at all.  Where did I defend Bush?  In fact this will be the third time I have told you that your wealth HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO THE PRESIDENT IS.
> 
> I am not debating politics here bobo.  And I am not arrogant.  I'm simply a person who acknowledges what he has control over and is responsible for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR MALFUNCTION?  What in god's name does this have anything at all do with what I posted back in #102 (which you have been avoiding the substance of like the plague)?
> 
> If you want to quote me respond to that.  But what the hell this rant has to do with or how it is  somehow an accurate reflection on what I said is beyond me and thus didn't require you quoting me at all.




Oh I'm sorry.  I wanted to ask you that question I asked way back, so I found the last time we spoke.  

Did I not answer a question?  My bad.  What was the question again?  Why when we dance do you always lead?


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> my head is fine, I am sure your head hurts after the afternoon blowjobs you probably give him.
> 
> Also, when the guy they adopted from Guatamala is 22 year old fruit picker, thats not their son.  It's their Friday night entairtainment



Oh!  Snap!  That was cold!!!  Damn Andy!  

He'll go to the best schools in Ann Arbor, probably go to UofM and become a very successful hetero man.

Just like straight parents have a horrible time turning their gay kids straight, I doubt those two will make their son gay.  

He just won't be as judgemental as you.


----------



## Ravi

Andrew2382 said:


> And I am defending that?  That was a stupid move, I remember it and was totally against it then and am still against it now.  Sorry, but to buy a home, there should be 3 qualifications, credit, steady income, downpayment. End of Story. However it doesn't change the fact he also tried to reform the GSE and have a regulatory body oversee fannie and freddy which got blocked by cocksuckers (no pun intended) barney frank.


It's good to know that you at least support some regulation.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> For the record the Bush tax cuts were across the board tax cuts.  EVERYBODY got them.  So what are you really complaining about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if you can show he is the exception rather than the rule you might have the semblance of a case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To have a real discussion about this we obviously have to determine what is accurate or not.  Some of what I'm getting from you is that you don't really have a problem with Skull or his views _if_ you believed the majority of business owners were like him.  Well what makes you think they aren't?  Our wonderfully biased media?
> 
> The real differences between the haves and have nots isn't government policies or corporate policies.  It is the behavior of individuals.  Most of the rich figured out that, one, they probably weren't going to get rich working for someone else. Most of the rich take proactive measures to insulate themselves from haveing their futures dictated to them.  Read some books on the rich sometime.  You will find most of them are completely void of any political perspective at all and focus mainly on the behaviors of people.
> 
> And at the end of the day whether you are actually right or not about people being somehow held down by this mysterious force, it makes no difference to the argument that your position is based on your behavior, because quite clearly even if some barrier does exist many, many people have overcome it.  Those people essentially decided to say fuck this system, i'm doing it my way, I'm taking the risk.  When that's the case is it any wonder what the real reason is for the few haves and many have nots?  Do you think risk like that is something many people would want to take on or few?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got Bush tax cuts?  HA!  Yea, when you let Republicans do the math, I even got more back than the top 1%
> 
> It's hard to even read on after that first comment.  Probably why I didn't.
> 
> Add up the 45,000 people that lost their jobs at a company and then add up the CEO bonus' and often times those amounts are equal.
> 
> I'm talking about corporate America, fortune 1000 companies and even a lot of what are considered "small business".
> 
> Tax break/bullshit loopholes.  It would take too much to explain to you if you don't already understand.  Or if you don't understand, it's because you don't want to understand.
> 
> A lot of what you says suggests you are on the other side of the coin.  I'm a worker bee.  I don't consider myself a "have".  I see it as us vs them, and I don't see the rich as part of us/me.  And I know many a former republican who thought they belonged to the have's.  No longer.  Now they are struggling too.  Now they have to go back and get a job, even though they've been retired for 5 years.
> 
> Maybe it's because we had it so good in Michigan for so long  I'm spoiled.  Don't worry, they'll lower your value too eventually, if not already.
> 
> No, many people have not beat this system, they got beat.  I think you are arrogant and those are the people who fall the hardest.
> 
> Not government or corporate policies.  Ok dude.  Just watch.  Just wait until you have a government that actually works for you and not against you.  And now your government isn't in cohoots with Corporate America, turning a blind eye everytime they break the rules/law.
> 
> I read your entire post, and it's a lot of garbage.  I can't disagree with what you are saying because yea, sure a couple of people in the right industies made out under Bushanomics.  I'd say about 10% of us fall into that bracket.  Congrats that you were part of the 10%.
> 
> Sorry, I'm part of the 90%ers who are just surviving it.
> 
> And I would be the Jimmy Hoffa.  YOU would be the sheep that worked next to him and didn't want to strike because you were a pussy to tell the man that he was working you too hard.
> 
> Most likely you are what I consider a house slave.  You got it good, but not that good.  But better than us.
> 
> So yea, I can go out and make millions!  And after I do, I won't stop caring about the rest of the people.  The masses.  I'd be like a John Kerry or John Edwards or JFK.
> 
> We love having the money, but that doesn't make us greedy selfish pricks.
Click to expand...


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got Bush tax cuts?  HA!  Yea, when you let Republicans do the math, I even got more back than the top 1%
> 
> It's hard to even read on after that first comment.  Probably why I didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not familiar with something called a tax bracket I guess.  You have no business talking about math when you can't understand it. Every tax bracket received a percentage decrease and the middle class receieved the largest decrease as a percentage.  Okay smart ass, how should the tax cuts have worked?  What's fair in your new math world?  That you receive a larger dollar amount tax cut?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm talking about corporate America, fortune 1000 companies and even a lot of what are considered "small business".
> 
> Tax break/bullshit loopholes.  It would take too much to explain to you if you don't already understand.  Or if you don't understand, it's because you don't want to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I understand that the more capital and resources a business has the more benefits in the tax code they can take advantage.  i woudl prefer those be done away with for something simpler.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of what you says suggests you are on the other side of the coin.  I'm a worker bee.  I don't consider myself a "have".  I see it as us vs them, and I don't see the rich as part of us/me.  And I know many a former republican who thought they belonged to the have's.  No longer.  Now they are struggling too.  Now they have to go back and get a job, even though they've been retired for 5 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I promise I make less than you so my ideals don't change with my financial standing.  To suggest that someone's position and indeed integrity on the issue of personal responsibility changed when their financial status changes says more about your character then any flaw in the system.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, many people have not beat this system, they got beat.  I think you are arrogant and those are the people who fall the hardest.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i don't have that far to fall buddy.  It has nothing to do with arrogance. YOU STILL DON'T WANT TO LISTEN.  Your one and only problem is your refusal to admit the control you have in the financial situation you are in.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not government or corporate policies.  Ok dude.  Just watch.  Just wait until you have a government that actually works for you and not against you.  And now your government isn't in cohoots with Corporate America, turning a blind eye everytime they break the rules/law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> it isn't government job to provide for my standard of living.  AGAIN you miss the point.  The rich don't succeed because of government.  they succeed in spite of it.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I read your entire post, and it's a lot of garbage.  I can't disagree with what you are saying because yea, sure a couple of people in the right industies made out under Bushanomics.  I'd say about 10% of us fall into that bracket.  Congrats that you were part of the 10%.
> 
> Sorry, I'm part of the 90%ers who are just surviving it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you notice how you're argument only works when you make unfounded, baseless and in this incorrect assumptions about people?  You are simply wrong to think that people do or don't succeed based on who is in office.  You will find for that many of the rich, who the President is, is pretty irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I would be the Jimmy Hoffa.  YOU would be the sheep that worked next to him and didn't want to strike because you were a pussy to tell the man that he was working you too hard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether the boss is working me 'too hard' is based on the contract i signed with my company.  If what is being asked of me exceeds what is detailed in my job description then I have grounds to ask for more pay from my boss.  YOU are the moron who seems to think the purpose of a business is to provide for whatever standard of living you choose.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most likely you are what I consider a house slave.  You got it good, but not that good.  But better than us.
> 
> So yea, I can go out and make millions!  And after I do, I won't stop caring about the rest of the people.  The masses.  I'd be like a John Kerry or John Edwards or JFK.
> 
> We love having the money, but that doesn't make us greedy selfish pricks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again incorrect and baseless assumptions.  Again your argument only works when you assume these ridiculous, unfounded and untrue characteristics about the rich.  Most of them are quite giving.  They just give to those that are deserving.  What they don't like are whiners like you who through some fucked up view of the world think they are entitled to something that someone else earned.
Click to expand...


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not familiar with something called a tax bracket I guess.  You have no business talking about math when you can't understand it. Every tax bracket received a percentage decrease and the middle class receieved the largest decrease as a percentage.  Okay smart ass, how should the tax cuts have worked?  What's fair in your new math world?  That you receive a larger dollar amount tax cut?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I understand that the more capital and resources a business has the more benefits in the tax code they can take advantage.  i woudl prefer those be done away with for something simpler.
> 
> 
> 
> I promise I make less than you so my ideals don't change with my financial standing.  To suggest that someone's position and indeed integrity on the issue of personal responsibility changed when their financial status changes says more about your character then any flaw in the system.
> 
> 
> 
> i don't have that far to fall buddy.  It has nothing to do with arrogance. YOU STILL DON'T WANT TO LISTEN.  Your one and only problem is your refusal to admit the control you have in the financial situation you are in.
> 
> 
> 
> it isn't government job to provide for my standard of living.  AGAIN you miss the point.  The rich don't succeed because of government.  they succeed in spite of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you notice how you're argument only works when you make unfounded, baseless and in this incorrect assumptions about people?  You are simply wrong to think that people do or don't succeed based on who is in office.  You will find for that many of the rich, who the President is, is pretty irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> Whether the boss is working me 'too hard' is based on the contract i signed with my company.  If what is being asked of me exceeds what is detailed in my job description then I have grounds to ask for more pay from my boss.  YOU are the moron who seems to think the purpose of a business is to provide for whatever standard of living you choose.
> 
> 
> 
> Again incorrect and baseless assumptions.  Again your argument only works when you assume these ridiculous, unfounded and untrue characteristics about the rich.  Most of them are quite giving.  They just give to those that are deserving.  What they don't like are whiners like you who through some fucked up view of the world think they are entitled to something that someone else earned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to know my plan or what I think is the right way to govern?  Watch Obama or read up on how Clinton managed to get er done.  Because let's face it, he got er did.
> 
> And I can go back to 2000, 01, 02, 03, 04-08 and point out exactly when and how the GOP fucked the middle class.
> 
> Trying to explain to you any more at this point would be futile.  You are hearing me say things I am not saying.  And you are totally missing my points.
> 
> But let me do some math for you.  If I had a choice between taxing everyone the same percentage, or if I could tax the people that make $40k NOTHING and tax the guy who makes a million dollars a year 50%, I'd rather tax the rich guy 50%.
> 
> Then he takes home $500K and the middle class take home ALL OF THEIR PAY.
> 
> But that's probably unfair in your opinion.  Not mine.
Click to expand...


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to know my plan or what I think is the right way to govern?  Watch Obama or read up on how Clinton managed to get er done.  Because let's face it, he got er did.
> 
> And I can go back to 2000, 01, 02, 03, 04-08 and point out exactly when and how the GOP fucked the middle class.
> 
> Trying to explain to you any more at this point would be futile.  You are hearing me say things I am not saying.  And you are totally missing my points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Make all the excuses to exit the debate you want.  I have given no indication that i am unwilling or unable to listen.  You say I have failed to see your point.  Undoublty that is true.  You would be required to admit however that you have also completely missed and ignored mine.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> But let me do some math for you.  If I had a choice between taxing everyone the same percentage, or if I could tax the people that make $40k NOTHING and tax the guy who makes a million dollars a year 50%, I'd rather tax the rich guy 50%.
> 
> Then he takes home $500K and the middle class take home ALL OF THEIR PAY.
> 
> But that's probably unfair in your opinion.  Not mine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Explain how this is fair.  Why, when presumabley both parties get some benefit from those taxes, should one be required to fund the benefits for himself AND the other person, while the other person should pays nothing towards reaping those benefits.  How crazy of me to think that isn't fair.
Click to expand...


----------



## WillowTree

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to know my plan or what I think is the right way to govern?  Watch Obama or read up on how Clinton managed to get er done.  Because let's face it, he got er did.
> 
> And I can go back to 2000, 01, 02, 03, 04-08 and point out exactly when and how the GOP fucked the middle class.
> 
> Trying to explain to you any more at this point would be futile.  You are hearing me say things I am not saying.  And you are totally missing my points.
> 
> *But let me do some math for you.  If I had a choice between taxing everyone the same percentage, or if I could tax the people that make $40k NOTHING and tax the guy who makes a million dollars a year 50%, I'd rather tax the rich guy 50%.*
> 
> Then he takes home $500K and the middle class take home ALL OF THEIR PAY.
> 
> But that's probably unfair in your opinion.  Not mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yep! it fits like a hand and glove,, you are the beautiful picture of the gimme gimme crowd.. except the guy with a million dollars is way smarter than you, that's why he makes a million and you don't,, he knows how to shelter it away from greedy people like you.. oh well.
Click to expand...


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Make all the excuses to exit the debate you want.  I have given no indication that i am unwilling or unable to listen.  You say I have failed to see your point.  Undoublty that is true.  You would be required to admit however that you have also completely missed and ignored mine.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain how this is fair.  Why, when presumabley both parties get some benefit from those taxes, should one be required to fund the benefits for himself AND the other person, while the other person should pays nothing towards reaping those benefits.  How crazy of me to think that isn't fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do get all of your points.  I have probably said all of the things you have said, sometime in my past, to someone else.
> 
> Only difference is, I finish by saying, BUT.......
> 
> Yes the rich pay too much in taxes, but...
> 
> Sure the rich pay more than the poor into the system, BUT........
> 
> Sure we got a tax break too under Bush, but......
> 
> I even agree that they should not be taxing any man's income, BUT....
> 
> It's all the stuff after BUT that you don't understand.
> 
> And why is it fair?  The guy takes home $500k and the other people take home $40k.  If you don't see why, then we'll never see eye to eye.  And thank gosh my party is back in charge, because it was sheeple like you that let Bush do what ever he wanted.  He spent as much as he wanted to in the name of free markets and defense.
> 
> He tugged at your emotion that says someone wants to take what you worked for and give it to other people.  Meanwhile, the man did that to us for 8 years.
> 
> Then you guys deny the government has any power.  Or you think I want the government to have more power, but the fact is, you have given Corporate America too much power.
> 
> You don't even know who the enemy is.  That's why we voted the people you voted for out of office.  You didn't know any better.  You still don't.  You were so brainwashed and confused.  Luckily, enough people woke up.  So relax, we have it from here.
> 
> When your quality of life goes back up, they'll tell you government had nothing to do with it.
> 
> When they fuck you, they say they didn't have anything to do with it.
> 
> But then they'll tell you Clinton had everythign to do with it.
> 
> And you'll assume that I want bigger government, when in reality, I  just want a government that works in my best interest.
> 
> And then you'll suggest that class warfare didn't occur over the past 8 years?  Hell, it's been going on since reagan.
Click to expand...


----------



## Andrew2382

because in Clinton's days everyone made the same and people didn't make 40 k while others made 500k


----------



## WillowTree

unfucking believeable bobo,, you quoted yerself then commenced to arguing with yerself... time for a rest buddy boy! but not before you go back and fix that.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Bern80 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I do get all of your points.  I have probably said all of the things you have said, sometime in my past, to someone else.
> 
> Only difference is, I finish by saying, BUT.......
> 
> Yes the rich pay too much in taxes, but...
> 
> Sure the rich pay more than the poor into the system, BUT........
> 
> Sure we got a tax break too under Bush, but......
> 
> I even agree that they should not be taxing any man's income, BUT....
> 
> It's all the stuff after BUT that you don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are typically referred to as excuses.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And why is it fair?  The guy takes home $500k and the other people take home $40k.  If you don't see why, then we'll never see eye to eye.  And thank gosh my party is back in charge, because it was sheeple like you that let Bush do what ever he wanted.  He spent as much as he wanted to in the name of free markets and defense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That can not in any way shape or form be defined as fair.  That simply isn't the definition of the word.  What your definition boils down to is that whoever has the most should pay for everything.  Is that really how fucked up you are?  By that definition if you and I go to dinner and i have more money on me than you then not only should I pay for both of us simply because i have more money, but you should have the right to expect that I pay for it?  In what fucked up world can you say that is fair?
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> He tugged at your emotion that says someone wants to take what you worked for and give it to other people.  Meanwhile, the man did that to us for 8 years.
> 
> Then you guys deny the government has any power.  Or you think I want the government to have more power, but the fact is, you have given Corporate America too much power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No YOU have given them too much power.  When you label yourself a victim, which admit it or not you have, that is the definition of giving power away.
> 
> And get off the I'm a Bush supporter schtick.  I have said nothing to indicate that i am one.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't even know who the enemy is.  That's why we voted the people you voted for out of office.  You didn't know any better.  You still don't.  You were so brainwashed and confused.  Luckily, enough people woke up.  So relax, we have it from here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't have shit from here.  What you propose historically has failed every single time it has been tried, because it completely ignores human nature.  William Bradford tried it with the pilgirms and it failed.  A whole fucking country tried it and collapsed.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> When your quality of life goes back up, they'll tell you government had nothing to do with it.
> 
> When they fuck you, they say they didn't have anything to do with it.
> 
> But then they'll tell you Clinton had everythign to do with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GET THIS PART THROUGH YOUR THICK FUCKING SKULL.  I AM NOT CONCERNED WITH WHAT SOME POLITICIAN SAYS HE HAS DONE FOR ME.  I don't care if they are left, right, black or white.  it isn't anybody's job but mine to provide for my standard of living.
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you'll assume that I want bigger government, when in reality, I  just want a government that works in my best interest.
> 
> And then you'll suggest that class warfare didn't occur over the past 8 years?  Hell, it's been going on since reagan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your position requires bigger government so whether you WANT it or not is irrelevant. Of course class warfare is going on.  You're just wrong about the context of the fight.  Many in  your class grew up with this fucked up entitlement, void of accountablity atitude which is the singular reason you are in the position you are in.
Click to expand...


----------



## sealybobo

WillowTree said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> yep! it fits like a hand and glove,, you are the beautiful picture of the gimme gimme crowd.. except the guy with a million dollars is way smarter than you, that's why he makes a million and you don't,, he knows how to shelter it away from greedy people like you.. oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of my rich friends aren't smarter than the rest of us.  They just went to work for their daddies business after highschool.
> 
> Some of them are fucked, because their jobs went away with manufacturing.
> 
> I guess they were stupid 20 years ago to not realize the GOP would send all manufacuting to 3rd world countries that pay slave labor.
> 
> I give my brother credit.  We came from nothing.  Greek immigrant parents.  And he graduated from Michigan State University with a Masters and he worked his way up to VP.  And he STILL isn't as greedy as you dumb bastards.  LOL.  JK.
> 
> And just like that he could lose his job to overseas too, so he's not arrogant and ignorant enough to think it can't happen to him.  So even though he makes $400k, he knows that he is not a Republican.
> 
> Only the mega rich are.  And you suckers still don't get it.  I suspect you never will.
Click to expand...


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> because in Clinton's days everyone made the same and people didn't make 40 k while others made 500k



$40k was worth $40k back then.  Don't forget that.  

And yes, it is fair for the poor to pay next to nothing in taxes because they make next to nothing.  And that means the rich have to pay a little more.

Now when Obama cuts spending, then come back to me about giving you a bigger tax break.  Then maybe we can talk.  Because I am not in favor of the government overtaxing you so they can overspend.  But I'm also not for giving the rich a tax break and shifting more of the burden on the middle class and/or debt.  

Anyways, don't worry.  Master will win or steal power back someday down the road and then he'll start throwing you the fat from his steak again.  And I understand it is us greedy field slaves that caused this crisis.


----------



## Andrew2382

40k was worth 40k?

what?

so your premise is that 40k doesn't take you as far as it did 10 years ago?

well no shit, thats what happens.

40k in Clintons time wasn't what it was during Reagens either

Also, I understand the rich pay mor ein taxes, where I have a problem i sgiving people who already don't pay taxes more free money by taking it away from people that work for it


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> 40k was worth 40k?
> 
> what?
> 
> so your premise is that 40k doesn't take you as far as it did 10 years ago?
> 
> well no shit, thats what happens.
> 
> 40k in Clintons time wasn't what it was during Reagens either
> 
> Also, I understand the rich pay mor ein taxes, where I have a problem i sgiving people who already don't pay taxes more free money by taking it away from people that work for it



ThomHartmann.com - Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

And you really need to read up on what the GOP has been doing ever since Reagan got into office.  

After the Republican Great Depression, FDR put this nation back to work, in part by raising taxes on income above $3 to $4 million a year (in todays dollars) to 91 percent, and corporate taxes to over 50% of profits. The revenue from those income taxes built dams, roads, bridges, sewers, water systems, schools, hospitals, train stations, railways, an interstate highway system, and airports. It educated a generation returning from World War II. It acted as a cap on the rare but occasional obsessively greedy person taking so much out of the economy that it impoverished the rest of us. 

Through the 1950s, though, more and more loopholes for the rich were built into the tax code, so much so that JFK observed in his second debate with Richard Nixon that dropping the top tax rate to 70% but tightening up the loopholes would actually be a tax increase. 

JFK pushed through that tax increase to take us back toward FDR/Truman/Eisenhower revenue levels, and we continued to build infrastructure in the US, and even put men on the moon. Health care and college were cheap and widely available. Working people could raise a family and have security in their old age. Every billion dollars (a half-week in Iraq) invested in infrastructure in America created 47,000 good-paying jobs as Americans built America. 

But the rich fought back, and won big-time in 1980 when Reagan, until then the fringe Voodoo economics candidate who was heading into the election trailing far behind Jimmy Carter, was swept into the White House on a wave of public concern of the Iranians taking US hostages. Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (theyre still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world). 

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined. 

In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagans tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadnt been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s. 

And, most tragically, Reagans tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, weve been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s. 

The Associated Press reported on August 4, 2007, that the president of Nike, Mark Parker, raked in $3.6 million [in compensation] in 07. Thats $13,846 per weekday, $69,230 a week. And yet it would still keep him just below the top 70% tax rate if this were the pre-Reagan era. We had a social consensus that somebody earning around $3 million a year was fine, but above that was really more than anybody needs to live in America. 

In the worldview Americans held in the 1930-1980 era, Parkers compensation was reasonable. But William McGuire (aka in the business press as Dollar Bill) taking over $1.6 billion - $1,600,000,000.00 - from the nations second largest health insurance company (you wonder where your health care dollars are going?) would have been considered excessive before the Reagan Revolution. 

There is much discussion of what the floor on earnings should be - the minimum wage - but none about the ceiling. Thats largely because effectively there is no ceiling, and those who control vast wealth in America are happy to have Americans fight over How poor is too poor? just so long as nobody asks How rich is too rich? 

When Reagan dropped the top income tax rate from over 70% down to under 30%, all hell broke loose. With the legal and social restraint to unlimited selfishness removed, the good of the nation was replaced by greed is good as the primary paradigm. 

In the years since then, mind-boggling wealth has risen among fewer than 20,000 people in America (the top 0.01 percent of wage-earners), but their influence has been tremendous. They finance conservative think tanks (think Joseph Coors and the Heritage Foundation), change public opinion (Walton heirs funding a covert effort to change the estate tax to the death tax), lobby congress and the president (who calls the haves and the have-mores his base), and work to strip down public institutions. 

The middle class is being replaced by the working poor. American infrastructure built with tax revenues during the 1934-1981 is now crumbling and disintegrating. Hospitals and highways and power and water systems have been corporatized. People are dying. 

And Bush, following closely in Reagans footsteps, is making things worse. As Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out at recent hearings for the confirmation of Bushs new nominee for the Office of Management and Budget: 

Since Bush has been president: 

over 5 million people have slipped into poverty; 
nearly 7 million Americans have lost their health insurance; 
median household income has gone down by nearly $1,300; 
three million manufacturing jobs have been lost; 
three million American workers have lost their pensions; 
home foreclosures are now the highest on record; 
the personal savings rate is below zero - which hasnt happened since the great depression; 
the real earnings of college graduates have gone down by about 5% in the last few years; 
entry level wages for male and female high school graduates have fallen by over 3%; 
wages and salaries are now at the lowest share of GDP since 1929. 
The debate about whether or not to roll Bushs tax cuts back to Clintons modest mid-30% rates is absurd. Its time to roll back the horribly failed experiment of the Reagan tax cuts. And use that money to pay down Reagans debt and rebuild this nation.


----------



## Andrew2382

yeah, well I stopped reading after you linked something about FDR putting people to work, when his policies prolonged the great depression by 10 years.

Did FDR ever see anything lower then 15, 17% unemployment?


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> yeah, well I stopped reading after you linked something about FDR putting people to work, when his policies prolonged the great depression by 10 years.
> 
> Did FDR ever see anything lower then 15, 17% unemployment?



Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (theyre still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world). 

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined. 

In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagans tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadnt been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s. 

And, most tragically, Reagans tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, weve been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.

When Reagan dropped the top income tax rate from over 70% down to under 30%, all hell broke loose. With the legal and social restraint to unlimited selfishness removed, the good of the nation was replaced by greed is good as the primary paradigm. 

In the years since then, mind-boggling wealth has risen among fewer than 20,000 people in America (the top 0.01 percent of wage-earners), but their influence has been tremendous. They finance conservative think tanks (think Joseph Coors and the Heritage Foundation), change public opinion (Walton heirs funding a covert effort to change the estate tax to the death tax), lobby congress and the president (who calls the haves and the have-mores his base), and work to strip down public institutions. 

The middle class is being replaced by the working poor. American infrastructure built with tax revenues during the 1934-1981 is now crumbling and disintegrating. Hospitals and highways and power and water systems have been corporatized. People are dying.

Since Bush has been president: 

over 5 million people have slipped into poverty; 
nearly 7 million Americans have lost their health insurance; 
median household income has gone down by nearly $1,300; 
three million manufacturing jobs have been lost; 
three million American workers have lost their pensions; 
home foreclosures are now the highest on record; 
the personal savings rate is below zero - which hasnt happened since the great depression; 
the real earnings of college graduates have gone down by about 5% in the last few years; 
entry level wages for male and female high school graduates have fallen by over 3%; 
wages and salaries are now at the lowest share of GDP since 1929. 
The debate about whether or not to roll Bushs tax cuts back to Clintons modest mid-30% rates is absurd. Its time to roll back the horribly failed experiment of the Reagan tax cuts. And use that money to pay down Reagans debt and rebuild this nation.


----------



## sealybobo

Andrew2382 said:


> yeah, well I stopped reading after you linked something about FDR putting people to work, when his policies prolonged the great depression by 10 years.
> 
> Did FDR ever see anything lower then 15, 17% unemployment?



I can continue to shorten it.  Just tell me what you don't like and I'll get rid of it.  Then we can discuss the facts that remain.  

Ultimately, the rich aren't paying their fair share in taxes.  

The arguments you use are the ones Reagan and Bush used to slash these taxes.  And now you see the country is falling apart, but you say that if we raise their taxes, the country will fall apart. 

These taxes, before Reagan cut them drastically, built America's infrastructure.

Corporations SHOULD be paying taxes.  Under Bushanomics, they didn't.  You can show me they paid billions, but then I can show you where they used loopholes and sneaky tax breaks to get that money back.  

Leona Helmsley says the rich don't pay taxes.  If you pay too much in taxes, you aren't rich.  Or you have a lousy accountant.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> I can continue to shorten it.  Just tell me what you don't like and I'll get rid of it.  Then we can discuss the facts that remain.



Facts?!  You want to start talking about facts?  That's fucking rich bobo.  Like the 'fact' that I must be rich because I'm so 'arrogant'?  

Like the 'fact' that most business owners are just money grubbing, back stabbing, tight wads that would sell their souls to the devil for a buck?

Like the 'fact' that in your fucked up world where the rich couldn't possibly have worked for their wealth and the poor are just victims?

Like the 'fact' that fair in your fucked up world is where 'fair' is defined as being where tax revenue suppossedly benefits everyone, but only the rich should have to pay them?

You wanna talk about facts.  I suggest you take ALL of them into account. Not just your made up, baseless assumptions or the ones that are most convenient for you.


----------



## Skull Pilot

Bern80 said:


> Facts?!  You want to start talking about facts?  That's fucking rich bobo.  Like the 'fact' that I must be rich because I'm so 'arrogant'.
> 
> Like the 'fact' that most business owners are just money grubbing, back stabbing, tight wads that would sell their souls to the devil for a buck?
> 
> Like the 'fact' that in your fucked up world where the rich couldn't possibly of worked for their wealth and the poor are just victims?
> 
> Like the 'fact' that fair in your fucked up world is where 'fair' is defined as being where tax revenue suppossedly benefits everyone, but only the rich should have to pay them?
> 
> You wanna talk about facts.  I suggest you take ALL of them into account. Not your made up, baseless assumptions or the ones that are most convenient for you.



Give it up Bern.

I promise myself that i will not get sucked into BoBos circular arguments but I still do.

You can give him all the facts and opposing data to what he says and all you'll get is ,"It's the GOP that sent all the jobs overseas"  The fact that he can't see how insane that statement is tells you you are wasting your time.

So I'll make a deal with you, if you answer a BoBo post, I'll slap you real hard and you can do the same for me.


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> Give it up Bern.
> 
> I promise myself that i will not get sucked into BoBos circular arguments but I still do.
> 
> You can give him all the facts and opposing data to what he says and all you'll get is ,"It's the GOP that sent all the jobs overseas"  The fact that he can't see how insane that statement is tells you you are wasting your time.
> 
> So I'll make a deal with you, if you answer a BoBo post, I'll slap you real hard and you can do the same for me.



Wow, two bitches slapping each other.  That's hot!


----------



## WillowTree

Skull Pilot said:


> Give it up Bern.
> 
> I promise myself that i will not get sucked into BoBos circular arguments but I still do.
> 
> You can give him all the facts and opposing data to what he says and all you'll get is ,"It's the GOP that sent all the jobs overseas"  The fact that he can't see how insane that statement is tells you you are wasting your time.
> 
> *So I'll make a deal with you, if you answer a BoBo post, I'll slap you real hard and you can do the same for me.[/*QUOTE]


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Wow, two bitches slapping each other.  That's hot!



Constructive as always.

Are you going to address your 'facts' or not?


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> Facts?!  You want to start talking about facts?  That's fucking rich bobo.  Like the 'fact' that I must be rich because I'm so 'arrogant'?
> 
> Like the 'fact' that in your fucked up world where the rich couldn't possibly have worked for their wealth and the poor are just victims?
> 
> You wanna talk about facts.  I suggest you take ALL of them into account. Not just your made up, baseless assumptions or the ones that are most convenient for you.




No, like the facts I laid out about how much taxes have been cut for the rich and corporations since Reagan got into office.  I think taxes were fair before Reagan started cutting them.  How about that?  

Supposedly so did a lot of other people, because the tax rates were where they were because someone (congress) decided that's where they should be.  So Republicans have been cutting corporate/rich tax rates for 30 years.  And I believe they went too far under this Bush.

And it's hard to even take you guys seriously.  You say Bush tried to fix the mess but Democrats stopped him.  Really?  Because I remember 8 years of you all defending every action/move that the GOP made.  Now you want to say you aren't Bushies?  You sure argue like Bushies.

I think after FDR rebuilt America with Corporate taxes, their argument was that it was time they got some tax breaks, and maybe they were right.  But they went too far, especially because the debt skyrocketted.  Is that all GOP's fault?  No, but now the Dems haven't been in power since 1991.  The one who was, Clinton, did a bang up job.  

And only the rich have any money.  So at least in this economy, i absolutely believe that the rich should pick up the slack for the poor and middle class.  When the economy gets back on track, we can talk about lowering their taxes again.  But that will mean balanced budgets first.  Social security fixed first.  Bridges, roads and levys built first.  Wars finished.  Unemployment low first.  

You'll see.  Just watch and see what Obama does.  That's what I'm talking about.  And when it works, don't say I didn't tell you so.  Just like I/we warned you that this economy was going to tank and you argued with us.  And now you want to say you were the ones that tried to fix the meltdown and we stopped you?  How rediculous.

Of course I think it's fair that the working poor pay zero taxes.  $40k with a family is poor.  So maybe the $1 million dollar taxed at 50% was extreme, but if it's either raise the rich taxes or get it from the poor, I say take it from the rich.  That's how it works here in America.  Always has.  You guys pushed for tax breaks but then your spending went out of control.  Mostly because Bush raped the treasury thru Iraq.  That caused inflation.  Deregulations allowed the banks to go wild and I beleive they pushed the envelope knowing they'd get bailed out.  In other words, this was all planned.

Anyways, you guys make it sound like I want to take advantage of the rich.  The fact is, they stole the last two elections and took advantage of America.  They raped the treasury.  On purpose?  No question.  

So now you can distance yourselves from Bush and at the same time defend every policy he ever had.  

It's my Birthday today by the way.  38 years old.


----------



## Skull Pilot

i warned you bern


----------



## sealybobo

Skull Pilot said:


> View attachment 6442
> 
> i warned you bern



And I don't think you are a demon Skull.  I respect your opinion and might see things similarly if I owned a business.  But I know a lot of business owners who see things like I do.  Maybe one difference is that they own business' that rely on the Big three.  Or maybe they don't care as much about taxes as you do.  They are more concerned with getting the masses out spending money again, because that's how they make money.      

Now as for Bern my fellow worker bee, guys like him I'll never understand.

And what I think is happening in Corporate America, doesn't mean I suggest you are doing it to your employees too.  Many American small business owners are very patriotic and want their employees to make good money and want good jobs to stay in America.  I believe you do, but you just don't care about people in other groups.  Like you want your 10 employees to make good money if they earn it, but you don't think line workers at the big 3 deserve what they make.  And with some of them, you may have a point.

I'm also sorry you aren't hearing where I'm coming from, but I'm positive you don't think I'm hearing you either.  I am.  And I agree that the government should not get involved any more than they need to in business and they shouldn't spend anymore than is absolutely necessary and if that all happened, then we should all pay as little in taxes as necessary.  I totally agree.  

But we may never agree on what the right tax system should be.  Flat tax, progressive tax, no income tax, only a sales tax.  Tax the rich a little less and the middle class a little more.  Cut everyone's taxes and keep doubling the debt.  

Or you might never agree with me on who fucked up this economy or how to solve it, but at least we both want it fixed.  

I also don't think you understand or will admit  just how bad this economy is.  I think that because you seem to suggest that anyone who doesn't like the pay they are making can just go get another job.  Yea, in this economy? 

But one thing I'm sure, you seem like a good American who only wants what is right/fair.  

They say people are born with conservative or liberal gene's.  I happen to be wired liberal.  Sorry.


----------



## Skull Pilot

I don't worry about "fairness"  because there is no such thing.

I worry about doing the right thing.  And that , to me at least, is being responsible for my obligations, taking care of my family, not being a burden to anyone and keeping my nose out of other peoples' lives.

I do not judge someone's income as too much or too little.  In the case of the auto workers, I haven't decided that their business model is unsupportable, the fact that the auto industry is failing because labor costs are too high decided that. the market decides which jobs are worth more not me and right now a guy who installs 2 screws and a nut all day isn't deemed very valuable to the market is he?

I don't presume to say what other people should or shouldn't do with their money or in their lives because frankly it's none of my business but then again when those same people make bad decisions I am not responsible, nor should I be called uponto bail them out.

I do however have the right to say the government should tax me and everybody less and the government should be forced to spend less, do with less and not be a burden on the tax payers as it is now.  Government should be so small as to not be noticeable in our daily lives and everyone should pay the same percentage of their income to the government.  Personally I think it should be something around 15% of gross income no more, but everyone pays.

but since I am



I will



slap my self


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> No, like the facts I laid out about how much taxes have been cut for the rich and corporations since Reagan got into office.  I think taxes were fair before Reagan started cutting them.  How about that?
> 
> Supposedly so did a lot of other people, because the tax rates were where they were because someone (congress) decided that's where they should be.  So Republicans have been cutting corporate/rich tax rates for 30 years.  And I believe they went too far under this Bush.



Thren we need to have serious conversation about what the word 'fair' means.  You stated quite clearly that fair to you is where the rich pay all taxes and the middle class and poor pay none.  That can not in any way shape or form be called fair.  It can be called a lot a things, but it can not be called a fair distribution of tax burden.



sealybobo said:


> [/B]And it's hard to even take you guys seriously.  You say Bush tried to fix the mess but Democrats stopped him.  Really?  Because I remember 8 years of you all defending every action/move that the GOP made.  Now you want to say you aren't Bushies?  You sure argue like Bushies.



If you want to respond to me, focus it on what *I* have said.  I have not brought up Bush or what any adminisitration has done with regards to the economy.  In fact, I think I have been quite clear that as far as wealth accumulation is concerned, what party is in office is irrelevant. SO GET THE FUCK OFF IT.



sealybobo said:


> And only the rich have any money.  So at least in this economy, i absolutely believe that the rich should pick up the slack for the poor and middle class.  When the economy gets back on track, we can talk about lowering their taxes again.  But that will mean balanced budgets first.  Social security fixed first.  Bridges, roads and levys built first.  Wars finished.  Unemployment low first.



Why should anyone feel it is their OBLIGATION to make up for a lack of effort on the part of someone else?    



sealybobo said:


> You'll see.  Just watch and see what Obama does.  That's what I'm talking about.  And when it works, don't say I didn't tell you so.  Just like I/we warned you that this economy was going to tank and you argued with us.  And now you want to say you were the ones that tried to fix the meltdown and we stopped you?  How rediculous.



I REPEAT, IF YOU ARE GOING TO ATTRIBUTE THINGS TO ME IN THE FORM OF 'YOU GUYS' MAKE SURE I ACTUALLY FUCKING SAID IT.

I think it may be you that needs to watch Obama seeing as how even he seems to be getting that raising taxes on businesses right now doesn't make a lot of economic sense.



sealybobo said:


> Of course I think it's fair that the working poor pay zero taxes.  $40k with a family is poor.  So maybe the $1 million dollar taxed at 50% was extreme, but if it's either raise the rich taxes or get it from the poor, I say take it from the rich.  That's how it works here in America.  Always has.  You guys pushed for tax breaks but then your spending went out of control.  Mostly because Bush raped the treasury thru Iraq.  That caused inflation.  Deregulations allowed the banks to go wild and I beleive they pushed the envelope knowing they'd get bailed out.  In other words, this was all planned.



No it isn't.  The American dream is that YOU can acheive whatever YOU work for.  Perhaps people should consider their financial position when they have a family and take some responsibility.  It can in no way shape or form be considered fair to distribute taxes the tax burden in that manner.

Our government collects taxes for a wide variety of reasons, roads, police, fire departments, social programs, etc. EVERYBODY experiences benefit from many of those things. On top of that one can easily make the arugment that the poor use a greater amount of the programs funded by those tax dollars. You are just plain dead wrong on this.  It is absolutely not fair to ask that only a segement of society pay for the benefits of everyone AND pay for many of things they don't even use (i.e. welfare).



sealybobo said:


> Anyways, you guys make it sound like I want to take advantage of the rich.  The fact is, they stole the last two elections and took advantage of America.  They raped the treasury.  On purpose?  No question.
> 
> So now you can distance yourselves from Bush and at the same time defend every policy he ever had.
> 
> It's my Birthday today by the way.  38 years old.



If you're 38 then I trully feel sorry for you. How did you get to be that age and this stupid?  You complain about all these things and don't get people with you mentality are the root cause of so much of it.  You believe you are entitled to all this shit just because.  You seemingly lack any aspect of personal accountablitity or responsibility.  And unfortunately there are only going to be more of you in the future.  More people that don't understand the are take responsibility for their postion in life.  Christ man, I'm 28 and figured this out. We are fucking doomed.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> Thren we need to have serious conversation about what the word 'fair' means.  You stated quite clearly that fair to you is where the rich pay all taxes and the middle class and poor pay none.  That can not in any way shape or form be called fair.  It can be called a lot a things, but it can not be called a fair distribution of tax burden.
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to respond to me, focus it on what *I* have said.  I have not brought up Bush or what any adminisitration has done with regards to the economy.  In fact, I think I have been quite clear that as far as wealth accumulation is concerned, what party is in office is irrelevant. SO GET THE FUCK OFF IT.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should anyone feel it is their OBLIGATION to make up for a lack of effort on the part of someone else?
> 
> 
> 
> I REPEAT, IF YOU ARE GOING TO ATTRIBUTE THINGS TO ME IN THE FORM OF 'YOU GUYS' MAKE SURE I ACTUALLY FUCKING SAID IT.
> 
> I think it may be you that needs to watch Obama seeing as how even he seems to be getting that raising taxes on businesses right now doesn't make a lot of economic sense.
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn't.  The American dream is that YOU can acheive whatever YOU work for.  Perhaps people should consider their financial position when they have a family and take some responsibility.  It can in no way shape or form be considered fair to distribute taxes the tax burden in that manner.
> 
> Our government collects taxes for a wide variety of reasons, roads, police, fire departments, social programs, etc. EVERYBODY experiences benefit from many of those things. On top of that one can easily make the arugment that the poor use a greater amount of the programs funded by those tax dollars. You are just plain dead wrong on this.  It is absolutely not fair to ask that only a segement of society pay for the benefits of everyone AND pay for many of things they don't even use (i.e. welfare).
> 
> 
> 
> If you're 38 then I trully feel sorry for you. How did you get to be that age and this stupid?  You complain about all these things and don't get people with you mentality are the root cause of so much of it.  You believe you are entitled to all this shit just because.  You seemingly lack any aspect of personal accountablitity or responsibility.  And unfortunately there are only going to be more of you in the future.  More people that don't understand the are take responsibility for their postion in life.  Christ man, I'm 28 and figured this out. We are fucking doomed.



Parts from an Article on Obama's new Economic Team:

We need to move the country in a new direction, and not continue the same old practices that have gotten us into the fix we're in. 

Volcker helped tame inflation by raising interest rates, despite intense opposition by some in Congress. Volcker's moves helped plunge the economy into recession in the short-term, but he was later credited with reviving the economy by getting inflation under control.

"As soon as the recovery is well under way, we need to set up a long-term plan to reduce the structural deficit and make sure we are not leaving a mountain of debt for the next generation," he said. 
Americans' disposable income fell at an annual rate of 9.2 percent in the same period, the largest drop in records that date to 1947.

number of Americans using government-subsidized food stamps to buy groceries was expected to pass 30 million this month, a new record. (IT'S ALL THEIR FAULT.  AND THE PEOPLE THAT SUFFERED IN THE GREAT DEPRESSION, WAS THEIR FAULT TOO)  (OR, IT WAS NO ONE'S FAULT, OR EVERYONE'S FAULT)

Obama said bank executives should make sacrifices because so many other people are struggling (WHAT IS THIS?  WHY SHOULD THEY SACRAFICE?  THEY AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR POOR PEOPLE'S POSITIONS IN LIFE!!!)

"I think that if you are already worth tens of millions of dollars, and you are having to lay off workers," Obama said, "the least you can do is say, 'I'm willing to make some sacrifice as well, because I recognize that there are people who are a lot less well off, who are going through some pretty tough times.'" 

(I CAN'T BELIEVE HE SAID THAT!  WHAT A SOCIALIST!!!!)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27924569/page/2/


----------



## sealybobo

Is closing loopholes and raising taxes the same thing?  Because I believe Obama will close loopholes so corporations can't avoid paying taxes.  

If that is a tax increase, Obama will raise taxes on the rich.  

And he will let Bush's tax breaks expire.  This one I'm not completely sure about.  I'll be pissed if he extends them.

I don't think Obama will lay all his cards on the table until Bush is out of office because anything Obama says, Bush can react to right now.  

Bush is still dangerous.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> Is closing loopholes and raising taxes the same thing?  Because I believe Obama will close loopholes so corporations can't avoid paying taxes.
> 
> If that is a tax increase, Obama will raise taxes on the rich.
> 
> And he will let Bush's tax breaks expire.  This one I'm not completely sure about.  I'll be pissed if he extends them.
> 
> 
> I don't think Obama will lay all his cards on the table until Bush is out of office because anything Obama says, Bush can react to right now.
> 
> Bush is still dangerous.



that doesn't jibe with what you want (rich pay all and middle/poor pay nothing).  Still waiting for an explanation as to why that's 'fair' btw.

if you want people to start addressing your points, then it also falls on you to actuall respond to what is written so a conversation can be had.  I realize i am long winded but it isnt a ton of work to use the quote function like the rest of us to respond to specific points.


I am all for making the tax code simpler to the point where loopholes (kinda of a misnomer) don't exist.  I think you are not being entirely honest.  You want the tax cuts to expire for the rich only, because the Bush tax cuts really do expire, then EVERYONE's taxes go up.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> that doesn't jibe with what you want (rich pay all and middle/poor pay nothing).  Still waiting for an explanation as to why that's 'fair' btw.
> 
> if you want people to start addressing your points, then it also falls on you to actuall respond to what is written so a conversation can be had.  I realize i am long winded but it isnt a ton of work to use the quote function like the rest of us to respond to specific points.
> 
> 
> I am all for making the tax code simpler to the point where loopholes (kinda of a misnomer) don't exist.  I think you are not being entirely honest.  You want the tax cuts to expire for the rich only, because the Bush tax cuts really do expire, then EVERYONE's taxes go up.



http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=123&Itemid=38

Once the rich and powerful gain control of the government, they turn it upon itself, usually first eliminating its taxation process as it applies to themselves. 
"General Electric Co., for example, reported paying an effective tax rate of 19% last year on world-wide income, compared with 26% in 2003." 
Corporations are taxed because they use public services, and are therefore expected to help pay for them - the same as citizens. 
Corporations make use of a work force educated in public schools paid for with tax dollars. They use roads and highways paid for with tax dollars. They use water, sewer, and power and communications rights-of-way paid for with taxes. They demand the same protection from fire and police departments as everybody else, and enjoy the benefits of national sovereignty and the stability provided by the military and institutions like NATO and the United Nations, the same as all residents of democratic nations. 
In fact, corporations are heavier users of taxpayer-provided services and institutions than are average citizens. Taxes pay for our court systems, which are most heavily used by corporations to enforce contracts. Taxes pay for our Treasury Department and other governmental institutions which maintain a stable currency essential to corporate activity. Taxes pay for our regulation of corporate activity, from assuring safety in the workplace to a pure food and drug supply to limiting toxic emissions. 
Under George W. Bush, the burden of cleaning up toxic wastes produced by corporate activity has largely shifted from polluter-funded Superfund and other programs to taxpayer-funded cleanups (as he did in Texas as governor there before becoming President). 
Every year, millions of cases of cancer, emphysema, neurological disorders, and other conditions caused by corporate pollution are paid for in whole or in part by government funded programs from Medicare to Medicaid to government subsidies of hospitals, universities, and research institutions funded by tax dollars through the NIH and NIMH. 
Because it's well understood that corporations use our tax-funded institutions at least as heavily as do citizens, they've traditionally been taxed at similar rates. For example, the top corporate tax rate in the US was 48% during the Carter administration, down from the a peak of 53% during the Eisenhower and Kennedy years. 
Today it stands at 35%, but in May of 2001 Bush administration Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill suggested there should be no corporate income tax whatsoever. This was the opening salvo in a very real war to have working people bear all the costs of the commons and governance, while the wealthy corporate elite derive most of its benefits. 
And, as George H.W. Bush pointed out when he was president, this isn't just an American phenomenon. It's a New World Order. 
A cornerstone of the conservative movement to consolidate power in the hands of a wealthy corporate elite, the campaign to end corporate income taxes altogether - and leave the rest of us to pick up the entire tab for corporate use of our institutions and corporation despoliation of our commons - first picked up steam when Reagan came to power in 1980. 
The December 1, 2004 Washington Times article, titled "End Corporate Income Tax," reflects a powerful and growing movement not just in the United States but across the world. So-called "free trade" agreements and supranational institutions like the WTO have given multinational corporations control of the economic lives of nations that were previously democracies. Holland, Ireland, Germany, Portugal, Belgium - the list goes on and on. 
In a feudal state, as Bloch reminds us, the nobles need not pay taxes. 
And as Mussolini told us, the newest form of feudalism has been reinvented and renamed. He called it "fascism" - a word that was defined by The American Heritage Dictionary (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983) as "fas-cism (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." 
We are quickly shifting toward a corporate-run state in countries all over the world. It appears "free" and even allows elections, albeit they are only among candidates funded and approved by corporate powers, held on voting machines owned by those corporate powers, and marketed in media owned by those corporate powers. 
But this bears little resemblance to the democratic republic envisioned by our nation's Founders. 
If our elected representatives - and those of other "free" nations - don't quickly wake up and reverse course, we will soon again be in a feudal world. And it's up to us - We the People - to help them awaken.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> that doesn't jibe with what you want (rich pay all and middle/poor pay nothing).  Still waiting for an explanation as to why that's 'fair' btw.
> 
> I am all for making the tax code simpler to the point where loopholes (kinda of a misnomer) don't exist.  I think you are not being entirely honest.  You want the tax cuts to expire for the rich only, because the Bush tax cuts really do expire, then EVERYONE's taxes go up.



Do you agree with this guy?

In May of 2001 Bush administration Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill suggested there should be no corporate income tax whatsoever. 


I, along with Thom Hartmann, believe this was the opening salvo in a very real war to have working people bear all the costs of the commons and governance, while the wealthy corporate elite derive most of its benefits.

And you don't think there isn't class warfare going on?  The GOP got control in 2000 and whether you want to admit it or not, have passed tax laws that benefit them but hurt America.  If you don't think so, just turn on the news.   

What makes you think the tax scheme before Reagan was unfair?  You say what I'm proposing is unfair.  Please justify that lowering corporate tax rates in the 80's was needed/necessary or the right thing to do.  

I don't think sending manufacturing overseas was the right thing to do either.  What if China/Japan attacks us again?  Will we have Honda/Toyota build our bombs/tanks/ships?  

But the GOP gave corporate America tax breaks to send jobs overseas, in the name of maximizing profits.  

Is there a point where you think they can go too far?  

I at least understand your position.  Of course it isn't "fair" to a rich person for them to pay all of the taxes, but then it isn't fair that some people die because they can't afford aids medicine.  And it isn't fair that some people go hungry while other people throw away food.  Life isn't fair.  

It may not be "fair", but it's right.  The rich will get richer off of us.  

And since the rich fucked up the economy/home values/our 401k's/inflation, it is only fair that THEY pay to fix what they broke and for the next 20 years, we should pay zero taxes and that will help us retire with some money in our 401K's, and maybe give our homes time to gain some value.

Ok, I just went off on a tangent right at the end, because the more I think about your "it isn't fair" argument, the more I want to puke.  

Or do you want to go back to the times when 95% of the populis was working poor/peasants and the handful of Nobles own everything.

And then tell us it isn't right to revolt against these feudal lords.  

Again, I think you are have house slave mentality.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> that doesn't jibe with what you want (rich pay all and middle/poor pay nothing).  Still waiting for an explanation as to why that's 'fair' btw.
> 
> if you want people to start addressing your points, then it also falls on you to actuall respond to what is written so a conversation can be had.  I realize i am long winded but it isnt a ton of work to use the quote function like the rest of us to respond to specific points.
> 
> 
> I am all for making the tax code simpler to the point where loopholes (kinda of a misnomer) don't exist.  I think you are not being entirely honest.  You want the tax cuts to expire for the rich only, because the Bush tax cuts really do expire, then EVERYONE's taxes go up.




Thom wrote:  Once the rich and powerful gain control of the government, they turn it upon itself, usually first eliminating its taxation process as it applies to themselves.

And that makes me think of this story:

Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax
GAO Study Also Finds 68% Of Foreign Companies In U.S. Avoid Corporate Taxes

Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax, GAO Study Also Finds 68% Of Foreign Companies In U.S. Avoid Corporate Taxes - CBS News


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> ThomHartmann.com - Nobles Need Not Pay Taxes
> 
> Once the rich and powerful gain control of the government, they turn it upon itself, usually first eliminating its taxation process as it applies to themselves.
> "General Electric Co., for example, reported paying an effective tax rate of 19% last year on world-wide income, compared with 26% in 2003."
> Corporations are taxed because they use public services, and are therefore expected to help pay for them - the same as citizens.
> Corporations make use of a work force educated in public schools paid for with tax dollars. They use roads and highways paid for with tax dollars. They use water, sewer, and power and communications rights-of-way paid for with taxes. They demand the same protection from fire and police departments as everybody else, and enjoy the benefits of national sovereignty and the stability provided by the military and institutions like NATO and the United Nations, the same as all residents of democratic nations.
> In fact, corporations are heavier users of taxpayer-provided services and institutions than are average citizens. Taxes pay for our court systems, which are most heavily used by corporations to enforce contracts. Taxes pay for our Treasury Department and other governmental institutions which maintain a stable currency essential to corporate activity. Taxes pay for our regulation of corporate activity, from assuring safety in the workplace to a pure food and drug supply to limiting toxic emissions.
> Under George W. Bush, the burden of cleaning up toxic wastes produced by corporate activity has largely shifted from polluter-funded Superfund and other programs to taxpayer-funded cleanups (as he did in Texas as governor there before becoming President).
> Every year, millions of cases of cancer, emphysema, neurological disorders, and other conditions caused by corporate pollution are paid for in whole or in part by government funded programs from Medicare to Medicaid to government subsidies of hospitals, universities, and research institutions funded by tax dollars through the NIH and NIMH.
> Because it's well understood that corporations use our tax-funded institutions at least as heavily as do citizens, they've traditionally been taxed at similar rates. For example, the top corporate tax rate in the US was 48% during the Carter administration, down from the a peak of 53% during the Eisenhower and Kennedy years.
> Today it stands at 35%, but in May of 2001 Bush administration Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill suggested there should be no corporate income tax whatsoever. This was the opening salvo in a very real war to have working people bear all the costs of the commons and governance, while the wealthy corporate elite derive most of its benefits.
> And, as George H.W. Bush pointed out when he was president, this isn't just an American phenomenon. It's a New World Order.
> A cornerstone of the conservative movement to consolidate power in the hands of a wealthy corporate elite, the campaign to end corporate income taxes altogether - and leave the rest of us to pick up the entire tab for corporate use of our institutions and corporation despoliation of our commons - first picked up steam when Reagan came to power in 1980.
> The December 1, 2004 Washington Times article, titled "End Corporate Income Tax," reflects a powerful and growing movement not just in the United States but across the world. So-called "free trade" agreements and supranational institutions like the WTO have given multinational corporations control of the economic lives of nations that were previously democracies. Holland, Ireland, Germany, Portugal, Belgium - the list goes on and on.
> In a feudal state, as Bloch reminds us, the nobles need not pay taxes.
> And as Mussolini told us, the newest form of feudalism has been reinvented and renamed. He called it "fascism" - a word that was defined by The American Heritage Dictionary (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983) as "fas-cism (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
> We are quickly shifting toward a corporate-run state in countries all over the world. It appears "free" and even allows elections, albeit they are only among candidates funded and approved by corporate powers, held on voting machines owned by those corporate powers, and marketed in media owned by those corporate powers.
> But this bears little resemblance to the democratic republic envisioned by our nation's Founders.
> If our elected representatives - and those of other "free" nations - don't quickly wake up and reverse course, we will soon again be in a feudal world. And it's up to us - We the People - to help them awaken.



You know what bobo, I will actually buy that argument.  One minor problem.  It doesn't refute mine.  It doesn't change the fact that if corporations are required to pay more taxes it makes it more difficult for them to put more people to work.  And it actually contradicts yours.  Mr. Hartman writes a convincing article about distribution of tax burden based on usage of tax provided services.  He isn't advocating that one group pay everything and another pay nothing despite the fact that both use said services to one extent or another.

It also isn't what I was talking about in the first place.  My original focus was on the behaviors and attitudes behind rich and poor individuals.  And in reality it is also what you were talking about.  You didn't differenitate 'rich' in terms of people or corporations.  Presumably rich peopel aren't using the roads any more or less then the middle class or poor and yet for some inexplicable reason you feel the rich person should have to pay for said roads and not the middle/poor class.

This house slave mentality is ridiculous and at the very leat completely backwards.  I am not the one claiming victim status or letting others dictate to me or expecting someone else to facilitate my ends.  How that makes me a slave is beyond me.  YOU are the one behaving like a slave bobo, you are the one claiming the condition you're in is someone elses fault, you are the one who won't look to yourself for the answers.  Slaves do not have power, nor do victims.  When you claimed victim status you gave up your power willingly and YOU became the slave of your own fucked up attitudes and beliefs, not me.


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> You know what bobo, I will actually buy that argument.  One minor problem.  It doesn't refute mine.  It doesn't change the fact that if corporations are required to pay more taxes it makes it more difficult for them to put more people to work.  And it actually contradicts yours.  Mr. Hartman writes a convincing article about distribution of tax burden based on usage of tax provided services.  He isn't advocating that one group pay everything and another pay nothing despite the fact that both use said services to one extent or another.
> 
> It also isn't what I was talking about in the first place.  My original focus was on the behaviors and attitudes behind rich and poor individuals.  And in reality it is also what you were talking about.  You didn't differenitate 'rich' in terms of people or corporations.  Presumably rich peopel aren't using the roads any more or less then the middle class or poor and yet for some inexplicable reason you feel the rich person should have to pay for said roads and not the middle/poor class.
> 
> This house slave mentality is ridiculous and at the very leat completely backwards.  I am not the one claiming victim status or letting others dictate to me or expecting someone else to facilitate my ends.  How that makes me a slave is beyond me.  YOU are the one behaving like a slave bobo, you are the one claiming the condition you're in is someone elses fault, you are the one who won't look to yourself for the answers.  Slaves do not have power, nor do victims.  When you claimed victim status you gave up your power willingly and YOU became the slave of your own fucked up attitudes and beliefs, not me.



Companies in the 90's paid more taxes than they do now and they somehow figured out a way to grow and hire more people.    

But yes, it is or can be true that if you raise a corporations costs, it might affect their ability to hire more people.  IE Joe the Plumber.  But, if business/the economy is good, they'll hire to make more sales and they won't let taxes stop them.  If taxes are stopping them, then their business is failing really.

Ok, and when I say $40K people should pay NOTHING and the rich should pay everything, I was exaggerating.  I also don't think a guy that makes a million should be taxed 50% either.  That would be wrong/unfair/too much.

But I would still rather be the guy taking home $500K than I would be the guy making $40k and not paying any taxes. 

I found these quotes from Republicans about what Bill Clinton would do to the economy:

"Clearly, this is a job-killer in the short-run. The impact 
on job creation is going to be devastating."
-Rep. Dick Armey, (Republican, Texas)

"The tax increase will.lead to a recession.and will actually 
increase the deficit."
-Rep. Newt Gingrich (Republican, Georgia)

"I will make you this bet. I am willing to risk the mortgage 
on it.the deficit will be up; unemployment will be up; in my 
judgment, inflation will be up."
-Sen. Robert Packwood (Republican, Oregon)

"The deficit four years from today will be higher than it is 
today, not lower."
-Sen. Phil Gramm (Republican, Texas)

"The President promised a middle-class tax cut, yet he and 
his party imposed the largest tax increase in American 
history. We hope his higher taxes will not cut short the 
economic recovery and declining interest rates he inherited. 
Instead of stifling growth through higher taxes and 
increased government regulations, Republicans would take 
America in a different direction."
-Sen. Robert Dole (Republican, Kansas)

And, I am where I am in life because of hard work, because I took the time to graduate college and because of my talents.  I'm not a fucking loser you know?  I just see how corporations are getting more from us and paying  us less.  I saw it coming before it happened and now I can say I told you so.  I work with 50 people, who will all tell you the company is demanding more and paying less for it.  And I know it's happening all across the country, in every industry/department.  IT people are in high demand, yet still IBM cut their pay 15%.  What's that all about?  Supply and demand suggests that they should be able to go out and get another job tomorrow, for more money.  Yet wages are not going up, not even for them.  They sent jobs overseas and flooded the market with illegals, so there are more people who need jobs than there are jobs.  That's lowering wages.  Maybe we should kick the illegals out?  

You know what I kick myself over?  I could have easily got a job with Ford right out of highschool and I'd be getting a big fat buyout for $100k and I'd have a 20 year pension.  I'm KICKING MYSELF!!!  I should have went that route.  LOL.  

PS.  Yes, often times I interchange rich people and corporations.  I usually mean corporations.  Typically, most rich people are corporations, no?  Remember Kerry said Bush had a lumber company and he used it for tax write offs?  So many times I mean Corporations but sometimes I mean super rich people too.  Like if you are willed $20 million dollars, I think you should pay a death tax of 50% on that.

ThomHartmann.com - How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Thom & I both believe that it is bullshit to charge a farmers son the death penalty on a farm worth $5 million dollars.  That person should not pay the death tax at all.  It should only be meant for the super rich.  For example, Paris Hilton?  Let's say she enherits $20 million dollars.  Read Thom's article on why she should be subject to a death tax.


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> And, I am where I am in life because of hard work, because I took the time to graduate college and because of my talents.  I'm not a fucking loser you know?  I just see how corporations are getting more from us and paying  us less.  I saw it coming before it happened and now I can say I told you so.  I work with 50 people, who will all tell you the company is demanding more and paying less for it.  And I know it's happening all across the country, in every industry/department.  IT people are in high demand, yet still IBM cut their pay 15%.  What's that all about?  Supply and demand suggests that they should be able to go out and get another job tomorrow, for more money.  Yet wages are not going up, not even for them.  They sent jobs overseas and flooded the market with illegals, so there are more people who need jobs than there are jobs.  That's lowering wages.  Maybe we should kick the illegals out?
> 
> You know what I kick myself over?  I could have easily got a job with Ford right out of highschool and I'd be getting a big fat buyout for $100k and I'd have a 20 year pension.  I'm KICKING MYSELF!!!  I should have went that route.  LOL.



What it's about is basic economics and how the economic landscape of this country is changing in a global economy and how our cultural behaviors have changed.  As others have alluded to several times the wages of places like the big 3 are simply out of line.  In a free market the value of something is based on things like demand and scarcity.  Finding a person that can be trained in a day to put piece x on piece y is not a scarce skill and thus doesn't warrant the exhorbitant amount that the big 3 (really forced by the unions) pay them. 

We switched from a predominantly manufacturing based economy to a predominantly service based economy.  Ultimately the citizens of this country will be better served learning that they need to adapt to the changing landscape rather then waiting for government to throw life jackets to peopel on ships that are gonna sink anyway.



sealybobo said:


> PS.  Yes, often times I interchange rich people and corporations.  I usually mean corporations.  Typically, most rich people are corporations, no?  Remember Kerry said Bush had a lumber company and he used it for tax write offs?  So many times I mean Corporations but sometimes I mean super rich people too.  Like if you are willed $20 million dollars, I think you should pay a death tax of 50% on that.



Actually no that isn't really correct.  In the eyes of the law a business is considered it's own enitity. I was taught think of it like another person.  It has it's own income, seperate from whomever the owner is, it's own tax liability seperate from the owner, etc.  The revenue of the business is not tied to the income of the indivudual in terms of taxes. 

And why should I owe the government something when I keel over? You're becoming more reasonable, but you still seem to be stuck on this illogical position that the rich should pay taxes just because their rich.  If we really want to talk about real fairness, the fairest way to tax people should be based the extent to which the use the services taxes provide.  that would be fair, pretty impossible, but that's as fair a system as you can get. 

Shouldn't the argument be that government should be working within a budget that renders asanine crap like a death tax unneccessary?  Rather than debating who should pay and whether their should be such a tax at all?


----------



## sealybobo

Bern80 said:


> This house slave mentality is ridiculous and at the very leat completely backwards.  I am not the one claiming victim status or letting others dictate to me or expecting someone else to facilitate my ends.  How that makes me a slave is beyond me.  YOU are the one behaving like a slave bobo, you are the one claiming the condition you're in is someone elses fault, you are the one who won't look to yourself for the answers.  Slaves do not have power, nor do victims.  When you claimed victim status you gave up your power willingly and YOU became the slave of your own fucked up attitudes and beliefs, not me.



When I say house slave, I mean a person who really isn't a HAVE, but has it better than the HAVE NOTS, so they don't want to rock the boat.  So let's say you made $70k a year and everyone else at your company made $40k, and the company cut all of your pay by $10K.  You might not want to buck the system because you still make $60k, where the people who now make $30k are pissed.  

And no, a house slave never complains.  He tells the field slaves that they shouldn't complain because they too don't know how good they got it.  

PS.  I was reading the news and had some questions for you.  As far as what we were talking about before, I think I get where you are coming from, and I hope you realize that I'm not being a victim.  I'm not failing and blaming someone else.  I'm actually succeeding and seeing that "the man" is making me work more for less.  Now you may not agree with me because you don't think they crashed this economy on purpose, but maybe you haven't read Naomi Klein's Disaster Capitalism or Shock Doctrine yet.  Or maybe you don't realize the same thing they super rich are doing now is the same thing they did during the Great Depression and Guilded Age.  It sure seems like this is by design.  And only the super duper rich are benefitting from it.  Even people that make $1 million a year are strugging/losing their jobs/going bankrupt.  I guess you could make an argument that they should have saved more and they should have seen it coming.

And you would be right.  But, when I see Bush/Delay policies caused this financial mess, I'm not being a victim by pointing it out.  

Anyways, here's the news and my comments:

Jobless claims remain at recessionary levels, Americans cut back on their spending by the largest amount since the 2001 terrorist attacks, orders to U.S. factories plummeted and new-home sales fell to the lowest level in nearly 18 years. 
(YOU GUYS SAY AMERICANS SPEND TOO MUCH, BUT YOU SEE THE ECONOMY FALLS APART IF WE DONT.  SO DO YOU WANT TO CUT OUR PAY AND TELL US TO TIGHTEN UP OR DO YOU WANT TO PAY US MORE AND ENCOURAGE US TO GO OUT AND SPEND?)
Meanwhile, the Commerce Department reported that consumer spending plunged by 1 percent in October, even worse than the 0.9 percent decline that had been expected. Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of total economic activity.
(THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE PAID MORE NOT LESS)
(AND THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD NOT SEND MANUFACTURING OVERSEAS)

Orders to U.S. factories for big-ticket manufactured goods also plunged last month by the largest amount in two years. Orders for durable goods dropped by 6.2 percent, more than double the decline economists expected. The Commerce Department report showed widespread declines throughout manufacturing led by decreases in autos and airplanes. 
(SO SHOULD WE CONTINUE TO SEND JOBS OVERSEAS SO WE CAN GET THERE CHEAPER PRODUCTS?  EVEN IF NO ONE IN AMERICA CAN BUY THEM BECAUSE WE ARENT MAKING ANY MONEY?  IS IT EVERYONES FAULT THAT THEY ARENT MAKING ANY MONEY?  IS IT THE GUY SELLING AMERICAN MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS FAULT ALL HIS CUSTOMERS ARE BUYING FROM CHINA?)


----------



## Bern80

sealybobo said:


> When I say house slave, I mean a person who really isn't a HAVE, but has it better than the HAVE NOTS, so they don't want to rock the boat.  So let's say you made $70k a year and everyone else at your company made $40k, and the company cut all of your pay by $10K.  You might not want to buck the system because you still make $60k, where the people who now make $30k are pissed.
> 
> And no, a house slave never complains.  He tells the field slaves that they shouldn't complain because they too don't know how good they got it.
> 
> PS.  I was reading the news and had some questions for you.  As far as what we were talking about before, I think I get where you are coming from, and I hope you realize that I'm not being a victim.  I'm not failing and blaming someone else.  I'm actually succeeding and seeing that "the man" is making me work more for less.  Now you may not agree with me because you don't think they crashed this economy on purpose, but maybe you haven't read Naomi Klein's Disaster Capitalism or Shock Doctrine yet.  Or maybe you don't realize the same thing they super rich are doing now is the same thing they did during the Great Depression and Guilded Age.  It sure seems like this is by design.  And only the super duper rich are benefitting from it.  Even people that make $1 million a year are strugging/losing their jobs/going bankrupt.  I guess you could make an argument that they should have saved more and they should have seen it coming.
> 
> And you would be right.  But, when I see Bush/Delay policies caused this financial mess, I'm not being a victim by pointing it out.
> 
> Anyways, here's the news and my comments:
> 
> Jobless claims remain at recessionary levels, Americans cut back on their spending by the largest amount since the 2001 terrorist attacks, orders to U.S. factories plummeted and new-home sales fell to the lowest level in nearly 18 years.
> (YOU GUYS SAY AMERICANS SPEND TOO MUCH, BUT YOU SEE THE ECONOMY FALLS APART IF WE DONT.  SO DO YOU WANT TO CUT OUR PAY AND TELL US TO TIGHTEN UP OR DO YOU WANT TO PAY US MORE AND ENCOURAGE US TO GO OUT AND SPEND?)
> Meanwhile, the Commerce Department reported that consumer spending plunged by 1 percent in October, even worse than the 0.9 percent decline that had been expected. Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of total economic activity.
> (THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO BE PAID MORE NOT LESS)
> (AND THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD NOT SEND MANUFACTURING OVERSEAS)
> 
> Orders to U.S. factories for big-ticket manufactured goods also plunged last month by the largest amount in two years. Orders for durable goods dropped by 6.2 percent, more than double the decline economists expected. The Commerce Department report showed widespread declines throughout manufacturing led by decreases in autos and airplanes.
> (SO SHOULD WE CONTINUE TO SEND JOBS OVERSEAS SO WE CAN GET THERE CHEAPER PRODUCTS?  EVEN IF NO ONE IN AMERICA CAN BUY THEM BECAUSE WE ARENT MAKING ANY MONEY?  IS IT EVERYONES FAULT THAT THEY ARENT MAKING ANY MONEY?  IS IT THE GUY SELLING AMERICAN MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS FAULT ALL HIS CUSTOMERS ARE BUYING FROM CHINA?)



We should not be paid more just because.  You want to really throw this economy out of whack and open the door to higher inflation, we'll do it your way and you can watch prices on everything sky rocket.  The value of labor needs to based on something.  Right now it's based on the free market (for the most part).  That's the way basic supply and demand work.  If everyone has more money, businesses know then that people have more disposable income which means they know they can charge more for their products.  That's how a market works.  You want this new system, I suggest you think about the ramifications of just giving people more money just because, and think about it A LOT.

So long as we're suggesting reading material I will suggest a few to you:

Rich Dad/Poor Dad
The Millionaire Next Door
The 4 Hour Work Week


Start with the first two.  When you take a step back after reading your list and my list you will notice one major difference.  Your books blame externalties for people's problems.  Most of the stuff on my list is void of a politcal slant, or any external blame.  The one thing I figured out (10 years faster than you) is that their is no surer way to fail then with the atittude you have.  Blaming others does not move you forward.  Attempting to point out all these external excuses will not move you forward. Not only do you need to acknowledge the things you have control of and the things you have or haven't done, but they need to be the FIRST things you examine when you start complaining about your financial condition.  You have failed at that at every turn.  Your first instinct is to blame something else for the plight of yourself and others.  If you look at yourself first, heck, maybe you will find this really isn't your fault, but it's not very likely.


----------

