Evil corporations sit on $trillions while millions remain unemployed!

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Nov 23, 2011
34,612
2,153
1,100
Actually, if corporate America is sitting on money that they could invest or spend wisely to make money and create jobs then others would see the opportunity too and make the money themselves. This is the exact nature of capitalism.

The reality, however, is that globalization and Obama's idiotic anti-business liberal policies have left far fewer domestic opportunities for American corporations.

Obama's biggest liberal socialist blunder is, of course, Obamacare.
 
Last edited:
I'm still waiting to hear liberals tell me exactly what the working class is supposed to do to make a living after they teach those evil corporations a lesson.
 
I'm still waiting to hear liberals tell me exactly what the working class is supposed to do to make a living after they teach those evil corporations a lesson.

Yes, Obama, a typical liberal, hates corporations, by, for example, imposing the highest corporate tax in the world on them, yet he needs corporations for his long anticipated recovery from what he still imagines is Bush's recession.

It is no wonder that liberals seem to have psychological as well as intellectual problems.
 
Last edited:
Actually, if corporate America is sitting on money that they could invest or spend wisely to make money and create jobs then others would see the opportunity too and make the money themselves. This is the exact nature of capitalism.

The reality, however, is that globalization and Obama's idiotic anti-business liberal policies have left far fewer domestic opportunities for American corporations.

They were sitting on the money when George W. Bush was president. This is the way the economy looked after eight years of Bush, who had a Republican Congress for six of those years:

"On every major measurement, the Census Bureau report shows that the country lost ground during Bush's two terms. While Bush was in office, the median household income declined, poverty increased, childhood poverty increased even more, and the number of Americans without health insurance spiked. By contrast, the country's condition improved on each of those measures during Bill Clinton's two terms, often substantially."
Closing The Book On The Bush Legacy - Ronald Brownstein - The Atlantic
 
Obama's biggest liberal socialist blunder is, of course, Obamacare.

The President's health plan is nearly the same as the one Mitt Romney introduced in Massachusetts as governor. That plan is popular in Massachusetts.

PolitiFact | RomneyCare & ObamaCare: Can you tell the difference?

--------

(Reuters) - A large majority of Massachusetts residents are satisfied with the commonwealth's subsidized health plan, which has components similar to the Obama administration's federal plan, according to a poll released on Thursday.

The poll by Market Decisions, a research and consulting group, found that 84 percent of residents are satisfied with the Massachusetts plan, which requires most adults to have health insurance.
Massachusetts Health Care Plan Gets High Marks: Poll
 
I'm still waiting to hear liberals tell me exactly what the working class is supposed to do to make a living after they teach those evil corporations a lesson.

Yes, Obama, a typical liberal, hates corporations, by, for example, imposing the highest corporate tax in the world on them, yet he needs corporations for his long anticipated recovery from what he still imagines is Bush's recession.

It is no wonder that liberals seem to have psychological as well as intellectual problems.

Any corporation that decides to work with Obama is making the Aesop fable about the frog and the scorpion a truth adage.
 
Last edited:
Basically, the got to do exactly what they wanted during the Bush administration, and got major tax cuts to boot. What happened? The entire financial system collapsed and tax payers footed the bill after corporations fleeced them.

So, Obama comes in and proposes fixing things. He gets stopped in 2010 and his only option to stimulate the economy? Quantitative Easing. Which means dumping liquidity into the market, hoping, as I guess Bush did, that rich corporations would eventually stop sitting on the cash and start investing.

So far? Not so good.

Oh they are happy for the cash..alrighty.
 
Fund science, tech and infrastructure

The goal should be for corporation to innovate and grow jobs, but also for the government to invest into infrastructure + R @ D. Anyone that wants a pure capitalist or socialist system doesn't know what they're talking about.

I think going after personal wealth=ok
Going after corporation=bad

As corporations use that money to hire people and expand. Maybe the democrats aren't totally wrong with raising taxes on people making more then 500k per year??? It isn't so good to expect people making less then 30k per year as we generally want them to increase their wealth to go from the lower to middle classes.
 
Basically, the got to do exactly what they wanted during the Bush administration, and got major tax cuts to boot. What happened? The entire financial system collapsed and tax payers footed the bill after corporations fleeced them.

So, Obama comes in and proposes fixing things. He gets stopped in 2010 and his only option to stimulate the economy? Quantitative Easing. Which means dumping liquidity into the market, hoping, as I guess Bush did, that rich corporations would eventually stop sitting on the cash and start investing.

So far? Not so good.

Oh they are happy for the cash..alrighty.

We have to get those corporations wanting to spend that money...Best way to do that is to increase the consumer demand from the avg joe. ;)

The more product that is brought=the more R@d at the corporate level is being spent. This also means more jobs. ;)
 
Last edited:
Five years out, Bush is still having an effect?

policy.jpg
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTj9AcwkaKM]Wealth Inequality In America - YouTube[/ame]
 
There are perhaps ten thousand pages of government rules and regulations regulating the operation of corporations and the DOW. The freaking government regulates corporations and the freaking government is in charge. The same government that let Fannie Mae collapse and spent every dime in Social Security is in the business of regulating corporations today. Corporations ain't your enemy and Ronald Reagan said it best "government is not the solution, it's the problem".
 
Basically, the got to do exactly what they wanted during the Bush administration, and got major tax cuts to boot. What happened? The entire financial system collapsed and tax payers footed the bill after corporations fleeced them.

So, Obama comes in and proposes fixing things. He gets stopped in 2010 and his only option to stimulate the economy? Quantitative Easing. Which means dumping liquidity into the market, hoping, as I guess Bush did, that rich corporations would eventually stop sitting on the cash and start investing.

So far? Not so good.

Oh they are happy for the cash..alrighty.

We have to get those corporations wanting to spend that money...Best way to do that is to increase the consumer demand from the avg joe. ;)

The more product that is brought=the more R@d at the corporate level is being spent. This also means more jobs. ;)

There's the idea of using the candy and stick method of encouraging good behavior.

So far with American Corporations over the last 30 years or so?

It's been LOTS of candy.

:doubt:
 
Actually, if corporate America is sitting on money that they could invest or spend wisely to make money and create jobs then others would see the opportunity too and make the money themselves. This is the exact nature of capitalism.

The reality, however, is that globalization and Obama's idiotic anti-business liberal policies have left far fewer domestic opportunities for American corporations.

Obama's biggest liberal socialist blunder is, of course, Obamacare.
Corporations will not spend money in areas where there is no demand. That is the nature of capitalism. And they are sitting on over $6 trillion dollars in profits, but are not re-investing because there is no demand. And the reason there is no demand, is because the middle class doesn't have any money to spend. And the reason the middle class doesn't have any money to spend, is because the top 1% has rigged the system to where the middle class pays a higher tax rate than they do.
 
I will never understand why in the hell people think they need jobs. Work eight hours a day at anything you're remotely good at and you will make a living.

Jobs are for chumps.
 
I will never understand why in the hell people think they need jobs. Work eight hours a day at anything you're remotely good at and you will make a living.

Jobs are for chumps.
I was really good at park basketball, but never got paid to do that.

You can't make money at something that is not in demand.
 
Business tends to sit on cash when things are uncertain the Obama administration has increased rules and regulations on businesses in a major way there is big time uncertainty with the implementation of Obamacare which has increased with the employer mandate being pushed back a year. Now while the employer mandate will not effect huge corporations it does play into the overall uncertainty that is going on in the business community.
 
Jeebus the BS you hater dupes believe. EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is 12%. But thamks for the depression and mindless obstruction and fear mongering...
 

Forum List

Back
Top