Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So letting the people who actually DO the work have more of a share is "Marxist"?
Interesting. I guess most sensible people are Marxists, then.
When the mechanism for it is having government take it from the people who earned, yes, that is Marxism.
Marxists are imbeciles and thugs.
Where would you get the idiotic idea that just because one comes from a poor family hed be a mediocre student? Not all worthy students can win a scholarship. And I see no better use of tax dollars than to help break the cycle of poverty.It isn't an obstacle. All they have to do is study hard and any kid can get a scholarship. Of course, you want the taxpayers to pay for mediocre students to go to college.
Sorry, but I see no reason why I should have to pay for that.
Oh my goodness....bank president
Nothing like having parents who were Presidents, Senators and Admirals like Bush, Romney and McCain
Republicans are elitists...Obama came from working class stock
ROFL! Liberals simply refuse to admit reality. A bank president is "working class stock?" Can you hear everyone laughing at you?
That's a bank vice president in Hawaii.......not exactly a fast track to fame and fortune
As opposed to having a daddy who was Vice President and President. Talk about elitist
Really? Name one.
At it's very base, government provides security and a solid judicial environment that allows for trusted markets.
So you'd have to find an American that went to a country like Somalia..and made his fortune there.
So the fact that government kept people from robbing you means the government is entitled to rob you?
Somalia has a government. It's more along the lines of the kind of government liberals are trying to implement here: A class of robbers and thieves who take whatever they want.
Where would you get the idiotic idea that just because one comes from a poor family hed be a mediocre student? Not all worthy students can win a scholarship. And I see no better use of tax dollars than to help break the cycle of poverty.It isn't an obstacle. All they have to do is study hard and any kid can get a scholarship. Of course, you want the taxpayers to pay for mediocre students to go to college.
Sorry, but I see no reason why I should have to pay for that.
This bears repeating.
No, Class Warfare is when someone who was born wealthy goes into a company like GST or AmPad and puts a bunch of working stiff out of good paying jobs so that his company can make a profit
To keep running the company into bankruptcy just so these working stiffs could have a good paying job is not only a form of welfare, it is so counter productive that it will kill the company. So what if EVERYONE loses their jobs and the company folds. Liberals want all those evil companies dead and everyone unemployed because the company went under.
If a company does not make a profit, it is closed. Everyone is let go, the assets are sold off and it's over. That's okay. The goal is that companies should be deprived of profits. Even if it kills them.
Sometimes there is nothing to be done, all the financial surgery in the world won't save tht failure. It goes off to corporate death. Sometimes cutting off deadwood increases efficiency and productivity. The company grows. It hires three times the number of people it had to let go while it healed from the damage.
Mitt Romney has a lot to be proud of in turning companies around. He has a lot to be proud of in knowing what cuts to make and where. Just like any surgeon who amputates a diseased leg. This is a reason to vote for him, not to vote for obaabaa.
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas is an example of a person who was raised in a disadvantaged environment.Obama was raised by a single mother and worked his way up to be president
Now candidates like George Bush and Mitt Romney ARE elitist snobs who went to prep schools and had political connections
He was raised by his grandmother who was a bank president, and he went to a private college prep school. The image of Obama as some disadvantaged kid couldn't possibly be more hysterical.
He took it one step further. He refused the liberal gifting of Affirmative Action and racial set asides and slugged it out on his own merits.
"When you talk about affirmative action programs you talk about the benefits and the costs." says Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a group critical of racial preferences. "Thomas can talk about costs with a credibility you can't have if you are not a supposed beneficiary of affirmative action."
When Thomas applied to Yale Law School, his race was taken into consideration. He wrote in his book, "I asked Yale to take that fact into account when I applied, not thinking that there might be anything wrong with doing so."
'Silent' Justice Outspoken on Affirmative Action - ABC News
When the mechanism for it is having government take it from the people who earned, yes, that is Marxism.
Marxists are imbeciles and thugs.
But that's the problem, who "earned" it? the guy actually on the factory floor putting the item together getting a pittance, or the investor who thought keeping the factory open instead of selling off the assets?
Really? Name one.
At it's very base, government provides security and a solid judicial environment that allows for trusted markets.
So you'd have to find an American that went to a country like Somalia..and made his fortune there.
So the fact that government kept people from robbing you means the government is entitled to rob you?
Somalia has a government. It's more along the lines of the kind of government liberals are trying to implement here: A class of robbers and thieves who take whatever they want.
The challenge was pretty simple. If you are not up to it..just say so.
Otherwise you look foolish and silly. As you do here.
When the mechanism for it is having government take it from the people who earned, yes, that is Marxism.
Marxists are imbeciles and thugs.
But that's the problem, who "earned" it? the guy actually on the factory floor putting the item together getting a pittance, or the investor who thought keeping the factory open instead of selling off the assets?
They guy who earned it is the one who received through a voluntary exchange. Any other definition of "earn" is rooted in robbery and plunder.
This bears repeating.
No, Class Warfare is when someone who was born wealthy goes into a company like GST or AmPad and puts a bunch of working stiff out of good paying jobs so that his company can make a profit
To keep running the company into bankruptcy just so these working stiffs could have a good paying job is not only a form of welfare, it is so counter productive that it will kill the company. So what if EVERYONE loses their jobs and the company folds. Liberals want all those evil companies dead and everyone unemployed because the company went under.
If a company does not make a profit, it is closed. Everyone is let go, the assets are sold off and it's over. That's okay. The goal is that companies should be deprived of profits. Even if it kills them.
Sometimes there is nothing to be done, all the financial surgery in the world won't save tht failure. It goes off to corporate death. Sometimes cutting off deadwood increases efficiency and productivity. The company grows. It hires three times the number of people it had to let go while it healed from the damage.
Mitt Romney has a lot to be proud of in turning companies around. He has a lot to be proud of in knowing what cuts to make and where. Just like any surgeon who amputates a diseased leg. This is a reason to vote for him, not to vote for obaabaa.
The problem was, these companies didn't "make a profit", they went under.
AmPad is instructive. When Mittens and his boys went in there, the company was selling at $35.00 a share and had 11 million in debt. When they were done, they laid hundreds of people off, the company declared bankruptcy after being saddled with 400 million dollars of debt from other Bain adventures, and the stock was reduced to junk bond status. They managed to pay them millions in "management fees" for this brilliance, though.
Democrats target Mitt Romney’s role concerning job cuts while at Bain - Political Intelligence - A national political and campaign blog from The Boston Globe - Boston.com
Known as the Ampad Holding Corporation, the company was purchased in 1986 by the Mead Corporation. In 1992, the newly formed holding company American Pad & Paper and Bain Capital purchased the subsidiary from Mead. Upon its formation, American Pad & Paper consolidated its 13 manufacturing and distribution facilities into six in 21 locations in the US. At the time, the company had more than 3,700,000 square feet (340,000 m2) of production and warehouse space in California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.[4]
The company continued to enjoy 53 percent compound annual growth in net sales, which increased from $8.8 million in 1992 to $200.5 million in 1996, when the company became publicly traded. The company made a number of acquisitions, including writing products company SCM in July 1994, brand names from the American Trading and Production Corporation in August 1995, WR Acquisition and the Williamhouse-Regency Division of Delaware, Inc. in October, 1995, Niagara Envelope Company, Inc. in 1996, and Shade/Allied, Inc. in February 1997.[4]
So the fact that government kept people from robbing you means the government is entitled to rob you?
Somalia has a government. It's more along the lines of the kind of government liberals are trying to implement here: A class of robbers and thieves who take whatever they want.
The challenge was pretty simple. If you are not up to it..just say so.
Otherwise you look foolish and silly. As you do here.
Yeah...the government of Somolia wants all of their kids to have the chance to go to college?
At no point has bripat ever looked more foolish.
The challenge was pretty simple. If you are not up to it..just say so.
Otherwise you look foolish and silly. As you do here.
Yeah...the government of Somolia wants all of their kids to have the chance to go to college?
At no point has bripat ever looked more foolish.
Yes and no. From his perspective, that of a Monarchist in love with Dynastic rule, Somalia is sort of left leaning.
His preference would have been that America lose it's revolution and we still be living under the rule of royalty.
But watcha gonna do?
But that's the problem, who "earned" it? the guy actually on the factory floor putting the item together getting a pittance, or the investor who thought keeping the factory open instead of selling off the assets?
They guy who earned it is the one who received through a voluntary exchange. Any other definition of "earn" is rooted in robbery and plunder.
Voluntary implies that there is an equal playing field.
The real problem here is that we don't have what we had when I was growing up, and that was working folks banding together and excercising real power. You didn't cross a picket line. You didn't patronize a business that didn't play fair with it's employees.
Now we reward these people, bail them out when they fuck up, and wonder why we have so many problems.
I could call the government of Somolia a lot of things...but "liberal" isn't one of them.
Your explanation of the facts doesn't seem to be accurate. The company grew rapidly after it was purchased by Bain Capital. Of course, when do liberals ever post facts?
Ampad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1992, Bain Capital acquired American Pad & Paper, or Ampad, from Mead Corp., embarking on a ''roll-up strategy'' in which a firm buys up similar companies in the same industry in order to expand revenues and cut costs.
Through Ampad, Bain bought several other office supply makers, borrowing heavily each time. By 1999, Ampad's debt reached nearly $400 million, up from $11 million in 1993, according to government filings.
Sales grew, too - for a while. But by the late 1990s, foreign competition and increased buying power by superstores like Bain-funded Staples sliced Ampad's revenues.
The result: Ampad couldn't pay its debts and plunged into bankruptcy. Workers lost jobs and stockholders were left with worthless shares.
Bain Capital, however, made money - and lots of it. The firm put just $5 million into the deal, but realized big returns in short order. In 1995, several months after shuttering a plant in Indiana and firing roughly 200 workers, Bain Capital borrowed more money to have Ampad buy yet another company, and pay Bain and its investors more than $60 million - in addition to fees for arranging the deal.
Bain Capital took millions more out of Ampad by charging it $2 million a year in management fees, plus additional fees for each Ampad acquisition. In 1995 alone, Ampad paid Bain at least $7 million. The next year, when Ampad began selling shares on public stock exchanges, Bain Capital grabbed another $2 million fee for arranging the initial public offering - on top of the $45 million to $50 million Bain reaped by selling some of its shares.
Bain Capital didn't escape Ampad's eventual bankruptcy unscathed. It held about one-third of Ampad's shares, which became worthless. But while as many as 185 workers near Buffalo lost jobs in a 1999 plant closing, Bain Capital and its investors ultimately made more than $100 million on the deal.
The real problem here is that we don't have what we had when I was growing up, and that was working folks banding together and excercising real power. You didn't cross a picket line. You didn't patronize a business that didn't play fair with it's employees.
That's just pure horseshit. What you had is a federal government that looked the other way when union thugs beat up anyone who crossed a picket line.
Your explanation of the facts doesn't seem to be accurate. The company grew rapidly after it was purchased by Bain Capital. Of course, when do liberals ever post facts?
Ampad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Guy, you need to do some real research... AmPad was looted by Bain.
They went bankrupt, while Bain walked out with a $50 million dollar profit.
Reaping profit in study, sweat - The Boston Globe
In 1992, Bain Capital acquired American Pad & Paper, or Ampad, from Mead Corp., embarking on a ''roll-up strategy'' in which a firm buys up similar companies in the same industry in order to expand revenues and cut costs.
Through Ampad, Bain bought several other office supply makers, borrowing heavily each time. By 1999, Ampad's debt reached nearly $400 million, up from $11 million in 1993, according to government filings.
Sales grew, too - for a while. But by the late 1990s, foreign competition and increased buying power by superstores like Bain-funded Staples sliced Ampad's revenues.
The result: Ampad couldn't pay its debts and plunged into bankruptcy. Workers lost jobs and stockholders were left with worthless shares.
Bain Capital, however, made money - and lots of it. The firm put just $5 million into the deal, but realized big returns in short order. In 1995, several months after shuttering a plant in Indiana and firing roughly 200 workers, Bain Capital borrowed more money to have Ampad buy yet another company, and pay Bain and its investors more than $60 million - in addition to fees for arranging the deal.
Bain Capital took millions more out of Ampad by charging it $2 million a year in management fees, plus additional fees for each Ampad acquisition. In 1995 alone, Ampad paid Bain at least $7 million. The next year, when Ampad began selling shares on public stock exchanges, Bain Capital grabbed another $2 million fee for arranging the initial public offering - on top of the $45 million to $50 million Bain reaped by selling some of its shares.
Bain Capital didn't escape Ampad's eventual bankruptcy unscathed. It held about one-third of Ampad's shares, which became worthless. But while as many as 185 workers near Buffalo lost jobs in a 1999 plant closing, Bain Capital and its investors ultimately made more than $100 million on the deal.
Yes and no. From his perspective, that of a Monarchist in love with Dynastic rule, Somalia is sort of left leaning.
His preference would have been that America lose it's revolution and we still be living under the rule of royalty.
But watcha gonna do?
