So you want better paying jobs?

[Ernie S.]

We need to bring jobs back to America.

very simple:
end the liberal programs the forced them to leave:

liberal unions deficits and taxes
and then end the liberal war on the family and schools.

Do you understand??

The cheap labor market existed before unions were even a concept.
That's how stuff like the French Revolution came about.

Most nations do not practice Free Trade like the US does, especially with India and China; our businesses and Portfolio Conservatives are whores for selling out their fellow citizens.
We have legislation, written by corporations, that rewards corporations for leaving the US.
Corruption, plain and simple.
Any business that can't profit within the framework of Fair Trade doesn't deserve to exist.

One question: Why the hell do you call yourself "Independent"?

Because both the Democrats and Republicans have to tow their parties lines 100%, which I think is a croc.
I'm not going to be anybody's robot.
There's no thinking involved with ideologues.
I think both parties have good points and bad points, but when I have a discussion with knee-jerk Republicans, they say I'm a Democrat and when I try (notice the work "try") to have a discussion with knee-jerk Democrats, they say I'm a Republican.

I am a Conservative Republican. There is nothing knee jerk about me. From what I see of you, you are a Socialist that refuses to identify as Democrat because to still have that last shred of integrity.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

if capitalism failed us the total idiot illiterate liberal would say when that happened.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

.
There's no thinking involved with ideologues.

of course thats very very stupid.
Jesus Jefferson Aristotle and Hitler were all thinkers. The question is, do you have the IQ to know which thinking is correct or are you indeependent of the brains necessary to know which ideology is correct.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There are only 7 conditions to Ricardo's "Free Trade".
2 are being violated.
I presume you can differential between a condition being violated or adhered to.
But then again, you're a Nazi.

dear, cut the BS, if you have an argument against free trade please present it or admit with your silence or attempts to change the subject that you are independent of the brains necessary to do it.

 

[Antimatter]

I'm a Republican Capitalist, but that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Such as " So you want better paying jobs " or other related topics such as demand for labor, trade, taxes and other reasons why people don't get paid enough money. I wish people would stop bringing there ideology into this and keep it on topic.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I'm a Republican Capitalist, but that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. .

dear, Republicans have one idea about how to create better paying jobs and Democrats have another. Do you have the IQ to understand?

 

[Boss]

. The socialism of or War on Poverty, bails out Capitalism, everyday, dear.

100% stupid and liberal of course. The socialist "War on Poverty" didn't work in the USA while capitalism bailed out socialism in China and prevented another 60 million from slowly starving to death.

See why we say the liberal will be stupid!!

Only silly alleged conservatives say that, dear. We have some of the richest poor in the world due to socialism, not capitalism.

Not true. Any "socialist" program we have is the direct result of free market capitalist system.

There are countless examples of people who came from abject poverty to be financially successful... not a single example exists of anyone who got there because of welfare handouts.

Chairman Mao Zedong implemented your idea in China... a system devoid of capitalism, devoted to total socialism and communism. In fact, you socialist lefties would have loved it... he rounded up all the "evil greedy capitalists" and executed them. Took their property and wealth and installed his Socialist system. His country withdrew from capitalist trade on the world stage and became isolationists.

If ever there was a time in human history to prove that Socialism was greater, this was it. The results were-- it plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years. Millions upon millions starved to death. As the people who sparked this revolution became more and more frustrated and impatient, they rose up to protest and were also executed. Millions more died and were dumped into mass graves. And it was not until after Mao's death and reformers took over that things for China began to change for the better. This has been 100% due to capitalism.

Meanwhile, during the same 40-year time span, thousands and thousands of people in America went from poor and middle class to wealthy beyond imagination. Thousands upon thousands of millionaires and billionaires were created as a result of a vibrant free market capitalist system.

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

 

[Boss]

I'm a Republican Capitalist, but that has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. .

dear, Republicans have one idea about how to create better paying jobs and Democrats have another. Do you have the IQ to understand?

Correction: Democrats don't have an idea. They have a long history of failed policies which they perpetually want to keep trying again.

 

[Boss]

I'm just basically studying the downward and upward flow of the economy on a graph. As for demand for labor I had an Idea. What if you gave tax breaks to businesses who hired new workers using a certain percentage. Meaning for every business who can only afford to hire one worker and that hires another gets a tax break and a business that can only afford to hire a hundred workers and hires a hundred more also gets a tax break.

Have you ever stopped to think about why (in principle) we tax businesses? You may say, well, they make a profit... so what? It's what a business has to do... it's the whole idea. Well, they should have to pay a certain amount in taxes on the profits... Why? The CEO gets an income, he pays income tax on that. The employees get incomes, they pay tax on that. If the business spends their profit on something, they likely pay taxes on the transaction. But most of their profit is going back into the business. It's how business grows and expands. Why do we tax that?

A simple conservative principle that can always be applied to taxation: The more you tax anything, the less of it you will have. Every chart and graph that has ever legitimately been produced, bears this fact out. So why do we want to tax something that we actually WANT more to happen?

We want businesses to grow. People get wealthier. Jobs are created. The economy is stimulated. Cut the corporate tax rates and let business grow and prosper. Stop listening to idiotic Socialists who think we're somehow 'punishing the evil capitalist' by levying taxes on him.

 

[danielpalos]

. The socialism of or War on Poverty, bails out Capitalism, everyday, dear.

100% stupid and liberal of course. The socialist "War on Poverty" didn't work in the USA while capitalism bailed out socialism in China and prevented another 60 million from slowly starving to death.

See why we say the liberal will be stupid!!

Only silly alleged conservatives say that, dear. We have some of the richest poor in the world due to socialism, not capitalism.

Not true. Any "socialist" program we have is the direct result of free market capitalist system.

There are countless examples of people who came from abject poverty to be financially successful... not a single example exists of anyone who got there because of welfare handouts.

Chairman Mao Zedong implemented your idea in China... a system devoid of capitalism, devoted to total socialism and communism. In fact, you socialist lefties would have loved it... he rounded up all the "evil greedy capitalists" and executed them. Took their property and wealth and installed his Socialist system. His country withdrew from capitalist trade on the world stage and became isolationists.

If ever there was a time in human history to prove that Socialism was greater, this was it. The results were-- it plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years. Millions upon millions starved to death. As the people who sparked this revolution became more and more frustrated and impatient, they rose up to protest and were also executed. Millions more died and were dumped into mass graves. And it was not until after Mao's death and reformers took over that things for China began to change for the better. This has been 100% due to capitalism.

Meanwhile, during the same 40-year time span, thousands and thousands of people in America went from poor and middle class to wealthy beyond imagination. Thousands upon thousands of millionaires and billionaires were created as a result of a vibrant free market capitalist system.

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

 

[Boss]

100% stupid and liberal of course. The socialist "War on Poverty" didn't work in the USA while capitalism bailed out socialism in China and prevented another 60 million from slowly starving to death.

See why we say the liberal will be stupid!!

Only silly alleged conservatives say that, dear. We have some of the richest poor in the world due to socialism, not capitalism.

Not true. Any "socialist" program we have is the direct result of free market capitalist system.

There are countless examples of people who came from abject poverty to be financially successful... not a single example exists of anyone who got there because of welfare handouts.

Chairman Mao Zedong implemented your idea in China... a system devoid of capitalism, devoted to total socialism and communism. In fact, you socialist lefties would have loved it... he rounded up all the "evil greedy capitalists" and executed them. Took their property and wealth and installed his Socialist system. His country withdrew from capitalist trade on the world stage and became isolationists.

If ever there was a time in human history to prove that Socialism was greater, this was it. The results were-- it plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years. Millions upon millions starved to death. As the people who sparked this revolution became more and more frustrated and impatient, they rose up to protest and were also executed. Millions more died and were dumped into mass graves. And it was not until after Mao's death and reformers took over that things for China began to change for the better. This has been 100% due to capitalism.

Meanwhile, during the same 40-year time span, thousands and thousands of people in America went from poor and middle class to wealthy beyond imagination. Thousands upon thousands of millionaires and billionaires were created as a result of a vibrant free market capitalist system.

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

 

[danielpalos]

Only silly alleged conservatives say that, dear. We have some of the richest poor in the world due to socialism, not capitalism.

Not true. Any "socialist" program we have is the direct result of free market capitalist system.

There are countless examples of people who came from abject poverty to be financially successful... not a single example exists of anyone who got there because of welfare handouts.

Chairman Mao Zedong implemented your idea in China... a system devoid of capitalism, devoted to total socialism and communism. In fact, you socialist lefties would have loved it... he rounded up all the "evil greedy capitalists" and executed them. Took their property and wealth and installed his Socialist system. His country withdrew from capitalist trade on the world stage and became isolationists.

If ever there was a time in human history to prove that Socialism was greater, this was it. The results were-- it plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years. Millions upon millions starved to death. As the people who sparked this revolution became more and more frustrated and impatient, they rose up to protest and were also executed. Millions more died and were dumped into mass graves. And it was not until after Mao's death and reformers took over that things for China began to change for the better. This has been 100% due to capitalism.

Meanwhile, during the same 40-year time span, thousands and thousands of people in America went from poor and middle class to wealthy beyond imagination. Thousands upon thousands of millionaires and billionaires were created as a result of a vibrant free market capitalist system.

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

In the usual and customary manner. Socialism requires social morals for free, and it may include a work ethic.

Any more diversions?

 

[Correll]

Not true. Any "socialist" program we have is the direct result of free market capitalist system.

There are countless examples of people who came from abject poverty to be financially successful... not a single example exists of anyone who got there because of welfare handouts.

Chairman Mao Zedong implemented your idea in China... a system devoid of capitalism, devoted to total socialism and communism. In fact, you socialist lefties would have loved it... he rounded up all the "evil greedy capitalists" and executed them. Took their property and wealth and installed his Socialist system. His country withdrew from capitalist trade on the world stage and became isolationists.

If ever there was a time in human history to prove that Socialism was greater, this was it. The results were-- it plunged China into economic darkness for 40 years. Millions upon millions starved to death. As the people who sparked this revolution became more and more frustrated and impatient, they rose up to protest and were also executed. Millions more died and were dumped into mass graves. And it was not until after Mao's death and reformers took over that things for China began to change for the better. This has been 100% due to capitalism.

Meanwhile, during the same 40-year time span, thousands and thousands of people in America went from poor and middle class to wealthy beyond imagination. Thousands upon thousands of millionaires and billionaires were created as a result of a vibrant free market capitalist system.

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

In the usual and customary manner. Socialism requires social moralsvfor free, and it may include a work ethic.

Any more diversions?

Social morals for free?

What the fuck does that mean?

 

[danielpalos]

I'm just basically studying the downward and upward flow of the economy on a graph. As for demand for labor I had an Idea. What if you gave tax breaks to businesses who hired new workers using a certain percentage. Meaning for every business who can only afford to hire one worker and that hires another gets a tax break and a business that can only afford to hire a hundred workers and hires a hundred more also gets a tax break.

Have you ever stopped to think about why (in principle) we tax businesses? You may say, well, they make a profit... so what? It's what a business has to do... it's the whole idea. Well, they should have to pay a certain amount in taxes on the profits... Why? The CEO gets an income, he pays income tax on that. The employees get incomes, they pay tax on that. If the business spends their profit on something, they likely pay taxes on the transaction. But most of their profit is going back into the business. It's how business grows and expands. Why do we tax that?

A simple conservative principle that can always be applied to taxation: The more you tax anything, the less of it you will have. Every chart and graph that has ever legitimately been produced, bears this fact out. So why do we want to tax something that we actually WANT more to happen?

We want businesses to grow. People get wealthier. Jobs are created. The economy is stimulated. Cut the corporate tax rates and let business grow and prosper. Stop listening to idiotic Socialists who think we're somehow 'punishing the evil capitalist' by levying taxes on him.

How typical of the right. Why not end the work tax for labor instead of artificial Persons of capital wealth?

 

[Correll]

I'm just basically studying the downward and upward flow of the economy on a graph. As for demand for labor I had an Idea. What if you gave tax breaks to businesses who hired new workers using a certain percentage. Meaning for every business who can only afford to hire one worker and that hires another gets a tax break and a business that can only afford to hire a hundred workers and hires a hundred more also gets a tax break.

Have you ever stopped to think about why (in principle) we tax businesses? You may say, well, they make a profit... so what? It's what a business has to do... it's the whole idea. Well, they should have to pay a certain amount in taxes on the profits... Why? The CEO gets an income, he pays income tax on that. The employees get incomes, they pay tax on that. If the business spends their profit on something, they likely pay taxes on the transaction. But most of their profit is going back into the business. It's how business grows and expands. Why do we tax that?

A simple conservative principle that can always be applied to taxation: The more you tax anything, the less of it you will have. Every chart and graph that has ever legitimately been produced, bears this fact out. So why do we want to tax something that we actually WANT more to happen?

We want businesses to grow. People get wealthier. Jobs are created. The economy is stimulated. Cut the corporate tax rates and let business grow and prosper. Stop listening to idiotic Socialists who think we're somehow 'punishing the evil capitalist' by levying taxes on him.

How typical of the right. Why not end the work tax for labor instead of artificial Persons of capital wealth?

Why do you purposefully use obtuse jargon?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes dear, it was when capitalism failed us that socialism bailed us out.

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

In the usual and customary manner. Socialism requires social moralsvfor free, and it may include a work ethic.

Any more diversions?

Social morals for free?

What the fuck does that mean?

That you don't have a Social clue or a Social Cause, and are irrelevant as a result.

 

[Correll]

Really? Where did Socialism get resources?

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

In the usual and customary manner. Socialism requires social moralsvfor free, and it may include a work ethic.

Any more diversions?

Social morals for free?

What the fuck does that mean?

That you don't have a Social clue or a Social Cause, and are irrelevant as a result.

It was a rhetorical question.

I knew you would not give a real answer.

 

[danielpalos]

I'm just basically studying the downward and upward flow of the economy on a graph. As for demand for labor I had an Idea. What if you gave tax breaks to businesses who hired new workers using a certain percentage. Meaning for every business who can only afford to hire one worker and that hires another gets a tax break and a business that can only afford to hire a hundred workers and hires a hundred more also gets a tax break.

Have you ever stopped to think about why (in principle) we tax businesses? You may say, well, they make a profit... so what? It's what a business has to do... it's the whole idea. Well, they should have to pay a certain amount in taxes on the profits... Why? The CEO gets an income, he pays income tax on that. The employees get incomes, they pay tax on that. If the business spends their profit on something, they likely pay taxes on the transaction. But most of their profit is going back into the business. It's how business grows and expands. Why do we tax that?

A simple conservative principle that can always be applied to taxation: The more you tax anything, the less of it you will have. Every chart and graph that has ever legitimately been produced, bears this fact out. So why do we want to tax something that we actually WANT more to happen?

We want businesses to grow. People get wealthier. Jobs are created. The economy is stimulated. Cut the corporate tax rates and let business grow and prosper. Stop listening to idiotic Socialists who think we're somehow 'punishing the evil capitalist' by levying taxes on him.

How typical of the right. Why not end the work tax for labor instead of artificial Persons of capital wealth?

Why do you purposefully use obtuse jargon?

How typical of the right, blaming others for their own incompetence.

 

[Correll]

I'm just basically studying the downward and upward flow of the economy on a graph. As for demand for labor I had an Idea. What if you gave tax breaks to businesses who hired new workers using a certain percentage. Meaning for every business who can only afford to hire one worker and that hires another gets a tax break and a business that can only afford to hire a hundred workers and hires a hundred more also gets a tax break.

Have you ever stopped to think about why (in principle) we tax businesses? You may say, well, they make a profit... so what? It's what a business has to do... it's the whole idea. Well, they should have to pay a certain amount in taxes on the profits... Why? The CEO gets an income, he pays income tax on that. The employees get incomes, they pay tax on that. If the business spends their profit on something, they likely pay taxes on the transaction. But most of their profit is going back into the business. It's how business grows and expands. Why do we tax that?

A simple conservative principle that can always be applied to taxation: The more you tax anything, the less of it you will have. Every chart and graph that has ever legitimately been produced, bears this fact out. So why do we want to tax something that we actually WANT more to happen?

We want businesses to grow. People get wealthier. Jobs are created. The economy is stimulated. Cut the corporate tax rates and let business grow and prosper. Stop listening to idiotic Socialists who think we're somehow 'punishing the evil capitalist' by levying taxes on him.

How typical of the right. Why not end the work tax for labor instead of artificial Persons of capital wealth?

Why do you purposefully use obtuse jargon?

How typical of the right, blaming others for their own incompetence.

The purpose of language is that using agreed upon sounds to mean certain things, allows communication of information.


YOur choice to misuse words with meanings that no one else knows, defeats that purpose.

That is no reflection on me.

 

[danielpalos]

The collective of the People. It really is that simple, except to the right.

No... Socialism provides for the collective of the people... where do they get their resources?

In the usual and customary manner. Socialism requires social moralsvfor free, and it may include a work ethic.

Any more diversions?

Social morals for free?

What the fuck does that mean?

That you don't have a Social clue or a Social Cause, and are irrelevant as a result.

It was a rhetorical question.

I knew you would not give a real answer.

dear, you got a real answer. You are merely too incompetent to understand it. Now we know why the right has nothing but repeal instead of better solutions at lower cost.