Why can't Public Assistance increase?

[Conservative65]

They're not, huh?

cleveland transportation - craigslist

Most jobs absolutely suq in this GOP world of tomorrow. 70% hate their jobs and get paid crappe. Way to break the unions and replace them with nothing, Reaganist GOP...

According to the Obama supporters, he's created all the job that supposedly brought the unemployment rate down. Since he is credited for creating them, he gets the blame if the suck.

BS. GOP have obstructed everything good for 8 years.

His supporters claim HE created jobs. YOU say those jobs absolutely suck and get paid crap. Logic says the jobs for which he's given credit amount to nothing and his supporters count them only for the numbers not the quality.

The GOP couldn't have obstructed anything good for 8 years. 2 of them the Democrats had control of Congress and the other 6 didn't produce any good ideas from Obama.

Yup, 2 years of control with only 200+ GOP filibusters- You're duped AGAIN. 2 things passed. ACTUALLY, 2 months of control , all used to pass ACA.

And btw, the middle of ANOTHER corrupt world economic melt down is no time for economic reform.

You said good things were obstructed. That's impossible. Obama put forth nothing that was good because anything where one group is forced to fund for another something the other should be funding for themselves is bad. Surely you bleeding hearts can understand that the government doesn't have to be involved if you, as a group, believe something should be done. Get together and do it yourselves with your own money. I know you won't because your mindset it that by having others forced to do it your way, it somehow means you have compassion. Doesn't work that way. If you don't think what you believe should be done is a good enough investment for you to do with you own money only, it damn sure isn't a good enough investment for me.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Actually, I suspect it was more that nobody builds a tractor with manual steering anymore. (The package trucks have power steering now for the same reason.)

They will build a truck anyway you want. Hell, we lease from Penske, and we can have anything we want to order right down to the color of the truck. Now if you take it off the lot, that's a different story.

I've been doing this a long time, and I know how companies try to cut the extras to save money. Years ago larger companies didn't even provide air-ride. But the medical claims from drivers (which were many of them) for back problems made it more expensive in the long run, so they all went to air-ride. I drove a truck years ago that didn't have it, and those things could shake the fillings out of your mouth. I couldn't drive over 50 mph, and it shook so bad you couldn't even select a preset radio station on your radio.

The extras did get cheaper to buy as years went on. But companies found it more advantageous to get the extras. Air conditioning is another one. Drivers fell asleep more often without AC when it was hot and muggy. This is not to mention how terrible their drivers looked when they went to a customer being all sweaty and looking like you just got out of a war zone. Many times the drivers took breaks in the company cafeteria at their stops, or somewhere that had AC just so they could cool off for a while, and that really slowed things down. Now just about everybody has AC.

 

[Wilbur Right]

My father worked for 50 years before he had a heart attack which rendered him disabled. He hated that... could not stand to not be able to provide for himself. He accepted the benefits because he had no other choice

The fuck he had no other choice. Didn't he have a son (you) to provide for him? Sure he did. But his son said; hey Dad, get you some of that free welfare republicans are complaining about all the time. It's FREE.

Fucking amazing.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The 1%ers got that way by many methods. They inherited, started from the bottom and worked up (hasn't happened in about 10 years or more), cheated the system whether it be taxes or other methods, (on paper only) shifted their main corporations overseas where they pay ZERO US Taxes but collect oodles in sales in the US.

While small business needs help, the Corporations are raiding everyone in their pathway. It's like locust in a grain field.

I do say that the taxes need to be lowered on all businesses that play the game with America's best interest. But I also say that we need to not only lower the tax rate but close ALL the loopholes that corporations seem to find. Even when a bill is trying to be introduced that may do this, it's laughed right out of congress. The first step is to get rid of the congress critters that work for the Corporations instead of to whom they are supposed to working for.

You do realize there is nothing you can ever do that will eliminate a Top 1%... right? I mean, regardless of what measures you put into place, there will forever and always be a Top 1% and a lower 99%.

I don't want to get rid of the 1%. These are the only ones that can privately make things shake and bake.

People who "cheat the system" are called lawbreakers and we send them to prison. Unfortunately, we have to first catch them breaking the law. There is no law that we can ever pass that will be followed by everyone.

Actually, there are quite a few laws that allow this. Much of it is considered immoral and unethical but there are no laws that force a person or a corporation to be moral and ethical. But it's called Regulation. We have some. Before Reagan, any company that would have tried to close up their factory in the US and move it overseas would have been in serious trouble. They would have had the FTC, IRS and Justice Department tear their company apart. And it would be a safe bet that the CEOs would have offered up a scapegoat to do the time or be terminated for it. But all things would have been fine.

Now, I am taking the time to patiently explain these things to you because it sounds like you are an average person who is listening to the Marxist rhetoric and finding it believable. Certainly, a lot of people who are wealthy are beneficiaries of their family's wealth. But there is really not anything wrong with that, most people want to pass something down to their children and they should be able to do that in a free society. And there is always the old adage, "a fool and his money are soon parted" ...so even when someone inherits wealth, they have to be somewhat smart with money or they won't be wealthy for very long.

Now where did you get that idea. The Walton Kids are greedy but not too bright but as a family, they make up the #6 spot on the wealthy in the US. 2 of them are in the top 10. They do hire some pretty bright corporate CEOs to run things but are smart enough to get rid of them when they see the CEOs start to really profit.

In addition to those who gained wealth through the fortune of the family they happened to be born in, we have a great many more who earned their wealth. When we begin to study their backgrounds and history, we find two striking things. Either or both can be true. One: They tend to come from humble beginnings. They may have even grown up in poverty. And-- Two: They had extraordinary work ethic and ambition to succeed. One or both is almost always the case.

So again, there is nothing wrong about this. Some people are jealous of it, but really, there is nothing wrong with people being ambitions and utilizing the tools of freedom to generate wealth... in fact, it's one of the great things about our nation. Oh, it's a helluva problem to have.... Our system creates more millionaires and billionaires than any system ever created by man. And with that, it creates some extremely jealous people who resent those people for what they obtain.

No, there is nothing wrong with the concept. In fact, I know of a few that are in that bracket. They are some of the nicest people you ever want to meet. But their employees (CEOs) are real nightmares.

Finally, since you mentioned it, I want to address these "loopholes". You didn't specify anything in particular and that tells me that you are again, listening to the rhetoric and responding emotionally. You've heard that some people gain wealth by "exploiting loopholes" and that sounds unethical and sinister... but you have to remember, you are listening to jealous people who want to destroy your freedom to obtain wealth.

I used to be the lead purchasing agent for a Corporation. That's the one spot that they like to keep their leads rotated out quickly. You get to see what's behind the curtain. I had to check my soul, morals and ethics at the door. I was rotated out like all the others. But in the meantime, I kept watching that corporation. The CEO was the actual owner. It was listed as a public company but all the stocks were owned by various family members. He would come by and pick up the company CC and go shop for the company. He came back with food, cleaning supplies, full gas tank, cash draw, and even toilet paper in bulk. Then he would remove his "Cut" from all that and take it home. His 2 homes were written off as Employee housing. All Cars in the whole family were company cars, his Kids education was paid for since they are Employees, Then one day, all those cars and houses were transferred to his various family members (not anything to him), On paper, he bought up all the stocks. Things were run pretty honest for a 3 year period. At the end of 3 years, he file Chapter 13 on the Business and kept the 3.5 mil from what was left over which he did pay taxes on But at an extremely low tax rate. The workers showed up and the locks where changed and the trucks were gone.

These so-called "loopholes" are actually laws and legislation passed by our governing bodies and carefully deliberated through the free exchange of ideas. Generally, these measures are passed into law in order to address a problem which needed a solution. Now... some people believe that every politician in Washington is corrupt and bought off by special interests, etc. If you believe that to be the case, the real problem is US... we vote for these people and keep them in power, and again... we live in a free society where we have the ability to throw the bums out or prosecute the bad ones and throw them in jail for corruption. So let us assume, most of them are legitimately trying to represent us as they are intended to do, because if not, we have a bigger problem.

Let's not assume that at all. If a ultra rich donates to a person to get them elected he damned sure demands something in return. I'll use two around here. I am sure your area isn't any better.

1. A Corporation became the #1 campaign contributor for Scott Tipton. One day, he got a little sloppy. It was noted that the bill he was backing directly benefited that corporation. Too bad it wasn't caught this October.

2. Now for the King of the Corrupt. Scott McGuinous was a Representative for Colorado in the US House. There is a law that says that they can't work for a Lobbyist Organization for one year after leaving office. He didn't work for them directly, he became an Advisor to them. He was a contractor. Then after a few other things were brought up, he ran for Governor and was crushed. Then he ran for a county Commissioner and was elected. Sure enough, it was noticed that he was backing county legislation that directly benefited his largest campaign contributor. Wow, whodathunk that we would be recycling corrupt politicians.

Congressmen don't go to work thinking, what kind of loopholes can I write into the law today in order to screw the little guy and help the wealthy. When they vote on these things, no one is saying... let's all pass this new loophole so the wealthy can make more wealth and the poor can be exploited more. Again... IF that is happening, we have bigger problems. I don't believe that's what is happening and I don't think most reasonable people think this about the representatives they've elected. Therefore, we must presume that when they pass this legislation, there is a very real and important reason they did so. These so-called "loopholes" are addressing some problem and when they are suddenly removed, the problem comes back.

When you press a liberal progressive to cite some examples of these nasty awful "loopholes" you typically get to the bottom of things and you find they are not fully informed. They generally make the exact same arguments against the "loophole" that was made when it was deliberated but their side lost the debate. So why, all of a sudden, without any need for further debate, are they now correct?

Let me guess. it's only the Liberal Dems, right? It' both sides bellying up to the pick trough. And the problem is it takes millions to get reelected. If one won't take the money, he won't be in office or even get to office for very long.

 

[Boss]

My father worked for 50 years before he had a heart attack which rendered him disabled. He hated that... could not stand to not be able to provide for himself. He accepted the benefits because he had no other choice

The fuck he had no other choice. Didn't he have a son (you) to provide for him? Sure he did. But his son said; hey Dad, get you some of that free welfare republicans are complaining about all the time. It's FREE.

Fucking amazing.

Nope... I told him to take the benefits he worked his whole life to earn. He paid his dues and deserved to be taken care of. If we can pay for your lazy freeloading ass to sit at home on your computer bashing and trashing the system that feeds you like some kind of goofy moron, then we can take care of a man who worked as hard as my dad.

No... YOU are fucking amazing, goofball. You think government entitlements like disability are there for everyone except Republicans?

Go fuck yourself.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Actually, I suspect it was more that nobody builds a tractor with manual steering anymore. (The package trucks have power steering now for the same reason.)

They will build a truck anyway you want. Hell, we lease from Penske, and we can have anything we want to order right down to the color of the truck. Now if you take it off the lot, that's a different story.

I've been doing this a long time, and I know how companies try to cut the extras to save money. Years ago larger companies didn't even provide air-ride. But the medical claims from drivers (which were many of them) for back problems made it more expensive in the long run, so they all went to air-ride. I drove a truck years ago that didn't have it, and those things could shake the fillings out of your mouth. I couldn't drive over 50 mph, and it shook so bad you couldn't even select a preset radio station on your radio.

The extras did get cheaper to buy as years went on. But companies found it more advantageous to get the extras. Air conditioning is another one. Drivers fell asleep more often without AC when it was hot and muggy. This is not to mention how terrible their drivers looked when they went to a customer being all sweaty and looking like you just got out of a war zone. Many times the drivers took breaks in the company cafeteria at their stops, or somewhere that had AC just so they could cool off for a while, and that really slowed things down. Now just about everybody has AC.

Penske won't even spec a truck without AC anymore. A local outfit tried, and Penske flatly refused.

I suspect you couldn't get a manual-steering tractor today if you wanted to, from anyone at any prrice...they simply no longer have the parts!

 

[Boss]

I don't want to get rid of the 1%. These are the only ones that can privately make things shake and bake.

That's good because mathematics says it's impossible to do anyway. So what you want to do is take from the Top and give to the Bottom... and the problem is, that doesn't work either. What happens is, the people you put in charge of taking from the Top end up with all the wealth. Then, they control the power you gave them AND the wealth... and you're screwed. Usually it all ends at an open ditch with a bullet in your brain by a tyrannical out of control government.

Actually, there are quite a few laws that allow this. Much of it is considered immoral and unethical but there are no laws that force a person or a corporation to be moral and ethical. But it's called Regulation. We have some. Before Reagan, any company that would have tried to close up their factory in the US and move it overseas would have been in serious trouble. They would have had the FTC, IRS and Justice Department tear their company apart. And it would be a safe bet that the CEOs would have offered up a scapegoat to do the time or be terminated for it. But all things would have been fine.

No sir. In America, you have always been free to come and go as you please. You have property rights that can't be alienated. You are again spewing Marxist rhetoric. It's simply not true. And you are advocating government tyranny over liberty... you want the government apparatus to be turned against free Americans to whip them in line with your policies.

Let's not assume that at all. If a ultra rich donates to a person to get them elected he damned sure demands something in return. I'll use two around here. I am sure your area isn't any better.

Again... What you are talking about is a quid-pro-quot and it's highly illegal. People can be sent to prison for that and they have been. So if you have evidence of this sort of thing happening, you should report it and turn over your evidence to the authorities. If they're not Hillary Clinton, they will probably go to jail. But more to the core of the problem... we should elect people who can't be bought... who have the kind of moral integrity that we can trust them with power. If we're not electing that type of person, WE are the problem, not the system.

 

[Wilbur Right]

If we can pay for your lazy freeloading ass to sit at home on your computer bashing and trashing the system that feeds you like some kind of goofy moron, then we can take care of a man who worked as hard as my dad.

This is how fucking stupid you are. You come from a background where your father worked 50 fucking years and then had to rely on welfare to survive. WTF? Minimum wage the entire time?

And you expect people to think you know what you are talking about when it comes to the economy? When you have cited as an example your welfare receiving father. Is that where you learned finance?

Fuck you.

I am 63 yo. Never had anything given to me ever. But I will put my net worth against yours any day. And I will work your ass into the ground. And I will never ask for welfare like you told your dad to do.

Are you collecting welfare also?. Runs in the family doesn't it?

 

[Boss]

If we can pay for your lazy freeloading ass to sit at home on your computer bashing and trashing the system that feeds you like some kind of goofy moron, then we can take care of a man who worked as hard as my dad.

This is how fucking stupid you are. You come from a background where your father worked 50 fucking years and then had to rely on welfare to survive. WTF? Minimum wage the entire time?

And you expect people to think you know what you are talking about when it comes to the economy? When you have cited as an example your welfare receiving father. Is that where you learned finance?

Fuck you.

I am 63 yo. Never had anything given to me ever. But I will put my net worth against yours any day. And I will work your ass into the ground. And I will never ask for welfare like you told your dad to do.

Are you collecting welfare also?. Runs in the family doesn't it?

Excuse me... Social Security Disability is NOT WELFARE!

If you've ever earned a paycheck (which I doubt) then you have a deduction for SSI ...My Dad paid into SSI for 50 years. The few years he lived while drawing disability benefits amount to a small fraction of the money he paid in.

So again... go fuck yourself.

 

[JoeNormal]

Capital wants the lowest possible labor costs coupled with the lest possible competition. This is why it goes to Taiwan for sweatshop labor costs, and why it goes to congress for regulatory control over most domestic markets. Research the number of cable/internet providers and how they have (with the help of congress) divided the nation mostly into fixed no-compete zones, allowing them to raise rates/decrease services without being disciplined by market competition. Real money comes from government protected monopolies.

Capital wants and gets a ton of free technological research and advanced industrial infrastructure. The 80s consumer electronics boom was heavily dependent upon the state sector (mostly Defense and NASA). Research the history of satellite and Internet technology or containerization or Aerospace, to name only a few industries. FDR and Reagan were masters of Military Keynesianism; both grew the economy and our technological superiority with the help of The Big Government Defense Sector.

[Most Republicans don't know the kind of subsidies say Boeing received. Nor do they understand how WWII manufacturing helped to end the depression; nor do they know how the aforementioned government-lead manufacturing was converted to the commercial boom that undergird the great postwar growth from 1945-1973.]

[Seriously, ask a republican to talk about the government-lead industrial output of WWII or the Cold War (including the number of jobs and spenders it put into the economy), and then ask how said output was converted to domestic commercial uses... and you will get a blank stare followed by simplistic cliches about the evils of government. These people are know-nothings who have never studied this stuff - never fucking read an actual policy paper. They get their information from pop media bafoons like Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin]

The carrying capacity of the Southwest, with all its thriving profit centers, wouldn't exist without the Hoover Dam and the multi-trillion dollar engineering of the Colorado tributary system, which no combination of corporations could have afforded in the 20s. Same goes for the nation's energy or overseas trade routes, which require a massive military (government) effort across multiple continents.

The reason why large corporations build massive offices in Washington DC is precisely because so much profit making is parasitic on the public dollar.

And when those large corporations place massive bets they can't cover, like AIG and their corrupt derivative insurance scam, who do you think bails them out so that the global market doesn't tank?

Listen, my family owned a successful small business across several generations. I support a system that provides incentives to the productive, one that doesn't reward laziness. This is second grade stuff.

I also think price controls are fucking moronic because they not only fail to create appropriate incentives for suppliers but no central planner could ever have enough information to predict consumer behavior.

Let's cut to the chase. The Republican Party takes advantage of well-meaning uneducated people who have no clue the degree to which profit makers are parasitic on the state. This means any debate regarding government involvement in the economy can't even get started.

Turn off Fox News and go to a library.

Let's get you up to speed on some things here.... Capitalism comes in all shapes and forms. The Russians, China and North Korea engage in Capitalism... it's not free market capitalism, it's Marxist-Socialist-Fascist capitalism... but it's Capitalism.

What you have an objection to is what many in the current anti-establishment GOP object to... Crony Corporatist Capitalism. That is NOT Free Market Capitalism. The Corporatist unfairly uses the powers of government to leverage an advantage over his competition... that's the antithesis of "free markets" and is actually more subversive and damaging to free market capitalism than Marxist socialism.

Whoosh! And the point goes straight over your head. He's saying (among other things) that there is a symbiotic relationship between government and industry that provides much or most of what we enjoy as an advanced technological society.

No there's not and that's not what has created our advanced technological society. This is the reason you keep getting things wrong. From the most fundamental level, you don't comprehend reality. Then you build an ideology based on that. If what you are claiming were true, every nation on the planet would enjoy technological advancement and that's clearly not the case.

There is a reason why we are the most technologically advanced and it is no coincidence our government was most certainly designed and intended to be small and limited in power.

It is our individual freedom to pursue our interests and passions, our ability to freely participate in enterprise and commerce with each other. To trade, barter and sell our ideas, our skills and our talents. To develop those ideas and build upon them without being encumbered by outside forces of power or their influence, or the influence of their agents.

To what extent we need government, it is to protect that freedom and liberty and stay the hell out of the way. That's a huge and important job, make no mistake, but to claim that there is a "symbiotic relationship" is just plain wrong.

Like most hard core right wingers, you are the polar opposite of a visionary. As such, you apparently believe that the Constitution is absolute in your personal interpretation of it and was written by prophets.

Furthermore, I would peg your understanding of the technological development process at the level of a savvy kindergartener. I develop technological IP for a living and I can tell you that if something we innovate won't pay off in a maximum of five years (two years is more typical), it doesn't receive funding to see the light of day. I'm personally grateful that big science and big infrastructure has been funded by the government. If you had even a hazy understanding of how our modern world came to be, you would be too.

Let me first say, your personal insults don't impress me and they make terrible argumentative points. Whenever you have to immediately resort to juvenile quips about your adversary, you've already lost the debate. It confirms to me that you have no basis for a response other than your unfounded opinion. As is revealed in your post, that is essentially all you have.

I believe the Constitution is absolute in the framer's understanding which is articulated in the Federalist Papers, of which I have read. I doubt you have ever read them, nor would you have the intellectual capacity to understand them if you did. Take note that I just insulted you but I did so whilst making a valid and enlightening point. There is a huge but subtle difference.

The fact that you are receiving some gravy from government completely nullifies your ability to be an objective actor. You are simply a parasite making the argument about why the host is so awesome. But because you leach off the host, doesn't mean that is it's purpose for existing.

I think I do understand how the modern world came to be and it's you who is confused. You seem to think we miraculously established some kind of magical government that was superior to all other governments somehow... even through years of slavery, segregation and all the rest, was able to become the world's greatest superpower and give forth the bounty of all our technological achievement. I think that is a total load of crap.

Our government was established to be small and limited in power. To have as it's main and primary function, the protection of individual freedom and rights to property. In doing so, this enabled individual private endeavor (aka: free enterprise) to blossom and out-grow, out-produce, and out-achieve all other nations on the planet in a relatively short time, as nations go.

Thank you for such an enlightened insult. What 'gravy' do you imagine I'm getting from the government?

Apparently, the Supreme Court has given greater weight to the welfare clause than absolutists like you have or we'd have the small government you dream of. Perhaps you can convince them that your knowledge of The Constitution is superior to theirs.

Oh BTW, your favorite medium, the internet is also the product of government research.

 

[Kristian]

United States have more money and therefore spend little under GB and Finland in military industry but F-35 gonna break in value to at least 1% of USA's BNP. 10/15/20 nations will cost USA's next stealth aircrafts.

 

[Boss]

Thank you for such an enlightened insult. What 'gravy' do you imagine I'm getting from the government?

Apparently, the Supreme Court has given greater weight to the welfare clause than absolutists like you have or we'd have the small government you dream of. Perhaps you can convince them that your knowledge of The Constitution is superior to theirs.

Oh BTW, your favorite medium, the internet is also the product of government research.

Well you mentioned receiving funding so I assumed you're a government contractor.

The Supreme Court is not a good measure of what our Constitution was intended to mean. For nearly a century, the SCOTUS denied the meaning of basic human rights to blacks and for another century, basic civil rights.

I never said that government research wasn't useful. That is not the argument here. Neither is government encouraging, advocating or promoting technological advances. These are great things made available by a free and prosperous nation... but you have the cart before the horse. It is our freedom and prosperity that enables our government to do those things, not the other way around.

 

[JoeNormal]

Thank you for such an enlightened insult. What 'gravy' do you imagine I'm getting from the government?

Apparently, the Supreme Court has given greater weight to the welfare clause than absolutists like you have or we'd have the small government you dream of. Perhaps you can convince them that your knowledge of The Constitution is superior to theirs.

Oh BTW, your favorite medium, the internet is also the product of government research.

Well you mentioned receiving funding so I assumed you're a government contractor.

The Supreme Court is not a good measure of what our Constitution was intended to mean. For nearly a century, the SCOTUS denied the meaning of basic human rights to blacks and for another century, basic civil rights.

I never said that government research wasn't useful. That is not the argument here. Neither is government encouraging, advocating or promoting technological advances. These are great things made available by a free and prosperous nation... but you have the cart before the horse. It is our freedom and prosperity that enables our government to do those things, not the other way around.

Funding from corporate... <roll eyes> I guess when you're a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

I said the government and corporations have a symbiotic relationship. You apparently want to turn this into a chicken and egg debate.

 

[P@triot]

I said the government and corporations have a symbiotic relationship.

And therein lies the problem. They should not have any relationship at all. And for all of the liberals pitching a fit over how businesses "buy" politicians and "buy" votes in Congress - good. It was your idiot ideology that caused government to start controlling every facet of the private sector. Businesses are just trying to survive in the game that you moron's built.

 

[JoeNormal]

I said the government and corporations have a symbiotic relationship.

And therein lies the problem. They should not have any relationship at all. And for all of the liberals pitching a fit over how businesses "buy" politicians and "buy" votes in Congress - good. It was your idiot ideology that caused government to start controlling every facet of the private sector. Businesses are just trying to survive in the game that you moron's built.

Anything that is beneficial can be misused. Small minds want to take unfair advantage of what exists because it's easier than creating something of actual value legitimately. What we need is some harsh punishment in both the public and private sectors for the douchebags who abuse the system.

 

[P@triot]

I said the government and corporations have a symbiotic relationship.

And therein lies the problem. They should not have any relationship at all. And for all of the liberals pitching a fit over how businesses "buy" politicians and "buy" votes in Congress - good. It was your idiot ideology that caused government to start controlling every facet of the private sector. Businesses are just trying to survive in the game that you moron's built.

Anything that is beneficial can be misused. Small minds want to take unfair advantage of what exists because it's easier than creating something of actual value legitimately. What we need is some harsh punishment in both the public and private sectors for the douchebags who abuse the system.

What we need first is to restore Constitutional government. Everything else will pretty much take care of itself after that.

 

[francoHFW]

shifted their main corporations overseas where they pay ZERO US Taxes but collect oodles in sales in the US.

Challenge: Cite three examples of these corporations who pay zero US tax but collect sales in the US?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiT3beU1YLOAhXEcT4KHbclDisQFgg1MAM&url=http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-corporate-tax-rates/&usg=AFQjCNFQUNPRYUMm7ONb-tuD3xCJb__yYA&sig2=UzkhaAAC69GcI7wbRs6JpQ

• Corporate share of federal tax revenue has dropped by two-thirds in 60 years — from 32% in 1952 to 10% in 2013.
• General Electric, Boeing, Verizon and 23 other profitable Fortune 500 firms paid no federal income taxes from 2008 to 2012.
• 288 big and profitable Fortune 500 corporations paid an average effective federal tax rate of just 19.4% from 2008 to 2012.
• Profitable corporations paid U.S. income taxes amounting to just 12.6% of worldwide incomein 2010.
• U.S. corporations dodge $90 billion a year in income taxes by shifting profits to subsidiaries — often no more than post office boxes — in tax havens.
• U.S. corporations officially hold $2.1 trillion in profits offshore — much of it in tax havens — that have not yet been taxed here.

 

[francoHFW]

Most jobs absolutely suq in this GOP world of tomorrow. 70% hate their jobs and get paid crappe. Way to break the unions and replace them with nothing, Reaganist GOP...

According to the Obama supporters, he's created all the job that supposedly brought the unemployment rate down. Since he is credited for creating them, he gets the blame if the suck.

BS. GOP have obstructed everything good for 8 years.

His supporters claim HE created jobs. YOU say those jobs absolutely suck and get paid crap. Logic says the jobs for which he's given credit amount to nothing and his supporters count them only for the numbers not the quality.

The GOP couldn't have obstructed anything good for 8 years. 2 of them the Democrats had control of Congress and the other 6 didn't produce any good ideas from Obama.

Yup, 2 years of control with only 200+ GOP filibusters- You're duped AGAIN. 2 things passed. ACTUALLY, 2 months of control , all used to pass ACA.

And btw, the middle of ANOTHER corrupt world economic melt down is no time for economic reform.

You said good things were obstructed. That's impossible. Obama put forth nothing that was good because anything where one group is forced to fund for another something the other should be funding for themselves is bad. Surely you bleeding hearts can understand that the government doesn't have to be involved if you, as a group, believe something should be done. Get together and do it yourselves with your own money. I know you won't because your mindset it that by having others forced to do it your way, it somehow means you have compassion. Doesn't work that way. If you don't think what you believe should be done is a good enough investment for you to do with you own money only, it damn sure isn't a good enough investment for me.

Tax incentives to train for 3-5 million tech jobs going begging, Immigration bill with good SS ID card, infrastructure jobs bank, raise of min wage- we could have led the world out of this mess...GOP allows NOTHING.

 

[francoHFW]

I said the government and corporations have a symbiotic relationship.

And therein lies the problem. They should not have any relationship at all. And for all of the liberals pitching a fit over how businesses "buy" politicians and "buy" votes in Congress - good. It was your idiot ideology that caused government to start controlling every facet of the private sector. Businesses are just trying to survive in the game that you moron's built.

Anything that is beneficial can be misused. Small minds want to take unfair advantage of what exists because it's easier than creating something of actual value legitimately. What we need is some harsh punishment in both the public and private sectors for the douchebags who abuse the system.

What we need first is to restore Constitutional government. Everything else will pretty much take care of itself after that.

Nothing unconstitutional, dupe. What we need is a return to GOOD government. Not with the "no compromise, un-American TP GOP" -TIME. A brainwashed disgrace.

 

[Conservative65]

According to the Obama supporters, he's created all the job that supposedly brought the unemployment rate down. Since he is credited for creating them, he gets the blame if the suck.

BS. GOP have obstructed everything good for 8 years.

His supporters claim HE created jobs. YOU say those jobs absolutely suck and get paid crap. Logic says the jobs for which he's given credit amount to nothing and his supporters count them only for the numbers not the quality.

The GOP couldn't have obstructed anything good for 8 years. 2 of them the Democrats had control of Congress and the other 6 didn't produce any good ideas from Obama.

Yup, 2 years of control with only 200+ GOP filibusters- You're duped AGAIN. 2 things passed. ACTUALLY, 2 months of control , all used to pass ACA.

And btw, the middle of ANOTHER corrupt world economic melt down is no time for economic reform.

You said good things were obstructed. That's impossible. Obama put forth nothing that was good because anything where one group is forced to fund for another something the other should be funding for themselves is bad. Surely you bleeding hearts can understand that the government doesn't have to be involved if you, as a group, believe something should be done. Get together and do it yourselves with your own money. I know you won't because your mindset it that by having others forced to do it your way, it somehow means you have compassion. Doesn't work that way. If you don't think what you believe should be done is a good enough investment for you to do with you own money only, it damn sure isn't a good enough investment for me.

Tax incentives to train for 3-5 million tech jobs going begging, Immigration bill with good SS ID card, infrastructure jobs bank, raise of min wage- we could have led the world out of this mess...GOP allows NOTHING.

So amnesty called by another name, someone other than the kid or his/her parents funding their education, giving people a wage they didn't earn, etc.? That will only cause a bigger mess.