EntrepreNever

If it takes you 27 years of sweat equity running a ‪small business to make it into the 1% don’t you think there should be a waiver from the Obama administration on his tax on everyone who makes $250,000 or more?

There are waivers for Big Union and Big Business for Obamacare.

  small business  owner is a community organizer too, only he’s not spending other people’s money.

After all, a small business reports income taxes on what the business makes and then must determine how much of that income has to go back into the business for the business to survive and grow.

Why should Obama decide how many employees I should hire?  Why should he decide how much we decide to invest in new and existing products and services to survive or grow?

 

 

 

 

 

About Idea Capitalist
Family guy and entrepreneur. Small Business owner. NFIB Leadership Council member. Serial blogger.

43 Responses to EntrepreNever

  1. The Devil's Advocate says:

    “Why should he decide how much we decide to invest in new and existing products and services to survive or grow?”

    He doesn’t. Money a business spends on payroll or reinvestment isn’t taxed. They only tax profit or what you take home and if that’s less than $250,000… you see where that ends.

    It’s like in 1993 when everyone said Clinton’s tax increases on the upper-end earners were going to doom the economy. Fast-forward to the end of the 90’s and we were on track to pay off the national debt and businesses were growing. Historically speaking, the wealthiest in America are enjoying a record-setting low tax rate.

    Like

    • I look at it differently. I look at it from a cash flow perspective. The less after tax income a small business owner has, the less he/she can invest in their business, including pay raises, and new hires.

      Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        But that’s not the way it actually works in real life. Once the business is started, the reinvestment is with pre-tax dollars. The business owner who reinvests doesn’t pay the taxes, but the one that takes all the money home does.

        When I hire an new employee, I do it we pre-income-tax dollars. When I buy a new copy machine, I do it with pre-income-tax dollars. When I hire a computer guy to modernize my workforce, I do it with pre-income-tax dollars. If I spend all the dollars before the end of my fiscal year, I pay no corporate income tax.

        Look at it any way you want, but the facts remain what they are.

        Like

      • I have $100. Obama takes $35, Romney takes $25 I have $10 l can choose to spend elsewhere. I would add that our business any small businesses are Sub-S corps.

        Like

  2. The Devil's Advocate says:

    I know we’re not directly discussing it, but consider these facts, relative to government spending:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

    Like

    • Rick Ungar’s article is a rehash of something CBS’ Rex Nutting (and well-known hack) tried to get away with last year. There’s a quite a bit of misdirection going on in the article because it fails to acknowledge the budget shenanigans that went on during the 2008 election year, which makes fully crediting the government’s fiscal year budget of 2009 to President Bush highly misleading.

      Here, the Democratic Party-controlled Congress only sent 3 of 12 appropriations bills for the 2009 budget year to President Bush for his signature before he left office, deliberately withholding the remaining 9 until after President Obama assumed office. As a result, unlike previous election years, the budget for the federal government’s 2009 fiscal year much more closely represents President Obama’s spending priorities than it does President Bush’s.

      That was a major deviation from how the federal government’s budget historically handled its budgets in previous election years, where the Presidents of previous years signed the budgets that applied during the first year of their successors in office. That makes comparing the federal government’s budgets per Presidential term an apples and oranges comparison where FY2009 is concerned.

      In any case, here’s a link to a contemporaneous report of President Obama’s signing of the “Omnibus” appropriations bill on 11 March 2009:

      http://www.concordcoalition.org/budget-report/141810/11-2009

      Congressional Quarterly also carried a fairly detailed report of the FY2009 budget omnibus’ appropriations bill history, but that requires a subscription to access. Here’s a key quote:

      The omnibus provided a total of $1.05 trillion — $410 billion of it for discretionary programs — and included many of the domestic spending increases Democrats were unable to get enacted while George W. Bush was president.

      Here’s the link:

      http://www.cq.com/doc/weeklyreport-3274850

      But of course, that completely dismisses President Obama’s previous role as a U.S. Senator from 2006 through 2008, where he supported or approved nearly every appropriations bill the Congress advanced (or in the case of 2008, where he was often not present to vote for the increases in spending during this period as he ran for President, where he instead signed on to the massive increases in spending after becoming President):

      http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/9490/

      That voting record alone would make President Obama uniquely responsible for all the federal government’s spending from Fiscal Year 2007 onward – far more so than President Bush….

      Like

  3. TAR says:

    If there was ever any doubt how Mr. Obama feels and thinks about small business and the entrepreneur who risks his own capital to start a business, it was put to bed this past Friday during his campaign stump. Obama’s belief is “if you own a business you didn’t build that”. His entire ideology surrounds around making government bigger, which he’s done his entire political life, especially these past 3 1/2 years. To say “We” in business didn’t build that? What an ignorant and quite frankly moronic statement. Obama, the Great Divider, is successfully driving a wedge between classes. Somehow we in business, don’t deserve the credit for risking our capital, our time, our energy and our expertise. Mr. Obama believes We owe it to government and somebody else? When times got tough from 2008 to present, we in business took measures to keep our businesses afloat. Did we get fat, happy and complacent during the good times – probably. But what’s different about business, than government and the Obama mentality, we in business looked for ways to CUT SPENDING and lived within our means. Obama has been doing a dutiful job in making the discussion about raising taxes on the “wealthy”. Demonize and drive a wedge between the electorate and distract from the real problem in Washington, D.C. and the White House – SPENDING! Generating revenue for government is NOT the problem. Spending Is the problem. Billions of taxpayer money wasted on risky ill advised green job initiatives, billions of taxpayer money given to foreign nations to restore “their” economies while America is suffering, increased government dependency – food stamp recipients up over 49%, an increase of 12 percentage points since 2008 and the list goes on. Government can confiscate all of the so-called “rich’s” income and wealth and still not satisfy the $16 trillion debt ($4+trillion amassed under Obama’s watch).
    Bottom line is for Obama to demonize the “wealthy” as being the problem is disingenuous and a flat out lie. Raising the tax rate on the rich to 39.6%, increasing dividend tax from 15% to 44%, increasing medicare tax an additional 2.2%, increasing Capital Gains tax from 15% to 30% and a new 3.8% tax on sale of your home (which affects ALL citizens, not just the wealthy), is irresponsible, but it fuels the governments appetite to continue spending and not be held accountable for a failed fiscal policy under the direction Obama and his administration.

    Like

    • The Devil's Advocate says:

      Consider this: The highest marginal tax bracket is at it’s lowest since 1917. Here’s a historical view: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

      Meanwhile, if we balance the budget tomorrow, that means more than a 40% cut to every program. How many small business owners rely on government contracts? How many small business owner’s customers are relying on government contracts? How many American children are fed with those food stamps whether we want them to be or not? An instantly-balanced budget would be an economic disaster.

      The “Green Jobs” debacles? Put that at the President’s feet. He pushed that fools errand since day one.

      As for the increase in food stamp recipients, unemployment goes up, food stamp receipts go up. That’s pretty fundamental. Solve the unemployment problem and food stamp payouts go down.

      Obama’s campaign speech forgets one incredibly obvious fact: If I built a business and benefited from public education, that’s fine because I’ve already paid those taxes. To come back and hit me up again is like the roofer who put the roof on my house coming by after every major storm and saying, “Roof kept the rain out again, didn’t it. You should pay me another thousand dollars.” It is true that businesses are not built in a vacuum. It’s true that American small business owners benefit from the infrastructure and civil peace that tax dollars pay for, but they pay for those services just like everyone else by paying their taxes. So what?

      You’re not wrong that spending needs to be brought under control, so how about we kill funding for corporate welfare, bank bailouts and agricultural subsidies? Let the big businesses collapse under the weight of their bad decisions so that small business can rise up and replace them.

      The wealthy that so many people are bad at are those who make their living trading imaginary slips of paper in the banking industry. It’s entirely too possible to borrow from the Fed at a near-zero interest rate, then “invest” in government bonds at a higher interest rate and make continual money without employing anyone, producing a thing and paying very few taxes. That’s a parasitic “I got mine so screw you guys” attitude that will doom this country if we let it continue.

      Like

      • TAR says:

        Devil, you managed to take the debate and change it to balancing the budget. Of course passing a budget is probably not a bad thing since the Senate, under Harry Reid’s leadership hasn’t passed a budget in over 1200 days. Even the Senate acted in a Bi-Partisan fashion for two years in a row and rejected the reckless spending budget of Mr. Obama.
        As for food stamps for funding children, isn’t always for the children. When “illegal” aliens can garner more of a monthly stipen than our seniors who were contributors their entire life to the social security system, there is something wrong with that. The word “illegal” should mean something, but it is now a derogatory word in the liberal vernacular.
        I would argue that it’s not business that enjoys the services of government, it is business who generates the local and municipal governments existance. Your argument is that of Elizabeth Warren, where business should be thankful for government because if it were not for government businesses would not exist. If business is thriving in a community, it paves the way for roadways and infrastructure, housing and provides a tax base for communities to flourish. Without business you have San Bernadino or dying townships in Massachusetts who have taxed themselves out of existance.
        Government bain of existence is funded through taxpayer monies. If a city/state/federal wants to provide services it generates income from assessing taxes. If the tax base is limited, you don’t have those levels of services say a city of Tampa or Boston can afford. Why are townships and cities across America doing away or merging their police and fire depts, the taxbase is no longer there. There are towns throughout New England that can no longer provide Fire Dept services due to diminished tax base, such as businesses closing and citizens uprooting families and moving out. Real Estate values are also impacted by that as well. Orange County Florida has lost over $26 billion dollars in real estate value, that means they must either cut expenses or raise taxes. How do you continue to raise taxes on an area that lost 40% of it’s value and has an unemployment rate of 12+%? At some point in time the spigot of money runs out for the taxpayer and the municipality.
        The President’s Green Job initiative is a clear example of reckless spending by the government, upwards to $100 billion of taxpayer money spent recklessly. $100 billion taken out of the economy and taken from taxpayers. Governments $800 million bailout costs taxpayers dearly and did not invigorate the economy. The job growth is anemic at best. However, when you have a President who’s mentality is bigger goverment, growing the private sector takes a back seat to a growing economy and a fruitful private sector.
        I would question Mr. Obama’s theory of economics, specifically his Keynsian theory which had been tried by the former Soviet Union and failed. Through Obama’s policies he has created a greater dependency on government programs, such as food stamps, unemployment compensation and yet his so-called “jobs” programs all revolve around growing government. That is throwing good money after bad. You grow government, you must then increase your tax base to cover the cost of government growth. That philosphy is not in tune with our Constitutional Republic.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        “When “illegal” aliens can garner more of a monthly stipen than our seniors who were contributors their entire life to the social security system, there is something wrong with that. ”

        I’m not sure anyone said that was a good situation, but, to be clear. It’s not. However, I’d rather mistakenly pay 10 illegal immigrants than let 100 American children go hungry because I’m angry with the system. Statistically, the level of fraud and waste in those programs is surprisingly low. (Wish I had the statistics handy, but you’d be surprised.)

        “If business is thriving in a community, it paves the way for roadways and infrastructure, housing and provides a tax base for communities to flourish.”

        So if I build a supermarket in the middle of an Iowa corn field, roads and electrical lines will appear? I think I’ve seen that movie, but I thought there was baseball in it… To pretend that business does not directly benefit from a gigantic number of governmental programs is simply ridiculous. But that’s okay, because business owners, just like their neighbors, have paid for those things just like everyone else does. My point was that I see the connection, but I don’t follow the President’s logic that somehow that makes a business owner more indebted that anyone else.

        “Real Estate values are also impacted by that as well. Orange County Florida has lost over $26 billion dollars in real estate value, that means they must either cut expenses or raise taxes. How do you continue to raise taxes on an area that lost 40% of it’s value and has an unemployment rate of 12+%?”

        To my knowledge, nobody, not even the President, is in favor of increasing taxes on the kind of people who are remotely affected by these statistics. But while you’re taking the typical conservative line, what most people are proposing is a rollback of the tax code to the Clinton years, or the Reagan years or any year in the 20th century.

        The fact is, the bankers are doing just fine. In fact, some are making record profits. Oil companies? Ditto. We are watching record-levels of wealth transfer in which unemployment is out of control and property values drop through the floor (per your statistics) yet the oligarchs are making out like gilded age robber barons. And whenever anyone suggests we create a tax bracket to capture some of the most rampant profit taking… my fellow conservatives start spouting about the poor middle class and excess taxation as if someone, somewhere had suggested that we tax them more. Which nobody has. You’re arguing the points you want to argue, not the ones I’m actually writing about. Have you considered a political career?

        “The President’s Green Job initiative is a clear example of reckless spending by the government, upwards to $100 billion of taxpayer money spent recklessly.”

        You aren’t wrong, but how much have we spent on military bases in the Middle East? How much have we spent on the F-35 fighter when, in fact, the F-22 still doesn’t have the kinks worked out yet? How much do we spend in oil company subsidies? Up to $52 bn a year. Will those companies go bankrupt without it, or is this just more corporate welfare? How much do we spend in agriculture subsidies, which wind up in the hands of factory farmers? That’d be $15 bn a year.

        But you’re not upset about that. Why not?

        “I would question Mr. Obama’s theory of economics, specifically his Keynsian theory which had been tried by the former Soviet Union and failed.”

        If you haven’t heard it before, hear it now: Keynesian Theory is dead. I say that on the grounds that if you can’t Keynes yourself with trillions of dollars over a multi-year span, then you can’t Keynes yourself at all. I think the monetary policy hawks like it because it’s a pretty straightforward formula and it’s one the government can actually manipulate with very little oversight. And it sounds great on paper. But in real life, it doesn’t work in large part because the government dollars get soaked up by fearful investors near the top of the monetary food chain, like banks and capital groups.

        I have never been a proponent of “growing the government.” However, I’m not blind to the fact that our government has financial obligations. Yes, cutting needs to be done, but I want to cut the things the most powerful men in the world would die to defend – like oil subsidies. Cutting school lunches and unemployment to people who need it is shameful when you’re handing out billions in tax breaks and subsidies to people who don’t need it.

        You want to raise money and balance the budget quickly?
        Cut all the subsidies and corporate welfare.
        Close 40% of the foreign military bases.
        Move every government employee (Congress and the Military included) to a 401(k) retirement program.
        Add a tax bracket of 45% for personal income over $500,000 / year.
        Treat all capital gains over $2,000,000 as ordinary income.

        There. I bet that puts us awfully close to a balanced budget and it looks, historically, more like what we were doing in America’s glory days. And we didn’t even have to cry about the middle class, rage about the immigrants, or kiss any wall street ass to do it.

        Like

      • TAR says:

        Well Devil, you have managed to take the good liberal stand. Hats off to you.
        I’d rather mistakenly pay 10 illegal immigrants than let 100 American children go hungry because I’m angry with the system. – First it’s not anger, just because I believe in the conservative point of view, doesn’t make me angry. Personally, if you are paying 10 illegal immigrant families, that’s 10 families too much. the families, including the children, need to be deported. That liberal kumbyya feel good mentality is what has contributed to deeper financial burdens. So we justify paying the 10 illegal families because “of the children”, sorry American taxpayers can no longer afford your free loading.
        So if I build a supermarket in the middle of an Iowa corn field, roads and electrical lines will appear? I think I’ve seen that movie, but I thought there was baseball in it – Field of Dreams was a great movie wasn’t it? – but the answer to your question is Yep! If an entreperneur sees an opportunity that could benefit a community while giving him/her a return on his investment and if that means building a supermarket in the middle of an Iowa corn field, God Bless him/her! Imagine the employment that supermarket would generate, the roads that could be built due to the increased tax revenue from that supermarket. Imagine the entreperneurliasm it could generate by another investor building say a tractor shop or Advanced Auto parts next to that supermarket to capture additional market share and the little mom & pop restaurant that goes up next to the supermarket because of the traffic generated to the market. If you build it they will come!
        To my knowledge, nobody, not even the President, is in favor of increasing taxes on the kind of people who are remotely affected by these statistics. – Please don’t give Obama that much credit, I know you follow the typical democratic talking points. When you take a look even at the healthcare bill the increase in taxes to even the middle class is staggering. 3.8% tax on the sale, of your home (no minimum limit on the price of the home), 3.2% tax on durable medical equipment such as cotton balls, swabs, sutures, needles 16,000 new IRS agents – who pays for them? Just the rich? Gas prices maintaining a price well over $3.20 per gallon, syphoning discretionary funds from middle class and poor Americans. $500 billion cut to Medicare.
        Well most people have it right regarding taxes, it’s not a problem of generating revenue for the government, it’s a spending problem. As long as Obama seeks to make more Americans dependent upon government for their existance, more money will have to paid by the taxpayers. As that base shrinks, there is no other alternative but to raise taxes. Obama has done a masterful job in skewing the debate to “raising taxes” and my favorite liberal line “paying your fair share”. But he and other liberals don’t define “fair share”.
        The fact is, the bankers are doing just fine. – Ah there is your class envy side.
        We are watching record-levels of wealth transfer in which unemployment is out of control and property values drop through the floor (per your statistics) yet the oligarchs are making out like gilded age robber barons.– Why is unemployment out of control? Is it because of the robber barons? Or could it be possible the policies coming out of Washington DC are pathetic? The president’s job bill was so riddled with increasing the size of government and controlling the $435 million job stimulous money, it did nothing to incentivize the private sector. Despite your Elizabeth Warren theory of economics, Government does not create the wealth for the private sector. The private sector is the engine that generates the revenue for governments to exist. but as government confiscates business or should I say Nationalizes business, then business becomes the employer and that becomes the problem. Unemployment is out of control because it sees our leaders like Obama as unstable and not business friendly. Businessmen/women understand the policies of growing government mean more has to be taken from the private sector in order to sate the government appetite. And at some point in time, business people say enough is enough. I already give 40%+ to the feds, my unemployment compensation taxes increased by over 900% and now their talking about extending benefits another year. 900%+ increase, that comes directly out of business. That additional $3,000+ per year could be used for something else.
        But in real life, it doesn’t work in large part because the government dollars get soaked up by fearful investors near the top of the monetary food chain, like banks and capital groups. — Ah there’s that class envy again, you’re making Obama proud!

        You aren’t wrong, but how much have we spent on military bases in the Middle East? How much have we spent on the F-35 fighter — I know I’m not wrong, but you cannot continue to justify your objection with throwing in the military. Hasn’t Obama’s green initiative programs been an absolute waste of taxpayer money? the answer is Yes! Stop there.
        Now you can go into the Middle East – funny you bring up the F-35, program is currently on hold, due to union negotiations. They were not happy with the contract and F-35 is not being produced. But you speak of the Middle East, it doesn’t stop at the bases my friend. It’s the entire Middle East policy under this president, in my opinion. We no longer should be in Afghanistan. We are not going to win the “hearts and minds” of the Afghani’s. Our new ROE are getting our soldiers killed on a daily basis. When Staff Sgt. Robert Bales is going on trial faster for allegedly killing 16 afghan civilians (6 months) than Major Nidal Hassan for premeditately killing 13 (+ an unborn) American Soldiers and wounding 29 – going on three years, that’s a problem. When the State Dept is spending $700 million of taxpayer money to build & rebuild mosques in the Middle east, that’s a problem. When Hamas, a State Dept listed terrorist organization receives over $1.4 Billion of taxpayer money from the Obama Administration to rebuild Gaza and shore up the Palestinian economy, that’s a problem. When the muslim brotherhood in Egypt are given over $3.2 billion of taxpayer money, yet another terrorist organization, that’s a problem.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        “Personally, if you are paying 10 illegal immigrant families, that’s 10 families too much. the families, including the children, need to be deported.”

        You and I both know how practical that isn’t. That’s like saying everyone should drive the speed limit. Did you drive the speed limit today?
        Look what happened to Alabama agriculture when they cracked down in illegal immigrants. The reality is, the illegal immigrants do jobs Americans won’t do at wages that are illegally cheap. The only sustainable, long-term solution is to reform immigration inside and out. That means a combination of cracking down on illegals (where’s that damned border fence?!) while at the same time making it reasonably possible for people to come to this country legally. We need to admit that “Give us your poor, your downtrodden, etc. ” is no longer the American way. Times have changed.
        But, let’s keep it practical. How much more funding would you like to divert to INS to round up these illegals? And where would you like to divert it from?

        “When you take a look even at the healthcare bill the increase in taxes to even the middle class is staggering. 3.8% tax on the sale, of your home (no minimum limit on the price of the home), 3.2% tax on durable medical equipment such as cotton balls, swabs, sutures, needles 16,000 new IRS agents – who pays for them? Just the rich? Gas prices maintaining a price well over $3.20 per gallon,”

        Now follow the money. Look for who the biggest lobbies for the healthcare bill were. It’s a bunch of really, really rich guys who stand to make a whole lot more money thanks to even more governmental regulation. And they don’t care who gets taxed, as long as it’s not them.

        Before you go citing it, though, you should know that the 3.8% sales tax on your home is false.
        http://www.factcheck.org/2010/04/a-38-percent-sales-tax-on-your-home/

        Have you noticed what gas prices are doing lately? That’s not to any politician’s credit, that’s just basic market economics at work, as skewed by the commodities trading market. You can’t give Obama credit for lowering the price of gas, but you also can’t stick him with raising it.

        “syphoning discretionary funds from middle class and poor Americans. $500 billion cut to Medicare.”

        Wait. What? You don’t want them taking funds away from middle class and poor Americans? And you don’t want them to cut the Medicare hand-out program?! How conservative are you?

        “Why is unemployment out of control? Is it because of the robber barons? Or could it be possible the policies coming out of Washington DC are pathetic?”

        Unemployment is out of control because businesses don’t hire people they don’t need. If I make widgets and I’m selling half as many widgets this year as last year, I may not need as many people on the assembly line. Any attempt by Washington to try to skew that is just misplaced bravado. You can’t make a business owner hire somebody he doesn’t need just because Washington thinks it’s a good idea.

        You’re going well out of your way to avoid any mention of the banking debacles that have helped get us to where we are. These are C-level executives who made millions in personal compensation that was paid for in part by government bailout money because they got too creative with their investment dollars.

        I don’t know about you, but if my business had a problem like that, I couldn’t expect a government check to bail it out. Lose a $1,000 it’s a bad day. Lose $1,000,000 you’re bankrupt. Lose $100,000,000,000 and the government makes it all better. That’s corporatized welfare, in which we privatize the gains, but socialize the losses. It’s an abomination and if you can’t see that, it’s because you’re willfully obtuse.

        “The private sector is the engine that generates the revenue for governments to exist. but as government confiscates business or should I say Nationalizes business, then business becomes the employer and that becomes the problem.”

        That’s very true, however some businesses due to size, scope or political in-dealing, have used undue influence to ensure that no credible competitor can rise (due to regulatory capture) or that they can use financial manipulation, aided by the government, in lieu of actual production or employment. And they get preferential tax treatment the likes of which we have never seen in the history of this country.

        “I already give 40%+ to the feds, my unemployment compensation taxes increased by over 900% and now their talking about extending benefits another year. 900%+ increase, that comes directly out of business. That additional $3,000+ per year could be used for something else.”

        Really? The maximum income tax bracket is 35% and that’s marginal, so only income in excess of that line (depending on how you’re filing) gets taxed at that rate. Mitt Romney didn’t pay 40% of the taxes you say you pay. In fact, the effective tax rate for most people on the really high end is well under 20%.

        You are exactly the person that’s getting screwed by the way things work. You make enough money to pay into the worst of the tax brackets, but not enough to rent a Senator and get an exemption carved out. You don’t make enough to use the tax attorney tricks the super-wealthy use, so you’re the one that gets to carry the load. And you’re afraid if we tax Mr. Romney any more that somehow it will arrive on your tax bill.

        “But in real life, it doesn’t work in large part because the government dollars get soaked up by fearful investors near the top of the monetary food chain, like banks and capital groups. — Ah there’s that class envy again, you’re making Obama proud!”

        You’re good at calling me names, but can you actually refute that fact?

        “I know I’m not wrong, but you cannot continue to justify your objection with throwing in the military. Hasn’t Obama’s green initiative programs been an absolute waste of taxpayer money? the answer is Yes! Stop there.”

        You want me to stop there, because you don’t want me calling out your favorite Republican spending programs you support. I never said it wasn’t a waste of taxpayer dollars. Solyndra is legendary, but you don’t want me cutting your precious subsidies or military.

        “It’s the entire Middle East policy under this president, in my opinion.”

        This president? EVERY President. Those armies didn’t get deployed on accident. We didn’t just mistakenly sail an aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf the other day. Obama has failed the American people by keeping us engaged in military conflict when we didn’t have to be. No doubt about that. The foreign aid situation is absolutely disastrous, but you should know that we deliberately buy off a lot of organizations in the Middle East so that they won’t attack our bases, embassies and friends. But that’s a loser scenario, because at some point we run out of money or they raise the price of compliance. We need to run, not walk, away from the Middle East.

        When the world is no longer dependent on oil for energy, they can go back to killing one another in the desert and we won’t have to be involved. I can’t wait for that day. (Don’t misread that as some kind of ridiculous endorsement of government-sponsored energy policy.)

        You and I aren’t so very far apart, really. I think we need to look into how we tax our super-rich. I outlined my plan for fixing that situation, which you didn’t really comment on. We agree that government spending is a problem. The difference is that I want to take the cuts out of subsidy payments, corporate welfare and the military before I start cutting medicaid and unemployment.

        Like

      • TAR says:

        With regards to oil subsidies continue: $570 million for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. (This program is classified as a petroleum subsidy because it artificially reduces the price of fuel, which helps oil companies sell more of it). this helps many seniors and low incomers and worth the subsidy.
        The second largest category is just under $1 billion in tax exemptions for farm fuel. The justification for that tax exemption is that fuel taxes pay for roads, and the farm equipment that benefits from the tax exemption is technically not supposed to be using the roads.

        Really? The maximum income tax bracket is 35% and that’s marginal, so only income in excess of that line (depending on how you’re filing) gets taxed at that rate. — You are confusing income tax with the Unemployment Compensation Taxes paid by businesses on employee income for the first $7,000 of earned income. Our business rate went from .0010 to just over 5%. When Congress authorized the extention of unemployment compensation, the State of Florida was borrowing over $350 million per month. In 2011, the state was required to start paying the $2 billion back and raised our business rate to 5%. We had no recourse and the rate is still at 5%. We can’t charge our employees and in my business specifically (insurance) we cannot pass the cost onto the consumer. So we just don’t hire anyone and try to do the work ourselves, even if it means working 6 and 7 days a week. Of course under Obama’s Friday comment – I still don’t earn it.

        Devil, we have a disagreement under many issues and close on others. I reject Elizabeth Warren and Obama’s rationale that if it were not for government business wouldn’t prosper. If it was not for business, governments would prosper. The answer to growing the economy is not by government spending (sorry investing) taxpayer money. We tried that with the almost $1 trillion stimulous and it did not work. Funny thing is Elizabeth Warren sent out the trial balloon in October 2011: “There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody”. Now Obama adopted the same speech and dialogue (sort of a Joe Biden and Nigel plaguerize) this past Friday, saying the same thing. With obama every thing revolves around Government. Growing the economy is Government’s responsibility. Confiscating wealth is governments entitlement. Investing taxpayer money is Governments responsibility. Well strongly disagree. There are plenty of people who got rich on their own. That’s what makes America great. hell even Gates and Jobs got rich on their own, starting their business in a garage. It’s an insult to think that even Gates and Jobs needed government to attain the success they enjoy today (well Jobs is dead). Once their respective businesses rose to a certain level, they had to comply with government rules and regs, that’s a given. However, could they have attained that level quicker without onerous government regulations? Now Gates can enjoy his wealth, setting up a foundation to help the less fortunate, no different than Tiger Woods or Warren Buffett donating $22 billion of his wealth to the Gates Foundation. If Buffett feels as though he owes the government for his success, why didn’t he donate it to the government? $22 billion is like 5 1/2 days of spending. it’s a drop in the bucket. At least that $22 billion may take some pressure off a community that is spending tax dollars to fund some sort of program, such as the failed Head Start program.

        Devil, I would just take exception to the constant bashing of the wealthy in America and the corporations who have succeeded. There was never anything wrong with that in America.
        We can agree the buying off of politicians must stop, by lobbyists and get back to grass roots constitutional politics. The U.S. Constitution, not the U.N. or some other foreign body. Revenue generation by the government is not the problem. Spending is.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        I don’t back Warren or Obama. I paid my taxes and if I decide to start a business and make some money or not is not a concern. I don’t consume extra government resources because I own a business.

        As for the unemployment compensation. It’s paid on the first $7,000 of earned income, right? So 5% of $7,000 is $350 per employee, right? Is that $350 enough to keep you from hiring staff? If you’re running your business that close to the edge, we should be discussing business strategy, not politics. Either that, or I don’t know how this math is done. I use a payroll company that does that for me.

        If it were not for business, there would be no government and no taxes to worry about. That’s been true for so long that I didn’t know it needed to be said.

        “The answer to growing the economy is not by government spending (sorry investing) taxpayer money.”

        I know. Cuts have to be made. I just want to see it come from subsidies, bailouts, defense and foreign programs before we cut the first nickel out of domestic programs. I might even be convinced to keep NASA around on the grounds that they’ve done a lot of good over a great number of years.

        “There are plenty of people who got rich on their own.”

        The phrase “On Their Own” is a very subjective phrase. Did they have their own ideas? Supply their own capital? Go to a public school? Drive on a public road? Fly from a public airport?

        I don’t deny that those men and men like me benefit from public services. Where Ms. Warren and I disagree is that she somehow seems to believe that how I chose to use those public resources (on a business) somehow puts me into greater debt. It doesn’t.

        “I would just take exception to the constant bashing of the wealthy in America and the corporations who have succeeded. There was never anything wrong with that in America.”

        Do you read the news?

        http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/17/us-hsbc-compliance-senate-idUSBRE86F18220120717

        http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/17/us-hsbc-compliance-senate-idUSBRE86F18220120717

        I do not begrudge anyone success. I only ask that they follow the law, be no more able to influence the law than any other individual, and that they be held responsible if they violate the law. Do you believe that we have that?

        Like

      • TAR says:

        As for the unemployment compensation. It’s paid on the first $7,000 of earned income, right? So 5% of $7,000 is $350 per employee, right? Is that $350 enough to keep you from hiring staff? If you’re running your business that close to the edge, we should be discussing business strategy, not politics. Either that, or I don’t know how this math is done. —
        Your math is fine, your numbers are a bit off. It’s no longer $7,000 of income it went to $8,500, so that’s now $425 at 5% vs $12. An increase in cost and I do appreciate your concern for my business. However if it was just labor costs that I had, I wouldn’t worry about how many people I hire. that $30,000 year employee is not just costing us $30,000 yr. UCT 6 is now $425 (from $12 – a political decision regarding the increase), Work Comp is $800 yr up 8.5% this year, Health Insurance cost is $5,400 yr (up 12%), Matching FICA at 7.65% or $2,295 yr. So at a minimum that $30,000 per yr employee is costing $38,920 – $743 per month in additional expenses. I just wish the $350 or $425 was all that person cost.

        The answer to growing the economy is not by government spending (sorry investing) taxpayer money.”
        I know. Cuts have to be made. I just want to see it come from subsidies, bailouts, defense and foreign programs before we cut the first nickel out of domestic programs. I might even be convinced to keep NASA around on the grounds that they’ve done a lot of good over a great number of years. —
        Well we did find some common ground here! You’re starting to come around…

        The phrase “On Their Own” is a very subjective phrase. Did they have their own ideas? Supply their own capital? Go to a public school? Drive on a public road? Fly from a public airport? —
        Many people who start businesses, didn’t look to government for help nor rely on government for there existence. They provided their own capital to start up and run their businesses, whether they went to public, private or home schooled. So if a person goes to a government school it was government who provided the vehicle? That government school doesn’t exist without the taxpayer. That government paved road doesn’t happen without a tax base. That airport could still be the little McCoy Airport if were not for business to move into Central Florida and now we have Orlando International Airport. While government now provides the dollars for airport expansion, it’s still taxpayers who fund the government in order to make those expansions. If business didn’t see an opportunity in Central Florida, I4 would not be 8 lanes running through Downtown Orlando. So business still takes the risk and due to their success, people have followed to become employees of that business, buy and rent housing, purchase goods and services that grow an economy. As more people move in, enterpernuerialism increases and innovators see an opportunity to provide a service – open a cafe or restaurant, McDonalds or Burger King, computer and software services. Had Disney and Seaworld and other entertainment giants not risked their capital and move to Central Florida, we would not enjoy the growth of this community and probably still be an agricultural community and not near as big. Governments existence is due to tax revenue derived by individuals and corporations. Government didn’t build Orlando on it’s own. Certainly Disney was a major factor in the expansion of Central Florida. Devil I think this is where we both would agree that Ms. Warren’s statement, as well as Obama mimicing her statement is wrong. I guess it would be correct if you believe in bigger government. Which is why last Friday’s comments by Obama was very insulting to business men and women throughout America. Somehow we should be indebted to government for our successes and have some form of guilt because we are successful.
        then again, maybe that’s why they are politicians and acedemics. They could not make it in business on their own.

        Like

  4. TAR says:

    Reply was limited above so had to use page 2 –
    but I want to cut the things the most powerful men in the world would die to defend – like oil subsidies. — I’m kind of sadden by your demand to cut oil subsidies. You bemoan the fact that if the Children are saved by 10 illegal families collecting welfare it’s the right thing to do. Well by cutting oil subsidies what about the impoverished families of Nigeria? It’s bad enough Boka Haram is committing genocide against Christians, now you would support the evil oil companies shutting off money to the poor children of Nigeria or the impoverished families in Venuzuela being suppressed from the dictator Chavez.

    Cutting school lunches and unemployment to people who need it is shameful when you’re handing out billions in tax breaks and subsidies to people who don’t need it. — Please cutting school lunches is shameful. What’s shameful is Michelle Obama’s food initiave program. The largest school district in America, L.A. County has Michelle’s menu – 21,000 students a day are dumping their food in the trash. Kids are bringing lunches from home. What is the cost of 21,000 students throwing away food? Obama just gave $174 million of taxpayer money to Palestine, how many school lunches would that pay for? In 2011, Obama Administration gave $700 million to rebuild mosques in the middle east – how many school lunches or unemployed would that help? Add in the $535 million of taxpayer money to the failed Solyndra or the $540 million to Fisker Auto that went to Finland?

    Close 40% of the foreign military bases.
    Move every government employee (Congress and the Military included) to a 401(k) retirement program — No argument from me. Close our South Korean bases and move our troops to our U.S. borders especially in Arizona, when U.S. citizens are getting killed, robbed and raped by Mexican gangs and cartels. Stop Saturday mail delivery while you’re at it and cut Congress pay from $175,000 to $125,000. No congressional staffer should be making more than their Congressman/woman. Cut all 43 Czar offices and employees. Cut Dept of Energy budget in half, Cut EPA budget in half, Cut the Dept of Education leaving 50 employees, one for each state. Since all 50 states in the U.S. has an Education dept, there is no need for taxpayers to pay for duplicate coverage.

    Sorry you had to end with a Class Envy – contrary to Obama and the democratic party talking points we don’t kiss Wall Streets ass. Unless of course your Obama campaigning.

    Like

  5. The Devil's Advocate says:

    “Well by cutting oil subsidies what about the impoverished families of Nigeria?”

    So you’re saying that by paying oil execs in Texas, we’re somehow saving Nigeria? I’m willing to live with that collateral damage if you are. The oil companies, though probably overregulated, are making plenty of profit without us giving them taxpayer money, too.

    “Please cutting school lunches is shameful. What’s shameful is Michelle Obama’s food initiave program. The largest school district in America, L.A. County has Michelle’s menu – 21,000 students a day are dumping their food in the trash. Kids are bringing lunches from home. What is the cost of 21,000 students throwing away food?”

    You won’t hear an argument from me on that one, but my actual point was that giving our money to agribusiness or big oil is a bad idea if we’re considering cutting other programs so we can continue to afford it.

    “Add in the $535 million of taxpayer money to the failed Solyndra or the $540 million to Fisker Auto that went to Finland?”

    So we should give money to oil companies and corn subsidies, but not to Solyndra or Fisker, right? I’m not sure I see the distinction. They’re both EQUALLY WRONG.

    “Close our South Korean bases and move our troops to our U.S. borders especially in Arizona, when U.S. citizens are getting killed, robbed and raped by Mexican gangs and cartels.”

    Absolutely. South Korean bases are part of the 40% I’d cut.

    “Stop Saturday mail delivery while you’re at it”

    How about let me BUY Saturday mail delivery if I WANT it? If my business depends on it, shouldn’t I have the opportunity to buy the service that I need?

    “No congressional staffer should be making more than their Congressman/woman. Cut all 43 Czar offices and employees. Cut Dept of Energy budget in half, Cut EPA budget in half, Cut the Dept of Education leaving 50 employees, one for each state. Since all 50 states in the U.S. has an Education dept, there is no need for taxpayers to pay for duplicate coverage.”

    You’re still headed in the right direction. Just promise me you’ll also kill the corporate welfare and I might even vote for you.

    “Sorry you had to end with a Class Envy”

    In your mind anyone who’s unhappy with the failed state of banking regulation and the gross abuses of regulatory recapture in that arena is “just jealous” and therefore their arguments bear no merit? I thought we got past ad hominem in high school debate class, but I may have overestimated the quality of a good Southern education so I’ll help you out: “Calling someone names doesn’t make their argument less valid, it just makes you look like a child,”

    Like

    • TAR says:

      Sorry you took offense to the Class Envy remarks, you ended many of your replies with wealthy are the problem. Those are the democratic talking points driving a wedge in our society. I don’t begrudge a corporation or individual from making a profit. It is not up to Washington or any politician to decide what is “fair”. Obama has made this election about what HE deems is “fair” and frankly that’s just wrong in my opinion. It’s getting to be the same old tired argument. God Bless a business for making a profit or an individual for becoming a millionaire, that’s the American dream for many Americans.

      I don’t begrudge Romney for making money in America. He did it legally and within the guidelines as a venture capitalist. You confused his tax paying of Earned Income versus Investment Income. It was a democratically controlled Congress who devised the tax scheme on Investment Income. Obama has cleverly skewed that argument to again drive a wedge between those Americans declaring Earned Income versus Investment Income, like Romney and Warren Buffet. Buffet’s earned income is $175,000, but investment income is $22 billion from 85 corporations. Buffet pays the appropriate tax on his earned income and congressional applied tax rate of 15% on investment income. As Romney had done. Somehow now they have screwed the middle class and America? That’s plain wrong and a flat out lie.
      Mitt Romney didn’t pay 40% of the taxes you say you pay. – No he didn’t pay 40% because the income derived was “investment income”. Obama relies on dumbing down of America so the average Joe doesn’t understand the difference between the two. If the effective tax rate for investment income is 15%, then Romney as well as Buffet paid and stayed within the IRS guidelines. The argument by Obama is just plain dishonest. But i wouldn’t expect anything less from a Community Organizer.

      As far as giving credit to Obama for gas prices, where do you start? He’s been asleep at the wheel or content with gas prices over $3.00+ per gallon versus when he took office gas prices were $1.80 per gallon and heating oil under $2 per gallon. just because gas prices went from $4.10 to $3.10, I should now applaud him? When he and his administration revoke 85 refinery permits, Obama nixes the XL pipeline that would have allowed for the flow of oil to the U.S. and create a minimum of 20,000 jobs, nixed deep water drilling and drilling in Anwar, he deserves no accolades for gas prices dropping to $3.20 gallon. There still up over 177% since he took office. America has plenty of it’s own resources that we can tap in to, lasting us an estimated 500 plus years. I’m pretty confident with American ingenuity we could achieve an alternate fuel source in 500+ years. Honestly if we can reduce oil & gas prices the next 40 years, I could care less what happens after that, I’ll be dead (lol).

      You want me to stop there, because you don’t want me calling out your favorite Republican spending programs you support. – Well sorry for having you make an assumption – I don’t have a favorite Republican spending program. So not sure where you’re going with that, other than taking a shot at me cause I’m a conservative. As far as I’m concerned all programs are on the table. Government has to go back to the basics. However, we have those in Congress who are power hungry, they love the attention and money it brings directly or indirectly as campaign donations. Our politicians have lost their way, whether it’s due to lobbyists or White House payoffs, they are no longer representative of the people. Leadership, in my opinion, does show that sense of urgency to control spending. They are all to concerned with the political ramifications.

      “It’s the entire Middle East policy under this president, in my opinion.” This president? EVERY President. Those armies didn’t get deployed on accident. – Let’s not forget it was candidate Obama who had all the answers to the middle east situation. I fully understand every president maintains a presence in the middle east. But Obama was the one with the answers. And now it’s Obama who is very supportive of a terrorist organization who wants nothing more than to destroy America and the West – The Muslim Brotherhood. Congress, irrespective of party affiliation, needs to hold him accountable for his funding of and allowing the muslim brotherhood in America. We are not going to change the hearts and minds of muslims in the middle east, therefore we need to end the mission, give our support to Israel, who is now surrounded by the muslim brotherhood and their affiliated organizations. Leave Iraq and leave Afghanistan (maybe carpet bomb Afghanistan as we leave).

      I outlined my plan for fixing that situation, which you didn’t really comment on. — I did not comment until I looked into the Oil Industry subsidies myself and found a Forbes article that showed American oil subsidies in 2010 was $4.5 billion. $1 billion of that was for the Strategic Oil Reserves. I would think we need the Strategic Oil reserves since we are not making any drilling prospects due, we don’t want to offend the environmentalists and subject to onerous government rules and regs.

      Think I hit the wall again for length of comment. Will continue.

      Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        “Sorry you took offense to the Class Envy remarks, you ended many of your replies with wealthy are the problem.”

        It’s more that you’re using that line as a crutch. You don’t want to acknowledge the problems that are out there due to some very wealthy and powerful people who are getting theirs at the expense of those less fortunate than themselves.

        I come from a long line of business owners, and I am one, too. I was raised to believe that when you own a business, you get the lion’s share of the benefit when business is good, but when business is bad, you’re the first one to make a personal sacrifice to keep the business afloat. You lay off employees or cut wages as a last resort. If that makes you wealthy, good for you.

        So that’s what I was taught. So when I see a business paying it’s upper-level executives seven figures while simultaneously laying people off, I think, “Wait, that’s not how it’s supposed to be.”

        I assume that Romney and Buffet and company paid taxes according to the law, but I think that our capital gains tax system is simply too skewed. It’s a non-progressive tax and it’s a tax advantage that only those wealthy enough to make significant capital gains can take advantage of. I am aware of the standard “if we tax them, they won’t invest” rhetoric, but reality doesn’t bear that out. It’s like Keynesian Economics – it looks good on paper until real life sets in.

        “just because gas prices went from $4.10 to $3.10, I should now applaud him? ”

        Nope. Politicians don’t set gas prices. He’s also not responsible for the dollar weed problem in my back yard. Coincidence does not equal causation.

        “nixed deep water drilling”

        Nobody was going to authorize more drilling after the fiasco in the Gulf of Mexico recently. That’s just political reality. Once we are no longer dependent on oil, I’ll miss the environmental beauty more than I will miss my relationship with the Middle East. I consider NOT drilling domestically to be an investment in the future.

        ” I’m pretty confident with American ingenuity we could achieve an alternate fuel source in 500+ years.”

        Hey, that’s the same ingenuity that put a man on the moon, built the Hoover dam and won World War II. Although those were all government projects, I’m confident that we can develop an alternate fuel source if and when it becomes truly necessary. Right now, it makes economic sense to just burn oil. When oil becomes scarce we’ll develop something else.

        ” As far as I’m concerned all programs are on the table. Government has to go back to the basics. However, we have those in Congress who are power hungry, they love the attention and money it brings directly or indirectly as campaign donations. Our politicians have lost their way, whether it’s due to lobbyists or White House payoffs, they are no longer representative of the people. Leadership, in my opinion, does show that sense of urgency to control spending.”

        Then end the bailouts, the subsidies, and the corporate welfare. Then give me some basic tax reform (capping capital gains would probably do it) and then let’s re-evaluate our position in a year or two and adjust as required. That’s all i’d ask.

        Actually, our government it represents the people very well. The people have learned that they can vote “YES” to tax cuts while voting “YES” to more benefits and then blame Washington for the result. See here for a humorous look: http://www.mightyheaton.com/2012/06/14/i-dont-blame-congress-i-blame-you/

        We have a government with financial obligations that were set in place by our representatives. And, in the 21st century, there are things we expect our government to provide. That’s not all bad, but we do have to pay for it. I don’t believe we can simply cut our way to prosperity. We can’t agree on what to cut and those who are in power will make sure that their favorites don’t get cut. Our Byzantine tax code has a lot of exemptions, provisions and credits that apply to very few people or that few can afford to really take advantage of – unless, of course, you’re already very wealthy.

        The perfect storm of historically-low tax rates, historically high bailout dollars, and awful regulatory environment have created an environment in which, as unemployment goes up and property values plummet, those on the top are making more than ever. Because when you’re that big, you don’t have to sacrifice and there’s something wrong with that. We used to be on the same team, right? Now, the biggest businesses have no fear of rising small business, because they can ensure that we get regulated to death. A perfect example is the small business exemption in the new healthcare law. It looks good on the surface, but it will ensure that if a small business has 49 employees that 50th employee will be the most expensive person they’ve ever put on the payroll. Therefore, it’s best if they just remain small and don’t challenge the big, national companies. Every small business exemption is carved out just like that, and I don’t believe it’s an accident.

        Government does not want to see small businesses fail. It is not in the government’s best interest to see a small business stop growing, but do you know whose best interests it is in? BIG business. I truthfully believe that the big banks and big businesses are the number one enemy to small business in America because they have the most to lose from our flexibility, innovation and courage.

        Here’s something else funny about business and regulation and why it poisons small business but not the big guys: http://www.mightyheaton.com/2011/12/06/how-federal-regulation-screws-over-small-businesses-a-story-of-cupcakes/

        Like

      • TAR says:

        It’s more that you’re using that line as a crutch. You don’t want to acknowledge the problems that are out there due to some very wealthy and powerful people who are getting theirs at the expense of those less fortunate than themselves. —
        Devil I would strongly disagree. I don’t need a crutch and quite frankly I get put off by your constant bashing of success. Because that’s what it boils down to, your crutch is the class envy. On one hand you say you don’t begrudge success, yet you find excuses to malign those who attained success and a level of wealth. It’s the evil bankers, it’s Romney for not paying 35% in taxes. Is it just because you have a problem with Capitalism or Free Enterprise? Free Enterprise is a damn good system, it’s worked for over 225 years in America. There are winners and losers. You can take risks or go with the flow. There are those baseball players who are making $500k a year and there are the Derek Jeters making $10 million a year. God Bless them both. Maybe the guy making $500k a year is just not as talented and marketable as Jeter is. But it seems with liberals all the way to the Occupyers they all want what Derek Jeter has but don’t want to pay their dues.

        Nobody was going to authorize more drilling after the fiasco in the Gulf of Mexico recently. That’s just political reality. Once we are no longer dependent on oil, I’ll miss the environmental beauty more than I will miss my relationship with the Middle East. I consider NOT drilling domestically to be an investment in the future. —
        Why? Why can’t we authorize drililng in the Gulf of Mexico? In 2004, 05 & 06 the Gulf of Mexico was hit with no less than 8 hurricanes including Hurricane Katrina. How many oil spills were there? how many oil rigs erupted spilling oil in the Gulf? uhh None! What happened with the BP spill was a disaster, but so was the response from this administration. Obama & company dropped the ball. obama could have suspended the Jones Act and let foreign vessels enter the Gulf to assist in repairing the damaged pipeline. But he is so beholden to the union, he did not. 60 days went by, 70, 90 days passed and nothing. Environmentalists were silent with the inaction of the president, but dumped on BP. hell if that were Bush in the White House the environmental whacko’s would have went mental. But because their good little liberal occupying the White House all the lefties were silent. suspend the Jones Act, let the foreign nations who deal with oil spills assist in repairing the damage, limit the damage and move on. And how much of the environment has been damaged in Alaska with the pipeline? Nothing! We have the resources right here in America, let’s use them, whether it’s shale oil, natural gas or coal. Today coal fire plants are burning cleaner than ever, there is absolutely no reason to terminate coal fire plants, unless you are beholden to the environmental lobby and seek higher energy prices. There have been enough technological advances that give us cleaner and better energy through coal and nuclear.

        I couldn’t agree with you more on bailouts. Let AIG fail, let GM fail. There is enough American ingenuity to restart those businesses without government taking over. GM labor costs and pension payouts are ridiculous. When your paying 50 & 60% higher labor costs than your competitors like Toyota and Honda and not making a superior product, nor making a profit, you must do something wrong. That’s $180 billion of taxpayer money that could have went back directly to the taxpayers or used to retire debt.

        Government does not want to see small businesses fail. It is not in the government’s best interest to see a small business stop growing —
        Mr. Obama has not made it a priority in the past 3 1/2 years to help small business. He has rather “invested” taxpayer money in growing government than getting out of the way of business. Do you know how many times Obama has met with The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and/or The National Federation of Independent Business, two of the largest representatives of business in the U.S.A.- zero! Obama and the democrats give lip service to business. They simply say enough to get by and appease the media. Private sector growth has been anemic at best, but growth of government has been good. Demonizing the wealthy and the risk takers implying capitalism is bad, it’s not “fair”. somehow these people stop paying their “fairshare”. Well what is “fair”? How much should their “fairshare” be?

        Politicians don’t set gas prices. He’s also not responsible for the dollar weed problem in my back yard. Coincidence does not equal causation. —
        Politicians may not set gas prices, but their policies have a direct affect on gas prices. Not drilling in Anwar, suspending and/or terminating deep water drilling, closing Coal Fire plants, terminating refinery licenses and permits, terminating the XL Pipeline all have an impact on pricing, supply and demand and jobs. It also continues to keep America dependent upon foreign sources of energy. If politicians find ways to limit supplies, you artificially keep prices inflated. If memory serves correct, then Sen. Obama criticized Pres. Bush for not doing anything about rising gas prices. Now that Obama is president he can’t do anything about it and Obama offers up some lame as excuse – it’s the speculators fault. Well we’ve learned with Obama it’s always someone elses fault. That’s now leadership.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        On Energy Policy:
        I believe that Oil is a short-term solution. I’d rather put money into nuclear power

        “It’s the evil bankers, it’s Romney for not paying 35% in taxes. Is it just because you have a problem with Capitalism or Free Enterprise?”

        Then I’ll ask you – Do you truthfully and honestly believe that no one on Wall Street today is guilty of anything more serious than making a mistake? That they should have been bailed out with taxpayer dollars, then set loose to do it again with no further consequence?

        But you know what? It’s not about opinion, it’s about fact.

        Are you aware that banks are borrowing from the Fed at near-zero interest rates, then collecting a financial bonus for retaining that money as a capital reserve, thus making a profit while doing virtually nothing? And if you are aware of it, do you agree with that practice?

        Here’s the facts:
        http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2010/05/are-banks-borrowing-from-the-f.html

        http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/the-banks-in-collusion-wi_b_1681685.html

        LIBOR Banking Scandal: The Fed knew it was corrupt back in 2008. How did they address it?

        Here’s the facts: http://www.slate.com/blogs/spitzer/2012/07/17/libor_scandal_and_bernanke_the_fed_knew_libor_was_corrupt_in_2008_so_why_didn_t_it_act_.html

        It’s important to see how corrupt this situation really is. It’s not their success that troubles me, it’s what they’re willing to do to maintain it.

        “Mr. Obama has not made it a priority in the past 3 1/2 years to help small business.”

        If you’re waiting for Obama to help your small business, you believe less in free market entrepreneurship than I thought. You’re an “I built it myself” guy, so why are you advocating that the government do a single thing to help you out?

        “Demonizing the wealthy and the risk takers implying capitalism is bad, it’s not “fair”. somehow these people stop paying their “fairshare”. Well what is “fair”? How much should their “fairshare” be?”

        Hey, I’m not demonizing them. They’re doing it for themselves in the news every day. I’m just posting the highlights.

        It’s not the wealthy or the risk takers that are a problem. It’s the people who can use their wealth to wield undue influence in our political process that’s the problem. These are the people who can get the keyhole tax exemptions passed. These are the people that can finance elections. And they do not want you to know about it:

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/16/republicans-block-bill-on-transparency/

        I don’t have a problem with success and I don’t have a problem with wealth. I have a problem with backroom deals designed to benefit a very small group of people. These are benefits that are negotiated through campaign donations and lobbyists.

        We need to grossly simplify our tax structure and configure it to eliminate the special deductions and favors we’ve granted to specific industries, specific investment vehicles and probably the blanket “all-you-can make” capital gains structure. I bet if we did that, we would find that we could lower tax rates for everybody, rich people included, and small business owners could find a more level playing field from which to compete with whatever national brand they’re up against.

        For me, it’s all about the government NOT giving the biggest businesses and the wealthiest people any more regulatory or tax advantage than the small business. Let’s get that playing field as level as we can and see who’s got the stamina and ingenuity to come out on top.

        Like

      • TAR says:

        “It’s the evil bankers, it’s Romney for not paying 35% in taxes. Is it just because you have a problem with Capitalism or Free Enterprise?”
        Then I’ll ask you – Do you truthfully and honestly believe that no one on Wall Street today is guilty of anything more serious than making a mistake? —
        Please, that was never the intent with my comment. One would have to be naive to believe in an absolute like that. There are bad doctors, lawyers and politicians as well. But you did avoid the question and decided to deflect by asking another question. So I’ll take that as you having a problem with Capitalism and Free Enterprise. Good job!

        Are you aware that banks are borrowing from the Fed at near-zero interest rates, then collecting a financial bonus for retaining that money as a capital reserve, thus making a profit while doing virtually nothing? And if you are aware of it, do you agree with that practice? —
        Yep! and also aware that Obama’s buddy George Soros is making millions upon millions as well, buying defunct real estate loans. He is the same whore who nearly destroyed the U.K. and was thrown out of Russia for trying to corner oil market.

        If you’re waiting for Obama to help your small business, you believe less in free market entrepreneurship than I thought. You’re an “I built it myself” guy, so why are you advocating that the government do a single thing to help you out? —
        Quite frankly you make a poor argument here. This what the initial thread was about. It was Obama who told the world last Friday if you own a business you didn’t build it. We, in business, are not waiting for Obama to help our business, but we don’t expect a president to dismantle capitalism and have contempt for the Free Enterprise system. Nice try in twisting my comment and interpreting it as I expect Obama to be the saviour. As a matter of fact, we in business want government to get out of the way of business. Onerous taxes, implementation of Obamacare Tax, government living beyond their means have lead to a very unstable business climate, even though I’m a “I built it myself guy”.

        “Demonizing the wealthy and the risk takers implying capitalism is bad, it’s not “fair”. somehow these people stop paying their “fairshare”. Well what is “fair”? How much should their “fairshare” be?”
        Hey, I’m not demonizing them. They’re doing it for themselves in the news every day. I’m just posting the highlights. —
        I guess I’ve been misinterpreting your posts?? The income tax brackets are unfair…the wealthy aren’t paying enough…the wealthy have advantages we don’t have… They’re doing it themselves in the news every day. Yea their in the news everyday because Obama and company are exploiting them. They have made the attacking of “Fairness” and paying your “fairshare” the central part of their campaign. As if the panacea of confiscating all the wealthies wealth is going to pay the deficit down and cure America’s financial woes. 329,000 people making over $10 million year. Let’s demand all their wealth to pay down the treasury. When that runs dry, move to those making $1 mill to $10 mill, when that runs dry go after the millionaires making $250,000 per year and more.
        Let those innovaters create businesses, which in turn create jobs. Creating jobs creates taxpayers who pay taxes and utilize services that spur additional businesses and jobs. So those “I built it myself guys” can feel as though they are contributing to society and making a difference.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        “So I’ll take that as you having a problem with Capitalism and Free Enterprise.”

        I can barely speak for all the words you’re putting in my mouth. I never said anything of the sort. I like Capitalism, Free Enterprise, America, the Bible and all that good stuff. Yay, America!

        “Are you aware that banks are borrowing from the Fed at near-zero interest rates, then collecting a financial bonus for retaining that money as a capital reserve, thus making a profit while doing virtually nothing? And if you are aware of it, do you agree with that practice? —
        Yep! and also aware that Obama’s buddy George Soros is making millions upon millions as well, buying defunct real estate loans. He is the same whore who nearly destroyed the U.K. and was thrown out of Russia for trying to corner oil market.”

        So you know that Obama’s cronies as well as Romney’s are capitalizing on the broken system. How about we make that a little harder for them to do? Perhaps we can even push them into legitimate business.

        “This what the initial thread was about. It was Obama who told the world last Friday if you own a business you didn’t build it. We, in business, are not waiting for Obama to help our business, but we don’t expect a president to dismantle capitalism and have contempt for the Free Enterprise system.”

        Obama wants to dismantle capitalism, right? Have you a factual source for that, or is that just your opinion?

        “Hey, I’m not demonizing them. They’re doing it for themselves in the news every day. I’m just posting the highlights. –
        I guess I’ve been misinterpreting your posts?? The income tax brackets are unfair…the wealthy aren’t paying enough…the wealthy have advantages we don’t have… They’re doing it themselves in the news every day. Yea their in the news everyday because Obama and company are exploiting them”

        You said Obama and company are exploiting “them” … What is Obama doing to exploit “them”, specifically? How is Obama personally responsible for the consistent news reports of bad (or at least unethical) behavior in the banking and investment fields?

        “As if the panacea of confiscating all the wealthies wealth is going to pay the deficit down and cure America’s financial woes.”

        It won’t. You could confiscate the wealth of many and not solve the problem. This is not a problem you can solve only with expense cuts any more than you can solve it only with tax hikes. It takes a balanced approach and I believe that our country would benefit greatly from a simplified tax code that eliminates many of the loopholes and deductions that few people can use, many of which were put there through shady means.

        That is, in part, why the Republicans are fighting against campaign finance transparency. I already posted an article about that, but I suspect you’ll ignore it and vote straight down the “R” ticket anyway. I know that’s easier than looking at the specific issues.

        “Let those innovaters create businesses, which in turn create jobs. Creating jobs creates taxpayers who pay taxes and utilize services that spur additional businesses and jobs. So those “I built it myself guys” can feel as though they are contributing to society and making a difference.”

        Of course. I didn’t think that was up for debate. I have a better than passing understanding of economics. I am concerned, however, that some powerful people can use their enhanced influence to help prevent competition from rising small businesses. It is, after all, in Walmart’s best interest to keep the mom and pop store down the street as small as possible.

        You should understand that I am advocating a better tax structure for rich and poor people alike. A system that is not so easily gamed and manipulated.

        As I said before:

        “We need to grossly simplify our tax structure and configure it to eliminate the special deductions and favors we’ve granted to specific industries, specific investment vehicles and probably the blanket “all-you-can make” capital gains structure. I bet if we did that, we would find that we could lower tax rates for everybody, rich people included, and small business owners could find a more level playing field from which to compete with whatever national brand they’re up against.

        For me, it’s all about the government NOT giving the biggest businesses and the wealthiest people any more regulatory or tax advantage than the small business. Let’s get that playing field as level as we can and see who’s got the stamina and ingenuity to come out on top.”

        Like

      • You forgot who’s making the rules and who’s best best at breaking them.

        Like

      • We live in the shadow of the Crystal River debacle. Deregulate like they did in IL. Watch prices drop.

        Like

  6. Sorry for the delays etc,,, on my part. I’m traveling extensively with little or no internet access. Good discourse though. Thanks. It may be a couple weeks before I’m back in the thick of things. Looks like you are doing just fine without me! I will say, I’d like to see some comments on Justice Roberts ruling under “Read My Lips.”

    Like

  7. TAR says:

    Well back from vacation, wasn’t ignoring you, sorry for not responding Devil.
    I can barely speak for all the words you’re putting in my mouth. I never said anything of the sort. I like Capitalism, Free Enterprise, America, the Bible and all that good stuff. Yay, America!–
    All you had to do was answer the question, but you went with the standard debate tactic in answering a question with a question. Glad that’s cleared up now.
    So you know that Obama’s cronies as well as Romney’s are capitalizing on the broken system. How about we make that a little harder for them to do? Yes, but it’s not limited to Obama and Romney cronies. It’s also the Pelosi’s, Reid’s, Boxers, Bohner, Hoyer, Imelt, Buffet and so on. We in America can affect change at the ballot box. I believe in 2010, Americans across the land saw they in fact can affect change. It’s not going to happen over night, but it did happen in 2010 as well as elections in 2011. Hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying efforts that pretty much buy influence in all three parties: democrats, rebublicans and independents.
    Just look the recent federal Transportation bill. A U.S. Senator stuck a provision that will now change the law concerning these small enterprises which provide roll your own cigarettes. It will now make them a manufacturer and subject them to regulations that in effect puts them out of business. Small business that have employees, invested their capital to buy the machines that roll your own cigarettes, buying inventory and renting space. All Gone, from a U.S. Senator who is most likely beholden to the cigarette manufacturers and proposed legislation inserted in a Transportation Bill that is not germaine to the bill itself.

    For me, it’s all about the government NOT giving the biggest businesses and the wealthiest people any more regulatory or tax advantage than the small business. Let’s get that playing field as level as we can and see who’s got the stamina and ingenuity to come out on top.”
    Lastly, it’s about Capitalism and the Free Enterprise system. I’m not concerned about class warfare. The tax system will never be fair and we have ove 84,000 pages to prove it. You want to make it fair, I say scrap the entire system all 84,000 pages, put in place a national sales tax. Since we have an illegal alien problem and they like to work in America and send money back to their homeland, let them pay taxes like the rest of us. They buy their food, beer and clothes they pay a national sales tax like the rest of us. If a wealthy person wants to buy a Lambraghini and spend $150,000 they pay a national sales tax. If I buy a Honda Civic, I pay a national sales tax. Forget all the homeowners mortgage interest deductions, medical deductions over 7.5% of your AGI, kids deductions and so on. The playing field is never going to be level in a Constitutional Republic. We keep trying to make it “level” and “fair” and the end result is a convoluted mess of IRS regulations, class warfare and class envy. God Bless those who make it in America. We have a government that cannot get their own fiscal house in order, they cannot control spending and now want to take more of what we earn. So what’s fair on a capital gain since 15% is not, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 70%? it’s ridiculous right now. We have a president who so focused on penalizing those Americans who are successful, because of an ideological belief that is flawed and radical – socialism. And he wants to continue to feed an appetitie of reckeless spending and the only consequence is: the rich or wealthy are not paying their fair share. Well, Mr. Obama had all the answers during the 2008 campaign and in 3 1/2 years his economic and fiscal policies have failed. His belief that government is the engine and we all in the private sector must follow is wrong and we have a 3 1/2 yr Obama Administration record to prove it. A record that Mr. Obama cannot or will not run on. Ciao…

    Like

    • The Devil's Advocate says:

      “Yes, but it’s not limited to Obama and Romney cronies. It’s also the Pelosi’s, Reid’s, Boxers, Bohner, Hoyer, Imelt, Buffet and so on. We in America can affect change at the ballot box. I believe in 2010, Americans across the land saw they in fact can affect change. It’s not going to happen over night, but it did happen in 2010 as well as elections in 2011.”

      Do you feel that positive and substantive change happened? I feel like we’re wasting more congressional time on gay marriage and major league baseball when we could be focusing on moving our country forward.

      It looks like, between the two of us, we have indicted most of the leadership of both parties. I wonder: If Pelosi, Reid, Boxer and Boehner are so terrible, how do they keep getting elected?

      “put in place a national sales tax.”

      Your idea does a lot of very good things for the taxation system. I would only be concerned that large, unregistered purchases could easily be made in Bermuda to avoid the tax. While you can capture things like yachts, aircraft and automobiles at the time of registration, it’s hard to capture precious metals, jewelry, art or mechanical parts that can easily be bought in Bermuda. While we don’t have a “fashion smuggling” problem today, we might get one if there’s a high sales tax to evade doing it. Add to that the problem of people setting up “dealerships” just to buy their own cars tax-free… but generally, the idea is a good one. I’d be in favor of switching to that system effective next Monday with one caveat: I want a law that requires all published prices to include all applicable tax, like we do with gas. I think that would help consumers adapt to the increase tax at the register and make smart buying decisions at the retail level.

      “We have a president who so focused on penalizing those Americans who are successful, because of an ideological belief that is flawed and radical – socialism.”

      I haven’t seen any documented proof that anyone in our present government wants to eradicate capitalism. What they do want to do is regulate certain industries that they feel are “too important” to leave up to the market. In this they are wrong, but let’s at least avoid hyperbole. I could just as easily say that Romney wants to sell the country to the bankers. And I’d be just as wrong.

      Charles Murray of the Wall Street Journal expressed things better than I ever can. Everything he says in this article about Capitalism’s public image problem resonates with me. I highly recommend this article to anyone that would consider themselves a Capitalist:

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577549223178294822.html

      Like

  8. TAR says:

    I haven’t seen any documented proof that anyone in our present government wants to eradicate capitalism. What they do want to do is regulate certain industries that they feel are “too important” to leave up to the market. In this they are wrong, but let’s at least avoid hyperbole. I could just as easily say that Romney wants to sell the country to the bankers. And I’d be just as wrong.
    You had made a similar statement in a previous post and forgot to respond. There is plenty of examples of Obama wanting to dismantle Capitalism – let’s start with his 2008 comment to Joe the Plumber where he wanted to redistribute wealth; How about his NLRB prohibiting Boeing Corporation from opening a plant in South Carolina? Over 1,000 jobs to be created, but since SC is a Right to Work State, he protected his brethren in the Unions. Speaking of Unions, the U.S. Government taking over GM, stock and bond holders of original GM lose everything, yet Union given ownership and 5% of new GM sold to Saudi Prince? Most all of Obama’s ecomomic solutions revolve around government being the solution to creating jobs. Even what started this thread was Obama stating if you own a business you didn’t build it. What? A Capitalist does not think like that. A radical left winger anti-Capitalist, Anti-Free Enterprise thinks along those lines. The XL Pipeline nixed by Obama, we are talking a minimum of 20,000 American jobs, not too mention the residual jobs and businesses created along the pipeline route. Governments do not exist without taxpayers. You create a population dependent upon government aide and assitance, you require more taxpayer involvement, so you take more from the producers (taxpayers). However the producers are not like politicians – when we cannot afford it we don’t buy it. Yes there are some business owners who will borrow and borrow, but they do not last and force to declare bankruptcy. The private sector lending institutions hold their clientele accountable. You can only borrow so much before the spigot is closed. Unlike government who can and will tax the producers more. Presently, why aren’t businesses hiring and/or expanding? Because of the uncertainty of the market. Higher cost of doing business, higher taxes and the implementation of the Obamacare Tax to name a few. Entreprenuers are not stupid, we will do more with less, we will wake up and downsize if necessary, cut expenses in order to keep our businesses afloat. Government does not operate that way, the President does not operate that way. Obama’s economic solutions have always revolved around expanding government – whether it was his failed jobs bill by spending $435 billion with the majority of taxpayer money going to fund governmental agencies: Dept. of Transportation, Dept. of Homeland Security, the Internal Revenue Service and Dept. of Justice.
    You truly believe America needs to hire and employ 16,500 more Internal Revenue agents? For what purpose? That’s 16,500 more government employees to be funded by taxpayers. Yes Government prints the money, but we taxpayers fund government. Look at local and city governments around the country. There are cities and towns across the country who can no longer afford to provide services or pay their employees, why? There tax base has eroded. They have driven their own citizens out of their cities and towns – whether California, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York.
    Bottom line is, Obama has shown on many occassions his disdain for business. Hell he hasn’t even met with the U.S. CHamber of Commerce, nor the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), yet he spent $25 million of taxpayer money on a Muslim Entrepernurial Summit in DC back in 2010. 44 country representatives in attendance. Well where is the American Entrepernurial Summit? It does not nor will not exist under an Obama Regime.
    Ciao…

    Like

    • The Devil's Advocate says:

      “Most all of Obama’s ecomomic solutions revolve around government being the solution to creating jobs.”

      That’s true and Mr. Obama is wrong about that and many other things, but I don’t think Mitt Romney is half the savior you expect. He would be just as much of a “crony capitalist” as Obama, the only difference being that there’s a different list of cronies.

      “The private sector lending institutions hold their clientele accountable.”

      Yes, but who holds them accountable? Clearly nobody. Our current economic debacle represents one of the largest transfers of wealth in history and nobody’s going to jail. We have laws against fraud and collusion, don’t we?

      “Presently, why aren’t businesses hiring and/or expanding? Because of the uncertainty of the market. Higher cost of doing business, higher taxes and the implementation of the Obamacare Tax to name a few.”

      So the only reason you haven’t hired someone is because you’re worried about the PPACA? How much will those provisions cost your business?

      Small Businesses are seeing a lot of money coming back because of PPACA:
      http://mainstreetalliance.org/5770/small-businesses-to-see-share-of-insurance-rebates-this-summer/
      I’ve already got my check, but I already provide health coverage for all my employees, so it’s no difference to me.

      The reason I’m not hiring is because there isn’t enough demand for my products and services and that sentiment has been echoed across a number of industries. An extra $700 in taxes per employee doesn’t stop me from hiring somebody if I think that somebody will make me $50,000 over-and-above their costs next year. If I told you it would cost you $50,000 to hire an employee that was going to make you $100,000, you’d jump at the chance. If I told you the costs just went up to $50,700 you act like the government is out to get you. If the employee didn’t make economic sense before, the extra tax isn’t going to change that either way.

      “You truly believe America needs to hire and employ 16,500 more Internal Revenue agents? For what purpose? That’s 16,500 more government employees to be funded by taxpayers.”

      In theory, they’re there to collect tax that isn’t being collected right now. Personally, I’d cut that number, but I’d assign them all to the SEC instead of the IRS, but that’s just me.

      “Hell he hasn’t even met with the U.S. CHamber of Commerce, nor the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)”

      I believe he did his “Small Business” time with the Main Street Alliance, which is more in line with his political leanings. USCoC and NFIB are documented as being highly partisan organizations.

      You cited a gigantic pipeline project, a Boeing factory and General Motors as bastions of free enterprise capitalism. But you’re in this for SMALL BUSINESS, right? Where are the small business references?

      And, for that matter, do you read the links I post as sources, or am I wasting my time with those? That last one was incredibly insightful, really.

      You’re good at ratting off all the Fox News talking points in defense of the top 1 or 2% of the population. What you aren’t good at is sourcing your accusations. When I point out something a Republican has done wrong, you say, “But Obama’s buddies do it too!” and somehow that makes the Repubs righteous and Obama the bad guy. You’ve got him blamed for municipal government’s failure to budget. The fact is, a large number of the bad actors in this situation are rich Republican businessmen and legislators. For every Pelosi you have a Boehner.

      Does that make Obama right? Of course not. It means we need a much more thorough house cleaning than we’re going to get as long as small business owners are deluded into thinking that the Republicans are actually on their side. They’ve convinced people like you that the laws that help Bank of America and bail out GM are the same laws that are “protecting” your business. They aren’t, they’re just taking your tax dollars and funneling them into the accounts of the guys at the very top in the form of special tax breaks, subsidies and bailouts. As a small business owner who believes in doing things yourself, that should bother you that they get benefits that you don’t.

      Like

      • TAR says:

        Small Businesses are seeing a lot of money coming back because of PPACA: http://mainstreetalliance.org/5770/small-businesses-to-see-share-of-insurance-rebates-this-summer/ I’ve already got my check, but I already provide health coverage for all my employees, so it’s no difference to me. —
        Yes so have I. While it’s nice to receive a check – $340 is not going to make my company wealthy. So insurance companies had to refund $1.1 Billion? Insurance companies aquisition costs are roughly 30% or less of their cost. 70% is earmarked to pay claims, the other 30% is earmarked to pay their operating costs. That’s why negotiating pricing with providers is so important to insurance companies. They used to be able to make up some of the losses through investment income, however you and I both know at 1% return, that is certainly not enough to offset their costs.

        I believe he did his “Small Business” time with the Main Street Alliance, which is more in line with his political leanings. USCoC and NFIB are documented as being highly partisan organizations.– Oh, so because it fits Obama’s political leanings it makes it right? It appears if Main STreet Alliance is more in line with Obama’s radical ideology for the private sector, they are highly partisan and out of touch with the majority of small businesses? BTW your opinion of NFIB being highly partisan organization is a gross mischaracterization of the organization and quite frankly I’m offended as a member of NFIB. They support democrats and republicans alike, who support small business. They are a nationwide organization and second only to AARP. If an elected official supports small business legislation with a paltry 70% rating or better, NFIB supports that politicians irrespective of their party affiliation. Unfortunately, Obama (even while a Senator) could not muster more than 20% voting record for small business, almost as high as Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. So you are grossly inaccurate regarding the NFIB.

        You cited a gigantic pipeline project, a Boeing factory and General Motors as bastions of free enterprise capitalism. But you’re in this for SMALL BUSINESS, right? Where are the small business references? —
        You ignored my comments regarding the ancillary businesses created as a result of the GIGANTIC pipeline project. You create 20,000+ new jobs as a result of the GIGANTIC pipeline being implemented, you create mom and pop businesses. I don’t care if you put up a Walmart next to the pipeline. As long as you have the demand in that area, it inspires confidence, confidence an entreperneur believes he live out his/her dream – opening a restaurant or deli, opening a consignment clothing store, opening a UPS delivery store, doctors, dentist or optical stores. Those businesses then need staff whether is a waiter or waitress, cashier or dental assistant. If the demand is there you create it.
        Some small business examples: Costanzo’s Restaurant – 22 yr family owned Italian Restaurant – 9 emploiyees; Pro Photo and Video two locations – 15 employees, Ob-GYN 27 years – retired due to regulations, cost of insurance and lower provider fees – 7 employees; Camera Center three locations now only 1, 32 employees down to 7, Dave’s lawn service 4 employees cost of fuel soared, many clients decided it was discretionary spending now down to 1 employee (Dave); the list goes on all across America my friend. It’s the gigantic businesses that spawn the little businesses that take the risk. It’s the roll your own cigarette shops across the country that spent their hard earned capital to build out their stores spending $250 to $500 thousand dollars, who will probably be out of business within a year.

        You’re good at ratting off all the Fox News talking points in defense of the top 1 or 2% of the population. —
        Thank you very much, but this just shows your ignorance as well. I don’t have to listen to Fox News to understand what Obama and company are doing to this country. Maybe it’s time you broaden your horizons and turn off MSNBC and CNN. You seem to be touting the failed big government liberal agenda, especially with your mischaraterization of the NFIB. So hang up your Occupy Tent and open your eyes. The 1% aint the problem in this country. It’s the leadership in this country who has sold Americans out. It’s the leadership in this country who pander to those who stick their hand out and want something for nothing (such as the Occupy Wallstreeters – while they talk on their iPhones, listening to their iTunes). Please spare me the judgemental crap. You have a hardon for bankers and the wealthy. So take it up with them. Those people who are now classified as “rich”, making $250,000 or more a year are not the problem in this country. You can take the 340,000 wealthy (those with over $10,000,000 in assets) and it would do squat to the deficit. Spending is the problem in this country and the radical left wing pro government ideology. Since 2009 the private sector workforce has shrunk by 4.2%, while the government employment has risen by 11.2%. Well that growth in government sector employees means that we taxpayers must pay more for a sated government. More salaries, more overhead, more pensions. We taxpayers fund the government and it has swelled such it falls directly on taxpayers backs!

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        “They used to be able to make up some of the losses through investment income, however you and I both know at 1% return, that is certainly not enough to offset their costs.”

        The average Senator has a much better return. Perhaps they just need better investment counselling.

        “Oh, so because it fits Obama’s political leanings it makes it right? It appears if Main STreet Alliance is more in line with Obama’s radical ideology for the private sector, they are highly partisan and out of touch with the majority of small businesses?”

        They would disagree, but I haven’t contacted them for comment. How many “Small Business Organizations” would he have to meet with to meet your demanding criteria?

        “BTW your opinion of NFIB being highly partisan organization is a gross mischaracterization of the organization and quite frankly I’m offended as a member of NFIB. They support democrats and republicans alike, who support small business.”

        NFIB donates almost exclusively to Republican candidates as demonstrated here:
        http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000160

        There’s nothing wrong with that – that’s part of freedom of speech, but you can SAY you’re non-partisan until somebody looks where the money goes.

        During the NFIB’s recent fight against PPACA, 85% of the $10ml financing came from only FOUR donors. Does that sound like small business to you? The President of NFIB is Dan Danner, an all-around decent human being, but what Small Business did he come from?

        “You ignored my comments regarding the ancillary businesses created as a result of the GIGANTIC pipeline project.”

        You’re right. I must have skimmed over that, and I apologize,

        “Some small business examples: Costanzo’s Restaurant – 22 yr family owned Italian Restaurant – 9 emploiyees; Pro Photo and Video two locations – 15 employees, Ob-GYN 27 years – retired due to regulations, cost of insurance and lower provider fees – 7 employees; Camera Center three locations now only 1, 32 employees down to 7, Dave’s lawn service 4 employees cost of fuel soared, many clients decided it was discretionary spending now down to 1 employee (Dave); the list goes on all across America my friend.”

        Well, two of these are PHOTO STORES who will die of creative destruction and crowding from CVS, Walgreens and RiteAid. People are carrying cell phones with better cameras these days. Photo is a niche market and the day of the photo hut has passed. You can’t really blame any one politician for that. The Ob-Gyn is a victim of a very different kind of economics (Defensive Medicine) whose causes are primarily collusion between the government and the AMA.

        “You seem to be touting the failed big government liberal agenda”

        Actually, that’s not true. I’m touting the failed government agenda across the board. I am tired of the false dichotomy that if we elect a Republican somehow it will all get better overnight. Before the last Republican we put in office we were on track to pay off the national debt. What happened?

        “Spending is the problem in this country and the radical left wing pro government ideology.”

        So you would be willing to close half our foreign military bases and pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan TOMORROW to help close the budget gap?

        This really isn’t about Obama or Romney, it’s about finding a way to correct some fundamental problems that are killing our economy and may end up killing our country.

        Let me break down the problem for you, because at this stage, I am extremely interested in what you think we should do:

        Let’s start with the obvious: Unemployment. Three years after the financial crisis, the unemployment rate is still at the highest level since the Great Depression
        And it’s not like unemployment these days is a quick, painful jolt: A record percentage of unemployed people have been unemployed for longer than 6 months.
        And that’s just people who meet the strict criteria for “unemployed.” Include people working part-time who want to work full-time, plus some people who haven’t looked for a job in a while, and unemployment’s at 17%
        Corporate profits just hit another all-time high.
        Corporate profits as a percent of the economy are near a record all-time high. With the exception of a brief happy period in 2007 (just before the crash), profits are higher than they’ve been since the 1950s. And they are VASTLY higher than they’ve been for most of the intervening half-century.
        CEO pay is now 350X the average worker’s, up from 50X from 1960-1985.
        EO pay has skyrocketed 300% since 1990. Corporate profits have doubled. Average “production worker” pay has increased 4%. The minimum wage has dropped.
        After adjusting for inflation, average hourly earnings haven’t increased in 50 years.
        Of course, life is great if you’re in the top 1% of American wage earners. You’re hauling in a bigger percentage of the country’s total pre-tax income than you have at any time since the late 1920s. Your share of the national income, in fact, is almost 2X the long-term average!
        In fact, income inequality has gotten so extreme here that the US now ranks 93rd in the world in “income equality.” China’s ahead of us. So is India. So is Iran.
        And, by the way, few people would have a problem with inequality if the American Dream were still fully intact—if it were easy to work your way into that top 1%. But, unfortunately, social mobility in this country is also near an all-time low.
        So what does all this mean in terms of net worth? Well, for starters, it means that the top 1% of Americans own 42% of the financial wealth in this country. The top 5%, meanwhile, own nearly 70%.
        And then there are taxes… It’s a great time to make a boatload of money in America, because taxes on the nation’s highest-earners are close to the lowest they’ve ever been.
        The aggregate tax rate for the top 1% is lower than for the next 9%—and not much higher than it is for pretty much everyone else.
        Remember when we bailed out the banks? Yes, and remember the REASON we were told we had to bail out the banks? We had to bail out the banks, we were told, so that the banks could keep lending to American businesses. Without that lending, we were told, society would collapse…
        So, did the banks keep lending? Um, no. Bank lending dropped sharply, and it has yet to recover.
        So, what have banks been doing since 2007 if not lending money to American companies? Lending money to America’s government! By buying risk-free Treasury bonds and other government-guaranteed securities.
        And, remarkably, they’ve also been collecting interest on money they are NOT lending—the “excess reserves” they have at the Fed. Back in the financial crisis, the Fed decided to help bail out the banks by paying them interest on this money that they’re not lending. And they’re happily still collecting it.
        When you can borrow money for nothing, and lend it back to the government risk-free for a few percentage points, you can COIN MONEY. And the banks are doing that. According to IRA, the “net interest margin” made by US banks in the first six months of 2011 is $211 Billion.

        The middle and lower class are getting hammered by these figures. The small businesses, too. The only ones really making money are at the very top. Don’t you see how that’s a problem?

        Like

      • TAR says:

        The minimum wage has dropped. After adjusting for inflation, average hourly earnings haven’t increased in 50 years. —
        I must have missed something, State of Florida has a minimum wage higher than the Feds and it increased from 7.25 to 7.65%. But you liberals like to use a 50 year adjusted, hell lets use 100 yr adjusted and add in housing and medical and tooth decay.
        “income equality.” –
        Ah that statement says it all. Your socialist value system has shown brightly. let’s just redistribute wealth so we are all equal, no matter your education, your job and socio-economic status. Let’s be fair. Let’s sing Kum-by-ya Devil. come on let’s hold hands and sing along and have a Coke. No can’t can’t have a Coke, that evil big corporation is not paying it’s drivers like the VP or President. Let’s have an organic tea, a mango tea.
        We are not China and thank God not IRan. We don’t kill people in America because of their gender affiliation or kill it’s people in a peaceful demonstration. If you want a European standard of living or a communist China just say so. Well in some ways, without putting words in your mouth, you did by bringing China in the fold. Their wages had no where to go but up, as compared to the U.S. Why are Toyota, BMW and Honda auto plants paying 50% less in wages than GM and Ford and making a superior product. Those stupid Toyota workers being exploited by the Germans and Japs. It’s awful. They need a “fair” wage now. Let’s rise up against the oppressive German and Japanese governments for exploiting the America worker.
        Please get your head out of MSNBC and the Huffington Post. You will continue to bitter and envious of the wealthy or the rich or however you all on the left define success.

        So you would be willing to close half our foreign military bases and pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan TOMORROW to help close the budget gap? —
        Nice way to change the discussion. But I will remain consistent as I stated in previous posts – We don’t need to be in Afghanistan or Iraq. They do not serve any purpose to America, just getting our brave American soldiers killed! I would move each and every soldier out of Afghanistan and after the last soldier steps boards that plane home, I’d carpet bomb Afghanistan. We are not going to change their hearts and minds. I’d go one step further and pull all troops out of So. Korea as well. We have more problems in the U.S. with the intrusion of illegals into America. Those troops on the So. Korea border can be better used and served in protecting America. How many billions are saved now in closing our bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan and So. Korea.

        NFIB donates almost exclusively to Republican candidates as demonstrated here:
        http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000160
        Again it appears you have somewhat of a learning disability. NFIB policy is to support those candidates and politicians who support small business. If it means they are giving the majority of our money to REpublicans than it should tell you something. When a John Kerry, Barack Barry Obama or a Ted Kennedy cannot even score 70% voting record for small business, then maybe their own partisan belief system is a problem. However, there are those democrats who support small business, who then get NFIB support. I can use your same logic with the unions. I’m sure I can dig up a perdiocal that tells how unions do not support Republicans and that almost every campaign dollar is given to a Democrat. Please spare me your partisan crap. When the union goes on strike and they are out for months, the union bosses still get paid their full salaries. Where is that fairness. I don’t see Jimmy Hoffa Jr., telling his minions to pay those striking workers 100% of their salaries and by the way give them all a 4% raise.
        Your argument is weak and partisan as well. So unions good, small business organizations bad. All NFIB asks is for Representatives and Senators to score 70% or higher. All unions ask is that you agree 100% with their pro-union anti-business stance. I guess that’s fair since they overwhelmingly support democrats.

        Like

  9. TAR says:

    The fact is, a large number of the bad actors in this situation are rich Republican businessmen and legislators. For every Pelosi you have a Boehner. —
    BTW you accuse me of opining the Fox News mantra – your statement above shows your ignorance and answers why Air America folded. The fact is the wealthies politicians collectively in Congress are democrats. In fact there are many democratic Obama supporters who are his main bundlers who maintain offshore bank accounts. The media has done a terrific job in demonizing REpublicans and painting them as the party of the rich and somehow that equated to all republicans in Congress are rich. Yet when you look at the wealth of each and every Congressman and Senator, the democrats out wealth the republicans. But the unbiased media does not report that. John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Nasty Pelosi and even Harry Reid who entered Congress with a low six figure wealth, now amassed a wealth in the millions. Amazing from a partisan hack making $125,000 to $175,000 a year for the last 20 yrs? Even if Reid would have saved every penny making $125k a year for 20 years that would only amount to $2.5 million. Yet he’s worth over 25 times that. But you all left wingers don’t see anything wrong with that? It’s the evil Republicans. Your small business bible toting bias has come through loud and clear.

    Like

    • The Devil's Advocate says:

      “The fact is the wealthies politicians collectively in Congress are democrats.”

      Did I deny that? Did I even bring it up? I said “A LARGE NUMBER OF THE BAD ACTORS”
      At no point did I say “All” or even “Most.” You decided that I was defending someone I didn’t mention.

      “But you all left wingers don’t see anything wrong with that?”

      I made it very clear that I see many things wrong with that.

      “Your small business bible toting bias has come through loud and clear.”

      So now because I happen to read the Bible that makes me wrong? When did this become a religious discussion anyway? Yes, I believe in Proverbs 22:16. Is my faith going to be a problem for you?

      Like

    • The Devil's Advocate says:

      “I must have missed something, State of Florida has a minimum wage higher than the Feds and it increased from 7.25 to 7.65%. But you liberals like to use a 50 year adjusted, hell lets use 100 yr adjusted and add in housing and medical and tooth decay.”

      So you don’t think inflation has anything to do with standard of living in this country? What economist are you following? The fact is, real wages for the rank and file are lower today as far as what they can actually buy.

      ” let’s just redistribute wealth so we are all equal, no matter your education, your job and socio-economic status”

      Nobody suggested that. I’m waiting to hear what you really think about the situation. You’re not responding to what I say, you’re responding to what you THINK I’m going to say. I am no liberal, sir. Nor am I a Democrat. Stop assuming I’m taking their talking points on every issue.

      “I’d carpet bomb Afghanistan. We are not going to change their hearts and minds.”

      Why? Why waste perfectly good explosives on a country on the other side of the world. What do we get as a country if we win that war?

      “Why are Toyota, BMW and Honda auto plants paying 50% less in wages than GM and Ford and making a superior product.”

      Are they? Toyota and Honda are leading in the number of NTSB-mandated safety recalls right now. Everybody knows the UAW is a mess. Lucky for me, though, I have not said one single word in defense of unions in our entire discussion. You’ve decided to argue with me on what you think I’ve said rather than what I’ve said.

      “Your argument is weak and partisan as well. So unions good, small business organizations bad.”

      I never said anything of the like. You might disparage my sources, but at least I bother to have them instead of parroting back heresay that may or may not actually be true. You’re smart enough to question this stuff without just vomiting facts.

      So you’re saying that income inequality is NOT a problem at all? Is that what you’re trying to say?

      You have managed to ignore the problem to beat your drum. In fact, I haven’t seen any evidence that you’ve actually chosen to read any of the sources I’ve posted and make any attempt to challenge the facts. You keep trying to fix the blame instead of fix the actual problem.

      Here’s the summary in case you missed it:

      The biggest businesses and the banking industry are making record profits right now. Unemployment is incredibly high. Banks aren’t lending to actual businesses, because they make more money borrowing from the Fed and loaning it back.

      So here’s the questions:
      In your opinion, is the rapidly divergent income inequality a problem?
      How much blame, if any, would you place on the banking industry to creating this mess?
      How would you fix it?

      Like

      • TAR says:

        Why are Toyota, BMW and Honda auto plants paying 50% less in wages than GM and Ford and making a superior product.”
        Are they? Toyota and Honda are leading in the number of NTSB-mandated safety recalls right now. —
        Yep. Toyota surpassed GM as the number one seller of vehicles. The NTSB recalls don’t seem to bother Americans and now Ford is recalling Escapes, nice try with the NTSB defense though.

        I never said anything of the like. You might disparage my sources, but at least I bother to have them instead of parroting back heresay that may or may not actually be true. You’re smart enough to question this stuff without just vomiting facts. —
        Again only you can be right. It’s your opinion on heresay. Your heresay revolves around the left leaning news. So my words are heresay like defending NFIB? NFIB has a policy and they’ve followed it, which is a fact but now I vomit facts. They look for candidates who espouse the Free Enterprise ideology. They seek candidates, not party affiliation that’s not vomit or parrot, that’s a fact. So to demean my argument with a perceived intellectual response is disingenuous. You can’t have it both ways Devil. On one hand you rail against the 1% and the other you chastise me for my retort to your NFIB response and using the unions. I don’t see you using that same rationale with unions. Problem is unlike the NFIB, unions will not support a candidate with a (R) after their name. You didn’t bring the unions in the discussion I did, because that’s a valid comparison. You like to rail against the 1% and mischaracterize NFIB, which I have defended. However you don’t like what I had to say it amounts to “parroting” and “vomiting” words. Yet I speak from fact and yet you ridicule my opinion. So screw you. You don’t agree with my view, I certainly don’t agree with yours. However my responses are considered “Parroting”, but you quote some rag and that’s supposed to be fact? I value NFIB over Main Street Alliance who is on the same ideological page as Obama. You agree with their opinion, good for you, I don’t. So you “parrot” their opinion and “vomit” there words, oh but according to your belief, I as a conservatives parrot and vomit and repeat Fox News mantra.

        You don’t agree with my opinions that’s fine. But don’t insult me. You take one side of the fence in asking the question, then when you don’t like the response you go to other side of the fence and then ridicule my response.

        Like

      • The Devil's Advocate says:

        ” I don’t see you using that same rationale with unions.”

        I still have not said a word in support of unions and I pointed that fact out in my last post.

        “You like to rail against the 1% and mischaracterize NFIB, which I have defended.”

        The NFIB is tangenital to anything we’re discussing. The NFIB has put money into the pockets of the people it likes just like every other politically active group in America. So what? Nothing makes them more or less righteous and it’s overall irrelevant. They choose which side of an issue a candidate needs to be on and if they’re on that side they send them a check. So?

        “However my responses are considered “Parroting”, but you quote some rag and that’s supposed to be fact?”

        It’s better researched and better sourced than anything you’ve brought to the table. You’ve made sweeping claims about Socialism and the destruction of American business without actually providing fact support. You’ve provided plenty of opinions, though.

        You don’t like my sources? Then show me where that article is proven wrong. Show me where the author’s research is incorrect or flawed. Show me where they’re distorting the facts or omitting inconvenient truths. I keep asking you to actually show some facts and now you’re playing martyr? If you’re so sure they are wrong, then prove it!

        You went after my religious belief as a point of argument and now you have the nerve to tell me I’m the one insulting you?

        Here’s the same thing I keep asking you and you haven’t really responded to, yet.

        The biggest businesses and the banking industry are making record profits right now. Unemployment is incredibly high. Banks aren’t lending to actual businesses, because they make more money borrowing from the Fed and loaning it back.

        So here’s the questions, and I’ve added a couple in the hopes of conclusion:

        In your opinion, is the rapidly divergent income inequality in America a problem?
        How much blame, if any, would you place on the banking industry to creating this mess?
        Should anyone be tried and if so, for what crime?
        How would you fix it?
        How will electing Mitt Romney improve (or worsen) the situation?

        Like

  10. I’m not taking sides here because I have been out of touch in AK and now I’m in MI on business but I do serve the community banking and credit union industry by providing software to help them go paperless, track documents for regulatory and compliance purposes and more. They are buried iin regs like the the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which gives nearly unlimited power to various agencies to control both the banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. Seven of my bank customers were closed by the Fed. Frankly several of them were no different than any other small business. You get to know the CEO personally, they have 30-40 employees and too often cannot choose to sell to the highest bidder or recapitalize. The Feds just come in 5Pm on a Friday and takeover. Just my two cents…

    Like

  11. one more comment, Obamacare is over 2,700 pages. Dodd-Frank over 2,300, so who’s running the country?

    Like

  12. Pingback: Feed In Tariff Uk | Photovoltaic Panels UK

  13. Pingback: 2012 – You’re Dead To Me… Part Three – You Didn’t Build That « Idea Capitalists

  14. Pingback: What Do Career Politicians, Professors and Community Organizers Have In Common? | Idea Capitalists

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: