The 2012 United States Presidential Election

[Sure Shot]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

It's being spent on ALL OF US! Those roads are not just for the business owners. They are for everyone. Some of us fund those, some of us don't.

And I'm not arguing that everyone should get back the same amount $ for $. I'm simply stating that it's ridiculous to not recognize that a few of us are supporting everyone.

Yes, but the few of you are also profiting extremely handsomely.

And of course roads are built for everyone, but the social safety net is for everyone too. It's a hedge against crime, disease, and social unrest. And who has the most to lose from those things? The rich. Most specifically, the business owners.

And not only that, every food stamp is spent on a product provided by corporate America. Welfare payments flow directly to landlords. Etc, etc.

It's not simple. It's dynamic.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by Sure Shot

Yes, but the few of you are also profiting extremely handsomely.

And of course roads are built for everyone, but the social safety net is for everyone too. It's a hedge against crime, disease, and social unrest. And who has the most to lose from those things? The rich. Most specifically, the business owners.

And not only that, every food stamp is spent on a product provided by corporate America. Welfare payments flow directly to landlords. Etc, etc.

It's not simple. It's dynamic.

1. Trust me, I'm barely profiting. Wait for Dayton to discuss those who are profiting handsomely
2. A social safety net can hedge against crime and social unrest. And I'm all for one that does that. Unfortunately our current approach does a lousy job of this. This is my problem. Not that we have safety nets. I favor safety nets. It's that they are run inefficiently and have lost these primary goals. Stupid people make the decisions, thus when a program fails, the answer is to give it more money rather than to re-think its approach.
3. Money may trickle back into "corporate America" but it does so inefficiently with no end goals.

[Sure Shot]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

3. Money may trickle back into "corporate America" but it does so inefficiently with no end goals.

Well the end goal is the intermediate goal here, namely providing for the needy. And it's not terribly inefficient either.

[hermie1985]

I think most agree that fraud is rampant in many government entitlement programs. If that is accepted as true, I think it is impossible to say the programs are efficient. I am all for helping the truly needy get back on their feet, but my obligation to support families other than my own is limited both by financial considerations and duty.

[Sybok]

Originally Posted by Sure Shot

Yes, but the few of you are also profiting extremely handsomely.

Crikey. Those handsome profits are what pays the government's bills, including roads. This isn't a chicken versus egg argument. The government must collect money from the people before it can provide services to the people.

[bmb777]

LOL

[AHSIllini32]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

Okay, he shows Romney saying what the President said. Then the words say that is not what Obama said (even though it's a verbatim quote).

Within 20 seconds they actually show Obama saying PRECISELY the words they claimed he didn't say.

It is opiate inspired in all likelihood. I told you I didn't think that the quote was that bad. I get what he was trying to say though I utterly reject the premise given that roads and schools and nearly everything else is only paid for by 50% of America, but to deny that you said it is simply foolish.

So you think they shouldn't run the ad because they said, "Obama didn't say that" instead of "that's not the only thing Obama said"? It seems as though instead of actually paying attention to the actual ad that shows Romney is CLEARLY manipulating the President's speech and leaving out the very key points (i.e. the part when Obama says, "THE POINT IS") to make it look like the President was saying something that he clearly wasn't.

It amazes me how people like you and Fox News can take that speech, take out the parts that are actually important to twist it into something entirely different, and then be happy with themselves and say, "I can't believe this guy is President!!!!!"

Can you imagine how hard you'd be pounding Obama and his people if they did this? You'd be calling him disengenous, a liar, someone who is clearly grasping at straws, etc.

[KBLEE]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

It amazes me how people like you and Fox News can take that speech, take out the parts that are actually important to twist it into something entirely different, and then be happy with themselves and say, "I can't believe this guy is President!!!!!"

It still amazes me that he said something as stupid as he did. No wonder he rarely leaves home without his teleprompter.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by KBLEE

It still amazes me that he said something as stupid as he did. No wonder he rarely leaves home without his teleprompter.

He really appears to be a very stupid man.

[bmb777]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

It seems as though instead of actually paying attention to the actual ad that shows Romney is CLEARLY manipulating the President's speech

I suppose you believe democrats have never manipulated anything Romney said? :rolleyes:

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by bmb777

I suppose you believe democrats have never manipulated anything Romney said? :rolleyes:

You know he does.

[illini80]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

Can you imagine how hard you'd be pounding Obama and his people if they did this? You'd be calling him disengenous, a liar, someone who is clearly grasping at straws, etc.

Obama does exactly this every single night on ads I see on television.

People can't seem to come to grips with why business aren't hiring. If you listen to the entire quote, it is clear that Obama sees private enterprise as the obstacle, not the solution, which is clearly more government. Paid for by businesses (people).

Here is the quote:

Look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

And the government did not invent the internet. Even if they had, they certainly would not have done it so companies could make money. However, companies did figure out how to use the technology to grow their business, hire workers, and improve productivity which raises the standard of living for everyone.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by illini80

Obama does exactly this every single night on ads I see on television.

People can't seem to come to grips with why business aren't hiring. If you listen to the entire quote, it is clear that Obama sees private enterprise as the obstacle, not the solution, which is clearly more government. Paid for by businesses (people).

Here is the quote:



And the government did not invent the internet. Even if they had, they certainly would not have done it so companies could make money. However, companies did figure out how to use the technology to grow their business, hire workers, and improve productivity which raises the standard of living for everyone.

See, I thought his comments were not that big of a deal at the time he made them. Not because I agree with them. I most emphatically do not. But because I know that is what he believes in his heart.

The simple fact is that only a small sliver of society has the wherewithal mentally, emotionally and socially to create jobs. If a plague killed off 3% of the population and those people killed were the job creators (not the richest 3% necessarily), the world would starve to death in 24 months.

There is a fundamental difference between an employee and a person that hires employees. It includes generous dollops of hard work, intelligence, good timing, risk taking, a strong personality, and good luck to successfully start a business. Most people lack these qualities.

If you wonder about yourself ask this simple question.

If I lost my job tomorrow, what would I do?

If your answer is I would start looking for another job, you probably are not a job creator.

If your answer is, I would immediately apply for unemployment and sit on my ass until that runs out, you are most definitely in the Democratic base.

If your answer is, I would reinvent myself and create value in the economy by forming my own business, you are a job creator.

[Sure Shot]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

The simple fact is that only a small sliver of society has the wherewithal mentally, emotionally and socially to create jobs. If a plague killed off 3% of the population and those people killed were the job creators (not the richest 3% necessarily), the world would starve to death in 24 months.

[bmb777]

Originally Posted by AHSIllini32

So you think they shouldn't run the ad because they said, "Obama didn't say that" instead of "that's not the only thing Obama said"? It seems as though instead of actually paying attention to the actual ad that shows Romney is CLEARLY manipulating the President's speech and leaving out the very key points (i.e. the part when Obama says, "THE POINT IS") to make it look like the President was saying something that he clearly wasn't.

It amazes me how people like you and Fox News can take that speech, take out the parts that are actually important to twist it into something entirely different, and then be happy with themselves and say, "I can't believe this guy is President!!!!!"

Can you imagine how hard you'd be pounding Obama and his people if they did this? You'd be calling him disengenous, a liar, someone who is clearly grasping at straws, etc.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dnc-...ut-of-context/

[bmb777]

Originally Posted by Sure Shot

that was by far the dumbest post of the day. but hey typical democrat reasponse, cant argue with the facts since you know you are wrong, so try to divert, or post something stupid like you did.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

See, I thought his comments were not that big of a deal at the time he made them. Not because I agree with them. I most emphatically do not. But because I know that is what he believes in his heart.

The simple fact is that only a small sliver of society has the wherewithal mentally, emotionally and socially to create jobs. If a plague killed off 3% of the population and those people killed were the job creators (not the richest 3% necessarily), the world would starve to death in 24 months.

There is a fundamental difference between an employee and a person that hires employees. It includes generous dollops of hard work, intelligence, good timing, risk taking, a strong personality, and good luck to successfully start a business. Most people lack these qualities.

If you wonder about yourself ask this simple question.

If I lost my job tomorrow, what would I do?

If your answer is I would start looking for another job, you probably are not a job creator.

If your answer is, I would immediately apply for unemployment and sit on my ass until that runs out, you are most definitely in the Democratic base.

If your answer is, I would reinvent myself and create value in the economy by forming my own business, you are a job creator.

Good post. You know this is what I believe as well. Although I'd give us 5 years rather than 24 months.

One thing that people often overlook, but you point out is RISK. People who build businesses usually live on the brink of disaster for quite a while before they become "rich" and start pulling in 200K annually.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

Good post. You know this is what I believe as well. Although I'd give us 5 years rather than 24 months.

One thing that people often overlook, but you point out is RISK. People who build businesses usually live on the brink of disaster for quite a while before they become "rich" and start pulling in 200K annually.

IO, that is the ONE thing that separates that 3% from the next 10% or so. God knows there are a ton of smart, hard working people. Obviously luck is fickle and timing you cannot always control. But many of us simply won't take a risk.

We'd much rather make $140K 'guaranteed' with defined work hours vs. possibly (likely) going bankrupt but with the possibility of making $1M+ in 3-4 years but by necessity working far more hours.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

IO, that is the ONE thing that separates that 3% from the next 10% or so. God knows there are a ton of smart, hard working people. Obviously luck is fickle and timing you cannot always control. But many of us simply won't take a risk.

We'd much rather make $140K 'guaranteed' with defined work hours vs. possibly (likely) going bankrupt but with the possibility of making $1M+ in 3-4 years but by necessity working far more hours.

Yes, and that's why I thought it was important to draw extra attention to it. It's also one thing that almost never gets mentioned in any of these debates over job creators vs. workers. I have a ton of respect for the 3% you describe. The next 10%, I think, are essential for their success but due to their risk aversion, they just aren't quite as important.

[hermie1985]

For Obama the problem was simply poor wording. He says, "They didn't build that". What the heck was "that"? He has talked about both infrastructure and a person's small business in the general vicinity of saying "that". Had he said, "They didn't build the infrastructure to support their small business", he would have been fine....but not really.

The problem is no body denies who builds the infrastructure in this country. Who would he have been debating. I guess he defends taxing business people more because they need the infrastructure to do commerce with the "little people". Well the "little people" need infrastructure do buy things too. I thought that we were all in this together. This speech (and maybe most of Obama's rhetoric) is about creating the us (99 percent) vs them mentality that he thinks is going to get him re-elected. Make no mistake, this is a President who has an unhealthy view of the job creators in this country.

Did he say, "They didn't build their own small business."? I don't think so myself but I do think he might as well have said it since his view is that the business class is raping society.

[pizzaman]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

IO, that is the ONE thing that separates that 3% from the next 10% or so. God knows there are a ton of smart, hard working people. Obviously luck is fickle and timing you cannot always control. But many of us simply won't take a risk.

We'd much rather make $140K 'guaranteed' with defined work hours vs. possibly (likely) going bankrupt but with the possibility of making $1M+ in 3-4 years but by necessity working far more hours.

At my first job in the early '70's one of the guys I worked with was a millionaire and in 1973, it meant something to be a millionaire. One day he looked at a few of us younger guys and simply said, "you guys will never be wealthy because you don't like money, you just like what you can buy with money. I like money, I don't care about buying things."

He was a millionaire who worked for someone else but was greedy and dedicated to accumulating wealth. He did through real estate investments and the stock market. He didn't employ anyone. What stuck with me is his quote. He was right.

I have my own business but I do it to make me happy. Working for someone else under someone else's rules got old when I was in my 40's so I left and started my own business. If I was dedicated to profit, I'd run my business differently and I don't think I'd be happy.

[hermie1985]

Originally Posted by pizzaman

At my first job in the early '70's one of the guys I worked with was a millionaire and in 1973, it meant something to be a millionaire. One day he looked at a few of us younger guys and simply said, "you guys will never be wealthy because you don't like money, you just like what you can buy with money. I like money, I don't care about buying things."

He was a millionaire who worked for someone else but was greedy and dedicated to accumulating wealth. He did through real estate investments and the stock market. He didn't employ anyone. What stuck with me is his quote. He was right.

I have my own business but I do it to make me happy. Working for someone else under someone else's rules got old when I was in my 40's so I left and started my own business. If I was dedicated to profit, I'd run my business differently and I don't think I'd be happy.

So you didn't like working for someone else but you are not dedicated to a profit in your own business? If things got nip and tuck in the business, your point of view would probably change.

[pizzaman]

Originally Posted by hermie1985

So you didn't like working for someone else but you are not dedicated to a profit in your own business? If things got nip and tuck in the business, your point of view would probably change.

I make a living. I have freedom to run things the way I want. That's worth something but its impossible to put into monetary value. My point is that people start businesses for different reasons and its not always high risk and profits.

If things got "nip and tuck" I'd need to adjust my priorities (and in the recession I have) or fold up shop and go out of business.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by pizzaman

At my first job in the early '70's one of the guys I worked with was a millionaire and in 1973, it meant something to be a millionaire. One day he looked at a few of us younger guys and simply said, "you guys will never be wealthy because you don't like money, you just like what you can buy with money. I like money, I don't care about buying things."

He was a millionaire who worked for someone else but was greedy and dedicated to accumulating wealth. He did through real estate investments and the stock market. He didn't employ anyone. What stuck with me is his quote. He was right.

I have my own business but I do it to make me happy. Working for someone else under someone else's rules got old when I was in my 40's so I left and started my own business. If I was dedicated to profit, I'd run my business differently and I don't think I'd be happy.

That's why I said the 3% are not necessarily the richest ppl. You can be rich w/o creating value and you can create jobs w/o being rich

[KBLEE]

Who Will Be Mitt's VP?

I've not been a big fan of Mitt's use of social media, but this is kinda cool. The link takes you to a page where you can download an Android / iPhone app that will immediately notify the user as soon as a VP is announced.