Romney/Ryan

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344957619' post='1146133']
"If you’ve got a business. you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."

By the reasoning and words used in the article you posted the link for, nothing anyone does is of their own initiative or doing. I don't agree. You may agree with the statement and if you do that is your opinion.
[/quote]

Here’s the full context of what he said:

[indent=1]
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t -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 point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for president – because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.”[/indent]

If you want to take it out of context to help with your delusions thats ok. But

1. Do you disagree with this...."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."
2. Do you disagree with this...."The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires."

He literally says...the point is...which means, if that was not clear in the last sentence, here is what I was trying to say.

It's plenty clear to anyone without a bias against him of what he was saying and Mitt Romney is preying on the weakest minded among us who see that small tidbit and believe it to be true. Romney is running on 2 things 1. This statement taken out of context 2. Obama wanting free welfare for everyone...also not true....

When a candidate has to lie about the other candidate you know they have nothing to stand on.

In addition, the last time I checked tax shelters were not patriotic.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344959843' post='1146140']
Here’s the full context of what he said:
[indent=1]
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t -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 point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for president – because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.”[/indent]

If you want to take it out of context to help with your delusions thats ok. But

1. Do you disagree with this...."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."
2. Do you disagree with this...."The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires."

It's plenty clear to anyone without a bias against him of what he was saying and Mitt Romney is preying on the weakest minded among us who see that small tidbit and believe it to be true. Romney is running on 2 things 1. This statement taken out of context 2. Obama wanting free welfare for everyone...also not true....

When a candidate has to lie about the other candidate you know they have nothing to stand on.

In addition, the last time I checked tax shelters were not patriotic.
[/quote]

Come on, man, let's not introduce facts into a opinion laden right wing diatribe. Rich people are the job creators, didn't you know?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI

[Jamie_B]

I think Lincoln said it best.


[quote]Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.[/quote]

[|Numbers|]

How can we as citizens hold them accountable if it is our fault ? Afterall it is not their responsibility but ours as the collective....

[Squirrlnutz]

big_dish's argument: I make X and I don't like how much I pay in taxes. Romney and other wealthy people make X+Y so clearly their taxes must already be too high as well.

Come on man, you can't be that dense. You casually refer to capital gains and investment income as gambling and manage to gloss over the fact that its not gambling because the game is rigged. When those with deep Wall Street/Bain capital ties "invest" 25 million dollars they don't buy some fucking tech stock and hope it gains value. They use detailed knowledge of a specific commodity not available to you or me because we don't work at the firm that has analyzed and cataloged every penny's worth of value in said commodity, then take advantage of the trading/selling LAWS THEY WROTE to maximize their own income without a fucking care in the world what happens to that commodity. Those commodities are your uncle's pension and your cousins house. They turn that 25 million into 35 million overnight and pay shit in taxes on the profits. With Ryan's plan they pay nothing.

No one who gains 50+ million dollars a year GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX YOU ARE HARPING ON BECAUSE MOST OF THE MONEY THEY MAKE [size=5][u]DOES NOT QUALIFY AS INCOME.[/u][size=3] [/size][/size]

They have gamed the system. Should I be allowed to "gamble" and "keep all my winnings" if I get to look at every card before I choose to hit or stay? How is that fair? What about if I then encourage you to take a card, knowing full when you're going to bust, because I gambled on you losing as well as me winning?

We are broke because we stopped taxing super rich people at proportional rates and on APPROPRIATE income, have been fighting meaningless wars for over a fucking decade AND have disproportionate entitlement program costs.

You are wrong, step one is taxing the fuck out of the "Americans" who have been ruining our fucking country, step two is to stop killing brown people, step three is to reform entitlement and healthcare

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344961360' post='1146147']
How can we as citizens hold them accountable if it is our fault ? Afterall it is not their responsibility but ours as the collective....
[/quote]

Vote them out and vote people in who agree with you.

I think we are moving to a much more finance based economy as many many people are going into those jobs. This scares me because I think business schools teach a "I got to get mine" hoodrat mentality and don't talk about doing well in the community, balance of life or ethics. For people in business its all about the bottom line....I thought we had evolved past that.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344961360' post='1146147']
How can we as citizens hold them accountable if it is our fault ? Afterall it is not their responsibility but ours as the collective....
[/quote]

You keep taking things I say and running with them as if I havent said "in part". You are either obtuse or being purposefully disingenuous. Personally I think it's the latter, which really offers nothing to these debates.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1344961513' post='1146148']
big_dish's argument: I make X and I don't like how much I pay in taxes. Romney and other wealthy people make X+Y so clearly their taxes must already be too high as well.

Come on man, you can't be that dense. You casually refer to capital gains and investment income as gambling and manage to gloss over the fact that its not gambling because the game is rigged. When those with deep Wall Street/Bain capital ties "invest" 25 million dollars they don't buy some fucking tech stock and hope it gains value. They use detailed knowledge of a specific commodity not available to you or me because we don't work at the firm that has analyzed and cataloged every penny's worth of value in said commodity, then take advantage of the trading/selling LAWS THEY WROTE to maximize their own income without a fucking care in the world what happens to that commodity. Those commodities are your uncle's pension and your cousins house. They turn that 25 million into 35 million overnight and pay shit in taxes on the profits. With Ryan's plan they pay nothing.

No one who gains 50+ million dollars a year GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX YOU ARE HARPING ON BECAUSE MOST OF THE MONEY THEY MAKE [size=5][u]DOES NOT QUALIFY AS INCOME.[/u][size=3] [/size][/size]

They have gamed the system. Should I be allowed to "gamble" and "keep all my winnings" if I get to look at every card before I choose to hit or stay? How is that fair? What about if I then encourage you to take a card, knowing full when you're going to bust, because I gambled on you losing as well as me winning?

We are broke because we stopped taxing super rich people at proportional rates and on APPROPRIATE income, have been fighting meaningless wars for over a fucking decade AND have disproportionate entitlement program costs.

You are wrong, step one is taxing the fuck out of the "Americans" who have been ruining our fucking country, step two is to stop killing brown people, step three is to reform entitlement and healthcare
[/quote]

Step four is get the lobbyists out of Washington and get rid of Citizens United.
Step five is have the the banks go back to being seperate from investments (I really don't understand this one but the smart economists I know do)[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule[/url]
Step six bring the troops home have them round up illegals and send them packing home...you can't have both illegal immigration and a high unemployment rate, fine the hell out of someone who hires an illegal.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1344961513' post='1146148']
No one who gains 50+ million dollars a year GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX YOU ARE HARPING ON BECAUSE MOST OF THE MONEY THEY MAKE [size=5][u]DOES NOT QUALIFY AS INCOME.[/u][size=3] [/size][/size]

They have gamed the system. Should I be allowed to "gamble" and "keep all my winnings" if I get to look at every card before I choose to hit or stay? How is that fair? What about if I then encourage you to take a card, knowing full when you're going to bust, because I gambled on you losing as well as me winning?

[/quote]

It would be as if Bounty Gate happened, and instead of banning those idiots we decided to make them the Commissioner of the league and make bounties par for the course.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344962015' post='1146153']
Step four is get the lobbyists out of Washington and get rid of Citizens United.
[color=#ff0000]Step five is have the the banks go back to being seperate from investments [/color](I really don't understand this one but the smart economists I know do)[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule"]http://en.wikipedia....ki/Volcker_Rule[/url]
Step six bring the troops home have them round up illegals and send them packing home...you can't have both illegal immigration and a high unemployment rate, fine the hell out of someone who hires an illegal.
[/quote]


Simple keeping investment banks separate from community banks means when Wall St gambles and loses their shirts they arent using my or your money to cover their balance sheet and report earnings that may be fraudulent.

Which is much bigger than the Volker Rule, it's Glass Stegal - [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act[/url]

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344962015' post='1146153']
Step four is get the lobbyists out of Washington and get rid of Citizens United.
Step five is have the the banks go back to being seperate from investments (I really don't understand this one but the smart economists I know do)[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcker_Rule"]http://en.wikipedia....ki/Volcker_Rule[/url]
[b]Step six bring the troops home have them round up illegals and send them packing home...you can't have both illegal immigration and a high unemployment rate, fine the hell out of someone who hires an illegal.[/b]
[/quote]

Ehh, I don't really want military personnel with M16s stopping me and asking for my papers. How about we just make serious fines and/jail time for those who hire illegals. Take the incentive away from hiring illegals and we won't have to end up like the SS rounding people up and putting them on trains.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1344962229' post='1146156']
Ehh, I don't really want military personnel with M16s stopping me and asking for my papers. How about we just make serious fines and/jail time for those who hire illegals. Take the incentive away from hiring illegals and we won't have to end up like the SS rounding people up and putting them on trains.
[/quote]

Probably a better decision. I just don't understand illegal immigration....and welfare or unemployment....incentivize people to get jobs even if they seemingly suck...incentivize owners to pay better wages.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1344962171' post='1146155']
Simple keeping investment banks separate from community banks means when Wall St gambles and loses their shirts they arent using my or your money to cover their balance sheet and report earnings that may be fraudulent.

Which is much bigger than the Volker Rule, it's Glass Stegal - [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act"]http://en.wikipedia....â€"Steagall_Act[/url]
[/quote]

It seems that they do the same....?

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344962378' post='1146157']
Probably a better decision. I just don't understand illegal immigration....and welfare or unemployment....incentivize people to get jobs even if they seemingly suck...[b]incentivize owners to pay better wages.[/b]
[/quote]

Which harps back to something Old said a few pages ago...lets stop giving people tax breaks on the wink and nod notion that they are going to re-invest in employees and infrastructure and start giving them tax breaks AFTER they already invested. I'm sure we can come up with a good threshold; multi-national corporations, S&P 500 listed or something where once you reach that level your taxes fucking balloon and they only go down when you demonstrate an effort to build and employ here. Planning to build a manufacturing plant? Well your taxes are going to go up by 15% if you do it in India and they are going to go down by 15% if you do it in Indiana.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344962526' post='1146158']
It seems that they do the same....?
[/quote]

They do but Glass-Stegal does much much more.

[|Numbers|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1344961614' post='1146151']


You keep taking things I say and running with them as if I havent said "in part". You are either obtuse or being purposefully disingenuous. Personally I think it's the latter, which really offers nothing to these debates.
[/quote]

No, I intentionally left out in part because if there is a part that is the individual there is no collective but merely a collection of individuals. You had earlier stated " completely " and that means no part but all.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1344962709' post='1146159']
Which harps back to something Old said a few pages ago...lets stop giving people tax breaks on the wink and nod notion that they are going to re-invest in employees and infrastructure and start giving them tax breaks AFTER they already invested. I'm sure we can come up with a good threshold; multi-national corporations, S&P 500 listed or something where once you reach that level your taxes fucking balloon and they only go down when you demonstrate an effort to build and employ here. Planning to build a manufacturing plant? Well your taxes are going to go up by 15% if you do it in India and they are going to go down by 15% if you do it in Indiana.
[/quote]

Clever use of India and Indiana....+1

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344963562' post='1146161']
No, I intentionally left out in part because if there is a part that is the individual there is no collective but merely a collection of individuals. You had earlier stated " completely " and that means no part but all.
[/quote]

I think you may want to read what I said again.

What I said was "Completely, it's not"

Meaning a person does not hold solely the creation of their own business and the success of it, that it takes the individual initiative along with the collective infrastructure to make any business successful. That without the roads and highways that we all pay for, no business would be successful.

Further without customers who can afford the products the business owners want to sell, those same businesses would not be stressful.

So yes the collective as you call it, really I call it the consumer, along with investments in infrastructure, so as not to put scare tactics of Soviet Russia on it, is what drives the economy, even more so than the person who came up with the idea for the business.

That's why I love that Lincoln quote, because it wraps it all up nice and neat.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1344962229' post='1146156']
Ehh, I don't really want military personnel with M16s stopping me and asking for my papers. How about we just make serious fines and/jail time for those who hire illegals. Take the incentive away from hiring illegals and we won't have to end up like the SS rounding people up and putting them on trains.
[/quote]

Good point. I have said repeatedly that if you make it painful for the employers of illegals, you will stop the flow of illegals. It's kinda like having a dirty kitchen with roaches everywhere, you can keep killing the roaches, but until you clean up the kitchen, you'll keep getting them back.

[|Numbers|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1344963959' post='1146163']


I think you may want to read what I said again.

What I said was "Completely, it's not"

Meaning a person does not hold solely the creation of their own business and the success of it, that it takes the individual initiative along with the collective infrastructure to make any business successful. That without the roads and highways that we all pay for, no business would be successful.

Further without customers who can afford the products the business owners want to sell, those same businesses would not be stressful.

So yes the collective as you call it, really I call it the consumer, along with investments in infrastructure, so as not to put scare tactics of Soviet Russia on it, is what drives the economy, even more so than the person who came up with the idea for the business.

That's why I love that Lincoln quote, because it wraps it all up nice and neat.
[/quote]

Thank you for clarifying. The quote from Obama was a point that all politicians can be interpreted however a person wants to interpret them. Just because one person views the world through a different lens does not make that person wrong in their opinion, just different.

There are too many philosophies running around on this board to keep track of.

Boiling this race down to facts and not interpretations is not easy. That's why I liked Olds list of items in regards to social issues. Those are facts that leave little for interpretation. I for one don't need the government in my bedroom.

The economy sucks, can we agree on that ? How to solve that issue is debatable but continuing to do the same thing is dumb or if you prefer the definition of insanity...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344964905' post='1146172']
Thank you for clarifying. The quote from Obama was a point that all politicians can be interpreted however a person wants to interpret them. Just because one person views the world through a different lens does not make that person wrong in their opinion, just different.

There are too many philosophies running around on this board to keep track of.

Boiling this race down to facts and not interpretations is not easy. That's why I liked Olds list of items in regards to social issues. Those are facts that leave little for interpretation. I for one don't need the government in my bedroom.

The economy sucks, can we agree on that ? How to solve that issue is debatable but continuing to do the same thing is dumb or if you prefer the definition of insanity...
[/quote]

Except that for one to interpret what Obama said that way would mean he was leaving out the context.

The economy does suck, we do agree on that, and I suggest that what we are doing is what 1990s Republicans would be in favor of, what I think we need to be doing is much more investment as opposed to austerity, I mean we only have to look at europe struggling because of austerity to see it doesnt work.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Numbers' timestamp='1344964905' post='1146172']
Thank you for clarifying. The quote from Obama was a point that all politicians can be interpreted however a person wants to interpret them. Just because one person views the world through a different lens does not make that person wrong in their opinion, just different.

There are too many philosophies running around on this board to keep track of.

Boiling this race down to facts and not interpretations is not easy. That's why I liked Olds list of items in regards to social issues. Those are facts that leave little for interpretation. I for one don't need the government in my bedroom.

The economy sucks, can we agree on that ? How to solve that issue is debatable but continuing to do the same thing is dumb or if you prefer the definition of insanity...
[/quote]

The economy sucks....for poor people. I don't have one friend that is out of work and most are getting higher paying jobs and moving from job to job. I have one friend that is under employed. Granted I have a Master's degree, my wife has a Doctorate and we are isolated by living in Columbus and mostly being friends with people who are similarly hypereducated or went into Business-Technology-Engineering or Health Care.

(Please don't fire me as soon as I send this....)

Not trying to really disagree with you here, just trying to parse out some thoughts.

[Jamie_B]

By the way...

[url="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/star-of-romney-my-hands-didnt-build-this-ad-received-millions-in-government-loans-and-contracts/"]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/star-of-romney-my-hands-didnt-build-this-ad-received-millions-in-government-loans-and-contracts/[/url]




[quote]
[b] Star of Romney ‘My Hands Didn’t Build This’ Ad Received Millions in Government Loans and Contracts[/b]


[color=#333333][font=Georgia]
The Romney campaign has been making much out of an out-of-context President Obama quote.[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
Speaking in Roanoke, Virginia on July 13 about the necessity of government for services such as infrastructure, the president said “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help…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. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.”[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
Listen to it for yourself: the remarks in question were roughly 33 minutes and 40 seconds into the speech:[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
The Romney campaign, has suggested that the president was telling business owners that they didn’t create their own business, taking the “If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that” remark out of context.[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
In a campaign ad, the Romney campaign spliced out the “roads and bridges” the president seemed to be referring to as “that” when he said “you didn’t build that.”[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
In a new TV ad, Romney features an offended New Hampshire businessman, saying, “My father’s hands didn’t build this company? My hands didn’t build this company? My son’s hands aren’t building this company?”[/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Georgia]
The [url="http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120723/NEWS0602/707199954"]New Hampshire Union Leader’s John DiStato today reports[/url] that in 1999 the business in question, Gilchrist Metal, “received $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority ‘to set up a second manufacturing plant and purchase equipment to produce high definition television broadcasting equipment’…” In addition, in 2011, Gilchrist Metal “received two U.S. Navy sub-contracts totaling about $83,000 and a smaller, $5,600 Coast Guard contract in 2008…”[/font][/color]

The businessman, Jack Gilchrist, also acknowledged that in the 1980s the company received a U.S. Small Business Administration loan totaling “somewhere south of” $500,000, and matching funds from the federally-funded New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center.
“I’m not going to turn a blind eye because the money came from the government,” Gilchrest said. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m getting some of my tax money back. I’m not stupid, I’m not going to say ‘no.’ Shame on me if I didn’t use what’s available.”


[/quote]

[|Numbers|]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1344966050' post='1146178']


The economy sucks....for poor people. I don't have one friend that is out of work and most are getting higher paying jobs and moving from job to job. I have one friend that is under employed. Granted I have a Master's degree, my wife has a Doctorate and we are isolated by living in Columbus and mostly being friends with people who are similarly hypereducated or went into Business-Technology-Engineering or Health Care.

(Please don't fire me as soon as I send this....)

Not trying to really disagree with you here, just trying to parse out some thoughts.
[/quote]

Not a problem. I don't argue with the resident psychologist

[|Elflocko|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1344966080' post='1146179']
By the way...

[url="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/star-of-romney-my-hands-didnt-build-this-ad-received-millions-in-government-loans-and-contracts/"]http://abcnews.go.co...-and-contracts/[/url]
[/quote]

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning...