On the 47% who don't pay taxes

[SaltyDawg]

Your logic says America should give all her wealth to poor China to make things nice and fair. Of course parents try to leave their posterity better off, just as you expect the previous generation to leave you. You probably hate American-Jews for their disproportionate sucess too.
They are by-and-large the entitled class, and you are making the exact same argument Hitler supporters made.

My logic says nothing of the sort. Get off the bogus Fox News talking points. And no I don't hate American Jews. But if one was running for president under the premise of being a job creator, and claiming that rich people should pay lower tax rates than poor people so we could bribe them into creating more jobs, while hiding money in the Cayman Islands and Swiss banks, after laying off tens of thousands of people and destroying many businesses, then I would probably not be too fond of that particular American Jew.

Right, and labor is worthless too because they don't innovate, huh.

Without laborers buying products, there would be no corporate elite.

Debunked, but go on with your tirade.

Not debunked at all. Unless you're talking about what might theoretically be in the many years of tax returns that Romney refused to release? He released 23 years of returns to McCain when he was hoping to be his choice for VP. McCain reviewed the returns and then picked someone else. What is in those returns? And why is Romney refusing to release anymore than last year? Why can't the public see how Romney made his money when he supposedly had a job?

You want a president to be an idiot who doesn't take advantage of what is given to him?

Not at all. I want a smart president who takes advantage of what is given to him. But I also want him to understand that not everyone has the same opportunities. And I definitely don't want a president who insists on lowering taxes on the rich even more under the false pretense that it is needed to create jobs.

My take is this: If you really believe in the free market, then it's hypocritical to say we need to lower taxes on the rich in order to create jobs. If these corporations don't want to do business in America because the taxes are too high, let them leave. Someone else will be happy to replace them in the market,

 

[LogGrad98]

Looks like Salty is the one spouting talking points and buying into media hype.

https://www.american.com/archive/2012/january/how-many-jobs-did-romney-create-at-bain

Fast forward to today. By the end of 2011, Staples had about 89,000 employees. Sports Authority is now a private company. The last time it reported employee numbers, in 2006, it had 14,300 employees. In addition, Gartner Group had over 4,400 and Steel Dynamics had over 6,000 employees. Using the most recently available data, these four companies alone employed almost 125,000 total employees.

When you combine the increase at Stage and the decreases at the other three companies, you end up with a net increase in jobs of 1,100. So, even if Ampad suffered another 1,000 job losses in its break up (another 25 percent or larger decline), Bain Capital could argue that these four investments led to a net increase in jobs.

No wonder you never see any numbers in the media, just the mindless "Romney likes firing people" comments (that one, in fact, came from a republican...lol).

 

[SaltyDawg]

You have completely strayed from your original argument, which was that Gates was better than Romney because Gates did not inherit his entire wealth and Romney did. I am glad you recognized that argument was fatally flawed, so you built up a couple straw men to argue against. Fine.

I didn't ever make that argument. Yes, I believe that Romney grew up rich while Gates grew up well off but not rich. But I never said that was the only reason gates was better than Romney.

One point I would contend is that it makes it easy to graduate summa *** laude from Harvard. I do not care how much money you have, to get through an institution like that with grades that high and abilities that strong requires an incredibly high level of intelligence and hard work. You make it sound like all Forrest Gump needed was the millions to get into Harvard and he too would have been a summa *** laude graduate of business and law.

It may not make it "easy" to graduate Harvard, but it certainly makes it possible. I doubt you'll find too many people who graduated Harvard summa *** laude while working 2 jobs to pay for it.

Also, Romney finished his education. Gates dropped out. Which one do you think is the more reliable path to success? Gates success is as much a product of luck and guile as it is his own ingenuity and hard work. Right place, right time, right money.

You can argue that Gates got lucky, sure. But the fact is he created an industry and millions of jobs exists right now because of Bill Gates. The same cannot be said of Mitt Romney.

But, as you never do, do not let anything like facts and logic get in your way. Continue to rail against the evils of Romney's unearned millions and the holy status of St. Gates. Gates and his illegal business practices that stifled competition and killed many medium and small businesses did at least as much damage to other people as Romney's job ever did.

I never said Bill gates was holy. I just said he's better than Mitt Romney (which isn't saying much).

As for Gates having illegal business practices, do you ahve any idea what you're talking about? Do you know what was deemed to be illegal? In short, they were putting Internet Explorer and windows Media Player in Windows, and telling companies like Dell they would stop giving them huge discounts on Windows if they put Linux on their computers.

Explain to me why that is illegal, but Apple is allowed to sell iPhones and iPads that not only have a browser and media player on them, but REQUIRE you to use them and actually prohibited competing products from being installed for several years. There is no way Microsoft would be found guilty of any wrongdoing if that whole thing went down today.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Looks like Salty is the one spouting talking points and buying into media hype.

https://www.american.com/archive/2012/january/how-many-jobs-did-romney-create-at-bain





No wonder you never see any numbers in the media, just the mindless "Romney likes firing people" comments (that one, in fact, came from a republican...lol).

And Staples tried to kill Office Depot who also had thousands of jobs, and did kill many mom and pop stationary and supply stores. Yes, Staples is successful, but it came at a price.

As for Sports authority- same deal. It took down many local sporting goods stores (Gart Sports in Utah, as an example) that employed thousands of people. So yes, Sports Authority is successful, but it came at a price.

It would be nice if Romney would spell it all out. He claimed to be a job creator but has repeatedly dodged the question when asked to explain the numbers.

 

[LogGrad98]

In Romney's 2007 Iowans for Taxpayer Relief and Iowa Republican Straw Poll speeches, he advocated eliminating the capital gains tax.[34][106] Romney has since stated that he favors eliminating any taxes related to capital gains or other investments on all individuals or families who make less than $200,000 per year. Romney has also advocated eliminating the estate tax.[46]
Romney has supported tax relief for all Americans and has advocated eliminating the capital gains tax for all those who earn less than $200,000 per year.[34] Romney has also supported eliminating the estate tax, known by opponents as the Death Tax,[46] signed a pledge to oppose "any and all efforts" to increase income taxes,[107] and promises to control spending by Congress. Romney has supported a balanced budget amendment to deal with the burgeoning federal deficit. He has stated that deficit spending results in devaluation of the dollar and a decline in the economic stability of the United States. He has proposed reining in growth in entitlement programs. He has also proposed eliminating pork-barrell spending on unnecessary programs.[19]

Romney has never said anything close to "lower taxes for the rich". More buying into media hype. He advocates eliminating capital gains on people who earn less than $200k. He is way outside of that range, so no attempt there to cut his own taxes. He talks a lot about cutting spending, which absolutely has to happen, and cutting income taxes overall. We already know from all the discussions about Romney's wealth that a cut in income tax would help Buffet's secretary and have no effect on Buffet. Isn't that the soundbite?

 

[LogGrad98]

And Staples killed Office Depot who also had thousands of jobs, and many mom and pop stationary and supply stores. Yes, Staples is successful, but it came at a price.

As for Sports authority- same deal. It took down many local sporting goods stores (Gart Sports in Utah, as an example) that employed thousands of people. So yes, Sports Authority is successful, but it came at a price.

It would be nice if Romney would spell it all out. He claimed to be a job creator but has repeatedly dodged the question when asked to explain the numbers.

So you think Romney engineered all of those other companies failing to compete? Do you know anything at all about the economy? Even so, at least he wasn't investigated for truly illegal activity aimed directly at killing competing companies, like your idol, Bill Gates was.

So you are saying it would have been better for Sports Authority to fail than any local or small companies? It would have been better for staples to fail than Office Depot? So you can see in your crystal ball that Office Depot would provide for far more jobs than staples had staples never existed? How do you know that the reason Office Depot failed wasn't because of poor management and had nothing or little to do with competitors? You are sure stretching to draw a firm iron-clad cause-effect relationship where none exists.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Romney has never said anything close to "lower taxes for the rich". More buying into media hype. He advocates eliminating capital gains on people who earn less than $200k. He is way outside of that range, so no attempt there to cut his own taxes. He talks a lot about cutting spending, which absolutely has to happen, and cutting income taxes overall. We already know from all the discussions about Romney's wealth that a cut in income tax would help Buffet's secretary and have no effect on Buffet. Isn't that the soundbite?

https://business.time.com/2012/01/2...ve-him-millions-but-not-as-much-as-gingrichs/

"Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney would save $3.4 million a year — roughly 85 times the total pre-tax income of the average American citizen — if the tax plan he advocates were enacted in the year that he is seeking to be President. In fact, Romney’s policies would not only shrink what he pays to the government, they would also boost his income, and roughly double the amount of money that he can pass along to his children when he dies."

 

[LogGrad98]

Yeah then their kids can call everyone who isn't rich lazy.

I value the opinions (on this subject) of the self made millionaires much more than the ones who inherited their money.

Bill Gates >>>>>>>> Mitt Romney or Donald Trump.

This was the entirety of your argument about Gates being better than Romney until that argument was blown up. Then you started talking about products or something. As if Microsoft and it's illegal business practices is so much more saintlike than investing in Staples.

 

[SaltyDawg]

So you think Romney engineered all of those other companies failing to compete? Do you know anything at all about the economy? Even so, at least he wasn't investigated for truly illegal activity aimed directly at killing competing companies, like your idol, Bill Gates was.

So you are saying it would have been better for Sports Authority to fail than any local or small companies? It would have been better for staples to fail than Office Depot? So you can see in your crystal ball that Office Depot would provide for far more jobs than staples had staples never existed? How do you know that the reason Office Depot failed wasn't because of poor management and had nothing or little to do with competitors? You are sure stretching to draw a firm iron-clad cause-effect relationship where none exists.

I'm not saying I can prove these companies would be as successful as Staples or Sports authority, no. But I am saying, at least in Utah, I don't see anymore Sports Authorities than there were Gart Sports. and they aren't bigger than the Gart Sports they replaced. In fact, if I remember correctly, there was a Gart Sports on about 21st south and 12th east that is gone altogether now. So Sports Authority likely has an even smaller footprint in the Salt lake area than Gart Sports had.

I think the free market will take care of itself. If there weren't a million Staples around, there would still be just as many office supplies for sale by other stores. Romney didn't create a market, he simply took market share from others. Bill Gates created jobs that didn't previously exist. Romney took existing jobs from other companies.

 

[SaltyDawg]

This was the entirety of your argument about Gates being better than Romney until that argument was blown up. Then you started talking about products or something. As if Microsoft and it's illegal business practices is so much more saintlike than investing in Staples.

That wasn't an argument. That was me stating my opinion that I like Bill Gates a heck of a lot more than Mitt Romney, and giving 1 reason why. It wasn't the only reason why, and nobody had even said Mitt Romney was better.

 

[LogGrad98]

https://business.time.com/2012/01/2...ve-him-millions-but-not-as-much-as-gingrichs/

"Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney would save $3.4 million a year — roughly 85 times the total pre-tax income of the average American citizen — if the tax plan he advocates were enacted in the year that he is seeking to be President. In fact, Romney’s policies would not only shrink what he pays to the government, they would also boost his income, and roughly double the amount of money that he can pass along to his children when he dies."

So why don't you do the same in-depth analysis on this that you did on Staples impact to the overall job market and see how Romney's plan would benefit the middle class? Also interesting that the article said nothing about overall impact to the economy and other tax brackets, just railed on "the rich" yet again.

 

[franklin]

My logic says nothing of the sort.

Thank you for admitting your entire argument is spurious.

Without laborers buying products, there would be no corporate elite.

Thanks for proving my point and discounting yours further, if that were even possible.

Not at all. I want a smart president who takes advantage of what is given to him. But I also want him to understand that not everyone has the same opportunities.

OK.

Have you just barely discovered this mystery that life isn't fair? The rest of us have been clued in since 2 years old dude.

 

[franklin]

I'm not saying I can prove these companies would be as successful as Staples or Sports authority, no. But I am saying, at least in Utah, I don't see anymore Sports Authorities than there were Gart Sports. and they aren't bigger than the Gart Sports they replaced. In fact, if I remember correctly, there was a Gart Sports on about 21st south and 12th east that is gone altogether now. So Sports Authority likely has an even smaller footprint in the Salt lake area than Gart Sports had.

I think the free market will take care of itself. If there weren't a million Staples around, there would still be just as many office supplies for sale by other stores. Romney didn't create a market, he simply took market share from others. Bill Gates created jobs that didn't previously exist. Romney took existing jobs from other companies.

Nice rant.
Romney provided a better or cheaper service. The benefits to the consumer created more jobs elsewhere.
Why do you think you deserve to have an opinion on this stuff when you don't understand even the most basic concepts?

 

[SaltyDawg]

So why don't you do the same in-depth analysis on this that you did on Staples impact to the overall job market and see how Romney's plan would benefit the middle class? Also interesting that the article said nothing about overall impact to the economy and other tax brackets, just railed on "the rich" yet again.

I don't care what his plan does to my taxes. The revenue needs to be increased. Yes, we need to make some spending cuts too. But the revenue needs to be increased. And the start of that has to be with the wealthiest. They are the ones who can most afford it.

I also don't buy the argument that lower taxes on the rich is good for the economy. It may have been good before all the tax loopholes and free trade agreements (and that is debatable). But now all it does is create more jobs overseas. Once outsourcing became viable, it killed that notion. That's part of the reason why we have some of the lowest tax rates in a long time, yet just had the worst recession since the great depression (and it might not even be over). Besides, the post I was responding to was:

Romney has never said anything close to "lower taxes for the rich". More buying into media hype. He advocates eliminating capital gains on people who earn less than $200k. He is way outside of that range, so no attempt there to cut his own taxes. He talks a lot about cutting spending, which absolutely has to happen, and cutting income taxes overall. We already know from all the discussions about Romney's wealth that a cut in income tax would help Buffet's secretary and have no effect on Buffet. Isn't that the soundbite?

Clearly, Romney does want lower taxes for the rich, as the link showed.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Have you just barely discovered this mystery that life isn't fair? The rest of us have been clued in since 2 years old dude.

Just because life isn't fair doesn't mean I have to support someone who clearly doesn't have my own best interest in mind.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Nice rant.
Romney provided a better or cheaper service. The benefits to the consumer created more jobs elsewhere.
Why do you think you deserve to have an opinion on this stuff when you don't understand even the most basic concepts?

Romney did not create a better or cheaper service, lol. Explain to me what is better or cheaper in Sports Authority compared to Gart Sports.

They're renting the same buildings, selling the same stuff, and if anything the prices are higher. I remember getting incredible deals on basketball shoes at Gart Sports (like $10 for previous year Nike Airs). I haven't seen anything like that at Sports Authority, even though it's in the same building that used to be Gart Sports and looks identical inside and out (sans the name on the sign and prices on the merchandise, and even most of the prices are about the same).

 

[franklin]

Romney did not create a better or cheaper service, lol. Explain to me what is better or cheaper in Sports Authority compared to Gart Sports.

They're renting the same buildings, selling the same stuff, and if anything the prices are higher. I remember getting incredible deals on basketball shoes at Gart Sports (like $10 for previous year Nike Airs). I haven't seen anything like that at Sports Authority, even though it's in the same building that used to be Gart Sports and looks identical inside and out (sans the name on the sign and prices on the merchandise, and even most of the prices are about the same).

Moving into your competitors building is a pretty good way to "put them out of business".
Thanks for the laugh.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Moving into your competitors building is a pretty good way to "put them out of business".
Thanks for the laugh.

I don't understand your point (assuming you actually have one).

The bottom line is Sports Authority hasn't done anything for the Salt Lake area that Gart Sports wasn't already doing before Sports Authority bought them.

Or were you not familiar with the situation and implying that Gart Sports went under due to competition or something and then Sports Authority moved in later?

Sports Authority bought Gart Sports. Supposedly it was an equal merger, but they took Sports Authority's name, and Sports Authority's CEO was CEO of the combined company. That's what happened. And all of those jobs they "created" in the Salt Lake area already existed as Gart Sports jobs. They just renamed the Gart Sports jobs to Sports Authority jobs. In other areas that had both chains before the merger (Salt Lake only had Gart Sports before the merger) they closed many of the stores and laid a lot of people off. They didn't actually "create" jobs.

Microsoft, on the other hand, actually "created" thousands of jobs in the Salt Lake area.

 

[franklin]

Is this going to be your final stance or are you going to change your positioning again?
Let me know when you're dong flip-flopping so I can just tell you flat out I don't care if Mitt Romney was a corporate raider.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Is this going to be your final stance or are you going to change your positioning again?
Let me know when you're dong flip-flopping so I can just tell you flat out I don't care if Mitt Romney was a corporate raider.

I haven't flip flopped on anything. Funny that a Romney supporter would make such a bogus accusation.

And let me flat out say that I don't care if you like corporate raiders. I still don't like them (especially if they're going to claim to be a job creator, and demand even lower taxes for the rich), and Bill Gates is still way better than Mitt Romney.

I'm not the slightest bit worried about a president Romney because he has no chance to win the general election (assuming he even makes it that far).

How many jobs would Romney have "created" by letting Detroit go bankrupt? Probably lots of jobs in China/Japan/Germany/etc.