• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

World Politics

Page 370 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Dec 7, 2010
8,307
1
0
ChrisE said:
That's BS, and hits the supply side clowns right in the chops. Thanks Alpe for framing this.

If the demand was there for your services you wouldn't need a tax break to hire people to supply for a demand.....basic capitalism would take care of that.

If there is no demand, you will not have the incentive or the increasing cash flow as you add employees. Capitalism will not support this activity. Getting a tax break and saying you will add employees when there must be no demand (else you would grow without the tax break) is pure BS. You add employees with these tax breaks, yet there is no demand lol.

I call you a liar. You would just pocket that tax break, just like 99% of your like minded cohorts because it makes no economic sense to add employees in a stagnant market.
Not me man .......... I would put that money into a Whisky Tango Village aka Trailer Park...Not a Cracker Barrel but you get the point. LMAO:D

I could buy like 4 trailer "HOUSES" with that money and rent them out for about 800 bones a month. That would more than cover the expense I will have to keep the Hookers. Errrrr Meth Heads around. LMAO
 
Glenn_Wilson said:
Not me man .......... I would put that money into a Whisky Tango Village aka Trailer Park...Not a Cracker Barrel but you get the point. LMAO:D

I could buy like 4 trailer "HOUSES" with that money and rent them out for about 800 bones a month. That would more than cover the expense I will have to keep the Hookers. Errrrr Meth Heads around. LMAO
and so goes the American "dream"

http://www.sadtrombone.com/
 
Jul 7, 2009
562
0
0
I believe they're called stationary mobile homes.
Though I DO like your idea of being a stationary mobile home estate owner/operator. Is there a government grant available for that? Wonder if there's much demand for hookers and blow?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ChrisE said:
That's BS, and hits the supply side clowns right in the chops. Thanks Alpe for framing this.

If the demand was there for your services you wouldn't need a tax break to hire people to supply for a demand.....basic capitalism would take care of that.

If there is no demand, you will not have the incentive or the increasing cash flow as you add employees. Capitalism will not support this activity. Getting a tax break and saying you will add employees when there must be no demand (else you would grow without the tax break) is pure BS. You add employees with these tax breaks, yet there is no demand lol.

I call you a liar. You would just pocket that tax break, just like 99% of your like minded cohorts because it makes no economic sense to add employees in a stagnant market.
Well Chrissy, I now know what I have suspected for some time.


You don't know squat about business or markets and you damned sure don't know a thing about my business.

When I speak about 'production' I'm speaking of (largely) sales positions. The way the industry I'm in works is people that do what I need done require a few years of support before their return on investment (ROI) enters positive territory. Because of this, it takes some time before most become "profitable". There is no problem with demand for the business I'm in.. in fact, many of the products my company offers are required.

The bottom line here? As usual you have no fvcking idea of hat you are talking about. Am I surprised? Not even a little.

You calling me a liar makes me smile. I've been called worse by people who actually have a clue.

Or maybe you do and you are trolling. Either way, what you write is often ignorant. But please don't stop. Whatever you do, don't stop.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Alpe d'Huez said:
Well, Chris, you said I guess what I couldn't. LOL!.


No, my contention was what I posted. That the GOP at the time said the Clinton tax hike would destroy the economy. It did not. They are claiming a very similar thing now that closing any tax loopholes (such as the annual $4.4b oil industry tax break) is bad for the economy. Explain why you think such a tax break is fair, and should exist. Because I think it's unfair, and it's held up by lobbying.
Really?

you said I guess what I couldn't. LOL!.
Why don't you say what you want? You afraid to hurt my feelings? Say it.
Try not to be such a *****.

Ok, higher tax rates didn't destroy the economy... as you state, we all know what happened.

How about this: The Bush tax plan created higher income with a higher percenage of income paid in taxes when compared to the Clinton years... by almost 5% higher percentage of income (which was also higher by a significant margin). Why or how did this happen?

TBH, I really don't give a **** what your response is so don't ****ing bother. We are done.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Really?



Why don't you say what you want? You afraid to hurt my feelings? Say it.
Try not to be such a *****.

Ok, higher tax rates didn't destroy the economy... as you state, we all know what happened.

How about this: The Bush tax plan created higher income with a higher percenage of income paid in taxes when compared to the Clinton years... by almost 5% higher percentage of income (which was also higher by a significant margin). Why or how did this happen?

TBH, I really don't give a **** what your response is so don't ****ing bother. We are done.
sis boom bah.. scotty.. fanboi

 
Jul 9, 2009
6,625
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Really?



Why don't you say what you want? You afraid to hurt my feelings? Say it.
Try not to be such a *****.

Ok, higher tax rates didn't destroy the economy... as you state, we all know what happened.

How about this: The Bush tax plan created higher income with a higher percenage of income paid in taxes when compared to the Clinton years... by almost 5% higher percentage of income (which was also higher by a significant margin). Why or how did this happen?

TBH, I really don't give a **** what your response is so don't ****ing bother. We are done.

The Bush tax plan created
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
 
Scott SoCal said:
You are half-correct here. There is a change in behavior when tax rates get too high. It is a fact.

What is also a fact is we are spending way too much money.

Just curious Rhub... what would the income tax rate need to be to close our budget deficit this year? I mean, you realize it is not possible, even at 100% tax rate, to collect anywhere near what we are spending, right?

So, knowing this, what exactly becomes a civic duty? Throw every penny possible to the utter corruption that runs our govt?

Or would I be better off running a business that provides a product and service that people want and purchase, growing my business by re-investing and providing jobs for several people who help support their families (and pay taxes) by working for my company?

I could reduce payroll and send that money to the treasury. Would that be conducting my civic duty in your estimation??

Well I certainly don't have a magic wand.

I'd simply say that the mismanagement of the tax revenue and the wasteful military spending and the appalling praxis at the financial markets, means that America has found itself in a position to have to make huge sacrifices, across the board for years.

My only wish, is that in the spirit of civic duty, those who were most responsible for this dire situation, would be the ones called upon to assume the most responsibility and burden in beginning, I don't say to completely, just begin to steer a different course.

What the republicans want, due to a fanatical ideology of fiscal relief (including for and especially from the most well of class) and massive cuts on social services everybody needs like education and health care (especially the weaker classes) is simply irresponsible, grotesque and obscene (the two combined together).

I also think a civic duty is considering the guy next door, the community as a whole, of which the individual forms a part, not so much in the Christian spirit as in that of the demos and polis of Greek philosophy and the rationalism of the Enlightenment.

It thus has to do with a principle, with a culture, that goes beyond your mere and straightforward economic analysis of everything. And I think that the problem starts here: namely that the business criteria has taken over Americana, so that the state itself, society too, is percieved like any business and they believe it can be simply managed as such.

This identity and ideology of the state and of society has ruined us, because it is such a base and mean concept of humanity and the human condition.

That is all.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
rhubroma said:
It thus has to do with a principle, with a culture, that goes beyond your mere and straightforward economic analysis of everything. And I think that the problem starts here: namely that the business criteria has taken over Americana, so that the state itself, society too, is percieved like any business and they believe it can be simply managed as such.

This identity and ideology of the state and of society has ruined us, because it is such a base and mean concept of humanity and the human condition.

That is all.
When the first and foremost thoughts are "what is in it for me?" "me first" "the line forms behind me" etc ,,economic analysis of everything is not the case.. You can bet he doesn't even feed the fdog without demanding disproportional gratitude.
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Well Chrissy, I now know what I have suspected for some time.


You don't know squat about business or markets and you damned sure don't know a thing about my business.

When I speak about 'production' I'm speaking of (largely) sales positions. The way the industry I'm in works is people that do what I need done require a few years of support before their return on investment (ROI) enters positive territory. Because of this, it takes some time before most become "profitable". There is no problem with demand for the business I'm in.. in fact, many of the products my company offers are required.

The bottom line here? As usual you have no fvcking idea of hat you are talking about. Am I surprised? Not even a little.

You calling me a liar makes me smile. I've been called worse by people who actually have a clue.

Or maybe you do and you are trolling. Either way, what you write is often ignorant. But please don't stop. Whatever you do, don't stop.
You're full of it. You hire sales people that are not profitable for several years, according to you, which I do not believe. Maybe if taxes were invested in education in this country you wouldn't have such a stupid workforce to choose from, cutting this "years long" training program down to a manageable level.

And, a tax break would magically make this alleged fact go away in terms of your cash flow lol. This is not even the point of this discussion, and you try to pigeon hole it with your own BS situation you are pulling out of your azz. Whatever. :rolleyes:

And, I wasn't specifically talking about your business. Try to get some perspective here.

This is a general discussion; even if the BS you spew about the years long super-duper high intensity training program to sell your high tech required goods is legitimate, this is not the norm across the board.

So, back to you don't hire those people and stay stagnant in your growth, in a business that can grow according to you. Of course, unless you get a tax cut instead of a loan, like the common folk get when they need capital. Then all the magic starts lol.

But then, according to you, you will not be profitable for years even if you get this tax break. And, this tax break is probably a small percentage of that salesperson's salary/benefits/overhead support, etc, so you would be negative for years according to you. You've got this problem whether you get this tax break or not, and there are other avenues to obtain much more capital to help this issue, even taking into account this lie you have come up with about this years long negative cash flow/training BS you are spewing.

Yes, you are an ideological clown. But you do give people hope...if somebody like you can be productive in society even the dullest knife in the drawer has a chance.

Yes, I feel the same way about you as you feel about me, Scott. I can contiue to bust you up all thru this thread but I grow bored pretty easily. My apologies.
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,280
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
Not me man .......... I would put that money into a Whisky Tango Village aka Trailer Park...Not a Cracker Barrel but you get the point. LMAO:D

I could buy like 4 trailer "HOUSES" with that money and rent them out for about 800 bones a month. That would more than cover the expense I will have to keep the Hookers. Errrrr Meth Heads around. LMAO
At least someone here has a plan, but stick with the hookers, Meth heads don't psy rent. They just wait to get evicted then move on to another sucker.

And ALP, what in the hell kind of slave wages are you paying, three employees for 100,000 a year. So much for benefits, eh? :D. Are you planning to pay 'em in cash at the end of the day?
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
patricknd said:
At least someone here has a plan, but stick with the hookers, Meth heads don't psy rent. They just wait to get evicted then move on to another sucker.
?
Why is prostitution against the law? I always wonder about the point that prostitution stops and where "I will be your GF/BF and let you buy me stuff, in return I will screw you periodically" starts. :cool:
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,280
0
0
ChrisE said:
Why is prostitution against the law? I always wonder about the point that prostitution stops and where "I will be your GF/BF and let you buy me stuff, in return I will screw you periodically" starts. :cool:
i think it's against the law because it might not be as much fun if it didn't have the whole "naughtiness" factor.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ChrisE said:
You're full of it. You hire sales people that are not profitable for several years, according to you, which I do not believe. Maybe if taxes were invested in education in this country you wouldn't have such a stupid workforce to choose from, cutting this "years long" training program down to a manageable level.

And, a tax break would magically make this alleged fact go away in terms of your cash flow lol. This is not even the point of this discussion, and you try to pigeon hole it with your own BS situation you are pulling out of your azz. Whatever. :rolleyes:

And, I wasn't specifically talking about your business. Try to get some perspective here.

This is a general discussion; even if the BS you spew about the years long super-duper high intensity training program to sell your high tech required goods is legitimate, this is not the norm across the board.

So, back to you don't hire those people and stay stagnant in your growth, in a business that can grow according to you. Of course, unless you get a tax cut instead of a loan, like the common folk get when they need capital. Then all the magic starts lol.

But then, according to you, you will not be profitable for years even if you get this tax break. And, this tax break is probably a small percentage of that salesperson's salary/benefits/overhead support, etc, so you would be negative for years according to you. You've got this problem whether you get this tax break or not, and there are other avenues to obtain much more capital to help this issue, even taking into account this lie you have come up with about this years long negative cash flow/training BS you are spewing.

Yes, you are an ideological clown. But you do give people hope...if somebody like you can be productive in society even the dullest knife in the drawer has a chance.

Yes, I feel the same way about you as you feel about me, Scott. I can contiue to bust you up all thru this thread but I grow bored pretty easily. My apologies.
You bust me up? As in laughing my azz off at your disconnected stupidity? You try so hard to be the smart guy in the room.

There was a hyopothetical question asked. If I as an employer had my tax liability reduced by $100,000 would I hire people? Yes, I would. You call me a liar for answering this hypothetical. Fine. Believe it or not, I couldn't care less.

This is a general discussion; even if the BS you spew about the years long super-duper high intensity training program to sell your high tech required goods is legitimate, this is not the norm across the board.
Jump to conclusions much? I simply state that my expectation on the ROI for a nomal new employee could take some time... a couple of years generally. Are there exceptions? Sure.

It has nothing to do with a stupid workforce. It has to do with the nature of the business I'm in. That's it, no further assumptions on your part are required.

But then, according to you, you will not be profitable for years even if you get this tax break. And, this tax break is probably a small percentage of that salesperson's salary/benefits/overhead support, etc, so you would be negative for years according to you. You've got this problem whether you get this tax break or not, and there are other avenues to obtain much more capital to help this issue, even taking into account this lie you have come up with about this years long negative cash flow/training BS you are spewing.
Since you don't know the difference between a tax on earned income (I'll help you here, that means money that I already have earned, also know as the bottom line) and a long term liability (this means a loan, or borrowed money) there's not much point in going further with you.

Yes, you are an ideological clown
This just isn't real impressive to me.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
rhubroma said:
Well I certainly don't have a magic wand.

I'd simply say that the mismanagement of the tax revenue and the wasteful military spending and the appalling praxis at the financial markets, means that America has found itself in a position to have to make huge sacrifices, across the board for years.

My only wish, is that in the spirit of civic duty, those who were most responsible for this dire situation, would be the ones called upon to assume the most responsibility and burden in beginning, I don't say to completely, just begin to steer a different course.

What the republicans want, due to a fanatical ideology of fiscal relief (including for and especially from the most well of class) and massive cuts on social services everybody needs like education and health care (especially the weaker classes) is simply irresponsible, grotesque and obscene (the two combined together).

I also think a civic duty is considering the guy next door, the community as a whole, of which the individual forms a part, not so much in the Christian spirit as in that of the demos and polis of Greek philosophy and the rationalism of the Enlightenment.

It thus has to do with a principle, with a culture, that goes beyond your mere and straightforward economic analysis of everything. And I think that the problem starts here: namely that the business criteria has taken over Americana, so that the state itself, society too, is percieved like any business and they believe it can be simply managed as such.

This identity and ideology of the state and of society has ruined us, because it is such a base and mean concept of humanity and the human condition.

That is all.

What the republicans want, due to a fanatical ideology of fiscal relief (including for and especially from the most well of class) and massive cuts on social services everybody needs like education and health care (especially the weaker classes) is simply irresponsible, grotesque and obscene (the two combined together).

Let's say you get your wish. Let's say there is 100% income tax on earned income over $250,000. That would equate to about $1.4 Trillion. It would also only happen one time as there will no longer be any incentive to earn more than $250k.

If we elimnated the military that would save about $700 Billion. That's about half of the $1.5 Trillion we will borrow this year.

So what should we do?
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
.....Snip clown babble....


This just isn't real impressive to me.
OK. I agree "clown" is not a strong enough indication of your stupidity and shallow anecdotes.

How about "azzclown" as a description for you? Kinda an adjective/combo word that comes closer to describing you than just plain "clown". That works for me.

Do we have agreement?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ChrisE said:
OK. I agree "clown" is not a strong enough indication of your stupidity and shallow anecdotes.

How about "azzclown" as a description for you? Kinda an adjective/combo word that comes closer to describing you than just plain "clown". That works for me.

Do we have agreement?
Wow. You spew stupidity, get called out and commence with the name calling. My God, I have never seen this behavior before.
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Wow. You spew stupidity, get called out and commence with the name calling. My God, I have never seen this behavior before.
So why don't you tell us what kind of super-duper high tech sophisticated product your company sells, that requires years of training for a salesman to become profitable. All this while the product is in high demand. LOL.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ChrisE said:
So why don't you tell us what kind of super-duper high tech sophisticated product your company sells, that requires years of training for a salesman to become profitable. All this while the product is in high demand. LOL.
I think you are probably a bright guy. I also think you enjoy trolling this thread.

Or you really aren't very bright. It's one of the two.

At any rate, figure it out for yourself.

Is this where I'm supposed to put an LOL? I'm not LOL but I think I'll put another LOL right here for effect.
 
May 23, 2010
2,409
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
I think you are probably a bright guy. I also think you enjoy trolling this thread.

Or you really aren't very bright. It's one of the two.

At any rate, figure it out for yourself.

Is this where I'm supposed to put an LOL? I'm not LOL but I think I'll put another LOL right here for effect.
if republican cs-ing was a high tech product you would be one of the 400


LOL
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redtreviso said:
That's republican territory..I'm sure they know you are on their team.
Because I post on the politics thread of a cycling message board?

Fvking Brilliant you are.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Scott SoCal said:
In Obama's own words;

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion.That is “trillion” with a “T.” That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.

Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.

And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities.

Senator Barack Obama
Senate Floor Speech on Public Debt
March 16, 2006
Exactly. Magnifico. Well done Senator, well done.

I highlighted the parts I really thought were poignant.

Now I would have thought one of you lefties would have had something to say about the Senator's speech just a few years ago. Do any of you agree with what he said then? How about what he's saying now?

Just curious. LOL
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Off Topic DIscussions 12
Similar threads
2019 Rugby World Cup

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts