|
FirmhandKY -> RE: frustrated with President Obama (7/24/2011 9:38:34 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: farglebargle
For the record, you haven't ever answered the Employer/Entrepreneur question of how many FTE jobs you've personally created, so I'm going to assume that like your 'inventing career', your employer and entrepreneur credentials are also non-existent.
Sometimes, "jobs created" aren't directly hires, but an overall increase in economic activity.
That being said, while I would be somewhat more circumspect than locked, his is basically correct in most of his assertions.
In particular, your claim about all property being owned by the government. The right to be inviolate in the ownership of private property is (was) one of the very basic principles on which this country was founded. Your belief that "it's the government's" marks you as something other than what you claim to be, on an historical basis.
And, FYI, I've probably directly created at least 20 jobs or careers for people over the years. Currently, primarily because of the BS that "government" requires, I provide jobs for three other people directly, but allow hundreds of others to profit economically.
I could easily increase that ... but the BS and taxes I'd have to pay has made me ask the question "why?", as the ratio of personal benefit versus hassle and return simply isn't worth it. Therefore the overall economy suffers reduced economic activity because of excessive government intervention into the process.
I find it pretty funny, too, that so many insist that adding an additional tax burden will "help" the economy, as in this will somehow increase economic activity. It's the same people who wanted to increase the cost of gasoline in order to reduce its use. In that case, they recognize that taxes have a negative effect on the activity or product being taxed, yet in this case, they insist it will do the exact opposite.
Magical thinking at its finest.
quote:
ORIGINAL: farglebargle
Remember, the Democrats would accept a "deal" wherein the debt limit is raised, thus avoiding default. The Republicans would not. All else is just details. I therefore suggest that we start calling this "the Republican Default of 2011".
Which is exactly the political effect that Obama wishes to incur.
Political brinkmanship at the expense of the nation as a whole.
I believe that many (most) liberals - including Obama - have zero understanding of the economy, or where "money" actually comes from. They seem to believe that just because they've always been able to "find the money", that they always will be able to "find the money".
Reality will likely teach them some cold hard facts.
But probably not. It will then be the fault of those "cold, hard Republicans and rich bastards" who will likely be hunted down, tarred and feathered.
That will certainly help the economy. Eat the seed-corn, and burn the crops that feed everyone to teach those bastards a lesson! And it will teach them a lesson, but not one that will do a damn thing to help you, or anyone else who depends on the government for support or subsistence.
Grasshopper, meet ant.
Firm
|
|
|
|
