quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Tamaka Why are you against saving money? That is a form of hording. You put it in the bank, get 2% interest or whatever, and they use it for other purposes until you ask for it back. So the money stayed incirculation by the bank. Now if I made the 12B and put it in the bank for them to use and got my $240M in interest I am sure that you might well be upset with me because I didn't give it to my employees, I just put it away in a savings account and lived off the interest.

As my doctor says... everything in moderation. Saving some money for a rainy day makes sense. If everyone saved all of their money it wouldn't be good for the economy. Money needs to be circulated in order to keep thd economy going. And it needs to be circulated in a way that benefits our country. Billionnaires not paying taxes and American corporations off- shoring everything, and everyday people buying all their goods imported from China and people paying illegal immigrants to do work.... all of these things aren't helping our economy.

I would like for you explain how billionare aren't paying taxes. They may have enough legal deductions to avoid paying taxes, but then that iss the fault of the tax code and staff of good lawyers and cpa's to find all those deductions. You too can file using whatever duductions you are eligible for and pay your taxes accordingly. The only way to really fix it the way I understand you wanting to do is to eliminate all deductions and everyone pay the same tax based upon a percentage of income. Would simplify the tax laws.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka



I think that success should be shared and regulated. Yes i do. Because this system isn't working too well, in my opinion.

So, you think I should bust my ass and then have to give the fruit of my labor to someone else.

Let's say you have a class room where the professor has determined that all test scores will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade. No one would fail and no one would earn an A.

Why would you bother to try to get an A score? You're never going to get the A because it's going to be reduced so that someone who didn't study won't fail.

That is exactly what you're proposing.

And FYI, eventually the entire class will fail because no one will put forth the effort because there is no reward for that effort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

I think everyone should share in the success of the country.

You get to share in my success when you've shared by putting something into it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
And the Walton children did what exactly?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


I have some admiration for Sam Walton's initial efforts, but not for how it turned out, or the family, or society, but it is still an interesting story how it all came about. The guy almost invented 'monospsony power' all by himself. To give a basic econ intro to the subject (you just can't wait for this one, can you?), 'monopoly power' describes the degree to which one holds all the cards or whatever can be close to it, in having all or most of the market in his possession for that item. Like DeBeers in diamonds, at one time. No one holds absolute monopsony, but if someone says "I will buy 15,000 pair of baby booties and 40,000 child pyjamas and 60,000 cheap sweaters of whatever size, -at my price- " then "If you can't meet that price, I'll find some other factory that will." That is monopsony power. The buyer dictating terms, with the buying power to do so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
And the Walton children did what exactly?

I have some admiration for Sam Walton's initial efforts, but not for how it turned out, or the family, or of ultimate effect on society, but it is still an interesting story how it all came about. The guy almost invented 'monospsony power' all by himself. To give a basic econ intro to the subject (you just can't wait for this one, can you?), 'monopoly power' describes the degree to which one holds all the cards or whatever can be close to it, in having all or most of the market in his possession for that item. Like DeBeers in diamonds, at one time. No one holds absolute monopsony, but if someone says "I will buy 15,000 pair of baby booties and 40,000 child pyjamas and 60,000 cheap sweaters of whatever size, -at my price- " then "If you can't meet that price, I'll find some other factory that will." That is monopsony power. The buyer dictating terms, with the buying power to do so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


That factory collapse in India with people still working in it has everything to do with Western bitch companies, and not just Walmart.

Some poultry processing place in Hamlet NC in the US locked the fire escape doors because they didn't want people sneaking out for a cigarette. Twenty-five deaths and 55 other casualties later ...

But all we can yell about is "where are the jobs!"

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


I have some admiration for Sam Walton's initial efforts, but not for how it turned out, or the family, or society, but it is still an interesting story how it all came about. The guy almost invented 'monospsony power' all by himself. To give a basic econ intro to the subject (you just can't wait for this one, can you?), 'monopoly power' describes the degree to which one holds all the cards or whatever can be close to it, in having all or most of the market in his possession for that item. Like DeBeers in diamonds, at one time. No one holds absolute monopsony, but if someone says "I will buy 15,000 pair of baby booties and 40,000 child pyjamas and 60,000 cheap sweaters of whatever size, -at my price- " then "If you can't meet that price, I'll find some other factory that will." That is monopsony power. The buyer dictating terms, with the buying power to do so.

Sure. And what benefit towards society have the Walton children who inherited all of that money demonstrated? If anything they have set up slave- like working conditions for their employees. Too much power in the wrong hands.

And i doubt that he figured that out all by himself. I am pretty sure the government tapped his shoulder to open up trade with China and also deal with the welfare- to- work issue later on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

We're in a system that thinks it's okay for us to pay $1671 per month for two people for the worst plan to support a family of 6 paying $75 a month for the best plan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl
and the $15 minimum wage is going to hurt small businesses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
could you guys trim quotes please...

while im here though---generally speaking, when things (like community college) are free, people don't value them.

Amen on the first point.

As for the second point ....

You've got it bass-ackwards. Germany, e.g., has a 'free' education system for everything but die Universität, which in any case is immensely cheaper in than in the US.

The Germans very much value community college education (or it's superior version as exists there) as a constituent component of their socioeconomic well being, which is why it's available to every student up to the task for 'free.' Nothing in society is absolutely 'free,'

So as consequence of all that, who is the third largest exporter in the world?

Do you think that a country of 83 million proposed to do that by bullying up to a country of 1.3 billion people, or anybody else? No, that could only be accomplished by having something to offer. and the principle holds true outside education as well.

They did by that by recognition of the fact that any country so utterly stupid as to consider any higher education beyond HS as a 'luxury' or 'privilege not appreciated if given for free' gives their own country an immediate economic advantage.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka



I think that success should be shared and regulated. Yes i do. Because this system isn't working too well, in my opinion.

So, you think I should bust my ass and then have to give the fruit of my labor to someone else.

Let's say you have a class room where the professor has determined that all test scores will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade. No one would fail and no one would earn an A.

Why would you bother to try to get an A score? You're never going to get the A because it's going to be reduced so that someone who didn't study won't fail.

That is exactly what you're proposing.

And FYI, eventually the entire class will fail because no one will put forth the effort because there is no reward for that effort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

I think everyone should share in the success of the country.

You get to share in my success when you've shared by putting something into it.

Surely most all of you people are smarter than this. For example Oside, most if not all of Buffet's $12 billion was capital gains and taxed at 1/2 the rate your income is, even as you bust your ass and make a few 100 thou.....

In fact to give you a prime example, lets say your businesses were a private stock co. (or public) and Buffet bought a bunch of shares.
You bust your ass, work those 60-70 hour weeks or more and kick ass. You and your business make a ton of money and could pay 40% in fed. taxes while Buffet sells his shares and...pays 20% on his 'gains.' Why ?

There simply is no justification for that regardless of what we all might think anyone...is 'supposed' to pay in taxes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


That factory collapse in India with people still working in it has everything to do with Western bitch companies, and not just Walmart.

Some poultry processing place in Hamlet NC in the US locked the fire escape doors because they didn't want people sneaking out for a cigarette. Twenty-five deaths and 55 other casualties later ...

But all we can yell about is "where are the jobs!"

That's another aspect to the very immorality of the corporation...no criminal liability. The corporation is an ethics-free zone because [it] is the most powerful, economic authoritarian institution of a free society.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird


I have some admiration for Sam Walton's initial efforts, but not for how it turned out, or the family, or society, but it is still an interesting story how it all came about. The guy almost invented 'monospsony power' all by himself. To give a basic econ intro to the subject (you just can't wait for this one, can you?), 'monopoly power' describes the degree to which one holds all the cards or whatever can be close to it, in having all or most of the market in his possession for that item. Like DeBeers in diamonds, at one time. No one holds absolute monopsony, but if someone says "I will buy 15,000 pair of baby booties and 40,000 child pyjamas and 60,000 cheap sweaters of whatever size, -at my price- " then "If you can't meet that price, I'll find some other factory that will." That is monopsony power. The buyer dictating terms, with the buying power to do so.

Sure. And what benefit towards society have the Walton children who inherited all of that money demonstrated? If anything they have set up slave- like working conditions for their employees. Too much power in the wrong hands.

And i doubt that he figured that out all by himself. I am pretty sure the government tapped his shoulder to open up trade with China and also deal with the welfare- to- work issue later on.

You need to learn to read better. I never said that Sam Walton himself nor anyone in the family did anything great for society. Sam Walton was after Nixon as far as China goes, and I can assure you no one tapped S Walton on the shoulder to give him a 'go' about anything.

See if you can get your reading comprehension up to that level, let's see how it goes from there. Not that I'm expecting much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
And the Walton children did what exactly?

I have some admiration for Sam Walton's initial efforts, but not for how it turned out, or the family, or of ultimate effect on society, but it is still an interesting story how it all came about. The guy almost invented 'monospsony power' all by himself. To give a basic econ intro to the subject (you just can't wait for this one, can you?), 'monopoly power' describes the degree to which one holds all the cards or whatever can be close to it, in having all or most of the market in his possession for that item. Like DeBeers in diamonds, at one time. No one holds absolute monopsony, but if someone says "I will buy 15,000 pair of baby booties and 40,000 child pyjamas and 60,000 cheap sweaters of whatever size, -at my price- " then "If you can't meet that price, I'll find some other factory that will." That is monopsony power. The buyer dictating terms, with the buying power to do so.

The only surprising aspect to the success of Walmart is that nobody was smart enough to copy Walton's business model of taking advantage of cheap Chinese labor. (80%+ of Walmart's inventory is made in China) It simply didn't take any particular brilliance on his part or degrees from Harvard or Wharton to figure that out.

Kmart, (Kresge's) JCPenny, Sears...(Montgomery Ward or Woolworths) all dropped the ball and few can figure out why. In fact, Sears is not long for this world actually having to borrow money from its own management. If that isn't a slap in their corporate face...nothing is. JC Penny may soon be...right behind them.

BTW, what is a monopsony ? Do you mean monopoly ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Because it makes more sense.

Nothing more than your opinion. And an entitled one at that.

Fuck off lady. I've never been entitled to shit. I am just stating common sense. There is no need for 1 person to have the money he's got and in fact... it could be very dangerous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka
Fuck off lady. I've never been entitled to shit. I am just stating common sense. There is no need for 1 person to have the money he's got and in fact... it could be very dangerous.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwird
If you had any clue how a business or an economy works, you would realize that there is no way the fortune could have come to this much other than precisely knowing where and how to "circulate the money." And many others gained share from his acumen in that regard in their retirement accounts.
If he was of a sort to 'keep it all to himself' he'd be stuck where he was in 1964.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)