On-Topic Mondays Final Debate

[HenryReardon]

LOL. Wow. I just discussed obscene profits and included links that back up my case. I don't have wealth envy. I don't care for money. I prefer to be a happy person with less money... then many of the rich miserable people in this country. What wealth envy? People need to pay up in the system. Set the tax rate to 1970 levels on the upper 5%.

Bring some proof.

You discussed nothing, simply posted links to talking points about CEO compensation. Do you even understand the word profit? I rather doubt it.

 

[HenryReardon]

Well I certainly don't have wealth envy and I'm appalled at the dead money accruing in the vaults of the corporations and the !% of the wealth hoarders in the US and elswhere.

.

Do you know why business are siting on three trillion dollars right now? It's because they deem it unsafe to invest in expansion until the current anti-business adminstration is out of office. Why bother to invest, only to see the money confiscated for "social' programs.

 

[HenryReardon]

Oh I discussed plenty... and your arguments have not addressed my points. CEOs make gross amounts of profits. I seem to know more about profits in this regard.



Where is the proof for this? Other then that, it's just another empty partisan bullshit claim.

FYI, CEOs don't make profits. Their companies make profits, and very often a CEO's compensation is tied to profitability.

If the stockholders (owners) of a company hire someone to run it, they have every right to expect performance and to base compensation on that performance. And the CEOs damn well earn it, putting in 60 and 70 hour weeks.

Where is the proof? Numerous interviews on the air with business owners who freely admit that they are sitting it out. If you'd go to sources other than PMS-NBC and the Puffington Post, you might learn a thing or two.

 

[JayHawk]

What no one addresses correctly is that the uncertainty comes from a belligerent house of representatives that refuses to pass any legislation for fear it may make Obama look good.

 

[HenryReardon]

What no one addresses correctly is that the uncertainty comes from a belligerent house of representatives that refuses to pass any legislation for fear it may make Obama look good.

That's ridiculous on the face of it. None of Obama's proposed legislation would make him look good, and thank goodness the House has sense enough to stop it.

If they truly wanted to make Obama look bad, they could pass some of the crap he's proposed, but they don't want the country to suffer any more at the hands of this evil little man than it already has.

 

[JayHawk]

Right because defaulting on our debt or the threat of it and the instability that it caused was really good policy after voting to increase it 61 times prior....

 

[Kulindahr]

I'm not voting FOR anybody. I'm voting AGAINST Obama.

There are no good choices in this election.

So why pick the one who's been keeping us in the air over the one who by unbiased analysis will crash us?

 

[chance1]

What no one addresses correctly is that the uncertainty comes from a belligerent house of representatives that refuses to pass any legislation for fear it may make Obama look good.

Nice story if u can sell it

Bob Woodward - über liberal

In his exceedingly thorough non partisan summary of events

Says no

That Obama reneged on a deal as he felt he'd lose face

 

[Kulindahr]

Obscene profits.

http://www.verisi.com/resources/us-ceo-compensation.htm

Executive compensation has for quite some time been poorly correlated with profit -- e.g. bank executives who got giant bonuses when their companies were tanking.

Obama made a factual claim about the upper 1% paying the lowest tax rates since the 1950s. Mitt Romney would know it.

Time to raise the taxes on the rich.

Yes, but that has little to do with the profits.

 

[Benvolio]

Oh I discussed plenty... and your arguments have not addressed my points. CEOs make gross amounts of profits. I seem to know more about profits in this regard.



Where is the proof for this? Other then that, it's just another empty partisan bullshit claim.

You just don't understand. In a capitalist economy people are motivated by the prospect of big profits to do great things, inventions and innovations, business expansions. But such things involve risk, so the possible reward must compensate for the risk. What socialists and foreigners coming to th US fail to understand is that small profits and high taxes destroy the incentive which makes economies prosper. The hispanic countries have historically impeded innovation while the US rewards it. But Hispanics come to the US for superior opportunities , then vote to destroy the system which creates them. Once over the border they think they have the right to dictate to those whose families have participated in Americas rise to greatness.
Socialists hate the goose but want the golden eggs.

 

[Kulindahr]

LOL. Wow. I just discussed obscene profits

Actually you discussed, and linked to, CEO compensation -- which has become obscene whether a company is making any profit at all.

 

[Centexfarmer]

You just don't understand. In a capitalist economy people are motivated by the prospect of big profits to do great things, inventions and innovations, business expansions. But such things involve risk, so the possible reward must compensate for the risk. What socialists and foreigners coming to th US fail to understand is that small profits and high taxes destroy the incentive which makes economies prosper. The hispanic countries have historically impeded innovation while the US rewards it. But Hispanics come to the US for superior opportunities , then vote to destroy the system which creates them. Once over the border they think they have the right to dictate to those whose families have participated in Americas rise to greatness.
Socialists hate the goose but want the golden eggs.

"And you may find yourself..."

 

[Kulindahr]

Do you know why business are siting on three trillion dollars right now? It's because they deem it unsafe to invest in expansion until the current anti-business adminstration is out of office. Why bother to invest, only to see the money confiscated for "social' programs.

Actually it's because there's no point when there's a shortage of customers with money -- a shortage that Republicans have been quite deliberately keeping high by killing jobs bills Obama has supported.

 

[Kulindahr]

FYI, CEOs don't make profits. Their companies make profits, and very often a CEO's compensation is tied to profitability.

Unfortunately, the link is to the sort of short-term parasitic profit Romney was good at generating. At the time, that served a purpose, winnowing out chaff from the corporate jungle, but it isn't what's needed now.

 

[Kulindahr]

That's ridiculous on the face of it. None of Obama's proposed legislation would make him look good, and thank goodness the House has sense enough to stop it.

Right. That's why they've blocked, with the help of Senate Republicans who actually helped author some of the legislation, bills Obama wanted that would have generated some five million jobs in the last couple of years, including jobs for veterans.

On top of that, the legislation to drop the Bush tax cuts for the top bracket would have made Obama look very good, considering that a vast majority of Americans favored it.

 

[Kulindahr]

Nice story if u can sell it

Bob Woodward - über liberal

In his exceedingly thorough non partisan summary of events

Says no

That Obama reneged on a deal as he felt he'd lose face

Try reading Do Not Ask What Good We Do, by Robert Draper -- he chronicles the whole sorry charade.

 

[Kulindahr]

You just don't understand. In a capitalist economy people are motivated by the prospect of big profits to do great things, inventions and innovations, business expansions. But such things involve risk, so the possible reward must compensate for the risk.

You just don't understand. In a capitalist economy workers are motivated by the prospect of good pay for creating wealth. When they don't get it, their work declines in quality. High profits with wages below where they should be is a recipe for ruining an economy.

Taxes on corporations need to come down; profits need to be pared, and high-quality work has to be once again rewarded by high pay. We haven't been doing that, which is why many actually socialist economies have been outdoing us.

 

[Benvolio]

Don't say I don't understand. I grasp the issues very strongly. Many innovations in today's modern world were because of government spending... not this so called "private sector innovation". The private sector merely takes government funded inventions and changes them. And those constant xenophobic insults of Hispanic countries, many of which are doing well economically right now in South America, show the lack of grasp of those countries. Those xenophobic ideas are absolutely false and suggests both racism and xenophobia.

If so, why do they escape to our country by the millions. It is inconsistent for them to come here and yet believe that they know best how to run an economy. If they know so much, why don't they stay home and prove their theories at home. It is not xenophobia, it is resentment of foreigners telling us how to run our country when their own countries are failures; coming here for superior opportunities, then voting to destroy the systems which create the opportunities; voting for high taxes on Americans to pay for charity for themselves.

 

[opinterph]

Benvolio, you are generalizing and stereotyping in a way that very much resembles racism. You are welcome to discuss economic concept(s) relative to the movement of populations into or out of the US, but please dispense with the race baiting.

 

[Rolyo85]

Yeah I gotta say as a foreigner I feel pretty insulted by these constant generalizations - even the few I see in people's quotes.