QuakerOats;691731 wrote:Back to the topic at hand -- obama vying with carter for worst president in history --- he now sent the wrong f--ing charter boats to rescue Americans from Libya ........ incredible. If that was Bush it would be the lead story everywhere - nonstop.

somebody kick me; is this jimmy carter's second term ??

Just amazing ......... change we can believe in .......

WTH are you talking about? The ferry arrived and the Americans are in Malta. Fail.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/02/25/ferry-americans-aboard-leaves-libya/

ptown_trojans_1;691829 wrote:WTH are you talking about? The ferry arrived and the Americans are in Malta. Fail.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/02/25/ferry-americans-aboard-leaves-libya/

I think he was talking about this:

The Maria Dolores, carrying 167 U.S. citizens and 118 other foreigners, left Tripoli's As-shahab port Friday on the eight-hour trip for Valetta, Malta. Its passengers have been aboard the catamaran since Wednesday but high seas prevented it from leaving.

A real president would've calmed the seas so the ferry could leave sooner.

jhay78;691906 wrote:I think he was talking about this:



A real president would've calmed the seas so the ferry could leave sooner.

Well, he IS the Messiah......lol.

QuakerOats;691731 wrote:Back to the topic at hand -- obama vying with carter for worst president in history --- he now sent the wrong f--ing charter boats to rescue Americans from Libya ........ incredible. If that was Bush it would be the lead story everywhere - nonstop.

somebody kick me; is this jimmy carter's second term ??

Just amazing ......... change we can believe in .......

actually bush surpassed carter. as far as it being the lead story everywhere, it wouldnt have been the lead on the fox.

Ty Webb;682123 wrote:I'm right here Belly......I don't run away

Is it the workers fault the CEOs are stupid? No it's not. If they are doing an exceptional job,they deserve a bonus plain and simple,and you really can't agrue that. I would be willing to bet that if anyone of you worked at one of these companies and you were given one of these bonuses you would take it in a second.

Oh, you absolutely can argue that if someone works hard at a failing enterprise they don't deserve a bonus. Whether this is a failing enterprise is a different story, but bonuses aren't paid based on hard work--they're paid based on hard work plus success of the company.

Obama another fuck-up .... Good Fucking Job Worthless Public Servant

http://nation.foxnews.com/libya/2011/02/25/obama-charters-wrong-boat-botches-evacuation-americans-libya?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation_20110225?cmpid=cmty_twitter_Gigya_Team_Obama_Botches_Libya_Evacuation,_Charters_Wrong_Boat

Belly35;692500 wrote:Obama another fuck-up .... Good Fucking Job Worthless Public Servant

http://nation.foxnews.com/libya/2011/02/25/obama-charters-wrong-boat-botches-evacuation-americans-libya?cmpid=NL_FiredUpFoxNation_20110225?cmpid=cmty_twitter_Gigya_Team_Obama_Botches_Libya_Evacuation,_Charters_Wrong_Boat

Wrong thread, head to the Libya ME thread for this.
Oh, and the people are now out of the country, so chill.

...and here is just another reason why the American Public is, and should be, disgusted by this administration.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/28/news/companies/3M_CEO_Obama/index.htm?hpt=T2

Companies still have reason to look to manufacture in opther countries because it is just too hard to do business in America.

disgusting......

wkfan;694560 wrote:...and here is just another reason why the American Public is, and should be, disgusted by this administration.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/28/news/companies/3M_CEO_Obama/index.htm?hpt=T2

Companies still have reason to look to manufacture in opther countries because it is just too hard to do business in America.

disgusting......

Actually, it's more to do with cheap labor. Why have something made here for $10/hr. when you can have the same thing made in Mexico or China for less than $10/day?

You can blame regulations all you want, but the bottom line is cheap labor. Unless you or someone else is willing to take a huge pay cut, I don't see this changing.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41845257

3M CEO Says Obama's "Anti-Business" Attitude Could Drive Firms Out Of US.
The Minneapolis Star Tribune (3/1, Feyder) reports on 3M's CEO George Buckley's assessment of the US business climate and his remarks published in an interview with the UK's Financial Times that President Obama has an "anti-business" attitude and "Robin Hood-esque" instinct. Buckley said, "Politicians forget that business has choice. ... If it's hostile, incrementally, things will slip away. We've got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada and Mexico -- which tend to be pro-business -- or America." "In a speech to business leaders last year at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Buckley emphasized that elected officials need to cut corporate taxes, adding that combined federal and state corporate taxes in Minnesota are among the highest in the world." The company "had gotten few calls" about his remarks, according to spokeswoman Jacqueline Berry, who said some praised him while others didn't.
The Financial Times (2/28, Weitzman; subscription required) reported in the original interview with Buckley that he was harshly critical of the President's handling of issues critical to industry. Buckley said, "I judge people by their feet, not their mouth. We know what his instincts are - they are Robin Hood-esque. He is anti-business."

Perhaps the President is anti-business. But, it was also those same and other CEOs that helped get us into this mess of a recession.

I'd also add that what were the tax rates in the 1990s? Are they really that much higher than then? Or, what is the real difference between the boom of the 1990s and now?
Would lower corporate tax rates really foster investment or would a reduced overhead and restructuring under the current tax system or the 1990s tax system foster investment?

ptown_trojans_1;696194 wrote:Perhaps the President is anti-business. But, it was also those same and other CEOs that helped get us into this mess of a recession.

I'd also add that what were the tax rates in the 1990s? Are they really that much higher than then? Or, what is the real difference between the boom of the 1990s and now?
Would lower corporate tax rates really foster investment or would a reduced overhead and restructuring under the current tax system or the 1990s tax system foster investment?

... you mean 'balloon' of the '90's, which burst in '00.

What has also changed signficantly is globalization, making your statement about domestic taxation between then and now a moot point. The real questions are what is our taxation level vs. the rest of the world, how has that situation evloved over the last 20 yeras, and what do we need to do to treat capital better vis-a-vis world economies.

If ANYONE still cannot figure out that high taxes, incredibly burdensome regulations, and the hostile business climate faced by manufacturing, exploration and mining industries have caused the decline of those sectors, when ALL the evidence points directly thereto, then we may as well not even talk about it because the necessary level of comprehension doesn't exist.

If unchecked, the obama regime will be the group nailing the coffin lid on American capitalism --- and they would love nothing more.

And when we've removed all of the "burdensome regulations", rolled back corporate tax levels to all-time lows and played "feely-goodie" with business, the jobs will magically appear, right?


And the burden of financing our government will once again fall on the middle class. That makes a lot of sense.

It's called making America a place to invest in, and a return to growth, with a broader tax base, all of which combines to supply adequate revenues to the government; and allows the 50% of the people who pay zero federal income taxes yet absorb much of the benefits, to continue to contribute nothing.

I nearly have to run to the bathroom and throw up when I read this shiiiit:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/50417.html

when will be rid of the communists/marxists who have infiltrated OUR government?

QuakerOats;697080 wrote:It's called making America a place to invest in, and a return to growth, with a broader tax base, all of which combines to supply adequate revenues to the government; and allows the 50% of the people who pay zero federal income taxes yet absorb much of the benefits, to continue to contribute nothing.

Once again you have unmitigated disgust for people who pay no income taxes despite those income earners by and large not seeing their incomes rise for over 20 years despite contributing productivity to our economic expansions. Yet, you harbor not an ounce of contempt to their employers who send the economy into near ruin, chase the smokestacks and abuse international tax conventions.

I've said before that I could bear to see the U.S. corporate tax rate lowered (so long as it is lower relative to a higher capital gains rate). Nevertheless you moan about the exacerbation of the U.S. corporate tax rate despite not taking into account the effective tax burdens when this is the name of the game.

See this study by the GAO. levin.senate.gov/newsroom/supporting/2009/PSI.GAOtaxhavensreport.011609.pdf

87 of the top 100 publicly traded U.S. companies including Citigroup and Bank of America, GE and ExxonMobil among others paid a grand total of $0 in taxes since 2009.

In Fact, 2/3 of U.S. Corporations paid $0 federal income tax according to GAO findings. I'd even bet that 3M, one of the companies listed in the report, was one of them and if they weren't you can be damn sure


One factor is not only transfer pricing abuses but accelerated depreciation ramped up even more by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act decried as porkulus by you and signed into law by our anti-business commie president.

And because that accelerated depreciation I'd even bet that 3M, one of the companies listed in the report, was one of them that paid $0 taxes and if they weren't you can be damn sure they didn't pay much; almost assuredly a lower percentage than many individual taxpayers.

Hence, when we take a step back we see that you loathe low income hard working Americans who have not seen a morsel of our economic growth in decades because they don't pay income tax....yet the corporations that hire them a greater percentage of which pays no taxes earn your pity despite being the ones who have not raised the wages of those you hate. In addition, this disparity is made a reality in part because of the stimulus legislation and other BHO administration economic policies.

So in sum, you are absolutely full of shit through and through.

Incorrect, Shoes, I really have no contempt whatsoever for those who pay no income taxes; I have contempt for those who continue to [deficit] spend our money without figuring out whether it is good policy to have 50% of the country not contributing. You clearly mis-interpret my contentions.

As for your assertion regarding taxes paid by certain corporations, I am not going to waste time going through every financial statement, but just for starters GE has recorded $1.634 billion in tax expense in just the first 3 quarters of 2010; Q4 is not posted yet. 3M tax exepense is $1.592 billion for 2010. You might want to check your facts first, and not take certain political rhetoric at face value.

What I loathe is government that does only one thing well: GROW. And I also loathe those politicans who continue to STEAL money from every single American and the generation of Americans yet to come, via deficit spending ---- that should be a crime.

If you think the setup is working properly ---- half the nation contributing nothing, while the top 5% pays for about everything; and companies fleeing because of regulators and IRS, then you oughta be in utopia right about now.

Hmmm...

http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/01/ge-exxon-walmart-business-washington-corporate-taxes.html

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=GE

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=MMM+Income+Statement&annual

If you want the SEC filings links on EDGAR also, let me know. Good luck.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/16/news/companies/ge_7000_tax_returns/

Showing tax expense is one thing. You need to know what they actually paid.

Good article; thanks. Obviously when you have an unprofitable year, you don't pay tax on the loss. The have paid a couple tens of billions in taxes in the decade. Are you guys suggesting they should lose money, give everyone a job, and pay a hundred billion in taxes so our spineless politicians can spend that plus an extra $1.4 trillion every year that we don't have?

QuakerOats;697532 wrote:Good article; thanks. Obviously when you have an unprofitable year, you don't pay tax on the loss. The have paid a couple tens of billions in taxes in the decade. Are you guys suggesting they should lose money, give everyone a job, and pay a hundred billion in taxes so our spineless politicians can spend that plus an extra $1.4 trillion every year that we don't have?

There you go again, Quaker. I've told you dozens of times to stop arguing logic with the lefties. It's not fair.

Why do people complain when businesses don't pay income-related taxes? Do they not realize that taxing business is nothing but a PASS THROUGH tax to the American people that we all end up paying in the form of higher costs for goods and services?

Funny how the people arguing these companies need to pay more don't realize that these kinds of pass through taxes end up hurting the people they (liberals) PRETEND to protect the most: the poor.

Writerbuckeye;697596 wrote:Why do people complain when businesses don't pay income-related taxes? Do they not realize that taxing business is nothing but a PASS THROUGH tax to the American people that we all end up paying in the form of higher costs for goods and services?

Funny how the people arguing these companies need to pay more don't realize that these kinds of pass through taxes end up hurting the people they (liberals) PRETEND to protect the most: the poor.

Aw crap....even more truth. We're going to need to chip-in on therapy sessions for the lefties when they pop the corks.