Belly35;1235381 wrote:My personal identity and the anonymity of my business will remain status quo.
I have shared this information with a few creditable OC individual and the legalistic of my business are documented so your comment is unwarranted and the idea to do so is ludicrous

You never fail to disappoint. I will assume than that you and your business have indeed received some kind of government assistance like most have such as small business loans, tax credit etc. The point of the speech I heard applies about the teachers who mentored you, the taxes that you and lots of other hard working Americans paid so that the infrastructural to your business could be built. Try as you may anyone, with no agenda to pursue understands what Obama was saying.

ccrunner609;1235321 wrote:Once again his point is clear. Individual success and individual wealth is what he is against.

How did you get that from the notion that society does things together? I own a business, but I've hired web designers, content writers, programmers, various services, etc. Now, I made the CHOICE to hire those, but I didn't build my business myself. I hired help, so I genuinely didn't do it on my own, but since I got to decide who helped and who didn't, I have no problem saying that while I agree that we don't do it alone, I merely disagree with the sentiment that paying for such things should be obligatory.

Nowhere did he ever imply that individual success or wealth was a bad thing, or that he was opposed to it. I can't believe I'm defending the guy, but you're just being silly and taking an opposition to Obama past where it makes rational sense.

Heretic;1235360 wrote:Because, when push comes to shove, the other side is more concerned with delving into the "true meaning" of bland quotes such as the one in this thread in order to "score points" instead of actually providing logical, factual reasoning behind what isn't working and why a change needs to be made. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, since the same sort of thing happens every election season, but it does get kind of tricky to delve into the actual nuts and bolts of things concerning candidates and their policies when you have to dig through epic retardation like the birthers and the people over-exaggerating the meaning of this quote to the same degree Isadore over-exaggerates every single point it tries to make.

I know an over-reaction and hyper-political-point-scoring when I see it, and this ain't it. He repeated almost verbatim what Elizabeth Warren said, both were outrageous, and he and his campaign couldn't backpedal fast enough to smooth it over.

O-Trap;1235506 wrote:How did you get that from the notion that society does things together? I own a business, but I've hired web designers, content writers, programmers, various services, etc. Now, I made the CHOICE to hire those, but I didn't build my business myself. I hired help, so I genuinely didn't do it on my own, but since I got to decide who helped and who didn't, I have no problem saying that while I agree that we don't do it alone, I merely disagree with the sentiment that paying for such things should be obligatory.

Nowhere did he ever imply that individual success or wealth was a bad thing, or that he was opposed to it. I can't believe I'm defending the guy, but you're just being silly and taking an opposition to Obama past where it makes rational sense.

Mitt Romney's 2002 Olympic quote was about society doing things together; Obama's quote was how successful individuals and businesses can't succeed without the government- therefore, the government needs a little more from their already disproportionately-picked pockets. If he stopped after saying, "We all need to work together to succeed", then fine, nothing to get all worked up about. But it's where he wants to go from there that's upsetting.

It's a common theme of his presidency, he just let it slip out explicitly in a brief untelepromptered moment.

O-Trap;1235506 wrote:How did you get that from the notion that society does things together? I own a business, but I've hired web designers, content writers, programmers, various services, etc. Now, I made the CHOICE to hire those, but I didn't build my business myself. I hired help, so I genuinely didn't do it on my own,

Difference in connotations, perhaps. When I think of "help", that means to me a free or greatly discounted service, or some sort of "favor". If I got out and pay market rates to a contractor, programmer, etc, I didn't really get any help but rather PURCHASED supplies and service to BUILD MY BUSINESS - they aren't doing me any real favor but rather selling their service at a market rate. A looser interpretation that those people helped you would imply they somehow don't exist without government, social services and public works.

And if I had to bring someone in from Europe with a highly specialized skillset, then should my tax dollars go to France, instead, because they're responsible for helping me?

jhay78;1235534 wrote:I know an over-reaction and hyper-political-point-scoring when I see it, and this ain't it. He repeated almost verbatim what Elizabeth Warren said, both were outrageous, and he and his campaign couldn't backpedal fast enough to smooth it over.



Mitt Romney's 2002 Olympic quote was about society doing things together; Obama's quote was how successful individuals and businesses can't succeed without the government- .

No it wasn't. That is what is has been spun into. I originally heard it on the radio and that's what it kind of sounded like on there but I saw the whole video and he is clearly saying that business owners didn't build roads and bridges. If he would have said "those" instead of "that" (amazing that such language games about pronouns are not beyond consuming an entire news cycle) it wouldn't even be a discussion...and it shouldn't now either. This whole thing is silly. In the same speech he praises individual initiative.

BGFalcons82;1235402 wrote:I'm going to agree the other side should be making more cogent economic proposals. They should also be talking more of what their presidency will look like, to mimick their "1st Day in Office" ad campaign. They need to be more positive about what will change.

On the other hand, Obama has failed across the board. What motivates people to want more failure? Is it the lack of tax returns by his opponent? Do the "birthers" cause such outrage, even though they don't have one scintilla of power? Are you afraid that fiscal restraint will be more pain than what we already have? By the way, fiscal restraint is like Fram Oil Filters...it's coming so we either pay for it now, or through our busted-up country later.

Do I think President Obama has been a great president? No. But the question is why has he not been great? You have been wrong about everything for 4 years now. It is clear that a lack of demand because of burdened private balance sheets is the overall major problem in our economy and nothing that conservatives propose or entertain will address this problem. There is at least hope that democrats will. President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act last fall and our economy would be growing faster than a paltry 1.5% if it were passed.

Fiscal restraint right now when the Federal Reserve won't even do anything as it is...will be gravely more painful than what we're experiencing right now. Spain has 24% unemployment...and real unemployment is closer to 30%.

^That is the result of policies that you think would be a good idea. And, Mr. Romney, even if he is secretly not as extreme; his whole party is...they don't understand the world.

I don't think we see wholesale improvement unless we were able to get democrats in control of Congress but I'm sticking with Obama because the world is clear on how much worse it could be.

Under your reasoning, if Tyrelle Pryor is failing at QB and fumbling and throwing interceptions...at half time you switch to Joe Bauserman even though you know he's going to be throwing the ball into the stands. Although I wish we had a Troy Smith, I'm sticking with the guy we got cus the bench is worse.

" No. But the question is why has he not been great?"

Because he had very little experience before his '08 election. He went to Harvard Law School (apparently his greatest accomplishment, with at least 1,000 people per year are admitted to, including me), never practiced in any real function and just milled around Chicago organizing communities and sort of professed Constitutional law. He really hasn't had any world experience.

He's an empty suit. He is Bauserman.

" President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act last fall and our economy would be growing faster than a paltry 1.5% if it were passed."

Jesus Christ on a tractor. Based on what? His own speculation? His economic team has been a disaster, with the ones with some reputation or sense of decency - like Summers or Romer have left. Others like Rahm left to pee on the First Amendment by demonizing a businessman who won't open up his store on Sundays - wow, shocker that he does't support gay marriage, which our savior didn't even do until a few months ago when it was politically convenient.

We're being run by amateurs and idiots.

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act last fall and our economy would be growing faster than a paltry 1.5% if it were passed.

Did the AJA propose magically creating more demand?

Abe Vigoda;1235479 wrote:I will assume than that you and your business have indeed received some kind of government assistance like most have such as small business loans, tax credit etc.

Mine has not.

It's funny....For many, Obama is not nearly what they hoped. And for many others, he's every bit the failure they feared.

gut;1235796 wrote:It's funny....For many, Obama is not nearly what they hoped. And for many others, he's every bit the failure they feared.

Unfortunately, he's been worse than many of us anticipated. I'm so angry at myself for not realizing the upcoming disaster in '08. If nothing else for selfish reasons (economic, but considering anyone not a government employee or subsidized by the government [cough, GM] has been hurt economically, I'm far from alone). I was warned. I mentored a young co-employee that told me over and over again that she knew an Obama administration would be catastrophic, that he had little experience and what little there was arose from Alinsky/Chicago Politick philosophy. I didn't listen to her. I didn't even vote in the GOP primary in '08. I laughed off the smelly hippies knocking on my door to give me "hope and change" literature. We voted for change - we got it, and it is still hurting.

Manhattan Buckeye;1235805 wrote:We voted for change - we got it, and it is still hurting.

Caution: the kool aid drinkers will jump on that with, "no pain, no gain."

believer;1235823 wrote:Caution: the kool aid drinkers will jump on that with, "no pain, no gain."

People can drink what they want. Believer, you would kiss my wife tonight, we're out with a new hire (from the UK, it is a South African position), he told her and the rest of our group he's an atheist, doesn't believe in marriage, would never move to the U.S. and that he's met at least 500 Americans abroad and all are Democrats because they are educated and that all Republicans are fundamentalist idiots.

My wife sipped her martini and said you obviously don't know a liar when you hear them. Damn I love that woman.

Manhattan Buckeye;1235833 wrote:People can drink what they want. Believer, you would kiss my wife tonight, we're out with a new hire (from the UK, it is a South African position), he told her and the rest of our group he's an atheist, doesn't believe in marriage, would never move to the U.S. and that he's met at least 500 Americans abroad and all are Democrats because they are educated and that all Republicans are fundamentalist idiots. My wife sipped her martini and said you obviously don't know a liar when you hear them. Damn I love that woman.

Love it! If your wife ever decides to run for political office, tell her she has my vote. lol

Abe Vigoda;1235479 wrote:... I will assume than that you and your business have indeed received some kind of government assistance like most have such as small business loans, tax credit etc. ...

???

Wow. Why assume such a thing? ...because you believe most have?

If I were in need over government assistance for my business I have already failed in that business. Time to move on to another/different venture.

Whether or not businesses use public roads or get handouts from the government doesn't at all mean they needed the government's help (some do, but those are the Wall Street banks and the pharmaceutical companies and those who paid for their own government officials).

If I steal the gas out of your car and give some of it back to you so you can drive it, does that mean I helped you?

The fact of the matter is that progress comes from private individuals with the absolute right to their property acting in their own self interest. We get pencils because the people who own land with graphite mine it and sell it to feed themselves, the people who cut down trees and sell wood sell it to feed themselves, and the company that puts them together does so to sell them and feed themselves. No central planner is needed. If there were no public roads then there would be private ones to serve the obvious need of consumers who would need to travel. Progress happens faster the less involved the government is.

Cleveland Buck;1235949 wrote:...
If I steal the gas out of your car and give some of it back to you so you can drive it, does that mean I helped you?

The fact of the matter is that progress comes from private individuals with the absolute right to their property acting in their own self interest. We get pencils because the people who own land with graphite mine it and sell it to feed themselves, the people who cut down trees and sell wood sell it to feed themselves, and the company that puts them together does so to sell them and feed themselves. No central planner is needed. If there were no public roads then there would be private ones to serve the obvious need of consumers who would need to travel. Progress happens faster the less involved the government is.

This is a wonderful post.

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:Do I think President Obama has been a great president? No. But the question is why has he not been great? You have been wrong about everything for 4 years now. It is clear that a lack of demand because of burdened private balance sheets is the overall major problem in our economy and nothing that conservatives propose or entertain will address this problem. There is at least hope that democrats will. President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act last fall and our economy would be growing faster than a paltry 1.5% if it were passed.

Fiscal restraint right now when the Federal Reserve won't even do anything as it is...will be gravely more painful than what we're experiencing right now. Spain has 24% unemployment...and real unemployment is closer to 30%.

^That is the result of policies that you think would be a good idea. And, Mr. Romney, even if he is secretly not as extreme; his whole party is...they don't understand the world.

I don't think we see wholesale improvement unless we were able to get democrats in control of Congress but I'm sticking with Obama because the world is clear on how much worse it could be.

Under your reasoning, if Tyrelle Pryor is failing at QB and fumbling and throwing interceptions...at half time you switch to Joe Bauserman even though you know he's going to be throwing the ball into the stands. Although I wish we had a Troy Smith, I'm sticking with the guy we got cus the bench is worse.

Bush and Obama have added $8 trillion in debt over the last 3.5 years to stimulate demand. How much more do we need?

Demand isn't the problem. There is always demand at the right price. Prices are too high.

And complaining that the Fed isn't doing anything? What more do you want them to do? Treasuries have negative real yields right now because the Fed is the only buyer for them. They can't do anything but print money non stop to buy treasuries and MBS.

They are managing to drag this charade out for a while, but this economy will never be fixed without a severe depression free from government meddling, and every dollar they print now just makes the coming depression that much worse.

Cleveland Buck;1235949 wrote:If I steal the gas out of your car and give some of it back to you so you can drive it, does that mean I helped you?

I laughed pretty hard at this because it is TRUE!

reps

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:Do I think President Obama has been a great president? No. But the question is why has he not been great? You have been wrong about everything for 4 years now.

4 years, eh? I just checked my status on OC and it states I've only been a member for 2 years and 1 week. Are you clairvoyant? :huh:

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:It is clear that a lack of demand because of burdened private balance sheets is the overall major problem in our economy and nothing that conservatives propose or entertain will address this problem. There is at least hope that democrats will. President Obama proposed the American Jobs Act last fall and our economy would be growing faster than a paltry 1.5% if it were passed.

So, if demand is the problem, how can it be generated? Both Bush and Obama have spent trillions upon trillions to "stimulate" Americans into spending money. How's that working out, Mr. Keynes, Jr? You believe the half-trillion dollar American Jobs Act will be the final titration to spur the country into economic nirvana? Seriously? Only you and Krugman believe we can spend our way into prosperity. The banks have also been given trillions to loan out and they are as historically tight to lend as ever. Why? Instead of lashing out at them as being, "evil profit-hungry Scrooges", why not dig a little deeper? Do they like to loan money in anticipation of a good return or do they loan money just for fun and to carry Obama's Social Justice water? You KNOW the answer.

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:Fiscal restraint right now when the Federal Reserve won't even do anything as it is...will be gravely more painful than what we're experiencing right now. Spain has 24% unemployment...and real unemployment is closer to 30%.

Fiscal restraint is coming whether you like it or not. We either start now while we have a choice or spend spend spend more more more until the choice is taken away, services are completely cut, or we inflate our way to the stars.

BoatShoes;1235571 wrote:Under your reasoning, if Tyrelle Pryor is failing at QB and fumbling and throwing interceptions...at half time you switch to Joe Bauserman even though you know he's going to be throwing the ball into the stands. Although I wish we had a Troy Smith, I'm sticking with the guy we got cus the bench is worse.

You equate Barry's leadership to Pryor's at OSU? Ummm...Pryor actually won games, titles and bowls. Barry can only win rigged contests when the Congress passes everything he wants. If Barry's economy were a B1G football team, they'd finish behind the Golden Goophers.:laugh:

If we don't have demand we reduce the offering. Has the government done that?

Cleveland Buck;1235949 wrote:Whether or not businesses use public roads or get handouts from the government doesn't at all mean they needed the government's help (some do, but those are the Wall Street banks and the pharmaceutical companies and those who paid for their own government officials).

If I steal the gas out of your car and give some of it back to you so you can drive it, does that mean I helped you?

The fact of the matter is that progress comes from private individuals with the absolute right to their property acting in their own self interest. We get pencils because the people who own land with graphite mine it and sell it to feed themselves, the people who cut down trees and sell wood sell it to feed themselves, and the company that puts them together does so to sell them and feed themselves. No central planner is needed. If there were no public roads then there would be private ones to serve the obvious need of consumers who would need to travel. Progress happens faster the less involved the government is.

The bolded part is the antithesis of what Obama believes and what his government does.

Have fellow conservatives went Batshit crazy?

This is the best against Obama?

So sorry for all other conservatives Mitt Romney is pathetic and will lose the election with little problem. The GOP could have done so much better than the pathetic Romney.

Cleveland Buck;1235949 wrote:Progress happens faster the less involved the government is.

This should be obvious but after decades of having "Big Gubmint is goooood gubmint" pounded into our collective psyche by the media, our universities, Hollyweird, and our public education system it will take decades for that mindset to change.

Real progress won't occur until the "progressives" take a political back seat.