How is government in way of Business??

[Quantum Windbag]

Idiot wingnuts think words mean whatevery they want them to mean

"Fees" are not "used for revenue". "Fees" ARE "revenue"

The govt doesn't raise revenue for the sake of raising revenue, and in the case of fees, the revenue they generate is USED FOR financing services.

Again "fees" ARE "revenue". They are not "used for revenue". They ARE revenue that USED FOR funding services.

Are you trying to change the rules in the middle of the debate, or simply trying to switch to the other side because you know you lost?

In wingnut world, posting the definitions of a word is "changing the rules" because wingnuts believe that words mean whatever they want them to mean

You started this debate by flatly stating that fees are never used for revenue. I posted examples of them being used for that purpose, and you weaseled out and said that we were only talking about fees collected from business, those are pure, and not used for revenue. I posted another link showing that you were wrong about that, and you then posted the definitions that proved I was right all along.

I will take this last example as an implicit admission that I was right, and that you are changing your position because you are completely incapable of admitting you are wrong.

 

[shintao]

Your side lost because Americans do not want to live in a lib/socialist country.

Hmmm, really? Have a quote or proof of that assertion? Meantime you just lost all credibility, but then you didn't have far to go............

 

[sangha]

Are you trying to change the rules in the middle of the debate, or simply trying to switch to the other side because you know you lost?

In wingnut world, posting the definitions of a word is "changing the rules" because wingnuts believe that words mean whatever they want them to mean

You started this debate by flatly stating that fees are never used for revenue. I posted examples of them being used for that purpose, and you weaseled out and said that we were only talking about fees collected from business, those are pure, and not used for revenue. I posted another link showing that you were wrong about that, and you then posted the definitions that proved I was right all along.

I will take this last example as an implicit admission that I was right, and that you are changing your position because you are completely incapable of admitting you are wrong.

Wrong again!!

Actually, a wingnut started this discussion when he claimed the "fees are used for revenue"

Amd yes, we are talking about business fees. Can't you read the subject line of the entire thread? We're talking about business. Wake up!!

And "pure"??? Did someone mention pure, or is this just one more wingnut lie?

And the only definition I posted was about the word "undue", so your claim about my definition proving you right sounds like another wingnut lie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Businesses are required to clean up the messes they make. To allow corps to pollute would be to allow those corps to expropriate assets from others, which the wingnuts seem to oppose.........except when they dont

The new business didn't make the mess, and is using a new process that cannot possibly result in said mess, yet they still have to comply with the regulations requiring them to prevent the mess someone else has already made, and to pay for cleaning up the mess they had nothing to do with.

I bet you think that makes sense.

Now you're becoming delusional.

You are hallucinating new businesses with new non-polluting technology that are subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess.

Why don't you tell us the name of this new business with new non-polluting technology that is subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess?

Or are you just lying again?

I am just trying to understand where you are trying to stake out a position. It changes every time I post because you realize I am right, and you immediately stake out that position as yours, It makes you impossible to actually debate, but I enjoy mocking you when you try to make me look stupid.

Please continue.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Idiot wingnut doesn't realize that those fees ARE a part of the parks and recreation budget

The parks and recreation budget already exists. The new fees were to free up that money to be spent in other places, and not part of the budget. That is the reaosn it failed, because voters are not stupid enough to fall for extra taxes that will not fix things.

Thanks for playing though, it is fun mocking you.

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

The P&R budget is part of the budget. The fees they collect are part of the budget.

They do not collect fees in California, the attempt to do so by adding a fee to license plates was shot down.

Again, thanks for playing.

 

[sangha]

The new business didn't make the mess, and is using a new process that cannot possibly result in said mess, yet they still have to comply with the regulations requiring them to prevent the mess someone else has already made, and to pay for cleaning up the mess they had nothing to do with.

I bet you think that makes sense.

Now you're becoming delusional.

You are hallucinating new businesses with new non-polluting technology that are subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess.

Why don't you tell us the name of this new business with new non-polluting technology that is subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess?

Or are you just lying again?

I am just trying to understand where you are trying to stake out a position. It changes every time I post because you realize I am right, and you immediately stake out that position as yours, It makes you impossible to actually debate, but I enjoy mocking you when you try to make me look stupid.

Please continue.

So there isnt any new business and no new technology?

How did I know you were lying?

My position hasn't changed on any issue, which is why you don't mention any. However, your "new companies" with "new technologies" have turned out to be a fiction that even you won't defend.

As usual, you ran away from your own words like a little girl runs from a spider (ie screaming)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I won several successful companies. Printing 1099's takes about 30 minutes over the course of the entire year. But for a wingnut, looking for vendors with purchases over $600 is as difficult as building a space shuttle out of tinfoil.

How many 1099s did you print for WalMart, Best Buy, or your local pizza place?

Millions

Bullshit.

If you had, they would have been required to file their own so the IRS would be able to check that you actually spent the money on what you said. Which is why the new regulations are so stupid, WalMart does not keep track of my purchases, nor do I want them too.

By the way, it would take a lot longer than 30 minutes to print out millions of 1099s. That alone proves that you are full of shit in claiming that it only takes you 30 minutes to print out your 1099s.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What the hell are you talking about? That it should be the consumer to clean up the messes corporations make?? Or maybe it is the wrong business to be in and cannot accept the risks of being in business.

You claimed that a business should be required to pay up any mess it makes as justification for making them spend money to start a business, and then you think I do not make sense?

Boy are you dumb!! You can't even undestand simple english

I said THEY should pay for any mess THEY make. I said nothing about a "justification for making them spend money to start a business"

Restaurant owners have to pay to have their garbage disposed of. They can't just dump it in the street.

Oil refineries, electrical plants, etc (ie the types of business required to clean their emission from their smokestacks) can't just dump their pollutants into the air and water.

Yes you did, because that is the question I asked. I think that means you are the one who does not comprehend English.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Your side lost because Americans do not want to live in a lib/socialist country.

Hmmm, really? Have a quote or proof of that assertion? Meantime you just lost all credibility, but then you didn't have far to go............

Really?...
Look , this country has always been and for the forseeable future be socially right of center and fiscally conservative.
Only 20% of the population identifies themselves as "liberal"....36% of "independent" or non affiliated voters identify themselves as conservative.
This is a conservative country. Period.
In 2010, Conservatives Still Outnumber Moderates, Liberals

You shouldn't challenge me. I will come up with enough factual material to kick your ass from Canada to Mexico.
You're a liberal. What the fuck would you know about credibility. Remember where those bruises you have came from last Tuesday.
Oh an anvil to drop on your other foot.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/139877/Near-Record-Say-Democratic-Party-Liberal.aspx

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Now you're becoming delusional.

You are hallucinating new businesses with new non-polluting technology that are subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess.

Why don't you tell us the name of this new business with new non-polluting technology that is subject to non-existing rules that require them to clean up someone else's mess?

Or are you just lying again?

I am just trying to understand where you are trying to stake out a position. It changes every time I post because you realize I am right, and you immediately stake out that position as yours, It makes you impossible to actually debate, but I enjoy mocking you when you try to make me look stupid.

Please continue.

So there isnt any new business and no new technology?

How did I know you were lying?

My position hasn't changed on any issue, which is why you don't mention any. However, your "new companies" with "new technologies" have turned out to be a fiction that even you won't defend.

As usual, you ran away from your own words like a little girl runs from a spider (ie screaming)

Try building a new petroleum refinery in the US. No one has done so for over 30 years because the startup costs are prohibitive, and the regulations are all designed for old technology. Or did you think that the reson no one is building them is because no one can make a profit by refining gasoline?



Tell me again how you knew I was lying.

 

[sangha]

How many 1099s did you print for WalMart, Best Buy, or your local pizza place?

Millions

Bullshit.

If you had, they would have been required to file their own so the IRS would be able to check that you actually spent the money on what you said. Which is why the new regulations are so stupid, WalMart does not keep track of my purchases, nor do I want them too.

By the way, it would take a lot longer than 30 minutes to print out millions of 1099s. That alone proves that you are full of shit in claiming that it only takes you 30 minutes to print out your 1099s.

Ask a stupid question; Get a stupid answer

And wingnut that you are, you think it's relevant

 

[sangha]

You claimed that a business should be required to pay up any mess it makes as justification for making them spend money to start a business, and then you think I do not make sense?

Boy are you dumb!! You can't even undestand simple english

I said THEY should pay for any mess THEY make. I said nothing about a "justification for making them spend money to start a business"

Restaurant owners have to pay to have their garbage disposed of. They can't just dump it in the street.

Oil refineries, electrical plants, etc (ie the types of business required to clean their emission from their smokestacks) can't just dump their pollutants into the air and water.

Yes you did, because that is the question I asked. I think that means you are the one who does not comprehend English.

You are lying. That's why you can't quote me saying a business should pay to clean up another businesses mess.

 

[sangha]

I am just trying to understand where you are trying to stake out a position. It changes every time I post because you realize I am right, and you immediately stake out that position as yours, It makes you impossible to actually debate, but I enjoy mocking you when you try to make me look stupid.

Please continue.

So there isnt any new business and no new technology?

How did I know you were lying?

My position hasn't changed on any issue, which is why you don't mention any. However, your "new companies" with "new technologies" have turned out to be a fiction that even you won't defend.

As usual, you ran away from your own words like a little girl runs from a spider (ie screaming)

Try building a new petroleum refinery in the US. No one has done so for over 30 years because the startup costs are prohibitive, and the regulations are all designed for old technology. Or did you think that the reson no one is building them is because no one can make a profit by refining gasoline?



Tell me again how you knew I was lying.

I have no idea why you think the lack of new refineries has anything to do with this thread

And I'll tell you about how you lied about there being some new companies with new technologies when they don't exist

 

[thereisnospoon]

So there isnt any new business and no new technology?

How did I know you were lying?

My position hasn't changed on any issue, which is why you don't mention any. However, your "new companies" with "new technologies" have turned out to be a fiction that even you won't defend.

As usual, you ran away from your own words like a little girl runs from a spider (ie screaming)

Try building a new petroleum refinery in the US. No one has done so for over 30 years because the startup costs are prohibitive, and the regulations are all designed for old technology. Or did you think that the reson no one is building them is because no one can make a profit by refining gasoline?



Tell me again how you knew I was lying.

I have no idea why you think the lack of new refineries has anything to do with this thread

And I'll tell you about how you lied about there being some new companies with new technologies when they don't exist

The OP is spot on.The oil business is just like anoy other business where government regulations combined with lobbying efforts by those hostile to a particular industry, stand in the way of business development.
Tell us, with your aversion to the use of petroluem as a fuel base for your auto, how would you intend on getting to work if your wish of "getting off oil" were to be realized now? Caution, the electric car thing is not an answer. Electric cars are not viable because they are not self sustaining. They run 100 miles then must be charged for 8 hours at taxpayer expense. Yes, charging stations and the electricity used by the car are taxpayer subsidized. As is the purchase of these vehicles. Try something else and I'll kick that to the curb as well.
At this time there is no replacement for oil that is as efficient and inexpensive as petroleum based fuel.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The rightys keep chanting from under their rocks, that somehow government is preventing the economy recovery, BECAUSE GOVERNMENT IS IN THE WAY!! I'ts all somehow governments fault that jobs are not being created with the Trillon dollars corporations are known to be hoarding. So lets eliminate a few myths;

1.That government creates jobs. No, cons know that is not true, and they tell us quite often that government does not create jobs.

2.That government is standing in the way of corporations. Yet they cannot cite anything, and when you put them on the spot, they take their Rushkie myths and dive back under their rocks.

So rightys, this is your chance to tell us Leftys, honestly, how is government in the way of business's creating jobs??

The government creates jobs by spending tax revenue of those employed by private business.

By raising the taxes on these businesses the governmnet makes it more difficult to be profitable which is the ONLY motivation to own and run a business, to make money. This means that to make the money people will hire less workers to do the same job.

Its really that simple.


My current choice for 2012 tries to explain it here....you can see where the ideologies clash over math Cain was found out to be right which is why Clinton abandoned the health care thing.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdLGKRBJ_0E&feature=related]YouTube - Herman Cain vs. Bill Clinton.[/ame]