Ok it's true Bill Gates didn't get there on his own

[Erand7899]

Businesses existed and thrived before the government built roads and bridges, and even in areas where government protection was limited. Edison did not need government to invent the light bulb, or a thousand other items. The transistor was invented by Bell Labs while looking for a fix for problems on transcontinental telephone cables.

There is little doubt that modern roads and bridges are valuable to most Americans, and that is why we pay the government to build and maintain them. The same applies to schools and most of our other public infrastructure. However, the notion that we used government to build our infrastructure, is no more responsible for our success than the contractor who built our house, or the electric company that we pay to light that house.

In addition, many people are smart, and even more work hard. That is not enough for success. One must work both hard and smart to get ahead.

 

[tererun]

The internet you are using right now was directly accomplished through the development of ARPnet which was a government made military computer network,

the Internet was invented by Xerox as way for copy machines to communicate!!


"The federal government was involved, modestly, via the Pentagon's Advanced Research Projects Agency Network. Its goal was not maintaining communications during a nuclear attack, and it didn't build the Internet. Robert Taylor, who ran the ARPA program in the 1960s, sent an email to fellow technologists in 2004 setting the record straight: "The creation of the Arpanet was not motivated by considerations of war. The Arpanet was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computer networks."

Your knowledge of computer networking could fill a thimble. Anyway, the next time you superficially google part of the story make sure to read up on the whole thing. It is actually very interesting. You cannot possibly understand the points i am making if this is the extent of your piss poor education. Yes, xerox and other printer protocols allowed for the use of "network" printers. 2 computers talking was not an odd thing within offices and could easily have been accomplished through com ports locally, but the reality is that the internet requires a lot more than those protocols were able to do.

but hey, that is way beyond thios and way beyond your feeble mind. The reality is that even bill Gates would tell you that your piss poor knowledge of the development of MS and the conclusion you drew that MS could have done it without other companies is something he knows is a load of shit.

Windows is an OS. If you look at Apple you see the failings of an OS that tried to do it themselves. one of Apple's biggest mistakes was to try and push it's limited Appletalk system while the internet was cruising on a much more dynamic protocol. Even IBM failed in it's attempts to push Token Ring over ethernet. gates saw the direction things were going and made TCP/IP native to windows, and especially it's server and profesional OS. He also allowed development of games, cheap office software, and even a native web browser. In the end windows was never the elite OS, but Bill recognized that the world did not need a GUI that was as advanced as Unix. it needed familiarity and consistency. He also recognized his systems needed to allow other more advanced technologies to operate on the back end and made his platform able to do that. Bill also recognized the need to allow for competition in the marketplace which made his focus on the X86 system and the clones of intel. Without the competition of intel and clones like AMD and cyrex windows certainly would not be what it is today. We can also see that Bill was smart in not offering up proprietary systems like IBM and their token ring and OS2. Windows integrated everything and allowed you to do anything, and they di it cheaply and put their OS in the office and at home.

To tell the truth MS is the product of advancements of many companies. yes, bill had the smarts to not limit his product like others were doing, but he certainly did not develop the technology his OS runs on. Without Intel, AMD, HD manufacturers, printer companies, game manufacturers, software developers, advanced video card developers, the major brand name manufacturers, and a lot of other people windows is just an OS with nothing to run on. So no he never did it himself, but you are way too stupid to know that.

 

[tererun]

Businesses existed and thrived before the government built roads and bridges, and even in areas where government protection was limited. Edison did not need government to invent the light bulb, or a thousand other items. The transistor was invented by Bell Labs while looking for a fix for problems on transcontinental telephone cables.

There is little doubt that modern roads and bridges are valuable to most Americans, and that is why we pay the government to build and maintain them. The same applies to schools and most of our other public infrastructure. However, the notion that we used government to build our infrastructure, is no more responsible for our success than the contractor who built our house, or the electric company that we pay to light that house.

In addition, many people are smart, and even more work hard. That is not enough for success. One must work both hard and smart to get ahead.

Without those roads and bridges he couldn't ship his products very far. Anyone who develops something right now works off of the distribution capabilities of someone else. Even this site would be nothing without the internet to allow for communication, and that is something they did not invent. one of the things that made businesses a lot more profitable is the lack of a need to take your products to market yourself. I could invent the most awesome thing in the world today, and without the distribution, advertisement, media, and government to make sure my idea stays mine I can only sell locally unless I wanted and had the ability to make an advertising system, logistics system for distribution, have federally protected patents, and a global sales force to sell my shit.

This idea that people do everything themselves is a load of crap that is perpetuated by the right wing media and complete ignorance of the idiots who never have done it. The fact that Mittens would even suggest such a completely bullshit idea that he did it himself shows he complete stupidity and ignorance of his followers. There is no way a person in mitt's position thinks he did it without anyone else. It is just impossible, but he can spread that bullshit to the do nothings who think they know something.

 

[Avatar4321]

The only glaring hole in your argument is that Gates and Buffet believe the super wealthy should pay more in taxes. They don't really need you to argue against something they have already made clear publicly.

No they don't. If they believed it, they would pay more taxes. No one is stopping them from paying more.

 

[tererun]

Can anyone tell me one business that operates without the use of any other business? The more i argue this the more I realize there is no business I can think of that works without some other business or government help. If I invent something i need a manufacturer to make it. If I make it myself i need the resources to build it. then i need a place to sell it. If i write a song or book i need publishers, media, and sales. If i sell knick knacks from my house I need the internet, shipping companies, and the resources to do it. Even if i shuffle around money for profit i need someone to buy and sell on the stock exchange for me. I need communications to tell them, and i need a bank to store my money.

Could one of your republicans, or anyone for that matter, tell me a business that is completely self reliant and doesn't use the services of other businesses or the government? one fucking business, that is all i ask. Not that one business in millions doing it would make obama wrong, but it would at least show you put some sort of thought into any of this.

 

[eots]

.

Bill Gates is a loser. He's only rich because someone else built his business for him. Otherwise he'd be a crack ho, straight up.

.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njos57IJf-0]Steve Jobs vs Bill Gates. Epic Rap Battles of History Season 2. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Londoner]

Here is a book written by Bill Gates Sr - Bill Gates' father. It contains an argument for why we should tax accumulated fortunes at the progressive rates we had prior to Reagan. The book mostly rotates around the Estate Tax, but it goes into broader tax philosophy and how the concentration of wealth has become the new centralized power. Accumulated fortunes now own government and media. Politicians don't work for the people, they work for the special interests who on them. The Koch brothers - two men - have more power than Stalin ever dreamed. They own an entire political party. They fund elections. They staff government. They fund think tanks, publishing groups, talk radio and television pundits: they pay for American opinion. Never before in history has there been this kind of concentrated power. We have witnessed the rise of an uber-private sector who have harnessed 100% of the government's power.

Wealth and Our Commonwealth: Why America Should Tax Accumulated Fortunes - Chuck Collins, William Gates - Google Books

At least read an argument from the other side before you recite tired talking points against it.

None of your talking points explain the difference between the Hoover Dam and a welfare check. Both are indiscriminately called spending.

Problem is: one is an investment with a massive multiplier effect for commerce.

(Turn off talk radio)

The funny part is this. This Obama tax rate provides a tax cut on your income up to 250K. Every dollar you make over 250K will be taxed at the Clinton rates - 4 points higher than the current rates.

4 points.

 

[bripat9643]

it would be idiotic to think government will spend his[Gates] money better than he will spend what he earned

Yeah, because spending money to help the market that made him so successful is completely pointless. Do you think of the idiocy you spout before you spout it you twat?

dear, you forgot to say how government would spend money to help the market and do it better than Gates??????

The only glaring hole in your argument is that Gates and Buffet believe the super wealthy should pay more in taxes. They don't really need you to argue against something they have already made clear publicly.

That isn't a hole in his argument, nimrod. Their opinion isn't relevant to the economic issue. being good at making money does not make you an expert economist.

 

[bripat9643]

The only glaring hole in your argument

dear, you're a liberal so lack the IQ to find holes. No offense

is that Gates and Buffet believe the super wealthy should pay more in taxes. They don't really need you to argue against something they have already made clear publicly.

too stupid. They lie in public as part of a PR campaign not to be branded by the anti- capitalism MSM as Gordon Geekos or Daddy Warbucks.

In reality they are leaving their entire fortunes in foundations so clueless liberal bureaucrats don't get to waste a penny of it on Solyndra bridges to nowhere!!

Not YOUR dear.

Not a "liberal".

They have already spent more money than Mitten's has dreamt about saving millions of lives. I wouldn't demean thier philanthropy.

If they actually believed their absurd pap they would turn over all their money to the government

 

[HUGGY]

dear, you're a liberal so lack the IQ to find holes. No offense




too stupid. They lie in public as part of a PR campaign not to be branded by the anti- capitalism MSM as Gordon Geekos or Daddy Warbucks.

In reality they are leaving their entire fortunes in foundations so clueless liberal bureaucrats don't get to waste a penny of it on Solyndra bridges to nowhere!!

Not YOUR dear.

Not a "liberal".

They have already spent more money than Mitten's has dreamt about saving millions of lives. I wouldn't demean thier philanthropy.

If they actually believed their absurd pap they would turn over all their money to the government

I find it difficult to respond seriously to someone that represents themself behind an image of a child doing something foolish and what they will undoubtedly regret when they grow up.

Apparently that is what you wanted when choosing your avatar.

 

[midcan5]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...e-dumbest-gaffe-or-does-he-6.html#post5651977


No rich person ever made a single dime outside of society. No so called entrepreneur made their wealth in a vacuum from nothing. Obama was right, but the thought does not appeal to the cowboy mentality of the modern right wingnut. Oh, and no cowboy roped a steer before there was a steer to rope, someone made the rope, and someone taught him how to ride the horse.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No rich person ever made a sing...e that liberalism is based on pure ignorance?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"you didn't get there on your own"

so??? everyone had parents and teachers and many other somebodies, living and dead, who contributed, directly and indirectly, to what happened?

Does Barry want simple recognition for the somebodies, a new tax payable to the somebodies who made that happen or just a new tax for himself cause he's a socialist , like his parents, and that's what socialists always want?

"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."

 

[Dick Tuck]

Bill Gates: 'Have to raise taxes'

“Even as the economy improves and you end the wars, you’re going to have to raise taxes and certainly, whatever form it takes, and I’m not an expert on this — the rich should bear a larger increase than the rest,” the billionaire founder of Microsoft told Fox News Thursday in Switzerland, where he is attending the World Economic Forum.

...

“There is no strong correlation between job creation and what the tax environment has been at any point in time,” gates said. “If something’s a profitable activity, you’re going to engage in it. Yes, there are tax rates that are so high that people may work less. But that’s — you have to get up in the 50, 60 percent range before that’s the case.”

So you have the 2nd and 3rd richest people in the world saying that taxes should be progressive, and it should be higher. The richest man in the world doesn't count, since he's a Mexican.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

“There is no strong correlation between job creation and what the tax environment has been at any point in time,” gates said.

Trust me he doesn't believe that; not in 1000 years. Its merely PR so he and Buffet won't get branded by the MSM as the symbols of greedy capitalism.

Why do you think he's putting his fortune in a private foundation rather than let the liberals tax it away and waste it???