"You didn't get there on your own"

[thereisnospoon]

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

A tax payer funded stadium built with taxes by private businesses and the people they employ.

But CON$ habitually say that businesses do not pay taxes, they pass them on to their customers in the price they charge for their goods and services!

Cut the shit.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What exactly is un-American about saying the system which is certainly funded by the government plays a part in success.

I know a man who runs an $80m company. He immigrated here from Taiwan and got his Masters degree in EE from Long Beach State (just the kind of person we send home today). When we talked about taxes and estate planning his comment to me I will never forget. He said, " I have no problem paying taxes. I could never have done this in Taiwan. I am happy to pay the money so the next poor kid has the same chance."

The problem is that 90% of your taxes are poured down the welfare sewer. They don't help anyone get ahead. People in this country were "getting ahead," long before public universities existed.

WTF. These are the misstatements and the misinformation that produce meat heads like you.


As of 2000, 24% of the welfare state funds education, and 47% pays for Social Security, 22% finances Medicare, 11% supports public employee retirement, 8% accounts for what is spent for workers compensation, and 3% provides for unemployment insurance.(156) Means tested cash welfare benefits remain the most criticized and resented, even though needs tested welfare only made up 17% of the welfare state, and only 1.7% of the national budget. (157)

156 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16 157 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16

more recently:

2007..Ok...Note the $342 billion for "discretionary spending".
The pie chart is not accurate.
The problem is not social spending in and of itself.
The objection to social spending is that for every dollar collected, 40 cents is spent on administration of social programs. The other problem is the lack of oversight and the existence of legislation which makes it illegal for those who monitor these programs to actually vet the people applying for benefits.
This is how we get so many people who game the system.
Lastly, the most important issue is the largest part of the US federal budget goes to social spending. The condition is absurd.

 

[Listening]

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

A tax payer funded stadium built with taxes by private businesses and the people they employ.

But CON$ habitually say that businesses do not pay taxes, they pass them on to their customers in the price they charge for their goods and services!

Liar.

What is said that is in a balanced business....any tax increase is generally going to be passed along.

There is a big difference. Of course, you knew that. You only post to look stupid.

 

[Sactowndog]

And it only resonates with the people who never had exposure to American free enterprise, the ones who embrace this are the losers, the slackers, the Mommy's basement resident, the feeble-minded who are convinced that they failed because America is so darn mean-spirited. It's not just an unAmerican attitude, it's anti-American

Dems are the American't Party

What exactly is un-American about saying the system which is certainly funded by the government plays a part in success.

I know a man who runs an $80m company. He immigrated here from Taiwan and got his Masters degree in EE from Long Beach State (just the kind of person we send home today). When we talked about taxes and estate planning his comment to me I will never forget. He said, " I have no problem pUaying taxes. I could never have done this in Taiwan. I am happy to pay the money so the next poor kid has the same chance."

The problem is that 90% of your taxes are poured down the welfare sewer. They don't help anyone get ahead. People in this country were "getting ahead," long before public universities existed.

This shows a complete and utter disregard for the budget and how it is broken out. The numbers are on line. Why don't you look them up and see where the tax money really goes. Once you are educated I would be happy to talk with you about it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

And it only resonates with the people who never had exposure to American free enterprise, the ones who embrace this are the losers, the slackers, the Mommy's basement resident, the feeble-minded who are convinced that they failed because America is so darn mean-spirited. It's not just an unAmerican attitude, it's anti-American

Dems are the American't Party

What exactly is un-American about saying the system which is certainly funded by the government plays a part in success.

I know a man who runs an $80m company. He immigrated here from Taiwan and got his Masters degree in EE from Long Beach State (just the kind of person we send home today). When we talked about taxes and estate planning his comment to me I will never forget. He said, " I have no problem paying taxes. I could never have done this in Taiwan. I am happy to pay the money so the next poor kid has the same chance."

The reality is he did not understand that it was not the US Government which helped his business. It was had he stayed in Taiwan and attempted the same thing, the government has rules that PREVENT success.
His reality is what he brought with him from his home country.
Where he comes from, government rules are restrictive.
So when he comes here to the US he sees an absence of those restrictions. His reaction would be to believe he is receiving assistance. He is not. Our government is simply less restrictive. He equates this to 'active' assistance.
He will soon find that our government is not all fun and games.

 

[Sactowndog]

Bull. He made the statement because he believes it. If he is so confident why does he keep running from it. He should say it everytime he gets up and talks. But he won't.

We don't want to be like the failed nations of Europe that are collapsing under their own unwillingness to own up to the fact that they can't sustain 2/3 of the people living on government help.

The only Banana Republic is Chicago....there, it seems like your chances are not so good.

Libturds keep saying he didn't say it, and then they defend the statement!

The fact is they all believe the statement exactly as Obama's critics have interpreted it.

Absolutely I defend it and only today's Republicans would be so small minded to say they did it all on their own.

 

[Sactowndog]

And it only resonates with the people who never had exposure to American free enterprise, the ones who embrace this are the losers, the slackers, the Mommy's basement resident, the feeble-minded who are convinced that they failed because America is so darn mean-spirited. It's not just an unAmerican attitude, it's anti-American

Dems are the American't Party

What exactly is un-American about saying the system which is certainly funded by the government plays a part in success.

I know a man who runs an $80m company. He immigrated here from Taiwan and got his Masters degree in EE from Long Beach State (just the kind of person we send home today). When we talked about taxes and estate planning his comment to me I will never forget. He said, " I have no problem paying taxes. I could never have done this in Taiwan. I am happy to pay the money so the next poor kid has the same chance."

The reality is he did not understand that it was not the US Government which helped his business. It was had he stayed in Taiwan and attempted the same thing, the government has rules that PREVENT success.
His reality is what he brought with him from his home country.
Where he comes from, government rules are restrictive.
So when he comes here to the US he sees an absence of those restrictions. His reaction would be to believe he is receiving assistance. He is not. Our government is simply less restrictive. He equates this to 'active' assistance.
He will soon find that our government is not all fun and games.

Are you insinuating he was stupid? I don't think so. And yes the government being less restrictive was part of it but certainly not all of it. I find it amazing you meat heads are so programmed to think the government had no role in your success.

 

[Sactowndog]

The problem is that 90% of your taxes are poured down the welfare sewer. They don't help anyone get ahead. People in this country were "getting ahead," long before public universities existed.

WTF. These are the misstatements and the misinformation that produce meat heads like you.


As of 2000, 24% of the welfare state funds education, and 47% pays for Social Security, 22% finances Medicare, 11% supports public employee retirement, 8% accounts for what is spent for workers compensation, and 3% provides for unemployment insurance.(156) Means tested cash welfare benefits remain the most criticized and resented, even though needs tested welfare only made up 17% of the welfare state, and only 1.7% of the national budget. (157)

156 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16 157 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16

more recently:

2007..Ok...Note the $342 billion for "discretionary spending".
The pie chart is not accurate.
The problem is not social spending in and of itself.
The objection to social spending is that for every dollar collected, 40 cents is spent on administration of social programs. The other problem is the lack of oversight and the existence of legislation which makes it illegal for those who monitor these programs to actually vet the people applying for benefits.
This is how we get so many people who game the system.
Lastly, the most important issue is the largest part of the US federal budget goes to social spending. The condition is absurd.

Again you just show your ignorance if you think discretionary spending is mostly welfare for the poor. Corporate welfare maybe but much of it is what it takes to run the non DoD part of the government.

The budget is on line. Why don't one of you right wing apologists actually try reading, go on-line and report back actual numbers on where the money goes. Maybe you will learn something in the process

 

[Uncensored2008]

If people truly dont need ANYONE to aid or help them.........then why is the GOP trying so hard to convince us how much we need them?

Vacuous Obamabot is vacuous.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

Government can't "fund" anything. Government only has funds taken from private citizens.

 

[Foxfyre]

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

Government can't "fund" anything. Government only has funds taken from private citizens.

Well, gentle correction here. Because government got away from the gold standard and the concept of balanced budgets, government DOES fund a lot of things by printing more paper money that devalues the money in circulation and by borrowing money a lot of which comes from countries that do not have our interests at heart. So we and those who follow us are saddled with the very real effects of inflation plus a crushing debt that we will be generations paying off. A debt that will compromise America's sovereignty if we do not bring it under control now.

But almost all infrastructure is built with tax dollars paid.

It was the willingness of the individual to risk whatever capital they had and/or to gamble their credit rating and their future on loans that depended on their personal success to be repaid that 'built that'. Whatever previous generations have done, the guy who takes the plunge and risks everything he has to open an automotive repair shop or open up a bakery or start a janitorial service are the people who 'built that' and who are 'building that'. It is because they risk, they gamble on themselves, then and now, that people have jobs, that taxes are paid, and that infrastructure exists.

I watch new infrastructure going in all the time and in every case it is because new businesses and new housing projects are being built, not because government is making it happen.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Absolutely I defend it and only today's Republicans would be so small minded to say they did it all on their own.

I sometimes like to watch cooking shows. One I particularly enjoy is called "Chopped." The basic premise is that 4 chefs compete using a "Mystery Basket" of ingredient. Each has to make a dish from the ingredients in the basket, and have it judged by the panel.

These chefs all use supplied ingredients, cooked on the stoves of the studio.

So do you think the judges should look at the food and shout "You didn't make that, someone else did?"

Fucking libtards - stupidest creatures in creation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

Government can't "fund" anything. Government only has funds taken from private citizens.

Well, gentle correction here. Because government got away from the gold standard and the concept of balanced budgets, government DOES fund a lot of things by printing more paper money that devalues the money in circulation and by borrowing money a lot of which comes from countries that do not have our interests at heart. So we and those who follow us are saddled with the very real effects of inflation plus a crushing debt that we will be generations paying off. A debt that will compromise America's sovereignty if we do not bring it under control now.

But almost all infrastructure is built with tax dollars paid.

It was the willingness of the individual to risk whatever capital they had and/or to gamble their credit rating and their future on loans that depended on their personal success to be repaid that 'built that'. Whatever previous generations have done, the guy who takes the plunge and risks everything he has to open an automotive repair shop or open up a bakery or start a janitorial service are the people who 'built that' and who are 'building that'. It is because they risk, they gamble on themselves, then and now, that people have jobs, that taxes are paid, and that infrastructure exists.

I watch new infrastructure going in all the time and in every case it is because new businesses and new housing projects are being built, not because government is making it happen.

Fair points;

However, each of these creates an encumbrance on the tax payer, so I would still say that government didn't fund anything, they just stole your credit card...

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

After two nights of the GOP convention in which speech after speech after speech is peppered with "And yes, Mr. President, he/she/I DID build that!!!", I'm guessing that President Obama is sore from kicking himself for giving the GOP that line.

Every time the GOP tells that lie it shows the American people just how little Willard Mitt THE Twit thinks they are able to see through his lies.

How does a President who advocates Big Government as the answer to what voters need to solve their problems, and Big Government control . . find his supporters saying he is taken out of context. When has Obama supported "individualism", allowing people to choose their OWN goals, succeed and fail on their own, allowing for business owners to build their dreams on their own, without the President stepping his Big Government foot into private business affairs and digging his greedy fingers into it?

 

[Foxfyre]

Government can't "fund" anything. Government only has funds taken from private citizens.

Well, gentle correction here. Because government got away from the gold standard and the concept of balanced budgets, government DOES fund a lot of things by printing more paper money that devalues the money in circulation and by borrowing money a lot of which comes from countries that do not have our interests at heart. So we and those who follow us are saddled with the very real effects of inflation plus a crushing debt that we will be generations paying off. A debt that will compromise America's sovereignty if we do not bring it under control now.

But almost all infrastructure is built with tax dollars paid.

It was the willingness of the individual to risk whatever capital they had and/or to gamble their credit rating and their future on loans that depended on their personal success to be repaid that 'built that'. Whatever previous generations have done, the guy who takes the plunge and risks everything he has to open an automotive repair shop or open up a bakery or start a janitorial service are the people who 'built that' and who are 'building that'. It is because they risk, they gamble on themselves, then and now, that people have jobs, that taxes are paid, and that infrastructure exists.

I watch new infrastructure going in all the time and in every case it is because new businesses and new housing projects are being built, not because government is making it happen.

Fair points;

However, each of these creates an encumbrance on the tax payer, so I would still say that government didn't fund anything, they just stole your credit card...

Yes. Actually infrastructure is a legitimate function of government, but it has to follow economic activity. It doesn't create it. Infrastructure begins crumbling when economic activity diminishes, becomes stagnant, when people are no longer willing to risk starting up new businesses. If you drive through many small towns that were once thriving communities, but are now fast becoming ghost towns because no new businesses and people are moving in, you see the infrastructure crumbling away.

I notice that our fearless leader hasn't mentioned that and probably wouldn't want government to take credit for 'dismantling that'.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Obamination's stupid words against business owners and the snide way he said it to his ghetto voters in that crowd is the main reason why he is toast.

There were Americans that were so-so about Obamacare, so-so about him going after rich people's money, so he was getting a pass with them.....but he crossed the line when he showed his socialist colors while trashing people that work hard to build their business.

He is going to get his ass kicked in November because of his stupidity and arrogance.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

What exactly is un-American about saying the system which is certainly funded by the government plays a part in success.

I know a man who runs an $80m company. He immigrated here from Taiwan and got his Masters degree in EE from Long Beach State (just the kind of person we send home today). When we talked about taxes and estate planning his comment to me I will never forget. He said, " I have no problem paying taxes. I could never have done this in Taiwan. I am happy to pay the money so the next poor kid has the same chance."

Several speakers did address that. And pointed out that government infrastructure exists because private enterprise is successful. and pays for that infrastructure. It simply does not happen the other way around.

And they said that while speaking in a government funded stadium.

Government didn't do it. A group of Founding Fathers and believers who risked treason, standing up to dictating tyrant who wanted more control over their lives, did. They created a system of a "limited" government system, whose job was to work FOR [and to be completely under the control of] "the people", not the other way around. We have a President who, if he doesn't like the current legislative process to his satisfaction, feels free to violate the established Constitution founding regarding "separation of powers", through establishing "executive" laws that bypass Congress.

 

[Barb]

The problem is that 90% of your taxes are poured down the welfare sewer. They don't help anyone get ahead. People in this country were "getting ahead," long before public universities existed.

WTF. These are the misstatements and the misinformation that produce meat heads like you.


As of 2000, 24% of the welfare state funds education, and 47% pays for Social Security, 22% finances Medicare, 11% supports public employee retirement, 8% accounts for what is spent for workers compensation, and 3% provides for unemployment insurance.(156) Means tested cash welfare benefits remain the most criticized and resented, even though needs tested welfare only made up 17% of the welfare state, and only 1.7% of the national budget. (157)

156 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16 157 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, figures 1.1, 16

more recently:

2007..Ok...Note the $342 billion for "discretionary spending".
The pie chart is not accurate.
The problem is not social spending in and of itself.
The objection to social spending is that for every dollar collected, 40 cents is spent on administration of social programs. The other problem is the lack of oversight and the existence of legislation which makes it illegal for those who monitor these programs to actually vet the people applying for benefits.
This is how we get so many people who game the system.
Lastly, the most important issue is the largest part of the US federal budget goes to social spending. The condition is absurd.

CEO’s are administrators; you pay for administration in the market just as you pay for it to government agencies. The only difference is that you pay vastly more in the market.

Those who believe that government would run better as a business resist the idea that government employees should be guaranteed rights to carry out their own capitalist activity and contract negotiations through collective bargaining. They don‘t view civil servant pay and benefits packages in the same rosy glow that they see CEO compensation, although that CEO compensation not only drives up costs, it also drives down service because of the expense. The idea that contracted benefits of government, local, and state employees are an obscenity is swallowed whole in the same breath that that excuses, even applauds, private industry for raising your prices based on the last dime the largest demographic has to spend.

Their bureaucrats enjoy substantially more in pay and benefits than our civil servants do, even the dreaded "administrators."

Most rank-and-file civil servants make at best an average income, work their tails off, and currently face massive and career-ending layoffs whenever a screw needs to turn in penance for a quarter of a percent tax hike on corporations and bazillionairs. The members of every state and federal employee union are members of their community, patrons of local businesses, taxpayers... productive and contributing members of society. As your neighbors, they would call the fire department if they saw your house on fire, you might see them at your firehouse picnic, and they might even plow your mother's driveway. These are the people who have become the latest scapegoats for an economic mess that was the logical result of the ridiculous excesses that began in the 1980s.

Many people currently advocate for a balance between public and private sector wages and benefits, but it would not be a "balance," it would rather be a leveling of wages and benefits, and the only direction privately owned industry will ever level wages and benefits is down. Meanwhile, prices continue to rise, and because corporations got rid of the people who once provided the service they charge such high prices for, customer service continues to deteriorate. Whenever the ugly and inevitable results become evident, the advocates of supply side policies point to their handiwork as proof of the ―inefficiency‖ of government bureaucracy and claim that the private sector can do the job better, they‘ll also claim that they can do it cheaper. And oh, by the way, they just so happen to know a guy.

Every bureaucrat, large or small, who makes their living administering welfare programs are paid to do so because there are people who need these programs, and these bureaucrats also support every other industry imaginable with the taxes they pay and the consumer spending they engage in. Because of the programs that they administer, people are able to pay their bills and buy needed goods and services. We rarely, if ever hear a word from media or politicians about how these programs benefit big business. All of this is economic activity that fuels the consumer economy, adds to the tax revenues, and in spite of claims to the contrary, the welfare state most certainly does bear a substantial relation to the economy in ways that are a benefit to everyone, even for neoconservatives most favored "people": the corporations.

When Republican politicians and individuals that write for conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation publicly discuss the ―welfare state,‖ they gloss over details about what percentages go to which programs, or even the enormity of what the term ―welfare state‖ covers, and in so doing tacitly implicate means tested welfare as the whole of it. As a result, the poor who receive means tested aid, and who are already blamed for their own condition, also foot the public perception bill for the entire welfare state.

Because of the local nature of most of Education funding, the US education system primarily subsidizes the middle classes and the wealthy.(129) Students attending schools in poor communities receive lower shares of funding, work with poorer supplies, uncertified and fewer teachers, outdated technologies, and low expectations of reward for hard work.(130)

129 Gilens, Martin, Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy, 15 130 Schiller, Bradley R. The Economics of Poverty and Discrimination, 198-202

There is a host of government expenditures included within the welfare state that benefit the wealthy and corporations to a greater degree than they do ordinary citizens. A few examples are an educated workforce funded or subsidized by taxes, research and development for drugs pharmaceutical giants have patented and sold back to the public, and the medical and ecological agencies that cure, alleviate, or clean up after corporate damage, malfeasance, and waste.

Honorable mention must also go to the US military, which is used to control and ―stabilize‖ the world for global trade, the courts that regulate and litigate business transactions, and the police who protect the uppity crust from the ever more disenfranchised, disenchanted, and disgruntled rabble down here at the bottom (160)

160 Hartman, Thom, Screwed: the undeclared war against the middle class-and what we can do about it, 1st Ed., Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, US 2006, 2007, 67-69

And where in the Sam Hell did you come up with that little bit of twaddle?

 

[Foxfyre]

However much you want to give government the praise, credit, and applause, Barb, the fact is that the federal government has become so big, so bloated, so expensive, and so inefficient and ineffective, that much if not most of the tax dollars it takes in are swallowed up to feed the monster itself and/or are wasted on what it funds. For every person who is actually helped out of poverty by government, ten others are encouraged to stay in poverty so that they will be eligible for government freebies.

None of that is the fault of private enterprise. When you look at the welfare state and the ever swelling debt that will sooner or later impoverish all of us if it is not brought under control, President Obama can honestly look at that and say, "Government did build that."

 

[Barb]

However much you want to give government the praise, credit, and applause, Barb, the fact is that the federal government has become so big, so bloated, so expensive, and so inefficient and ineffective, that much if not most of the tax dollars it takes in are swallowed up to feed the monster itself and/or are wasted on what it funds. For every person who is actually helped out of poverty by government, ten others are encouraged to stay in poverty so that they will be eligible for government freebies.

None of that is the fault of private enterprise. When you look at the welfare state and the ever swelling debt that will sooner or later impoverish all of us if it is not brought under control, President Obama can honestly look at that and say, "Government did build that."

Citizens deserve a government that responsibly stewards the economy and squares the rules between people and corporations to provide achievable opportunity and protection from the predatory claws of a capitalism that would have all of the power, the rights, the profits, and none of the responsibility. This is what you ignore, and this is what you struggle against all the while claiming that you're advocating for the "people." You're not, you're advocating for what amounts to an American aristocracy.

Once Upon a Time
The likelihood of corporate grasping and abuse is why corporations originally ran under state and national charters. As planned by the founding fathers, a state granted corporate charters, which did not grant rights to corporations, but instead granted them limited dispensation to operate their businesses until or unless they abused the terms of their contract, in which case the state revoked the charter and the privilege it conveyed.171 These charters limited corporate ability (rather than liability) to avoid responsibility for their actions, set limits on what they could damage, and regulated how they could operate in order to make sure that what they did, at the very least, did not damage the fabric of a decent society.(172)

172 Hartman, Thom, Screwed: the undeclared war against the middle class-and what we can do about it, 99-101

After fighting a bloody war for independence from King George over the unbridled power of the East India Trading Company, ―the states passed hundreds of laws restricting and restraining corporations. (173) The war was not about tea; the colonists had an aversion to ginormous corporations that (rather than who) put local businesses and small trades people at a disadvantage.
Once upon a time in America, it was a criminal act, punishable by prison time and a painful financial penalty, for a politician to collude with corporate sponsors regarding anything political, legal or having to do with elections.(174)

173 Hartman, Thom, Screwed: the undeclared war against the middle class-and what we can do about it, 100 174 Hartman, Thom, Screwed: the undeclared war against the middle class-and what we can do about it, 100-101

The “we want our county back” "small government" folks might want to revisit these parts of our vainglorious past.

Government is the collective voice of the actual people in action through policy, or it should be. Unfortunately, people like you have been led through a mass media run and paid for by your Gentleman's Quarterly and Fortune 500 heroes, your masters, to believe that their economic interests not only don't clash with your own, but that they compliment your endeavors.

Nothing could be further from the truth.