Liberal Business owners - a true story of what I get to deal with right now

[TrinityPower]

What blue wrote in the original post is true and accurate. Not going to waste time arguing with you. You are just not worth my time and energy.

In that post Ravi asked you to:

[come] back and admitted that you are full of shit.

So you, the one so cocksure of her position responds:

You are just not worth my time and energy.

which is the boilerplate response from those who don't have the first clue what they've read.

I have not seen you bring any info from the other side to counter other than to say it is wrong...and that is putting it kindly. By all means give some real data to refute the reality that is happening around you.

 

[Jarhead]

This story is not true.

Funny how all of a sudden in this shitty Obama economy all these companies all of a sudden want to expand, but are told by brave, noble right wingers they cannot haha!

Actually, many small companies that were able to survive the recession see voids left in their markets by those that went under....So many are looking at ways they can fill those voids....and the reason you do NOT see companies hiring due to expansion is becuase company owners are looking at things like tax increases and uncertainties about the ACA and saying..."this is not the best time".

I do not have an issue with the idea of the ACA (I do not know enough about it to say it sux)...and I do not have an issue with increasing taxes (it is something that MUST be done to chip away at our annual deficit and ultimnately, our enormous debt)..

What I DONT get is why we are implementing these things and imposing them on business owners when we have 25 million people out of work.

You need to look at it this way...

Business owners BY NO MEANS made the kind of money they were used to over the last 4 years...that is fact.

So they have either more debt, or a lot less savings for their future....or both.

ALong with that they have a tax increase coming up in January....and the ACA coming up in another year.

How can they think about spending MORE on expansion...or hiring when, in fact, they have made less and saved less...over the past 4 years?

The government, if anything, should have offered them incentives...but insttead, the have told them their operating costs will be going up.

My number 1 issue is the timing.

 

[TrinityPower]

This story is not true.

Funny how all of a sudden in this shitty Obama economy all these companies all of a sudden want to expand, but are told by brave, noble right wingers they cannot haha!

And which companies can you list that are expanding? Hostess? No Walmart...no, papa johns...no. If major chains can't then why not small business? Explain your position

Dont you feel dishonest, like inside, when you skip over substantive posts and just draw on frivolous non sequitors?

The OP's math does not work.

The healthcare bill couldnt bankrupt his company. Whether they expanded or not.

Well you just keep believing that

 

[kwc57]

I know oohPoo...you are sitting there trying to come up with a government service that is not for safety that you can toss at me...but whatever it is will be tossed right back at you. The only government services I agree with are those that are for my, and my family's safety.

That's the problem right there,

but all government programs are for somebody's safety or well being.

No...many are designed to do EXACTLY what you applauded NYCarbineer for saying...they make people's lives better.

The federal government has increased the level used to determine poverty.....poverty should be "unable to sustain a roof over ones head and food in ones stomach"......you have seen the reports, I am sure.....now one with a family of 4 with an apartment of 3 bedrooms, AC, 2 TV's and a computer can still be deemed as "needy" and worthy of welfare and/or foodstamps.

That is not for their safety...or even their health...that is designed to make them more comfortable....make their lives "better" as NYCarbineer said....and that is where I disagree with the way government interferes.

To be frank, with the exception of the mentally and physically challanged individuals, all people should ONLY receive assistance if they can not house, clothe and feed themselves.....from there they need to learn to sacrifice wants so they can move forward and slowly gain their "wants" WHEN THEY DO NOT NEED TO SACRIFICE their needs to get those wants.

Sure, you can come up with reasons why everyone should have a cell phone....but 20 years ago, we all got by without them. You can try to convince me that everyone needs AC...but years ago, I grew up in the NYC area without one. You can say everyone needs a computer....but years ago, we all got by without one.

It is not that bI dont care about those that struggle. I do. Heck, I was homeless at one time in my life. I know what it is like to wonder where your next meal is coming from. It sux and I wouldnt wish it on anyone...and I support those safety nets.

But lets be real.....a high speed computer is by no means a necessity. If you can afford to buy one, you can afford to feed your family. If you cant afford to feed your family, then you cant afford to buy a computer.

Be prepared to be called a liar like the OP was by the tolerant and caring liberals here.

 

[Ravi]

Sad.

 

[Jarhead]

That's the problem right there,

but all government programs are for somebody's safety or well being.

No...many are designed to do EXACTLY what you applauded NYCarbineer for saying...they make people's lives better.

The federal government has increased the level used to determine poverty.....poverty should be "unable to sustain a roof over ones head and food in ones stomach"......you have seen the reports, I am sure.....now one with a family of 4 with an apartment of 3 bedrooms, AC, 2 TV's and a computer can still be deemed as "needy" and worthy of welfare and/or foodstamps.

That is not for their safety...or even their health...that is designed to make them more comfortable....make their lives "better" as NYCarbineer said....and that is where I disagree with the way government interferes.

To be frank, with the exception of the mentally and physically challanged individuals, all people should ONLY receive assistance if they can not house, clothe and feed themselves.....from there they need to learn to sacrifice wants so they can move forward and slowly gain their "wants" WHEN THEY DO NOT NEED TO SACRIFICE their needs to get those wants.

Sure, you can come up with reasons why everyone should have a cell phone....but 20 years ago, we all got by without them. You can try to convince me that everyone needs AC...but years ago, I grew up in the NYC area without one. You can say everyone needs a computer....but years ago, we all got by without one.

It is not that bI dont care about those that struggle. I do. Heck, I was homeless at one time in my life. I know what it is like to wonder where your next meal is coming from. It sux and I wouldnt wish it on anyone...and I support those safety nets.

But lets be real.....a high speed computer is by no means a necessity. If you can afford to buy one, you can afford to feed your family. If you cant afford to feed your family, then you cant afford to buy a computer.

Be prepared to be called a liar like the OP was by the tolerant and caring liberals here.

lol.....I really dont get why people think others lie on here...I mean, I guess I do get it...but if I need to make a point by lying, then I must not feel very strong about my position...and if I dont feel strong about my poisition, then why would I want to argue I am right about my position?

I really was homeless.....spent many a night under the boardwalk in Long Beach...wasnt long lived...and it was the summer so it wasnt the end of the world....but it was likely the best thing that ever happened to me. It woke me up and made me realize that no one else gave a crap about me and only I am the one who can pull me out of it.

And I did.

It was the birth of my conservative values. I grew up in a very liberal household.

 

[TrinityPower]

This story is not true.

Funny how all of a sudden in this shitty Obama economy all these companies all of a sudden want to expand, but are told by brave, noble right wingers they cannot haha!

Actually, many small companies that were able to survive the recession see voids left in their markets by those that went under....So many are looking at ways they can fill those voids....and the reason you do NOT see companies hiring due to expansion is becuase company owners are looking at things like tax increases and uncertainties about the ACA and saying..."this is not the best time".

I do not have an issue with the idea of the ACA (I do not know enough about it to say it sux)...and I do not have an issue with increasing taxes (it is something that MUST be done to chip away at our annual deficit and ultimnately, our enormous debt)..

What I DONT get is why we are implementing these things and imposing them on business owners when we have 25 million people out of work.

You need to look at it this way...

Business owners BY NO MEANS made the kind of money they were used to over the last 4 years...that is fact.

So they have either more debt, or a lot less savings for their future....or both.

ALong with that they have a tax increase coming up in January....and the ACA coming up in another year.

How can they think about spending MORE on expansion...or hiring when, in fact, they have made less and saved less...over the past 4 years?

The government, if anything, should have offered them incentives...but insttead, the have told them their operating costs will be going up.

My number 1 issue is the timing.

Exactly! It is not necessarily just one thing it is many. Look at the individual...taxed more, home value decreased, property tax up, health care costs up, and depending on what kind of business it is because of that will not have as many patrons so their business slows they cut hours...now a mandatory thing to keep the business afloat...less money to go around so economy slows to a near halt and REAL unemployment is in the double digits. If businesses in private sector are making these cuts but government spending continues to rise where can anything to but down? It is simple economics but some people can't grasp the concept.

 

[Barb]

I know oohPoo...you are sitting there trying to come up with a government service that is not for safety that you can toss at me...but whatever it is will be tossed right back at you. The only government services I agree with are those that are for my, and my family's safety.

That's the problem right there,

but all government programs are for somebody's safety or well being.

No...many are designed to do EXACTLY what you applauded NYCarbineer for saying...they make people's lives better.

The federal government has increased the level used to determine poverty.....poverty should be "unable to sustain a roof over ones head and food in ones stomach"......you have seen the reports, I am sure.....now one with a family of 4 with an apartment of 3 bedrooms, AC, 2 TV's and a computer can still be deemed as "needy" and worthy of welfare and/or foodstamps.

That is not for their safety...or even their health...that is designed to make them more comfortable....make their lives "better" as NYCarbineer said....and that is where I disagree with the way government interferes.

To be frank, with the exception of the mentally and physically challanged individuals, all people should ONLY receive assistance if they can not house, clothe and feed themselves.....from there they need to learn to sacrifice wants so they can move forward and slowly gain their "wants" WHEN THEY DO NOT NEED TO SACRIFICE their needs to get those wants.

Sure, you can come up with reasons why everyone should have a cell phone....but 20 years ago, we all got by without them. You can try to convince me that everyone needs AC...but years ago, I grew up in the NYC area without one. You can say everyone needs a computer....but years ago, we all got by without one.

It is not that bI dont care about those that struggle. I do. Heck, I was homeless at one time in my life. I know what it is like to wonder where your next meal is coming from. It sux and I wouldnt wish it on anyone...and I support those safety nets.

But lets be real.....a high speed computer is by no means a necessity. If you can afford to buy one, you can afford to feed your family. If you cant afford to feed your family, then you cant afford to buy a computer.

When we have achieved 100% employment, I'll understand your position, but we haven't.

Homeless people don't have access to a land line. Hard to accept a call back for a job...

There are people who already HAD a tv, a microwave, a computer, and other things who are newly unemployed / in dire straits. Should they give up the beds and sleep on the floor too, in order that they LOOK needy enough?

Kids without computers are at a distinct disadvantage in a school system that makes researching (and reading!) their work something that is graded more generously on both levels. Additionally, when would be employers ask someone for an e-mail address, they're AS less likely to hire the poor slob without one as frequently as they would be the poor slob without the roof and mailing address, and you must know that most employers discriminate in favor of the already employed applicant, don't you?

It isn't as simple as people who comfort themselves with images of the unworthy like to think. Its good that you were homeless once upon a time (so was I), not that I wish you ill even in retrospect, but so at least you have an idea what it is like to work out of a hole. Still, I think that reality has changed so much over time that you wouldn't recognize the landscape enough to fully appreciate what it is to negotiate it.

 

[Jarhead]

Jarhead, they did get offered incentives.
Just a point of clarification. They did do, what you advised they should do, in that regard.

yes...they are offering incentives....I know....

But to say here is a dollar...but it will cost you 2 dollars in operating costs is by no means enough of an invcentive...in my opinion.

Bear in mind...most business owners have been taking in a lot less over the last 4 years.

They are still licking their wounds..and those are the lucky ones.

 

[TrinityPower]

That's the problem right there,

but all government programs are for somebody's safety or well being.

No...many are designed to do EXACTLY what you applauded NYCarbineer for saying...they make people's lives better.

The federal government has increased the level used to determine poverty.....poverty should be "unable to sustain a roof over ones head and food in ones stomach"......you have seen the reports, I am sure.....now one with a family of 4 with an apartment of 3 bedrooms, AC, 2 TV's and a computer can still be deemed as "needy" and worthy of welfare and/or foodstamps.

That is not for their safety...or even their health...that is designed to make them more comfortable....make their lives "better" as NYCarbineer said....and that is where I disagree with the way government interferes.

To be frank, with the exception of the mentally and physically challanged individuals, all people should ONLY receive assistance if they can not house, clothe and feed themselves.....from there they need to learn to sacrifice wants so they can move forward and slowly gain their "wants" WHEN THEY DO NOT NEED TO SACRIFICE their needs to get those wants.

Sure, you can come up with reasons why everyone should have a cell phone....but 20 years ago, we all got by without them. You can try to convince me that everyone needs AC...but years ago, I grew up in the NYC area without one. You can say everyone needs a computer....but years ago, we all got by without one.

It is not that bI dont care about those that struggle. I do. Heck, I was homeless at one time in my life. I know what it is like to wonder where your next meal is coming from. It sux and I wouldnt wish it on anyone...and I support those safety nets.

But lets be real.....a high speed computer is by no means a necessity. If you can afford to buy one, you can afford to feed your family. If you cant afford to feed your family, then you cant afford to buy a computer.

When we have achieved 100% employment, I'll understand your position, but we haven't.

Homeless people don't have access to a land line. Hard to accept a call back for a job...

There are people who already HAD a tv, a microwave, a computer, and other things who are newly unemployed / in dire straits. Should they give up the beds and sleep on the floor too, in order that they LOOK needy enough?

Kids without computers are at a distinct disadvantage in a school system that makes researching (and reading!) their work something that is graded more generously on both levels. Additionally, when would be employers ask someone for an e-mail address, they're AS less likely to hire the poor slob without one as frequently as they would be the poor slob without the roof and mailing address, and you must know that most employers discriminate in favor of the already employed applicant, don't you?

It isn't as simple as people who comfort themselves with images of the unworthy like to think. Its good that you were homeless once upon a time (so was I), not that I wish you ill even in retrospect, but so at least you have an idea what it is like to work out of a hole. Still, I think that reality has changed so much over time that you wouldn't recognize the landscape enough to fully appreciate what it is to negotiate it.

So a homeless person with a cell phone but no food or shelter somehow looks and feels right? You do have to pay for those you know...yet they can't buy a meal? It is all in the priorities isn't it. A computer, tv, cell phone and the like are not a right. Go to a impoverished nation come back and tell me then what is a right and what is a privilege.

 

[mudwhistle]

Good OP.

 

[Mac1958]

h) It seems to me that some liberals have forgotten what the point of a business is. The point of a business is to generate profit. The point is NOT to make the employees lives better.

That's why we need government, because government's point is to make people's lives better.

It is?

I think the government's point is to protect the people and to maintain an environment in which we make our OWN lives better.

.

 

[Barb]

In that post Ravi asked you to:



So you, the one so cocksure of her position responds:

You are just not worth my time and energy.

which is the boilerplate response from those who don't have the first clue what they've read.

I have not seen you bring any info from the other side to counter other than to say it is wrong...and that is putting it kindly. By all means give some real data to refute the reality that is happening around you.

Then you haven't read my posts. Not my fault, yours.

 

[Jarhead]

That's the problem right there,

but all government programs are for somebody's safety or well being.

No...many are designed to do EXACTLY what you applauded NYCarbineer for saying...they make people's lives better.

The federal government has increased the level used to determine poverty.....poverty should be "unable to sustain a roof over ones head and food in ones stomach"......you have seen the reports, I am sure.....now one with a family of 4 with an apartment of 3 bedrooms, AC, 2 TV's and a computer can still be deemed as "needy" and worthy of welfare and/or foodstamps.

That is not for their safety...or even their health...that is designed to make them more comfortable....make their lives "better" as NYCarbineer said....and that is where I disagree with the way government interferes.

To be frank, with the exception of the mentally and physically challanged individuals, all people should ONLY receive assistance if they can not house, clothe and feed themselves.....from there they need to learn to sacrifice wants so they can move forward and slowly gain their "wants" WHEN THEY DO NOT NEED TO SACRIFICE their needs to get those wants.

Sure, you can come up with reasons why everyone should have a cell phone....but 20 years ago, we all got by without them. You can try to convince me that everyone needs AC...but years ago, I grew up in the NYC area without one. You can say everyone needs a computer....but years ago, we all got by without one.

It is not that bI dont care about those that struggle. I do. Heck, I was homeless at one time in my life. I know what it is like to wonder where your next meal is coming from. It sux and I wouldnt wish it on anyone...and I support those safety nets.

But lets be real.....a high speed computer is by no means a necessity. If you can afford to buy one, you can afford to feed your family. If you cant afford to feed your family, then you cant afford to buy a computer.

When we have achieved 100% employment, I'll understand your position, but we haven't.

Homeless people don't have access to a land line. Hard to accept a call back for a job...

I made it clear that homel;ess people deserve the safety nets

There are people who already HAD a tv, a microwave, a computer, and other things who are newly unemployed / in dire straits. Should they give up the beds and sleep on the floor too, in order that they LOOK needy enough?

If losing a job for a year WITH unemployment meant that you can no longer feed your family, then you should not have had that TV, miocrowave, etc. My point is, people do not prepare. Just becuase you have 100 dollars in your pocket and only 80 of it is for needs, does not mean to spend the other 20 on wants

Kids without computers are at a distinct disadvantage in a school system that makes researching (and reading!) their work something that is graded more generously on both levels. Additionally, when would be employers ask someone for an e-mail address, they're AS less likely to hire the poor slob without one as frequently as they would be the poor slob without the roof and mailing address, and you must know that most employers discriminate in favor of the already employed applicant, don't you?

First the computers....I used to donate every year my uised company comiuters to our local library. All have access to the library for computer use.

As for employers discriminating against those unemnployed. Heck yeah...it is real. It is sad, but it is not discrimination. It is smart business decisions...unfortunately, but true. One who is unemployed is more likely to take a job for the sake of takling a job....and I support that. But one who takes a jhob for the sake of taking a job is mopre likely toleave that job when a "better one" comes up. But one who LEAVES a job for a job is one who is giving something up and more likely to bne there for a longer period of time. I am not saying it is right or wrong....but you can not deny it is smart business. Sux...but true.

It isn't as simple as people who comfort themselves with images of the unworthy like to think. Its good that you were homeless once upon a time (so was I), not that I wish you ill even in retrospect, but so at least you have an idea what it is like to work out of a hole. Still, I think that reality has changed so much over time that you wouldn't recognize the landscape enough to fully appreciate what it is to negotiate it.

look...being poor sux.....but being poor isnt the end of the world......and I am not only a true believer in the theory that being poor can make you rich if you learn from it...I am an actual success story.

It is why I preach as I do. I experienced it.

 

[Barb]

h) It seems to me that some liberals have forgotten what the point of a business is. The point of a business is to generate profit. The point is NOT to make the employees lives better.

That's why we need government, because government's point is to make people's lives better.

It is?

I think the government's point is to protect the people and to maintain an environment in which we make our OWN lives better.

.

Please tell us what policies you think do that. Macro or micro, or what combination of both.