ericredaxe
Veteran
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Neither here nor there... but wow, Clint Eastwood looks old...
Neither here nor there... but wow, Clint Eastwood looks old...
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Convention junkies can obsess details here!
- Thread starter FreshFish
- Start date
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
And can't really speak very well...
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
OK, it's not you, but a distant relative (and don't be catty about it)?
OK, it's not you, but a distant relative (and don't be catty about it)?
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Not quite sure what to make of Romney's speech. A few too many vapid platitudes for my taste, though I suppose they are de riguer to "rally the base" these days.
I thought he missed an opportunity to lay out a real clear, concrete specific foundation behind his "five point plan." In fact, those two paragraphs were about the only time that genuine passion for the job really shone through, you could almost hear the bullet points and see the vision of the powerpoint slide show for those few moments.
I'm sure it's clear enough in his mind....I think it would have helped quite a bit if he elucidated a bit further just how powerfully integrated that five point plan really is:
> the low interest rates that are essential to keep the deficit from exploding due to the interest on the burgeoning national debt also mean that there is a lot of potential capital sitting idle on the sidelines
> the uncertainty of how much more severe the regulatory burden will become is intimidating entrepreneurs from taking even a modest risk
> the viciousness of the "punish the rich" proposals means people have to take extra precautionary steps to protect themselves, and that also is stifling innovation
> unnecessarily high energy costs impede business profits; anemic business profits impede hiring
> we need jobs
"I understand how by addressing all of these problems simultaneously in an integrated, co-ordinated manner we can unleash profoundly powerful synergistic effects: give entrepreneurs a chance to succeed in energy development, you put idle capital to work, entrepreneurs start purchasing things from companies that produce energy extraction equipment, people get hired both to extract the energy and to build the tools needed with which to extract the energy, which means these folks all have paychecks to spend on better food and nicer clothes which puts even more people to work."
that's the kind of thing I wanted to hear, and it wasn't there.
That virtuous circle is second nature to him; but it is a foreign concept to most people. He needed to make that sing, to turn it into concrete simple pictures for ordinary folk, and he didn't.
He demonstrated that he is a decent and earnest man who keeps his word. That's nice enough as far as it goes, Mitt; but in these times we need more than that.
Not quite sure what to make of Romney's speech. A few too many vapid platitudes for my taste, though I suppose they are de riguer to "rally the base" these days.
I thought he missed an opportunity to lay out a real clear, concrete specific foundation behind his "five point plan." In fact, those two paragraphs were about the only time that genuine passion for the job really shone through, you could almost hear the bullet points and see the vision of the powerpoint slide show for those few moments.
I'm sure it's clear enough in his mind....I think it would have helped quite a bit if he elucidated a bit further just how powerfully integrated that five point plan really is:
> the low interest rates that are essential to keep the deficit from exploding due to the interest on the burgeoning national debt also mean that there is a lot of potential capital sitting idle on the sidelines
> the uncertainty of how much more severe the regulatory burden will become is intimidating entrepreneurs from taking even a modest risk
> the viciousness of the "punish the rich" proposals means people have to take extra precautionary steps to protect themselves, and that also is stifling innovation
> unnecessarily high energy costs impede business profits; anemic business profits impede hiring
> we need jobs
"I understand how by addressing all of these problems simultaneously in an integrated, co-ordinated manner we can unleash profoundly powerful synergistic effects: give entrepreneurs a chance to succeed in energy development, you put idle capital to work, entrepreneurs start purchasing things from companies that produce energy extraction equipment, people get hired both to extract the energy and to build the tools needed with which to extract the energy, which means these folks all have paychecks to spend on better food and nicer clothes which puts even more people to work."
that's the kind of thing I wanted to hear, and it wasn't there.
That virtuous circle is second nature to him; but it is a foreign concept to most people. He needed to make that sing, to turn it into concrete simple pictures for ordinary folk, and he didn't.
He demonstrated that he is a decent and earnest man who keeps his word. That's nice enough as far as it goes, Mitt; but in these times we need more than that.
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
You mean Old Pio? He comes across to me like the crazy uncle who yells at passersby in the streets, I don't think there's any malice behind it, just a bit of over-exciteability. I've never heard him take pleasure in someone else's misfortune, he's just cranky.
It's the "I hurt someone else on purpose and I feel good about it" attitude that I find repulsive. Saying "they deserved it" just makes it worse.
I suppose that "libtard," "libstain," & "dip****" are just cute little nicknames signifying endearment.
There's other big meanies around here besides the two left-leaning ones that you've pointed out.
Just sayin'.
You mean Old Pio? He comes across to me like the crazy uncle who yells at passersby in the streets, I don't think there's any malice behind it, just a bit of over-exciteability. I've never heard him take pleasure in someone else's misfortune, he's just cranky.
It's the "I hurt someone else on purpose and I feel good about it" attitude that I find repulsive. Saying "they deserved it" just makes it worse.
Last edited:
G
Gurtholfin
Guest
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Sounds about right.
I was just pointing out that there's plenty of bile in these threads to go around.
Sounds about right.
I was just pointing out that there's plenty of bile in these threads to go around.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
I don't understand this opposition to asking someone to pay a fair share of taxes. If you want to know why there is viciousness coming from working class and younger people it's because we've sat by and given trickle down economics a chance and the only innovation out of it was to see jobs go off to other countries. I see it everyday at my job with the huge amounts of products coming in from China and almost nothing going the other way. You really wanna get the economy going? Give corporations that have manufacturing facilities in the US a tax break, not their CEOs.
I always like to use this quote from Fight Club that I think describes those in my age group:
"We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires and movie gods and rockstars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very very *ed off."
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Giving tax reliefs to corporations that manufacture in US makes good sense.
I don't think there is opposition to asking everying to pay a "fair share" of taxes, and for people to direct viciousness at one another out of resentment and envy merely plays into the hands of politicians who have set things up that way. There is a huge, yawning gulf between saying "pay your 'fair' share" and saying "being successful is a bad thing; s/he must have done it at someone else's expense."
I've been to many small businesses and interviewed their owners. Every one of them, without fail, is acutely aware that all of their employees depend upon them for their livelihood. Have you any idea what a responsibility it is on a person to have 20 families depending on him to make good decisions consistently? The problem is not at all about 'fair' share; the problem lies in saying that one person's success must have come at someone else's expense, and that is simply not true. Every small business owner I know seeks out and rewards employee feedback and innovation; every small business owner I know encourages advancement and growth in his/her workforce.
You can, in a pleasant and affable way, say "hey guys we need you to pitch in more." That is not the problem. The problem is when the leader of the federal government declares you to be an enemy of the state.
Giving tax reliefs to corporations that manufacture in US makes good sense.
I don't think there is opposition to asking everying to pay a "fair share" of taxes, and for people to direct viciousness at one another out of resentment and envy merely plays into the hands of politicians who have set things up that way. There is a huge, yawning gulf between saying "pay your 'fair' share" and saying "being successful is a bad thing; s/he must have done it at someone else's expense."
I've been to many small businesses and interviewed their owners. Every one of them, without fail, is acutely aware that all of their employees depend upon them for their livelihood. Have you any idea what a responsibility it is on a person to have 20 families depending on him to make good decisions consistently? The problem is not at all about 'fair' share; the problem lies in saying that one person's success must have come at someone else's expense, and that is simply not true. Every small business owner I know seeks out and rewards employee feedback and innovation; every small business owner I know encourages advancement and growth in his/her workforce.
You can, in a pleasant and affable way, say "hey guys we need you to pitch in more." That is not the problem. The problem is when the leader of the federal government declares you to be an enemy of the state.
G
Gurtholfin
Guest
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
First off, I don't think that small business owners are the ones that people are thinking about when they think of rich people not paying enough taxes.
Now, if you believe that small business owners will be disproportionately effected by a raise in their personal income tax (not talking about the business, but their own take home), I'd have to wonder how that would effect their employees in the way you are implying. The tax hike would be on people making more than $250k a year.
If you're making that kind of jack, it seems unlikely that paying a bit more is gonna send you spiraling into personal bankruptcy. To be clear, we're not talking about someone here who owns a lawn cutting business or a boutique with 10 employees. It's VERY unlikely that those people are paying themselves $250k per year.
As to your final paragraph, the protectors of "enemies of the state" have called the leader of the federal government a socialist, a communist, a muslim, an angry man, etc, etc, etc. Do you really expect anyone to feel bad for those poor, poor rich folk?
To be honest, in the face of the constant attacks, I'm surprised he's been able to keep it together as well as he has.
First off, I don't think that small business owners are the ones that people are thinking about when they think of rich people not paying enough taxes.
Now, if you believe that small business owners will be disproportionately effected by a raise in their personal income tax (not talking about the business, but their own take home), I'd have to wonder how that would effect their employees in the way you are implying. The tax hike would be on people making more than $250k a year.
If you're making that kind of jack, it seems unlikely that paying a bit more is gonna send you spiraling into personal bankruptcy. To be clear, we're not talking about someone here who owns a lawn cutting business or a boutique with 10 employees. It's VERY unlikely that those people are paying themselves $250k per year.
As to your final paragraph, the protectors of "enemies of the state" have called the leader of the federal government a socialist, a communist, a muslim, an angry man, etc, etc, etc. Do you really expect anyone to feel bad for those poor, poor rich folk?
To be honest, in the face of the constant attacks, I'm surprised he's been able to keep it together as well as he has.
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Correct. The execs of multinationals use small business owners as a human shield in these arguments. ADM kept up their subsidies for twenty years by sponsoring Sunday political shows like the McLaughlin Group and running wall-to-wall ads of family farmers cooling apple pie on their window sills. It's a canard.
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Didn't watch a lick of the convention but did see a clip of Clint Eastwood on the news this morning. Was there no hair or makeup person backstage to tone down that tuft of hair at the back of his head? It made him look like a grumpy old man. I know he is a grumpy old man, but he's a major Hollywood celebrity. Wet that piece of hair down. Or spray it or something.
Also, there's a Invisible Obama twitter account that's pretty comical.
Didn't watch a lick of the convention but did see a clip of Clint Eastwood on the news this morning. Was there no hair or makeup person backstage to tone down that tuft of hair at the back of his head? It made him look like a grumpy old man. I know he is a grumpy old man, but he's a major Hollywood celebrity. Wet that piece of hair down. Or spray it or something.
Also, there's a Invisible Obama twitter account that's pretty comical.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Not that I know of.OK, it's not you, but a distant relative (and don't be catty about it)?
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
edit: To your point, you are correct that the "very small businesses" that you are using as examples are unlikely to have that much profit, but for long term job growth, we need those companies to grow into small businesses and then medium-sized businesses. At some point along that chain, higher personal income taxes will make a difference. However, I don't think our taxes are currently so high that businesses are being strangled - just pointing out that it could/will make a difference if the rates are raised too much.
If it's a sole proprietorship, partnership, or S-corporation, all of the company's profit is considered personal income and is taxed at the personal rates of the owner(s), whether or not they "take the money out" of the business as salary. Therefore, raising personal income tax rates does reduce the amount that the owners can re-invest to grow their companies.
edit: To your point, you are correct that the "very small businesses" that you are using as examples are unlikely to have that much profit, but for long term job growth, we need those companies to grow into small businesses and then medium-sized businesses. At some point along that chain, higher personal income taxes will make a difference. However, I don't think our taxes are currently so high that businesses are being strangled - just pointing out that it could/will make a difference if the rates are raised too much.
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
I love Clint's spaghetti westerns, but it's fitting that the only take-away from this convention was an addled, ancient, angry white man mumbling into empty space.
50k followers. Probably more people than actually watched Romney's speech.
I love Clint's spaghetti westerns, but it's fitting that the only take-away from this convention was an addled, ancient, angry white man mumbling into empty space.