Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,407 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Dont Know Nothing

Medford, OR

#26135 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
How many jobs does the CEO of Wal Mart create? What is their economic impact on the American economy? We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible. Having said that, I do believe that if a company CEO's are found taking the tax breaks and using them for their own personal use, then jail time is in order along with removal of the tax breaks. A company should be able to show a trail that clearly shows the usage of the funds for their intended purpose. As for the Walton's wealth, do you really think that they got their wealth off of the sale of one product? No, they get their wealth a few cents or dollars at a time. Since they probably have over 100K items in each Wal Mart and probably around 3,000-5,000 Wal Marts world wide, it wouldn't take long for revenues to add up. Especially since Wal Mart turns their inventory at least 2.5 times per year which is about average for retailers. Not to mention they are a publicly traded company. On the income front, did you know that income inequality has sped up and the gap has widened significantly under Obama? More so than under Bush. Under Obama, the rich are getting richer faster and the poor are getting poorer faster. He is not about income equality. He is about control and power regardless of who can survive his governing and who can't.
lol it still amazes me that you are on here spewing rhetoric. "We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible." Tell that to your Republican buddies on the hill who just shot down a bill to reduce corporate tax rates and in exchange for an infrastructure bill. "I do believe that if a company CEO's are found taking the tax breaks and using them for their own personal use, then jail time is in order along with removal of the tax breaks." That is about the smartest thing I have heard you say; however, why should CEO's take advantage of tax breaks that would nullify all the breaks they receive already in the tax code that allows them to pay under 15% and sometimes lower than 10%? 25% or 30% is still higher than that last time I checked. Concerning Wal-Mart, you would think you would know a little about a business that started in your home state. I grew up there years ago and I still know how it started and how the family got their wealth. Sam worked for JCP to start out, quit and started his own business, and did excellent. He then found a bigger space and opened up a chain of Ben Franklin Stores. Those stores did excellent as well. He then opened the first Wal-Mart Discount City store in 1962, and stocked the shelves with AMERICAN made products. Something Wal-Mart and other retailers have forgotten how to do. He then passed away and left stock shares to his children to avoid estate taxes, and so will the rest of his family. Forget helping the AMERICANS that helped build your business by paying in your share of taxes, lets give away stock shares and take advantage of capitol gains taxes and other tax breaks to avoid paying in as much money as possible. LOL, your reasoning is a joke. Please inform yourself on what you are talking about before you actually start talking. Oh and that income equality gap started growing when? Oh yeah, when Bush first offered the tax breaks. The US economy is not your strong point is it? Nor is knowledge of the Constitution, bill of rights, political science, any of our founding fathers, Declaration of Independence, Arkansas history, US history, our marginal tax rate and tax code, or intellectual capitol. When you quit practicing your artificial ignorance, the rest of the world will be here in reality waiting.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26136 Aug 2, 2013
Dont Know Nothing wrote:
<quoted text>lol it still amazes me that you are on here spewing rhetoric. "We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible."
Believe me, if it were up to me, corporations would pay 0% in corporate taxes. You do realize it was Wal Mart that brought Chinese merchandise into the American market don't you? Wal Mart is the reason that every retail store now carries merchandise made overseas. But make no mistake, you and every other consumer are behind those decisions, are the reason products with Made in America on them are now a needle in a haystack instead of a dime a dozen. American consumers drive the disposable society we live in. American consumers only care about price and it shows in our purchasing habits. Stop buying things not made in America and the Made in China products will start disappearing from the shelves. Retailers won't stock things that don't sell. Why do liberals always want to blame someone else for things they either caused or helped cause? Please tell me how putting in a business, where a ton of capital is required and only the business owner can lose everything if it is not repaid, that also offers products and services to make life easier for the buying public isn't helping the public. You and other liberals always come from the position of "we bought your product and now your rich and evil" standpoint, yet nobody twisted your arm to buy the services or products. I will never get that. If you think someone is too rich or evil then stop shopping with them. You don't see the 70-80 hour weeks that many of these "rich evil" people go through. All you look at are quarterly earnings reports and wish that someone would take from them and give to you so you can continue working the 40 hour or less week you work yet increase your lifestyle. It's insulting but it clearly shows how little you know about business so I really can't take much offense.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26137 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you familiar with the Heritage foundation? You would be wise to consider those numbers high coming from that group, however that is another story.
I agree they are to high, and my opinion why they are.
If you will notice they added Welfare to Entitlement programs to reach the their 62%.
They are not the same, just as their name suggests.
Social Security and Medicare ,unemployment, are entitlement programs and by far make up the bulk of that 62%.
Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and housing assistance would be Welfare programs.
Entitlement programs either the recipient, or the recipient employer has paid into those funds and are entitled to get their money back.
Welfare you did not have to pay a dime to anyone to receive benefits.
'Entitlement'
Why are conservatives trying to convince me that is a dirty word.
If you think Welfare, SSI, and food stamps have not become entitlements then I now have a greater understanding of why you support liberalism. You have never been exposed to the lives these individuals live. You are ignorant of the meat and potatoes of the issue. You are only looking at the numbers and listening to the left wing spin of those numbers. I agree that entitlement was set up to mean exactly what you said. HOWEVER, the prevelent thought is that income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life which makes those programs entitlements. If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement. You can't get around that even if you use the historical definition of entitlements. That should explain why conservatives see the word entitlement as dirty. You should too.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26138 Aug 2, 2013
Is the media finally realizing that Obama is bad for America? CNN came out with a report about the corruption of the IRS and the FEC that blistered the Obama administration. The report was about the collusion between the two when they shared information about conservative's tax records in the 2012 elections. That's illegal and a government no-no. The report also cited the extreme pressure that FBI agents were under to remain silent. The Obama administration was even cited by an anonymous FBI agent that said agents, who were conducting the investigation, and their families were threatened if they didn't keep silent. ABC also had a report today that said, though the unemployment rate dipped to 7.4% that we shouldn't get excited because it has more to do with a reduction in labor participation than actual jobs created. We're talking about CNN and ABC, not Fox News. Believe me, I'm not getting too excited because I know those two organizations are still in the tank for Obama but it was nice to see actual Journalism coming from them instead of liberal spin.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26139 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think Welfare, SSI, and food stamps have not become entitlements then I now have a greater understanding of why you support liberalism. You have never been exposed to the lives these individuals live. You are ignorant of the meat and potatoes of the issue. You are only looking at the numbers and listening to the left wing spin of those numbers. I agree that entitlement was set up to mean exactly what you said. HOWEVER, the prevelent thought is that income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life which makes those programs entitlements. If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement. You can't get around that even if you use the historical definition of entitlements. That should explain why conservatives see the word entitlement as dirty. You should too.
"If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement"
..........

Damn, where did you get such and idea?

OH I know, that came from my post that you are issuing this rebuttal to.


"Entitlement programs either the recipient, or the recipient employer has paid into those funds and are entitled to get their money back"

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26140 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you think Welfare, SSI, and food stamps have not become entitlements then I now have a greater understanding of why you support liberalism. You have never been exposed to the lives these individuals live. You are ignorant of the meat and potatoes of the issue. You are only looking at the numbers and listening to the left wing spin of those numbers. I agree that entitlement was set up to mean exactly what you said. HOWEVER, the prevelent thought is that income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life which makes those programs entitlements. If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement. You can't get around that even if you use the historical definition of entitlements. That should explain why conservatives see the word entitlement as dirty. You should too.
First, I am a meat and potatoes type of person, and I can tell you that your idea that;

"income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life"


Is only a PREVALANT thought among the ultra conservative, and racial bigots.

People who cannot grasp the concept that the cost to society would be much greater without a social welfare safety blanket.

Not to mention the moral baggage that a Christian COULD add to the equation of not having a social welfare program.

After all you said this Country is a Christian country founded by Christians.

Entitlement is a bad word, A quote by a self professed Christian.

As I have said before, it's not Christians I have a problem with,
its the Hypocrites claiming to be Christians that tar my roof.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26141 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
Is the media finally realizing that Obama is bad for America? CNN came out with a report about the corruption of the IRS and the FEC that blistered the Obama administration. The report was about the collusion between the two when they shared information about conservative's tax records in the 2012 elections. That's illegal and a government no-no. The report also cited the extreme pressure that FBI agents were under to remain silent. The Obama administration was even cited by an anonymous FBI agent that said agents, who were conducting the investigation, and their families were threatened if they didn't keep silent. ABC also had a report today that said, though the unemployment rate dipped to 7.4% that we shouldn't get excited because it has more to do with a reduction in labor participation than actual jobs created. We're talking about CNN and ABC, not Fox News. Believe me, I'm not getting too excited because I know those two organizations are still in the tank for Obama but it was nice to see actual Journalism coming from them instead of liberal spin.
"anonymous FBI agent"

Now that phrase really says a lot about "actual Journalism" .

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26142 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
Is the media finally realizing that Obama is bad for America? CNN came out with a report about the corruption of the IRS and the FEC that blistered the Obama administration. The report was about the collusion between the two when they shared information about conservative's tax records in the 2012 elections. That's illegal and a government no-no. The report also cited the extreme pressure that FBI agents were under to remain silent. The Obama administration was even cited by an anonymous FBI agent that said agents, who were conducting the investigation, and their families were threatened if they didn't keep silent. ABC also had a report today that said, though the unemployment rate dipped to 7.4% that we shouldn't get excited because it has more to do with a reduction in labor participation than actual jobs created. We're talking about CNN and ABC, not Fox News. Believe me, I'm not getting too excited because I know those two organizations are still in the tank for Obama but it was nice to see actual Journalism coming from them instead of liberal spin.
Do you think the 162,000 NET jobs created had a bit to do with the drop.

No reason to get excited at all, this was just the 34th-straight month of job creation. A gain, but way short of what is needed.

Just imagine what it could have been without Republican obstruction.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26143 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement"
..........
Damn, where did you get such and idea?
OH I know, that came from my post that you are issuing this rebuttal to.
"Entitlement programs either the recipient, or the recipient employer has paid into those funds and are entitled to get their money back"
Let me help you with your own quote. You said: "They are not the same, just as their name suggests.

Social Security and Medicare ,unemployment, are entitlement programs and by far make up the bulk of that 62%.

Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and housing assistance would be Welfare programs." What you are referencing above is the part of your quote I agreed with. What I was referring to was personal income tax for the sole purpose of funding welfare, SSI, and food stamps making them entitlements even though most of the recipients never paid into those programs. Of course, you already knew that and was just trying to turn it around. It's the definition of entitlement that has changed thanks to liberalism infecting our once great nation.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26144 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"anonymous FBI agent"
Now that phrase really says a lot about "actual Journalism" .
We're talking about CNN so I know that "actual journalism" is rare. Would you want your name known if you were telling that about an administration that was threatening you and your family? I sure hope not.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26145 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think the 162,000 NET jobs created had a bit to do with the drop.
No reason to get excited at all, this was just the 34th-straight month of job creation. A gain, but way short of what is needed.
Just imagine what it could have been without Republican obstruction.
ABC cited that the reason it dropped was more about the lack of labor participation than actual jobs created (net or gross). You still don't get it do you? You only get hung up on the feel-good numbers. I mean, with almost 3 straight years of jobs growth, the participation rate must be in the 80% range by now. Right? I know you and the Obama administration care how many American's are working and paying taxes, or does "everyone getting a fair shot" only apply to 50%-60% of the nation? It explains alot if that's the case. You ask where we would be if there were no Republican obstruction. I would say 9.5% unemployment with 45% participation rate. That's giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, that he actually wants America to succeed, of course.
Guestless

Jonesboro, AR

#26146 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think the 162,000 NET jobs created had a bit to do with the drop.
No reason to get excited at all, this was just the 34th-straight month of job creation. A gain, but way short of what is needed.
Just imagine what it could have been without Republican obstruction.
Now if he could only think of a way to come up with full time jobs.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26147 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me help you with your own quote. You said: "They are not the same, just as their name suggests.
Social Security and Medicare ,unemployment, are entitlement programs and by far make up the bulk of that 62%.
Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and housing assistance would be Welfare programs." What you are referencing above is the part of your quote I agreed with. What I was referring to was personal income tax for the sole purpose of funding welfare, SSI, and food stamps making them entitlements even though most of the recipients never paid into those programs. Of course, you already knew that and was just trying to turn it around. It's the definition of entitlement that has changed thanks to liberalism infecting our once great nation.
How can you call SSI, food stamps, and entitlement after just saying,

"even though most of the recipients never paid into those programs"

and you could not be more wrong about food stamps.

Among SNAP households with at least one working-age, non-disabled adult, more than half work while receiving SNAP — and more than 80 percent work in the year prior to or the year after receiving SNAP. The rates are even higher for families with children — more than 60 percent work while receiving SNAP, and almost 90 percent work in the prior or subsequent year.(See Figure 1.)[3]

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/...

Based on your theory, tax dollars are used, so it is a entitlement program.

That would make the Department of Defense one Hell of a entitlement program, wouldn't it?

Have you ever seen a exclusive tax deduction for SNAP, or Welfare on a pay check stub, as you said, money was collected just for that purpose, like Social Security or Medicare does?
Guestless

Jonesboro, AR

#26148 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
How can you call SSI, food stamps, and entitlement after just saying,
"even though most of the recipients never paid into those programs"
and you could not be more wrong about food stamps.
Among SNAP households with at least one working-age, non-disabled adult, more than half work while receiving SNAP — and more than 80 percent work in the year prior to or the year after receiving SNAP. The rates are even higher for families with children — more than 60 percent work while receiving SNAP, and almost 90 percent work in the prior or subsequent year.(See Figure 1.)[3]
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/...
Based on your theory, tax dollars are used, so it is a entitlement program.
That would make the Department of Defense one Hell of a entitlement program, wouldn't it?
Have you ever seen a exclusive tax deduction for SNAP, or Welfare on a pay check stub, as you said, money was collected just for that purpose, like Social Security or Medicare does?
Are you in the percentage that worked prior to drawing?
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26149 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I am a meat and potatoes type of person, and I can tell you that your idea that;
"income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life"
Is only a PREVALANT thought among the ultra conservative, and racial bigots.
People who cannot grasp the concept that the cost to society would be much greater without a social welfare safety blanket.
Not to mention the moral baggage that a Christian COULD add to the equation of not having a social welfare program.
After all you said this Country is a Christian country founded by Christians.
Entitlement is a bad word, A quote by a self professed Christian.
As I have said before, it's not Christians I have a problem with,
its the Hypocrites claiming to be Christians that tar my roof.
I never said we shouldn't have a safety blanket. I said the one we have is broken and have also gone so far as to say that there are those that really need help that can't get it because we have leeches, pretending to be needy, that suck up funds before they can get to those that really need help. Again, you have a gross misunderstanding of what a Christian is so you REALLY need to study it before you go ignorantly blurting out liberal talking points about Christians. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church is an established church that claims to be Christian but I can assure you they are not.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26150 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
ABC cited that the reason it dropped was more about the lack of labor participation than actual jobs created (net or gross). You still don't get it do you? You only get hung up on the feel-good numbers. I mean, with almost 3 straight years of jobs growth, the participation rate must be in the 80% range by now. Right? I know you and the Obama administration care how many American's are working and paying taxes, or does "everyone getting a fair shot" only apply to 50%-60% of the nation? It explains alot if that's the case. You ask where we would be if there were no Republican obstruction. I would say 9.5% unemployment with 45% participation rate. That's giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, that he actually wants America to succeed, of course.
No, you do not get it, if you do, you do a damn good job of hiding it.

The recession killed off 7.9 million jobs, I do not give a Rats ass about a labor participation percentage that has been dropping for several straight years, in large part due to baby boomers retiring and when you lose 7.9 million jobs, what do you expect?

The fact is, new people becoming work eligible every day. The economy must create enough jobs each month for them and gain some of the 7.9 Mill. jobs back.

If you have not notice we still have a high UE rate and a Republican Majority House not doing a damn thing about it
because the economy is doing well enough to produce those jobs and regaining some of the 7.9 million lost jobs.

Big business continues to line their pockets with cash, big business is happy, that makes Republicans ecstatic.

Some of the people who voted Republican crying,

'WORST PRESIDENT EVER'

I said some, because the Republican base is starting to turn on its own. Look at Mitch McConnell the incumbent Senator trailing in the polls to a Democrat not to mention having to fight it out with a another Republican for the GOP nomination.




Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26151 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said we shouldn't have a safety blanket. I said the one we have is broken and have also gone so far as to say that there are those that really need help that can't get it because we have leeches, pretending to be needy, that suck up funds before they can get to those that really need help. Again, you have a gross misunderstanding of what a Christian is so you REALLY need to study it before you go ignorantly blurting out liberal talking points about Christians. For example, the Westboro Baptist Church is an established church that claims to be Christian but I can assure you they are not.
Let me help you out here a bit with your constant struggle of comprehending the written word.



1."Is only a PREVALENT thought among the ultra conservative, and racial bigots. People who cannot grasp the concept that the cost to society would be much greater without a social welfare safety blanket.

I do not care what you say you do not understand it. This last post proves it. You are going to have fraud in any program.

BTW, that you just included yourself in the above,
ultra conservative and or a racial bigot.


But check out much fraud has dropped in the food stamp program the last few years.

2.Entitlement is a bad word, A quote by a self professed Christian.

Is that not a true statement, or was it, as you like to say
"liberal talking points about Christians.

As I have said before, it's not Christians I have a problem with,
its the Hypocrites claiming to be Christians that tar my roof.

Nothing derogatory about Christians there.

I WILL TELL YOU AGAIN..........

Its the ignorant, ultra conservatives, and racial bigots, and
Hypocrites claiming to be Christians that I find despicable .

Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#26152 Aug 2, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you do not get it, if you do, you do a damn good job of hiding it.
The recession killed off 7.9 million jobs, I do not give a Rats ass about a labor participation percentage that has been dropping for several straight years, in large part due to baby boomers retiring and when you lose 7.9 million jobs, what do you expect?
The fact is, new people becoming work eligible every day. The economy must create enough jobs each month for them and gain some of the 7.9 Mill. jobs back.
If you have not notice we still have a high UE rate and a Republican Majority House not doing a damn thing about it
because the economy is doing well enough to produce those jobs and regaining some of the 7.9 million lost jobs.
Big business continues to line their pockets with cash, big business is happy, that makes Republicans ecstatic.
Some of the people who voted Republican crying,
'WORST PRESIDENT EVER'
I said some, because the Republican base is starting to turn on its own. Look at Mitch McConnell the incumbent Senator trailing in the polls to a Democrat not to mention having to fight it out with a another Republican for the GOP nomination.
Obama still has 2/3 to work with. He just doesn't know how to lead. The low participation rate speaks to a larger problem. Your right, the baby boomers are retiring. The fact that we now have a generation that buys into the propaganda of "we're all winners in life". I had a guy with an 8th grade education actually tell me that he wouldn't come to work for less than 65K per year. He's still unemployed as far as I know. These up and coming kids don't want to work their way up. They want the big bucks now. At least 85% aren't even qualified to work at McDonald's. Our culture is telling them that all they need to do is believe in themselves to be successful. No one is telling them they need to work and work hard to really succeed. They go out believing that garbage and the next thing you know they are disgruntled and they simply give up. We are finding out now that those "Republicans" you mentioned and many you didn't are actually progressives that have been acting like Republicans for a long time. It's only because there is a new breed of politicians that are actually trying to follow the Constitution that has shed light on the faux Republicans. So there's a rift in the party. You should be happy to know that you only thought you had 2/3 of government but in reality you actually had all three branches and have had for quite some time. I could never figure out why the Republicans kept getting it handed to them when negotiating with the Democrats. It's becoming quite clear now.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#26153 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama still has 2/3 to work with. He just doesn't know how to lead. The low participation rate speaks to a larger problem. Your right, the baby boomers are retiring. The fact that we now have a generation that buys into the propaganda of "we're all winners in life". I had a guy with an 8th grade education actually tell me that he wouldn't come to work for less than 65K per year. He's still unemployed as far as I know. These up and coming kids don't want to work their way up. They want the big bucks now. At least 85% aren't even qualified to work at McDonald's. Our culture is telling them that all they need to do is believe in themselves to be successful. No one is telling them they need to work and work hard to really succeed. They go out believing that garbage and the next thing you know they are disgruntled and they simply give up. We are finding out now that those "Republicans" you mentioned and many you didn't are actually progressives that have been acting like Republicans for a long time. It's only because there is a new breed of politicians that are actually trying to follow the Constitution that has shed light on the faux Republicans. So there's a rift in the party. You should be happy to know that you only thought you had 2/3 of government but in reality you actually had all three branches and have had for quite some time. I could never figure out why the Republicans kept getting it handed to them when negotiating with the Democrats. It's becoming quite clear now.
"2/3 of government" That is just laughable, and a great example of your political ignorance.

Presently, a minority of senators are engaged in unprecedented obstructionism to block legislation and bring judicial confirmations to a crawl.

"There’s a simple reason for this disparity. It may only take 60 votes to get something accomplished in the Senate, but it takes 100 votes to do so quickly".

If the Dems had 60 votes in the Senate, then they would control two of the three branches.
Dont Know Nothing

Medford, OR

#26154 Aug 2, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You and other liberals always come from the position of "we bought your product and now your rich and evil" standpoint, yet nobody twisted your arm to buy the services or products. I will never get that. If you think someone is too rich or evil then stop shopping with them. You don't see the 70-80 hour weeks that many of these "rich evil" people go through. All you look at are quarterly earnings reports and wish that someone would take from them and give to you so you can continue working the 40 hour or less week you work yet increase your lifestyle. It's insulting but it clearly shows how little you know about business so I really can't take much offense.
You are still missing the whole point. So what you are saying is you would not tax corporations anything correct? Then where would revenue to build the roads and bridges come from then to go to work at these corporations? Are you implying that you would then double the tax rate for the wealthy to make up for the revenue loss that you would be taking out of the economy? You cannot have both schools, bridges, roads, and any sort of infrastructure, and tax corporations at 0%, period. You do realize that I said nothing about Chinese products and even though your ignorance impels you to tell me about how they were the first to bring over Chinese manufactured goods. I do not care. I was stating the facts on how the company was started, and it was started with AMERICAN made goods. The company has also stated a reinvestment plan to bring in over $10B dollars worth of American made products to its shelves, who cares if they were the first to bring Chinese goods to the table, you are still living in the past. No, the reason behind Chinese goods being sold along with overseas manufactured parts here in the US all started with NAFTA. It was a dumb decision that each side messed up on. It is what America wanted at the time and now we are paying a price; however, all things will soon end as Chinese wages are rising along with skyrocketing utilities that are now sending factories back tot he US, as they find it cheaper to manufacture at home. No one is blaming anyone. You just view it that way. If someone wants to take the risk in opening a business and that business fails then yes they deserve to lose the capitol that was invested to start the business, it is only fair and just. You are not looking for a hand out now are you? Who is talking about evil besides you? I never said or complained about the goods or services that I have bought or received. Are you talking about 70-80 hour weeks for CEO's and business owners? I could care less. They get paid rewardingly for the jobs that they do and more than most require less intellect or skill than the laborers they demand. You tell me how taxing the rich at a higher rate increases any benefits received by welfare recipients, unemployed, or the poor. Those funds are used for infrastructure, technological advancement, and academic advancement. So where is your logic? I know more than you and your pathetic buddies you claim to have that own or operate businesses. That is why they are failing. Do not say they are not because you clearly stated that they are, but only after Obama has been in office, do not forget that. Like I stated before, I have started, operated, and help start SUCCESSFUL business's that are still operating today with increased revenue. You know how that happens? Quit whining because things are not going your way and look for better ways to adapt your business to the changing economy. That is how you run a successful business, not by complaining to your customer base about a supposedly awful economy and poor work ethic.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Travis Redwine is cheating and doing his old w... 45 min Hahaha 1
Russian interference 3 hr He is a Molestor 9
News Power still out for people in region 3 hr Duh 1
T-Ricks slot machines 4 hr Curious person 18
Word Association (Sep '10) 7 hr Cockballa 198
Whos a better mother Samantha Garrett or Hayley... 7 hr Abc 2
Jessicas' Consignment 10 hr Curious myself 7

Pocahontas Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pocahontas Mortgages