So In the Liberal/Socialist mind view the tax cuts should be equal in dollar amount instead of percentage of taxes paid?

Wake up! Socialism, even steven, communism whatever you call it has never worked anywhere!

For those of us who struggle, sacrifice and work 80 hours a week plus building a business that's not fair nor right. 95% of the businesses in this country are small businesses.

Get your head out and find out what makes this country work!
It's about those who struggle to build businesses in the everyday world.

You wanna punch a clock, you get what the man offers you.

You want what the man has, build your own business and try to run it successfully!

 

SAXNBBQ,

I was waiting for a response like yours. It's so predictable. Any time someone says something against Bush, Reagan or the logic of a tax cut, they are labled a liberal, communist, socialist, pinko.

I'm saying that his tax cuts are misleading and his economic plans do not benefit our country.

You own a "Carpet cleaning Co. and Also a Bar-B-Q Vending and catering Trailer"

Hey, pay your workers whatever you want. But, see how long they stay and how great their work is when you pay them minumum wage, without benefits, and get off on yelling at them.

What makes out country work is the workers, not the CEO on the golf course. Without happy, fairly compensated employees, our economy is dead.

 

And I suppose your response is not predictable either?

Workers must have a place to work first.

You have no idea what I pay workers or benefits for that matter, muchless get off yelling at them.

Try an arguement based on logic, instead getting out the liberal manifesto of innuendos and trash talking.

Being louder or more emotional does not make your side of a disagreement correct.

As matter of fact, I have friends who will volunteer to help me out, we have so much fun making money and paying taxes. And for the record the volunteers work better than the clock punchers, go figure!

Have you ever built up a bussiness?

 

can't argue with this point. no economy if the populace can't afford the products.

 

Well, I suppose if you want to be "happy" and "fairly compensated" you better be ready to make up the difference by paying higher prices for whatever it is that you're working for.


Hey, I'm not saying corporate greed doesn't exist. It always has and it always will. The only way you can keep it in check is through competition. Otherwise you'll end up with Enron's that drive companies into the ground. There's the problem with a lot of healthcare policies. By locking people into a certain way of doing things you limit the competition, therefore the prices skyrocket. If you're gonna lock people into something, you need to lock the companies that provide the services into it too, or allow companies to compete on services. Generic drugs being a great source of competition. (There's one of my bones to pick with Bush, at least in the way I understand the medicare bill.)

Anyway, healthcare is a mess, I think we can all agree on that. Bush isn't that responsible for it, this is something that has been building for at least 10 years, probably 20-30. A lot of things have contributed. The health of the average american, drug companies charging insane prices, poor decisions on insurance companies parts ( link ), out of control lawsuits against doctors (thanks John Edwards), and the list goes on.


"Hey, pay your workers whatever you want. But, see how long they stay and how great their work is when you pay them minumum wage, without benefits, and get off on yelling at them."

You're right, that's why companies will continue to offer benefits and incentives to keep employees. Not very many of them can afford high turnover rates. The government doesn't need to be involved in supplying this.

 

One of the things I haven't seen mentioned is the flooding of the job market.

We here (Americans) love to operate on the key thing at the time, whether it be the latest diet craze such as Atkins, or the latest buzz word such as *reality* pushing out *extreme*, or the big thing in the job market.

Computer related work was the next hot ticket, big salaries, jobs popping up everywhere, the huge dot-com boom, etc. People flocked to schools to get their degrees and get in the field. As a result there are to many people.

I caught the tail end of it, I graduated from school and went on the job search just at the peak of the rise. It was crazy the amount of people competing for a job then, and layoffs were not even happening. Luckily I got hired, but honestly I get paid to much for the work I do, but not enough to put up with living a Dilbert cartoon.

It's just the way things work in the free trade world. Jobs come and go. Outsourcing technology is no different then outsourcing products. From what I see some outsourcing crashing down. The public doesn't want to deal with tech support over seas resulting in some of that getting brought back here, some of the programming they cannot do over seas so it's staying here.


One thing that does annoy is me is some of the obscene salaries that high officials in companies make and thats not even including their bonuses. Granted some deserve it for the work/dedication they do, but most do not.

Personally I think their bonuses should be could drastically and should then be spread among the other employees, but that idea is coming from having the company I work for taking away bonus from everyone except the ones who don't need it.

 

You say I make an argument for socialism, I talk trash instead of logic, I'm against small bunsiness owners and that I'm loud and emotional? You'll see that every statement I've made is logical and my argements are grounded in reality, not emotion.

I'm loud and emotional?

You've used 5 exclamation points (!) in 17 sentences; that's being loud.

Liberal manifesto?

I'm not getting my ideas or arguments out of someone elses play book. My thoughts are my own, based on logic and education that I paid for without a single student loan, grant or help from anyone else.

I have nothing against small business owners and never said anything that would suggest I did. IBM, Enron, General Motors, Walmart, HMOs: These are not small busniesses. Just because Bush says that he once was a small business does not mean he supports small business in action.

That's the thing: With all of the jobs that have gone overseas or down to Mexico, the prices we pay have not changed. The only things that have changed are the quality of the products and the amount of money the CEOs and stock holders make. We, as consumers, have ended up paying more for products that are actually worth less and of lower quality.

When GM and Ford sent manufacturing jobs to Mexico in the 80s, did the prices drop? Did the quality go up? No. Levi's closed down their last US manufacturing plant last month: Did the cost of a pair of Levi's drop? No.

Sending jobs overseas is not good for American workers and it is not good for American consumers. That point needs to be clear. Sending jobs overseas for cheap labor supports only the CEOs and shareholders.

 

The only people who receive fair compensation are the ones who work on straight commission or business owners.

 

Exactly.

 

So you're saying there is no benefit to the company as a whole?

There are a lot of people out there (Americans and foreigners alike) that won't buy American made products because they don't stand up quality wise. Quality issues aren't just a foreign thing. Does quality drop as a result of moving some jobs out of the country, in some cases yes. It can also be said that some companies move jobs out of the country because the quality they are getting here is inferior, and if they can get the same result (if not better) for a cheaper price, well?

Here's a thought, if all the big corpoate likes are building such inferior products then you should be able to start an in-country buisiness to compete with them. Your quality will be superior. You might have to charge a little more for it, but most consumers will go for the quality product. I know I do. Now you've beaten "The Man" at his own game. It's happened before. I'll leave it up to you to figure out what it is you can beat "The Man" at.

Or, you can hold the "The Man" down. Wow, sweet justice this is. We have a government in place that is guarunteeing our job security and health benefits. We just keep getting dumber (not forced to pursue training to be competetive), lazier (why should we work harder to compete), and fatter (we're lazier remember). The rest of the world is being forced to compete on the open market (except maybe Europe) and they are now light years ahead of us in all respects. Bet hey, we got our health care and high pay! Down the road we go, 10...20.....30 years.....

At some point we'll get slapped silly and forced to change. Look at our health care system, we're already getting slapped silly with that. Hey, but we can sue the man for millions if something goes wrong!

 

I love how I always hear about the greed of corporations but I never hear about the greed of the consumers. Look, this works on so many levels that it would take volumes to explain it, and even then you couldn’t cover everything so I’ll try to do the reader’s digest condensed version.
The situation we, the “hard working” folks of the USA, find ourselves in is not entirely the result of this administration’s fiscal policy, nor is it the fault of greedy corporations (by the way…a corporation can not be greedy…the people who run it, or as is more often the case, the shareholders are), nor is it the consumers (although they play a MAJOR role in this). It is all of the above.
The real problem is the basic underlying cancer of an ideology of SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. It is the foundation that this country is currently built on (didn’t always used to be that way), and it is what has caused this vicious little cycle we find ourselves in.
Consumers want to pay as little as possible and get the most for their money.
Companies respond to consumer demands which are expressed by how they spend their money. If IBM finds that Dell is selling a million more computers than they are because their computers are $100 less, then IBM has to adjust. Add to this the added pressure of shareholders (often those same folks who are buying the cheapest product and screaming for even lower prices) are demanding high returns on their investment. Which causes even more cost cutting.
The pressure from all of this has resulted in the shortsightedness of corporate executives who, under pressure of increasing profits, use cannibalism as the quick fix. Send the jobs overseas, lay off work force and have few people do the work of many….
This can only go on for so long. You can only eat so much of your body before you kill yourself. But where does this start and where does it stop?
Whining about it doesn’t fix the problem. Blaming the government doesn’t fix it either. If you think the problem is caused by the government do you honestly believe they are going to remedy it (they couldn’t anyways but that’s another book).
All the armchair critics out there blame the corporations. What they fail to realize is that the corporations exist only because consumers let them. If consumers (that’s you. Me and everybody) decide not to buy the product any more, that company will cease to exist. Want to keep jobs in America? Want higher wages? Want some/more/better health coverage (by the way…employer sponsored medical insurance is a fairly recent invention…it didn’t used to exist…and is just another example of entitlement/something for nothing ideology that is killing us) then demand that the companies you purchase goods and services from provide all that….and be willing to pay for it. But the American consumer isn’t willing to do that. Do you shop at Wal-Mart to save a buck or two? Go to Costco? Buy on the internet to save money? Congratulations, you are adding to the problem.
This is not to say that it is all the consumers fault because it isn’t. The investor, and corporate executive mentality with regard to what PROFIT is also needs to change. We continue to expect high returns and unreasonable growth. In fact, growth is EXPECTED, although in reality it is not necessary. The idea that you have to grow X% per year or you are actually losing is a fallacy. But this feeds the executive level with expectations that can’t be kept, which feeds investors with ideas of returns that can’t be met, without requiring detrimental actions be taken all for SHORT TERM RETURN. Again, something for nothing. The consumers respond by seeing prices lowered and like a drug high, they want more….and it round and round and round.
What is needed is for everyone’s expectations to change. Frankly, I don’t see that happening, and so we’ll continue down this spiral. We’ll keep cannibalizing ourselves until there’s nothing left.
Change can occur, but it’s gonna have to start with the consumer because they ultimately decide who stays in business and who doesn’t. It is them they ultimately drives the business machine and how that machine is run. But if you want anything you gotta pay for it, and the consumer is going to have to start paying if they want certain things to happen. They will have to demand form the companies they patronize that they expect certain things of those companies other than the bottom line. Only then will the companies respond….and it won’t matter one iota who is the President of the US, be it George or John or whoever.
But…all anyone cares about is…WHAT’S IT GOING TO COST ME? Until that changes, nothing will change.

 

Aj, if i offended you , I apologize.

As a hard working business owner who takes all the risks(not the workers), I get a little hot about the tax issues.

Companies have a right to make a profit.
If we don't like the company and their tactics, do not buy the product. That's the consumers power, his wallet.

Levis have always been my favorite jeans, I no longer wear them or support them because of their tactics and agendas.

Keep in mind Kerry(democrat) will not change anything, his money comes from profits also.

I still stand on the principle that you can not distribute a companies monies equally amongst the people(workers).

For some reason people believe that the cost of doing business does not go up, in the last tens years some of my supplies have gone up one hundred percent. Do you think the consumer wants to absorb that increase. My insurance goes up just like everyone else's.

Bush did not Give us the tax cuts, the money was earned and ours to begin with.

To punish the GM, IBM , Ford, Walmart you will hurt 95% of the businesses in this country. nothing makes that right.

You want to hurt, change the major corporations, stop buying their products.

Blaming Bush for things started many years ago, Insurance, Health Care, company cutbacks is silly. He didn't start this crap and he certainly can't stop it. Only the consumer has the power, should they choose to be strong enough to use it.

 

Tax cuts = More jobs, more opportunity, better economy and MORE federal revenue.

Tax hikes = Less jobs, less opportunity, stagnate economy, and LESS federal revenue.


Those are the facts, there is no ifs ands or butts about it…

 

Kobiashi, in a sense you are correct. The simple fact of the matter is that consumers vote with they're wallets. When I go to buy something in a store, my priorities go like this:
Support local small business. If what I want is locally produced I am willing to pay a few dollars more to keep the money in my community.
Support Canadian or U.S. ( depending on where you are of course) owned and operated businesses and manufacturers. I am willing to spend more for a product that keeps the money in my country and helps support the Canadian economy.
Check the tags! I am willing to spend more on a product that is produced in my country as this keeps our manufacturers in business. The more local product you buy the cheaper it will get because of volume.
Boycott Walmart and their ilk! They treat their employees like ***** and browbeat their suppliers into ever lower prices by threatening to withdraw their business. They are one of the main reasons countries like China can get away with paying their employees (slaves) two dollars a day or less. Your pair of $150.00 Nikes probably cost about a buck and a half to produce. What's up with that?
The only time I go in a Walmart store is to pass through on my way somewhere else.
Shop smart and insist on buying your own countries products and things might start to turn around.
No logo! Why are people so enamoured of doing the corporations advertising for them and paying for the privilege to boot?

End of rant.

 

kobiashi: I think you kinda hit home there. I think that balance needs to be struck in order to maintain the growth. I think the Stock market (read that technology) bubble of the 90's is a perfect illustration of things getting WAY out of balance. Almost everyone (including myself) got so caught up in it we lost all sense of reality.

SAXNBBQ: I share your sentiments. I am not out to offend anyone, I just don't agree that the executives/rich are the great scurge of this nation. More than anything I think the political system is.
We have two groups trying to pull us all apart. Unfortunately they have it set up to where we have to choose a side, and all issues have a side. If one side takes a stand on one issue (i.e. the war on terror) the other side HAS TO APPOSE this position. What sense is that? If somebody tries to come in with a viewpoint that sides with both parties on different issues they are pushed out. I Have yet to see a signifigant politician that talks about REAL comprimise.