It's dangerous following Liberals

[apple0154]

Does he have an LLC?

Not sure. I think there is another designation for something similar. A private business as opposed to the official "company" designation. I believe the difference is the income of a private business is considered personal income whereas the income from a company can be put aside in a separate account. Again, I'm not sure even though I was a partner in one my wife still owns. I'll have to ask her the specific difference when she comes home from work.

 

[apple0154]

I see that your narrow view and short sightedness didn't allow you to comprehend and then address what was posted; but instead your selective reading and thinking created a situation for you to address, that wasn't part of the post.


When you get your eyes checked, have them test for a connection to your cognitive thinking center.

You asked, "How do you explain all the people who imigrate to this country, with nothing, and years later they are successful business men?"

What explanation are you looking for? I told you how some people do it.

 

[apple0154]

Excellent! You discovered the solution.

So you admit that building Yachts in the US is unprofitable; because of the taxes levied against them.[/QUOTE]

No, I admit if a business is not profitable, get out.

Wages. Materials. The location of the factory will determine costs. Problems wih suppliers......there are a lot of possible reasons.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

No, I admit if a business is not profitable, get out.

isn't that what outsourcing is all about?....

 

[apple0154]

isn't that what outsourcing is all about?....

I suppose one could say the entire business was outsourced.

 

[Althea]

isn't that what outsourcing is all about?....

Not necessarily. Outsourcing is about greatly increasing profits. That doesn't mean the business wasn't profitable to begin with.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

The solution, would've been to tax the ultra wealthy on income/investments. Top marginal rates when Bush signed the yacht tax, were 28-31%.

The tax wasn't on the builders of the yachts, as was erroneously offered by your tag team partner. It was a surcharge on the purchase of any boat over 100k. The ultra wealthy could certainly afford the extra few grand. They just found a way to skirt the tax.

Of course, there are/were various tax loopholes that allow these owners to deduct their yachts as second homes, so all the whining is nonsense.

Blame the unpatriotic millionaires for the failure of the industry. Although, I saw no sense at the time that Bush signed the law. He should've just ignored his promise for 'no new taxes', and raised marginal rates.

Why should there be a special tax on the "ultra wealthy" on their "income/investments"?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

You asked, "How do you explain all the people who imigrate to this country, with nothing, and years later they are successful business men?"

What explanation are you looking for? I told you how some people do it.

You ranted and raved about something that had nothing to do with what I asked; but then that is to be expected from you, any time you realize that your strawman is on fire.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Not necessarily. Outsourcing is about greatly increasing profits. That doesn't mean the business wasn't profitable to begin with.

Outsourcing is not about increasing profits as much as decreasing cost. The two go hand in hand, but it is costs which keep increasing, not the need for greater profit. Wealthy owners already have wealth, why would they need more profit? The fact is, the cost of doing business is what continues to be a growing burden, and as it grows, it eats away at the profit margin, and the business owner is forced to find more cost-efficient means of production, which means, outsourcing.

Let's take something we can all relate to. A computer keyboard. You have on in front of you right now, and there is a 99% chance the keyboard you have, was made outside the USA. Go ahead and flip it over and look, see where it is made! Mine is made in China by Logitech, it cost about $24 at Walmart. I've had it for several years, not sure how many... it's been through two OS changes. In any event, it will eventually not function properly, and I will have the task of replacing it. I will likely buy another similar one, because this one has served me so well. When I do buy one, I will reasonably expect it to function and perform at least as well as this one has, and for about the same price, adjusted for inflation, etc.

IF we no longer allowed the sale of outsourced keyboards, and they had to be made in the USA, I could expect the same quality keyboard for about $200. Now, it may have more bells and whistles, and it may even look sleek and cool, or be bluetooth-enabled... but at the end of the day, as a consumer, it's 10x higher in price than what I am accustomed to. This also means, whenever I need to buy a keyboard, there is really going to be an actual NEED there, and it won't be simply a matter of getting bored or tired of the old one. Now, multiply this same example by the hundreds of thousands of products we have in our everyday lives, that we buy as consumers. If it all costs 10x as much, how much are employers going to have to pay us, to be able to live?

Now, why would a keyboard made in the USA cost $200 while a keyboard made in China costs $24? Well, cost of production is the main reason. Cost of regulatory compliance, mandates from the government on pay, holidays, family leave, insurance, etc. Things the Chinese don't have to worry with, along with the difference in labor costs. Here, we have manufacturing-sector unions who go on strike if they can't make $25 an hour.... There, they are fortunate to get 10 cents a day and a bowl of rice. Here, the employer has to give you so many weeks of family leave time, paid vacations and such... There, if you get sick and can't work, they shoot you. So there is a completely different level of productivity for the buck, and this is what mainly creates an outsourcing juggernaut.

The solutions are not simple, they require a level of sophisticated thinking the typical liberal does not possess, contrary to their own beliefs they are the 'smartest people in the world.' We have to begin by becoming more 'realistic' in terms of government mandates and restrictions, and labor union influence, and get back to the basics... and honest day's work for an honest day's pay. We have to start removing the yoke of endless liberal feel-good mandates and requirements on large manufacturers, and enable them to see an advantage in keeping production here. At the same time, we have to take a stronger political stance against China's human rights, which we should all be on board with anyway. The liberals want to go in another direction on these things, and it is the direction we have followed, as we've watched America go from being pioneers of the industrial age, to virtually NO manufacturing of anything. Why? Because business can't compete with China while paying thousands of workers to sit on a beach in the Bahamas 12 weeks a year.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Throughout the history of liberal socialist statism, there have been many hapless victims. Sucked in to the rhetoric, mesmerized by the prophets, brainwashed into believing in Utopia. I suppose it's not really a surprise, it's human nature for mankind to course the path of least resistance, and it's easier to believe in a Utopian dream world than to accept reality. What's wrong with dreaming we can someday feed all the hungry and heal all the sick? Well, it's dangerous, that's what.

We can look to history, and find example after example, of the liberal socialist statist philosophy being attempted, in a number of different variations-- Maoism in China, Marxism in Russia, Nazism in Germany, and assorted offshoots from rogues like Pol Pot and Qaddafi to regime dynasties like Castro and Saddam Hussein. None of the examples end well for the people. It would be great if there were a good example, then the liberal socialist statists could manage to print t-shirts with someone other than Che Guevara.

The struggle against the liberal socialist statist mentality in our own country, has been going on for years. Libs love to quote Hamilton, and perhaps Hamilton was one of the country's first pinheads. Most of his statist ideas were fundamentally rejected by Madison, Jefferson, and Washington, but important to history, because they presented the perfect platform to juxtapose the new ideas of freedom and liberty. Of course, lazy asses today will not bother reading the Federalist Papers, to understand this, they will accept the Liberals quoting Hamilton, as if his words were some sort of principled ideas of our founding fathers. The "general welfare" clause is a good example. Hamilton believed, like many liberal socialist statists, that "general welfare" was sort of a 'carte blanc' for government to assume responsibility regarding any aspect of our general welfare. Madison brilliantly pointed out, that is precisely why "general welfare" can't be interpreted that way, it would render the Constitution meaningless and grant unlimited power to the central government. If you follow the Hamiltonian philosophy, the end result is not good for the people. It eventually replaces personal freedom with central government power, which has never worked out well for the average Joe.

Still, we have people in history like Adams, who have entertained some notion of a "middle ground" between founding principles and statist nonsense. We've always had a certain segment who are not totally on board with the liberal socialist statists, but apparently dislike confrontation so much, they are willing to abandon their own principles to try and "get along" with them. This is where we find the most evidence of how dangerous it is to follow Liberals. A most recent example is the Pill Bill, signed into law by Compassionate Conservative, George W. Bush. Libs throw the 'crisis' out there... poor old people can't buy their medicine! They continue to protest and scream, and cry and plead, and nag and pester, until someone who should know better, says... OKAY! OKAY! Maybe we can do something to help the poor old people buy their medicine! *poof* we get the Pill Bill. What happened next? Problem solved? Hardly! Libs moved on to nationalized health care. Look what happened with FDR? We went along with his liberal socialist statist principles because we were desperate, and created an entitlement class. Was the New Deal it? Did it fix all our problems? Oh no! Was LBJ's Great Society enough? Nope! Still not there yet. Since then, Libs have pressed on, with more an more departments and more and more government.

You see, when you follow a Liberal, the road to Utopia never ends. The world has an endless supply of people suffering, the planet produces new crisis everyday. The planet is never going to have enough people or resources to adequately accommodate all inhabitants at all times everywhere. There will forever and always be, some people who have more than others, and some people who have very little or nothing. This is what is commonly referred to as "a fact of life." We should all be aware of this, and it should be obvious it's a problem we can't ever solve, but for some reason, it is easier to believe in Liberal Utopia....Nirvana!

Yea, yea, yea Dixie. Keep blowing smoke. Liberalism is the greatest thing that ever happened in politics. Common people with the right to do and speak as they please. Even unacceptable people with different skin color who practice strange relgions.

You can spew this kind of empty rhetoric all you want but liberals like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, TR, FDR are the greatest political thinkers ever. Thanks to these men of the age or reason we have unprecedented freedoms unheard of in the ages before and that's what really rankles right wingers like you.

The fact is we know where your kind of authoritarianism leads. Slavery, Jim Crow, Concentration Camps and the killing fields of the totalitarian ethics your slippery slope leads to. It is safer to say that authoritarian militirist like you are far, far closer the mass murderers like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot than any modern liberal politician by leaps and bounds.

Your case of projection is beyond ironic. The fact is, you can't tolerate freedom. You can't tolerate true knowledge. You prefer your arguments from authority. The Good ole boys say it's true so it must be true. You despise freedom cause it implies freedom for all and then you have to tolerate ideas that are unacceptable to the good ole boys. You have to accept behavior that is unacceptable to the good ole boys, you have to tolerate people who are unacceptable to the good ole boys. Freedom is just a word for you. You're completely clueless as to not only what it means but what it implies.

So go ahead and preach your Goebelesque rhetoric so you can marginlize those people who practice their God given freedom, cause you're not fooling anyone. We know where it leads. Dictators, War, Oppression, Totalitarianism, Concentration Camps, Death Squads and Killing Fields.

Thank God that the Liberal men who founded our Republic understood the true nature of freedom and liberty and what a shame that you don't.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Yea, yea, yea Dixie. Keep blowing smoke. Liberalism is the greatest thing that ever happened in politics. Common people with the right to do and speak as they please. Even unacceptable people with different skin color who practice strange relgions.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, keep not reading the OP and making a complete ass of yourself.

You can spew this kind of empty rhetoric all you want but liberals like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, TR, FDR are the greatest political thinkers ever. Thanks to these men of the age or reason we have unprecedented freedoms unheard of in the ages before and that's what really rankles right wingers like you.

First of all, Washington, Madison and Jefferson, were not Liberals. Adams was somewhat of a moderate, and Ben Franklin was more libertarian. The only real statist socialist liberal of the time, was Hamilton, unless maybe you want to count Thomas Paine. Their viewpoints were often used as a backdrop to explain the unique attributes of the Constitution, not as principles OF the Constitution. They served as the 'counterpoint' to the argument for the fundamentals in the Constitution, and Madison (in particular) would often exploit them as such. This is all found in the Federalist Papers, particularly in #14,#17, and #22.

The fact is we know where your kind of authoritarianism leads. Slavery, Jim Crow, Concentration Camps and the killing fields of the totalitarian ethics your slippery slope leads to. It is safer to say that authoritarian militirist like you are far, far closer the mass murderers like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot than any modern liberal politician by leaps and bounds.

Hold on a sec... Slavery came over on the Big Boat from England, buddy! It was around a lot longer than conservatism. And Concentration Camps? You mean when Hitler orchestrated his National Socialist (i.e.; liberal socialist statists) master plan? The Killing Fields? Have you studied history much? That was Pol Pot trying to emulate Mao, and his Maoist philosophy (i.e.; liberal socialist statists) on steroids! That's precisely MY point, it's DANGEROUS to follow a Liberal!

Your case of projection is beyond ironic. The fact is, you can't tolerate freedom. You can't tolerate true knowledge. You prefer your arguments from authority. The Good ole boys say it's true so it must be true. You despise freedom cause it implies freedom for all and then you have to tolerate ideas that are unacceptable to the good ole boys. You have to accept behavior that is unacceptable to the good ole boys, you have to tolerate people who are unacceptable to the good ole boys. Freedom is just a word for you. You're completely clueless as to not only what it means but what it implies.

In the words of the Great Philosopher Kristofferson... Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.

I prefer not continuing to delude myself into thinking that Liberals should be listened to. It is whenever we entertain their notions, and accept their memes, that we venture down a dark and predictable path to our own demise, it's dangerous indeed, and never turns out well for the people in the end.

So go ahead and preach your Goebelesque rhetoric so you can marginlize those people who practice their God given freedom, cause you're not fooling anyone. We know where it leads. Dictators, War, Oppression, Totalitarianism, Concentration Camps, Death Squads and Killing Fields.

Again with the Killing Fields... the philosophy behind it was, to kill the capitalists who owned the wealth and replace them with central government authority... Debbie Wasserman-Schults is a bad burrito away from introducing something like this in Congress! Are you kidding us here?

Thank God that the Liberal men who founded our Republic understood the true nature of freedom and liberty and what a shame that you don't.

Wow... so you believe in God, huh?

 

[apple0154]

You ranted and raved about something that had nothing to do with what I asked; but then that is to be expected from you, any time you realize that your strawman is on fire.

Strawman? There are a multitude of reasons and I offered one.

How do you explain all the people who didn't imigrate to this country, born with nothing, and years later never became successful business men?"

 

[apple0154]

Outsourcing is not about increasing profits as much as decreasing cost. The two go hand in hand, but it is costs which keep increasing, not the need for greater profit. Wealthy owners already have wealth, why would they need more profit? The fact is, the cost of doing business is what continues to be a growing burden, and as it grows, it eats away at the profit margin, and the business owner is forced to find more cost-efficient means of production, which means, outsourcing.

Let's take something we can all relate to. A computer keyboard. You have on in front of you right now, and there is a 99% chance the keyboard you have, was made outside the USA. Go ahead and flip it over and look, see where it is made! Mine is made in China by Logitech, it cost about $24 at Walmart. I've had it for several years, not sure how many... it's been through two OS changes. In any event, it will eventually not function properly, and I will have the task of replacing it. I will likely buy another similar one, because this one has served me so well. When I do buy one, I will reasonably expect it to function and perform at least as well as this one has, and for about the same price, adjusted for inflation, etc.

IF we no longer allowed the sale of outsourced keyboards, and they had to be made in the USA, I could expect the same quality keyboard for about $200. Now, it may have more bells and whistles, and it may even look sleek and cool, or be bluetooth-enabled... but at the end of the day, as a consumer, it's 10x higher in price than what I am accustomed to. This also means, whenever I need to buy a keyboard, there is really going to be an actual NEED there, and it won't be simply a matter of getting bored or tired of the old one. Now, multiply this same example by the hundreds of thousands of products we have in our everyday lives, that we buy as consumers. If it all costs 10x as much, how much are employers going to have to pay us, to be able to live?

Now, why would a keyboard made in the USA cost $200 while a keyboard made in China costs $24? Well, cost of production is the main reason. Cost of regulatory compliance, mandates from the government on pay, holidays, family leave, insurance, etc. Things the Chinese don't have to worry with, along with the difference in labor costs. Here, we have manufacturing-sector unions who go on strike if they can't make $25 an hour.... There, they are fortunate to get 10 cents a day and a bowl of rice. Here, the employer has to give you so many weeks of family leave time, paid vacations and such... There, if you get sick and can't work, they shoot you. So there is a completely different level of productivity for the buck, and this is what mainly creates an outsourcing juggernaut.

The solutions are not simple, they require a level of sophisticated thinking the typical liberal does not possess, contrary to their own beliefs they are the 'smartest people in the world.' We have to begin by becoming more 'realistic' in terms of government mandates and restrictions, and labor union influence, and get back to the basics... and honest day's work for an honest day's pay. We have to start removing the yoke of endless liberal feel-good mandates and requirements on large manufacturers, and enable them to see an advantage in keeping production here. At the same time, we have to take a stronger political stance against China's human rights, which we should all be on board with anyway. The liberals want to go in another direction on these things, and it is the direction we have followed, as we've watched America go from being pioneers of the industrial age, to virtually NO manufacturing of anything. Why? Because business can't compete with China while paying thousands of workers to sit on a beach in the Bahamas 12 weeks a year.

Dix: "Outsourcing is not about increasing profits as much as decreasing cost. The two go hand in hand, but it is costs which keep increasing, not the need for greater profit. Wealthy owners already have wealth, why would they need more profit? "

You are one funny dude. Yep, the average business owner says to themselves, "I am making a profit and I'm wealthy so I won't try to make more. I'll keep producing my product just because I love people."

Dixie, the folks who devised and signed the free trade agreements understood the consequences. Obviously, a country where the workers receive lower pay will be able to produce products that cost less. As human beings we had two choices. We can continue to send aid to foreign countries or we can help them get established. We chose the latter. It makes the most sense and the whole idea is to level the playing field. Unite the planet. That means a lot of people in first world nations are going to take a hit. Accept it because that's the way it's going to go. There can no longer be a huge disparity between the citizens of different nations anymore than there can be a huge disparity between the citizens of the same nation.

There will always be exceptions but, by and large, things are slowly changing. Accept it.

 

[Althea]

Why should there be a special tax on the "ultra wealthy" on their "income/investments"?

Who said anything about a 'special' tax?

Tax rates for the uber wealthy were at an all time low when Bush signed the yacht tax. If he wanted to raise revenue, he should've raised the tax rates...which he ultimately did anyway..

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dix: "Outsourcing is not about increasing profits as much as decreasing cost. The two go hand in hand, but it is costs which keep increasing, not the need for greater profit. Wealthy owners already have wealth, why would they need more profit? "

You are one funny dude. Yep, the average business owner says to themselves, "I am making a profit and I'm wealthy so I won't try to make more. I'll keep producing my product just because I love people.".

That's not what I said. Let's set up the scenario... Richie Rich makes widgets. He has become a multi-gazillionaire selling said widgets at a 20% profit over total cost of production. The 20% profit rate has generated all his wealth. Why would Richie be interested in making a 22% profit rate? What would be his motivation? He already has wealth, he achieved it at 20%, and this provides him as much money as he can spend. Why would he not be perfectly content to continue making 20% and amassing more wealth with the formula? Why would he take the risk of messing up the formula, to gain more of something he doesn't really need? He knows that a 2% increase in his profits, means fewer consumers will buy his product, so he may not make as much actual money, at the higher profit rate. What motivation would he have to change this? If he is greedy and stupid at business, perhaps... but then Richie would probably not have gotten rich in the first place.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

the whole idea is to level the playing field. Unite the planet.

Again, this is a Liberal Utopian pipe dream. We will NEVER see a place and time, where all inhabitants of Earth share the exact same material wealth. It's not going to ever happen, because it can't happen, and it never has happened. We've tried all kinds of socialistic ideas to make it happen, and it still hasn't happened. Even if you could wave your magic Utopian wand and *poof* suddenly, all people have the same exact amount of wealth around the globe, within a decade, there would again be disparity of wealth. Why? Because certain people on our planet are better at making money than others. Certain people on our planet are incapable of self-discipline or lack entrepreneurial spirit. This is just the way God made us, and there isn't any political philosophy out there which will alleviate this fact of life.

 

[Althea]

That's not what I said. Let's set up the scenario... Richie Rich makes widgets. He has become a multi-gazillionaire selling said widgets at a 20% profit over total cost of production. The 20% profit rate has generated all his wealth. Why would Richie be interested in making a 22% profit rate? What would be his motivation? He already has wealth, he achieved it at 20%, and this provides him as much money as he can spend. Why would he not be perfectly content to continue making 20% and amassing more wealth with the formula? Why would he take the risk of messing up the formula, to gain more of something he doesn't really need? He knows that a 2% increase in his profits, means fewer consumers will buy his product, so he may not make as much actual money, at the higher profit rate. What motivation would he have to change this? If he is greedy and stupid at business, perhaps... but then Richie would probably not have gotten rich in the first place.

Outsourcing increases profits a lot more than 2 points

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Strawman? There are a multitude of reasons and I offered one.

How do you explain all the people who didn't imigrate to this country, born with nothing, and years later never became successful business men?"

It's obvious that you're uncomfortable with this and want to change the goal posts.

Apple = Strawman

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Outsourcing increases profits a lot more than 2 points

Again, it does not matter, outsourcing is not driven by something illogical. It makes no sense that the business needs to increase profit margin. It is COST which drives the business to find cheaper ways to produce their product. So that it doesn't effect current profit margin? Perhaps... but certainly not to increase an already successful profit margin, it makes no logical sense.

 

[apple0154]

That's not what I said. Let's set up the scenario... Richie Rich makes widgets. He has become a multi-gazillionaire selling said widgets at a 20% profit over total cost of production. The 20% profit rate has generated all his wealth. Why would Richie be interested in making a 22% profit rate? What would be his motivation? He already has wealth, he achieved it at 20%, and this provides him as much money as he can spend. Why would he not be perfectly content to continue making 20% and amassing more wealth with the formula? Why would he take the risk of messing up the formula, to gain more of something he doesn't really need? He knows that a 2% increase in his profits, means fewer consumers will buy his product, so he may not make as much actual money, at the higher profit rate. What motivation would he have to change this? If he is greedy and stupid at business, perhaps... but then Richie would probably not have gotten rich in the first place.

Ahhh, you're changing the dynamics. It's not that he doesn't want to make more money/profits. It's that he might not want to take the risk vs profit. BIG difference.