Obama: If you got a business, you didn't build that!

[SmarterthanYou]

Good point. Just like today people are homeless and hungry while others have more than they can possibly use.

so when you said that raiding wasn't a nice way to acquire things, you were just disappointed in that particular situation and you actually DO approve of violent raids to get what you want?

 

[apple0154]

so when you said that raiding wasn't a nice way to acquire things, you were just disappointed in that particular situation and you actually DO approve of violent raids to get what you want?

There's a difference between life and death situations and old fashioned greed.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

There's a difference between life and death situations and old fashioned greed.

so in life or death situations, your life is more important than the life of the person you're raiding?

 

[Damocles]

But that's impossible. I mean, how could they be rich without government to do it for them?

Apparently they know how to drink the water.

 

[ekg]

So, the argument is that because there are roads people succeed. What about all the other companies that didn't succeed and were on the same roads? Did those people just not use the road right? They drank the same water provided by the same beneficent government providing water for them to succeed, did they put it in the wrong glass?

When the successful businessman took out a loan, sometimes at very high interest, to start their business was it the government that took the risk for them? When they put a mortgage on their house to pay the payroll in the first few months, should they thank government for the water?

Did these people pay taxes to help build the roads, to create the infrastructure, or did they appear out of vacuum to start a business that government made happen because they provided roads?

How often have you ever heard a successful businessperson thanking government for their success because the roads they helped to build were there for them to use?

When Solyndra folded, after getting some of the 20% of the "stimulus" earmarked for Green Energy that actually was spent in the US, did they fold because the government didn't build good enough roads for them? Provide good enough police? The golden parachutes for their CEO was payed by the taxpayer that build the roads... but they didn't succeed because those same people that "made it happen" for the others weren't working hard enough? They just didn't know how to use the water?

would Donald Trump be the Donald, had he been born in Somali?

Would Bill Gates have invented the world (I know), had his garage been in Lybia?

Would the Koch bros. still have their fortune if they lived in Russia and were against the ruling party there?

Of course there are hard working people all over the globe taking risks, but America offers them more than they have there...you mock the clean water and safe roads, education, safety..but those are part of the reason people succeed here, it's part of the reason why we don't have outbreaks of different diseases and why we're educated.. hell we even pay for a mosquito truck to come around and spray the area to keep the biters down.. does that make Solyndra successful? No, but it makes the people who would buy it's products healthier, it makes the workers less likely to get malaria... and that benefits them..our mail system benefited them, our roads where the big rigs drove to deliver items benefited them.. but they also needed a whole other side of things to succeed.

Unless of course you think regular and unchecked outbreaks of dysentery and typhoid is good for employers and consumers?

It's because of our sanitation that we don't have those outbreaks like they do in other places. Rush Limbaugh can vomit his mind because someone paid that mosquito truck to kill the bug that would have given him west nile virus and someone else died for his right to free-speech. he made his brand a success, but he damn sure didn't make his free-speech.

because of many many people, we're not part of the Monarchy anymore. because of many other people our police are not Gestapo. Because of who knows how many, we have rights and fair courts. And because of some more,our schools teach a balanced and regulated curriculum where boys and girls can learn instead of only boys learning the Koran and girls getting firebombed for trying to read.

Your mocking is an insult to those who went before you. Do you not think Thomas Jefferson and George Washington sacrificed for you and everyone else? Do you negate their sacrifice as being beneficial to Solyndra and Apple and Bobby Welfare and Rich Richies? Kids aren't forced to work because of someone else, women can work because of another. Newt Gingrich didn't pave the road, nor build the school that educated him. Sarah Palin was admitted into 4 different colleges not because she crossed some hidden gender line that allowed all women to go to school, but because someone else did...and both are considered 'degreed' and 'educated' because their schools were here and not in some Caribbean slacker school.

Does any of that guarantee success? Nope. But it damn sure guarantee's that everyone in this country is starting with one hell of an advantage over someone starting out in Turkmenistan.

Why do you think people die to come here? Why do you think we're better? Why do you mock and roll your eyes at the ones before you who made it that way?

 

[Damocles]

would Donald Trump be the Donald, had he been born in Somali?

Would Bill Gates have invented the world (I know), had his garage been in Lybia?

Would the Koch bros. still have their fortune if they lived in Russia and were against the ruling party there?

Of course there are hard working people all over the globe taking risks, but America offers them more than they have there...you mock the clean water and safe roads, education, safety..but those are part of the reason people succeed here, it's part of the reason why we don't have outbreaks of different diseases and why we're educated.. hell we even pay for a mosquito truck to come around and spray the area to keep the biters down.. does that make Solyndra successful? No, but it makes the people who would buy it's products healthier, it makes the workers less likely to get malaria... and that benefits them..our mail system benefited them, our roads where the big rigs drove to deliver items benefited them.. but they also needed a whole other side of things to succeed.

Unless of course you think regular and unchecked outbreaks of dysentery and typhoid is good for employers and consumers?

It's because of our sanitation that we don't have those outbreaks like they do in other places. Rush Limbaugh can vomit his mind because someone paid that mosquito truck to kill the bug that would have given him west nile virus and someone else died for his right to free-speech. he made his brand a success, but he damn sure didn't make his free-speech.

because of many many people, we're not part of the Monarchy anymore. because of many other people our police are not Gestapo. Because of who knows how many, we have rights and fair courts. And because of some more,our schools teach a balanced and regulated curriculum where boys and girls can learn instead of only boys learning the Koran and girls getting firebombed for trying to read.

Your mocking is an insult to those who went before you. Do you not think Thomas Jefferson and George Washington sacrificed for you and everyone else? Do you negate their sacrifice as being beneficial to Solyndra and Apple and Bobby Welfare and Rich Richies? Kids aren't forced to work because of someone else, women can work because of another. Newt Gingrich didn't pave the road, nor build the school that educated him. Sarah Palin was admitted into 4 different colleges not because she crossed some hidden gender line that allowed all women to go to school, but because someone else did...and both are considered 'degreed' and 'educated' because their schools were here and not in some Caribbean slacker school.

Does any of that guarantee success? Nope. But it damn sure guarantee's that everyone in this country is starting with one hell of an advantage over someone starting out in Turkmenistan.

Why do you think people die to come here? Why do you think we're better? Why do you mock and roll your eyes at the ones before you who made it that way?

LOL. I don't. I simply ask you questions. Do you really believe that starting from exactly the same point, that the people who become successful do it because of the roads? So the people who aren't successful, starting from the same point, they just don't quite know how to drive right? They can't drink the water? They had the same people who "came before" to respect, but I guess that didn't soak in for the unsuccessful right? The same teacher, the same types of mentors, the same cops and firefighters, the same water...

But you know, If he has a business, the successful dude didn't build that. It wasn't because he was smart, or hardworking. It was because he knew how to drink that water right and had those cops... It wasn't the risks he took to build something, it was the magical water supply. It wasn't that he figured out how to make payroll in a shoestring budget and had to forgo paying himself for a while, the second mortgage he got to make that happen, the risks and the hard work... nope. It was the water.

 

[ekg]

Or you could acknowledge that people have made that argument in this very thread. That it was the water and the roads that made their success... that because there were cops provided for them they succeeded, not because they took risk... That the risk they took is minimal and shouldn't be considered because we paid for the water supply they use... I was told that the lemonade stand didn't "make it on their own" because the government provided the road they put their business on, and the water they used to mix lemonade... directly. Yet you didn't get all upset about supposed "mischaracterization" then... why not? Since it was a "mischaracterization" when I simply asked them questions about their assertions it must have been "mischaracterization" when somebody insisted that it was why those girls in Texas succeeded in their business...

These are the arguments made in this thread. If you want to get upset at "mischaracterization" then talk to the people who made the assertions.

no one has said successful people didn't take any risks.. nor have they said that those same people didn't accomplish their own sets of goals to succeed. no one had said that all you need to 'make it' in this country is clean water and a paved road and it's an extreme mis-characterization to say they did. It's very dishonest and beneath, what I assumed was, your intellect to break it down into something so flippant and microscopic.. But mostly, why is it the liberals who are always telling you how great this country is because of the people in this country and what all of our forefathers have done for us and you guys thinking eh, not so much I could have done it all on my own?

It's not just our clean water and paved roads that make Cubans dare to cross 90 miles of shark infested,stormy waters on a raft made of car parts to get here.. it's because as a whole, we're just better than the rest. and yes, that means our sanitation, our schools, our roads, our banking system or USDA meat and EPA air... if none of that stuff mattered, then people wouldn't die to come here... if it was all so easy-peasy, why doesn't every country have it all like us?

I didn't find your 7 sec video deceptive at first.. I do now because I see it's coming from the ignorant position that you did it all n your own and nothing before you mattered or helped. You created your own free speech, your own freedom of the press, your own roads to travel, your own education, your own medical community that created your own vaccinations.. you believe you are an island unto yourself that can invent,produce,sell and buy your own widget and still be successful because you're just that good..

well hey, guess what.. someone died for you to believe that.. and someone else made sure the government didn't break in your door for saying it out loud.. and even someone else created a chlorination technique that gave you sustainable water instead of a polluted river to dip out of,but don't worry, I'll appreciate them even if you won't.

 

[ekg]

LOL. I don't. I simply ask you questions. Do you really believe that starting from exactly the same point, that the people who become successful do it because of the roads? So the people who aren't successful, starting from the same point, they just don't quite know how to drive right? They can't drink the water? They had the same people who "came before" to respect, but I guess that didn't soak in for the unsuccessful right? The same teacher, the same types of mentors, the same cops and firefighters, the same water...

But you know, If he has a business, the successful dude didn't build that. It wasn't because he was smart, or hardworking. It was because he knew how to drink that water right and had those cops... It wasn't the risks he took to build something, it was the magical water supply. It wasn't that he figured out how to make payroll in a shoestring budget and had to forgo paying himself for a while, the second mortgage he got to make that happen, the risks and the hard work... nope. It was the water.

Let's try this.. you move to Syria and start a business... come back in a couple years and then mock what the American people have accomplished as a whole..

no wait, you won't do that will you.. you won't put your money where you mouth is and actually start from scratch with no benefit of those who became before you.. but you will insult all the blood, sweat and tears that made this country what it is won't you? Must be nice to live in a place where you can do that.

so why is it people come here? What is it we offer that Cuba doesn't?

and for the record..I never said that person didn't take a risk, nor did I say he didn't work his ass off.. I never said 'he didn't build it'.. I said he didn't do it all on his own... because as far as my history tells me.. everything that helped that person become a success was built into the system before he got there... and yes, that includes the water... he just built upon that already existing foundation.

 

[Damocles]

no one has said successful people didn't take any risks.. nor have they said that those same people didn't accomplish their own sets of goals to succeed. no one had said that all you need to 'make it' in this country is clean water and a paved road and it's an extreme mis-characterization to say they did. It's very dishonest and beneath, what I assumed was, your intellect to break it down into something so flippant and microscopic.. But mostly, why is it the liberals who are always telling you how great this country is because of the people in this country and what all of our forefathers have done for us and you guys thinking eh, not so much I could have done it all on my own?

It's not just our clean water and paved roads that make Cubans dare to cross 90 miles of shark infested,stormy waters on a raft made of car parts to get here.. it's because as a whole, we're just better than the rest. and yes, that means our sanitation, our schools, our roads, our banking system or USDA meat and EPA air... if none of that stuff mattered, then people wouldn't die to come here... if it was all so easy-peasy, why doesn't every country have it all like us?

I didn't find your 7 sec video deceptive at first.. I do now because I see it's coming from the ignorant position that you did it all n your own and nothing before you mattered or helped. You created your own free speech, your own freedom of the press, your own roads to travel, your own education, your own medical community that created your own vaccinations.. you believe you are an island unto yourself that can invent,produce,sell and buy your own widget and still be successful because you're just that good..

well hey, guess what.. someone died for you to believe that.. and someone else made sure the government didn't break in your door for saying it out loud.. and even someone else created a chlorination technique that gave you sustainable water instead of a polluted river to dip out of,but don't worry, I'll appreciate them even if you won't.

My roads are not paved, the government didn't provide my road, my water is not chlorinated, not everybody lives like you do.

That somebody died for my freedoms doesn't mean that they built my business or assumed my risk. The idea that somebody bought my product or gave me that loan doesn't change that it was my risk, my work, my success. The idea that because I took the same infrastructure and made a success of it while another failed means that I should be punished for my success because you "helped" me is inane.

I paid the taxes that built that infrastructure, as much as anybody else. I was part of the "we" who "helped"... when I become a success it shouldn't mean that I should be punished for that success or demonized as part of an "evil" 1%.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

As I said "a lot fewer". A lot fewer rich than if there were amenities like roads and running water and a decent communication system. Just consider what the internet has done for established businesses and, more relevant to this discussion, how one-person "hobbies" have ballooned into thriving enterprises. Where would eBay be if there wasn't any USPS?

I think one way Obama's comment has been misinterpeted is it's not just the government that has helped people. It's other people and businesses that have helped. Where would any mail order business be today without credit cards? It would take weeks for transactions to be completed as checks would have to clear the banks.

A quick summation. Let's say I want to open a mail order business. I need a credit card company and I need a transportation system. I will be using the inventions/businesses that other people operate so it's reasonable to say they helped me. If I want to advertize locally I need a newspaper business or a printing shop to make fliers.

That is the way I interpret what Obama said.

Well should the government open print shops and publish newspapers? Open credit companies and build infrastructure? If that's what is needed to build a successful business, then government should provide it for us, right? That is what you're beliefs are, right?

Here's where I think you and Obama have accidentally stumbled on a point you didn't intend to make....

Successful business breeds successful business. It feeds off of itself. Whenever this business prospers, that business prospers. When my business succeeds my supplier is successful, and my banker, and my local convenience store owner. Whenever we have governmental policies which are IMPEDING economic prosperity, and the ability for commerce to happen (which involves rich people succeeding)... the whole darn thing begins to grind to a halt. My business folds, my supplier has to scale back... people lose jobs... fewer jobs are available. It's a dirty snowball, and it continues to grow until you remove the impeding obstacles and enable economic prosperity to flourish.

.....but like I said.... I don't think that was the point you or Obama intended to make.

 

[Althea]

Sorry, but what I said REJECTS Obama's point. History REJECTS Obama's point. The Erie Canal wasn't an idea of government, they rejected the idea, said it was stupid, refused to spend any money on it for years and years. If "corporations" had been removed from political influence like you idiots want, the government would have never built the Erie Canal, and New York would never have become the world center of trade.

And yet, if not for the govt. the Erie canal wouldn't exist. Know why?
Cuz there's no profit motive.

And ultimately the funding came from capitalists who profited and paid tax. The government has no source of income. It DOES matter where the impetus comes from, that is the whole entire argument here! You and Obama are saying we need government to provide the impetus, while me an others are saying... No, you don't... and here is historic accounts to prove it!

Nonsense. What was the impetus for the internet? Satellites? Computers? Obama never said that we need govt. for impetus. You ought to listen to what he actually said, before you make shit up, and offer it as fact.

We need the govt. to fund the projects that the private sector can't/won't. The issue is about Romney's insistence that taxes are bad. You just proved that taxes are not only good...they're necessary. And you provided historic accts. to prove it!

Again, these things are ultimately paid for by capitalists.

Capitalists haven't paid taxes in over a decade. That's the point...it's time to collect again.

But the government didn't think it was a good idea, they thought it was a STUPID idea that wouldn't work! CAPITALISTS thought it was a good idea.

But Capitalists refused to fund it.

What the hell do you mean it doesn't work that way, of course it does! Government doesn't provide a thing to make profits, and are totally NOT needed for that. They get their money from taxes on the profits, therefore, they DO need to get out of the way, and let capitalists profit.

Wrong. Now they have to pay for services rendered. Same as every family does. There's plenty of profit to be made anyway. You do realize that taxes are only paid on profits?

Well sorry you have trouble understanding this, but the government didn't build the roads. Government has no source of income, they can't fund a damn thing. We the People have incomes, businesses and industries make profits, and we pay taxes to the government, their revenue comes from our pockets, they don't create or produce anything.

And 'you' are trying to argue against paying those taxes. That's the point.

 

[Althea]

Well should the government open print shops and publish newspapers? Open credit companies and build infrastructure? If that's what is needed to build a successful business, then government should provide it for us, right? That is what you're beliefs are, right?

Here's where I think you and Obama have accidentally stumbled on a point you didn't intend to make....

Successful business breeds successful business. It feeds off of itself. Whenever this business prospers, that business prospers. When my business succeeds my supplier is successful, and my banker, and my local convenience store owner. Whenever we have governmental policies which are IMPEDING economic prosperity, and the ability for commerce to happen (which involves rich people succeeding)... the whole darn thing begins to grind to a halt. My business folds, my supplier has to scale back... people lose jobs... fewer jobs are available. It's a dirty snowball, and it continues to grow until you remove the impeding obstacles and enable economic prosperity to flourish.

.....but like I said.... I don't think that was the point you or Obama intended to make.

Great for China. Not so good for this country.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

And yet, if not for the govt. the Erie canal wouldn't exist. Know why?
Cuz there's no profit motive.

This has almost become as silly as arguing with a child. What in heaven's name are you talking about here? Did you hear grown-ups using these words, and thought you could sound smart if you did the same? What you're saying doesn't make sense.

Again... The Erie Canal did not exist... It was the brainchild of a Capitalist, who wanted to be able to capitalize on the fur trade to the west and expedient shipping to New Orleans, in order to profit and get rich. The Federal government REFUSED to do this. (If that word is too difficult to grasp, let me know?) Eventually, the capitalists grew in number and gained enough "corrupt and evil corporate influence in government" to find an advocate, Governor Clinton, who took enormous political heat for his support of the idea. Again... NOT a popular idea with Government, or the people. After decades, they finally convinced the State of NY to fund the project, which was paid for by the capitalists eventually.

Nonsense. What was the impetus for the internet? Satellites? Computers? Obama never said that we need govt. for impetus. You ought to listen to what he actually said, before you make shit up, and offer it as fact.

The impetus IS the debate. Capitalism ultimately PAYS FOR everything. You can't cite one thing that is purchased by someone other than a capitalist. IF the government acts and provides the impetus, the capitalist still ultimately pays for that, in the form of taxes. If a consumer purchases something, the money came from a capitalist who paid them to work, or from the government entitlement afforded by capitalists who paid taxes. The government has no other source of revenue besides capitalists, and taxpayers who earn incomes from capitalists. So the impetus is EVERYTHING in this debate.... whether the impetus should come naturally, at the behest of capitalists, (like the Erie Canal) or whether it should come from government, deciding what we need and don't need.

We need the govt. to fund the projects that the private sector can't/won't. The issue is about Romney's insistence that taxes are bad. You just proved that taxes are not only good...they're necessary. And you provided historic accts. to prove it!

We need the government to assist capitalist in funding projects important to capitalism. Like Keystone.

I didn't prove "taxes are good" and have no idea where that came from. In the historic example, capitalists lobbied a reluctant government who said the idea was insane and refused to do it. Ironically, it is YOUR position that 'corporations aren't people' and shouldn't be able to lobby for such things. But that's exactly what happened with the Erie Canal, corporate capitalists wanted to exploit the fur trade in the north and gain a valuable quick trade route to New Orleans. After decades of effort, they finally succeeded in getting government to build it, and the capitalists who used the canal paid for it over the next years. Now what it has ultimately meant for New York, is that it turned NY into the world center of trade. Wouldn't have happened if not for Capitalists, wouldn't have been funded by ANY government, if not FOR capitalists.

Capitalists haven't paid taxes in over a decade. That's the point...it's time to collect again.

Really? I beg to differ. In fact, I challenge you to prove that capitalist haven't to some degree, been responsible for every penny paid in tax.

 

[Althea]

My roads are not paved, the government didn't provide my road, my water is not chlorinated, not everybody lives like you do.

That somebody died for my freedoms doesn't mean that they built my business or assumed my risk. The idea that somebody bought my product or gave me that loan doesn't change that it was my risk, my work, my success. The idea that because I took the same infrastructure and made a success of it while another failed means that I should be punished for my success because you "helped" me is inane.

I paid the taxes that built that infrastructure, as much as anybody else. I was part of the "we" who "helped"... when I become a success it shouldn't mean that I should be punished for that success or demonized as part of an "evil" 1%.

Who said anything about punishing you?

That's the problem here. Taxation does not equal punishment. All of your startup costs were paid for by the taxpayer via deductions.

 

[Althea]

This has almost become as silly as arguing with a child. What in heaven's name are you talking about here? Did you hear grown-ups using these words, and thought you could sound smart if you did the same? What you're saying doesn't make sense.

Funny, I could say the same about you.

Again... The Erie Canal did not exist... It was the brainchild of a Capitalist, who wanted to be able to capitalize on the fur trade to the west and expedient shipping to New Orleans, in order to profit and get rich. The Federal government REFUSED to do this. (If that word is too difficult to grasp, let me know?) Eventually, the capitalists grew in number and gained enough "corrupt and evil corporate influence in government" to find an advocate, Governor Clinton, who took enormous political heat for his support of the idea. Again... NOT a popular idea with Government, or the people. After decades, they finally convinced the State of NY to fund the project, which was paid for by the capitalists eventually.

Bottom line....no govt., no Erie canal. Can I make it much simpler? Now there are extremely successful businesses as a result. And Obama's point stands...those businesses had help, and his name is the Govt.

.

The impetus IS the debate. Capitalism ultimately PAYS FOR everything. You can't cite one thing that is purchased by someone other than a capitalist. IF the government acts and provides the impetus, the capitalist still ultimately pays for that, in the form of taxes. If a consumer purchases something, the money came from a capitalist who paid them to work, or from the government entitlement afforded by capitalists who paid taxes. The government has no other source of revenue besides capitalists, and taxpayers who earn incomes from capitalists. So the impetus is EVERYTHING in this debate.... whether the impetus should come naturally, at the behest of capitalists, (like the Erie Canal) or whether it should come from government, deciding what we need and don't need.

Again, you bolster Obama's point. It's a perfect system when we all work together. Despite what Romney claims.

We need the government to assist capitalist in funding projects important to capitalism. Like Keystone.

Except Keystone yields no benefit for this country.

I didn't prove "taxes are good"

Yea...you did. Several times in 2 posts. Thanks for that.

and have no idea where that came from.

Reality?

In the historic example, capitalists lobbied a reluctant government who said the idea was insane and refused to do it.

So why didn't they just do it without the govt?

Ironically, it is YOUR position that 'corporations aren't people' and shouldn't be able to lobby for such things.

Incorrect. They shouldn't be able to purchase legislation. Big difference.

But that's exactly what happened with the Erie Canal

Nope...it's different.

,

corporate capitalists wanted to exploit the fur trade in the north and gain a valuable quick trade route to New Orleans. After decades of effort, they finally succeeded in getting government to build it, and the capitalists who used the canal paid for it over the next years. Now what it has ultimately meant for New York, is that it turned NY into the world center of trade. Wouldn't have happened if not for Capitalists, wouldn't have been funded by ANY government, if not FOR capitalists.

And there wouldn't have been any Capitalists reaping the rewards, without help from the govt.

Really? I beg to differ. In fact, I challenge you to prove that capitalist haven't to some degree, been responsible for every penny paid in tax.

Take a look around.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Funny, I could say the same about you.

No you couldn't because I am using phrases and terminology that does make sense, while you are saying stupid sounding shit. Or maybe I should correct myself, you CAN say it, and no doubt, you WILL say it, but that doesn't make it true, we already know this.

Bottom line....no govt., no Erie canal. Can I make it much simpler? Now there are extremely successful businesses as a result. And Obama's point stands...those businesses had help, and his name is the Govt.

No one that I am aware of is arguing for "No government" ...did you think that was what Republicans or the right wanted? Seriously?

If Capitalists had no influence in politics, as you desire... and if we relied solely on The Government to decide for us... there would have NEVER BEEN an Erie Canal!

.Again, you bolster Obama's point. It's a perfect system when we all work together. Despite what Romney claims.

I've not bolstered Obama's point or refuted Romney's. It's not a perfect system, there is no "perfect" system. But the concept of grass roots movements from people (and capitalists especially) to persuade state and local government to fund projects conducive to economic prosperity, is the foundation of free enterprise and a free market system. That is INDEED how it's supposed to work, not the other way around, dictated by Central Planning.

Except Keystone yields no benefit for this country.

Opponents of the Erie Canal said the exact same thing. For decades! The Federal government REFUSED to participate!

Yea...you did. Several times in 2 posts. Thanks for that.

Nope, I didn't. Do you understand how the Erie Canal was paid for? The state put up the bonds for the project, which had to be paid back, with interest. The users of the canal paid a fee, and that went into a fund that paid the state back every penny they invested. No "taxes" were paid by the people. The real windfall for the state was immeasurable, it turned NYC into the #1 world center of trade. Without the Erie Canal, New York would have been no different than Miami or New Orleans, in fact, New Orleans might actually have become a larger city. It was the Erie Canal that opened NY's port to the rest of the world westward. It would have NEVER happened if not for Capitalist who lobbied state government.

So why didn't they just do it without the govt?

First and foremost, because it required purchasing a 300+ mile strip of land across the state, and corporations can't use eminent domain to do that. Remember, at the time, this was the largest engineering project Americans had ever proposed. This was EARLY 1800's! There wasn't cranes and trucks, just men and muscle.

Incorrect. They shouldn't be able to purchase legislation. Big difference.

But that is hyperbole, no one purchases legislation. IF that is happening, you need to bring proof, and I will join you in denouncing it and demanding people be sent to prison for it. Capitalists and corporations did indeed INFLUENCE politicians to get them to fund the Erie Canal project, and perhaps some of it was under the table and corrupt or whatever, the state agreed to fund the project, and lucky for them, because it MADE them!

Nope...it's different.

Nope... it's not. Go read the history!

And there wouldn't have been any Capitalists reaping the rewards, without help from the govt.

Again.... No one is proposing we disband the Government, are they????

Take a look around.

I AM! THAT'S WHY I ASKED YOU! EVERYWHERE I LOOK, I SEE PEOPLE WHO HAVE INCOME DERIVED FROM A CAPITALIST OR A GOVT CHECK DERIVED FROM TAXES PAID BY CAPITALISTS OR FROM MONEY THAT WAS INCOME PAID BY A CAPITALIST! I ASKED YOU TO SHOW ME SOME TAX CAPITALISTS DIDN"T ULTIMATELY PAY, AND YOU OFFERED ZILCH... WHICH IS ALSO THE SUM OF EVERYTHING YOU HAVE OFFERED THUS FAR!

 

[Damocles]

Who said anything about punishing you?

That's the problem here. Taxation does not equal punishment. All of your startup costs were paid for by the taxpayer via deductions.

The same deductions as the companies that failed. You get nothing that the failures don't also get. Shoot some of the failures get a portion of the Green Energy grants (that small 20% of those that actually were spent in the US) and fail. I didn't get that.

For your success, hiring employees, etc. fighting through the bad times, finding ways to meet payroll, for all the risk you take you receive people who tell you that you aren't paying your "fair share" when you (and others who succeed with you) pay over 70% of all federal income taxes. You get people who tell you that you have become "out of touch with America" because you succeeded, you get people who tell you that what you earn should be shared with those who have not earned it, and you get somebody who tells you that what you have built isn't even yours. You didn't build that...

You participate in society, pay your share of the taxes for the infrastructure you support, do everything right and some idiot tells you that your property isn't something you built... And to support that they tell you that you drink water?

First, none of the things they relate are part of the Federal spending... Roads are paid for locally, water too... Those who make more pay more taxes at higher rates but never their "fair share"... those employees are educated on the local dime...

What level of taxation will be "fair"? What part of what I earn should be mine?

One man is running on an attempt to demonize those who have reached the American Dream, another is running in support of the American Dream.

 

[apple0154]

so in life or death situations, your life is more important than the life of the person you're raiding?

What does the person's life have to do with raiding. There's no need for killing.

 

[apple0154]

Well should the government open print shops and publish newspapers? Open credit companies and build infrastructure? If that's what is needed to build a successful business, then government should provide it for us, right? That is what you're beliefs are, right?

In a manner of speaking, yes. If there is something major missing that would greatly improve many businesses then the government should look into it. Just like it looked into supplying rural electricity.

Here's where I think you and Obama have accidentally stumbled on a point you didn't intend to make....

Successful business breeds successful business. It feeds off of itself. Whenever this business prospers, that business prospers. When my business succeeds my supplier is successful, and my banker, and my local convenience store owner. Whenever we have governmental policies which are IMPEDING economic prosperity, and the ability for commerce to happen (which involves rich people succeeding)... the whole darn thing begins to grind to a halt. My business folds, my supplier has to scale back... people lose jobs... fewer jobs are available. It's a dirty snowball, and it continues to grow until you remove the impeding obstacles and enable economic prosperity to flourish.

.....but like I said.... I don't think that was the point you or Obama intended to make.

There is no way a healthy population will hinder business so all this nonsense about ObamaCare ruining business is just that, nonsense. Every business is obliged to co-operate so every business is still on an equal footing. Every business is obliged to obey environmental laws. If a business can not operate without polluting then it is not a successful business.

 

[Althea]

For your success, hiring employees, etc. fighting through the bad times, finding ways to meet payroll, for all the risk you take you receive people who tell you that you aren't paying your "fair share" when you (and others who succeed with you) pay over 70% of all federal income taxes. You get people who tell you that you have become "out of touch with America" because you succeeded, you get people who tell you that what you earn should be shared with those who have not earned it, and you get somebody who tells you that what you have built isn't even yours. You didn't build that...

No business starts by hiring anyone that they don't need. Typically, they start small, and grow in size as they become successful. Nobody ever demonized those who have succeeded by working hard, and building a business.

That is, unless you started/grew a predatory hedge fund business. Or a private equity company that takes govt. subsidies, and outsources labor to another country. There's a world of difference between a wealthy factory owner, and a wealthy Wall St. whore.

You participate in society, pay your share of the taxes for the infrastructure you support, do everything right and some idiot tells you that your property isn't something you built... And to support that they tell you that you drink water?

I've never heard any idiots making that claim. Of course, Romney's attack ads make it seem as if Obama said that, but you'd have to be pretty ignorant to believe anything his selective editing offers.

Karma took care of the trash Breitbart. Romney's campaign staff ought to take heed.

First, none of the things they relate are part of the Federal spending... Roads are paid for locally, water too... Those who make more pay more taxes at higher rates but never their "fair share"... those employees are educated on the local dime...

Not quite accurate. Before the Bush tax cuts, Fed. grants were regularly doled out to states for such projects. Likewise, many who make the most pay a severely reduced tax rate through creative accounting. Most of the wealthiest pay 15% or less.

What level of taxation will be "fair"? What part of what I earn should be mine?

Depends how you earned it.

One man is running on an attempt to demonize those who have reached the American Dream, another is running in support of the American Dream.

Nonsense.