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

Dixie said:
The problem with Liberals is, they don't understand 'trickle down' economics. It has nothing to do with 'throwing scraps your way' and everything to do with entrepreneurial freedom. If you don't like scraps, you can make your own business to provide whatever level of service or product the people desire, so you don't have to settle for scraps. When government controls those means and makes entrepreneurial freedom impossible, we depend on the government for scraps. The major downside to this is, we can't do anything about the government scraps, because government is not in business to satisfy the customer, it doesn't have to. We can take our scraps and be grateful, and hope that maybe the scraps will be enough. Historically speaking, government scraps have never been enough.

"Placating the rich" is not what you are doing when you enable people with the capital to invest and take risks to do so. What you ARE doing, is enabling some people to have more than scraps, to have a real paying job with a good company, to be a part of something, to make a product or provide a service that people need and want, because they desire more than scraps.

When you successfully destroy Capitalism and free markets, we will indeed suffer a terrible fate. When the Socialist State controls the distribution of our scraps and not Capitalists, and you start bitching and moaning about your scraps, do you know what generally happens to you then? Unlike the corporations who have to tolerate your freedom of speech and relentless attacks on them, the State doesn't have to put up with you. I could post pictures of mass graves from Socialist failures, but I think you get the idea.
Click to expand...

Entrepreneurial freedom has led to everything from causing cancer in citizens from water pollution (remember Demi Moore in the role explaining how boobs are an asset to reporters) ;) to a financial meltdown and you question government regulations. As for bitching at companies has any company helped an unemployed citizen? Helped people save money on interest rates? Showed concern over medical care?

I don't know why on earth anyone would think that about Republicans...

GWB became the first president in history to declare a national disaster in a place BEFORE the disaster happened. Did you know that?

As people suffered inside the Superdome, hundreds of FEMA trucks were parked on the side of the interstate outside New Orleans, unable to get in because the state would not give the okay to allow traffic on the roads inside the city. Did you know that?

Five days before Katrina struck the coast, Bush had already contacted the Gov. of LA, to find out what resources were needed from a Federal level to assist, and received NO response. Did you know that?

For MONTHS after Katrina, temporary mobile housing units provided by FEMA sat on boxcars outside New Orleans in the sun, until their frames warped from being strapped down, rendering them unusable... WHY? Because of the ordinance in the city against mobile housing. Did you know that?
Click to expand...

Did you know that Bush/the Feds could have helped and dealt with the consequences later? Is the President supposed to sit back and watch people die because some govenor doesn't respond or a city has an ordinance? It's ludicrous.
 
apple0154 said:
Entrepreneurial freedom has led to everything from causing cancer in citizens from water pollution (remember Demi Moore in the role explaining how boobs are an asset to reporters) ;) to a financial meltdown and you question government regulations. As for bitching at companies has any company helped an unemployed citizen? Helped people save money on interest rates? Showed concern over medical care?



Did you know that Bush/the Feds could have helped and dealt with the consequences later? Is the President supposed to sit back and watch people die because some govenor doesn't respond or a city has an ordinance? It's ludicrous.
Click to expand...

The governor and the ordinances didn't matter one whit at that point. It was a declared National Disaster thereby giving all control and responsibility to the Federal Government. The catch 22 myth is just that. The bushies like to use that to excuse their own lack of leadership and dereliction of duties. Total fail on the part of the gwb administration. Period.
 
Gatorman said:
The governor and the ordinances didn't matter one whit at that point. It was a declared National Disaster thereby giving all control and responsibility to the Federal Government. The catch 22 myth is just that. The bushies like to use that to excuse their own lack of leadership and dereliction of duties. Total fail on the part of the gwb administration. Period.
Click to expand...

Exactly! When the lives of citizens are at stake for someone to say the Feds have no jurisdiction or authority is complete nonsense. If the local folks can't do the job the Federal Government has every right to protect the lives of US citizens.
 
apple0154 said:
Exactly! When the lives of citizens are at stake for someone to say the Feds have no jurisdiction or authority is complete nonsense. If the local folks can't do the job the Federal Government has every right to protect the lives of US citizens.
Click to expand...

Every right and every responsibility by whatever means necessary and available.
 
apple0154 said:
Entrepreneurial freedom has led to everything from causing cancer in citizens from water pollution (remember Demi Moore in the role explaining how boobs are an asset to reporters) ;) to a financial meltdown and you question government regulations. As for bitching at companies has any company helped an unemployed citizen? Helped people save money on interest rates? Showed concern over medical care?
Click to expand...

I have no idea why a Hollywood actress has anything to do with entrepreneurial freedom.

"has any company helped unemployed, interest rates, medical care?"

YOU BET THEY HAVE! Without the company, people have no jobs, which makes them unemployed. Without jobs, they can't pay off loans, which causes higher interest rates. Without companies providing jobs with company-paid health care insurance, most couldn't afford it.

Did you know that Bush/the Feds could have helped and dealt with the consequences later? Is the President supposed to sit back and watch people die because some govenor doesn't respond or a city has an ordinance? It's ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Again... No they couldn't do more than the constitution says the Federal government has the authority to do. There is a protocol, and a reason for it.

Since you are big on analogous stories, let's have one here... Let's say Katrina is bearing down on NO, and the local and state engineers are looking at the levees, which they care for everyday and know all about, and in their view, the levees are in danger of breaching... so the local engineers have decided it's best to evacuate the 9th ward and put sandbags up, for when the levee breaks. Enter the Fed, and their representative from Washington D.C. ---In HIS expert opinion, the levees are just fine, the Corp of Engineers says they should withstand this event, and HE thinks resources would be better spent elsewhere. IF we followed YOUR thinking, the Fed trumps the local and state officials, and they do as the Fed says, which results in thousands dying from the floods. Dozens of examples exist, where state and local officials are better equipped to make the call on things, because it's what they work with everyday, and what they know and understand... whereas, a federal government official has no idea. In the scenario above... The state engineer tells the Fed guy he is full of shit, and the levees must be secured and people evacuated immediately... the Fed guy just laughs at him and says, "this is Ne Orleans, no one here voted for the president, so we don't really care if they die! Now-- go make me some coffee!"

You want to make the false assumption that the Federal government somehow has a magic cape, or can prevent natural disasters from happening. Or at the very least, has more expertise in dealing with things than state and local government. None of these is true, the Federal government officials are just as likely to be incompetent and make mistakes. Hurricanes are not more fearful of people who work for the Federal government. In most cases, the state and local government understands MORE than the Fed about certain local aspects they deal with on a daily basis. This is why, in our system, the STATE government has ultimate control and authority, and the FED is supposed to be there in a support role to the state, when requested. The Feds make Federal resources available to the state, but the State calls the shots. That is how it has always been, and always was, up until Katrina, when Liberals saw a political opportunity.
 
Dixie said:
I have no idea why a Hollywood actress has anything to do with entrepreneurial freedom.

"has any company helped unemployed, interest rates, medical care?"

YOU BET THEY HAVE! Without the company, people have no jobs, which makes them unemployed. Without jobs, they can't pay off loans, which causes higher interest rates. Without companies providing jobs with company-paid health care insurance, most couldn't afford it.



Again... No they couldn't do more than the constitution says the Federal government has the authority to do. There is a protocol, and a reason for it.

Since you are big on analogous stories, let's have one here... Let's say Katrina is bearing down on NO, and the local and state engineers are looking at the levees, which they care for everyday and know all about, and in their view, the levees are in danger of breaching... so the local engineers have decided it's best to evacuate the 9th ward and put sandbags up, for when the levee breaks. Enter the Fed, and their representative from Washington D.C. ---In HIS expert opinion, the levees are just fine, the Corp of Engineers says they should withstand this event, and HE thinks resources would be better spent elsewhere. IF we followed YOUR thinking, the Fed trumps the local and state officials, and they do as the Fed says, which results in thousands dying from the floods. Dozens of examples exist, where state and local officials are better equipped to make the call on things, because it's what they work with everyday, and what they know and understand... whereas, a federal government official has no idea. In the scenario above... The state engineer tells the Fed guy he is full of shit, and the levees must be secured and people evacuated immediately... the Fed guy just laughs at him and says, "this is Ne Orleans, no one here voted for the president, so we don't really care if they die! Now-- go make me some coffee!"

You want to make the false assumption that the Federal government somehow has a magic cape, or can prevent natural disasters from happening. Or at the very least, has more expertise in dealing with things than state and local government. None of these is true, the Federal government officials are just as likely to be incompetent and make mistakes. Hurricanes are not more fearful of people who work for the Federal government. In most cases, the state and local government understands MORE than the Fed about certain local aspects they deal with on a daily basis. This is why, in our system, the STATE government has ultimate control and authority, and the FED is supposed to be there in a support role to the state, when requested. The Feds make Federal resources available to the state, but the State calls the shots. That is how it has always been, and always was, up until Katrina, when Liberals saw a political opportunity.
Click to expand...

Liberals saw a political opportunity? You are a buffoon. The pukes were were screaming from the mountaintops that finally they could make New Orleans a red city!!!!! The liberals were scrambling for some kind of help down there. You are indeed a total failure.
 
Gatorman said:
Liberals saw a political opportunity? You are a buffoon. The pukes were were screaming from the mountaintops that finally they could make New Orleans a red city!!!!! The liberals were scrambling for some kind of help down there. You are indeed a total failure.
Click to expand...

x10
 
Obama's got to be doing real good if the teabaggers have to dredge up stuff from ten years ago to find something to blame on the commie pinko fag liberals.
 
WinterBorn said:
I am glad you have no need for anything the gov't provides. While I am confused about how you get online, the fact that you don't make use of the clean water, food mostly free from harmful substances and don't have any need of the benefits outlined in the article you quoted.

Your ridiculous reply, while amusing, is in no way like the examples given in the quoted post. Most of us haven't availed ourselves of an abortion or bought a Volt. But all of us have benefited from the work of "liberals" and gov't services.
Click to expand...

The question is whether those things could be provided without gobblement. The answer is yes. I could get clean water without gobblement. I could get safe food without gobblement. I could have safe prescriptions without gobblement. In fact I would argue that the FDA actually causes needless suffering. Did you know that aspirin could not make it through the FDA approval process? So spare me the "how would we ever get by without gobblement". That is not to say we need no government. That is a false choice painted by statist left wingers when people point out the present day gobblement is large, obtrusive and inefficient and meddles in things it ought not meddle. Sticking to the outlined powers defined by the US Constitution would be fine by me
 
Gatorman said:
The governor and the ordinances didn't matter one whit at that point. It was a declared National Disaster thereby giving all control and responsibility to the Federal Government. The catch 22 myth is just that. The bushies like to use that to excuse their own lack of leadership and dereliction of duties. Total fail on the part of the gwb administration. Period.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that any President can just declare a national disaster and that gives him powers over and above those proscribed by law? You do realize that there are federal laws prohibiting the federal government from just taking over a state don't you? You do know that the Feds just can't drop the military in a state on an whim right? Please tell me you know that? Or do you think laws can be waived at te whim of a President. Oh wait, you supported OWEdummys failure to enforce immigration laws so injust answered my own question
 
Dixie said:
I have no idea why a Hollywood actress has anything to do with entrepreneurial freedom.
Click to expand...

Didn't you see the Erin Brockovich movie?

activist-brockovich-erin-brockovich7858h.jpg


images


Check out from 1:00 to 1:10. This is not a Liberal site so clicking on it is safe. :)

The boss (Ed): "What makes you think you can just walk in there and find what you need?"
Brockovich (Julia Roberts): "They're called boobs, Ed."

In case you need a little background info/context regarding boobsI direct your attention to this video.


"has any company helped unemployed, interest rates, medical care?"

YOU BET THEY HAVE! Without the company, people have no jobs, which makes them unemployed. Without jobs, they can't pay off loans, which causes higher interest rates. Without companies providing jobs with company-paid health care insurance, most couldn't afford it.
Click to expand...

They aren't doing it to help the people. They are doing it to help themselves and even if they were doing it to help the people that doesn't give them the right to poison other people or steal their money.
Again... No they couldn't do more than the constitution says the Federal government has the authority to do. There is a protocol, and a reason for it.

Since you are big on analogous stories, let's have one here... Let's say Katrina is bearing down on NO, and the local and state engineers are looking at the levees, which they care for everyday and know all about, and in their view, the levees are in danger of breaching... so the local engineers have decided it's best to evacuate the 9th ward and put sandbags up, for when the levee breaks. Enter the Fed, and their representative from Washington D.C. ---In HIS expert opinion, the levees are just fine, the Corp of Engineers says they should withstand this event, and HE thinks resources would be better spent elsewhere. IF we followed YOUR thinking, the Fed trumps the local and state officials, and they do as the Fed says, which results in thousands dying from the floods. Dozens of examples exist, where state and local officials are better equipped to make the call on things, because it's what they work with everyday, and what they know and understand... whereas, a federal government official has no idea. In the scenario above... The state engineer tells the Fed guy he is full of shit, and the levees must be secured and people evacuated immediately... the Fed guy just laughs at him and says, "this is Ne Orleans, no one here voted for the president, so we don't really care if they die! Now-- go make me some coffee!"

You want to make the false assumption that the Federal government somehow has a magic cape, or can prevent natural disasters from happening. Or at the very least, has more expertise in dealing with things than state and local government. None of these is true, the Federal government officials are just as likely to be incompetent and make mistakes. Hurricanes are not more fearful of people who work for the Federal government. In most cases, the state and local government understands MORE than the Fed about certain local aspects they deal with on a daily basis. This is why, in our system, the STATE government has ultimate control and authority, and the FED is supposed to be there in a support role to the state, when requested. The Feds make Federal resources available to the state, but the State calls the shots. That is how it has always been, and always was, up until Katrina, when Liberals saw a political opportunity.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about BEFORE an event occurs. I'm talking about rescue AFTER an event occurs. As Gatorman notes in msg #66,
(The government has) every right and every responsibility by whatever means necessary and available.
Click to expand...

As for the Liberals seeing a political opportunity that's exactly why I am a Liberal. If saving lives is considered a political opportunity by a party count me as a member. :)

Regarding analogous stories here's one to help you differentiate between someone helping and someone doing something for their own benefit. Many years ago during my semi-hippy days I had a Chevy van. I left work around 4 pm (8 - 4 shift) and there had been a huge snow storm all day and it was still snowing. I noticed the busses were not running on time and some were stuck. So, as I approached a bus stop I asked if anyone needed a ride telling them the direction I was going. The first stop I picked up a couple of people. The next stop I picked up a few more. There were no seats in the back of the van so some sat on the carpeted floor and others just stood sort of bent over.

I had six or seven people at one time. When I had to change direction on my way home some got out and others got in, as room permitted. They were all thanking me for picking them up but I explained to them they were helping me get home. The streets had not been plowed and the empty van would just spin it's tires but the weight of the people held the van on the street enabling me to make it to the highway. So, while I was helping the people that was not the primary objective. I was helping myself.

The same applies to companies. The people being helped is simply a by-product of them helping the company. Government help does not depend on one helping the government. Do try to learn the difference.
 
Why the hell is it we are even still listening to you people again?

Here, the brightest minds of Liberalism can't seem to manage to make their arguments without using liberal propaganda and HOLLYWOOD!:orang:
 
Derp Derp said:
Yea? Kiss my ass. I see that bull shit all the time at work. The "Talent" who consist of a group of assholes who's daddys sent them to Harvard earn 130 times what the typical engineer, systems analyist, chemist and accuntant makes and they only work a 20 hour week cause they have personal business interest they need to take care of (something I'd get fired for) and what do they produce? Well they know somebody who knows somebody on WallStreet and K-Street. So who are the makers and who are the takers?

So fuck you. I work my ass off and I produce and god damnit I'm going to fight like hell to earn the most value for my productive work and if you don't like it fuck you get out of my way and go lay your lame line of shit on someone else.
Click to expand...

you sound like a free rider. jus sayin
 
I have my own business and I did not build it alone.

My Grandparents ensured I got my undergraduate degree debt free.
My father lent me about $18,000 for my education.
The Federal Government, via the student loan program, enabled me to borrow about $80,000 for school.
I gained my experience working for the State of Florida as a Prosecutor.
I drive to my office on public roads.
My clients drive here on public roads.
My profession is regulated by the State Supreme Court.
When a Hurricane destroyed my first office, Federal Disaster Aid helped me remain in business.
 
Jarod said:
I have my own business and I did not build it alone.

My Grandparents ensured I got my undergraduate degree debt free.
My father lent me about $18,000 for my education.
The Federal Government, via the student loan program, enabled me to borrow about $80,000 for school.
I gained my experience working for the State of Florida as a Prosecutor.
I drive to my office on public roads.
My clients drive here on public roads.
My profession is regulated by the State Supreme Court.
When a Hurricane destroyed my first office, Federal Disaster Aid helped me remain in business.
Click to expand...

I also have an employee who works very hard and has been instermental in getting us where we are!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top