UBinVA Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the blue-collar worker asked. After Obama responded that it would, Wurzelbacher continued: "I've worked hard . . . I work 10 to 12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American Dream." "It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too. http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publi.../pub_detail.asp So the way I read this, if I succeed, the government will tax (punish) me more so that another guy can also have a chance at success. So tax punishment now equates to other peoples chances of success, got it! So with that additional government revenue generated off people’s success as stated above, what programs will be created to promote another person’s success? Or will that additional revenue just go into the government coffers and spent on useless social programs that don’t promote job creation and just stymies possible success. The problem is that one person’s success should not be dependent on another person’s success or failure. We are individuals and we either fail or succeed based on our own merits and hard work. If I succeed, hopefully I’ve created a business that employees people and make their life better. But to equate my success with higher tax revenue so that others can do it makes no sense unless you are a socialist. Hence, Obama is a socialist as are all of his supporters. Repeat after me Obama supporters: I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Marxist. (You’re one of these too!) I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Marxist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Marxist. (You’re one of these too!) I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Socialist. I am a Marxist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Thread title: Obama wants to punish your success! Quote from Obama in first post: "It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 ... you have anything new to bring to the table? Rehashing your distorted views of old information does not count as informative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Not only is he going to take away all our money, but he will also force us to convert to Islam. He will build minarets on the White House grounds and force all white people to the deep South where they will pick cotton and sling burgers at McDonald for $.45 and hour, and live in shpping containers. If they complain he'll waterboard them (proving that he is willing to use the best ideas from across the aisle). Be afraid. Be very afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? How can you not understand? It's the trickle up theory of economics. If you take money from the productive and give it to the unproductive, the unproductive will suddenly be more productive at being unproductive. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? The good business man will have less incentive to get ahead and will limit how much he grows. Or worse they will not split out and want to own their own business. It will become the united states of givernment corporations where the only ones who have money to reinvest in the company are those that get the official "Obama seal of approval" better know as a large donation to the communist party. These companies will prosper as all other small/medium businesses will be shut down, as the wealth is distributed among the masses. Damn it why should an apprentice plumber make less the the guy who went out invested his time, money and ideas to start the business. the apprentice has needs like his wekly stash, his nightly case of PBR, his xbox, and his gambling money just like the wealthy. Who are you to deny him his basic rights? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 How can you not understand? It's the trickle up theory of economics. If you take money from the productive and give it to the unproductive, the unproductive will suddenly be more productive at being unproductive. :lol: Either that or they'll have more money for booze and lottery tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? He obviously is not a "small business owner" although NFIB will call a lot of large businesses and corporate farms small business. That being said, Obama should have known better how his response would sound. The lifting the Capital Gains tax rate across the board has unintended consequences for folks that I don't think Obama intends to target, but makes his plan problematic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 He obviously is not a "small business owner" although NFIB will call a lot of large businesses and corporate farms small business. What are you basing this statement on? What is the size of the guy's business? Do you understand the definition of a 'small business'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? Despite the fact that I disagree with him vehemently about this, I think he set his threshold too low for what he is trying to do. Make the threshold $1 million and you may get less opposition. I still think its wrong to penalize any success, but treating Warren Buffet and the plumber making $275k the same is blatantly unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 How can you not understand? It's the trickle up theory of economics. If you take money from the productive and give it to the unproductive, the unproductive will suddenly be more productive at being unproductive. So the ammount of $ you make is directly porpotional to one's productivity?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 The good business man will have less incentive to get ahead and will limit how much he grows. Or worse they will not split out and want to own their own business. It will become the united states of givernment corporations where the only ones who have money to reinvest in the company are those that get the official "Obama seal of approval" better know as a large donation to the communist party. These companies will prosper as all other small/medium businesses will be shut down, as the wealth is distributed among the masses. Damn it why should an apprentice plumber make less the the guy who went out invested his time, money and ideas to start the business. the apprentice has needs like his wekly stash, his nightly case of PBR, his xbox, and his gambling money just like the wealthy. Who are you to deny him his basic rights? It's more simple than that. Would you risk your money to start a business, with a 20% chance of success say, if success meant earning 200k after taxes? It depends on the numbers. Would you risk that same amount of money, against the same odds, if the payout for success were lowered to 150k? You would be much less likely to than in the previous situation, and more likely to bank the money and keep working for the Man. Higher taxes on a successfull outcome means less people risking their money to start businesses, which ultimately means less job growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Despite the fact that I disagree with him vehemently about this, I think he set his threshold too low for what he is trying to do. Make the threshold $1 million and you may get less opposition. I still think its wrong to penalize any success, but treating Warren Buffet and the plumber making $275k the same is blatantly unfair. Exactly. Comparing anyone to Warren Buffet (other than Bill Gates) is merely a way to pander to the intensely ignorant (little wonder certain people on this board continue to use him as an example). You'll never see the Obama camp provide an example of what his tax hikes will mean for a plumber who lives in an expensive part of the country and grosses $275K on his small business. Gee, I wonder why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 What are you basing this statement on? What is the size of the guy's business? Do you understand the definition of a 'small business'? I am not, just figured I would get a rise out both sides with my post. Seriously though, plumbers make a lot of cash and I agree that Obama set his figure too low for business owners. $1 million for net revenue would have been a better figure. I stated that I wasn't sure what should constitute a small business. Might be a good thread for discussion. I have no idea of the stats in this regard, what the distribution is and how many make what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's more simple than that. Would you risk your money to start a business, with a 20% chance of success say, if success meant earning 200k after taxes? It depends on the numbers. Would you risk that same amount of money, against the same odds, if the payout for success were lowered to 150k? You would be much less likely to than in the previous situation, and more likely to bank the money and keep working for the Man. Higher taxes on a successfull outcome means less people risking their money to start businesses, which ultimately means less job growth. Yep. Entreprenureal spririt in this country died eons ago. Nobody would ever start a business under this tax code! C'mon buddy, give the American people a bit more credit. We're not ALL greedy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 ... you have anything new to bring to the table? Rehashing your distorted views of old information does not count as informative. No but it counts as important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Despite the fact that I disagree with him vehemently about this, I think he set his threshold too low for what he is trying to do. Make the threshold $1 million and you may get less opposition. I still think its wrong to penalize any success, but treating Warren Buffet and the plumber making $275k the same is blatantly unfair. Then vote McCain Obama is a fraud ,and a communists one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I know the title is way off base but how is taking money from a sucessful business owner and giving to someone else giving them the same chance at success? Explain exactly how that's going to play out. I'd love to hear it. Anybody?? Easy ,its lie , Obama is a fraud and a communist at that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts