The thrill is gone

The thrill is gone

by thesumofyourfears | Published on September 13th, 2010, 9:49 pm | News

SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:The Bush tax cuts did nothing for MY income, so why should I be interested in extending them?

A very self centered attitude. But that is to be expected of an angry leftist. It's not a perfect world. Just because you claim it did not work for you doesn't mean it did not work. You're lucky to have the unemployment check. There are worse places to be in this world. I showed proof in a previous posts, but you thumbed your nose at it. The unemployment rate went down after a tax cut bill JGTRRA went into effect in May 2003 and kept going down until the effing democrats took the House and Senate in Jan 2007 and latter that year, the rate started to go up. All in a previous post and all right here at http://www.bls.gov. The unemployment rate for June 2003 was 6.3%, July was 6.2% and August was 6.1%. So, now we see the rate go down and continued to do so until November 2006, the unemployment rate stood at 4.5% when the democrat party took both the House and Senate in Jan 2007. In June, July and August 2007, it stood at 4.6% which now we see a trend upward at 4.7% in October 2007 and has not stopped since. And btw, No president of the United States can create either a budget deficit or a budget surplus. All spending bills originate in the House of Representatives and all taxes are voted into law by Congress. You cannot get any simpler than that. Why is it hard for the angry left to accept, I don't know. No spin. No ideology. Just what works and works right.

I agree Sum. The backlash that is building up against the Obama administration is snowballing and it is astounding. If this keeps going you may not see another democrat in the White House for another 30 years.

thesumofyourfears wrote:
SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:The Bush tax cuts did nothing for MY income, so why should I be interested in extending them?

A very self centered attitude.

That's the American way, Summy. Remember how Reagan got into office? He asked people to consider if THEY were better off in 1980 than they were in 1976, and vote for him if the answer was no. On the other hand, what are you suggesting? That I be willing to sacrifice my standard of living in order to make sure the rich will get even richer than they already are? What would be the point? I don't see how helping Donald Trump and the board of directors at AIG get to the standard of living of the Saudi Royal Family would be good for any American.

You mention that I should be grateful that I have unemployment checks to keep me from bankruptcy. Indeed I am grateful, but certainly I'm not grateful to conservatives. That socialist government benefit was created during the Great Depression, and I daresay would not be allowed in Farright Town if that crowd had free rein.

So while I struggle to find a way to retain my home, family and dignity intact, I think I am within my rights to argue that it was a rum move for my employer to replace me with a team of 3 Indians, and that it does the economy a net disservice in America for the wages I used to be getting to be sent to be spent in India. How long will doing that have to go on, with American workers becoming net burdens on the government while no new American jobs are created, before the economy goes into the tank?

SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:A very self centered attitude.

On the other hand, what are you suggesting?

I didn't try to suggest anything.

That I be willing to sacrifice my standard of living in order to make sure the rich will get even richer than they already are? What would be the point? I don't see how helping Donald Trump and the board of directors at AIG get to the standard of living of the Saudi Royal Family would be good for any American.

The rich you demonize are not rich because of some evil force of your fantasies. And soaking the rich, as you seem to advocate, will not make anyone richer. For the most part, the poor aren't poor because the rich are rich. They're usually poor for their own reasons: family breakdown, low skills, destructive personal habits and plain bad luck, just few. Attacking the rich won't do us any good if the high corporate taxes dull investment and risk-taking, discouraging economic growth that benefits everyone. You would not have your pc or Blackberry/iPhone had it not been for the "mean ole" rich that risks capital for R&D, production, distribution, sales floor and to you. You also attack the many middle income Americans who have 401k retirement plans at work which their funds do just that.

You mention that I should be grateful that I have unemployment checks to keep me from bankruptcy. Indeed I am grateful, but certainly I'm not grateful to conservatives. That socialist government benefit was created during the Great Depression, and I daresay would not be allowed in Farright Town if that crowd had free rein.

Employers pay a unemployment tax. The money does not come out of thin air. I don't think the Republicans would get rid of it because there are a host of other gov't monstrosities that should/could be eliminated. Had FDR admin not do what it did, we would have a whole lot more of wealth creation, less unemployment, inflation, less poverty and less need for unemployment.

So while I struggle to find a way to retain my home, family and dignity intact, I think I am within my rights to argue that it was a rum move for my employer to replace me with a team of 3 Indians, and that it does the economy a net disservice in America for the wages I used to be getting to be sent to be spent in India. How long will doing that have to go on, with American workers becoming net burdens on the government while no new American jobs are created, before the economy goes into the tank?

Ask this question. WHY did your employer do what it did? For starters, high corporate tax rates, excessive regulations costs money and takes away investment and operating capital. There comes a point when tax and regulations are too burdensome that they have to relocate somewhere else, thanks to Far Left Town. Just leave it to folks at Far Left Town to cut the hands that feed them. Until we become more business friendly, we will continue to have the economic issues we have.

thesumofyourfears wrote:You would not have your pc or Blackberry/iPhone had it not been for the "mean ole" rich that risks capital for R&D, production, distribution, sales floor and to you

Your Blackberry was a product of socialist Canada with (according to you) entrepreneurial killing taxes

Using loaded words like 'soaking the rich' for 'returning tax levels to pre Bush levels' doesn't strengthen your case

thesumofyourfears wrote:Ask this question. WHY did your employer do what it did? For starters, high corporate tax rates, excessive regulations costs money and takes away investment and operating capital. There comes a point when tax and regulations are too burdensome that they have to relocate somewhere else, thanks to Far Left Town. Just leave it to folks at Far Left Town to cut the hands that feed them. Until we become more business friendly, we will continue to have the economic issues we have.

In Victorian England children were employed in coal mines and factories because they were cheaper than men. Workers were kept in poverty, sent to the workhouse and treadmills. This is generally considered to have been a bad thing. You might relish the idea of returning to the unbridled capitalism of Dickensian England. I don't.

Charles Dickens wrote:“At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge,” said the gentleman, taking up a pen, “it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir.”

“Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge.

“Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

“And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?”

“They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “ I wish I could say they were not.”

“The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge.

“Both very busy, sir.”

“Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”

“Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,” returned the gentleman, “a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?”

“Nothing!” Scrooge replied.

“You wish to be anonymous?”

“I wish to be left alone,” said Scrooge. “Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.”

“Many can’t go there; and many would rather die.”

“If they would rather die,” said Scrooge, “they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides — excuse me — I don’t know that.”

“But you might know it,” observed the gentleman.

“It’s not my business,” Scrooge returned. “It’s enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people’s. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!”

Actually most of the parts that go into the blackberry come from Austin Texas and right here in Greensboro NC. Canada's RIM is simply the one putting the pieces together.

Actually the founders, entrepreneurs, investors and designers are Canadians. i.e. The people that "risk capital for R&D, production, distribution, sales floor"

Where the components come from is irrelevant to the discussion - which is that the higher levels of taxation and regulation in Canada do not stifle entrepreneurs and investors. But it's good to know that some Americans are benefiting too.

The same is true for Nokia - a product of socialist Finland. Not to mention those socialist produced BMWs and Mercedes Americans like to drive.

The suggestion that a few points in the marginal tax rates for wealthy people will destroy the economy is fatuous. The investors in RIM need ordinary people to be able to afford their products - which requires them to have jobs and be secure enough to spend on non essentials. It's the buyers that drive an economy not the sellers. Economies are demand driven not supply driven.