On the 47% who don't pay taxes

[franklin]

I'm not saying I can prove these companies would be as successful as Staples or Sports authority, no. But I am saying, at least in Utah, I don't see anymore Sports Authorities than there were Gart Sports. and they aren't bigger than the Gart Sports they replaced. In fact, if I remember correctly, there was a Gart Sports on about 21st south and 12th east that is gone altogether now. So Sports Authority likely has an even smaller footprint in the Salt lake area than Gart Sports had.

I think the free market will take care of itself. If there weren't a million Staples around, there would still be just as many office supplies for sale by other stores. Romney didn't create a market, he simply took market share from others. Bill Gates created jobs that didn't previously exist. Romney took existing jobs from other companies.

Nice rant.
Romney provided a better or cheaper service. The benefits to the consumer created more jobs elsewhere.
Why do you think you deserve to have an opinion on this stuff when you don't understand even the most basic concepts?

 

[SaltyDawg]

So why don't you do the same in-depth analysis on this that you did on Staples impact to the overall job market and see how Romney's plan would benefit the middle class? Also interesting that the article said nothing about overall impact to the economy and other tax brackets, just railed on "the rich" yet again.

I don't care what his plan does to my taxes. The revenue needs to be increased. Yes, we need to make some spending cuts too. But the revenue needs to be increased. And the start of that has to be with the wealthiest. They are the ones who can most afford it.

I also don't buy the argument that lower taxes on the rich is good for the economy. It may have been good before all the tax loopholes and free trade agreements (and that is debatable). But now all it does is create more jobs overseas. Once outsourcing became viable, it killed that notion. That's part of the reason why we have some of the lowest tax rates in a long time, yet just had the worst recession since the great depression (and it might not even be over). Besides, the post I was responding to was:

Romney has never said anything close to "lower taxes for the rich". More buying into media hype. He advocates eliminating capital gains on people who earn less than $200k. He is way outside of that range, so no attempt there to cut his own taxes. He talks a lot about cutting spending, which absolutely has to happen, and cutting income taxes overall. We already know from all the discussions about Romney's wealth that a cut in income tax would help Buffet's secretary and have no effect on Buffet. Isn't that the soundbite?

Clearly, Romney does want lower taxes for the rich, as the link showed.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Have you just barely discovered this mystery that life isn't fair? The rest of us have been clued in since 2 years old dude.

Just because life isn't fair doesn't mean I have to support someone who clearly doesn't have my own best interest in mind.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Nice rant.
Romney provided a better or cheaper service. The benefits to the consumer created more jobs elsewhere.
Why do you think you deserve to have an opinion on this stuff when you don't understand even the most basic concepts?

Romney did not create a better or cheaper service, lol. Explain to me what is better or cheaper in Sports Authority compared to Gart Sports.

They're renting the same buildings, selling the same stuff, and if anything the prices are higher. I remember getting incredible deals on basketball shoes at Gart Sports (like $10 for previous year Nike Airs). I haven't seen anything like that at Sports Authority, even though it's in the same building that used to be Gart Sports and looks identical inside and out (sans the name on the sign and prices on the merchandise, and even most of the prices are about the same).

 

[franklin]

Romney did not create a better or cheaper service, lol. Explain to me what is better or cheaper in Sports Authority compared to Gart Sports.

They're renting the same buildings, selling the same stuff, and if anything the prices are higher. I remember getting incredible deals on basketball shoes at Gart Sports (like $10 for previous year Nike Airs). I haven't seen anything like that at Sports Authority, even though it's in the same building that used to be Gart Sports and looks identical inside and out (sans the name on the sign and prices on the merchandise, and even most of the prices are about the same).

Moving into your competitors building is a pretty good way to "put them out of business".
Thanks for the laugh.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Moving into your competitors building is a pretty good way to "put them out of business".
Thanks for the laugh.

I don't understand your point (assuming you actually have one).

The bottom line is Sports Authority hasn't done anything for the Salt Lake area that Gart Sports wasn't already doing before Sports Authority bought them.

Or were you not familiar with the situation and implying that Gart Sports went under due to competition or something and then Sports Authority moved in later?

Sports Authority bought Gart Sports. Supposedly it was an equal merger, but they took Sports Authority's name, and Sports Authority's CEO was CEO of the combined company. That's what happened. And all of those jobs they "created" in the Salt Lake area already existed as Gart Sports jobs. They just renamed the Gart Sports jobs to Sports Authority jobs. In other areas that had both chains before the merger (Salt Lake only had Gart Sports before the merger) they closed many of the stores and laid a lot of people off. They didn't actually "create" jobs.

Microsoft, on the other hand, actually "created" thousands of jobs in the Salt Lake area.

 

[franklin]

Is this going to be your final stance or are you going to change your positioning again?
Let me know when you're dong flip-flopping so I can just tell you flat out I don't care if Mitt Romney was a corporate raider.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Is this going to be your final stance or are you going to change your positioning again?
Let me know when you're dong flip-flopping so I can just tell you flat out I don't care if Mitt Romney was a corporate raider.

I haven't flip flopped on anything. Funny that a Romney supporter would make such a bogus accusation.

And let me flat out say that I don't care if you like corporate raiders. I still don't like them (especially if they're going to claim to be a job creator, and demand even lower taxes for the rich), and Bill Gates is still way better than Mitt Romney.

I'm not the slightest bit worried about a president Romney because he has no chance to win the general election (assuming he even makes it that far).

How many jobs would Romney have "created" by letting Detroit go bankrupt? Probably lots of jobs in China/Japan/Germany/etc.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I haven't flip flopped on anything. Funny that a Romney supporter would make such a bogus accusation.

And let me flat out say that I don't care if you like corporate raiders. I still don't like them (especially if they're going to claim to be a job creator, and demand even lower taxes for the rich), and Bill Gates is still way better than Mitt Romney.

I'm not the slightest bit worried about a president Romney because he has no chance to win the general election (assuming he even makes it that far).

How many jobs would Romney have "created" by letting Detroit go bankrupt? Probably lots of jobs in China/Japan/Germany/etc.

Booooommmmm goes the dynamite....

 

[Deleted member 365]

I think one issue that remains to be appropriately addressed by the GOP is their lack of credibility.

Americans might not be going ga ga over Obama like ESPN is with Blake's latest dunk.

However, I think the majority of voters still lack a lot of confidence and trust in the GOP. they still have never admitted any mistakes from the Bush administration. It's like they just try and ignore it. According to them, the Presidents were in the order of Clinton and then Obama took over. and now Americans are suffering after decades of "Democrat" destructive policies. The entire Bush administration of 8 years seems to have been swept under the rug. In fact, the only reference to any previous GOP President seems to be Reagan. Who the hell was Reagan? That was 30 years ago. Can many voters really identify with a man who was President so long ago?

In reality, the stigma of the GOP being the party of the white rich evangelical uneducated and angry American continue. the doubt on whether they truly know what the hell they're doing exists.

Have they separated themselves enough from Bush's policies to become a significant threat to Obama? What effect will all this in-house fighting do since they're basically dirtying up each other and doing Obama's job for them.

Have they really convinced American voters that a vote for Newt/Romney will be really that much different than a vote for more of the same Bushlike policies? Has enough time passed so that Americans will "forget" how utterly pathetic the GOP was for 8+ years?

The GOP might be hoping to "run out the clock" and hope that the economy tanks and that Obama can be blamed for. Unfortunately, for the GOP, I don't think they've done enough to repair the damage they created. They haven't done enough to prove to Americans that a vote for the GOP really will be better than Obama or Bush.

And all this mudslinging, probably isn't exactly helping their cause.

Is this the year that a third party candidate really might have a chance?

 

[Scat]

I think one issue that remains to be appropriately addressed by the DNC is their lack of credibility.

Americans might not be going ga ga over Romney like ESPN is with Blake's latest dunk.

However, I think the majority of voters still lack a lot of confidence and trust in the DNC. they still have never admitted any mistakes from the Obama administration. It's like they just try and ignore it. According to them, the Presidents were in the order of Bush and then Romney took over. and now Americans are suffering after decades of "Republican" destructive policies. The entire Obama administration of 4 years seems to have been swept under the rug. In fact, the only reference to any previous DNC President seems to be Clinton. Who the hell was Clinton? That was 12 years ago. Can many voters really identify with a man who was President so long ago?

In reality, the stigma of the DNC being the party of the black poor evangelical uneducated and angry American continue. the doubt on whether they truly know what the hell they're doing exists.

Have they separated themselves enough from Obama's policies to become a significant threat to Romney? What effect will all this in-house fighting do since they're basically dirtying up each other and doing Romney's job for them.

Have they really convinced American voters that a vote for Obama will be really that much different than a vote for more of the same DNC policies? Has enough time passed so that Americans will "forget" how utterly pathetic the DNC was for the past 6 years?

The DNC might be hoping to "run out the clock" and hope that the economy tanks and that the GOP can be blamed for. Unfortunately, for the DNC, I don't think they've done enough to repair the damage they created. They haven't done enough to prove to Americans that a vote for the DNC really will be better than Obama or Bush.

And all this mudslinging, probably isn't exactly helping their cause.

Is this the year that a third party candidate really might have a chance?

Funny how your post has so many interchangeable parts.

 

[babe]

We've had four straight RINO/DINO shills. And we're not going to get "change" this time either.

Ron Paul won't be the spoiler, will pass the torch to son Rand. The strategy that might keep our nation free would require some of trouts' type of grass roots. Run for local office if you want to make a difference.