If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   Golf legend Jack Nicklaus to stump for Romney, play 18 holes with an empty chair   (sfgate.com) divider line 67
    More: Obvious, Jack Nicklaus  
•       •       •

362 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Sep 2012 at 6:16 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-27 11:55:05 AM

torr5962: If you are correct, I would offer that that is a small segment of small business owners. Small business-the dry cleaning, the Rita's water ice, the car wash, the franchise of (fill in the blank), the neighborhood deli, the local UPS store, etc...they have taxes to pay for payroll, wages, etc. That is fulfilling their "social contract". The more places that open, the more people can be employed. This should be the goal of every community-open business and employ people. Obama seemed to be saying that small business owners are not paying enough; which is anecdotal and ignores the ones who do pay enough-in fact we pay a lot. And we do a huge service in the community by employing 27 people-let alone the charity functions we donate to and families we sponsor for clothes food and gifts during the holidays.


How do you feel about those companies that pay so little that their workers require government assistance to meet their requirements for subsistence? Does it anger you that your taxes are used to subsidize their businesses?
 
2012-09-27 01:01:31 PM
EyeballKid
And where, where I ask, is your golden idol, for all of this selfless work you do? I mean, really! The nerve of that ungrateful, arrogant...uppity?

lol. We got a big plaque from Sacred Heart in Camden, which was cool. Its better than buying each other stupid gifts we dont need. Don't hate.


Philip Francis Queeg
How do you feel about those companies that pay so little that their workers require government assistance to meet their requirements for subsistence? Does it anger you that your taxes are used to subsidize their businesses?

There's not collusion among the small businesses-some pay higher than others. To earn a higher wage, get experience in that field so that you become more skilled and demand a higher wage.
 
2012-09-27 01:04:56 PM

torr5962: Philip Francis Queeg
How do you feel about those companies that pay so little that their workers require government assistance to meet their requirements for subsistence? Does it anger you that your taxes are used to subsidize their businesses?

There's not collusion among the small businesses-some pay higher than others. To earn a higher wage, get experience in that field so that you become more skilled and demand a higher wage.


So you are OK with parasites as long as they are businesses. Got it.

Tell us, do you pay your employees a living wage, or are you a moocher who let's others subsidize your business?
 
2012-09-27 02:34:58 PM

torr5962: It would be a tremendous stretch to assume that the business my wife and I started "exploited" anyone or anything. Even before the business was profitable, taxes were still paid.


So who built the physical structure of the business? Who filed the papers and what data entry took place? The roads to drive the materials to the site and the refuse away from it? Where did your builders get their workforce? Where did they buy their materials? Where did the supplier obtain the work on the processed materials?

Someone is always exploited in building anything. Taxes are but a small part of how our society is built and maintained. No one built anything alone from the first time a group of humans took down their first predator.

You smugly jerk yourself off to the delusion that you climbed the mountain by yourself, but you didn't make the lotion and you didn't build the tissue.
 
2012-09-27 03:02:06 PM
Cookbook's Anarchist:

So who built the physical structure of the business? Who filed the papers and what data entry took place? The roads to drive the materials to the site and the refuse away from it? Where did your builders get their workforce? Where did they buy their materials? Where did the supplier obtain the work on the processed materials?

Someone is always exploited in building anything. Taxes are but a small part of how our society is built and maintained. No one built anything alone from the first time a group of humans took down their first predator.




Somehow you've managed to ignore everything I have previously posted to leapfrog into the most ridiculous conclusion. The "physical" structure of the business is paid for by my lease in the shopping center, and the papers that were filed with the local and state offices are partly paid by my local and state taxes. I did not need builders as the building was already available, but you can be sure I paid a nice upfront cost to assume the business, plus paying for the zoning employee from the township who makes sure every business is up to code. The upfront costs and continued taxes are a large part of my nut, and my paying of it is a huge boon to the local economy. The building I occupy sat empty for 6 months, and when the business next door left, we broke the wall down and expanded, creating the ability for more jobs as well as paying the shopping center owner more.

I never said I did the whole thing myself. I said I do my part to pay for what I didnt build myself. Obama's speech inferred that all small business owners aren't paying their allotted amount as part of the social contract. He could be right with a percentage of small biz, but he slathered that goo to include everyone.

You smugly jerk yourself off to the delusion that you climbed the mountain by yourself, but you didn't make the lotion and you didn't build the tissue.

Wrong again. I paid for the lotion and I paid for the tissue. In my price that I paid for both items includes all costs, to the manufacturer, the transportation, market research, etc. I paid for the lotion and tissues, you idiot, and I own them. If it didnt pay for the making of the product, they should charge a higher price.

Thanks for the insults though.
 
2012-09-27 03:15:22 PM
Philip Francis Queeg

So you are OK with parasites as long as they are businesses. Got it.

Dont be so small minded and petty.

Tell us, do you pay your employees a living wage, or are you a moocher who let's others subsidize your business?
What is a living wage to you? If I paid too less, wouldnt my employees quit? They don't have to work for me. We (my wife and I) far overpay our managers and 3 assistant managers, as well as a media director, marketing analyst, assistant and buyer.

Are you inferring that I do more harm than good by owning a business? What exactly is your problem? I dont even know anything about "subsidizing". who are "others"?

Im not Walmart, man, damn.
 
2012-09-27 03:25:46 PM

torr5962: Philip Francis Queeg

So you are OK with parasites as long as they are businesses. Got it.

Dont be so small minded and petty.

Tell us, do you pay your employees a living wage, or are you a moocher who let's others subsidize your business?
What is a living wage to you? If I paid too less, wouldnt my employees quit? They don't have to work for me. We (my wife and I) far overpay our managers and 3 assistant managers, as well as a media director, marketing analyst, assistant and buyer.

Are you inferring that I do more harm than good by owning a business? What exactly is your problem? I dont even know anything about "subsidizing". who are "others"?

Im not Walmart, man, damn.


How about the people below manager level? Do you pay all of your full time employees enough to get by without government assistance? Or do you offload costs onto the taxpayer so that you can be more profitable?
 
2012-09-27 03:44:02 PM
So an old rich entitled white man is going to vote for Rmoney? I am absolutely shocked.
 
2012-09-27 03:56:50 PM
How about the people below manager level? Do you pay all of your full time employees enough to get by without government assistance? Or do you offload costs onto the taxpayer so that you can be more profitable?

Offload costs? Did you really write "offload" costs? Full-time salaried employees were promoted from within. Like all small businesses, people have to start somewhere to weed out the employees who suck from the one's who don't. But all of the positions are above min wage.


I have a few questions for you Mr. Mutiny--How old are you? Where were you educated? This will tell me a lot, because honestly, you sound like a kid who read something in a textbook and is now trying to apply it to real-life.
 
2012-09-27 04:05:40 PM

torr5962: How about the people below manager level? Do you pay all of your full time employees enough to get by without government assistance? Or do you offload costs onto the taxpayer so that you can be more profitable?

Offload costs? Did you really write "offload" costs? Full-time salaried employees were promoted from within. Like all small businesses, people have to start somewhere to weed out the employees who suck from the one's who don't. But all of the positions are above min wage.


I have a few questions for you Mr. Mutiny--How old are you? Where were you educated? This will tell me a lot, because honestly, you sound like a kid who read something in a textbook and is now trying to apply it to real-life.


Yes I did write that because it is an accurate description of what many businesses do. They do not want to bear the full costs of maintaining a full time employee so they rely on government assistance programs to pick up part of the burden. Welfare assistance to the full time working poor is a subsidy to the businesses that employ those individuals. It is the businesses who are leaches and moochers, not those workers.

I'm a 45 year old architect with a Master degree who has been continually employed for over 20 years. I understand how small businesses work.
 
2012-09-27 04:20:57 PM
Yes I did write that because it is an accurate description of what many businesses do. They do not want to bear the full costs of maintaining a full time employee so they rely on government assistance programs to pick up part of the burden. Welfare assistance to the full time working poor is a subsidy to the businesses that employ those individuals. It is the businesses who are leaches and moochers, not those workers.

I'm a 45 year old architect with a Master degree who has been continually employed for over 20 years. I understand how small businesses work.


I get it now...you've experienced people taking advantage of the system and what you've described Wal-Mart has done to almost an art-form, simply to profits. You know full well then that I need to have part-time employees at a low cost not do subterfuge the system, but to weed out poor employees. The system is in place that if the part-timers do well and dont fark me, I will find a position for them. I cannot be at the business every day and I overpay the salaried people because I simply dont want them to leave. A business with 27-35 people is obviously not huge, but I think we've run it morally.

Your tone up until your last post was nasty and condescending, making assumptions that ALL small businesses are somehow farking people over and leaching the system simply for a profit. I have had workers just flat out quit to take unemployment (which shouldnt be allowed, but I didnt fight it) and I have had employees rob (some young people do this)....this isnt any indication of their demographic, just those specific people.
I know you understand that not all small businesses are created equal.
 
2012-09-27 04:29:05 PM

torr5962: I get it now...you've experienced people taking advantage of the system and what you've described Wal-Mart has done to almost an art-form, simply to profits. You know full well then that I need to have part-time employees at a low cost not do subterfuge the system, but to weed out poor employees. The system is in place that if the part-timers do well and dont fark me, I will find a position for them. I cannot be at the business every day and I overpay the salaried people because I simply dont want them to leave. A business with 27-35 people is obviously not huge, but I think we've run it morally.

Your tone up until your last post was nasty and condescending, making assumptions that ALL small businesses are somehow farking people over and leaching the system simply for a profit. I have had workers just flat out quit to take unemployment (which shouldnt be allowed, but I didnt fight it) and I have had employees rob (some young people do this)....this isnt any indication of their demographic, just those specific people.
I know you understand that not all small businesses are created equal.


And you know what? The government may be assisting those low paid part time employees. That benefits your business directly. We all pay taxes to pay for that benefit to you. It's not a one way street of you being burdened to assist others. You take from the community as well as give to it.
 
2012-09-27 05:21:23 PM
Philip Francis Queeg
And you know what? The government may be assisting those low paid part time employees. That benefits your business directly. We all pay taxes to pay for that benefit to you. It's not a one way street of you being burdened to assist others. You take from the community as well as give to it.

And I think its a fair relationship. Its not like we opened a business to take advantage of low wage employees. Most of these workers are college aged, or just out of college working adults. Those seem to be the sort of people that want to work, or at least want to work here. I dont think its necessarily a "burden" to have people work in this business-its a win-win as far as Im concerned. Because I exist in the community, I pay my "fair share" of government taxes, and I also go above and beyond. I also am providing something good in this community by having a business that turned out to do pretty well, and allowed me to hire more people.

I dont see where this a bad thing. I also dont think, referring to the earlier point, that I am somehow underpaying to exist in this environment. There are a TON of costs, especially within the local government here in NJ ( a tight-locked Democratic stronghold). I disagree that somehow I should pay more. End of Discussion.
 
2012-09-27 05:24:26 PM
Philip Francis Queeg
And you know what? The government may be assisting those low paid part time employees. That benefits your business directly. We all pay taxes to pay for that benefit to you. It's not a one way street of you being burdened to assist others. You take from the community as well as give to it.

And I think its a fair relationship. Its not like we opened a business to take advantage of low wage employees. Most of these workers are college-aged and in college, or just out-of-college working adults. Those seem to be the sort of people that want to work, or at least want to work here. I dont think its necessarily a "burden" to have people work in this business-its a win-win as far as Im concerned. Because I exist in the community, I pay my "fair share" of government taxes, and I also go above and beyond where I see fit.. I am also providing something good in this community by having a business that turned out to be profitable (so far), and allowed me to hire more people.

I dont see where this a bad thing. I also dont think, referring to the earlier point, that I am somehow underpaying to exist in this environment. There are a TON of costs, especially within the local government here in NJ ( a tight-locked Democratic stronghold). I disagree that somehow I should pay more. End of Discussion.

sorry for double post...my copy editor is on vacation.
 
2012-09-27 05:34:43 PM

torr5962: Philip Francis Queeg
And you know what? The government may be assisting those low paid part time employees. That benefits your business directly. We all pay taxes to pay for that benefit to you. It's not a one way street of you being burdened to assist others. You take from the community as well as give to it.

And I think its a fair relationship. Its not like we opened a business to take advantage of low wage employees. Most of these workers are college-aged and in college, or just out-of-college working adults. Those seem to be the sort of people that want to work, or at least want to work here. I dont think its necessarily a "burden" to have people work in this business-its a win-win as far as Im concerned. Because I exist in the community, I pay my "fair share" of government taxes, and I also go above and beyond where I see fit.. I am also providing something good in this community by having a business that turned out to be profitable (so far), and allowed me to hire more people.

I dont see where this a bad thing. I also dont think, referring to the earlier point, that I am somehow underpaying to exist in this environment. There are a TON of costs, especially within the local government here in NJ ( a tight-locked Democratic stronghold). I disagree that somehow I should pay more. End of Discussion.

sorry for double post...my copy editor is on vacation.


And I am saying that you are not overpaying. The social safety net is a direct aid to your business, not a burden unfairly placed upon it. I disagree that somehow you should pay less. End of Discussion.
 
2012-09-28 03:26:33 AM

torr5962: Obama's speech inferred that all small business owners aren't paying their allotted amount as part of the social contract


It implied nothing of the sort. Ridiculous inference is what you are guilty of. His speech was an attack on the notion that American business owners (large or small) accomplish what they accomplish because of the foundations laid before them.

The large shopping center was not built by your money and your effort alone. The roads you drive to get to your store were not built by your money and effort alone. The customers you serve aid in what you build. To describe any success as self-attained is disingenuous. That was what you should have inferred from Obama's speech.
 
2012-09-28 03:32:05 AM

Cookbook's Anarchist: torr5962: Obama's speech inferred that all small business owners aren't paying their allotted amount as part of the social contract

It implied nothing of the sort. Ridiculous inference is what you are guilty of. His speech was an attack on the notion that American business owners (large or small) accomplish what they accomplish because of the foundations laid before them. Ugg, terrible wording...his speech was a critique against the misguided notion that "job creators" attain success solely on their own merit without any aid from the accomplishments and efforts of others in their community. Things are not crafted in a vacuum, they don't magically line up on shelves...these small things are accomplished through the shared efforts of others.

The large shopping center was not built by your money and your effort alone. The roads you drive to get to your store were not built by your money and effort alone. The customers you serve aid in what you build. To describe any success as self-attained is disingenuous. That was what you should have inferred from Obama's speech.

 
Displayed 17 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report