Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

The Liberal Media

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
The poor create plenty of jobs. How many walmart jobs would there be without the poor shopping there? How many MCD and Burger King jobs without the poor getting their daily nutrition there? Who do think supports the makers of keystone lite, busch beer and rocket fuel malt liquor? The 10 million a year CEO or the 20k a year poor person? Yeah demand for Colt 45 by the rich created those jobs.
Click to expand...

And who pays the wages for that poor person, i think is what the guy was trying to say. If that poor person has money it comes from somebody that he works for, or it comes from somebody elses taxes. Either way, he wouldn't be shopping at Walmart if Sam didn't put one there.
 
dillfer said:
And who pays the wages for that poor person, i think is what the guy was trying to say. If that poor person has money it comes from somebody that he works for, or it comes from somebody elses taxes. Either way, he wouldn't be shopping at Walmart if Sam didn't put one there.
Click to expand...

Sam wouldn't have put a walmart there if there weren't people, mostly on the lower income class, that were going to shop there.
This is clearly the chicken or the egg argument.
Also Sam walton wasn't rich when he started Walmart. So no it not always the rich that create jobs. Walmart has something like 1 million employees all created by a man who wasn't rich at the start.
 
bizicmo said:
Sam wouldn't have put a walmart there if there weren't people, mostly on the lower income class, that were going to shop there.
This is clearly the chicken or the egg argument.
Also Sam walton wasn't rich when he started Walmart. So no it not always the rich that create jobs. Walmart has something like 1 million employees all created by a man who wasn't rich at the start.
Click to expand...

Are you employed by a poor person/people? NO? Then rethink your argument.

Sam Walton may have started small, but money had to come from somewhere (loans) to get the company to it's success. That money came from rich people.

This was back in the great depression:

In 1945, after leaving the military, Walton took over management of his first variety store. With the help of a $20,000 loan from his father-in-law, plus $5,000 he had saved from his time in the Army, Walton purchased a Ben Franklin variety store in Newport, Arkansas.[4] The store was a franchise of the Butler Brothers chain.

I'm not saying that sam walton wasn't a great business man or that he wasn't an innovator, just that he needed help from someone with $$$$$$$$$$$$$ to get started.


POOR PEOPLE DON"T CREATE JOBS
 
clydefastly said:
Are you employed by a poor person/people? NO? Then rethink your argument.

Sam Walton may have started small, but money had to come from somewhere (loans) to get the company to it's success. That money came from rich people.

This was back in the great depression:

In 1945, after leaving the military, Walton took over management of his first variety store. With the help of a $20,000 loan from his father-in-law, plus $5,000 he had saved from his time in the Army, Walton purchased a Ben Franklin variety store in Newport, Arkansas.[4] The store was a franchise of the Butler Brothers chain.

I'm not saying that sam walton wasn't a great business man or that he wasn't an innovator, just that he needed help from someone with $$$$$$$$$$$$$ to get started.


POOR PEOPLE DON"T CREATE JOBS
Click to expand...

I admit I am not sure how much 20k and 5k in 1945 dollars equates to today's value. If 20k and 5k in 1945 make you rich then I am wrong. If 20k and 5k does not make you rich then again walmart jobs originate from a non rich person. And as you wrote," but money had to come from somewhere (loans) to get the company to it's success," doesn't mean it comes from rich people. Getting a business loan from a bank is not the same thing as money from a rich person.
 
And no the person that signs my paycheck is not poor, however he didn't create my job either. The company, and jobs there after, originated from a non rich person, who yes got a business loan or two. And yes without the poor purchasing the product, the rich person that signs my paycheck and that didn't create the job, would not be able to pay me or himself for that matter. So yes it is more then just the rich that create jobs.
 
I agree that people that come from nothing can create successful bsinesses that create many jobs. Those people need money from a some source like a bank or some other type of investor (rich people) to start their business. If there are excessive taxes and regulations that limit the success of a start up making it, these rich people will not lend money for these businesses to start up, because they will not get a return on their investment. If these rich people are excessively taxed for being successful they will not lend money, they will not expand their business and not create more jobs if they are losing money for doing so. If these rich people, who are usually really smart, don't trust the economy and/or govt they will do what they can to save their money and not hire people. These poor people that you say create jobs by spending money, can't spend money if they are not employed, like 9.5% of americans.

Here are some ways to avoid the problems this country is facing:
- Save Money
- Don't live beyond your means
- Hold people accountable for their actions
- Don't let people become dependant on the govt or any other source when they are capable of taking care of themselves.
- Don't let any politician that has proven themselves to be inadequate contine to hold office(all of them)
- Don't tax employers out of existence
- Don't tax employees out of existence

I could go on and on, but this stuff seems to me to be common sense
 
gunfyter said:
The more people flying on private jets, the better!
Click to expand...

That is one ignorant statement. As if capitalism is some perfect machine.:rolleyes:
 
gunfyter said:
If you only have one hour a day to watch television news ... The Glenn Beck Program is the most information dense hour of television you will find.
Click to expand...

This statement made you lose whatever shred of credibility that you had left from your last stupid post.
 
Sam wouldn't have put a walmart there if there weren't people, mostly on the lower income class, that were going to shop there.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that Walmart is not meeting demand by placing his stores where he places them. I'm saying that you and I and the majority of the population are not working for the people that shop at Walmart. Not that there's anything wrong with shopping at Walmart. Like I said before, those people who shop at Walmart are getting paid from someone else. Someone who probably does not shop at Walmart (a rich person). I feel like I'm really repeating myself here.
 
waka;2038113 That is one ignorant statement. As if capitalism is some perfect machine.:rolleyes:

Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than the alternatives.

Small business is the engine that drives capitalism. Walmart started out as a small business. Microsoft started out as a small business. Dell started out as a small business. McDonald's started out as a small business. Does anyone see the pattern here?

Innovation and the freedom to make it work creates jobs that create wealth and more jobs.
 
That's the problem with you Laissez Faire capitalists, you think it's all black and white between socialism and capitalism. In real life, there are many shades of gray. Many accuse any regulation of capitalism as socialism. It's kind of stupid to do so, but if you want to say that, so be it. We need a balance of capitalism and socialism for society to function.

Laissez Faire capitalism IS JUST AS insidious to society as Communism
 
Last edited:
wolfpackpilot said:
This is the kind of crap that pisses me off. This country is headed straight to socialism. CNN is selling the tickets, and Obama is driving the bus.

(and us fancy jet pilots will be sitting in the back).

Wolf


http://finance.yahoo.com/career-wor...tra-rich-what-they-cost?mod=career-leadership
Click to expand...

Ever hear of a show called "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous"?? Still plenty of wealthy people.... nothing to see here.

I agree with gunfyter.... the more the merrier... and yes, keep the tax cuts because that is my job too. True the tax cuts are not paid for, but I am almost 40.... I figure I have 20-30 good years left and wont have to worry about any of this debt anyway.Plus, then I will be as grouchy and miserable as you are after reading a harmless article about things rich people buy.
 
Last edited:
Thank God for the Chinese communists who are willing to lend us money so we can continue the capitalist American Dream.
 
jetwash said:
Thank God for the Chinese communists who are willing to lend us money so we can continue the capitalist American Dream.
Click to expand...

The Chinese treat Capital better than we do. Lower taxes. Corporate tax rate in the US is 35%. In China it ranges from 10% to 25%. Tax cuts for the Rich work... as demonstrated by China! Fractional Flying grew fastest with the Bush tax cuts --- with these low Chinese tax rates ...Standby for NJ China.

All we have to do is eliminate taxes on Capital and Income by implementing the Fair Tax. At the very least we should lower taxes on the Rich to match the Chinese....

The Great Tax Cut of China
http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6789

China to cut corporate tax Jul 6, 2010 ... BEIJING
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Money/Story/STIStory_550257.html
China has averaged 10 percent real growth annually for nineteen years, a world record. The key ingredient? Massive, sustained tax reduction​
.
 
Last edited:
gunfyter said:
China has averaged 10 percent real growth annually for nineteen years, a world record. The key ingredient? Massive, sustained tax reduction​
.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the strong centralized government.

Could that have also contributed to their growth and stability?
 
Last edited:
jetwash said:
Don't forget the strong centralized government.

Could that have also contributed to their growth and stability?
Click to expand...

If we could get a strong Centralized government to reduce taxes to China's level it might.

Right now tax revenues collected by the United States is almost 20% of GDP. China is less than 10%! The tax burden of Americans is now DOUBLE the burden of China.

In 1978 the tax burden in China was 31% GDP before they started cutting taxes. They had a strong centralized government before the tax cuts, but a crappy economy. So NO, I think the strong centralized government had nothing to do with economic growth. It was tax Policy.

Lets give tax cuts a chance ... it worked for the Chinese.
 
Last edited:
If we could get a strong Centralized government to reduce taxes to China's level it might.

Right now tax revenues collected by the United States is almost 20% of GDP. China is less than 10%! The tax burden of Americans is now DOUBLE the burden of China.

In 1978 the tax burden in China was 31% GDP before they started cutting taxes. They had a strong centralized government before the tax cuts, but a crappy economy. So NO, I think the strong centralized government had nothing to do with economic growth. It was tax Policy.

Lets give tax cuts a chance ... it worked for the Chinese.
Click to expand...



Don't try to confuse them with facts, it never works.
 
dillfer said:
Don't try to confuse them with facts, it never works.
Click to expand...


The heart of the wise inclines to the right,
but the heart of the fool to the left.

- Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)
 
Aren't we coming off a full decade of lower taxes and deregulation? I guess that's why the economy is going so swimingly.
 
We had a massive expansion of the economy ... but we just can't expand the economy as fast as Congress can outspend revenues... requiring borrowing and debt.

But no ... we had an increase in regulation ... as measured by the increase in number of pages of federal Regulation over that time.

Bush's Regulatory Kiss-Off - Reason Magazine


"... Overall, the final outcome of this Republican regulation has been a significant increase in regulatory activity and cost since 2001. The number of pages added to the Federal Register, which lists all new regulations, reached an all-time high of 78,090 in 2007, up from 64,438 in 2001...."

Published on March 25, 2008 by James Gattuso
​
In this election year, Americans will hear a lot about taxes. Candidates for everything from President to vil*****lage alderman will present their plans on who should pay and how much. Yet in the political frenzy, one type of tax will almost certainly be overlooked: the hidden tax of regulation. The federal government alone enforces thousands of pages of regulations that impose a burden of some $1.1 trillion-an amount that is comparable to total federal income tax receipts.

And the cost of regulation is getting higher. Despite the claims of critics-and some supporters-of the Bush Administration, net regulatory burdens have increased in the years since George W. Bush assumed the presidency. Since 2001, the federal government has imposed almost $30 billion in new regulatory costs on Americans. About $11 billion was imposed in fiscal year (FY) 2007 alone.


Even more are on the way. Historically, the amount of regulatory activity surges dramatically in the last year of a presidential Administration, whether Repub*****lican or Democrat, as regulators, freed from normal political constraints, clean off their desks. A similar surge looks likely for the final year of the Bush Admin*****istration unless the President and other policymakers keep a tight hand on the regulatory leash.
​
 
Last edited:
German austerity vs US liberal spending

Defying Others, Germany Finds Economic Success - NYTimes.com
Aug 13, 2010 ...

BERLIN — Germany has sparred with its European partners over how to respond to the financial crisis, argued with the United States over the benefits of stimulus versus austerity, and defiantly pursued its own vision of how to keep its economy strong.

Statistics released Friday buttress Germany’s view that it had the formula right all along. The government on Friday announced quarter-on-quarter economic growth of 2.2 percent, Germany’s best performance since reunification 20 years ago — and equivalent to a nearly 9 percent annual rate if growth were that robust all year.

The strong growth figures will also bolster the conviction here that German workers and companies in recent years made the short-term sacrifices necessary for long-term success that Germany’s European partners did not. And it will reinforce the widespread conviction among policy makers that they handled the financial crisis and the painful recession that followed it far better than the United States, which, they never hesitate to remind, brought the world into this crisis.
​
The Germans did the OPPOSITE of the Obama Administration policy.

9% annual growth! Do you think there would be some Furlough recalls in the Fracs? Hmmmm?

Besides cutting government spending ... how did they do it?

 
Last edited:
Congress caused the housing bubble and Bush was/is blamed for it. Barney Frank insisted Fannie and Freddie were fine loaning money to people who should have been renting.

Glenn Beck has a great show and inspires millions to get their heads outta the sand and learn how we got here.
 
rumorhasit;2039670 Congress caused the housing bubble and Bush was/is blamed for it. Barney Frank insisted Fannie and Freddie were fine loaning money to people who should have been renting.

Glenn Beck has a great show and inspires millions to get their heads outta the sand and learn how we got here.

Lately, ol' Barney is pushing to abolish Fannie and Freddy. I wonder id he's really pushing to get rid of the evidence.

With you all the way on Glenn.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom