11-14-2013 07:34 PM
749 ... 1314151617 ...
tools
  1. pappy53's Avatar
    A good start to a solution would be to fire 537 politicians in D.C. (Congress, vice-pres, and president).
    10-16-2013 12:09 PM
  2. palandri's Avatar
    75 Ways Socialism Has Improved America

    Daily Kos: 75 Ways Socialism Has Improved America
    10-16-2013 12:09 PM
  3. pappy53's Avatar
    Yeah.. that evil Wal-Mart employing people. How dare they. If you don't like Wal-Mart salary, better yourself and find a non Wal-Mart job. People say Wal-Marts got all this money they should pay more. These same people say tax the crap out of walmart and you wonder why businesses can't pay more. If you don't like walmart pay, work somewhere else.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Yeah, since jobs are so easy to find, with 11% unemployment.
    10-16-2013 12:11 PM
  4. craZDude's Avatar
    Yeah.. that evil Wal-Mart employing people. How dare they. If you don't like Wal-Mart salary, better yourself and find a non Wal-Mart job. People say Wal-Marts got all this money they should pay more. These same people say tax the crap out of walmart and you wonder why businesses can't pay more. If you don't like walmart pay, work somewhere else.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Seriously? Didn't we just have a long discussion about how oftentimes this isn't possible?

    Oh, I get it, you think people should switch to the jobs that are available in the small businesses that were all just put out of business by the Walmart they work at. I finally understand.
    10-16-2013 12:14 PM
  5. craZDude's Avatar
    Just because someone is successful and makes a lot of money does not mean they are taking that money away from someone else. There is not a set amount of wealth. The amount of wealth grows and shrinks all the time.

    The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. A corporation is not a person. I don't understand why we tax them at all.

    The drive to make more money is what runs an economy. If you take the ability to make more money away, the economy ceases to work. If a company expands, it has the ability to make more money. Within that expansion, a company has to hire more workers, promote workers to management, buy equipment, contract services, ect. ect. ect. When you tax said company, you are limiting its ability to expand and do all the things listed above which is great for the economy and workers.

    One thing i will never understand is the contempt for the "Rich" people. What right do you have to tell anyone else how much they should or should not make? You call them greedy, but you are the one trying to take their stuff away. You want to help the poor? Create an environment where companies can make as much money as possible. Then the companies will grow and offer more jobs and more higher paying jobs Yes a consequence of this is the owners of said companies will make a lot of money as well, but that is not at the expense of its workers. It is actually to their benefit. Then said owners with want to invest more in the company so that they can make even more money. Which will in turn make more money for the workers.

    It is simple math and psychology. Why would a person want to run a business in country that prevents them from making as much money as they could somewhere else?
    In an ideal world this would be the way it works. But we have already discussed how all these huge companies are moving jobs overseas because they can get much cheaper labor there. By your logic, decreasing our minimum wage would bring companies back to America and then they would suddenly start paying people more because they can pay them less and earn more money. It literally makes no sense.
    msndrstood likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:21 PM
  6. craZDude's Avatar
    "Senate leaders agree on plan to end government shutdown | The Verge" http://feedly.com/k/1aptWru

    And there you have it. Hopefully this will pass in the House, and we can put the government shutdown behind us.
    msndrstood likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:35 PM
  7. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    In an ideal world this would be the way it works. But we have already discussed how all these huge companies are moving jobs overseas because they can get much cheaper labor there. By your logic, decreasing our minimum wage would bring companies back to America and then they would suddenly start paying people more because they can pay them less and earn more money. It literally makes no sense.
    Ideally, institute a fair tax. Quit hammering the businesses that provide jobs. Then the would be able to hire more and pay more. Then EVERYONE pays taxes. Any successful business owner will to government causes growth problems in business. Bigger government=more taxes. Bigger taxes causes growth to stop. Government gets in the way.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:37 PM
  8. NoYankees44's Avatar
    Wal-Mart has been great for workers, right? So many stories of them being treated poorly, unfairly, etc. Paid minimum wage (so much for increasing wages, right?), and they typically kill small business when they move into an area they weren't previously in. I've seen it happen.

    Keep telling me that big corporations making all this money is so great for everyone else. It's great for those reaping the rewards of the profits. Wal-Mart, Kraft, GE, Johnson & Johnson, are just a few. Show me any proof whatsoever that because they've made so much money that they've allowed that to trickle down to the line-level workers.

    Your logic is flawed in that area. "I don't understand why we tax them at all" do you not understand how our government works? I mean heck, we get taxed for just spending money. How hard is that to figure out? Democracy runs on taxes. So let's take away the corporate tax and increase income tax, or sales tax, or the gas tax. I'm gathering that you don't agree with the concept that if a company is based in the US, does business in the US, sells products in the US, that it should then pay taxes for that money in the US? You're ok with them taking all of their money overseas and paying nothing in taxes on the majority of it? I sure wish I could do that with MY income.

    The idea is that those that make the most money can afford to pay more taxes. That's the idea, and when you look at from a fundamental standpoint, it logically makes sense. If I make a million dollars I can afford more than someone that makes ten thousand. It's a mathematical fact, and when you take politics out of it is a sound concept. If it helps, make it marbles instead of dollars. I can give someone more marbles if I have a million and you have ten thousand.
    Are any of those jobs at Walmart worth more than minimum wage? Are the employees forced to work there? If they think that they are worth more then they should find someone that will pay them more. If they cannot find someone that will pay them more, they are wrong and need to increase their experience and skill set to make themselves more valuable.

    If a company can operate from another country for cheaper and pay import taxes ect., then the only one to blame is US policy. All that corporate money will still be taxed when it is used in some way. Why should taxes be taken off the top?

    Do you think that all the money "rich" people make is somehow put into a bank where no one else can benefit from it? No they spend it. It goes back into the economy one way or the other.

    How is it fair that we force the top 10% to pay the vast majority of the taxes in this country. Dont you feel bad someone else paying for the vast majority of all that you benefit from? Of course they can pay it, but should they? Should we punish people just for being successful? For more often than not giving other people jobs?

    What the tax system needs is to switch to a sales tax only system with cost of living deductions. In other words, if you only make and spend enough to live every year, you will effectively pay no taxes. But every dollar you spend past the cost of living is taxed. That way, those that spend more will be taxed more. Those that spend less will be taxed less. It has nothing to do with income. It is completely fair to everyone.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:38 PM
  9. craZDude's Avatar
    Are any of those jobs at Walmart worth more than minimum wage? Are the employees forced to work there? If they think that they are worth more then they should find someone that will pay them more. If they cannot find someone that will pay them more, they are wrong and need to increase their experience and skill set to make themselves more valuable.

    If a company can operate from another country for cheaper and pay import taxes ect., then the only one to blame is US policy. All that corporate money will still be taxed when it is used in some way. Why should taxes be taken off the top?

    Do you think that all the money "rich" people make is somehow put into a bank where no one else can benefit from it? No they spend it. It goes back into the economy one way or the other.

    How is it fair that we force the top 10% to pay the vast majority of the taxes in this country. Dont you feel bad someone else paying for the vast majority of all that you benefit from? Of course they can pay it, but should they? Should we punish people just for being successful? For more often than not giving other people jobs?

    What the tax system needs is to switch to a sales tax only system with cost of living deductions. In other words, if you only make and spend enough to live every year, you will effectively pay no taxes. But every dollar you spend past the cost of living is taxed. That way, those that spend more will be taxed more. Those that spend less will be taxed less. It has nothing to do with income. It is completely fair to everyone.
    If you agree that most of the extra money companies earn go to their top earning employees, then when those top earning employees spend money, and that money goes to other companies, then by definition it is only that new companies top earning employees that are seeing any of that additional wealth.

    If you think it is ok for our country to be filled with jobs that pay minimum wage, and thus for many, many people to be far poorer than necessary, then keep supporting the economic policies that you support.
    palandri likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:50 PM
  10. NoYankees44's Avatar
    In an ideal world this would be the way it works. But we have already discussed how all these huge companies are moving jobs overseas because they can get much cheaper labor there. By your logic, decreasing our minimum wage would bring companies back to America and then they would suddenly start paying people more because they can pay them less and earn more money. It literally makes no sense.
    Then you get into value of labor. If companies want skilled employees, they will pay what they are worth. If a worker believes they are worth more, they can find someone that will pay them more. If they cannot find anyone that will pay them more, then they are wrong. If someone is willing to do the same job you do for cheaper, then they should have your job. Just like if another company is willing to pay you more to do the same job, then you should be working for them.

    No one should be attempting to support a family on a cashier or other minimum wage job long term. They should be working for something better. And if the economy is good and the business is expanding, that better paying job will be there for them as long as they are willing work for that job.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 12:54 PM
  11. NoYankees44's Avatar
    If you agree that most of the extra money companies earn go to their top earning employees, then when those top earning employees spend money, and that money goes to other companies, then by definition it is only that new companies top earning employees that are seeing any of that additional wealth.

    If you think it is ok for our country to be filled with jobs that pay minimum wage, and thus for many, many people to be far poorer than necessary, then keep supporting the economic policies that you support.
    If the majority of a company's money is going to their top management, then that is a bad business model and their workers should go work for someone else if they dont like it.

    As i said in my previous post, if a job is worth minimum wage, then the employee should get minimum wage. There is no reason someone should be supporting a family long term on a low skill job.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:01 PM
  12. craZDude's Avatar
    Ideally, institute a fair tax. Quit hammering the businesses that provide jobs. Then the would be able to hire more and pay more. Then EVERYONE pays taxes. Any successful business owner will to government causes growth problems in business. Bigger government=more taxes. Bigger taxes causes growth to stop. Government gets in the way.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    You are assuming that the money that goes to the government simply disappears. The more money the government has, the more they are able to redistribute wealth through government programs.

    Take for example the NIH and the NSF. Without these science based divisions in the government, most scientific funding in the nation would dry up. We would stop producing top scientists, and would no longer be a World leader. Without taxes, these government funded organizations would cease to exist.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    palandri likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:04 PM
  13. palandri's Avatar
    The sad part is we'll be going through all this again in February, when the Tea Party tries to defund the ACA again.
    10-16-2013 01:04 PM
  14. llamabreath's Avatar
    "Senate leaders agree on plan to end government shutdown | The Verge" http://feedly.com/k/1aptWru

    And there you have it. Hopefully this will pass in the House, and we can put the government shutdown behind us.
    Kicking the can down the road yet again.

    Soon our country will be kicking the bucket instead.




    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:05 PM
  15. craZDude's Avatar
    Kicking the can down the road yet again.

    Soon our country will be kicking the bucket instead.




    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    To be honest, at this point I'm looking forward to that day. If everyone hates what America is becoming, why even bother having America anymore? Just split into different countries in which the constituents feel similarly about main issues.

    Patriotism never made any sense to me.
    10-16-2013 01:09 PM
  16. NoYankees44's Avatar
    No it's not. Pointing out the fact that the companies already don't let the profits trickle down to increased wages for workers isn't an entitlement mentality. It's pointing out the fact that even WITH regulation it doesn't happen, so why would it happen WITHOUT any regulation? Companies get huge, make record profits, and don't increase wages. Fact (because I said so. Works for you guys, works for me.)

    Fact is, what's been pointed out flies in the face of some of the points that have been made, and you're trying to apply a label to it that just doesn't fit.
    Why should they increase wages? Are those jobs suddenly worth more? The employee is doing the exact same work in the exact same time. Nothing has changed other that the business has become successful.

    Now if a business wants to avoid spending time and money on training ppl then they should pay them more to stay. If they want loyal workers, they should add profit based bonus and raise incentives(like my company does). But that is not up for someone else to mandate.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:12 PM
  17. craZDude's Avatar
    If the majority of a company's money is going to their top management, then that is a bad business model and their workers should go work for someone else if they dont like it.

    As i said in my previous post, if a job is worth minimum wage, then the employee should get minimum wage. There is no reason someone should be supporting a family long term on a low skill job.
    You're right, it is a bad business model, but welcome to how most companies in the 21st century are run. Isn't it ironic that government regulation would be the very thing that would prevent that from being a prevalent practice among businesses?
    10-16-2013 01:12 PM
  18. palandri's Avatar
    Kicking the can down the road yet again.

    Soon our country will be kicking the bucket instead.




    •• Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    It's either kick the can or kick the people who can't get medical insurance due to a pre-existing condition down the road or kick the sick child that can't get anymore medical treatment because she has topped out with the insurance company down the road..
    msndrstood likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:27 PM
  19. NoYankees44's Avatar
    You are assuming that the money that goes to the government simply disappears. The more money the government has, the more they are able to redistribute wealth through government programs.

    Take for example the NIH and the NSF. Without these science based divisions in the government, most scientific funding in the nation would dry up. We would stop producing top scientists, and would no longer be a World leader. Without taxes, these government funded organizations would cease to exist.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    A Government is a drain on a society. A necessary expenditure, but a drain. When a government taxes its workers, it is taking back the money it just gave them. When the government taxes the private sector, that is new money coming in. Thus if the private sector shrinks, there is less new money going into the government and it has less ability to sustain itself. The job of the government from an economic stand point is to foster a good environment for the private sector. Not to control or dictate the environment, just to provide a hospitable one.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:27 PM
  20. craZDude's Avatar
    A Government is a drain on a society. A necessary expenditure, but a drain. When a government taxes its workers, it is taking back the money it just gave them. When the government taxes the private sector, that is new money coming in. Thus if the private sector shrinks, there is less new money going into the government and it has less ability to sustain itself. The job of the government from an economic stand point is to foster a good environment for the private sector. Not to control or dictate the environment, just to provide a hospitable one.
    You are ignoring the crucial effects of what happens with that money that the government receives. Like I said, the government funds many crucial organizations, without which, the large companies would have trouble finding skilled labor. I would say that part of providing a hospitable environment for business growth is providing a happy, healthy, and skilled work force. The government is what does that, with schools, research grants, roads, food stamps, etc. , not the private sector. You can't simply say the government is a drain on society because it costs money to run. That would be like saying paying the people who work for companies is a drain on society because then there is less money for the companies.
    palandri and Fairclough like this.
    10-16-2013 01:34 PM
  21. palandri's Avatar
    You are ignoring the crucial effects of what happens with that money that the government receives. Like I said, the government funds many crucial organizations, without which, the large companies would have trouble finding skilled labor. I would say that part of providing a hospitable environment for business growth is providing a happy, healthy, and skilled work force. The government is what does that, with schools, research grants, roads, food stamps, etc. , not the private sector. You can't simply say the government is a drain on society because it costs money to run. That would be like saying paying the people who work for companies is a drain on society because then there is less money for the companies.
    Spot on!
    msndrstood likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:38 PM
  22. llamabreath's Avatar
    To be honest, at this point I'm looking forward to that day. If everyone hates what America is becoming, why even bother having America anymore? Just split into different countries in which the constituents feel similarly about main issues.

    Patriotism never made any sense to me.
    YEAH!

    Why don't we just have 312 million different countries here? One for each opinion?

    Or (to make it SO much easier) maybe a separate country for blacks, a separate country for whites, a separate country for Orientals, a separate country for Indians, a separate country for Spanish people, a separate country for rich people, a separate country for poor people, a separate country for middle-class people (of course the rich, poor and middle-class countries would then have to be divvied up into their corresponding racial countries) (or maybe not, depending on their opinions), a separate country for Southerners, a separate country for Northerners, East Coasters, West Coasters, Plains people, Mountain people, a separate country for animal lovers, animal haters and one for the hater haters.

    Oh, and of course amnesty for the illegals.




    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    mrsmumbles likes this.
    10-16-2013 01:43 PM
  23. craZDude's Avatar
    YEAH!

    Why don't we just have 312 million different countries here? One for each opinion?

    Or (to make it SO much easier) maybe a separate country for blacks, a separate country for whites, a separate country for Orientals, a separate country for Indians, a separate country for Spanish people, a separate country for rich people, a separate country for poor people, a separate country for middle-class people (of course the rich, poor and middle-class countries would then have to be divvied up into their corresponding racial countries) (or maybe not, depending on their opinions), a separate country for Southerners, a separate country for Northerners, East Coasters, West Coasters, Plains people, Mountain people, a separate country for animal lovers, animal haters and one for the hater haters.

    Oh, and of course amnesty for the illegals.




    Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    I know you were trying to be funny, and I appreciate good humor, but man you just came off as racist, bigoted, and incredibly prejudiced.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    10-16-2013 01:47 PM
  24. palandri's Avatar
    YEAH!

    Why don't we just have 312 million different countries here? One for each opinion?

    Or (to make it SO much easier) maybe a separate country for blacks, a separate country for whites, a separate country for Orientals, a separate country for Indians, a separate country for Spanish people, a separate country for rich people, a separate country for poor people, a separate country for middle-class people (of course the rich, poor and middle-class countries would then have to be divvied up into their corresponding racial countries) (or maybe not, depending on their opinions), a separate country for Southerners, a separate country for Northerners, East Coasters, West Coasters, Plains people, Mountain people, a separate country for animal lovers, animal haters and one for the hater haters.

    Oh, and of course amnesty for the illegals.




    •• Sent via a pay phone at the gas station.
    There's a big divide in this country, maybe divide it into red states and blue states.
    10-16-2013 01:48 PM
  25. NoYankees44's Avatar
    You are ignoring the crucial effects of what happens with that money that the government receives. Like I said, the government funds many crucial organizations, without which, the large companies would have trouble finding skilled labor. I would say that part of providing a hospitable environment for business growth is providing a happy, healthy, and skilled work force. The government is what does that, with schools, research grants, roads, food stamps, etc. , not the private sector. You can't simply say the government is a drain on society because it costs money to run. That would be like saying paying the people who work for companies is a drain on society because then there is less money for the companies.
    Roads are nice too... but completely different subject than mandating wages and regulating service and prices and having high corporate tax rates...
    10-16-2013 01:52 PM
749 ... 1314151617 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Changing battery's better to shutdown the S4?
    By Nuno Mota in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-02-2013, 12:15 PM
  2. 4.3 random shutdown
    By talsi_st in forum Google / Samsung Galaxy Nexus
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-21-2013, 12:45 AM
  3. samsung s4 shutdown "help"
    By Shatha816 in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-27-2013, 07:46 AM
  4. Government Notifications & the Skyrocket
    By SpringCTIL in forum Samsung Galaxy S II Skyrocket
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 05:50 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD