Obama Says: Steve Jobs Deserves to be Rich

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
421
0
18,930
Guys, I think we have a national security crisis on our hands. Someone has kidnapped Obama and replaced him with a free-market thinking impersonator.
 

CoryInJapan

Distinguished
Aug 14, 2008
128
0
18,630
Cory says: Obama is a pupet..quit looking to him for the answeers...he just runs the register at the white house...u need the manager...who ever tells obama what to do.
 

chickenhoagie

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2010
311
0
18,930
[citation][nom]aaron88_7[/nom]That is, of course, unless you have a medical condition that prevents you or seriously inhibits you from working. Life ain't that simplistic.[/citation]
if you have a medical condition that prevents you from working, chances are its preventing you from doing most things in life, so what would you need money for anyways? If you're sitting in a wheel chair right now, not only does that tell me you can't spend money on half the things you wish you could such as snowboarding, but i can also describe to you thousands of jobs that you could still apply for. So unless you like to LEECH off of a job you still have by saying you can't work, I would find another job that you can be progressive at. Just because life throws rocks at you instead of lemons doesn't mean you should get special treatment like free paychecks for the rest of your life. If that were the case, i'd break my legs right before i retire.
 

geofry

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2010
39
0
18,580
[citation][nom]aaron88_7[/nom]The problem is that the wealthy have hired the best lobbyists money can buy; republicans. These lobbyists specialize in manipulating the general public in ways unimaginable to the rest of the world.[/citation]

Let me fix your error. "The wealthy have hired the best lobbyists money can buy; republicans & democrats (politicians)...."

There all fixed.

The difference between a Republican and Democrat is the Republican wants the freedom to engage in comerce, the Democrat wants to take your freedom and your money and use it for "social justice". Which would you rather have a government that let's you compete and make money if you so desire and then do with it what you will or a government that takes a "reasonable amount" (in Europe that is 75% that means you work for 8 months out of the year and give it to them instead of yourself) and then proceeds to tell you how to live your life "for your own good".

Personally I'd rather have the 1st option. Because if you don't like the way things are run, you can go out get off your ass form your own company and change the world, verses the end game in the socialist world which usually involves the elite dictating things to the masses even if it results in large numbers of their deaths.
 

Homeboy2

Distinguished
Mar 21, 2006
18
0
18,560
[citation][nom]aaron88_7[/nom]The wealthy can easily afford to pay a higher percentage of taxes than lower and middle class Americans. All that is needed is a very modest increase in taxes on the wealthiest 1% and we could easily pay to put teachers back to work and fund a national healthcare system. Nobody is going to move out of the country over a modest tax increase. Even if they did if they were really important to the American economy their change of residency would not change their financial ties to the US so they would still be required to pay taxes.The problem is that the wealthy have hired the best lobbyists money can buy; republicans. These lobbyists specialize in manipulating the general public in ways unimaginable to the rest of the world. They were successful in lowering the taxes for the wealthy while stalling a 9/11 responders health bill, and yet they still have supporters that think this party cares about protecting and honoring 9/11 victims.[/citation]
Both of you are idiots
 
G

Guest

Guest
Jeez, I know this will start a flame war, but where has this idealized "let's give some more from the rich to the poor who need it" actually worked? I'd help (and have helped) someone I know who needs it, but separating someone who needs just a little help paying their bills from someone else who'll just waste it on drinking is where the problems are. And most of the time, you give someone regular help without earning it and they take all there is and ask for more. It also assumes the rich have a paycheck like everyone else does instead of most of their money being tied in assets.....as in the corporations and companies paying people money to work. And what about all these people who make a good income but just can't afford that much to give? Why should the rich bear it all? How about this for a novel idea--everyone pays a flat tax, no breaks, no loopholes. You're a citizen you pay the same percentage no matter who you are. People only get help when they simply can't work, otherwise you get help getting a job. The only thing I've seen here I agree with is stopping roadblocks on people making their own success--but good luck on fixing that. As for Obama, anyone dare to think he likes Jobs because he agrees with him ideologically more than how he's done business wise?
 

johnnylawman01

Distinguished
Jun 29, 2010
3
0
18,510
The lefty comments made here ARE the problem with the country. Do you even remember on what the country is founded? Freedom.

Who decides what is rich and and what is not? You, not me or me, not you?

Who decides what is socially responsible and what is not? Again, you, not me, or me not you?

Charity is just that. Not anyone else's ideas of forced charity, which is NOT charity at all.

86% of ALL federal income taxes are paid by the top 25% of wage earners...FACT (IRS). The top 1% pay 39% (again fact).

How much more should they pay? What is a moderate tax increase?

I love the so called rich that say that they are under taxed and want a tax increase on the "rich." How can this be? Who is stopping them from writing an additional check to the IRS?

No one is stopping them. But yet they aren't doing it. What they really mean is that they want everyone else to pay more taxes then they'll kick in theirs. It's not the same thing.


Who are you facist people that think you can just take away someone's wealth because YOU think its right? What are you gonna take next? Maybe someone wants to take something away from you?

That notion might not sit too well with you.
 

wvar15

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2010
2
0
18,510
[citation][nom]Marco925[/nom]If that was the case, why after so many tax cuts, we're in recession? we should be jumping in pools of money right now. Such crazy comments to think that tax cuts for wealthy people create jobs.. tax cuts to companies can help with performance and increase jobs, but personally, if i have money, i'm gonna bloody keep it. not spend it elsewhere, Keep living in your bubble if that's what makes you happy.[/citation]

What do you think the wealthy do with their money? You make it sound like they hide it away in a vault somewhere. Their money is going to be in the bank which allows the bank to loan money to others. The stock market providing capital for business. The bond market providing money for government and business, or invested in their own business creating jobs.

 

wvar15

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2010
2
0
18,510
[citation][nom]Ramar[/nom]Jesus don't get started on that Constitution crap. Bush called it a "goddamn piece of paper," and the constitution specifically states that we can do anything we want, as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness of anyone else.So tell me, how do the "conservative" ideals of the drug war, censorship, anti-gay, warmongering right wing fare any better than Democrats? Me smoking pot doesn't infringe on any of those, me saying whatever I want covered under the first amendment doesn't infringe on those, gay people getting married REALLY doesn't infringe on those in any way, and war is [with the exception of the world wars and the first gulf war] based on taking those away from people that we don't think deserve them.Grow up; stop watching Glenn Beck.[/citation]


http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_president_bush_call_the_constitution_a.html

I know plenty of liberals that support the war on drugs and oppose gay marriage. California voted to outlaw gay marriage and they are not a conservative state. How do you explain that? I'm conservative and gay marriage doesn't bother me, if they don't try to force my church to preform the marriages. I also support legalization of all drugs.
 

loomis86

Distinguished
Dec 5, 2009
233
0
18,830
[citation][nom]2real[/nom]You really think corporations are going to move their jobs to africa or asia with all those uneducated people? Think again they'll keep the jobs in America because we have the best and the brightest.[/citation]

what the heck, are you blind? ever heard of china? ever heard of american jobs being outsourced? Here's a clue for ya, when jobs are "outsourced", that means they leave america and go to china or india. sheesh.
 

kyee7k

Distinguished
Dec 24, 2006
22
0
18,560
I'm a moderate, but voted conservative this term because Obama overstepped where it didn't need to be fixed, namely healthcare. Mind, it wasn't efficient, but neither was it broken, and could have been amended over time if given a chance. Now that it will be implemented, it will mean more stricter federal and state regulations that will be much more expensive but does not supply more for less money. And because states tend to be less giving to Medicaid and Medicare (under Obamacare, the state obligation will significantly increase), more people will receive less and less.

Republicans, democrats are exactly the same in that as long as no one touches their pet projects, or heaven forbid their tax breaks, or incur more taxes in their income bracket, they don't give a damn. See what happened in Washington State when the legislature tried and wonderfully failed to enact an income and soda tax--it failed with over 60% (both Democrats and Republicans) voting no for the measure.

Both parties play this class warfare off each other to protect their supposedly ardent supporters, both the super-wealthy and impoverished poor, that the only ones being stuck with the heavy tax burden (as always) is the middle class to pay for this Obamacare, tax break for the businesses, Medicaid, Medicare, job opportunities, etc.

It disgusts me that someone from Toms's Hardware, one of my favorite tech site would incite continuous political rancor even in this season of giving. I think it is time for Tom's Hardware to let Marcus Yam be dismissed as a contributer/writer as I'm sure many readers are fed up by his "editorial" shenanigans.
 

kyee7k

Distinguished
Dec 24, 2006
22
0
18,560
I'm a moderate, but voted conservative this term because Obama overstepped where it didn't need to be fixed, namely healthcare. Mind, it wasn't efficient, but neither was it broken, and could have been amended over time if given a chance. Now that it will be implemented, it will mean more stricter federal and state regulations that will be much more expensive but does not supply more for less money. And because states tend to be less giving to Medicaid and Medicare (under Obamacare, the state obligation will significantly increase), more people will receive less and less.

Republicans, democrats are exactly the same in that as long as no one touches their pet projects, or heaven forbid their tax breaks, or incur more taxes in their income bracket, they don't give a damn. See what happened in Washington State when the legislature tried and wonderfully failed to enact an income and soda tax--it failed with over 60% (both Democrats and Republicans) voting no for the measure.

Both parties play this class warfare off each other to protect their supposedly ardent supporters, both the super-wealthy and impoverished poor, that the only ones being stuck with the heavy tax burden (as always) is the middle class to pay for this Obamacare, tax break for the businesses, Medicaid, Medicare, job opportunities, etc.

It disgusts me that someone from Toms's Hardware, one of my favorite tech site would incite continuous political rancor even in this season of giving. I think it is time for Tom's Hardware to let Marcus Yam be dismissed as a contributer/writer as I'm sure many readers are fed up by his "editorial" shenanigans.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Wow, hey Americans. Guess what there is a whole world outside the US, most of which would be considered extremely socialist from an american point of view.....and guess what, we are thriving. Australia's tax system has always been very socialist and our economy has and still is booming for decades. And yet i am in a high tax bracket.
 

THEfog101

Distinguished
May 12, 2010
50
0
18,580
@scottbdrury

You have a point, Australia as of late has been thriving compared to alot of western nations, even after labor took up the trend of backstabbing. Our healthcare works, out tax isn't all that bad, interest could be lower but is tolerable and easily handled and on top of that we are expected to start generating surplus to slowly pay off our debt. whats strange is Kevin Rudd pulled a similar stunt to George bush with the payouts to jump start the economy, except where Bush's failed, Ours worked and our economy became strong enough to handle the looming "Economic Crisis".
 

tomaz99

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2010
55
0
18,580
[citation][nom]Silmarunya[/nom]You make redistribution of wealth sounds like a bad thing, while it's the cornerstone of a welfare state...Nobody expects Jobs to give everything away. But imagine this: you make a few million dollars a year. Your neighbour is ill, can't work and can't pay his bills. If you were to give him, say, 1k dollars, he could lead a life above the poverty limit. Not far above, but still liveable. You on the other hand wouldn't even notice it. That's redistribution at its best: take from those who can afford to give, give to those who need it.Nobody expects a working class person to support the poor, but it's reasonable for a millionaire to do so. Nobody expects a lazy ass that never did something productive in his life to be supported. But is it wrong to transfer money from the super rich to the disabled, elderly, poor and other groups of people who would otherwise be dangerously close to the poverty line?And how would that fundamentally transform society? The rich remain rich, so no change. The middle class doesn't receive or gives a lot in this model, so no change. The poor remain rather poor, they'll just be able to pay their bills and feed their children. Not a fundamental change, rather an incremental one.Also, redistribution of wealth supports the economy. A rich person can only buy so much before he has everything he desires. The remaining money is not spent and thus doesn't stimulate the economy (unless perhaps through capital investment). A poor person will spend every additional dollar he has on health care, food, basic appliances,... Because of that, this money will directly stimulate the economy. In turn, a growing economy provides jobs and lifts the poor out of poverty. These people won't need redistribution of wealth anymore, on the contrary they'll pay taxes, thus reducing government deficit. It's a win win situation!(Before someone mentions this doesn't belong in a tech forum, he's right. But if the person above can post political comments, so can I)[/citation]

It sounds like a bad thing because it is.

Stealing is wrong; if you take something with out the person's consent it is stealing...it doesn't matter how much money the person has or how much they'd miss it.

If I make $1,000,000 and you make $100,000 and we both pay 20% federal tax (for simplicity) aren't I already paying more...even at the same percentage...FYI, this is not a trick question...

Lets say your family makes $100,000 and my family makes $100,000. You do well managing your money, but I'm reckless and blow everything...have huge bills (let's say they're all medical for my ill wife)...is it so wrong if you sent me a $1k check in the mail (I can provide a postal address if you would like to exercise your theory)...after-all, you're rich compared to me (just look at the discrepancies in our bank accounts)...and really think about it...do you think you'd miss it? (I too see this as a win-win situation).

I suspect you won't send me the check...but instead will delegate the coerced charity for my household to the 'really' rich...anybody above your level anyway :)
 

mj4358

Distinguished
May 28, 2009
68
0
18,580
[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]man you got a twisted democratic half truth for social communism in everything don't you. i can shoot down every everything you spew about democrat or republican.the fact of the matter is apple invented nothing, they're just as bad as microsoft except apple makes thier stuff more idiot friendly. i pad, i phone, i pod, i tunes, macs os, mac's.obama blundered his statement no biggie. just alot less when you are not smoking pot or left with 1 braincell left from your crack sniffing.it happens to them all at some point or another, i gaurantuee had the 14 foxconn suicides been brought up in such a manner as this" so mr president your saying it's okay for mr jobs to have every penny when it's at the expense of the people making your products under such pressure they have no life, no social contact with the outside world from family or friends or the rest of the world under extremely long working hours and stressful conditions with minimal sleep, poor housing accomidations and blah food and being charged high prices for all that while making a meager wage all for an unbelieveably low unit production costs with a price turn around of 3000 percent? if you don't believe me about shooting down your half bakedtheory/truths, billy clinton relaxed the banking regs and wall street (mind you the savings and loans scam had just bust prior to slippery willy getting in office) in an effort to manipulate the housing market to boom by allowing unqualified low income people to compete at the bottom teir thrusting more people to buy into high priced homes then they could afford at variable apr with falling interests rates bottoming at 1-2% (huge amounts of people failed to lock in their loans either by denial of the banks or unable to refinanace to a new loan at a lower apr.as for your education bit, america is draining alot of countries of their brightest people. it's a huge brain drain i have noticed for the last 25 years from india and asia. problem is amiercan companies have found out there's billions of people with university degrees for the same things me, you and every one else do, only bust their butts trying to do the most and they do it for peanuts and with out the attitude most americans have these days about having to lift a finger for manual labor and that we should all have a desk job doing nothing and getting paid huge sums for it after mommy and daddy paid for our education while we partied thru those years of higher learning.as for the loss of manufacturing, that's congress's fault after ww2 they wanted to move america out of being a manufacturing economy and into a service industry in an order to avoid another great depression due to over manufacturing and demand loss for war products while companies waited at the last minute to shift to peace time production.congress has also let road apple trade agreements go thru where we can export small #'s of things to the asian markets but the asians are unrestricted in what they can export to us. case in point obama's new trade agreements with asia and india. and instead of continuing with trying to starve off communist countries trade was also developed with china despite the war on communism to try and cause the people to revolt thru economic and propoganda measures of information on every one elses freedoms and benefits in the world. the chinese gov.'t how ever is fighting back economically doing everything they can to flood the american markets to bankrupt our manufacturing. once tariff limits are hit, products in shipping containers are purposely wrongly manifested as something else in efforts to get them thru customs and dump them for prices cheaper then it cost american companies to buy the materials to make their own. as an example american steel companies have proven it and the u.s. governement has done nothing. most of the industries being affected are the ones that would produce our war materials and war products.companies in america are looking for cheapest disposable work force and facilities to operate and produce goods as demand dictates in an effort to keep the bottom line in the black as show profits so ceo's can get their bonuses. companies are bone thin and have either eliminated the competition or bought them up and are either sitting on the verge of bankruptcy or sitting on huge stock piles of cash waiting to see what the latest scam is going to be they can invest in and propogate.i can elaborate further but it disgusts me i have to educate you that it's both the social republicans and social democrats that are finding ways to steal the middle and lower income classes money to fill their own pockets and those of their constituents thru republican or democratic sponsored scams.fact is the united states is bleeding businesses and cash faster then it is taking in. at -$13.8 trillion national debt and 1.7 trillion gone from social security, medicaid and medicare that is supposed to be held in trust fund and record setting deficits year after year and still contiuning with a projection of -$15 trillion in national debt in 2012 (but looking more like mid 2011)how much more has america got to bleed before it can legally be declared dead/bankrupt? china's already warning they are going to demand their 4.8 trillion payment in the next 6 -12 months and we still owe them another 3.4 trillion on top of that at this moment.credit card and banks would have cut every one off at -$7k to13k for people making less then 50k a year, americas tripple A rating has already been cut to double A and is about to get the credit line pulled.usdebtclock.org[/citation]


Can you please cite your references for this conjecture?
 

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
127
0
18,630
[citation][nom]wvar15[/nom]http://www.factcheck.org/askfactch [...] ion_a.htmlI know plenty of liberals that support the war on drugs and oppose gay marriage. California voted to outlaw gay marriage and they are not a conservative state. How do you explain that? I'm conservative and gay marriage doesn't bother me, if they don't try to force my church to preform the marriages. I also support legalization of all drugs.[/citation]

Thanks for setting me straight on the quote. And as for churches performing gay marriages, I think forcing people to accept anyone is stupid. Everyone should be equal, but you're going to force a black person to be able to work somewhere that doesn't want black people? That's not going to work out well for anyone.

But I dare you to find me a GOP candidate for presidency that isn't anti-drug, or anti-gay marriage. There are good conservatives; people are people. However, none of them are in the GOP, and that's where the supposed "conservative and constitutional president" would almost certainly have to come from.

@ kyee7k - Healthcare is/was broken as hell. I'm a firefighter/EMT; I'm in and out of these situations all day. We're supposed to be the greatest nation on earth, but our healthcare system is shit compared to 90% of the other first-world countries.

[citation][nom]scottbdrury@gmailcom[/nom]Wow, hey Americans. Guess what there is a whole world outside the US, most of which would be considered extremely socialist from an american point of view.....and guess what, we are thriving. Australia's tax system has always been very socialist and our economy has and still is booming for decades. And yet i am in a high tax bracket.[/citation]

I have been a socialist since I was 15 [old enough to form any sort of decent opinion] and this is incredibly true, thank you. Americans just have a stigma against socialism because of our feud with Russia.
 

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
127
0
18,630
P.S.:

[citation][nom]kyee7k[/nom]I think it is time for Tom's Hardware to let Marcus Yam be dismissed as a contributer/writer as I'm sure many readers are fed up by his "editorial" shenanigans.[/citation]

Says the man that just wrote 300 words on the topic. Intellectual debate is a good thing, and it's good if someone says something that pisses you off. Our forefathers would probably have spent all day on the net arguing political points. I understand this is a tech site, but I guess from your point of view that means NOONE IS ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE.

tl;dr If you don't like it why the hell did you click it?

 
Status
Not open for further replies.