Apple's Steve Jobs to meet with President Obama on Thursday

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 121
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member
    Short of tearing out the convoluted tax code and replacing it with a fairer flat tax, all Obama is going to hear is some version of 'get out of the way.'



    Lower taxes, less regulation and smaller govt. are the direction we should be heading, not the reverse.



    Obama wants to be like Reagan and thinks it's all about the proper wording in his speeches. It's not. It's about the power of great ideas.



    I love this quote from Obama:



    "I think it?s fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last ten, fifteen years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom."
  • Reply 62 of 121
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member
    Lots of opinions here - very little intelligence ...



    One subject sure to be discussed in this meeting is how U.S. companies can repatriate some $1 trillion in overseas earnings without some kind of break on punitive U.S. taxes.
  • Reply 63 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Y.M.S.BUSHAN View Post


    sometimes the quotes get funny and other times it gets obnoxious !



    I don't know where this comment fits in !!



    Somewhere above your head.
  • Reply 64 of 121
    wow, so much partisanship in here.. is anybody out there an independent realist anymore?
  • Reply 65 of 121
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadash View Post


    The right in this country tars Obama with the label "socialist." Their Exhibit A is the insurance reform he got passed. But it is hard for them to explain how Obama's use of the ideas of Senator Dole and Governor Romney in putting this package together is "socialist," while those two aren't. It is easy for them to make him an "other" because of his race.



    No, you coming from a misplaced center. What is now the so called right was the center just a few years ago. When the left came a long they identified the center as such. Now any movement from the "right" to a misplaced center is actually a political push to the left. No one wants to come across as being considered "far-right", right?



    Thankfully people are starting to wake-up to this old trick and calling a turd a turd. That's why there is such a strong push against policies such as government run healthcare, social security, department of education, and multiple out of control spending.



    As for Dole and Romney, they too are part of the problem. At no point should Romney be considered a presidential candidate until he admits what a disaster his healthcare plan turned out to be. He's another "pretty face" making the same mistakes as the guy now in office...
  • Reply 66 of 121
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by j1h15233 View Post


    Sorry but I fail to see the correlation between studies to cure cancer and people having healthcare.



    You don't see competition as a potential driver of technological advancement? Developing new tech to get ahead of the competition should be an easy correlation for anyone who frequents this site.



    It stands to reason that if healthcare had been a vigorous free market these past decades Steve might have his cure by now.
  • Reply 67 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    Knowing and having been around Steve your type of remarks would only be met with a scathing retort and basically having him ask who is this idiot wasting everybody's time.



    He'd want to know what you do for the company because it isn't being the class clown. Save that for a political site.



    Amen, and if ARSgm stands for Apple Retail Store general manager, it's no wonder he is "former."
  • Reply 68 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by planetWC View Post


    Foxconn workers are paid the equivalent of $299 per YEAR.

    Stop lying about US Workers.



    Sorry, I'm not lying. They may only make the equivalent of $299 per year, but at least they're thankful for having a job.



    You mention their wage but fail to mention their commensurate cost of living.





    Just stating their wage doesn't take into account their way of life or accepted standard of living.



    I'm referring to their work ethic in comparison to ours, so don't try to change the subject. The fact that they produce such quality, in such volume, for such a small wage just bolsters my statement. They're thankful for working and take pride in their work. All things equal, it would be a rare instance to find an American that would do the same.



    Again, I'm not slamming my country, I'm simply stating the fact that our attitude sucks because we feel entitled to earn a premium wage but feel we're not required to provide, in return, the equivalent in productivity.



    You must be an employee.
  • Reply 69 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    Obama has no clue -- he wants Obamacare which is flagrantly unconstitutional. The solution is LESS, NOT MORE government involvement.



    This is a very business-unfriendly environment due to the substantially increased government interference in our lives and regulation. Government NEVER creates wealth, it ONLY consumes wealth.



    I am convinced Obama is just a cog in the machine to lower the standard of living in this nation, and that is toward the effort of new world order types. They would create an EU style system in the Americas and eventually try to combine all those conglomerations to further centralize power. Very dangerous to liberty -- no American should desire this.



    Come on, there are plenty of politically themed sites on which such spewing is quite appropriate. Please give us technophiles a political free zone where we can be safe from the usual righty versus lefty dirt clod fights. Enough of that on TV and radio.
  • Reply 70 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post


    Making $250K a year is hardly rich. I will admit it is a nice salary by most any standard but this crapola about being rich - come on now? At least back in the day when we said rich we were talking about millionaires (and today more like multi-millionaires) but a quarter of a million a year is hardly being rich. I will give in to upper middle but hardly rich.



    I think that's where we have lost our way to be honest, we don't appreciate what rich is.



    I make just shy of $250k per year, and even living in the Bay Area as far as I am concerned I am rich.



    Why do I say that? Because if you earn over $100,000 per year, you are in the top 7% of earners, in the US - that's rich.



    If you earn $250k, you earn six times the median average - that's rich.



    And by the way, I would willingly pay more tax. It is not right that because I own two expensive homes that I can have tax writeoffs that allow me to pay a lower percentage of my earnings as tax than someone who earns far less than me.
  • Reply 71 of 121
    I would like to see the president get these guys on board a top secret skunk works devoted to internet warfare. Besides the usual defense against cyber attacks, there is much we could do to support popular democratic movements around the world. Imagine a satellite-based internet service targeted on Iran--Sky-Fi if you will. Available everywhere in the country and could not be blocked by the government. Just blue skyin.'
  • Reply 72 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post


    Making $250K a year is hardly rich. I will admit it is a nice salary by most any standard but this crapola about being rich - come on now? At least back in the day when we said rich we were talking about millionaires (and today more like multi-millionaires) but a quarter of a million a year is hardly being rich. I will give in to upper middle but hardly rich.



    It all depends what you feel your standard of living should be. Earning $250k a year makes one a top 5% wage earner in the US. While one may not be swimming in dough, it makes for quite a comfortable living if one spends it wisely.
  • Reply 73 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pit5000 View Post


    wow, so much partisanship in here.. is anybody out there an independent realist anymore?



    Are you kidding? When there is so much noise-to-signal, why even bother.
  • Reply 74 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    I would like to see the president get these guys on board a top secret skunk works devoted to internet warfare. Besides the usual defense against cyber attacks, there is much we could do to support popular democratic movements around the world. Imagine a satellite-based internet service targeted on Iran--Sky-Fi if you will. Available everywhere in the country and could not be blocked by the government. Just blue skyin.'



    There's some folks with software skills in some of these bad places too, you know.



    Just sayin'....
  • Reply 75 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by razorpit View Post


    No, you coming from a misplaced center. What is now the so called right was the center just a few years ago. When the left came a long they identified the center as such. Now any movement from the "right" to a misplaced center is actually a political push to the left. No one wants to come across as being considered "far-right", right?



    Thankfully people are starting to wake-up to this old trick and calling a turd a turd. That's why there is such a strong push against policies such as government run healthcare, social security, department of education, and multiple out of control spending.



    As for Dole and Romney, they too are part of the problem. At no point should Romney be considered a presidential candidate until he admits what a disaster his healthcare plan turned out to be. He's another "pretty face" making the same mistakes as the guy now in office...



    And, therefore, your choice would be......?
  • Reply 76 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    Come on, there are plenty of politically themed sites on which such spewing is quite appropriate. Please give us technophiles a political free zone where we can be safe from the usual righty versus lefty dirt clod fights. Enough of that on TV and radio.



    In theory all of the partisan political blather should be confined to the political forum, but in practice it frequently boils over into other discussions, and unfortunately the mods don't make much of an effort to shut it down. This is the rare time when posters who are almost never seen participating in any discussion outside of the political forum turn up to pollute other threads.
  • Reply 77 of 121
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    Come on, there are plenty of politically themed sites on which such spewing is quite appropriate. Please give us technophiles a political free zone where we can be safe from the usual righty versus lefty dirt clod fights. Enough of that on TV and radio.



    The solution is so simple with this guy.



    1. Impeach Obama

    2. Cancel Social security

    3. Cancel Medicare

    4. Cancel taxes for business

    5. Cancel public education

    6. Cancel the Federal Reserve



    Then all would be 'right' with the world.



    Hell you might as well make it illegal to be homeless.
  • Reply 78 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post


    ... I do believe (as many do in the Democratic party) that [President Obama] believes in wealth redistribution and although says he doesn't he doesn't believe in putting a penalty on 'those that can afford more' I think he really does not mind it at all. In his (and others minds) its OK to take away from those that have worked hard to make their money (or those fortunate enough to have someone else in there lives that did) as long as it is to help the poor or some other group he wants to help. I personally think that is what charities are for and that we would all pay less if we paid a flat tax. ...



    Everyone believes in redistribution of wealth. The difference is in which direction it ought to be redistributed. Republican economic policies favor redistribution from middle class and poor to the rich, and these policies have become much more actively aggressive over the past 30 years. Democratic policies tend to favor redistribution in the opposite direction.



    As far as either approach supports the goal of a free, open and democratic society, it seems to me that one that tends to hinder the development of a moneyed aristocracy is the correct approach. So, while it's easy to complain about, "taking money away from those who have worked hard to make it," -- as though the poor and middle class are entirely a bunch of idlers who never put in a hard days work in their lives -- and to pretend that wealth isn't very much due to the accidents of circumstances (for every rich person who became rich because they had a "good idea" (defined in retrospect based on their success) and profited from it, there are at least a thousand people who had equally good ideas, worked hard and didn't succeed) the reality is that unless a society has a mechanism (or mechanisms) in place to hinder the development of hereditary wealth, the power that that wealth gives its possessors will ultimately undermine any democracy.



    The question therefore, is not whether redistribution of wealth is right or wrong -- it will happen in one direction or the other in any case -- but which direction and degree of redistribution is best for maintaining a healthy democracy.



    (And, as far as tax policy goes, a flat tax is utterly regressive and favors a redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich. It's hard to imagine a less "fair" tax system, nor one which threatens the foundations of a democracy more, in and of itself. That doesn't mean our current tax system is the best of all possible systems, it just means that while emotionally appealing to some, a flat tax would be ultimately destructive of our society.)
  • Reply 79 of 121
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post


    ... There is only one major political party in the US -- the big government party. We need libertarians for smaller government.



    Libertarianism is the most entirely self-contradictory and absurd political philosophy that has ever been developed. Taken to its logical conclusions, it bears no difference from anarchy. Yet, it never follows its premises anywhere, but simply creates arbitrary categories of instances where the government ought to act, while, just as arbitrarily excluding others.



    Essentially it's nothing more than cheap window dressing on a belief that the rich ought to be able to do as they damn well please and that the resources of society ought to be directed solely at preserving their wealth. Perversely, the selfish, childish and uncritical impulses of the not rich often drive them to adopt it, in name at least, as some sort of utopian ideal where life will be wonderful because they can live without any societal responsibilities.
  • Reply 80 of 121
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Libertarianism is the most entirely self-contradictory and absurd political philosophy that has ever been developed. Taken to its logical conclusions, it bears no difference from anarchy. Yet, it never follows its premises anywhere, but simply creates arbitrary categories of instances where the government ought to act, while, just as arbitrarily excluding others.



    Essentially it's nothing more than cheap window dressing on a belief that the rich ought to be able to do as they damn well please and that the resources of society ought to be directed solely at preserving their wealth. Perversely, the selfish, childish and uncritical impulses of the not rich often drive them to adopt it, in name at least, as some sort of utopian ideal where life will be wonderful because they can live without any societal responsibilities.





    +2, I really like both of your posts.
Sign In or Register to comment.