Obama calls Steve Jobs' success a prime example of American wealth

13567

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 136
    nofeernofeer Posts: 2,422member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BartBuzz View Post


    Obama doesn't care as much about Steve Jobs' success as he does about getting a bigger slice of his wealth in higher taxes. Like so many liberals and progressives, they feel the government deserves more from them because they can "afford" it. I wish this article had not been posted. Every time I hear Obama praise capitalism I wait for the other shoe to drop.





    great points, obama should be praising wealth building and getting rich

    i would like to be rich, making creating goods people want and MAKING JOBS

    i never got a job from a poor person, this war on "rich" wealthy, etc kills jobs

    i want my boss to do very very well, so i can keep my job as i show him/her my worth in my work ethic and if not i can move to another job....JOBS MAN JOBS



    Government needs to get away from picking winners and losers, but it benefits far too much from feeding dependency, welfare, unemployment, disability ARE NOT CAREERS.
  • Reply 42 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BartBuzz View Post


    Obama doesn't care as much about Steve Jobs' success as he does about getting a bigger slice of his wealth in higher taxes. Like so many liberals and progressives, they feel the government deserves more from them because they can "afford" it. I wish this article had not been posted. Every time I hear Obama praise capitalism I wait for the other shoe to drop.



    Hey, the wealthy in this country pay very little in taxes, this is a fact, despite your whining.



    Based on our current tax structure, Oprah or SJ pays 7% more of their incomes in taxes than I do, and I can assure you I am not wealthy. Their incomes are *-much-* larger, 'obscenely larger' would be an apt description in FACT, and they have a great many more deductions such that they really shouldn't have to pay much tax at all if they have experienced any losses (like Oprah slipped and gave away 2 dozen more Cadillacs than she should have or something.)



    Seriously? Seven percent more? Those poor, poor rich people. Since 35% is the top bracket, and no one pays more than that, then people who are barely making ends meet shouldn't be paying even 1/2 that much. But, the TRUTH is that someone who is making 34K is paying OVER 70% of what the ELITE PAY--so that's 25% from the struggling workers and only 35% from the richest of the rich. How in the world is this fair? On 34K you are going to be lucky to afford a house and a car.
  • Reply 43 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xSamplex View Post


    Goodie for Jobs. When you can convince every customer to pay an extra couple hundred bucks for your commodity product, I guess you get rich. Unfortunately, the world can't sustain a world of capitalist Svengalis



    Apple doesn't need the whole world they only needed less then 10% to be massively profitable. Most of the other companies make money on quantity because they have all undercut each other on price. Those other companies need "the world" to support them.
  • Reply 44 of 136
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,635member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Momus View Post


    What an awful and depressing thing to say. Monetary wealth should not be a person's lifetime goal.



    You just don't get it do you. Socialists never do.
  • Reply 45 of 136
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post


    Obama doesn't realize that 'The American Dream' for many people is...........JUST TO HAVE A JOB!!!!

    Obama's just trying to stroke APPLE to get on the good side of people. Well it won't work.



    such ridiculous abortion of intelligence.
  • Reply 46 of 136
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post


    You just don't get it do you. Socialists never do.



    You're a socialist. Get over it. We all are.
  • Reply 47 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Macbrewer View Post


    Hey, the wealthy in this country pay very little in taxes, this is a fact, despite your whining.



    Based on our current tax structure, Oprah or SJ pays 7% more of their incomes in taxes than I do, and I can assure you I am not wealthy. Their incomes are *-much-* larger, 'obscenely larger' would be an apt description in FACT, and they have a great many more deductions such that they really shouldn't have to pay much tax at all if they have experienced any losses (like Oprah slipped and gave away 2 dozen more Cadillacs than she should have or something.)



    Seriously? Seven percent more? Those poor, poor rich people. Since 35% is the top bracket, and no one pays more than that, then people who are barely making ends meet shouldn't be paying even 1/2 that much. But, the TRUTH is that someone who is making 34K is paying OVER 70% of what the ELITE PAY--so that's 25% from the struggling workers and only 35% from the richest of the rich. How in the world is this fair? On 34K you are going to be lucky to afford a house and a car.



    Lol, I couldn't help but quote you on this ridiculous post. A 7% increase has no bearing on the real world take away of income taxation.



    Say You make 34 k and pay, say 25% of that in total income tax (thats $8,500 you have contributed to "the greater good"). Say Steve Jobs makes $100m dollars and pays 30% of that gross in taxes. That would be $30,000,000.



    Steve Jobs just paid 3529x more tax then you did. He just contributed more to "society" then you could in 30 lifetimes. Will Steve Jobs see 3529x more benefit from his tax contribution then you will?



    Of course, this is extremely simplified, and ignores other qualms I have with taxation, and social philosophy, etc. But sometimes people just need a little perspective.
  • Reply 48 of 136
    iliveriliver Posts: 299member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    You're a socialist. Get over it. We all are.



    Right - it's only the corporations like APPLE INC that are capitalist.
  • Reply 49 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    Steve Jobs is about true innovation and creating value, in many ways. Sure, he's not perfect, but the innovation and creating value is what is absolutely critical for the USA in a global economy... Not shifting around trillions of "nonreal money" in the corrupt and flawed financial system.



    I tell you now, Americans, if there are just 5 other American companies that have done what Apple has done, your company, the USA, will be much better off in the global market.





    Sent from Snootyville

    10 posts more to 6,000!

    muah ha ha ha ha ha



    The financial system may be flawed but it's just as critical as innovation for the USA in a global economy.



    Nice one on the 6,000!
  • Reply 50 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BartBuzz View Post


    Obama doesn't care as much about Steve Jobs' success as he does about getting a bigger slice of his wealth in higher taxes. Like so many liberals and progressives, they feel the government deserves more from them because they can "afford" it. I wish this article had not been posted. Every time I hear Obama praise capitalism I wait for the other shoe to drop.



    Democrats are healthier capitalists than republicans are, actually, and last I checked, you guys got your tax cuts. The rest of the country just can't wait for all those jobs the rich will create with a tax level the same as it has been throughout this country's long tumble down...



    I facepalm every time I hear a republican drone parrot the propaganda they've been fed, then turn around and act like everyone ELSE is an enemy to capitalism. Funny idiots individually, but scary and damaging when they get together.
  • Reply 51 of 136
    Well considering Obama signed an executive order authorizing the targetted assasination of US citizens, hopefully Steve doesn't tick him off...
  • Reply 52 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jhende7 View Post


    Lol, I couldn't help but quote you on this ridiculous post. A 7% increase has no bearing on the real world take away of income taxation.



    Say You make 34 k and pay, say 25% of that in total income tax (thats $8,500 you have contributed to "the greater good"). Say Steve Jobs makes $100m dollars and pays 30% of that gross in taxes. That would be $30,000,000.



    Steve Jobs just paid 3529x more tax then you did. He just contributed more to "society" then you could in 30 lifetimes. Will Steve Jobs see 3529x more benefit from his tax contribution then you will?



    Of course, this is extremely simplified, and ignores other qualms I have with taxation, and social philosophy, etc. But sometimes people just need a little perspective.



    PERSPECTIVE!????



    Let's go back to your little example there.



    What do you think Jobs and that person making 34k a year have in common? OH RIGHT, the cost of goods. You think that person making 34k has a choice in eating food, getting to work, paying for a place to live, or perhaps to take care of kids? Food, transportation, mortgage or rent, child care, these are all things that don't have a progressive price on them, and cost the same to both them and Jobs (cost of course meaning the actual cost, and not the impact on life the cost has.)



    Ok, so the taxes get taken out. Jobs is left with 70 million, and our good for nothing waste of space is left with 16k. When you add up the cost of surviving (not living) how much money is that dead beat left with? Enough to buy an iPad, Jobs hopes.



    So yes, Jobs pays into it more, but he's not battling for survival like the person making 34k a year is, and trust me, that $8500 to the person making 34k is felt FAR MORE than the 30 million taken from Jobs.



    Do you know why food stamps and unemployment benefit is the governments best way to stimulate the economy? Because there is a 100% chance it will be spent. It's a necessity. In fact, tax cuts to those who are struggling are FAR MORE effective than tax cuts to those who absolutely aren't struggling, because of this very reason! It gets spent! Spent on gas, groceries, energy, mortgage, what have you. These are the staples of our society that actually employ people. A bank account collecting interest does not create jobs like you think it does.



    Look at China. No social safety nets, so almost everyone saves every penny they have. Why? Because if they get hurt or sick, THEY ARE FUCKED. The result is people aren't buying enough domestic goods and China's economy depends heavily on the rest of the world. Remember this the next time a "conservative" talks about ending social programs that take care of Americans in need.



    Don't talk to us about perspective. People like you lost that such a long time ago, it's just a word with no meaning to you now. BTW, Jobs made his money in America because the system was healthy and working right. America has a system that provides a path to wealth and if that system is sick, and dying, then that path to wealth is cut off. If you want lower taxes, we need to lower the size of the government FIRST, otherwise people like Jobs won't have customers!
  • Reply 53 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by coolfactor View Post


    Amazing how pessimistic and negative this thread has become and it's just started.



    Well, then you better prepare yourself...



    Obama and the Democratic marauders in Washington have done more recently to harm American business and innovation in the past few years than any administration in recent memory. At least Bush was raiding the public coffers to make sweetheart deals with the military-industrial complex to ensure our country would remain at war for several more administrations, if not longer...



    Obama is clever, but never quite as clever as he thinks. His credibility among his own base has eroded and his transparent attempt to woo back the political middle is as sloppy as I've ever seen. He's nearly guaranteed a one-term presidency, and to be honest, it really didn't matter who won the office this time around. A recession/depression president could only avoid blame by getting out of the way so business and the market could accelerate the process of cleaning up this economic mess we're in by bankruptcies, reorganizations and much needed firings. Instead we got the "visible hand" of government manipulating markets, printing money and bailing out every large company with a hard luck story in hand.
  • Reply 54 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Well, then you better prepare yourself...



    Obama and the Democratic marauders in Washington have done more recently to harm American business and innovation in the past few years than any administration in recent memory.



    Like what?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Instead we got the "visible hand" of government manipulating markets, printing money and bailing out every large company with a hard luck story in hand.



    Maybe "conservatives" should actually learn the meaning of the word, and stop treating the primaries like a popularity contest.



    I'll be voting for Ron Paul.
  • Reply 55 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Macbrewer View Post


    Hey, the wealthy in this country pay very little in taxes, this is a fact, despite your whining.



    Based on our current tax structure, Oprah or SJ pays 7% more of their incomes in taxes than I do, and I can assure you I am not wealthy. Their incomes are *-much-* larger, 'obscenely larger' would be an apt description in FACT, and they have a great many more deductions such that they really shouldn't have to pay much tax at all if they have experienced any losses (like Oprah slipped and gave away 2 dozen more Cadillacs than she should have or something.)



    Seriously? Seven percent more? Those poor, poor rich people. Since 35% is the top bracket, and no one pays more than that, then people who are barely making ends meet shouldn't be paying even 1/2 that much. But, the TRUTH is that someone who is making 34K is paying OVER 70% of what the ELITE PAY--so that's 25% from the struggling workers and only 35% from the richest of the rich. How in the world is this fair? On 34K you are going to be lucky to afford a house and a car.



    I don't know what flavor Kool Aid you drink or where you get your "facts". But the latest data show that the top 1% of income earners pay over 38% of the federal taxes. The top 5% pay over 58%. The bottom 50% pay less than 3%. If you want to see all the data, here's a link from a non-partisan group http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html



    The question is how much more do you want these "obscene" wealthy people to pay? It is there money after all.
  • Reply 56 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BartBuzz View Post


    The question is how much more do you want these "obscene" wealthy people to pay? It is there money after all.



    How much should you pay? How much should I pay? How much should anyone pay?



    The answer is ZERO, but guess what? That's not the reality we live in right now. Those people are rich because they live in a free country that allowed them to get rich. If people don't have jobs, they can't buy products, and they won't make people "rich." To ignore that is obscene, and to simply give rich people tax cuts and claim it creates jobs is IDIOTIC.
  • Reply 57 of 136
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    If the other side runs Palin, Obama is a shoe in.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    I'm afraid Obama won't make it another term. It concerns me somewhat, but the election will probably see-saw over the next 10 years, depending on how soon the *real recovery* happens.



  • Reply 58 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    If the other side runs Palin, Obama is a shoe in.



    Remember many thought the "B" actor Reagan could never be elected- anything is possible. I mean the country voted in W and then Obama- 2 of our nation's worst.
  • Reply 59 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    :So yes, Jobs pays into it more, but he's not battling for survival like the person making 34k a year is, and trust me, that $8500 to the person making 34k is felt FAR MORE than the 30 million taken from Jobs.



    Let's be honest, someone making $34,000 who also has kids is not paying much in taxes. More than likely after returns are filed this person is getting money back and basically has a zero tax burden. We have a very large portion of our society that pays no taxes at all. The greatest amount of revenue comes from our highest earners and it isn't even close. You may be right when talking about tax as a percent of income... but let's talk about it from a bottom line perspective. Where does the government have tax revenues and where does the government have tax out flows?



    One thing you are very right about is China's domestic economy. Unless China improves social services their population will continue to hoard and will not spend. However, there comes a tipping point where the economic benefit of the social programs is far outweighed by their costs and the productivity they prevent. Socially programs have their place, unfortunately they grow like weeds and sap the soil.
  • Reply 60 of 136
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    How much should you pay? How much should I pay? How much should anyone pay?



    The answer is ZERO, but guess what? That's not the reality we live in right now. Those people are rich because they live in a free country that allowed them to get rich. If people don't have jobs, they can't buy products, and they won't make people "rich." To ignore that is obscene, and to simply give rich people tax cuts and claim it creates jobs is IDIOTIC.



    I guess you must work for a poor person. If the socialists in this country had their way, we would all be poor because the rich would emigrate. And if you don't think tax cuts create jobs, there's no common ground for discussion.
Sign In or Register to comment.