Only The Rich Pay Taxes

[4moreyears]

There is new data for 2001. The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% fell to 33.89% from 37.42% in 2000. This is mainly because their income share (not just wages) fell from 20.81% to 17.53%. However, their average tax rate actually rose slightly from 27.45% to 27.50%.


*Data covers calendar year 2001, not fiscal year 2001 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security





This proves that it was not the tax cut that caused revenues from the rich to fall, but the recession and the stock market crash. In other words, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If you are going to benefit from the rich paying more taxes, due to progressivity, on the upside, you are going to lose more revenue from these people on the downside. This is a good argument for reducing progressivity.

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:

Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.
The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy)

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.



*Data covers calendar year 2001, not fiscal year 2001 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security
This proves that it was not the tax cut that caused revenues from the rich to fall, but the recession and the stock market crash. In other words, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If you are going to benefit from the rich paying more taxes, due to progressivity, on the upside, you are going to lose more revenue from these people on the downside. This is a good argument for reducing progressivity.

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:

Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.
The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy)

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.

I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes. AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed.

Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation." What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it.

I have made an executive decision as the owner and ultimate editor of this website that this table and these numbers stay on this website forever - or until next year's numbers come out. In order to get these facts, you have to see them each and every day. This story, along with a link to the IRS chart, will stay somewhere on the RushLimbaugh.com homepage so everyone can see and find these numbers at any time. It's crucial that people get this, so please, share it with a friend now!
Check Out the UPDATED IRS Table of Numbers from 2001...
(The IRS: Individual Income Tax Returns Each Tax Year 1986 - 2001)
{Requires EXCEL to View}
(Rush Limbaugh.com Non-EXCEL version of the 2000 IRS Data)
Read the Article...
(AP: Obscure minimum tax will affect 36 million by 2010)



I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes. AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed.

Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation." What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it.

[Dr. Love]

Damn lazy-ass poor people.

[FORD]

The fact is that if the rich actually PAID the taxes that they owe, it would probably cut the deficit in half.

We don't need a drastic overhaul of the tax code. We just need to eliminate all the existing loopholes and the rich can PAY their fair share.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
There is new data for 2001. The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% fell to 33.89% from 37.42% in 2000. This is mainly because their income share (not just wages) fell from 20.81% to 17.53%. However, their average tax rate actually rose slightly from 27.45% to 27.50%.


*Data covers calendar year 2001, not fiscal year 2001 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security





This proves that it was not the tax cut that caused revenues from the rich to fall, but the recession and the stock market crash. In other words, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If you are going to benefit from the rich paying more taxes, due to progressivity, on the upside, you are going to lose more revenue from these people on the downside. This is a good argument for reducing progressivity.

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:

Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.
The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy)

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.



*Data covers calendar year 2001, not fiscal year 2001 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security
This proves that it was not the tax cut that caused revenues from the rich to fall, but the recession and the stock market crash. In other words, you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If you are going to benefit from the rich paying more taxes, due to progressivity, on the upside, you are going to lose more revenue from these people on the downside. This is a good argument for reducing progressivity.

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:

Top 5% pay 53.25% of all income taxes (Down from 2000 figure: 56.47%). The top 10% pay 64.89% (Down from 2000 figure: 67.33%). The top 25% pay 82.9% (Down from 2000 figure: 84.01%). The top 50% pay 96.03% (Down from 2000 figure: 96.09%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.97% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 17.53 (2000: 20.81%) of all income. The top 5% earns 31.99 (2000: 35.30%). The top 10% earns 43.11% (2000: 46.01%); the top 25% earns 65.23% (2000: 67.15%), and the top 50% earns 86.19% (2000: 87.01%) of all the income.
The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy)

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.

I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes. AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed.

Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation." What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it.

I have made an executive decision as the owner and ultimate editor of this website that this table and these numbers stay on this website forever - or until next year's numbers come out. In order to get these facts, you have to see them each and every day. This story, along with a link to the IRS chart, will stay somewhere on the RushLimbaugh.com homepage so everyone can see and find these numbers at any time. It's crucial that people get this, so please, share it with a friend now!
Check Out the UPDATED IRS Table of Numbers from 2001...
(The IRS: Individual Income Tax Returns Each Tax Year 1986 - 2001)
{Requires EXCEL to View}
(Rush Limbaugh.com Non-EXCEL version of the 2000 IRS Data)
Read the Article...
(AP: Obscure minimum tax will affect 36 million by 2010)



I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes. AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed.

Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation." What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it.

Do you actually ever have a link for your chain e-mails?

[Warham]

You don't think the poor became poor because they paid too much in taxes, do ya?

:D

[BigBadBrian]

Give those fuckers in the welfare line a broom or rake or something while they are standing there. :gulp:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Give those fuckers in the welfare line a broom or rake or something while they are standing there. :gulp:

Yeah! And those major corporations on welfare! Tell 'em to get their asses (HQ's) back here! Lazy cunts!

[Betty Bush III]

Originally posted by FORD
The fact is that if the rich actually PAID the taxes that they owe, it would probably cut the deficit in half.

We don't need a drastic overhaul of the tax code. We just need to eliminate all the existing loopholes and the rich can PAY their fair share.

Why should we punish the people who work and create jobs and wealth with an unfair tax code? The more money you make, the higher % the government takes. Please explain to me how that aspect doesn't need to be overhauled in a capitalist country.

People who don't work by choice should receive NOTHING from the taxpayers! If they turn to crimes then build bigger prisons.

[Betty Bush III]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Yeah! And those major corporations on welfare! Tell 'em to get their asses (HQ's) back here! Lazy cunts!

Oh those damn corporations!!! Those damn job creators !! Those damn wealth creators !!! To hell with the entire private sector !!!
You know the welfare culture is really carrying the load in this country. Standing in line all day, increasing our GDP by eating pallets of Cheetos and Coke. Soon we'll be a world power...

[steve]

How about everyone get guns, and no one pay taxes.
No roads.
No military.
No SS for your parents.

No corporations on welfare.
(no GM, no Chrysler, no United Airlines, no Boeing, no Defense contractors, no Haliburton)

No American agricultural system (they survive on govt. tariffs nowadays-otherwise, much of US agriculture would be undercut by South America & Asia).

Just us, our guns, and fighting our neighbor for that squirril.

Both Republican and Democratic philosophies have been (to greater or lesser extents) based on Rawlsian principles for the past 60 years-I say we've done fairly well by them.

Give yourself the ole' "Veil of ignorance" - then write the tax code.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Do you actually ever have a link for your chain e-mails?

Not a chain e-mail.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes .guest.html

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Betty Bush III
Oh those damn corporations!!! Those damn job creators !! Those damn wealth creators !!! To hell with the entire private sector !!!
You know the welfare culture is really carrying the load in this country. Standing in line all day, increasing our GDP by eating pallets of Cheetos and Coke. Soon we'll be a world power...

Actually the places we ship jobs offshore to soon will be world powers!

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Actually the places we ship jobs offshore soon will be world powers!

So corporations should pay american workers (many who are in unions) 2 to 3 times the price for labor than most of the competition they face. With the economy being of a global scale If my company is competing with Samsung or Hyundai or another Asian company I want to be competitive so I can win the business. The American worker has priced himself out of the job market in some cases.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
So corporations should pay american workers (many who are in unions) 2 to 3 times the price for labor than most of the competition they face. With the economy being of a global scale If my company is competing with Samsung or Hyundai or another Asian company I want to be competitive so I can win the business. The American worker has priced himself out of the job market in some cases.

And can no longer afford their products in some cases.

And why hasn't the vastly overpayed American CEO not priced himself out of a job when Europeon and Asian CEO's earn far less on average?

[steve]

If hipocracy were pate, this thread would be an Athur Anderson Christmas party.

First of all, those stats are WAY un true...there are many examples of why:

http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/20/news/buffett_tax/

Buffett slams dividend tax cut
One of world's richest calls plan 'voodoo economics,' says it puts burden on low-income families.

May 20, 2003: 10:41 AM EDT NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Renewing his criticism of the dividend tax cut laid out by the Senate last week, Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett called the proposal "voodoo economics" that uses "Enron-style accounting."

The Senate's plan for dividends to be 50 percent tax free in 2003, 100 percent tax free in 2004 through 2006 and then face the full tax in 2007 would "further tilt the tax scales toward the rich," Buffett wrote in an opinion piece in the Washington Post.

Buffett posed a hypothetical situation in which Berkshire Hathaway, which does not currently pay a dividend, paid $1 billion in dividends next year.

Through his 31 percent ownership of the company, Buffett said he would receive an additional $310 million in income that would reduce his tax rate from about 30 percent to 3 percent, while his office secretary would still have a tax rate of about 30 percent.

"The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote.

Instead of the Senate's tax cut plan, Buffett proposed that it provide tax reductions to those who need and will spend the money in the form of a Social Security tax "holiday" or a tax rebate to lower-income people.

"Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added.

He closed the piece by saying that the "government can't deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch. And last week the Senate handed the bill to the wrong party."


4moreyears...
here is some reading for you:

http://www.treas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/economics.shtml

Economics of Taxation
Introduction
Throughout history, every organized society had some form of government. In free societies, the goals of government have been to protect individual freedoms and to promote the well-being of society as a whole.

To meet their expenses, government need income, called "revenue," which it raises through taxes. In our country, governments levy several different types of taxes on individuals and businesses. The Federal Government relies mainly on income taxes for its revenue. State governments depend on both income and sales taxes. Most county and city governments use property taxes to raise their revenue.

[4moreyears]

Because the Board of Directors Who represent the share holders feel that that CEO is worth what they are paying him. This is a free enterprise system in this country, and it may not look fair. But it is. when the value of the stock drops the CEO gets fired. When the stock increaases in value he gets to keep his job and makes a ton of cash. If I can hire a CEO for an extra 500K per year and he/her will earn the shareholders an extra 20% on the stock price 500K is a drop in the bucket. The guy working on the line or sales guy in the field are not in a position to impact the company in the same way. As far as the Asian counter parts if they are providing the extra value for shareholders and is not getting the same level of compensation I think he stupid for not looking for his fair share.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Betty Bush III
Why should we punish the people who work and create jobs and wealth with an unfair tax code? The more money you make, the higher % the government takes. Please explain to me how that aspect doesn't need to be overhauled in a capitalist country.

People who don't work by choice should receive NOTHING from the taxpayers! If they turn to crimes then build bigger prisons.

Good idea, asshole! And how do you propose PAYING for those prisons???

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by academic punk
Good idea, asshole! And how do you propose PAYING for those prisons???

With all the welfare dollars. that would more than pay for it.

[FORD]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
With all the welfare dollars. that would more than pay for it.

With all the money WASTED in Iraq, we could have more prisons than Starbucks by now.

But that's beside the point. There wouldn't be a need for prisons if drugs were legalized and addiction was treated as a medical problem, not a criminal one. And let's not forget the amount of tax revenue that could be made on legal pot alone. Or on legal cocaine to all those disgustingly overpayed CEO's.

[Warham]

Drugs legalized?

Netherlands, here we come!

[scorpioboy33]

God how ignorant, witless and stupid Americans can be.....do you know how many people are in prison now in the US 2.1 million. And you want more prisons....god you're an idiot

[scorpioboy33]

btw it has almost doubled since 1990...and 12% of black men in their 20's and 30's are incarcerated whereas it's only 1.6% for white dudes...what a racist facist society you all live in

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by scorpioboy33
btw it has almost doubled since 1990...and 12% of black men in their 20's and 30's are incarcerated whereas it's only 1.6% for white dudes...what a racist facist society you all live in

Race shold not matter. The laws are pretty clear. If you break them you go to jail.

[scorpioboy33]

you know were talking 2.1 million people for god sakes...and why do you think 12% of black men are in jail could it be racism??????
it's kinda like the 34,000 gun deaths in America ..way toping any other industrial country but you know the figures are ignored cause they make the US look so bad

if you have 2.1 million people jailed obviously something is wrong with your system

[Warham]

No, something is wrong with parenting.

I would wager the reason more blacks are in prison is because more blacks, I believe it's up to 80% now, are born and raised in single parent families, many of which don't provide a strong support system. It's the breakdown of the family, and it causes problems down the line, like prisons being full.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
Drugs legalized?

Netherlands, here we come!

It's the only common sense way to handle the problem. The only reason the BCE won't legalize drugs is because they make all the money from the illegal stuff.

[scorpioboy33]

btw in canada we have 32 000 people incar.
and there are 76000 in the UK...
great system you all have

[Warham]

I can't believe I'm hearing a Christian saying we should legalize cocaine.

Now I really think I've heard everything.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by scorpioboy33
you know were talking 2.1 million people for god sakes...and why do you think 12% of black men are in jail could it be racism??????
it's kinda like the 34,000 gun deaths in America ..way toping any other industrial country but you know the figures are ignored cause they make the US look so bad

if you have 2.1 million people jailed obviously something is wrong with your system

I actually agree. People are not educated properly and prepred for soceity. Our educational system teaches out of date ideas and has you memorize facts that do not help people in real life. But they do not teach you how to balance a check book or file a tax return. I do not remember anything I learned about Pythagorean theorem. If the educational systm did not label students who are not geared to formal education stupid, it would be a step in the right direction.

[scorpioboy33]

cool 4 more that your thinking about solutions seriously more people need to do that :)

[4moreyears]

thanks scorp.


I am working on a project that hopefully will help me retire in 5 years. If I can do this I will dedicate myself to helping educate young people for the real world. Nothing against formal education, but it needs augmenting. YOu can tell by the people here who think the Gov't or a company owes them a living or the ability to support their family. If people were self sufficient and did not reley on anyone but themselves many of these problems would disappear. That all starts with a choice and taking responsibility. You can take responsibility or entitlement, but you can not take both.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
I can't believe I'm hearing a Christian saying we should legalize cocaine.

Now I really think I've heard everything.

Cocaine is a plant. God created it. It's not His fault or mine that people misuse it, or that the BCE makes billions from it.

What Would Jesus Do? He would treat addiction as a medical (and spiritual) problem, rather than putting addicts in prison.

[scorpioboy33]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
thanks scorp.


I am working on a project that hopefully will help me retire in 5 years.

right on GOOD FOR YOU!

[Three Lock Rock]

You tell 'em, 4moreyears. Im also tired of thinking I should be responsible for all the faggots and losers that don't want to work or be responsible. fuck 'em. let 'em starve if they want to be losers.

three lock rock (kickin ass even when im not talking sam)

[Warham]

Originally posted by FORD
Cocaine is a plant. God created it. It's not His fault or mine that people misuse it, or that the BCE makes billions from it.

What Would Jesus Do? He would treat addiction as a medical (and spiritual) problem, rather than putting addicts in prison.

Addicts need to be in prison, because they will do anything sometimes, including killing, to get their mits on more cocaine, etc.

If that's the case, FORD, let's call child molesters people with an addiction and spiritual problem, rather than putting them in prison.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by scorpioboy33
you know were talking 2.1 million people for god sakes...and why do you think 12% of black men are in jail could it be racism??????


No. Single parent families, drugs and gangs are the culprits.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Warham
Addicts need to be in prison, because they will do anything sometimes, including killing, to get their mits on more cocaine, etc.



What about the guy who's in prison for selling a quarter pound of pot? I've never thought of killing anybody to get some fine KB. And when's the last time some skinny chick offered to suck your dick for a joint?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Because the Board of Directors Who represent the share holders feel that that CEO is worth what they are paying him. This is a free enterprise system in this country, and it may not look fair. But it is. when the value of the stock drops the CEO gets fired. When the stock increaases in value he gets to keep his job and makes a ton of cash. If I can hire a CEO for an extra 500K per year and he/her will earn the shareholders an extra 20% on the stock price 500K is a drop in the bucket. The guy working on the line or sales guy in the field are not in a position to impact the company in the same way. As far as the Asian counter parts if they are providing the extra value for shareholders and is not getting the same level of compensation I think he stupid for not looking for his fair share.

What a load of horseshit! Do you cut and paste any response that requires use of more than a quarter of your little brain? Pu-leeze what a joke your posts are! Did you plagerize in school too?:rolleyes:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
thanks scorp.


I am working on a project that hopefully will help me retire in 5 years. If I can do this I will dedicate myself to helping educate young people for the real world. Nothing against formal education, but it needs augmenting. YOu can tell by the people here who think the Gov't or a company owes them a living or the ability to support their family. If people were self sufficient and did not reley on anyone but themselves many of these problems would disappear. That all starts with a choice and taking responsibility. You can take responsibility or entitlement, but you can not take both.

Oh brother? Who's gonna' give YOU an education 'cut and paste!?' You're little more than a cliche' spouting troll who posts largely false information! And you take credit for other people's work! I find that very gauling, even if I hate the people you rip-off! I think you are little more than a troll. He/she:

1.) Posts stuff as if it is origionally written material, with no link or origional attribution, when it is infact a cunt and paste e-mail or web site article clearing house.

2.) Your writting style changes dramatically from one post to another. Some of your posts contain numerous and very basic spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Everybody makes mistakes once in a while, but...Then suddenly, poof! A perfectly written article that is in a mucn different style of writing. Hmmmm....

3.) I have suspected 4moreyears is nothing but a troll posting largely bullshit he or she may not even really believe for a while now. Care to comment 4more?;)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
I actually agree. People are not educated properly and prepred for soceity. Our educational system teaches out of date ideas and has you memorize facts that do not help people in real life. But they do not teach you how to balance a check book or file a tax return. I do not remember anything I learned about Pythagorean theorem. If the educational systm did not label students who are not geared to formal education stupid, it would be a step in the right direction.

Actually, the kids in the last school I worked at filed tax returns and had to balance a check book in math & business classes. Good luck at dedicating your life to educating "soceity." LOL

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
What a load of horseshit! Do you cut and paste any response that requires use of more than a quarter of your little brain? Pu-leeze what a joke your posts are! Did you plagerize in school too?:rolleyes:

Actually, 4moreyears is pretty much right on the target about his assessment concerning CEO's. They are paid as to how they make money for the shareholders. That is their main responsibility. They make money for the company, they get paid nicely. They don't make money for the company, they get canned.

Also, concerning outsourcing......

US companies are gradually finding out that going overseas for certain business needs DOES NOT save them money, particularly when expertise is lost. It all depends on the field, time, and expertise involved, of course.

I'm particularly talking about the Information Technology field. Go to


INFORMATIONWEEK (http://www.informationweek.com/techcenters/outsourcing/;jsessionid=AMA3WTWHMYWNUQSNDBCCKHSCJUMEKJVN) to learn more about it. :gulp:

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh brother? Who's gonna' give YOU an education 'cut and paste!?' You're little more than a cliche' spouting troll who posts largely false information! And you take credit for other people's work! I find that very gauling, even if I hate the people you rip-off! I think you are little more than a troll. He/she:

1.) Posts stuff as if it is origionally written material, with no link or origional attribution, when it is infact a cunt and paste e-mail or web site article clearing house.

2.) Your writting style changes dramatically from one post to another. Some of your posts contain numerous and very basic spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Everybody makes mistakes once in a while, but...Then suddenly, poof! A perfectly written article that is in a mucn different style of writing. Hmmmm....

3.) I have suspected 4moreyears is nothing but a troll posting largely bullshit he or she may not even really believe for a while now. Care to comment 4more?;)

:)

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Actually, 4moreyears is pretty much right on the target about his assessment concerning CEO's. They are paid as to how they make money for the shareholders. That is their main responsibility. They make money for the company, they get paid nicely. They don't make money for the company, they get canned.

Also, concerning outsourcing......

US companies are gradually finding out that going overseas for certain business needs DOES NOT save them money, particularly when expertise is lost. It all depends on the field, time, and expertise involved, of course.

I'm particularly talking about the Information Technology field. Go to


INFORMATIONWEEK (http://www.informationweek.com/techcenters/outsourcing/;jsessionid=AMA3WTWHMYWNUQSNDBCCKHSCJUMEKJVN) to learn more about it. :gulp:

I liken them more to professional sports...if you're that damn good you'll get the jack. If you suck...you get the boot.

With companies like Enron, Adelphia, KMart, Global Crossing, Worldcom...etc they've forgotten basic business ethics. The books should be thrown the hardest towards those that rob the livlihood from hardworking people and the confidence of Wall Street with their lies and deceit. Everything should be stripped from them and those types should NEVER be allowed on a BOD of any company again!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Actually, 4moreyears is pretty much right on the target about his assessment concerning CEO's. They are paid as to how they make money for the shareholders. That is their main responsibility. They make money for the company, they get paid nicely. They don't make money for the company, they get canned.

Also, concerning outsourcing......

US companies are gradually finding out that going overseas for certain business needs DOES NOT save them money, particularly when expertise is lost. It all depends on the field, time, and expertise involved, of course.

I'm particularly talking about the Information Technology field. Go to


INFORMATIONWEEK (http://www.informationweek.com/techcenters/outsourcing/;jsessionid=AMA3WTWHMYWNUQSNDBCCKHSCJUMEKJVN) to learn more about it. :gulp:

Some CEO's are paid to how much they burn a company up! They implement policies which cause stocks to become over-valued or shortchange a company's long term viabiliy for short term profits. Then they leave the company right before it falls apart with a huge pay check!:)

Enron is but an extreme example of this.

Your ideas about golden parachuting CEO's that often destroy economic viabilty do not go over in the public arena these days. A lot of people can make a company seem as if it is performing well, as they are running it right into the ground!

American CEO's are wildley overpaid as compared their European and Japanese counterparts

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Some CEO's are paid to how much they burn a company up! They implement policies which cause stocks to become over-valued or shortchange a company's long term viabiliy for short term profits. Then they leave the company right before it falls apart with a huge pay check!:)

Enron is but an extreme example of this.

Your ideas about golden parachuting CEO's that often destroy economic viabilty do not go over in the public arena these days. A lot of people can make a company seem as if it is performing well, as they are running it right into the ground!

American CEO's are wildley overpaid as compared their European and Japanese counterparts

I agree and you cited some good examples here but that is the exception not the rule. Many CEO's get paid to provide long term value to share holders. Companies like McDonalds, Disney, Dell, Cisco, Microsoft, and Wal-Mart have offered long term value over time and have CEO's who are rewarded pretty well for it.

[Warham]

Are we painting with wide brushes around here again? :D

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
I liken them more to professional sports...if you're that damn good you'll get the jack. If you suck...you get the boot.

With companies like Enron, Adelphia, KMart, Global Crossing, Worldcom...etc they've forgotten basic business ethics. The books should be thrown the hardest towards those that rob the livlihood from hardworking people and the confidence of Wall Street with their lies and deceit. Everything should be stripped from them and those types should NEVER be allowed on a BOD of any company again!

Could not agree more. Once you betray that trust and do not handle the responsibility bestoyed upon you in running a large company you should be banned. Most CEO's are. Does anyone think Ken Lay would ever be hired again?

JH

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Actually, the kids in the last school I worked at filed tax returns and had to balance a check book in math & business classes. Good luck at dedicating your life to educating "soceity." LOL

Good, it is about time. Hopefully they will also learn about reading a financial statement and a balance sheet as well. No kid should be able to leave school without this.

JH

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
What a load of horseshit! Do you cut and paste any response that requires use of more than a quarter of your little brain? Pu-leeze what a joke your posts are! Did you plagerize in school too?:rolleyes:

You are sounding like 3 Lock Rock giving reasons why dave sucks. If you are going to respond when you debate instead of saying your post sucks give express why you disagree where your opinion lies. BTY where do you think I could have C&Ped this from? These are my own views. obviously a few people think I was dead on.

[Nickdfresh]

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20086&highlight=4moreyears

Hmmm...Another thread in which you delete the header, author, and fail to provide a link to your article:rolleyes;

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18701&highlight=4moreyears

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Oh brother? Who's gonna' give YOU an education 'cut and paste!?' You're little more than a cliche' spouting troll who posts largely false information! And you take credit for other people's work! I find that very gauling, even if I hate the people you rip-off! I think you are little more than a troll. He/she:

1.) Posts stuff as if it is origionally written material, with no link or origional attribution, when it is infact a cunt and paste e-mail or web site article clearing house.

2.) Your writting style changes dramatically from one post to another. Some of your posts contain numerous and very basic spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Everybody makes mistakes once in a while, but...Then suddenly, poof! A perfectly written article that is in a mucn different style of writing. Hmmmm....

3.) I have suspected 4moreyears is nothing but a troll posting largely bullshit he or she may not even really believe for a while now. Care to comment 4more?;)

Alright I wanted to save this for last.

First I admit, I do post things that are a bit extreme to my views. I do it for a few reasons. First I find it hilarious to see all the responses of you left wing idiots. It is entertainment. The fact that the republicans control the house, senate, and white house has got to make people like you and ford and other democrats just sick. No I do not believe everything I post but most republicans just think your left wing agenda posts are stupid and do not give them much credence. When something is posted from and oposite view and is extreme you guys go ape shit.

Second, some of my cutting and pasting should explain that. But also, I could care less about impressing you or anyone else here on a board which primary focus is about who should be a lead singer of Van Halen. To me I would rather be street smart, and financially smart. Formal education is last. I know many people who just got out of high school who run their own successful business or are financially free. I also have a lot of friends who have all kinds of degrees who are stuck in dead end jobs living paycheck to paycheck in their 30's and 40's. Another example is Henry Ford who started Ford Motor company. Although I do not know the story verbatim, I can give you the basics which will get the message across. Henry Ford was one of the richest men in America in his time. Ford Motor Company is still one of Americas most recognized companies today. He was suing a writer who called him a stupid uneducated man. At the trial the attorney cross examining Henry Ford was asking him questions that are at a fourth of fifth grade level. Ford was obviously frustrated because he could not answer some of the basic questions correctly. He finally responded saying that he chooses to fill up his head with useless knowledge but at any time he can press a button on his desk and in seconds 10 men will be in his office to answer any of those type of questions. I could care less If I can spell or type. I can hire people to proof my stuff where it matters, but all those "smart people" are working for me.

Like Henry Ford I would rather dedicate myself learning how to run a business, invest in real estate, or something productive which will create value. Outside of things you lern by 6th grade formal education is of no value for me.

Hey Nick do you want a job proofing my letters?

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20086&highlight=4moreyears

Hmmm...Another thread in which you delete the header, author, and fail to provide a link to your article:rolleyes;

Who cares. Again I did it to see you idiots get your panties in a bundle. Guess what it was entertaining and it worked.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Alright I wanted to save this for last.

First I admit, I do post things that are a bit extreme to my views. I do it for a few reasons. First I find it hilarious to see all the responses of you left wing idiots. It is entertainment. The fact that the republicans control the house, senate, and white house has got to make people like you and ford and other democrats just sick. No I do not believe everything I post but most republicans just think your left wing agenda posts are stupid and do not give them much credence. When something is posted from and oposite view and is extreme you guys go ape shit.

Second, some of my cutting and pasting should explain that. But also, I could care less about impressing you or anyone else here on a board which primary focus is about who should be a lead singer of Van Halen. To me I would rather be street smart, and financially smart. Formal education is last. I know many people who just got out of high school who run their own successful business or are financially free. I also have a lot of friends who have all kinds of degrees who are stuck in dead end jobs living paycheck to paycheck in their 30's and 40's. Another example is Henry Ford who started Ford Motor company. Although I do not know the story verbatim, I can give you the basics which will get the message across. Henry Ford was one of the richest men in America in his time. Ford Motor Company is still one of Americas most recognized companies today. He was suing a writer who called him a stupid uneducated man. At the trial the attorney cross examining Henry Ford was asking him questions that are at a fourth of fifth grade level. Ford was obviously frustrated because he could not answer some of the basic questions correctly. He finally responded saying that he chooses to fill up his head with useless knowledge but at any time he can press a button on his desk and in seconds 10 men will be in his office to answer any of those type of questions. I could care less If I can spell or type. I can hire people to proof my stuff where it matters, but all those "smart people" are working for me.

Like Henry Ford I would rather dedicate myself learning how to run a business, invest in real estate, or something productive which will create value. Outside of things you lern by 6th grade formal education is of no value for me.

Hey Nick do you want a job proofing my letters?

Thanks Tom Vu! Any advice for me?;)

But I really think you are full of shit, posting articles/e-mails and either passing them off as your own, or at the very least or preventing anyone from checking your bullshit, false statistics.

I think it far more likely you are an internet troll than a successful entrepeneur.:)

And Henry Ford was shown to be a miserable anti-semite despite all his wealth Tom Vu...

But you'll forgive me if I don't take you at your word.


Originally posted by 4moreyears
Who cares. Again I did it to see you idiots get your panties in a bundle. Guess what it was entertaining and it worked.

Thank you for verifying everything I said about you. That you are a mindless shit-stirer and an attention whore. You're not really much above Jesterstar in your computer posting jack-off athons. ;)

[vanzilla]

Tom Vu = Van Squalen.
Panamark has the goods on this idiot.

[Figs]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Do you actually ever have a link for your chain e-mails?


http://www.sdakotagop.com/newsdetail.asp?iNewsID=53

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by vanzilla
Tom Vu = Van Squalen.
Panamark has the goods on this idiot.

I actually have always though TOM VU was a funny SHEEP (both intentionally and unitentionally), the thing is that he also trolls at Hagar.net. I actually like VanSqaulen too.

No, I was just comparing the rhetoric of chest-thumping internet millionares, whom are very few and far between.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Thanks Tom Vu! Any advice for me?;)

But I really think you are full of shit, posting articles/e-mails and either passing them off as your own, or at the very least or preventing anyone from checking your bullshit, false statistics.

I think it far more likely you are an internet troll than a successful entrepeneur.:)

And Henry Ford was shown to be a miserable anti-semite despite all his wealth Tom Vu...

But you'll forgive me if I don't take you at your word.



Thank you for verifying everything I said about you. That you are a mindless shit-stirer and an attention whore. You're not really much above Jesterstar in your computer posting jack-off athons. ;)

I could care less what you think. I never came here to impress a dumb ass like you. Henry Ford provided millions of jobs and his company still does today. His Anti-Semite views are something I do not agree with. but the man was successful and provided many jobs and gave to charities.

Any yea I spend all my time thinking of ways to piss you off. You are a non-factor. You are like a toy I have fun with in my spare time.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Figs
http://www.sdakotagop.com/newsdetail.asp?iNewsID=53

You rock FIGS!:D

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Figs
http://www.sdakotagop.com/newsdetail.asp?iNewsID=53

Thanks for the help Figs.

Spell Checked, because I did not want Nick to flunk me.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by FORD
Cocaine is a plant. God created it. It's not His fault or mine that people misuse it, or that the BCE makes billions from it.


How exactly is it not fucking god's fault?

Absentee landlord...

[Warham]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
How exactly is it not fucking god's fault?

Absentee landlord...

That's just FORD trying to spin it so it looks OK for Christians to consume.

[Nickdfresh]

I've never really took much off for misspellings, It doesn't really matter that much and I make mistakes all the time myself. However, when I taught, I failed two kids for plagerism.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Figs
http://www.sdakotagop.com/newsdetail.asp?iNewsID=53

You'll notice it says wage earners.

Proper rich people don't earn wages because they have their own companies and use accountants to help them avoid paying their fair share.

I know I do...:)

Last year I 'earned' $5k in wages, or so my accountant tells me...

Cheers!

:gulp:

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Warham
That's just FORD trying to spin it so it looks OK for Christians to consume.

As far as I can make out it's ok for christians to do pretty much anything they want as long as its not deemed illegal by their government...:)

Killing, robbing, enslaving...all ok.

I think that's why it took off as a religion.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
You'll notice it says wage earners.

Proper rich people don't earn wages because they have their own companies and use accountants to help them avoid paying their fair share.

I know I do...:)

Last year I 'earned' $5k in wages, or so my accountant tells me...

Cheers!

:gulp:

He he he he!

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I've never really took much off for misspellings, It doesn't really matter that much and I make mistakes all the time myself. However, when I taught, I failed two kids for plagerism.

Nick is it possible you failed because your style of teaching did not get through to these kids. Do you think the pressure on them to either not be looked at as a failure because they did not get a correct answer and their desire to want to look successful in the classroom may have forced them to cheat to make up for your short comings as an educator?

That is the bigest problem with our education system. Instead of successful students helping those that struggle it is called cheating. Instead of having those that struggle get help and those that help develop leadership skills both are penalized. It makes no sense. But in the business world people that own or run successful businesses are encouraged to work in teams. You can cheat by calling your CFO with an accounting question. Or your VP of MFG with a production question or your VP of Eng. with a Development question. In the business world it is called smart but in school it is cheating. Another example of how our educational system is preparring our kids for life after 18.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Some CEO's are paid to how much they burn a company up! They implement policies which cause stocks to become over-valued or shortchange a company's long term viabiliy for short term profits. Then they leave the company right before it falls apart with a huge pay check!:)

Enron is but an extreme example of this.

Your ideas about golden parachuting CEO's that often destroy economic viabilty do not go over in the public arena these days. A lot of people can make a company seem as if it is performing well, as they are running it right into the ground!



"Some CEO's are paid to how much they burn a company up!"

Ridiculous. Blame lack of foresight if you will, but NO CEO deliberately runs a company into the ground. You can spout off Enron, Arthur Anderson, Adelphia, and Worldcom all you want, but it just isn't so.

As for salaries compared to European and Japanese counterparts...so what. Big fucking deal. You liberals need to get your lips out of the ass of Europe. The price of high-powered managerial talent is just what it is.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Nick is it possible you failed because your style of teaching did not get through to these kids. Do you think the pressure on them to either not be looked at as a failure because they did not get a correct answer and their desire to want to look successful in the classroom may have forced them to cheat to make up for your short comings as an educator?

That is the bigest problem with our education system. Instead of successful students helping those that struggle it is called cheating. Instead of having those that struggle get help and those that help develop leadership skills both are penalized. It makes no sense. But in the business world people that own or run successful businesses are encouraged to work in teams. You can cheat by calling your CFO with an accounting question. Or your VP of MFG with a production question or your VP of Eng. with a Development question. In the business world it is called smart but in school it is cheating. Another example of how our educational system is preparring our kids for life after 18.

Oh brother? No, they failed because they were too lazy to write their own fucking papers, so they went on a web site and "cut and pasted" a phoney paper, because they were too busy smoking pot, getting drunk, and screwing underage girls. Oh what a bastard I am, the humanity! I never realized that 'conservatives' had such bleeding hearts! I was trying to teach them personal responsablity for their actions, and it worked, at least in one of the cases. Something I thought conservatives were supposed to aspire to. They had to go to summer school. Hell, maybe they can even make it through college now because they can actually write something on their own and not just make shit up or pull it off the internet.

And the educational system, for all its failings, it underlying goal is to produce critical thinkers that can operate both independently and in teams; and to think critically on their own, so that way when ever they get to a company, workers can be trained by THAT COMPANY to do specific tasks IT needs. Not saving money by pawning its skill subset needs onto the public dole.

And corporate America has been shown that it needs to stay the fuck out of education. They successfully meddled in NY state with the "Regents" testing which is a bunch of bullshit that is simply dumbed down education overall, not made students any smarter! People teach towards a test, or even throw the scoring to pass kids that deserve to graduate to just get rid of them. And btw, when those little cheaters go to work for your company, make sure you ask yourself "did I reach them" if you have to fire them for stealing, underperforming, or when you lay them off after outsourcing their jobs to Indians to save money for your CEO's salaries.:)

Actually, if we really want a model of education that works better, we should ask Kentuckyklira on his thoughts of German educational system, in which students are matched to there interests/skill levels rather than thrown arbitrarily into a homogenized grouping (inclusion/no more "tracking") in which special education students either are just "passed," or prevent teachers from challenging the best and brightest.

It is not public educations job to perform as merely a "trade school" for any corporations. Nor is it there job to raise or just baby sit your children. And it is certainely not public educations task just to train students to be computer programmers for FED EX.

PS. This bullshit is the reason I am probably done with secondary education, at least as a career.

[Guitar Shark]

I pay too much damn taxes already and it irks the hell out of me that this money is being used, in part, to fund ridiculous wars in the Middle East.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
"Some CEO's are paid to how much they burn a company up!"

Ridiculous. Blame lack of foresight if you will, but NO CEO deliberately runs a company into the ground. You can spout off Enron, Arthur Anderson, Adelphia, and Worldcom all you want, but it just isn't so.

As for salaries compared to European and Japanese counterparts...so what. Big fucking deal. You liberals need to get your lips out of the ass of Europe. The price of high-powered managerial talent is just what it is.

Ask my sister what happened to one of the companies she worked for. They brought in a superstar CEO to run things better. He began to fudge things and the employees did a background check on him. He was a star because he was a mercenary working for companies for only a few years and getting good results. Several of them went backrupt shortly after he left. So he really didn't care how the company would be doing five years from now. It was sort of like a very small scale ENRON.

[academic punk]

As someone who lost a significant amount in investing in tech industries in the stock market several years ago, and saw that many of these companies provided the top brass with fat multi-million dollar bonuses as the company was going under, I can attest some companies are set up to lose money to give a tax break to the CEOs.

Even Bush has his littel timber company...

[Nitro Express]

Henry Ford was a farm boy. My grandfather was a multimillionare and he only had a 6th grade education. He made his money in the construction business.

Many people in Henry Ford's day did not have very high education levels. Ford was a brillant inventor and designer who happened to be a good business man. Ford was successful later because Henry's son Edsel was an even better business man.

As far as being an anti-semite. Most mid-western people in the US did not care for the Jews at that time. It was a cultural thing and Henry Ford grew up in that. Sure by today's standards we could label him as a racist but things were much different back then.

Ford paied everyone equal. Blacks and whites got the same pay which was unheard of in those days. Ford line workers got paid twice the average pay for their jobs. Ford provided free night school and many other wonderful perks.

Today we have a lot more educated people. We have so many educated people with bachelors degrees but I often wonder if we are as smart as we think we are. I've seen people with some impressive credentials do dumber than shit stuff a guy like Henry Ford would never do.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Ask my sister what happened to one of the companies she worked for. They brought in a superstar CEO to run things better. He began to fudge things and the employees did a background check on him. He was a star because he was a mercenary working for companies for only a few years and getting good results. Several of them went backrupt shortly after he left. So he really didn't care how the company would be doing five years from now. It was sort of like a very small scale ENRON.

Sounds like they should have checked his record prior to hiring him. CEO's are employees. A bad CEO can be hired just like a Gov't worker that leans on a shovel all day.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Sounds like they should have checked his record prior to hiring him. CEO's are employees. A bad CEO can be hired just like a Gov't worker that leans on a shovel all day.

Uh-no! A government worker doesn't destroy the organization by shovel leaning. Nor does he fuck up the stock market.

However, hopefully these bastards finally getting their due will serve as and example.

[Betty Bush III]

Originally posted by scorpioboy33
God how ignorant, witless and stupid Americans can be.....do you know how many people are in prison now in the US 2.1 million. And you want more prisons....god you're an idiot


YOU'RE GROUNDED!! GO TO YOUR ROOM, WITHOUT DESSERT!!

Witless and Stupid??? Well Gee Whiz..we must be doing something right...
Any other comments from the peanut gallery, Eh?


You may approve of a welfare state... I don't. The Government has no money, but the money it takes from citizens who earn it themselves. Any person who decides they don't feel like working should not be reaching into my pocket.

If the Government sent you a bill at the end of the year instead of stealing the money in small increments each week demanding cash for those who don't want to work, would you gladly pay it??
In general all I need from the gov. is roads and military protection.
If someone would rather steal than work, we should send them to prison. It would likely cost alot less than supporting their sorry ass.

This doesn't apply to people who CAN'T work.

Sure, I don't think our prisons should be filled with drug users/ dealers etc.. However, violent criminals, theives etc.. need to be locked up.

[Betty Bush III]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh


Actually, if we really want a model of education that works better, we should ask Kentuckyklira on his thoughts of German educational system, in which students are matched to there interests/skill levels rather than thrown arbitrarily into a homogenized grouping (inclusion/no more "tracking") in which special education students either are just "passed," or prevent teachers from challenging the best and brightest.



What about freedom of choice? Doesn't it make more sense to improve foundation education in the arts and sciences in order that a student can figure out themselves what they are good at. People generally gravitate toward their strengths, not their weaknesses. Presonal choice ought to be paramount, not an agency matching you to a career path. I don't want some idiot telling me what I should be doing. I would rather fail or succeed on my own choice of career. Kids need better education and more discipline in the classroom.

Matching students is dangerous and oppressive. I have close relations with many people who come from communist backgrounds who have been assigned to fields of studies based on testing. It's not appropriate in this day and age in a free nation to have that kind of reach into someone's life. We're run a different show here for good or ill.

PEACE, the children are our future, teach them well..and let them lead the way... as good conservative libertarians we hope.

[mwsully]

When a company's #1 focus is profit, everything else is on the sacrificial table. WHy local businesses are so valued is not only because of the better service, but also because the owners DO actually CARE about their employees. In large corporations, community is not a familiar term to them. Speaking of Henry Ford, I think I read around here that he paid his employees quite well, where the ratio of his salary to theirs was much smaller than it is now with present-day CEOs and their employees.

To say that CEOs create jobs and money for people is laughable. CEOs create money for CEOs and his circle of friends. Altruism is also not a word they know. For if it was, a larger chunk of their own personal profits would be used to enhance the work environment or the well-being of the employees.

So you think that a decision maker deserves that much more over the person who actually produced the product?

[mwsully]

Oops, forgot a few things:

If you are wealthy, you have the cash to pay someone to get you out of a sticky or costly situation. Taxes are not a worry for the top !% wage earners, which is really who we're talking about here. They have loopholed many years now from paying their share of taxes.

Uneducated people do have it harder to make it these days because labor jobs do not pay as much as they used to. These days you have to be educated. Shoot, my grandfather worked in maintenance at an oil refinery and salary supported a wife and two kids, with a house and a car. Try doing that working at WalMart.

There's a reason why the bottom 50% pay little taxes. They don't have the money!

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by mwsully
Oops, forgot a few things:

If you are wealthy, you have the cash to pay someone to get you out of a sticky or costly situation. Taxes are not a worry for the top !% wage earners, which is really who we're talking about here. They have loopholed many years now from paying their share of taxes.



That may be true. But that still accounts for more dollars than the average person pays. Why is it right to penalize those who are successful by making them pay more than others. Business owners are the ones who take the largest risks to start businesses that create jobs. Take away the tax benefits and you cut the incentive of starting a business.

JH

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
That may be true. But that still accounts for more dollars than the average person pays. Why is it right to penalize those who are successful by making them pay more than others. Business owners are the ones who take the largest risks to start businesses that create jobs. Take away the tax benefits and you cut the incentive of starting a business.

JH

The successful tend to have inherited it, not earned it for themselves! Thanks for recycling the myth that small business owners will pay less taxes or are in the top tax brackets.;) You're right, the Paris Hitons of the world should get tax breaks in order to afford more of their whore-trinkets.:rolleyes:

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The successful tend to have inherited it, not earned it for themselves! Thanks for recycling the myth that small business owners will pay less taxes or are in the top tax brackets.;) You're right, the Paris Hitons of the world should get tax breaks in order to afford more of their whore-trinkets.:rolleyes:

I was npot referring to Paris Hilton, but even so why should she or any other person be taxed more to take care of those who do not take care of themselves?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
I was npot referring to Paris Hilton, but even so why should she or any other person be taxed more to take care of those who do not take care of themselves?

She should pay her fucking fair share for the security and liberty she enjoys that others do not!

Watch crime rates skyrocket as America becomes poorer and the middle class is further dissolved. The "rich" never seem to mind paying more for security, but for some reason, (SOME) in the upper classes cannot fathom that poverty breeds crime and social anarchy, not "unfair tax rates."

Actually, there should be a very severe death tax so large inheritance is virtually done away with. That way we could truly achieve a society based on merit and not inherit!:) And the free market would explode with genius and innovation.

It's not really a choice at all, they'll pay in one form or another...

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
She should pay her fucking fair share for the security and liberty she enjoys that others do not!

Watch crime rates skyrocket as America becomes poorer and the middle class is further dissolved. The "rich" never seem to mind paying more for security, but for some reason, (SOME) in the upper classes cannot fathom that poverty breeds crime and social anarchy, not "unfair tax rates."

Actually, there should be a very severe death tax so large inheritance is virtually done away with. That way we could truly achieve a society based on merit and not inherit!:) And the free market would explode with genius and innovation.

It's not really a choice at all, they'll pay in one form or another...

If I work my ass off and become wealthy in the process why should my wealth be redistributed to everyone? Why should I not be able to leave it for those I choose?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
If I work my ass off and become wealthy in the process why should my wealth be redistributed to everyone? Why should I not be able to leave it for those I choose?

It's no longer about you when you die.

Why should your stupid, unproductive, and lazy rich kid leech off your bank account?

Don't we hate lazy, nonworking people when they're, oh say, ON WELFARE?!

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
It's no longer about you when you die.

Why should your stupid, unproductive, and lazy rich kid leech off your bank account?

Don't we hate lazy, nonworking people when they're, oh say, ON WELFARE?!

Because it is mine. I should be able to give my stuff to who ever I want to give it to. If the Gov't starts giving my stuff away or taking it after I die that would be somewhat like communism. If I choose to give it to my lazy kids that should be my choice. Not the ACLU's or other liberal activism groups.

JH

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Because it is mine. I should be able to give my stuff to who ever I want to give it to. If the Gov't starts giving my stuff away or taking it after I die that would be somewhat like communism. If I choose to give it to my lazy kids that should be my choice. Not the ACLU's or other liberal activism groups.

JH

Since when does the ACLU have any involvement in issues like this?
Well then it's not really about earning your way too the American dream either, is it?;)

Sort of punches a hole in that "American Dream" argument a bit, eh?