John Adams Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Just asking a question... Seems to me the best way for them to deflect would be by saying the public .... "well, gee people we do have huge profits that primarily go to exploration, etc. and we know that you are paying a ton at the pump. But look at that 401(k) - you might have gained $20" You don't get it do you. They can spend all their profits on canned spam. THEY made the money. It's theirs. Not yours. Not mine. Taking people's money? Does that include those who may be in some manipulating the system so that can receive more money? Criminals get prosecuted. Most people are in business to make money; not get arrested. I am owner in a company with partners. Not one of the owners (to my knowledge) is out to screw our employees or customers. Do we try to pay the least taxes possible? Of course. Do we try to maximize our profits? Of course. Do we lie, cheat, and steal? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 You don't get it do you. They can spend all their profits on canned spam. THEY made the money. It's theirs. Not yours. Not mine. Criminals get prosecuted. Most people are in business to make money; not get arrested. I am owner in a company with partners. Not one of the owners (to my knowledge) is out to screw our employees or customers. Do we try to pay the least taxes possible? Of course. Do we try to maximize our profits? Of course. Do we lie, cheat, and steal? No. No, I do get it. Hypothetically speaking... If you found out that a company tons of money by manipulating the system. Since they "earned" it, do you believe they should be able to keep it? Do you lie, cheat and steal to get ahead... you say no. However you can not say that everyone handles business the same as you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Drastic measures need to be taken when only 5.7% of the population is unemployed? Really? Emote much? 5.7% four year high.... I guess those what 52,000 people that just lost their jobs (436,000 jobs lost this year) will look at it that way as well. Only a small amount of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 No, I do get it. Hypothetically speaking... If you found out that a company tons of money by manipulating the system. Since they "earned" it, do you believe they should be able to keep it? In the realm of hypotehticals, if someone does something illegal, they will (usually) be pursued. Do you lie, cheat and steal to get ahead... you say no. However you can not say that everyone handles business the same as you. Most business people are not in the business of cheating and stealing. They are in the business of making money, which is why it's so gut-wrenching to hear Obama say that he wants to take a company's profits just because they are making money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 In the realm of hypotehticals, if someone does something illegal, they will (usually) be pursued. Most business people are not in the business of cheating and stealing. They are in the business of making money, which is why it's so gut-wrenching to hear Obama say that he wants to take a company's profits just because they are making money. Oh I am sure they are being looked at... example: Congressional Hearings Again, I do not believe it's simply because they are making money. Let's face it people are driving less, gas prices are going down, commuters are taking subway's (up roughly 40% in some cities), etc., etc. Yet, they just made their largest profit I believe ever. When demand goes down, prices go down, etc., etc. shouldn't the profits relate to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Oh I am sure they are being looked at... example: Congressional Hearings Are you saying that Congress is a better venue to figure out illegal activity by companies than SEC, IRS or any arm of Justice or Treasury departments? Or that Congress has better cameras? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Are you saying that Congress is a better venue to figure out illegal activity by companies than SEC, IRS or any arm of Justice or Treasury departments? Or that Congress has better cameras? I did not say that... however if Congress does get frustrated with them and their answers, I'm sure that they will request a formal investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 5.7% four year high.... I guess those what 52,000 people that just lost their jobs (436,000 jobs lost this year) will look at it that way as well. Only a small amount of people. Those people only need to wait a few months for Obama to get elected, then things like unemployment won't matter. They'll be handed profits from all the profitable companies AND free health care. Come to think of it, I may just quit my job and get in line for all the handouts. When demand goes down, prices go down, etc., etc. shouldn't the profits relate to that? Ummmmm...no. Not automatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 5.7% four year high.... I guess those what 52,000 people that just lost their jobs (436,000 jobs lost this year) will look at it that way as well. Only a small amount of people. Minimum wage increase...a population ga-ga over Chinese goods...ridiculing of American cars...Unions in my State of OH getting a ballot inititative this fall mandating 7 paid sick days for all...reduction in gasoline consuption reducing highway and bridge funds...little children pointing their fingers and saying "bang" getting charged with crimes... To name a few... Stick around. In 30 years, you will either work for the State or starve. Lenin won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Those people only need to wait a few months for Obama to get elected, then things like unemployment won't matter. They'll be handed profits from all the profitable companies AND free health care. Come to think of it, I may just quit my job and get in line for all the handouts. Ummmmm...no. Not automatically. Do it, then find a free computer and send us picture from the streets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Minimum wage increase...a population ga-ga over Chinese goods...ridiculing of American cars...Unions in my State of OH getting a ballot inititative this fall mandating 7 paid sick days for all...reduction in gasoline consuption reducing highway and bridge funds...little children pointing their fingers and saying "bang" getting charged with crimes... To name a few... Stick around. In 30 years, you will either work for the State or starve. Lenin won. 7 paid sick days. Pretty fair deal. I do agree with the constant ridiculing of american cars/ products in general. But hey, that Japanese car is assembled here. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 You don't get it do you. They can spend all their profits on canned spam. THEY made the money. It's theirs. Not yours. Not mine. I am not into politics but I don't think that is right at all. If they are really buying up the canned Spam they are probably either doing it just to show off about how much money they are making or they are trying to corner the market somehow. Spam is often purchased by people that do not have much money. Are the oil companies not getting rich enough on oil and now they have to basically steal Spam people were going to use to eat? There is probably also a new market for Spam from people who used to eat a little better but can't afford it anymore. I hope the Spam company sticks it to the oil companies and builds a new Spam plant but it will probably take too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 I am not into politics but I don't think that is right at all. If they are really buying up the canned Spam they are probably either doing it just to show off about how much money they are making or they are trying to corner the market somehow. Spam is often purchased by people that do not have much money. Are the oil companies not getting rich enough on oil and now they have to basically steal Spam people were going to use to eat? There is probably also a new market for Spam from people who used to eat a little better but can't afford it anymore. I hope the Spam company sticks it to the oil companies and builds a new Spam plant but it will probably take too long. Thanks. I needed that today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Do it, then find a free computer and send us picture from the streets. I won't be on the streets. I'll be getting that free money I'm entitled to. And the free health care I'm entitled to. Ultimately there'll be free housing I'm entitled to. And free food. And free transportation. Plus, let's face it, the moment President Obama starts handing out the freebies, what incentive would I have to actually work? If I work, I might make money. If I make money, I may invest and try to make a lot of money. If I make a lot of money, I may start my own business and make even more money and be extremely profitable. But that just means President Obama will take my profits and give it the people who are too !@#$ing lazy to find work, so I should just join the unemployed, let the freebies fall where they may and let other people do the work. Y'know...I'm really starting to come around on this Obama guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 7 paid sick days. Pretty fair deal. I do agree with the constant ridiculing of american cars/ products in general. But hey, that Japanese car is assembled here. :-) 7's good? We just get to take off whenever we're sick. Nobody really keeps track. You can do that when you have highly motivated and trustworthy employees, I guess. I also make a ton of money, particularly with overtime. But I guess working overtime is "manipulating the system", so that should probably all be confiscated as "windfall" profits. In which case I wouldn't be able to pay my mortgage...but that's okay, because when I default the government will now pay it for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 7 paid sick days. Pretty fair deal. What if you are not sick 7 times during the year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 What if you are not sick 7 times during the year? "Give" people seven sick days, and believe me, people will get "sick" seven times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Like the old line about pornography, you know it when you see it. You can whine all you want about capitalism, but with rising costs and unemployment at a 4 year high, drastic measures need to be taken like they were when FDR took office if the private sector won't do it voluntarily. The threat of a windfall profit tax is just a shot across the bow of the energy companies to remind them that their days of excess are numbered, and if they don't lower prices to help the economy while still making a profit, then steps will have to be taken. At the very least the first step should be to end their tax breaks. If you want hypocracy, run this argument past the Obama base: Rising costs and unemployment are at a 4 year high. For 20 years the cost of higher education has consistantly outstripped inflation. And yet, with working families finding it impossible to pay for education of their children, the endowments of our most elite institutions continue to set records for growth, outstripping most for-profit institutions. I propose a windfall profit mandate on private universities, requiring that increasing endowments be offset by a reduction in tuition and fees. The threat of a windfall profit mandate is just a shot across the bow of the elite institutions to remind them that their days of excess are numbered, and if they don't lower fees to help the families while still increasing their endowments, then steps will have to be taken. At the very least the first step should be to end their tax-exempt status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 If you want hypocracy, run this argument past the Obama base: Rising costs and unemployment are at a 4 year high. For 20 years the cost of higher education has consistantly outstripped inflation. And yet, with working families finding it impossible to pay for education of their children, the endowments of our most elite institutions continue to set records for growth, outstripping most for-profit institutions. I propose a windfall profit mandate on private universities, requiring that increasing endowments be offset by a reduction in tuition and fees. The threat of a windfall profit mandate is just a shot across the bow of the elite institutions to remind them that their days of excess are numbered, and if they don't lower fees to help the families while still increasing their endowments, then steps will have to be taken. At the very least the first step should be to end their tax-exempt status. Nice thought, but Harvard already offers free tuition to families earning less than $60K and has increased financial aid to families earning less than $180K. Now, if only all other private schools followed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philly McButterpants Posted August 1, 2008 Share Posted August 1, 2008 Remind me why I should feel sorry for companies that keep breaking the all-time records for profits and at the same time are receiving huge tax breaks, while the average person has to spend more of their budget paying for energy costs? If $30 Billion in taxes is a "tax break," I'd love to see what they would be paying without their "huge" tax breaks. Exxon's 2007 Tax Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts