published Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Happy Holidays

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

101
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
shifarobe said...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY, is entitled to what I've worked hard for. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY! Whether you make $15k a year or $15,000,000 a year, it is yours. Mr. Obama, get your stinkin', dirty paws of off of my hard earned money, you damn, dirty leftist, boil! You want to make more money? Then work harder, pinheads.

December 8, 2011 at 1:35 a.m.
fairmon said...

The IRS says the 1% plus the 9% pay at least 85% of income tax received by the federal government. Over half of the 90% pay zero income tax with 5% of the 90% receiving earned income credit resulting in a refund of more than paid. What would the fair share be for the 10%? Should they pay 100% or more of all income taxes paid? How much would the annual deficit be reduced?

Obama's income equality belief would be comparable to a policy that required the NBA and other professional sports to pay all players the same regardless of ability or contribution. What affect would this have on the incentive to be the best at what you do? Why not enable the 90% to earn and contribute more?

December 8, 2011 at 4:19 a.m.
EaTn said...

I think a lump of coal in the 1% greedy stocking would be more appropriate.

December 8, 2011 at 5:34 a.m.
najones75 said...

I love it. First top 1%. Now top 10%. Next top 20%. Finally, all tax payers. All the while, the 50% non-tax paying moochers continue to stick their hand out while sitting on the couch all day watching the Kardashians.

December 8, 2011 at 5:49 a.m.
woody said...

Just the fact that there are actually three stockings hanging there, with care, should be a good sign. However, if a closer look is taken, it will likely be discovered that there isn't much more than 'empty promises' in at least one of them.

I wish no harm to those who have provided my 'living' over the years..I just don't want them messing with that which I have coming to me..Woody

December 8, 2011 at 5:56 a.m.
alprova said...

Is it just me, or does anyone else not get the message being conveyed in the cartoon?

December 8, 2011 at 6:51 a.m.
bbchil said...

Those are CHRISTMAS stockings, not Holiday stockings. MERRY CHRISTMAS!

December 8, 2011 at 7:02 a.m.
davisss13 said...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY, is entitled to what I've worked hard for. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY! Whether you make $15k a year or $15,000,000 a year, it is yours. Mr. Obama, get your stinkin', dirty paws of off of my hard earned money, you damn, dirty leftist, boil! You want to make more money? Then work harder, pinheads.

Great face of the GOP. MINE! MINE! MINE! And I don't care about anything else but money! The Republican party and their priorities.

December 8, 2011 at 7:05 a.m.
davisss13 said...

najones75 said...

I love it. First top 1%. Now top 10%. Next top 20%. Finally, all tax payers. All the while, the 50% non-tax paying moochers continue to stick their hand out while sitting on the couch all day watching the Kardashians.

Educate yourself, fool.

National Review article debunking the 'freeloader myth'

The Freeloader Myth

December 8, 2011 at 7:13 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Obama's income equality belief would be comparable to a policy that required the NBA and other professional sports to pay all players the same regardless of ability or contribution. What affect would this have on the incentive to be the best at what you do? Why not enable the 90% to earn and contribute more?

How about just returning to Reagan era rates?

December 8, 2011 at 7:15 a.m.
sandyonsignal said...

It is about income disparity in the United States. Just 400 Americans have as much wealth as 155 million Americans combined. 400 Americans have as much wealth as half of our country combined. That is crazy.

December 8, 2011 at 7:18 a.m.
skiiiii664 said...

alprova- I think it can be taken a few different ways depending on your point of view. I think Clay's view is that he wishes that everyone had the same amount of money and was equal but that is just a ridiculous notion. That is pie in the sky fantasyland. The way that I see it is that the appeaser who occupies the White House is doing his best to make this a reality and it is taking this country and world down the tubes.

December 8, 2011 at 7:20 a.m.
patriot1 said...

alprova asks if anyone else gets the msg here?

Let me guess, is it Solyndra money, union money, Jon Corzine and Bubba's MF money, Obama's millions he's taking from Wall Street, Obama vacay money, Holder's gun running money, money for Blago's Senate seat, Chris Dodd sweetheart money from Countrywide, Jesse's shake down money, enlighten us please!!!

December 8, 2011 at 7:24 a.m.
davisss13 said...

I think Clay's view is that he wishes that everyone had the same amount of money and was equal but that is just a ridiculous notion.

Where the hell do you get that impression? Jesus Christ, what is wrong with you people? You need to stop listening to Clear Channel.

"That is pie in the sky fantasyland. The way that I see it is that the appeaser who occupies the White House is doing his best to make this a reality and it is taking this country and world down the tubes."

Build a straw man and knock him down. Nice job. Are you done with your little fantasy bs? You act like you clowns are going to save the US when you're flushing everyone but the filthy rich down the toilet.

Where the hell are your priorities?

I have never seen a pack of useless sacks o' crap who have the most bloated sense of entitlement of anyone in the US. I have no idea how you rich worshiping 'patriots' can even sleep at night.

December 8, 2011 at 7:27 a.m.
davisss13 said...

"patriot1 said... enlighten us please!!!"

If I were him I'd let you carry on like an idiot and show exactly how low Republicans can go.

December 8, 2011 at 7:29 a.m.
fairmon said...

alprova, is it not possible for people looking at the same facts, listening to the same speech etc. to reach different conclusions and support different resolutions or solutions? Some will look at this 'toon and see 10% wealthy and 90% dependent and conclude the 10% are greedy and not paying "fair share" and not sharing enough with those in the 90%. Too many will conclude their party has the right answer while neither party is addressing the root cause of the countries economic plight. Neither party is addressing the estimated 30% waste and fraud in government spending. Could it be it is not how much spending but how? Too many credit or blame the president who has limited power but can have significant impact.

December 8, 2011 at 7:38 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

I have to second Alprova's comment. Virtually all of the previous commentators are oblivious to the fact that America has one of the highest rates of income inequality in any developed country, and the disparity is getting worse. Even more to the point, none of those commments attempt to dispute that fact, because it would be futile. That is comparable to disputing the law of gravity. The relevant fact is that Clay's cartoon has nothing to do with who pays the biggest share of the taxes; it only has to do with income inequality.

But since you've raised the issue about paying taxes, I am forced o point out that you are simply wrong. Extremely high earners pay some of the lowest income tax rates in the country. In fact, Warren Buffett has publicly admitted that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. That's because the two items that typically constitute the bulk of the income of the extremely wealthy are taxed at 15%. For a married worker who is filing a joint return, his or her income tax is only tax at 15% if the taxable income doesn't exceed $36,900. Thus, if the taxable income is $36,901 or more, you are in a higher tax bracket than the millionaires and billionaires.

The best example of this disparity is the hedge fund manager John Paulson, who made 4.9 billion dollars one year, yet only paid the 15% tax rate.

December 8, 2011 at 7:51 a.m.
EaTn said...

I keep reading these posts about how the Occupy bunch have too much time on their hands and need to get a job (which is what their goal is). Seems to me that all of us posters are the ones that more time on our hands than the Occupy bunch--they're busy in the nasty weather to benefit many of the posters on this site.

December 8, 2011 at 7:55 a.m.
conservative said...

Well, he certainly got this one right! This living cartoon here depicts his wish for a socialist state. Santa god has equally distributed cash to everyone, just like himself and Obamination want. Grow up! Santa god and Santa government are a fantasy!

December 8, 2011 at 8:13 a.m.
rolando said...

He missed on -- a hugh, Paul Bunyan size sock labeled The elite...you know, the ones making the rules and then exempting themselves from those same rules.

December 8, 2011 at 8:31 a.m.

So … our earnings are gifts? Who says the spirit of Christmas only comes once a year? Thank you Santa Claus!!!

December 8, 2011 at 9:05 a.m.

I wonder which stocking has owners who will invest Santa's largesse in creating more wealth and who will simply buy a lottery ticket and cross their fingers?

December 8, 2011 at 9:08 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

Rock on shifarobe. I'm with you

December 8, 2011 at 9:44 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

I find it utterly fascinating, in that many of the commentators here are attacking President Obama, who has actually lowered their taxes during his administration, yet they are defending the millionaires and billionaires who are in a lower tax bracket than they are. Thus, they are attacking somebody who is benefiting them, while at the same time they arguing in favor of a system that works against their own self interest.

It is beyond me why they are taking positions that are not only morally unjustified (meaning lower tax rates for the ultra rich), they are arguing against their own self interests. But I guess I'm foolish if I am assume that there is logic underlying the rationale of the people who reflexively reject anything that President Obama does.

December 8, 2011 at 9:48 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

My taxes make me Santa Claus for probably 15 people that I pay health care for, feed, house and clothe because they "are down on their luck." My two adult kids with four jobs between them and are full-time college students have to pay into taxes every year, again to house, feed and clothe those who are "down on their luck." If you ain't working to fill your own stocking, quit complaining about what's put into it by people like me and take what you can steal, I mean get.

December 8, 2011 at 9:49 a.m.
Sailorman said...

news_junkie said:

"But I guess I'm foolish if I am assume that there is logic underlying the rationale of the people who reflexively reject anything that President Obama does."

Ahhhh yin and yang

"But I guess I'm foolish if I am assume that there is logic underlying the rationale of the people who reflexively support anything that President Obama does."

Isn't rational in either case

December 8, 2011 at 10 a.m.
librul said...

I wonder if Santa's elves are unionized. Heck, maybe he located on the North Pole to avoid the EEOC.

Anyway - right on, News_Junkie! The mere fact that the Republitards are grumbling about how the payroll tax cut for working folks (the 99%) shouldn't be extended without being "paid for" while they defend the theft of billions by the idle rich (the 1%) who haven't created a job or done any honest work over the last decade shows their true colors. Knuckle-dragging Ayn Randian twits like shifarobe are the problem, not the solution. And most of them are in the 99% too - go figure.

December 8, 2011 at 10:12 a.m.
Walden said...

The thing I find so annoying about cartoons like this is the fact that there are some people who will never understand that the Top 10% (or whatever % you wish to analyze) have a disproportionate share of the wealth because THEY EARNED IT. Yes, there are people who belong to the lucky sperm club and are born with it, but the vast majority of wealthy people in this nation got that way through hard work. As long as I live, I will never understand people who waste a minute of their precious time on this Earth hating wealthly people.

December 8, 2011 at 10:20 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

Sailorman:

I completely agree with you. Reflexively supporting any person, party, or movement is wrong. No person or entity has a monopoly on the truth.

December 8, 2011 at 10:22 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

Walden:

I don't think that people are claiming that the ultra wealthy didn't do anything to accumulate their wealth. What they are saying is that the deck is stacked in their favor. It is a lot easier to accumulate vast amounts of wealth if most of your income is in the form of capital gains, which is only taxed at 15%.

I would like to point out that (at least) two of the contenders for the Republican nomination have stated that they believe that capital gains should be completely exempt from income tax. Thus, under that scenario, the vast bulk of the income of the ultra wealthy would be completely exempt from taxes. That is a pretty clear statement about their position on income inequality; we need to increase it.

December 8, 2011 at 10:33 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

Part of the reason why the deficit is so big is because the taxes on the ultra wealthy have plummeted. My recollection is that the top marginal rate (which is the highest rate at which income is taxed) during the 1940s was 90%, now it is down in the 30s. Lowering the taxes for the ultra rich not only enhanced the disparity in the accumulated wealth in this country, but it also exacerbates the problem with the deficit. Yet if some of the Republican candidates for the nomination get their way, most of the income of the ultra rich would be completely exempt from taxes. I find that position to be morally reprehensible.

December 8, 2011 at 10:50 a.m.

On closer examination, those look more like I.O.U.'s than greenbacks. After all, it's not Santa's largesse. It's the generosity of future generations. Thanks in advance!! ho ho ho.

December 8, 2011 at 11:06 a.m.
najones75 said...

davisss13 said: Educate yourself fool.

I read the article, and this excerpt sums it up pretty well.

"According to the Tax Policy Center, provisions of the tax code that exempt subsistence levels of income from income taxes — the standard deduction, personal exemption, and dependent exemption — are the reason for about half of the tax filers who owe no income tax. Another large group of filers pays no income tax because its members are elderly and benefit from such features of the code as the non-taxation of some Social Security benefits. The tax credit for children and the earned-income tax credit, an effort to boost the pay of low-income workers, wipe out income-tax liability for other taxpayers. Those credits are “refundable,” meaning that beneficiaries can get money on top of paying no income tax. Other provisions of the code account for the rest of the 47 percent: education credits, the non-taxation of welfare payments, itemized deductions, and so on."

What's your point?

I'm "educated" enough and have been around long enough to know all of this. I never said anything about credits, deductions, etc. My point still stands. 47% pay no income taxes.

Let me see if I can "educate" you with some simple math. When you take the amount paid in and subtract the amount you get back and it equals zero or negative. That means you paid no income tax. Get it? Not just this, but a substantial amount of folks not only get all of it back, but get a hefty ransom, as well.

But, thank you for allowing me to reiterate my point.

Good day.

December 8, 2011 at 12:05 p.m.
mymy said...

What does EX-Senator/Governor Jon Corzine have in common with The Bomb?

They both like to gamble/lose other people’s money!

Where's the Missing $1.2B? Corzine: 'I Don't Know'

The Bomb has gambled away much, much more with no results!

So, I guess that will be Corzine’s line of defense--- I don’t know and The One’s is the Blame Game! It's everybody's fault but mine.

Bottom line: a lot of empty stockings this Christmas!

By the way Merry Christmas.

December 8, 2011 at 12:07 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Liberals should be ashamed of themselves. Go to work and make your own security. Stop coveting the fruits of those who have.

Who cares what Bennett's message is? His minions make me sick!

December 8, 2011 at 2:02 p.m.

And just think, the 1%, apart from Soros, probably made their money without doing any insider trading like the congress does. The envy is strong with the lazy socialist and marxist commenters on this site.

I am jealous of your abundance of kidneys and should be able to demand one of them just because I want it right? How about if you have 5 kids and I only have 1? I should be able to take one or two of yours to even things out. What if you run a small convenience store and I need to fill the tank of my hummer? You have plenty of gas. You should give me my fair share.

The income disparity in most cases wasn't created by the government. It was created by hardwork on one end and laziness or poor choices on the other. Only Congress and large contributors to Obama's campaign get rich off of the taxpayer.

December 8, 2011 at 2:17 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY, is entitled to what I've worked hard for. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY! Whether you make $15k a year or $15,000,000 a year, it is yours." - shifarobe

There is nothing more disgusting and more incomprehensible to me than you self-absorbed simple minded libertarian-thinking cretins who think you are such "rugged individuals" that you have accomplished and earned everything on your own. Just by nature of your being born into this country with its inherent safeguards and advantages you have reaped benefits that you would not have had otherwise.

The clean water you drink, the clean air you breathe, the safe food you eat, the roads and the interstate highway system that you drive your car or truck on, the cops who will come to your rescue in an emergency, the firemen who will come to your house if it's on fire, your waste that you flush down the toilet and into the sewer system, the child care tax credits you receive, the elevators you ride on whose safety is maintained by state government inspections, the public parks you visit, the very laws and regulations that allow you to own property and a house, the labeling of food products that enable you to see the list of ingredients, your microwave oven that is made safer by govt. regulations that limit the amount of radiation leakage, the protection and safety measures that are in effect where you work due to the Occupation Safety and Health Act, the peace and tranquility of your suburban neighborhood due to zoning laws....these are just a few of the many things that government and our tax dollars do for us. The list could go on and on and on.

Sure, there is a lot of wasted tax dollars, too, and our government today is rife with corruption, but it is not government grown too big but government too influenced by corporate money that is the source of the corruption.. And to make the ludicrous claim that taxation is nothing more than "stealing" your hard-earned money, and for you to think that you have made your money without taking advantage of the benefits that other people's tax dollars have provided for you, well, that's just simple mindedness to the nth degree.

You want to live in a tax-free, no-government "paradise," shifarobe? Move to Somalia. Please send me a post card and let me know how great it is there. But then, their mail system is not so good. It might never make it out of Somalia. But what will you care? You won't have to pay those god-awful pesky taxes and that's all that matters, right?

December 8, 2011 at 2:35 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Your "ditty", tu-quoque, is not witty;

in fact, it's not even a ditty.

There's no sense of flow,

you just blather and crow,

and your lack of cohesion's a pity.

Pardon me if I stir up your dander,

but you couldn't be any blander.

You huff and puff and hiss and hoot

but you're nothing more than a puss in boots

who suffers from delusions of grandeur.

THAT is a ditty.

December 8, 2011 at 2:39 p.m.
jesse said...

where is LIMRIC when you need him??? lol :>

he writs little ditties also!!

December 8, 2011 at 2:44 p.m.
lumpy said...

A lump of coal from lumpy to anyone who believes they're entitled to the fruits of someone else's labor. Obama will have a lump of coal at least as big as the 400 pound gingerbread house sitting in the White House, which we all paid for with our tax money.

The OWS mob will have one in each of their respective stockings, which they'll carefully hang in the box in the alley where they live, right next to their drug paraphernalia. Hopefully they'll get them in exact proportion to the piles they left in the streets of the various cities throughout the country.

December 8, 2011 at 2:48 p.m.
woody said...

tu_quoque said...

woody said...

… if a closer look is taken, it will likely be discovered that there isn't much more than 'empty promises' in at least one of them. I wish no harm to those who have provided my 'living' over the years. I just don't want them messing with that which I have coming to me. Woody

By “empty promises” are you by chance referring to the approximately $250,000,000 of penis pumps gifted by our government provided healthcare agency Medicare.

Why don’t you provide us a list of what you have coming to you so we can have a good laugh this morning?

Don’t bother listing Social Security because as we all know you have no legal right to that scam.

Tu_quoque, you'll have to find your own amusement..I've already laughed myself silly just reading your earlier posts. If you actually read "penis pumps" in my post, you either can't read or discern very well. But that's alright..I understand there are still some who invade this site to do nothing more than see teir own words in print (or hear themselves speak--I'm just assuming, of course your lips really do move while you type and that you may actually vocalize what you are typing). If I am wrong..I do apologize..however it was you who took the first blow..Woody

December 8, 2011 at 3:19 p.m.
News_Junkie said...

tu_quoque made the following remarks:

*Odd that he never gave her income totals or pointed out clearly that the secretary’s rate was not only based on income taxes.*

I don't think that it is the slightest bit odd that Warren Buffett didn't disclose what his secretary makes. It is her decision, not his, to disclose what she makes.

Warren Buffet's remark was based on her income tax paid, not including anything else. If you assume that his secretary only makes $40,000 per year, you obviously have no experience with pay scales in upper echelons of major corporations.

So the bulk of their income is qualified dividends and short term capital gains. I’m sure you to meant to include that the dividends are subjected to double taxation and the capital gains are not inflation adjusted.

How the amounts were treated before they were paid as dividends is immaterial; all that counts is that the person got to spend what they received. Also, many major corporations pay no income tax, so the amounts they distribute were not previously taxed. Also, what does the fact that capital gains aren't inflation adjusted have to do with anything? The salary that most people receive isn't inflation adjusted.

Why the double standard? Why net taxable income here but gross income above?

The tax rates are imposed on taxable income, not gross income, or even adjusted gross income.

How did you get access to his tax records and are you stating that 100% of his income was qualified dividends or short term capital gains?

It was widely reported in the press that he made $4.9 billion in compensation for managing a hedge fund one year. Also, there has been a number of articles in the press discussing the controversial provision in the Internal Revenue Code that allows the compensation of hedge fund managers to be treated "carried interest," and taxed as long-term capital gains.

One clarification. Short-term capital gains are taxed at the same rate as ordinary income (like wages). It is long-term capital gains that are taxed at a reduced rate.

December 8, 2011 at 3:19 p.m.

Rickaroo whined..

Rant, false premise, rave, lie, rant, naive supposition.

Rickapoo, Why, if it is so easy as you have stated due to the "inherent safegaurds and advantages" to earn a bunch of money and have "accomplished and earned everything" are there so many poor unfortunate people in this country that need your socialists to give them every single thing and still have them demand more like this lady? http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/forum/lounge/67006-i-got-15-kids-3-babydaddys-someones-gonna-pay-me-my-kids.html

Let me break it down for you.

"The clean water you drink, the clean air you breathe" If government control provided this little gem, why are two of the most polluted water tables in the country, in two of the most regulated states? http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/0912/dirty-water/flash.html

"the roads and the interstate highway system that you drive your car or truck on" These weren't built for me to drive on. They were built to satisfy the constitutional mandate to provide for the common defense. American citizens profiting from their construction is just a secondary benefit. They are tools of WAR.

"the cops who will come to your rescue in an emergency" If it weren't for the sheeple supporting the infringement of our second amendment rights, I wouldn't need any protection or rescue. Things are getting better though as more and more real americans lock and load.

"the firemen who will come to your house if it's on fire" Like this? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57338526/firefighters-watch-home-burn-owners-didnt-pay/

"your waste that you flush down the toilet and into the sewer system" What? How does this apply? I pay a fee that is more than twice the amount of my water on my water bill for that sewer service.

"the child care tax credits you receive" Lol! I don't and haven't ever received these. Even if I did, they wouldn't be a benefit paid to me, but instead a reduction in any taxes I would have to pay. It isn't the same thing as a paid benefit.

"the elevators you ride on whose safety is maintained by state government inspections" Where would I ride an elevator like this? The courthouse? A building owned by the state? Duh?

"the public parks you visit" I would rather pay a fee every time I visit a public park than have it taken from taxes. If not enough people visit it to keep the park open, it wasn't a benefit to the community at large anyway.

"the labeling of food products that enable you to see the list of ingredients" Was this really that big a problem before they started doing it? If it was, why have people gotten even fatter after they started doing it? Seems to me that would indicate it was a bad thing. Take the ingredient list off of products and people will start accidently eating healthy things again.

December 8, 2011 at 3:32 p.m.

"your microwave oven that is made safer by govt. regulations that limit the amount of radiation leakage" You don't think the free market would weed dangerous appliances out of the mix? You are deluded if you think the govt dictates what we buy. Toyota's sales dropped after false complaints of throttle problems. It wasn't because of govt regulation, it was because people don't want a product that will kill them.

"the protection and safety measures that are in effect where you work due to the Occupation Safety and Health Act" If your workplace is dangerous, you aren't forced to work there. In fact, you could be considered to be culpable for your own injuries if you stay knowing it was dangerous. I know... Personal accountablility sucks. Boo hoo.

Blah blah blah forever and ever complaining. Corporate money is not the source of corruption. Corrupt politicians taking the money are the source. If we had honest representation, all of the corporate money in the world wouldn't matter one bit.

December 8, 2011 at 3:33 p.m.
hambone said...

The way I see it, the three socks are tax cuts to be shared by 100 people. Each sock is the same size. 1 person gets 1/3, 9 people get 1/3 and 90 people share 1/3.

The first poster said the gov. shouldn't get any of his money. That's a novel thought. What if we could opt out of paying any taxes. no federal, no state, no local.

But then one would have to hire his own army, navy, police, fire dept. He would have to build and mantain the roads he uses or pay someone else to use theirs.

if he bought any thing at a store would he pay sales tax or just a higher price to the store keeper?

Man, this not having to pay taxes is great, but it sure does get complcated.

I think I like civilization better.

December 8, 2011 at 3:44 p.m.

Comparing apples (income tax) to organges (dividend tax) makes no sense at all. If his secretary were earning dividends, she would pay at the same rate her boss does. It's like comparing his income to hers. They are different because she doesn't do the same thing he does. Different work pays different rates. If you want to earn at the higher rate someone else does, get into the same business. Expecting to be paid equally no matter what you do is just plain stupidity.

December 8, 2011 at 4:46 p.m.
shoe_chucker said...

flyingpurple said "the elevators you ride on whose safety is maintained by state government inspections" Where would I ride an elevator like this? The courthouse? A building owned by the state? Duh?

The next time you press a button to designate the floor where you want an elevator to stop, thank one of the 23 elevator inspectors employed by the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development that your conveyance is operating safely.

Every elevator in the state, passenger and freight, is inspected twice a year, which means over 20,000 inspections a year. The division also conducts initial inspections on new buildings to make sure elevators are installed properly. An elevator cannot be operated until the state inspects it and assigns a number.

When an inspector goes on a job site, he goes without an appointment and meets with management personnel, then begins the inspection. The inspector will check safety devices, the complete hoistway, and limit and stop switches. A complete inspection takes about an hour per elevator.

In addition to acceptance inspections and routine inspections, elevator inspectors conduct inspections after accidents have occurred.

http://www.tn.gov/labor-wfd/elevators.html

http://www.tn.gov/labor-wfd/0800-03-04.pdf

I have neither the time nor inclination to debunk the rest of your post.

December 8, 2011 at 5:39 p.m.
sandyonsignal said...

Six Wal-Mart heirs have as much money as 30% of our nation combined. The Walton heirs have as much as 92 million Americans combined. This makes me want to throw up, why not help the peons who work at Wal-Mart? Why so much blatant greed?

Story here 6 Walmart heirs have as much wealth as 30% of all Americans

December 8, 2011 at 7:06 p.m.
alprova said...

FPSE wrote: "The income disparity in most cases wasn't created by the government. It was created by hardwork on one end and laziness or poor choices on the other."

You're so full of crap.

Among the next richest 19 percent of U.S. households, housing comprised 32 percent of their total assets (and net home equity 24 percent), liquid assets another 7 percent, and pension assets 16 percent.

Forty-four percent of their assets took the form of investment assets—real estate, business equity, stocks, and bonds—and 19 percent was in the form of stocks directly or indirectly owned.

Among the very rich, 85 percent held corporate stock, mutual funds, financial securities or a trust fund, in comparison to 63 percent of the rich and 23 percent of the middle. Ninety-three percent of the very rich reported owning stock either directly or indirectly, compared to 86 percent of the rich and 48 percent of the middle. If we exclude small holdings of stock, then the ownership rates drop off sharply among the middle three quintiles, from 48 percent to 32 percent for stocks worth $5,000 or more and to 26 percent for stocks worth $10,000 or more.

Source: http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_589.pdf

The vast majority of the top income earners wealth does not come from hard work. It comes from real estate holdings, investments, and trust funds.

"Only Congress and large contributors to Obama's campaign get rich off of the taxpayer."

Name five large Obama contributors that have gotten rich off of the taxpayers of this nation. Five. And don't forget to include the approximate amounts that they have received in return for contributing to his campaign.

December 8, 2011 at 7:13 p.m.
potcat said...

It has now been almost five years since the bursting of the housing bubble, and four years since the onset of the recession. There are 6.6 milion fewer jobs in the United States than were four years ago. Some 23 million Americans who would like to work FULL-TIME cannot get a job. Almost half of those who are unemployed have been unemployed long term. Wages are falling-the real income of a typical American is now below the level it was in 1997.

December 8, 2011 at 8 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tu quack... All of your posts are "ditty", using your definitions. rickaroo handed you your ass. Waay more clever and disciplined. Tu quote Ricky Bobby, "That just happened!"

December 8, 2011 at 8:27 p.m.
lumpy said...

So what, Sandy. All jobs at Wal Mart are necessary, but not all are worthy of high salaries. Sorry, they're just not. The more you take on, the more responsibility you have, the more you should get paid. Deal with it. You're completely consumed by class envy.

Wal Mart provides millions of jobs. You take Wal Mart out of the picture and it looks pretty sorrry.

Why don't you move to Cuba? Oh, wait, now it's going more toward capitalism there. You're stuck in the past. European socialism is bombing and Democrats like you and Obama think this is 1917.

Alprova, it must be exhausting having to constantly defend someone as worthless, vacant and incompetent as Obama all the time. Do you get paid for that?

Everyone in this country has a chance to be rich if theY work hard enough and apply themselves. The only thing getting in the way in many cases is the government, and meatheads like Obama.

December 8, 2011 at 8:36 p.m.
sandyonsignal said...

Well, Lumpy, the heirs aren't working. Most of them are drunks and have criminal records, but hey they are worthy of that money. Yeah right.

December 8, 2011 at 8:40 p.m.
alprova said...

Lumpy wrote: "Alprova, it must be exhausting having to constantly defend someone as worthless, vacant and incompetent as Obama all the time."

That's merely your opinion and nothing more. Indeed it is exhausting for me to defend the President with facts, but I find it necessary to do so, what with people like yourself who attempt to demean the man by expressing misinformation all the time.

"Do you get paid for that?"

Not so much as a penny.

December 8, 2011 at 9:55 p.m.
alprova said...

Lumpy wrote: "Everyone in this country has a chance to be rich if theY work hard enough and apply themselves."

If that were remotely true, and all there was to it was to work hard enough and to apply themselves, then this country would be filled with millionaires.

Many people work hard and apply themselves on a daily basis and they live from paycheck to paycheck. There's a little more to it than that.

"The only thing getting in the way in many cases is the government, and meatheads like Obama."

Would you care to expand on that accusation?

How does our President stand in the way of anyone at all in earning money?

December 8, 2011 at 10 p.m.
una61 said...

There 162 games in a baseball season. Each game lasts for about 3 and 1/2 hours. That's about 600 hours of work. Albert Pujols will be paid $25,000,000 dollars for this amount of on-the-job work (exclude exhibition games). Where's the outrage? I say "Occupy Baseball"!

December 8, 2011 at 10:39 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"There 162 games in a baseball season. Each game lasts for about 3 and 1/2 hours. That's about 600 hours of work. Albert Pujols will be paid $25,000,000 dollars for this amount of on-the-job work (exclude exhibition games). Where's the outrage? I say 'Occupy Baseball'!" - una61

Yes, it IS an outrage. I love baseball and football but I would gladly boycott pro ball if I thought enough other people would boycott it to make a difference. The salaries are completely out of proportion with what they are worth. We have lost all perspective in this country of what is truly meaningful work. Cops, firemen, teachers, paramedics, to name a few, all perform a much more valuable service than overpaid, egotistical sports figures... and celebrities.

December 8, 2011 at 11:12 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Good post, shoe_chucker. LyingPukingSh#tEater's entire rant, from which you quoted a part, shows how ignorant he and the looney right wing govt. haters like him are. They have no clue just how much government does for them in their every day lives. They are so filled with the notion that government is ALL bad ALL the time that they refuse to acknowledge the good things that government has done.

December 8, 2011 at 11:17 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"So what, Sandy. All jobs at Wal Mart are necessary, but not all are worthy of high salaries. Sorry, they're just not. The more you take on, the more responsibility you have, the more you should get paid. Deal with it. You're completely consumed by class envy." - lumpy

The CEO of Walmart makes in one hour what the average WM employee makes in one year. Executive salaries today are approximately 400 times higher than the average wage earner. In 1979 they were 40 times higher. Just what are today's CEOs doing that is so much more labor intensive or that requires so much more intelligence than a CEO from 1979? Don't even start to give me that crap about the super rich just working that much harder or being that much smarter and thus that much more deserving. Nobody deserves that amount of money, leastwise when it is made on the backs of workers who are doing the grunt work at less than subsistence wages.

Each of the surviving Waltons is worth 20 billion at the minimum. Walmart could easily pay its employees a realistic wage starting at $12/hr., plus full benefits and comprehensive health care, without having to raise retail prices - or if so, only minimally - to offset the increase in employee wages; and the Waltons would still be multi-billionaires and growing their wealth. On top of that, consider the added intangible benefits to the company of worker satisfaction, with far less turnaround (costly in itself) and the feeling among its workers of being part of an organization that truly valued their work.

As for your worn out comment about “class envy”...give it a rest already. Neither I nor any other libs that I know are jealous of their wealth. It is you sick twisted obsequious teagbagging dupes who constantly suck up to them and put them on a pedestal who “envy” them. That is abundantly clear.

December 8, 2011 at 11:34 p.m.
carlB said...

When the "stockings of the 90% are empty the next level of the richer will also be dragged into the 99% club. So Which party will you trust in 2012 for continuing to lead this Republic out of it's low disparity?

If any of the people here have been affected by the concerted effort of the few "money changers," it should be obvious that they are using the free trade agreements (global economy) with the lower monetary value countries, which were finalized by our "lobbied" elected "leaders," to actually wage a war against the workers here in the USA. There are a few powerful "players" involved in this "scheme" for destroying this Republic's status as we know it and what the growth of the "middle class" did for the growth of our economy after the 1929 great depression. During the last few years, there has been a concerted effort of the powerful few to destroy the balance of the manufacturing base, destroying of the middle class, the "busting up" of the workers' representation, bargaining rights, and moving this Republic back to the pre FDR attitude toward the working people. The arrogance of the people who are pushing the depression of the workers, creating an unsustainable condition of class warfare. Then act as if they really expect the people to accept being forced into poverty without any disagreements. As I have said before, It is the production jobs here which are necessary for getting this Republic back in balance. The Party of "NO, Obama: had better start helping instead of hindering.

December 9, 2011 at 2:05 a.m.
fairmon said...

carlB said.....

It is the production jobs here which are necessary for getting this Republic back in balance. The Party of "NO, Obama: had better start helping instead of hindering.

I agree that strengthening and growing the manufacturing base is the only way out of the economic quagmire and the income disparity. I don't see any evidence that either party offers a viable means of doing that. What did Obama do toward that end when he had a democratic house and senate? What effective proposals to strengthen the manufacturing base has he made that were rejected by this do nothing congress? He blocked the Keystone pipe line and the thousands of jobs it creates and which the DOE says can be operated safely. He thinks every student must have a BS degree even if it is in BS. Neither party acknowledges that decent paying manual labor is an acceptable way to earn a living and that millions of Americans lack the knowledge skill and ability to do more than produce low tech manufactured products. To encourage investment in such businesses able to pay decent wages requires a tax system and regulations that encourage them. The most important segment also ignored is craft level skills and failure to protect from the intrusion of immigrants in that sector.

The lower 80% improves and reduces the income disparity when unemployment is under 5% which increases wages as employers bid up to attract employees. Remember when the fast food chains were advertising all kinds of perks to attract employees because people had other employment options?

December 9, 2011 at 7:27 a.m.
dude_abides said...

tu quake...I am trying to say, above the hum of whatever device you're using on yourself, that you should stick to regurgitating other people's work and opinions and stay away from trying to be creative, because your one attempt was a train wreck. I'm going to go back and read it now, and probably shake my head again.

December 9, 2011 at 7:41 a.m.
fairmon said...

Why have the lower income earners not kept up? Something most politicians are ignorant of and if aware certainly don't inform people. China has over 3.2 trillion in foreign exchange reserves and zero debt. In 2007 China started the China investment corporation (CIC) with 200 billion which has experienced significant growth with an 11% return in 2010. China is now funding and starting a second sovereign fund with $300 billion to make additional investments in the economies of the U.S. and Europe. China's lower income segment is gaining in proportion to U.S. and European losses. Anyone in China that wants a job has one and Chinese employers are paying more to attract more workers.

China has a 5 year, ten year and 20 year plan. They own part of or have long term contracts with commodity producers that will fill their needs long term even if other countries experience a shortage.

China requires training, experience and expertise in a field before appointment to a government position. Inappropriate behavior or failure is severely punished.

Communist China aspires to be the next world dynasty and become the world's reserve currency. They are cunning and will steal or manipulate to achieve their goals.

U.S. politicians are like chickens waking up in a new world each day with their goals based on the latest polls and what it takes to retain or gain their government position.

December 9, 2011 at 8:12 a.m.
ITguy said...

One of the OWS protesters held a sign that said "If people were paid based on hard work and risk, coal miners would make $50,000 an hour". Obviously people are not paid based on hard work and risk. People are paid based on what the market will bear. Athletes and Entertainers are paid based on what their agents can negotiate and the income from ticket sales and advertising. CEOs are paid based on what they can convince the Board of Directors to pay them. By the way, most Board members are obscenely paid for serving on the BoD. I don’t have a problem with either of them. If I don’t like what a CEO makes then I can put my money in some other company’s stock, and not buy their product. No one forces me to go to the movies or to sporting events. The problem is that as more and more wealth is concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people our economy becomes more and more stagnant. For the economy to be robust, the money must circulate. Our economy is now Global and the money circulates Globally. The Job Creators are still creating jobs, but they are not in this country. If you visit Mexico you will see a growing middle class in that country due to the transfer of manufacturing jobs. Unfortunately it is growing at the expense of the middle class in America. The Government cannot and should not regulate what anyone can earn. That would be a total disaster. What the Government should do is to tax high earners and use that money to build infrastructure and pay teachers, firefighters and police. This would benefit all of society and create jobs that would keep some of that money here.

December 9, 2011 at 8:18 a.m.
mtngrl said...

FPSE, Your response to Rickaroo is full of falshoods and ignorance. Here are just 2 examples:

"the labeling of food products that enable you to see the list of ingredients" Was this really that big a problem before they started doing it? If it was, why have people gotten even fatter after they started doing it? Seems to me that would indicate it was a bad thing. Take the ingredient list off of products and people will start accidently eating healthy things again

Have you never heard of food allergies? Some people can actually die from eating just trace amounts of peanuts, tree nuts, and many other foods so it is critical they know what is in the things they buy. I know parents that have to carry Epi pens every where they go with their child. Those labling laws actually protect the manufacturer as well as consumers. A while back there was a woman who died from eating plain M&Ms becaused the chocolate had come in contact with peanuts. They tried to sue but couldn't because it was on the label.

"the protection and safety measures that are in effect where you work due to the Occupation Safety and Health Act" If your workplace is dangerous, you aren't forced to work there. In fact, you could be considered to be culpable for your own injuries if you stay knowing it was dangerous. I know... Personal accountablility sucks. Boo hoo"

Tell that to the multitudes of people who have died or are dying of Mesothelioma. There are records manufacturers knew of its dangers many decades before it became public yet still put their workers in harm's way. Dupont alone has paid out many lawsuits because of this.

December 9, 2011 at 9:34 a.m.

Shoe_chucker, So what? Are you saying that the companies that own those elevators would not have them inspected if the govt didn't mandate the inspections? That is just stupidity. Thanks to the litigious nature of our society, most companies that own assets that could endanger it's customers take steps to protect themselves by ensuring maintenance routines and posting warnings. That sticker on toasters warning people not to use them in the bathtub was not govt mandated. Your false premise that companies would routinely neglect common sense maintenance and put the lives of their customers in danger is naive. We don't need the govt to do this job. A private company could handle it better.

December 9, 2011 at 9:47 a.m.
BobMKE said...

Clay and others who post here embrace liberal/left wing economies even when it has not worked in various European Countries. Why? History is against you. We have a free market economic system here and have proven that it works. China went from a Third World County to a First World Country because of Capitalism. The point is that these Countries/Societies who have used the Socialist economic system have succeeded in implementing it but have never been able to sustain it. Why is this so hard to accept.

December 9, 2011 at 10:30 a.m.

Alprova, Why does the asset class making up the value of their portfolio matter one bit? The money they used to purchase those assets had to be earned first. Answer this question for me. If it is so easy to acquire all of these assets and become rich, why isn't everyone rich? If people could just sit around after graduating from high school and become rich, why bother going to college and getting a degree or work at starting a business? Ignoring the work that helped these "rich" people acquire their real estate, securities and stocks doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Even the trust fund baby's money was earned at some point with hard work. They didn't just inherit an account full of money from a computer that created those zeros and ones.

Obummers friends: G.E. They got out of paying taxes last year with $9bil in profits and their CEO is now an advisor to the president. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558 Their PAC contributed $24k to Obama's campaign.

Solyndra, Won a half-billion dollar loan thanks to the Kaiser foundation which was a big fund raiser for Obama's election campaign. George Kaiser is a huge investor in Solyndra.

First Solar SolarReserve SunPower Abengoa SA. Same deal as above, different names, different major donors to democratic campaigns.

December 9, 2011 at 11:06 a.m.
ibshame said...

“FlyingPurpleSheepleEater said... Shoe_chucker, So what? Are you saying that the companies that own those elevators would not have them inspected if the govt didn't mandate the inspections? That is just stupidity. ……..Your false premise that companies would routinely neglect common sense maintenance and put the lives of their customers in danger is naive. “

(1)You want to talk naivete? Then you evidently never took American History or maybe you slept through the part where they taught how Theodore Roosevelt(A Progressive Republican) after reading the passage below knew it was time for the federal government to step in to insure the safety of the food for the citizens of this country who were being served by the UNREGULATED meat packing industry. (2) And yes, companies do routinely neglect common sense maintenance and put the lives of their customers in danger if they can get away with it. Just ask the people who lost love ones driving Toyotas before that company was finally forced to admit there was a problem with their gas peddles sticking.

Excerpt from Upton Sinclair, “The Jungle” " There was never the least attention paid to what was cut up for sausage; there would come all the way back from Europe old sausage that had been rejected, and that was moldy and white – it would be dosed with borax and glycerin, and dumped into the hoppers, and made over again for home consumption. There would be meat that had tumbled out on the floor, in the dirt and sawdust, where the workers had tramped and spit uncounted billions of consumption germs. There would be meat stored in great piles in rooms; and the water from leaky roofs would drip over it, and thousands of rats would race about on it. It was too dark in these storage places to see well, but a man could run his hand over these piles of meat and sweep off handfuls of the dried dung of rats. These rats were nuisances, and the packers would put poisoned bread out for them; they would die, and then rats, bread, and meat would go into the hoppers together. ”

December 9, 2011 at 11:24 a.m.
potcat said...

Harp3339 asked, Why have the lower earners not kept up? Its not China.

The problem today is the so-called real economy. Its a problem rooted in the kind of jobs we have, the kind we need, and the kind we're losing, and rooted as well in the kind of workers we want and the kind we don't know what to do with. The real economy has been in a state of wrenching transition for decades, and its dislocations have never been squarely faced. A crsis of the real economy lies behind the long slump, just as it layed behind the Great Depession.

Today we are moving from manufacturing to a service economy. The decline in manufacturing jobs has been dramatic-from a work force 60 yrs ago to less to a tenth of it today. There are two reasons for the decline. One is greater productity- the same dynamic that revolutionized agriculture and forced a majority of American farmers to look for work elsewhere. The other is globalization, which has sent millions overseas,to low wage countries or structure or technology. Most of the job loss in the 1990s was related productivity increases, not to globalization. inevitable result is precisely the same as it was 80yrs ago. A decline in income and jobs. Former factory workers once employed in cities such as Youngstown and Birmigham and Gary and Detroit are the modern-day equivalent of the Depression's doomed farmers...."The Book Of Jobs" by Joseph E. Stigitz, in Jan. issue of Vanity Fair, in which i am of the same opinion.

December 9, 2011 at 12:14 p.m.
newshound_1 said...

Link above to Bass Fish and Butt Scratching.....

I think hits it on the head.

December 9, 2011 at 12:37 p.m.

ibshame,

Not the stupid sausage story... Really? Do you believe everything you read? I would like to see the facts on that not folk rumors. If people had eaten poisoned sausage they would have gotten sick and would no longer buy and eat that sausage. That company would either change their practices or go out of business due to competition that didn't have poisoned sausages. Aside from that, people that worked in the factory would have told their family, friends and neighbors about the problems and the word would spread and noone would buy their products.

As I said, in our society, companies that neglect maintenance get sued and promptly go out of business or fix the problem. The issues Toyota had were not maintenance related, but instead were related to design so they don't really apply to the subject at hand.

December 9, 2011 at 12:49 p.m.
ibshame said...

Flying PurpleSheepleEater said: "Not the stupid sausage story... Really? Do you believe everything you read?"

Evidently you don't read or you didn't in school or maybe you fell asleep in class either in History or English when the term "Muckraking" was discussed or maybe you just didn't go that day. www.theodoreroosevelt.org/life/purefo...>

Pure Food and Drug Act At the turn of the 20th Century, America’s food was rotten. A good part of the reason for this were the filthy conditions in the slaughter houses and packing houses, mostly in Chicago, where cattle and other livestock were butchered and processed for the consumer. There was no law permitting the federal government to inspect what could be likened to nothing less than charnel houses and to keep bad meat and other foods from crossing into other states. Bills had been introduced in Congress to address this problem, but each time the beef industry was able to beat back any law that would force it to clean up its act.

In 1904, Fred Warren, the managing editor of the socialist journal The Appeal to Reason (its circulation of 150,000 was the fourth highest of any weekly in the United States), asked Upton Sinclair, an occasional writer for the magazine, to write a piece on immigrant workers in the meat packing houses of Chicago. Originally serialized in the magazine, The Jungle would be published as a book not long after. Though a novel, its descriptions of what went on in these packing houses was accurate -and revolting.

Indiana senator Albert Beveridge, who earlier had sought Congressional action to address the situation, gave the book to President Theodore Roosevelt, who, sickened by what he read, realized his previous lukewarm support for pure food and drug laws was not enough. He ordered a new investigation by the Department of Agriculture (an earlier one had whitewashed the problem), and when he read it, he put the weight of the White House behind legislation. But Congress still stalled. The President released part of the report to the public, so alarming it that Congress was forced to pass a remedying law. On June 30, 1906, President Roosevelt signed the Pure Food and Drug Act into law.

The law now prohibited allowing diseased and otherwise bad food in interstate and foreign commerce. The use of spoiled animal and vegetable products was now illegal. Food could not have either substituted ingredients that would reduce its quality or added harmful ingredients. The act also dealt with drugs with false or misleading statements on their labels (sometimes referred to a patent medicines). Drugs had to abide by established and impartial standards of purity and quality. Offending food and drugs could be condemned and seized by the government, and offending persons could be fined and jailed.

December 9, 2011 at 2:23 p.m.
mtngrl said...

FlyingPurp, you are conveniently ignoring my post discussing mesothelieoma and food allergies.

Companies do not get sued when their negligent practices result in cancer 40 years later. Without regulations employees would never make the connection that working around asbestos in thier 20s led directly to thier plight today. I have loved ones going through this now from working at Dupont. Many of thier coworkers are dead, and those families now have decent settlements that would never have happened without government interferance in the use of that substance. it is documented that both Dupont and their supplier knew of the consequences at the time, but they didnt believe something that took that long to show up would ever come back to haunt them.

You put way too much blind faith in corporations, who actually have a long history of placing profit over employee or even customer safety

December 9, 2011 at 2:23 p.m.

ibshame, Upton was a socialist and "The Jungle" was meant to be an attack on capitalism like the OWS protests are today. Roosevelt, who was president at the time and a progressive used the momentum generated by the book to seize power over the food industries for political gain.

Upton lamented the reaction the public had to this book by saying "I aimed at the public's heart and by accident, hit it in the stomach."

While I wouldn't doubt there were bad business practices going on then as I am sure there are now, they didn't require goverment regulation. I am not saying the rules the regulations enforce are bad. They are great. I am saying it wasnt' neccessary for government to have to make and enforce them. Simple exposure of the issue would have forced the industry to clean itself up. Even Roosevelt had to resort to exposing the problem to the public to get the legislation through congress.

December 9, 2011 at 2:54 p.m.

Mtngrl, I am sorry I missed your comment completely. I hate to sound heartless, but I disagree. My mother is allergic to black walnuts. They cause her throat to swell closed. I am allergic to some squash type vegetables with the same result. My neice is allergic to peanuts, milk and eggs and her mother has to carry and epi pen for her. My nephew is allergic to milk and eggs like his sister.

We don't take stupid chances. My mom doesn't eat things with nuts in it. I avoid squash veggies, and my sister or a family member prepares most of the food my neice and nephew eat. If there were no labels, we wouldn't be in any danger of dying.

As to your claims about no one getting sued for mesothelioma.... What? There are so many law firms that will represent vicitms or victims families, you couldn't swing an asbestos tile without hitting one. http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=active&source=hp&q=mesothelioma%20claims&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=cdada9f3c44cb470&biw=1280&bih=637&pf=p&pdl=500

Besides you contradicted yourself at the end with your dupont statement. None of what you say proves government is the only way to prevent business from harming individuals. Heck, in a ton of the mesothelioma cases, the goverment itself was sued after it did the same thing you are blaming the corporations for. Asbestos is still approved and used in automobile brakes and clutches, creating tons of asbestos laden dust every year.

December 9, 2011 at 3:03 p.m.
mtngrl said...

That statement should have read companies would not get sued if the victims had no way of connecting their condition to their work environment 40 years ago. Without regulation these companies would be continuing to place employees in these situations without care as they did back then. Why wouldnt they? Your statement was it was the employees fault for continuing to work in dangerous environments while ignoring that in many cases they have no way of knowing it is dangerous if the company does not reveal it.

Now days there are processes in place for how to work with asbestos. I have had to deal with asbestos removal proceedures and it is expensive. that is an expense many companies would bypass if it were not for regulations and you are foolish if you think otherwise with history as a guide. That is why they are losing those lawsuits now.

And you just proved the need for labeling yourself. Very few people completely avoid all packaged food so the food that is packaged needs appropriate labeling or people die. i even explained how that helped companies as well as consumers.

December 9, 2011 at 3:28 p.m.
jesse said...

how did we get from xmas stocking to mesothelioma all on one thread??

seems the MAIN aim of the entire tfp forum is to provide a platform for the ignorant to showcase their lack of common sense! got a bunch of pseuedo mensa wanta be's that can't park a bicycle straight!

you folks NEED to get over your ownselves!

December 9, 2011 at 3:35 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Mtngrl, you and ibshame and shoe_chucker have provided some excellent documented examples of why we need government regulation in business for the sake of the consumer's health and safety. There have been many instances throughout our distant and very recent history showing how business simply does not and will not regulate itself. Even Alan “the wizard” Greenspan, who for all his life had believed in unfettered free-market capitalism, especially in the banking/financial industry, changed his tune and admitted that he was wrong, that there should have been some regulation that could have prevented the economic collapse (of course, there had been something to that effect until it was made null and void; it was Glass-Steagall). He believed so passionately in the "invisible hand" of the free market to magically correct itself that he had always advocated strongly against any type of government intervention. As recently as 2008 he openly and unequivocally admitted before Congress that he was wrong.

Unfortunately we have to deal with people like FPSE, con-man, and others of their ilk who are so blinded by their ideology that they cannot or will not see the cold hard facts before them. They are irrational and stubborn extremists, so filled with unbridled hate for government in any shape or fashion, that they would die before loosening their grip of hate even the slightest bit. I don't know what it will take for the country as a whole to rise above that neanderthal kind of thinking (non-thinking, actually) and set us on the right track of moving forward instead of backward, the way they seem hell-bent on taking us - all the way back to the pre-New Deal days; but whatever it takes I hope that we can one day soon overcome this collective stupidity and backward thinking of these regressive ones and their narrow vision of a country that serves only the selfish interests of the few.

December 9, 2011 at 3:47 p.m.
Walden said...
December 9, 2011 at 4:01 p.m.
mtngrl said...

"how did we get from xmas stocking to mesothelioma all on one thread??"

maybe the unregulated 1% had their employees create the 90% stocking from asbestos fibers

December 9, 2011 at 4:10 p.m.
jesse said...

hey rickaroo, can you not see that you ALSO are blinded by your ideology? along w/99 % of the posters on here! not picking on you,you have LOTS of co.

seems that an open mind and empathy is verbooten on here!

December 9, 2011 at 4:13 p.m.

Rickaroo, I never said I didn't believe in government. I believe in constitutional government. I believe in freedom.

Our current government (those representing us, not the framework)wants to steal every vestige of control we the people have in order to further the socialist agenda. You want cold hard facts? Try to ignore those coming over from the socialist utopia that is Europe and tell me everything over there is roses and candy canes. Socialism is and always will be a destroyer of wealth as long as people are corrupt, selfish, and greedy. I other words, socialism will never work.

The rest of the blather in your post is just you being so blinded by your ideology "that you cannot or will not see the cold hard facts before you." The free market has not been allowed to be truly free, the invisible had has been tied by the expectation that the government will intervene. If there was no expectation that the government would intervene, that invisible hand, guided by the consumer would be able to do it part.

It is so cliche' of you to fall back on name calling like a kindergartener. I really didn't expect any more from you so I am not really insulted.

The fed has no place in a free market. Fiat currency always fails and it always will. This market ceased to be free when the gold standard was abolished.

December 9, 2011 at 4:17 p.m.
ITguy said...

FPSE said "Socialism is and always will be a destroyer of wealth as long as people are corrupt, selfish, and greedy. I other words, socialism will never work"

This is a true statement. The problem is that every economic or political philosophy works perfectly so long as we live in a perfect world. We don't live in perfect world. As long as people are corrupt, selfish and greedy the powerful will use their power to lie, cheat, and steal every thing that they can get their hands on.

December 9, 2011 at 5:03 p.m.
shoe_chucker said...

In the U.S., there are an estimated 900,000 elevators, each serving an average of 20,000 people per year. Collectively, U.S. elevators make 18 billion passenger trips per year. The vast majority of these elevators are located within commercial, retail, or residential properties with an average rise of 40 feet (4 to 5 floors). Each elevator averages about 5 people per trip.

http://www.consumerwatch.com/workplacepublic/elevators

Can you truthfully say that ALL 900,000 elevators would be properly maintained without government mandated regulations and third party inspectors? If you answer yes then you really are hopelessly lost.

December 9, 2011 at 5:31 p.m.
fairmon said...

POTCAT...

You can't grow an economy with services as the main product. Those in service industries move wealth around, skim some off for themselves and continue moving money to other services. I assume we are not likely to agree since you agree with the author of an article with an objective of selling magazines. I didn't say China was the problem, our problem is in Washington D.C. with politicians that have not a clue how business systems operate, they continue to be out negotiated by every country with which we have a trade agreement, I don't dare call free trade. They provide incentives for American based businesses to build and produce elsewhere and in many cases move their headquarters to countries where they are treated better.

Many here jump on the band wagon suggesting some people object to regulations. This is simply not true. I do object to the waste with duplications and waste of money to poorly enforce them with too many over paid, under worked people in key positions. Credible businesses want reasonable regulations that apply equally to all in the same business.

December 9, 2011 at 5:35 p.m.
mtngrl said...

In the spirit of the toon...

Here's wishing a very Happy Holidays from the party of George Bailey and Bob Cratchit to the party of Mr. Potter and Ebenezer Scrooge. May your heart grow 3 sizes this Christmas!

December 9, 2011 at 5:37 p.m.
alprova said...

BobMKE wrote: "We have a free market economic system here and have proven that it works."

It only works if people can make a decent living while working.

December 9, 2011 at 6:20 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Hey rickaroo, can you not see that you ALSO are blinded by your ideology? along w/99 % of the posters on here! not picking on you,you have LOTS of co." - jesse

That's a fair statement, jesse, and I concur....to a point. The saying is that opinions are like a##holes - we all have one. And in the end I wonder if what we sincerely believe in our heart of hearts, whether it pertains to religion or politics or simply what kind of music or movies we like, is just a matter of opinion, such that when we die, the rightness or wrongness of our beliefs or our world view was not some profound, to-die-for matter of any lasting significance but nothing more than an opinion we held.

But I cannot, or choose not to, go through life without taking a stand on the side of the fence that I believe in and expressing myself thus. I am an unabashed liberal and an agnostic and I make no bones about it. I stood/stand for civil rights, women's rights, gay rights, the freedom of a woman to choose, and I believe in the American dream that had flourished in the late 50s, 60s, and early 70s for the average American who was able to make a decent living at practically any blue collar job; and that so-called dream has been stripped away from the middle class and, even worse, has become a nightmare. I also happen to believe that government can and should be a force for the good in our country. And when some people imply, - or worse yet, come right out and proclaim, as some do - that I am evil simply because I favor a socialistic form of democracy and a more regulated form of capitalism or because I do not believe in their Bible or their God, well, I am going to express myself even more vociferously.

Yes, I have my strongly held beliefs and I like to take my stand and express myself. But I know certain people who call themselves "independents" who do not take a stand at all because they claim to see the absurdity of both the right and the left who are constantly going at it tooth and nail; and I know certain very religious folks who refuse to enter the fray because they think they are somehow "above it." But I don't think they're really “above” anything; I think they are just afraid to take a stand.

I believe it was Howard Zinn who said, “You can't stand still on a moving train.” Well, we're definitely on a moving train and it appears to be headed off the tracks sometime very soon. Maybe I am as blinded by my ideology as anyone, as you claim, and maybe I'm not nearly as open minded as I like to think I am. If that's the case, all I can say is... may the best side win in the end.

December 9, 2011 at 6:21 p.m.
alprova said...

FPSE wrote: "Alprova, Why does the asset class making up the value of their portfolio matter one bit? The money they used to purchase those assets had to be earned first. Answer this question for me."

For the most part, it was made decades ago. It's the working capital that is used to make investments with, and those at the top have been sitting on it for years trying to earn more from what they have.

"Even the trust fund baby's money was earned at some point with hard work."

Self-made people are rarely successful on their own. The REAL hard work was performed by underlings.

"Obummers friends: G.E. They got out of paying taxes last year with $9bil in profits and their CEO is now an advisor to the president."

I've addressed that charge several times. G.E. took legitimate deductions last year for legitimate investment losses incurred in prior years, resulting in a diminished tax bite.

"Solyndra, Won a half-billion dollar loan thanks to the Kaiser foundation which was a big fund raiser for Obama's election campaign. George Kaiser is a huge investor in Solyndra."

You win some, you lose some. George Kaiser took a big loss too, when Solydra went under.

"First Solar SolarReserve SunPower Abengoa SA. Same deal as above, different names, different major donors to democratic campaigns."

By all rights, solar power should have taken off. The reason that it didn't is due to imported panels from Asia that were manufactured much cheaper. Welcome to the new Global economy and competition.

December 9, 2011 at 6:32 p.m.
potcat said...

Harp said, since you agree with the author of an article with an objective of selling magazines....

Do you believe that this man,Nobel laureate "Professor Stiglitz" and Bruce Greenwald of Columbia University who did research and intense study on the history of the Depression and the economy of today, do this work for a magazine article?

Stiglitz's essay looks at the parallels between what he calls the Long Slump-that is, the recession we are in now, and will be for years to come-and the Great Depression,of the 1930s. Analysts comparing then and now have often pointed at the financial meltdown as the key simiarity-and that analysis, accepted almost universally, dictated the goverments decision to save the banks. Here's what Stiglitz says we're overlooking, though: today, as it was during the Deprssion, the U.S. economy is in the midst of revolutionary transformation that will need massive buttressing. Back then the transition was the shift from a manufacturing economy. Today the move is from a manufacturing to a service economy. Socioeconomic shifts of this magnitude are wrenching; they destroy millions of jobs and consign countless lives to the waste heap. During the Depression, goverment investment, eventually acclerated by wartime production, kicked the economy into a new gear. Stiglitz argues that we face the same challenge today-and urgently need the same investment rather than tax cuts, deficit reduction, and belt tighening.

I do not think this man does these studies for magazine articles.

December 9, 2011 at 6:44 p.m.
whatsthefuss said...

Hey tu_quoque,

Please don't make fun of Woody's penis pump. After all, he earned it, didn't he?

And remember kiddies,

When you take away the reward you take away the reason. Most owners of companies in this country work very hard, invest their money, risking it to produce a product without any guarantee of a return. Now you may confuse these true Americans with the likes of the Enron bunch, J. Corzine, & Bernie Madoff. Then we have W Buffett and the other financial thieves but please make no mistake. There are two different groups of people with two different thoughts. One wants to employ people and make a profit. The other simply hides behind laws that allow them to steal Americans money and never face the legal system. Wake up America!!

Did anyone see Bill Clinton on "The View" this week. Here is another fine example of a weasel trying to convince Americans to forget about the financial fiasco we just underwent thanks to him as much as anyone. Remember he left office a poor man and is now a MULTI MILLIONAIRE! Funny how that works. Funny Queer, not Funny Ha Ha!

December 9, 2011 at 6:45 p.m.
inthemiddle said...

Many people already lead simple-living lifestyles and don't know it. And many of them are millionaires. Proof can be found in the best-selling book, ''The Millionaire Next Door," by Thomas Stanley and William Danko. You'd never guess that the subject of millionaires could have anything to do with simple living, but it does.

Compulsive savers vs. the rest of us The millionaires in this book were not born wealthy, nor do most of them have high-level, exotic jobs. What they do have are simple lifestyles.

It's the simple lifestyles, not the big paychecks, that turned these people into millionaires. According to the book, their wealth is the result of hard work, perseverance, planning and most of all, self-discipline.

So why aren't all of us hard-working souls rich? Answer: We regularly and continually give our money away to other people so they can become wealthy, while we live paycheck to paycheck. We buy the latest cars, biggest houses, full wardrobes, daily espressos, high-tech gizmos and gadgets of all kinds. As a result, we're on treadmills, never allowing ourselves the time to create the kind of lifestyle we want.

On the other hand, the millionaires are described in the book as "compulsive savers and investors." After surveying 1,115 millionaires around the country, authors Stanley and Danko came up with seven common denominators among those who successfully build wealth:

They live well below their means.

They allocate their time, energy and money efficiently, in ways conducive to building wealth.

They believe that financial independence is more important than displaying high social status.

Their parents did not provide economic outpatient care.

Their adult children are economically self-sufficient.

They are proficient in targeting market opportunities.

They chose the right occupations.

The millionaire next door "The flashy millionaires glamorized by the media actually represent only a tiny minority of America's rich," Stanley and Danko say in the book. "Most of the truly wealthy in this country don't live in Beverly Hills or on Park Avenue -- they live next door."

The authors say that the typical wealthy individual is a businessman who has lived in the same town for all of his adult life and owns a small factory, a chain of stores or a service company. He lives next door to people with a fraction of his wealth. Their survey indicated that while the paycheck-to-paycheck crowd drives new cars, most millionaires don't. They're not wearing expensive clothes and watches and their houses are relatively modest compared to their financial status.

You don't need to be a millionaire to lead a simple life, and indeed, no one said that money equals happiness. But you can learn from millionaires how to get off the treadmill and create a satisfying life.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/RetirementandWills/EscapeTheRatRace/SimpleLivingYieldsSimplyMillionsInSavings.aspx

December 9, 2011 at 6:58 p.m.
potcat said...

I meant to write , the transition was the shift from an agricultural to a manufacturing economy.

December 9, 2011 at 8:15 p.m.
whatsthefuss said...

potcat,

It seems you are not a depression baby. You make one very big mistake in your comparison. The majority of Americans aren't standing in soup lines right now. It's easy to go from 0 to hero when the population has nothing to start with. Yesterday I had nothing and today I have $1.00. Suddenly the economy has seen a 100% improvement. Now go make the comparison in todays market and see how that works out?

December 9, 2011 at 9:11 p.m.
fairmon said...

potcat....

I understand the transition from Ag to industrial. What the article authors do is study and explain the history and what is happening now. They identify the events but not the cause and effect. We have unnecessarily evolved to services as a major piece of out economy. No country without a strong manufacturing, mining, farming, fishing base has had a large middle class with a vibrant and growing economy. They fail to acknowledge that the growing income disparity and shrinking middle class results from the loss of those wealth creating jobs nor do they acknowledge that services do not create wealth. Australia and Argentina are good examples with their growing wealth creating activities that will have them debt free by 2020.

We have too many lawyers and people in political office, administration and congress, that have never managed a business of any size and couldn't manage to make water run down hill. They keep talking about twinkling around on the tax system to improve the economy which is ludicrous and down right ignorant. Very few people are asking for government hand outs and intervention in their lives. Most don't envy or want to take from the wealthy they want an opportunity to close the gap by improving their own lot in life. Services are definitely haves and have not creators. Most services jobs are low paying with a small number well paid which includes government employees. Wealth creating jobs transform things of lesser value to a product of greater value and the only activities that do that are mfg., mining, farming and fishing.

December 9, 2011 at 11:45 p.m.
potcat said...

Stiglitz's and contributors do identify the cause and effect of his studies on the economy, how could he possibly not, it would be an incomplete and bogus sham, and in my opinion it is not.

I actually find his essay's as a exciting learning tool. They are things he writes that i don't 100% correct agree with, and i would bet he would be the first to say ,he could be wrong and then work to correct it. I don't believe he has a political agenda, but a human one.

December 10, 2011 at 4:49 a.m.
fairmon said...

I don't believe he has a political agenda, but a human one.

Potcat with that I agree. It is an educational and well researched and well intended article.

December 10, 2011 at 5:54 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

The poor would like to be rich, so he who attacks the rich attacks what the poor want. (Read the last page or two of Peggy Noonan's book WHAT I SAW AT THE REVOLUTION.)

December 11, 2011 at 1:59 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.