published Thursday, July 19th, 2012

Obama's disdain for success

These election-year days, you might want to ignore some of the more breathless headlines. Either the president's poll numbers are so bad that he's got little chance in November, or Mitt Romney's poll numbers show him losing big. Either the president's policies have saved us from ruination, or his opponent will get us out of this mess. Whether you're a fan of Barack Obama or the Republican nominee-in-waiting, you can find all the news that's fit to agree with. You just have to know where to look.

A headline in the Washington Times, or maybe it was in Drudge last weekend, suggested President Obama said something about business owners not really being responsible for building their companies. The quote? It went something like this: "If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

Ah, the silly season. Sometimes it's hard to keep a straight face. The Times — the one in Washington — and the website officially called The Drudge Report are known for leaning starboard in their politics. Sometimes so far they just about fall overboard. This story had to be just another example of their taking something out of context and serving it up to their faithful readers, right? The way you'd throw red meat to right-wingers?

Except . . . .

Except, after watching the video of the president's speech, you'd be forgiven if you didn't get that feeling.

Not at all. The man sounded perfectly serious.

It's going to be interesting to see how the president's spinners explain this one away. The comment about somebody else's being responsible for your success, Mr. Business Owner, wasn't taken out of context. Though there was a lot of context in this speech. An awful, boring lot. This president's speeches about the economy aren't measured in minutes but light-years.

Listen to this speech and you know exactly how this president feels about the private sector -- and the role government should play in all our lives. The dominant role. (He gave the speech in Roanoke, Va., last Friday.

Here's where the good part starts:

"There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didn't -- look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own."

So far, so not-so-bad. Everybody's had parents, friends, teachers, good examples -- or should. Then ...

"I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something: There are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there."

No doubt. But how many of those smart, hardworking people out there are taking out a second mortgage to buy a business or borrowing against their retirement plan to meet a payroll? And sometimes, although the president of the United States may find this hard to believe, the businessman in question may just be smarter than most of us. What would you give to go back in time and invent Facebook? Or the iPhone? Or are we supposed to believe Steve Jobs wasn't exceptional-that anybody could do what he did?

Edison, Westinghouse, Alexander Graham Bell, the Wright brothers, all the great American inventor-entrepreneurs . . . . Nothing special about them, right? And the dreamers at work right now, they don't deserve any special credit, either, according to the president.

Is there any contempt so complete as that of our intellectual elite for business types -- even if they're the sort who found universities, fund faculty positions and research grants and government itself? Or maybe our elite think they're just entitled to support from the lesser, bean-counting breed? Most Americans know better. We daresay they'd trust a Sam Walton with their economic future a lot quicker than, well, a Barack Obama.

It's a dangerous tack to take, sneering at smart business people who work hard -- or even just get lucky -- this close to election day. Folks might remember.

Unfortunately, the president continued:

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. . . ."

Then came a few platitudes about the need for both individual initiative and teamwork. (Who could disagree with that?) And after that long wind-up, the breaking curve:

"Ever since the founding of this country, there are some things we do better together. That's how we funded the GI bill. That's how we created the middle class. That's how we built the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hoover Dam. That's how we invented the Internet. That's how we sent a man to the moon. We rise and fall together as one nation, and as one people, and that's the reason I'm running for president because I still believe in that idea ... ."

Forget about all these generalities nobody could disagree with. It's almost a requirement in 2012 American politics to talk about great teachers, the American way of life and all of us being one nation. But the idea that government is responsible for every worthwhile thing in the country, including every successful business, well, that's a little far-out even for Mr. Obama.

Maybe the president really believes that Al Gore invented the Internet, or that government invented fracking, which even now is solving the American energy crisis. Hey, who ever heard about George P. Mitchell and the Barnett Shale anyway, except a few Texans and business historians? Hydraulic fracking of shale to obtain natural gas and oil may have been around as a theory for some time, and public-funded research may have explored it, but it took a crazy wildcatter willing to risk his all on the idea to make it a reality that is changing our lives and our economy. For the better.

Yes, government does build highways and dams. But the president felt no need to go into detail. Nowhere did he mention, say, Henry Ford and those who built the automobile industry. Why does he think the government had to build highways? Because somebody in the private sector-like Henry Ford-built a car, and people wanted to drive and be driven. The Hoover Dam does indeed produce a lot of electricity. Why? To operate newfangled gizmos like the light bulb. Does the president believe it was invented by government, too?

We're glad Mr. Obama gave this speech. We have an idea he's even given it before, he's so proud of it. It does show how he thinks. Or feels, anyway. Namely, that all things good flow from government. That we must all be prepared to give what we can, each according to his ability. Then we can all collect, each according to his need. It's an ideal system, though it may prove only an ideal. In practice, it can produce monstrosities like Soviet Russia, the Cultural Revolution in Mao's China, National Socialism and other such dubious beneficences of allpowerful government.

For if the government is responsible for the interstates, the Internet and the Hoover Dam, it can also introduce institutions like the DMV, the Transportation Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.

But thank you, Mr. President. That was one heckuva speech. Or at least a telling one.

Even though November is months away, we have a feeling the words "If you've got a business, you didn't build that," will still be running in our ears. We can't wait to vote.

86
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.
Easy123 said...

You're "If you've got a business, you didn't build that," quote is taken out of context. Obama was referring to the "roads and bridges" in the previous sentence. It wasn't very artful or articulate but it's apparent that he was referring to the building of the roads and bridges, not the business.

This is the problem with Conservatives and Republicans in general. You like to build up these "smart business people". You love keeping their pockets padded. You love the Mitt Romney's of the world. But you always neglect the "little" man, the working man, etc. which, in most cases, is yourself.

The more people you name like Bell, Ford, etc. the more your 'special credit' claim flies out the window. There are many hardworking, intelligent people that likely had similar ideas as Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg etc. but they didn't have the funds to start a company or some other obstacle stood in their path. You don't give "average" people enough credit. You don't give YOURSELF enough credit.

Obama said it perfectly:

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive."

If you get anywhere in life, someone helped you get there. Parents, teachers, coaches, employers, mentors, friends, spouses, etc. You didn't do it alone. Your parents helped you out financially in college or a friend gave you a loan. A teacher inspired you to think outside the box or a coach taught you the true meaning of hard work. You folks at the Free Press can bitch and moan all you want but Obama hit the nail on the head with this speech. No one does anything alone. Hell, you wouldn't even be here without your parents. If you don't like it or disagree then I pity you. If you want to take credit for everything you have done in your entire life, you have that right. But you're dead wrong if you think that way.

July 19, 2012 at 1 a.m.

Thanks again for showing how someone can deceive and manipulate the truth with a false and malicious presentation of words.

But you can't even own up to actual deception being an issue with right-wing critics when it is obvious and in your own editorial. You even added to it, by once again repeating the often debunked story about Al Gore claiming to invent the Internet. He didn't. But you decided to lie about it, because it sounded good.

You know what I'm glad for? Your continuing misconduct. Because it shows what worthless critics you are, since you can't even pretend to a pretense of honesty.

But hey, you want to talk about the government having failings, why not talk about a few examples of the "business" world failing, and no I don't mean something like Coke II. I mean something like Bernie Madoff, robo-signing, or Chiquita's support of terrorism.

Yeah, sorry, but your blind devotion isn't going to get you anywhere. And no, for the repliers, don't bother with some wild accusation about me being indifferent to failings in government, I'm not. I'm willing to fix them. I admit that the government doesn't do everything perfectly.

But sometimes that's because business interferes. California power crisis, I'm looking at you.

Also...the Hoover Dam was constructed in the 1930s, several decades after the invention of the light bulb...which was protected by the government, since Thomas Edison was a big user of patents. So were several of the OTHER people who contributed to the invention of the light bulb, just in case you want to think it was one single person involved, as there were actually several over the whole process.

July 19, 2012 at 1:51 a.m.
EaTn said...

The problem with the right-wingers is that they are so blinded with successful individuals striking it rich that they've forgotten the government is "us", not "them". Of course unique individuals are what keep the free spirit wheels of the country greased, but the road these wheels move on are ordinary hard working folks trying to raise a family, willingly paying taxes and voting for a government that will keep the road paved for all of us and the next generation.

July 19, 2012 at 6:24 a.m.
anniebelle said...

Jul 18, 2012 at 3:50 pm The Romney campaign and conservative bloggers have been feasting on a selectively-edited quote from President Obama to argue that he believes that the government, not business owners, are responsible for the success of their enterprises. Though Obama’s comment — “if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else did that” — accurately observed that businesses large and small rely on public infrastructure funded by taxpayer dollars, Republicans have used the statement to reinforce their ‘Obama hates businesses’ narrative. But during a campaign appearance in Ohio on Wednesday, Mitt Romney misquoted Obama, before agreeing that tax payer-funded programs help all American businesses succeed: ROMNEY: I know that you recognize a lot of people help you in a business. Perhaps the bank, the investors. There is no question your mom and dad, your school teachers. The people who provide roads, the fire, the police. A lot of people help.

July 19, 2012 at 6:40 a.m.
moon4kat said...

Obama is right, corporations and business owners certainly do not do it all by themselves. That's not "disdain for success;" that's identifying how "success" happens.

Workers -- who are paid less than what they add to the value of the business -- create wealth for the owners and investors. And we all contribute to a society in which the wealthy can thrive. Yet, the actual wealth creators (workers) end up paying proportionally more in taxes than the owners.
That's not fair, and Republicans want to give even more tax breaks to the ultra rich. The GOP opposes economic fairness for the men and women who do the hard work that actually creates the wealth.

July 19, 2012 at 8:08 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Obama's overriding message is that government is what makes it possible for individuals to succeed in this country. This is true of certain valid roles for government, especially promoting rule of law and protecting property rights, but that is not what Obama is talking about. He is using the relatively small amount of helpful infrastructure spending to justify his demands that the successful pay for a bloated system of social guarantees. The social guarantees do not help the successful succeed, they are nothing more than a form of legalized theft.

The leftists buy this bilge hook, line and sinker.

In reality, the rich already pay enough in taxes to pay for ALL of the helpful infrastructure in this country. He is just using a bait and switch argument to justify getting them to pay more for other peoples food, healthcare, housing, condoms, abortions, etcetera...

July 19, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.
Leaf said...

Big Ridge said, "The leftists buy this bilge hook, line and sinker."

You're mixing metaphors and using the word bilge incorrectly. The bilge is the lowest part of a ship. The word you are looking for is bilgewater - meaning water that accumulates in the bilge. It's nasty. But what does bilgewater have to do with fishing tackle? Nothing. What you should have said was, "The leftists swallow this concept hook, line, and sinker." Or "The leftists buy this concept lock, stock, and barrel." Even "The leftists drink this bilgewater and call it wine" would be a marginally acceptable turn-of-phrase.

Oh, and the rest of your post was bilgewater.

July 19, 2012 at 11:05 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

This is how a leftist argues when they do not have a point.

The concept is bilge Mr. Leaf, bilge being nautical slang for nasty unwanted stuff. From Miriam Webster online "3: stale or worthless remarks or ideas". My seafaring friends would not have had your comprehension problem.

July 19, 2012 at 11:12 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

You seem to have the conprehension problem. You are mixing metaphors. That's obvious but for some reason, you don't get it.

July 19, 2012 at 11:18 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I get it Easy. You guys don't get it.

The leftists buy (this stale or worthless idea) hook, line and sinker.

It would be really refreshing if Obamabots could focus on an idea and not get lost in semantics.

July 19, 2012 at 11:27 a.m.
328Kwebsite said...

It's interesting that the editorial cited Steve Jobs. Have a look at the circuit boards. While they did build the Apple I in their garage, it was Woz who designed and engineered it. While Steve Jobs did schmooze a Las Vegas tycoon for funding, the Apple II circuit boards were made in China. Apple may be designed in California, but as a manufactured item, it's been made in China since the late 1970s.

It's so rare to see the Free Press endorsing the profiteering of the communist Chinese. How refreshing. No wonder they will choose to support Mitt Romney for President.

If you want to look for a disdain for success, look no further than a Republican Congress. These do-nothing obstructionists have decayed into paranoiac ranters who obstruct sound legislation at every turn. They choose to suck up to white collar crime while putting forth a candidate for President who made his money destroying American jobs.

The Republican Party's disdain for the success of anything besides their own wallets is the reason why they will lose significant numbers of seats in Congress over the next two elections. Romney, of course, will not be elected President. Instead, his daily appearances forge a permanent association between the Republican Party and white collar crime.

The leading supporter of communist Chinese today? Republican businessmen.

The leading user of government welfare programs today? Republican businessmen.

The leading cause of the demise of the Republican Party? Republican businessmen.

Reap what you've sown, gentlemen. You had your chance. It's over.

July 19, 2012 at 11:41 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

In terms even a leftist with their limited understanding of the world might have a chance of comprehending…

Obama's overriding message is that government is what makes it possible for individuals to succeed in this country. This is true of certain valid roles for government, especially promoting rule of law and protecting property rights, but that is not what Obama is talking about. He is using the relatively small amount of helpful infrastructure spending to justify his demands that the successful pay for a bloated system of social guarantees. The social guarantees do not help the successful succeed, they are nothing more than a form of legalized theft.

The opinion of the intellectually weak is artfully manipulated by Obama’s deceptive presentation of his worthless ideas.

In reality, the rich already pay enough in taxes to pay for ALL of the helpful infrastructure in this country. He is just using a bait and switch argument to justify getting them to pay more for other peoples food, healthcare, housing, condoms, abortions, etcetera...

I like the first version better.

July 19, 2012 at 11:43 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"He is just using a bait and switch argument to justify getting them to pay more for other peoples food, healthcare, housing, condoms, abortions, etcetera..."

This is utterly false and you know it.

July 19, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "This is utterly false and you know it."

Are you prepared to back up your opinion or will you continue to throw it around like it is a fact as if anyone is ready to accept your declarations at face value just because it came from the keyboard of "Easy123"?

The federal government collects more than enough money to fulfill its legitimate roles of supporting rule of law, property rights and infrastructure. They do not have the money to support the bloated social programs even if they spent nothing on their proper functions. Obama wants the money so he can redistribute it and you know it!

July 19, 2012 at 12:02 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

Are you prepared to back up your opinion or will you continue to throw it around like it is a fact as if anyone is ready to accept your declarations at face value just because it came from the keyboard of "BigRidgePatriot"?

That's the role of government. Redistribute tax dollars to areas, programs, etc. that they see fit. Gripe all you want to about "bloated social programs" but they wouldn't be so "bloated" if people weren't so poor.

I guess you would rather eliminate Food Stamps, welfare, the Health Department, Medicaid, etc. and let the poor fend for themselves, correct?

July 19, 2012 at 12:13 p.m.

Well, actually they would, if only we stopped wasting so much money on overpriced military expenditures.

That and corporate welfare for the rich and powerful. You do know they're getting the most directly from the government. Who do you think profits from SNAP and EBT? Why do you think the government switched away from direct food provision?

July 19, 2012 at 12:15 p.m.
timbo said...

You lefties have just demonstrated why you must be beaten into the ground. Our country was founded by people who developed businesses, took a chance on settling here, braved weather and starvation. When these things were overcome, the almighty British government started raising taxes and taking advantage of the population. The businesses and farms came first. The individuals that took the chance came first. They built a government to ensure that these freedoms couldn't be messed with. You libs have turned it on it's head and become the equivalent of the British government.

Obama made a Freudian slip. This is what an imbecile like him really thinks. You can try to explain it away any way you want but he said what he said.

Without entrepenaunrs this country would have never been founded. No jobs, no inventions, no progress is all that would be happening. This comes from a person who set the low standard for qualifications for President. NO EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER. Obama is an person of average intelligence and no background to do anything but maybe be a college professor. It is no wonder he doesn't get it.

Easy....I have decided to keep all my money from the business, not come up with ideas, not invent anything else and get my employees in the parking lot and tell them it is now up to them to do all of that stuff. Then I will just say, "create wealth."

Wonder how long I will be in business? You are a complete idiot.

July 19, 2012 at 12:25 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Timbo,

"I have decided to keep all my money from the business, not come up with ideas, not invent anything else and get my employees in the parking lot and tell them it is now up to them to do all of that stuff. Then I will just say, "create wealth.""

If you have a business, you already came up with the idea. If you have a business, you have already invented something. You can always invent new things or just keep making what you are making. But most of the time, it's the employees that have the great invention ideas, not the boss. But the employees could create wealth. They already create wealth by making whatever it is you invented in the first place. The employees make you all the money. Then you pay them 700% less than what you pay yourself and you come out on top. And you didn't even have to lift a finger!

Would you like to try another stupid scenario. It really brings out your ignorance. :-)

Would you like to try again, idiot?

"This comes from a person who set the low standard for qualifications for President. NO EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER. Obama is an person of average intelligence and no background to do anything but maybe be a college professor. It is no wonder he doesn't get it."

Straw Man Argument. Obama went to very prestigious schools. He was a U.S. Senator. How do you know his intelligence level? And it would seem he has a background to do anything. Senator, Author, President of the United States of America. Pretty good resume.

Get your head out of your ass, Timmy.

July 19, 2012 at 12:35 p.m.
Downtownman said...

Its stunning how hoodwinked the cons are. They have become so consumed by the fairy tale of the self made man/business myth they cannot see the truth that these successes are always the result of hard work, yes, but also with the huge help of the government. Roads, schools, police protection, student loans, tax breaks for businesses, loopholes, corporations are people decisions, clean water. I and every other American helped pay for these things, so for cons to stand up and say mine mine mine mine (cons favorite word), is disingenous at best and a boastful lie at worst.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness". Galbraith

July 19, 2012 at 12:49 p.m.
Leaf said...

Big Ridge. Re: your post of 11:12. I'm not arguing with you, I'm making fun of you.

July 19, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
raygunz said...

Someone,I forget who, said,"There are two types of Republicans, the rich,and the suckers."

Based on what I see and hear,that sounds pretty close!

July 19, 2012 at 1:32 p.m.
anniebelle said...

I thought "you people" would be interested to know....

Rmoney couldn't find investors in Boston for his company so he turned elsewhere...

The first outside investor in Bain was a leading London financier, Sir Jack Lyons, who made a $2.5-million investment through a Panama shell company set up by a Swiss money manager, further shielding his identity. Years later, Lyons was convicted in an unrelated stock fraud scandal. .... About $9 million came from rich Latin Americans, including powerful Salvadoran families living in Miami during their country's brutal civil war. At the time, U.S. officials were publicly accusing some exiles in Miami of funding right-wing death squads in El Salvador. Some family members of the first Bain Capital investors were later linked to groups responsible for killings, though no evidence indicates those relatives invested in Bain or benefited from it. ................ Other early investors included Robert Maxwell, the British publishing baron, who invested $2 million. After his drowning death in 1991, investigators discovered Maxwell had stolen hundreds of millions of dollars from his company's pension funds. ....................... Among the Bain investors were Francisco R.R. de Sola and his cousin Herbert Arturo de Sola, whose brother Orlando de Sola was suspected by State Department officials and the CIA of backing the right-wing death squads, according to now-declassified documents. Orlando de Sola, who has denied supporting the death squads, is now serving a four-year prison term for unrelated fraud charges. In an interview at the prison in Metapan, El Salvador, he said he did not benefit from the family investment in Bain Capital. ......................

read the rest here http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bain-creation-20120719,0,5698366,full.story

July 19, 2012 at 1:39 p.m.
Leaf said...

Big Ridge. No, you don't buy something hook, line, and sinker. You swallow it, like a fish. That's the expression.

When you don't write correctly, it makes people think you don't know what you're talking about. Also when you don't know what you're talking about it makes people think you don't know what you're talking about.

July 19, 2012 at 2:32 p.m.
dao1980 said...

Bless her heart, somebody give tu a hug.

July 19, 2012 at 4:28 p.m.
dao1980 said...

That's a tiny elephant! Or a barking spider to you thank you very much.

C'mon tu, a humorous post shouldn't take itself so seriously.

When you are actually trying to make a point, why start out the post with such a bad attitude?

Do you really expect anyone to digest your information when your posts read like the rants of a scorned soul?

Not that I am guilt free of releasing the occasional barrage of flaming arrows, but I really can't remember one single post from you that wasn't simple minded, baseless, acidic, combative, perspective-less pap.

I really do look for humor in most everything. I bet if you gave it a try you could offer something worth a sincere, honest, and spite-less "lol".

July 19, 2012 at 5 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "That's the role of government"

In the mind of a socialist, yes.

July 19, 2012 at 5:29 p.m.
dao1980 said...

Well, thanks for "recalling" and re-posting everything everyone posts... in the same thread.. every time.

Still seems like unproductively combative trash to me. Does it get lonely up in that ivory tower?.. Or down in that well? (wherever you're lost)

July 19, 2012 at 5:39 p.m.

timbo, in reality this country was founded by a variety of divergent interests. Some were business oriented, others were added as a result of military conquest, and some were merely havens for religious liberty and cultural identity. Rhode Island was even formed because some folks just couldn't get along in Massachusetts. One colony, Georgia, was even founded on the principle of giving a haven for debtors and the worthy poor to establish themselves. Also as a buffer to Spanish Florida. Quite a divergent range of interests.

But no, the American Revolution wasn't due to an absolute abhorrence of taxation, more to the lack of representation involved. There's a reason why the American government, lead by many of the people involved in the Revolution suppressed several rebellions based on tax protests within the first few years of the adoption of the Constitution. And actually, the taxes the British were passing? Were all about business. Business for the British companies, to increase their profits. That's right, not the American people being served by the government, but corporations who could care less about the needs of the citizens.

Hey, that sounds familiar...almost like today, where the government is becoming the pawn of the corporate lobbyists. Maybe it's the citizens who ought to come first, not the fictional persons.

As for your remark about running a business...now you know why the country has to invest in itself and its citizens. And why the citizens would do well to invest in their country, since it's what is making them wealthy.

tq, thanks once again for repeating lies! Your sycophantic devotion remains unabated.

dao1980, it's a gutter. Or possibly a pickle barrel.

July 19, 2012 at 5:45 p.m.
conservative said...

Sometimes easy races to be a hypocrite on the same day, sometimes he waits a day.

easy yesterday -

"I don't want anything from the government and I don't want the federal government to do anything. I don't have any expectations, wants or needs from the government"

easy today -

"That's the role of government. Redistribute tax dollars to areas, programs, etc. that they see fit. Gripe all you want to about "bloated social programs" but they wouldn't be so "bloated" if people weren't so poor."

"I guess you would rather eliminate Food Stamps, welfare, the Health Department, Medicaid, etc. and let the poor fend for themselves, correct?"

July 19, 2012 at 5:51 p.m.

Sometimes conservative makes it so easy to see how right-wingers like to take things out of context...which coincidentally is the theme of this editorial.

Thanks, but you really don't have to be such a bad example, you've quite thoroughly discredited the entire conservative agenda.

July 19, 2012 at 6:22 p.m.
conservative said...

easy on 17 July :

"And, once again, I'm not a Socialist"

easy today :

"That's the role of government. Redistribute tax dollars to areas, programs, etc. that they see fit".

July 19, 2012 at 8:35 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

Please show how either of those quotes are at odds with one another. I really think you have reading comprehension problems.

July 19, 2012 at 8:36 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

That is the role of government. Seriously, are you mentally handicapped?

July 19, 2012 at 8:38 p.m.

Yes, the only problem is you're not on Fox News.

You really should call Rupert Murdoch to get national attention.

You could be the next Glenn Beck or Michelle Bachmann.

Until then, well, you're just doing us the favor of making your side look bad here. I know you can do better. You can ruin the entire Right-wing movement for all time.

You just need a forum.

I KNOW! MITT ROMNEY CAN PICK YOU AS HIS VP CANDIDATE!

Perfect!

July 19, 2012 at 11:05 p.m.

Why, when they can see your lies here?

July 19, 2012 at 11:25 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

Stroke that ego, sweetie. Make it purr.

July 19, 2012 at 11:43 p.m.

That's nice, but I'm sorry you disrespect the people here so much you think they can't recognize your posts.

You really should get a job on Fox.

July 19, 2012 at 11:43 p.m.
Easy123 said...

sTUpid,

Don't stroke it to hard, it might break.

I'm sure you're an expert on keeping men limp.

July 20, 2012 at 12:25 a.m.
raygunz said...

tu_quoque said..."

RatsAzz Sucks On A Tailpipe:

"Someone,I forget who, said,"There are two types of Republicans, the rich,and the suckers."

Bumper stickers the research material of Fleabaggers"

If the shoe fits,wear it!

July 20, 2012 at 1:14 a.m.
anniebelle said...

It's a full-time job just keeping up with tu_jerque's lies and half-truths. Here's what the president actually said, that Faux and Limpballs conveniently left out. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” Meaning to you dunces out there, you didn't build the roads, the schools, the water plants, etc. Please do some critical thinking at some point in your life.

July 20, 2012 at 7:55 a.m.
MalleusChristus said...

Jesus Christ>>>John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, "I am The Way, The Truth, and The Life..."

II Chronicles 7:-"And the LORD appeared...and said...If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

July 20, 2012 at 8:16 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

anniebelle said... "Meaning to you dunces out there, you didn't build the roads, the schools, the water plants, etc. Please do some critical thinking at some point in your life."

In a big way, a minority of productive citizens did not only build their businesses but the entire infrastructure of this country with the money that was taken from them in taxes. That is why Obama's message is so offensive.

July 20, 2012 at 8:26 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

If people were not so easily sucked into the class warfare mindset it would be easy to see that the average citizen owes a great deal to the top 5% income earners. They have done more to advance our standard of living than any politicians, except maybe those who were around in the late 1700's.

July 20, 2012 at 8:32 a.m.
joneses said...

The only wealthy people Hussein Obama is for are him, Bill Ayers and others that are behind his complete government control agenda. He has admitted he does not understand business and hates anyone that is successful without the government being involved.

July 20, 2012 at 8:56 a.m.
timbo said...

easy123..... It takes a liberal to think that going to prestigious schools with a C- average makes you qualified to be president.

You and most other liberals are just jealous of those who can build a business, take a risk, or invent something new. You don't have the ability to do that and you just want to make yourselves feel better by tearing down the achievers in this society. You and Obama don't get it at all.

If Obama persists in this idiotic strategy he will not only lose donors who are achievers, he will piss us off to the point that we will hold our money and hiring until he is gone. Maybe you should advocate just passing a law that confiscates all all our money.

The ignorance of Obama and his supporters of what makes this country work is astounding. Maybe he should have majored in business and got a real job when he got out of college instead of becoming a comunnity organizer. Wow, I am sure that and his "prestigious" education really prepared him for being President.

You all are so dumb it takes my breath away.

July 20, 2012 at 9:35 a.m.
Easy123 said...

timbo,

How do you know his GPA?

"You and most other liberals are just jealous of those who can build a business, take a risk, or invent something new."

False.

"You don't have the ability to do that and you just want to make yourselves feel better by tearing down the achievers in this society."

False.

"If Obama persists in this idiotic strategy he will not only lose donors who are achievers, he will piss us off to the point that we will hold our money and hiring until he is gone. Maybe you should advocate just passing a law that confiscates all all our money."

Moronic.

"The ignorance of Obama and his supporters of what makes this country work is astounding."

You haven't presented anything that would prove your claim of ignorance. You have actually proven your own ignorance.

"Wow, I am sure that and his "prestigious" education really prepared him for being President."

Which jobs, schools, or experiences prepare you to be President, Timbo? Since you seem to be an expert on the subject, please let us all know.

"You all are so dumb it takes my breath away"

That's you gasping for breath because your head is up your ass.

July 20, 2012 at 10:14 a.m.

BigRidgePatriot, actually if you weren't so sucked into your own version of class warfare, you'd realize that the top 5% owe their wealth to the labors of everybody else.

Paying money in taxes doesn't magically make a bridge appear, somebody has to perform the construction work. Given how many rich people owe their income to the arteries of trade fostered by the government (Amazon.com, Wal-Mart, even Facebook), where would they be without that labor?

And that's not even mentioning the ones who make their money directly from road construction.

Somehow though, I doubt you appreciate that. You just find it offensive to think about, and so you try to dismiss it as class warfare.

July 20, 2012 at 10:18 a.m.
conservative said...

"BigRidgePatriot, actually if you weren't so sucked into your own version of class warfare, you'd realize that the top 5% owe their wealth to the labors of everybody else."

"This is an example of why bulbs seldom writes anything coherent"

July 20, 2012 at 10:36 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

The quote is coherent. Your quote isn't when applied to bulbs' quote.

Would you like to try again?

July 20, 2012 at 10:41 a.m.

Nope, that might cause his brain to melt.

July 20, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.
conservative said...

Why don't Liberals understand simple economics and contracts?

A worker was paid by his employer for his labor whether it was a good, service, bridge, road, government building etc. The employer owes him nothing more and the worker owes the business owner nothing more.

July 20, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

It is disappointing to see the disrespectful personal attacks that have become the typical MO of Clay Bennett followers spill over into the rest of the editorial page like this. Sure, a certain level of this happens with these anonymous on-line forums, but I still think Bennett holds some responsibility for downgrading the discussion with his lop-sided, shallow, repetitive messages. After you have argued the same point a dozen times about all that is left is to attack and try to discredit the opposing viewpoint. He has created a whole community of contributors that seem to live to take digs at each other. I am guilty myself.

July 20, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

Why doesn't Conservative understand real life?

The employer could not mass produce his product quickly without the worker.

The worker could, in fact, work for himself i.e. farm and still survive without the employer.

Unless the employer can mass produce his product by himself, then he will not make money.

July 20, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

happywithnewbulbs said... "BigRidgePatriot, actually if you weren't so sucked into your own version of class warfare, you'd realize that the top 5% owe their wealth to the labors of everybody else."

The job creators pay people for their labor as the job is done. At the end of the job the employer owes nothing, for the most part.

Obama seems to be arguing that pipe fitters and electricians are just as important the owner of an oil company. The laborers are in abundant supply and they compete with each other for the work they are given. The kind of persons who can bring together the oil company are not so common and as such are able to command much larger incomes.

It is no different than the extraordinary athlete that gets huge compensation. The job creators are exceptional people with exceptional skills and minds. They deserve to be compensated as such without disproportionate harassment from the government.

July 20, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"pipe fitters and electricians are just as important the owner of an oil company."

True. Without workers, there is no company.

"The kind of persons who can bring together the oil company are not so common and as such are able to command much larger incomes."

False. People create businesses everyday. Many workers go on to start their own businesses. You logic doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

"The job creators are exceptional people with exceptional skills and minds."

False. Like I said above, many workers go on to start their own businesses. Did they go from not exceptional skills and mind to people with exceptional skills and mind overnight? NO! Once again, your claim does not hold water.

July 20, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy,

I think the type of people who can learn to be a pipe fitter "grow on trees". Yes, workers are necessary in most cases, but not any particular worker. Unskilled, semiskilled and skilled laborers are literally a commodity in the economic sense. The employer does not need a person with a brilliant mind standing at the pipe threading machine.

I also think that you do not have any idea what it takes to create and operate a business of any size, or you would not be making the declarations that you are. Maybe you are equating the operation of a lemonade stand with operating an oil company?

July 20, 2012 at 12:08 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

I don't care what you "think". What you are thinking isn't congruent with reality.

sTUpid,

"The second is the only unqualified truth as some products can be mass produced quickly by a single individual owner or group of owners and money can surely be made on products without having to mass produce them."

These aren't the types of businesses I or BRP were referring to.

"You appear to be a believer in that when you buy a car it does not really belong to you due to the fact that you performed no labor in its creation and that those that did can come and use it as they see fit."

Baseless and false.

Keep trying, sweetie.

July 20, 2012 at 12:21 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "The worker could, in fact, work for himself i.e. farm and still survive without the employer."

What would the worker's life expectancy be then, without all of those employers elevating his standard of living? About 35 years?

I dare venture that if you were thrust into a world where you had to fend for yourself you would be dead in a couple of weeks.

July 20, 2012 at 12:22 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I don't care what you "think". What you are thinking isn't congruent with reality."

In your reality, that is. It is quite apparent that you have very strong opinions that you treat as fact. If you would turn down the rage and try to open your mind you might find it quite liberating.

July 20, 2012 at 12:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"What would the worker's life expectancy be then, without all of those employers elevating his standard of living? About 35 years?"

This makes no sense.

"I dare venture that if you were thrust into a world where you had to fend for yourself you would be dead in a couple of weeks."

Neither does this.

No rage involved. I'm not making all the claims. YOU are. I'm simply refuting them.

"try to open your mind you might find it quite liberating"

July 20, 2012 at 12:27 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "This makes no sense."

I suspect that is because your paradigm is limiting your ability to understand. What part does not make sense? I seem to recall that the life expectancy of humans who survived as subsistence farmers was about 35 years. Don’t forget, without all of those evil employers there will be no tractors for you to buy and use on your farm.

July 20, 2012 at 12:35 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I dare venture that if you were thrust into a world where you had to fend for yourself you would be dead in a couple of weeks. Neither does this (make sense)."

Do you have any idea how hard it really is to survive as a farmer or a hunter gatherer on your own? The vast majority of Americans simply do not have the skills to survive in this fashion anymore.

July 20, 2012 at 12:41 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

It doesn't make sense because it isn't 1804. The average life expectancy of any person is around 70. Look at the Amish. They are basically subsistence farmers. They have the same life expectancy as anyone. There is a thing, fairly new, called modern medicine that has increased life expectancy. For some reason, I don't think you were aware of this.

I haven't said anything negative against employers. NOTHING! I have made an argument for the importance of the worker. That is all.

Would you like to try one more time?

July 20, 2012 at 12:45 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

A successful farmer has much more in common with a business creator and employer than he does with a common laborer. That farmer will almost certainly be employing people to aid him in his effort.

July 20, 2012 at 12:47 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

Hunter-gatherer? LOL! What are you talking about, dude?

Just because many do not have the skills doesn't mean it's impossible. You're missing the point.

Workers can survive without the employer. But employers' business cannot survive without the workers.

July 20, 2012 at 12:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... “It doesn't make sense because it isn't 1804. The average life expectancy of any person is around 70. Look at the Amish. They are basically subsistence farmers. They have the same life expectancy as anyone. There is a thing, fairly new, called modern medicine that has increased life expectancy. For some reason, I don't think you were aware of this. I haven't said anything negative against employers. NOTHING! I have made an argument for the importance of the worker. That is all. Would you like to try one more time?”

You made the argument that a worker does not need the employer and that they could survive on their own as a farmer. You seem to want to elevate the common laborer’s value to society to par with job creators. In doing so you are lowering the value of the job creators. In your world it seems that a championship football team could be staffed by a bunch of 50 year old arm-chair quarterbacks and the results would be just as spectacular.

July 20, 2012 at 12:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"A successful farmer has much more in common with a business creator and employer than he does with a common laborer. That farmer will almost certainly be employing people to aid him in his effort."

A successful farmer does not have more in common with a business creator and employer than he does with a common laborer. The farmer may employ others or just have more children to help work the farm. For the few farmers that I know, it is a full-time plus overtime job. It has nothing to do with job creating or employing people. It's about getting work done.

July 20, 2012 at 12:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"You made the argument that a worker does not need the employer and that they could survive on their own as a farmer. You seem to want to elevate the common laborer’s value to society to par with job creators. In doing so you are lowering the value of the job creators. In your world it seems that a championship football team could be staffed by a bunch of 50 year old arm-chair quarterbacks and the results would be just as spectacular."

The worker doesn't need the employer. I gave the example of farming as an option for the worker.

The laborer's value IS on par with the "job creator's". One cannot function without the other.

I am not lowering anyones value. I have yet to devalue either party.

Good teams have been coached to championships by subpar coaches and vice versa. You are proving my point with this analogy.

July 20, 2012 at 12:58 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

By the way. Many Amish are now working off the farm to bring income back to the community. Although I respect their way of life, it would seem that even they are coming to appreciate how working for an employer can elevate their standard of living..

July 20, 2012 at 12:58 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "The worker doesn't need the employer. I gave the example of farming as an option for the worker."

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. If there are no employers, the farmer will have only rudimentary tools at his disposal and will have a very hard life. If employers still exist and the farmer is buying tools from them then they do in fact need those employers. They are just assuming a different relationship with them, as a customer rather than laborer.

July 20, 2012 at 1:01 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"Many Amish are now working off the farm to bring income back to the community."

Prove it.

July 20, 2012 at 1:03 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

If the farmer was to barter his time in return for a tool he would be both a laborer and a customer.

July 20, 2012 at 1:03 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"If there are no employers"

I AM NOT IMPLYING THAT I WANT TO ELIMINATE EMPLOYERS. Get that idea out of your head.

You are trying to argue points that I haven't presented and do not believe.

July 20, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "Prove it."

Please refer to the section titled "Separation from the outside world"

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Amish

July 20, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

And if he didn't barter any time in return for a tool, he would only be a laborer.

So what?

You're proving my point. Both sides are equal!

July 20, 2012 at 1:07 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I AM NOT IMPLYING THAT I WANT TO ELIMINATE EMPLOYERS. Get that idea out of your head. You are trying to argue points that I haven't presented and do not believe."

That is why I offered both scenarios. So, if the worker-turned-farmer buys tools from a business does he not still "need" the owner of that business?

July 20, 2012 at 1:09 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

I don't trust that source. Could you please provide another one.

July 20, 2012 at 1:12 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"That is why I offered both scenarios. So, if the worker-turned-farmer buys tools from a business does he not still "need" the owner of that business?"

No. He needs the product.

YOU ARE PROVING MY POINT!

July 20, 2012 at 1:13 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

OMG. Are you suggesting that the tool materializes from thin air in the absence of the owner of the business?

The point that I am trying to make is that if there are not people who are skilled at organizing material and labor to create a product the types of products available are very limited. Some people are more capable in this regard than others. It takes pretty talented people to coordinate the production of most of the things we expect in life. Without that talent you’d be left trading your time or production for a rudimentary plow.

July 20, 2012 at 1:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

The point I am trying to make is that without skilled laborers there would be no labor to organize. Both are equally important. This is the point that you have not conceded. You can't argue one is more important than the other when the elimination of one totally impairs the function of the other.

It takes pretty talented people to produce most of the things we expect in life. Without that talent you’d be left sitting in an empty factory, looking at all the nice machinery.

July 20, 2012 at 1:28 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I don't trust that source. Could you please provide another one."

That is just the first link I clicked on when I searched "amish working". If you are really interested go look yourself. I am not your research assistant. I am just trying to save you from your paradigm out of charity.

July 20, 2012 at 1:29 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "It takes pretty talented people to produce most of the things we expect in life. Without that talent you’d be left sitting in an empty factory, looking at all the nice machinery."

Employers are perfectly capable of training labor to do whatever it is they need done. It happens every day. Unskilled labor is turned into a productive team member. Not only does the laborer get paid for his work but he is taught a skill that he can take with him to other employers. That is all part of the coordination of labor part. Show a little gratitude!

July 20, 2012 at 1:33 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I learned more from my current employer in 1 year than I did in 4 years of college, and I am grateful for that.

July 20, 2012 at 1:35 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Today's conservatives do not see the US in the USA. They only see the ME in aMErica.

July 20, 2012 at 8:05 p.m.

BRP, so what you're saying is that the employer pays the worker, because they DID owe them a debt, since their labor actually allowed them to have things to sell or otherwise make a profit?

Think about what you just admitted.

And if you want to try to run an oil company without qualified labor, you go right ahead.

Just sign a waiver so you don't get a government bailout.

July 20, 2012 at 11:27 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Unbelievable. I am sure you think a government bureaucrat is a perfect substitute for business creators, since it does not take any particular talent to create and operate a business. You would be very happy in the Marxist utopia Obama aspires to create, until the real world consequences started to impact you and your progeny.

July 21, 2012 at 2:57 p.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.