I like this approach

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by USANick7

This is an excellent point. It would seem that study after study conducted on the topic of voluntary giving demonstrates that conservatives give a far larger share of their time and money to charity. And not just to religious institutions. It has also been noted that the type of institutions given to by conservatives, tend to be those that work on the behalf of the homeless, hungry, destitute etc. While liberal donations tend to favor arts.

There is one reason, and one reason alone, someone supports socialism...it is because they presume that they will personally gain through the labors of another.

Conservatives = Republicans = Giving, time and assistance that they chose
Socialism = Democrats = Hollywood Donations for elections, Redistribution of wealth and gaining something from the hard work of others.

Ping the light is coming on...
Wish the rest of america realized this.

[Defender968]

Originally Posted by dividebyzero

Perhaps I've been misunderstood. I didn't feel like my response was "high-horsed grandstanding" or off-the-cuff sarcasm, so please accept my apology if it was interpreted that way. I have nothing but the utmost respect for the QPs, servicemen and women (and their family members) who post here, and don't intend to convey anything otherwise in my posting.

As far as me "getting my bearings" with regards to who's posting here, I registered in August 2007 and lurked for well over a year before posting. I guess I'm the odd man out given that I'm an Obama supporter, as I've noticed there's a plurality of McCain supporters here. I respect the reasons that many of you have for wanting McCain, and I won't try to dissuade anyone from those. My point is: if this were the other way around, and this was from a small business owner who supported Obama, I'd think the objections I raised would have been resoundingly agreed with.

As far as "Chosen Soldier" goes, no, NYU doesn't have a copy. I bought my own last year, found it a fascinating read, re-read it several times and now it's resting on my bookshelf right in front of me.

Again, I mean no disrespect or condescension. If I'm still coming off as a jerk, I'll retreat for another year or so.

dividebyzero, you know I can see how you would think this was un-American, I don't agree with you but I think I at least understand your view, further I have a theory that I think explains why you think this way, and I don’t think I’ve shared it before on this board so I’m going to.

I call my theory “Everyone gets a trophy”, and it’s based on my observations of sporting events for young children today and how it's effecting present day society. So when I was a kid, even in the 1st grade in both “ant ball” soccer and T-ball the team who scored more goals or runs won the game and the other team lost. Now at the end of the respective seasons the teams who had won the most games got a little trophy, the rest of the teams were told try harder next year. Now fast forward to today, at the end of those same seasons everyone gets a trophy, there is no first or second, because some of the parents of the losing kids thought that not getting a trophy makes their kids feel bad and that’s somehow not fair, so instead they collectively have taken away the accomplishment from the team who actually worked harder and or had more talent to give to those who didn't earn it, see where this is going? What we have done is created a society of people who feel entitled, and feel like if they show up they should get the same thing as those who have not only showed up, but worked hard and excelled. Another side effect of this phenomenon is that personal responsibility has been pretty well discarded in our society of loop holes in lieu of perceived fairness, this has happened to the point that everyone feels like they aren’t responsible for anything even their own actions, there’s always an excuse they want to get off on. Look at nearly any murder trial, the suspect inevitably claims to have been abused, not bee hugged enough, blah blah blah, and that because of these things they’re not responsible for their actions. It has become so pervasive today, that we are indoctrinating our youth to believe they can do anything and they’re just not responsible. In today’s world if your parents didn’t make a concerted effort to teach the dying concept of personal responsibility then you truly probably don’t understand why others on this site have criticized your “un-American” statement.

Now I don’t mean to be harsh to you, but here is how I view the topic of this thread, if the business is hurt by Obama’s tax raises and must lay off workers, that is an effect of an action, the action is the tax raise that Obama levied on these businesses and HE WILL RAISE taxes that’s a fact, he can’t pay for all his socialist policies without doing so, further he has told you and everyone else he’s going to do so. The new taxes are a secondary effect of voting for a left wing uberliberal tax and spend socialist who has already SAID he WILL raise taxes, it's not like he's fooling ya if you're paying attention.

Now while no one can tell you what to think or who to support that does not mean that you do not have to accept the responsibility and repercussions for the actions that come of that support. You say it’s un-American to punish the BHO supporters for their beliefs, is it somehow more American or fair to punish those who voted against BHO and his new taxes? They didn’t want what he was selling, why should they have to pay for it? How is that fair? I would argue it’s very fair to lay off the BHO supporters first, they wanted this “change”, and voted for higher taxes and the hand outs, those votes in this scenario caused the harm that forced the businesses to have to lay people off, the responsible parties i.e. BHO voters should stand at the front of the line to pay for it, that's called personal responsibility and I hope it happens that way because that actually would be fair.

The truth is that no matter how many teachers, politicians, parents of looser kids, or Dims say it should be LIFE IS NOT FAIR , and it never will be, but taking from those who have to give to those who don’t is not only not accomplishing the fairness the above want, hell it isn't even American, it’s Socialism, and it’s one of the things we in the military have fought against since this countries inception, so if you come in here as a proponent of it, guess what you've just painted a target on yourself. That's a choice you made either intentionally or unintentionally, if it was unintentional you might want to keep lurking until you understand those here a little better.

Now your take is exactly what I expect from a Democrat, they want everyone to get everything as long as they don’t actually have to pay for it, look at BHO’s family, he wants to spread the wealth around in the rest of America, yet I haven't seen him spreading his own wealth around to the members of his family living illegally and in poverty in this country, I call that hypocrisy, but I digress. At the end of the day I think this business owners theory is a great lesson on responsibility.

My last point, your above statement is if the shoe were on the other foot we would be the ones bitching, well if the business owner was going after the McCain supporters he’d be punishing them for his own choices not punishing them for theirs, how is that the same? Apples to oranges IMO.

[PSM]

You know, we might want to rethink this.

If the B-Ho supporters get laid off, they’ll just sit at home with their X-Boxes and collect government checks that we fund.

How about they can have the jobs, we get the checks that they fund, and we go fishing?

Just a thought.

Pat

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by PSM

You know, we might want to rethink this.

If the B-Ho supporters get laid off, they’ll just sit at home with their X-Boxes and collect government checks that we fund.

How about they can have the jobs, we get the checks that they fund, and we go fishing?

Just a thought.

Pat

Pat
That will not work because we have too much Pride to do that.

[stuW]

My initial thoughts haven't been written since I first saw this thread, so I'll briefly provide. It is fair for a business to hire based on characteristics, and if political affiliation is important, that is fine. Affirmative action programs are different, as they are offered by the public sector for a specific public purpose.

While the business owner has the right to enact such policies, I personally would find it repugnant, and would choose not to engage in any transaction with the business - regardless of political affiliation. I also would be concerned about the good or service provided, as the quality may be impacted by this emphasis on this non-core aspect of the business. I believe our country's competitive advantage in business has been the variety of backgrounds we come from, which allows us to provide the most competitive good, and innovate. I come from a family of business owners, and I'd be highly concerned for the future profits of the businesses if they engaged in such practices.

stu

[Sigaba]

Here's something that bothers me about Senator Obama's identity issues.

Originally Posted by Pulsar

In "Dreams From My Father," Obama writes "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully."

Senator Obama's "logic" is the same as a person who befriends an African American so he can say "I'm not a racist---I have a black friend." How many people will vote for Senator Obama based upon the same twisted logic?

What I find especially egregious about Senator Obama's approach to friendship and to politics is that there is a place for radicalism (both left and right) in American society and politics. In my own experience, some of the best lessons in life come from people with whom I may not see eye to eye on many political and cultural issues.

Rather than engaging the radical left or the radical right, he has pandered to one and demonized the other. I remain at a loss to understand how this pattern of behavior constitutes "change" or "hope."

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by stuW

My initial thoughts haven't been written since I first saw this thread, so I'll briefly provide. It is fair for a business to hire based on characteristics, and if political affiliation is important, that is fine. Affirmative action programs are different, as they are offered by the public sector for a specific public purpose.

While the business owner has the right to enact such policies, I personally would find it repugnant, and would choose not to engage in any transaction with the business - regardless of political affiliation. I also would be concerned about the good or service provided, as the quality may be impacted by this emphasis on this non-core aspect of the business. I believe our country's competitive advantage in business has been the variety of backgrounds we come from, which allows us to provide the most competitive good, and innovate. I come from a family of business owners, and I'd be highly concerned for the future profits of the businesses if they engaged in such practices.

stu

Well Stu I find it Repugnant that BHO and the Dem party wants to spread the wealth as they call it. Socialism is Socialism and the United States Of American was not founded on these values. Mater of fact we went to war to protect people from these type of practices. Laying off of employees is the decision of the Owner and how he does it is his decision. You know he does not have to state that he let go off X amount of employees because they were behind BHO he only has to say business is bad and you are not employed any more. This thread was opened in a hypothetical situation and it is funny how some people have responded. It was started to make people think... and think we are doing.

I for one am ashamed to be a registered Democrat right now. I have never voted party lines as that is for an ignorant person. You vote for the individual for each position. I have only remained a Democrat due to laziness due to me being deployed and my time home is precious. I know I have always been a Republican at heart since I registered at 18. Mom and Dam were Dems and I followed suit but they have changed also. Well I can tell you I will change party's as soon as I get back to the US.

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by Defender968

dividebyzero, you know I can see how you would think this was un-American, I don't agree with you but I think I at least understand your view, further I have a theory that I think explains why you think this way, and I don’t think I’ve shared it before on this board so I’m going to.

My last point, your above statement is if the shoe were on the other foot we would be the ones bitching, well if the business owner was going after the McCain supporters he’d be punishing them for his own choices not punishing them for theirs, how is that the same? Apples to oranges IMO.

Could you erase your double Long Post.... Please

[PSM]

Originally Posted by SF_BHT

Pat
That will not work because we have too much Pride to do that.

You just had to bring up the P word! Spoil sport.

Pat

[plato]

Originally Posted by stuW

I believe our country's competitive advantage in business has been the variety of backgrounds we come from, which allows us to provide the most competitive good, and innovate.

stu

Now there's a line I've heard preached and regurgitated a number of times by those with their own social agenda.

If I have a company of twenty welders who communicate well, having a common language, bond well having common backgrounds, have few disputes because the feelings of acceptable/not acceptable are pretty well shared, then my business will fail because........ ??

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by PSM

You just had to bring up the P word! Spoil sport.

Pat

Yeah I came from a dysfunctional family.....

They taught me family values, Pride in doing a job the best you can, a proper work ethic and to not be afraid to get durty doing it, Patriotic values, a Moral code and how to treat a woman right. (Mom drummed that into me).

For all of that you get a Hard worker that loves his Family and Country and that person gets flaming mad when people Domestic and Foreign threaten our Family and our way of life. I have Pride in my Kids, Country and my job. YOu also get a person that Speaks my mind and is willing to listen to all viewpoints. They may differ from mine but I will listen and all I expect is that they listen to mine ans have an intelligent discussion. Morons just piss me off.

[dividebyzero]

Originally Posted by USANick7
Second: What exactly do you see about Obamas tax plan that takes into consideration "performance standards, reliability, and how they interact with other employees."

It sounds to me that your own candidates method for redistributing wealth fails your own standards by which producers should be gauged..."

I should preface my remarks by admitting that I'm not an economist. It's my understanding that taxation and exemptions are arrived upon by an number of quantitive factors like earned income, number of dependents, etc. In that case, I don't see how any metric for taxation can look at qualitative factors like "performance standards, reliability, and how they interact with other employees." The argument posted in the OP was about a business owner choosing to lay off workers based on a political choice, which I personally didn't see as linked to the aforementioned performance measurements. Guess I didn't get the joke like everyone else did, but given the amount of stuff thrown at either candidate during "silly season" I think my standard for humor's probably pretty out of whack.

With regards to "socialism" and this election- I don't see anything in Obama's economic policies that reflect that. Take a look at the table found here: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=213

Obama proposed a top income tax rate of 36.9%- that's the same as Clinton's, and if you look at the data here, lower than all but 2 years of the administration of the central figure of modern American conservatism- Ronald Reagan.

His proposed health care plan still plays off the principle of the free market by allowing individuals to pick their providers, plans, and doctors. It doesn't call for a truly socialized health care system where the government creates an overarching bureaucracy or nationalizes existing health care providers.

With regards to regulating the market, even Greenspan admitted that deregulation and the free market had failed the American economy. History has demonstrated that free markets work best with the boundaries clearly delineated- I don't want to see government regulating every facet of American business, but I'm not in favor seeing the mistakes of the past repeated. I freely admit that Clinton's economic policies in the later 1990s (starting the ball rolling on deregulation) bear as much of the blame for our current predicament as do Bush's.

I support McCain because He is the lesser of the 2 evils. Neither is perfect but Obama is a closet socialist or Marxist and if you are a history buff read about Hitlers and Stalin ans Mussolini's rise in the early years. You will find some amazing similarity's in their rhetoric and social programs. That is why I can not stand him. I have fought for years to protect this country and will not vote in a socialist type of president.

Those dictators rose to power because they made populist appeals to economic and social ills and promised quick fixes to complicated issues. However, you'd be hard pressed to find an office seeker who DIDN'T do that. The way the middle class has surged to the forefront of every recent political speech by EITHER candidate exemplifies this. I think applying Godwin's Law to Obama is just as absurd as it is to apply it to McCain or Bush. This is just electoral politics at its ugly and perverse conclusion. I wish that the American public had more of an attention span for substantial discussion of the issues, but that's a topic for another thread.

Do I think Obama represents some sort of grand shift towards an American-style socialism, or despotism? No. When faced with our mounting deficit, I'd rather see us looking inward to refunding social programs rather than having Chinese bankers buy up our debt. I wholeheartedly agree that American businesses and workers are among the most hard-working and innovative in the world, and I want to see it stay that way. I'm hoping that an Obama administration will lead the way in stimulating green business and development practices, so we can again make American technical ingenuity indispensable to our allies and aspiring nations alike.

One thing I'll give you all is that I'm not a big fan of the kind of messianism many associate with Obama. I personally like the guy, but the way some people act you'd think he'd solve every problem in the world in his first five minutes in office. I just happen to like him because most of what he's proposing makes sense to me.

[Blitzzz (RIP)]

Several things.
We can not always vote for who we would like and this has lead to my philosophy of voting to continue my pledge to "up hold and defend the constitution." So I vote on the most likely candidate to up hold the constitution. Usually that means voting against someone. In this case BHO.

Really foolish people believe in the BHO tax plan. By not taxing 95% of citizens and raising the taxes of the remaining 5%, he has created a "Back Door" tax. Yep, The 95% will be paying for that tax increase in the form of increased costs to the businesses supplying the goods and services. Fools all.

As to the Health care issues too many of the sheep are looking at the pretty paint and not the primer. Yes sure you make the choices he's promising But he's crew will be hands on dictating what insurance companies will be allowed the charge and cover.
In the end he's a liar. has not released his birth certificate. Had his cousin running Kenya put his Grandmother, who said she was at his birth IN KENA, put in "Protective custody".

BLITZ

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by Blitzzz

Several things.
We can not always vote for who we would like and this has lead to my philosophy of voting to continue my pledge to "up hold and defend the constitution." So I vote on the most likely candidate to up hold the constitution. Usually that means voting against someone. In this case BHO.

Really foolish people believe in the BHO tax plan. By not taxing 95% of citizens and raising the taxes of the remaining 5%, he has created a "Back Door" tax. Yep, The 95% will be paying for that tax increase in the form of increased costs to the businesses supplying the goods and services. Fools all.

As to the Health care issues too many of the sheep are looking at the pretty paint and not the primer. Yes sure you make the choices he's promising But he's crew will be hands on dictating what insurance companies will be allowed the charge and cover.
In the end he's a liar. has not released his birth certificate. Had his cousin running Kenya put his Grandmother, who said she was at his birth IN KENA, put in "Protective custody".

BLITZ

Blitz
Do not forget the 1/2 Auntie that is illegal in Boston that he threw under the bus and said she should get what is coming to her.

Most people would at least try to help or defend a family member no matter what they had done but he is such a politician he is worried about the next job above family.....

[PSM]

Originally Posted by PSM

My neighbor does specialized computer programming for small businesses. He was amazed how many of them have exactly 49 employees. Care to guess why?

Pat

dividebyzero,

You've done well explaining what you have been taught. But, what do you know?

You didn't answer my simple question from the first page that I've quoted above.

Pat