Welcome to PatsFans.com

Tea Party Nation Pledge for Small Businessmen

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Mrs.PatsFanInVa, Oct 19, 2011.

  1. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    Issued yesterday, 10/19/11.

    So, once again, it begs the question - how can "jobs and the economy" be their mantra?

    Unless, of course, their goal is to ruin it.

    blah blah blah blah blah blah, same old same old rant about socialism, treason, Obamacare, communists, the media, Hollywood celebrities.......

    I, an American small business owner, part of the class that produces the vast majority of real, wealth producing jobs in this country, hereby resolve that I will not hire a single person until this war against business and my country is stopped.

    I hereby declare that my job creation potential is now ceased.

    “I’m on strike!”


    http://www.teapartynation.com/profi...ogPost:1566647&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Which Is Reality.....
  3. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    Reality is a job crisis - reality is 9% unemployment, reality is people losing their livelihoods, their homes, their cars, their health insurance. Reality is the Tea Party is calling upon their almighty "job creators" to deliberately withhold and destroy the jobs which would keep these people from losing their livelihoods, their homes, their cars and their health insurance in order to futher their own twisted agenda.

    That's Reality.
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    The OWS have a large sign in NYC that reads "BAIL OUT THE PEOPLE" the best one I've seen and it was carried by a person that didn't look like they just crawled out of a drug den.

    SOMEBODY SHOULD TELL THAT PERSON TO TAKE THAT SIGN AND STAND IN FRONT OF THE WHITE HOUSE WITH IT, in fact, thats where this whole OWS movement belongs, in Washington.
  5. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    I am a small business ( super small ) and I will hire the second I feel I can make more money and grow my business becuase of it. I sure as **** not going to hire until I feel that way.

    I am motivated by profit. I enjoy making a profit which keeps a roof over my head, and food in my belly. I will not hire, or perform any action which may negatively effect my ability to make a profit.

    I hereby announce my intent to make a profit to my fellow citizens. My aim and goal is to make more money than I spend, and therefore save money which will give me the confidence to invest in the future. The more profit I can make, the faster, and more confident I feel in investing in the future.
  6. Gainzo

    Gainzo Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    When will Bachmann sign this pledge? We all know she signs every pledge put in front of her. She is a self proclaimed; "job creator*."

    *In GOP speak, job creator = business owner. Even if those business owners have laid off people.
  7. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    Even if they sign a pledge vowing to become a job-witholder.

    Go figure.
  8. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,287
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -1

    Who's TPN? Why do they matter?
  9. Gainzo

    Gainzo Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I guess they are another offshoot of the Tea Party. What is the official Tea Party website? Do they have one or are their hundreds of them around the Country?
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    Ironically, your best chance at increasing your profits is if people have money to spend; the best chance that people have money to spend if there are jobs. Since Wall Street has already demonstrated their is no correlation between their profitability and jobs, then it makes sense to look to the government to implement policies that create jobs. Tax cuts and bailouts haven't worked.
  11. khayos

    khayos Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The best chance at increasing your profits is if you have a captive customer base i.e. federal government or subsidies. Just giving the people money doesn't increase profitability for Wall Street either.
  12. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    Like the military industrial complex????
  13. khayos

    khayos Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,675
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Yep :) We agree too much defense spending.
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    First, liberals are more for workfare than are conservatives. It's conservatives who favor the handouts: Handouts are cheaper. You don't need to have facilities, trainers, materials for work, benefits, and a pay rate that's superior to welfare. Workfare and job training is very expensive.

    Second, "just giving people money does increase the profitability of welfare enormously." Food stamps and welfare money directly or indirectly end up in the hands of the Wall Street. When the poor person goes to buy food, they are chances buying name-brand foods at a supermarket or, if they're dishonest, selling some of the foodstamps and using the cash to buy cigarettes.
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3


    Well Obama and the radical left as represented at the OWS protest have declared war on small business and vilified them and demand higher taxes for them, so their response in rational until they stop being the focus of the hate campaign against them by the left.
  16. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    Can you provide a link showing that OWS has declared war on small business. I assume the link will be to the leader of OWS. My understanding of OWS is that it is representing a broad swath of people, including traditional liberals, union workers, Ron Paul supporters, and others. It is a rather leaderless grassroots campaign, sort of like the Tea Party was until the Koch Brothers bought them, and the Republicans co-opted them.

    Using your logic, if I find a tea partier who made a racist or homophobic comment is it fair to call the Tea Party racist or homophobic and radical right wing?
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
  17. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3



    They seems to be supporting Obama's billionaire tax which actually starts at 250k and would cover most small businesses. Don't forget Obamacare as a problem for small business

    If YOU have data that the OWS mob is not supporting the Obama proposal & obamacare, please feel free to provide a link.
  18. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    37,502
    Likes Received:
    24
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -5

    Why doesn't Aunt Zucchini work, from her pictures she looks like she could shovel snow and move pianos.

    Stop the Wars, imagine the money that could be saved.

    Obama Jug Ears just started another war.

    Why are billionaires like Teeth Pelosi allowed to serve in Congress, we all know what bastards billionaires are, the OWS are telling us everyday that people like Pelosi are no good?

    Why do we support 12 millliom illegal alien criminals?

    Democrats hate big banks and big business, why does President Jug Ears Bail Them Out?

    Why God.....:confused:

    MR PRSIDENT JUG EARS READ THIS
    "BAIL OUT THE PEOPLE"
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
  19. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    I see, so you're equating mainstream Democrat policies with this, and OWS with radicalism; therefore, the Democratic Party is radical. By the same logic, the Republican Party is racist and homophobic. Alternatively, OWS is not as radical as you thought.

    This is from Forbes, not a liberal publication, an article from January.

    More Small Businesses Offering Health Care To Employees Thanks To Obamacare - Forbes

    Because the tax cut created in the new health care reform law providing small businesses with an incentive to give health benefits to employees is working.

    ...

    How significant is the impact? While we won’t have full national numbers until small businesses file their 2010 tax returns this April, the anecdotal evidence is as meaningful as it is unexpected.

    United Health Group, Inc., the nation’s largest health insurer, added 75,000 new customers working in businesses with fewer than 50 employees.
  20. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3



    This event is being done on behalf of the Obama campaign. Yes that is what I think. Why aren't they encamped in front of the WH or congress?

    Unemployment is still over 9% many more have exhausted their benefits. Of course H Reid hasn't a clue:

    Dems Get It Exactly Wrong On Jobs - Investors.com




    H Reid thinks the private sector is doing fine what a f'n moron.
  21. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    Even if it starts at $250k, that wouldn't cover "most" small businesses.

    There's a legitimate criticism to any plan that considers $250k "rich," but no need to exaggerate.
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2011
  22. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,529
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    Point of clarity:

    - 13, you have the current discussion's "Millionaire's Tax" confused with early discussions of provisions that would hit other high earners. So you're rebelling against this use of the term and crying foul because you don't think making 250K makes you a millionaire -- which is true, and can remain true even if you make 250K every year, if (for example) you have a sufficient cocaine, hooker, gambling, or other habit.

    - "Millionaires" was indeed initially used loosely to mean "rich guy." The thing is you're a month late complaining about this.

    - However, the proposal currently under discussion involves a tax of dollar number 1,000,001 and above, through the usual mechanism of a marginal tax rate (rather than limiting deductions, as originally proposed, but at a lower threshold.)

    - In other words, what you're complaining about isn't on anybody's agenda anymore. It's replaced with what you say should be the rule, starting at folks making a million per annum. (If, in fact, you'd ever support taxing rich people, which frankly, you won't. You'll pivot and hate the new rule too.)

    - That said, here are some links about the "Millionaire's Tax/Buffet Rule" so you can catch up, and learn about what's presently under discussion:

    Starting with 9/17...
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/u...-ask-more-of-millionaires.html?pagewanted=all

    The Jobs plan comes out, but there's no new rate for millionaires, only a limitation on itemized deductions -- not a new tax rate -- beginning at 200K for individuals and 250K for married couples.

    Here's where we were 9/30: Arguing about whether 250K is rich enough, and "whattayamean millionaire" sorts of considerations:

    New Millionaires’ Tax Bracket: Coming Soon? - CBS MoneyWatch.com

    Somewhere in there the original administration proposal has already moved to begin at 382,550. But the pressure is on to make an annual qualifying salary $1 M, to "match the rhetoric with the policy".

    The literal, annual "Millionaires' Tax" surfaces courtesy of your other arch nemesis, Harry Reid, in the form that satisfies your objections, as reported October 5:

    So by 10/5, the version working its way through the Senate already says if you make more than $1M, in one year, after all your deductions and exemptions (which are not touched,) you'd start paying 5 percent more on dollar number $1,000,001.

    By 10.6, Obama is in the position of "agreeing to" a millionaire's tax:
    Obama Says He'd Agree to Millionaires Tax | Common Dreams

    But I don't know why you're so upset that the rich might be taxed. It's like they're asking for it. Maybe your imagined peers wouldn't be in this pickle without folks like this:

    The Agenda Project: Patriotic Millionaires' Message to Congress "Tax Me" - YouTube

    PFnV
  23. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,253
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    OWS has nothing to do with the Democrats. Most liberals are pretty fed up with Obama. Sure, we'll vote for him, just as you'll probably voe for Romney if he's the nominee.

    I don't agree the private sector is doing just fine in terms of job creation, and feel we need to stop giving it incentives to create jobs when they are simply hoarding profits. Nonetheless, overall the private sector is doing far better than the public sector.

    http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES9000000001
    http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000001

    PRIVATE SECTOR

    [​IMG]

    PUBLIC SECTOR

    [​IMG]

    Lastly, I don't know why you even read investors.com. It's simply a political rag. It's economic bias is so blatant, it's worthless. It would be as if I posted info from a socialist economic website.

    Take the way they measure Reid's statement that employment on the private side is doing just fine: "Overall, the private sector has lost 16 jobs for every job lost in government since 2007. Even if you correct for the relative difference in the size of the two job markets, the private sector has still lost three times more jobs than the public sector."

    Obviously, an enormous number of jobs have been lost. No one has disputed that, bit we're talking about job growth, not job losses.
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2011
  24. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,529
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    It's the usual game: pick the time window, dictate the meaning of the mini-trend.

    Over four years, there have been huge private sector job losses. So, we all (well, except the teabaggers) want the private sector to gain jobs. That is why we called it a recession, by the way. We had an economic contraction and then a long period of no growth. Now we want economic growth. Nobody is arguing. We have finally turned that corner.

    It's far easier to manipulate public sector employment through legislation, of course, and that's how the nation's been going about it.

    The private sector's growing. There is only one way to keep enough people unemployed to (hopefully) lock down a Republican win in '12, and that's to keep people unemployed. They're shooting for that number to stay high.

    So, they'll wag the dog the other way they have left: they'll lay off our teachers, cops, firefighters, garbage men, etc. Then they'll say that the "other guy's" "unsustainable" policies are to blame.

    Republican state houses are also busy re-writing voting procedures so they disenfranchise various voting groups. It's good news, in a way: the right realizes they cannot espouse the positions they hold and win. They're trying early to steal elections procedurally to make up for the wrongheadedness and unpopularity of their plutocratic policies.

    PFnV
  25. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    One thing I'd be interested in seeing w/regard to jobs is the historical relationship b/t job data and M&A booms.

    There was an M&A boom earlier in the decade, as valuations were high an debt plentiful and owners took advantage (as did buyers, obviously). After companies are sold, many will of course grow, but many will cut jobs due to consolidation, some will become mismanaged and some will experience a more or less natural downcycle after having been on the upswing.

    Again, this is just speculation on my part, but I wouldn't be shocked to see historical downturns in jobs after strong M&A cycles.
  26. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,230
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -3



    Obama and the dems are calling 250k rich not me your beef is with them, but they are your heros so better to play a straw man with me right? The tax increase os for the rich they start at 250k for their definition of rich.
  27. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,378
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +14 / 0 / -0

    You need to learn to read. You also need to learn what a "strawman" is.

    As I stated, "...There's a legitimate criticism to any plan that considers $250k "rich,"..."

    One step at a time here, I want to keep it simple for you -- do you understand what that statement means?

    Next step: your post stated, "...starts at 250k and would cover most small businesses..." My response included, "... that wouldn't cover "most" small businesses..." Now go look up the term "strawman," and then come back here and admit to your mistake.

    Run along and do your homework now, 13. Maybe you'll learn something today, and maybe you'll even demonstrate some character in owning up to your miscue.
  28. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    14,486
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -1

    What part of this:


    Senate Democrats on Wednesday proposed a 5 percent surtax on taxable income above $1 million as a way to finance the bill, hoping that would be easier to sell to wavering Democrats and some Republicans.

    The surtax, which would start in 2013, would replace Obama's proposed tax increases on annual incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families.


    are you having trouble understanding, 13?

    Unlike the Republicans, Obama and the Democrats have no problem compromising.
  29. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    That limitation already existed until January 1, 2010. The phaseout and elimination of those limitations are part of why revenues as a % of GDP continued to fall. Extending the Bush tax cuts did not lower rates any further. This phaseout was, in effect, another tax cut. In this case it only benefited those making over $167k.

    Itemized deduction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  30. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,029
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +9 / 0 / -0

    It depends on what metric you are using.

    Beltway Earnings Make U.S. Capital Richer Than Silicon Valley - Bloomberg
    Occupy K Street!

Share This Page