Suspend and impeach O B O M B M A, arrest the top tier in the Federal Reserve, arrest Bush and his cronies, and vote Ron Paul it might not be too late.
Ahh shut up .. please just shup up and GTFO of the White house don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
@funboy69able No, it's not misleading. This is what he thinks, but mainly only re: to those who don't support him or those whom he perceives as the peasantry out here in real America, he has reiterated it over and over and over via words and actions.
@mattdd05....it's none of your business how much anybody makes unless you're paying the salary. If baseball teams can afford to play players enormous salaries then that's their business. If you don't like it then you can decide not to spend your money benefiting them in any way.
@zzyzxblvd You have a good point. But you see, its not the team that pays the salary, its the fans. You think the owners use money out of their own pocket to pay salaries? Yeah right. Salaries come from TV contracts, ticket sales, merchandise, etc, all of which comes from the fans' wallets, not the owners. So yes, if I want, I can avoid watching baseball, but with other things such as food, taxes, house, clothing, we don't really have the choice of avoiding.
you silly fools, the money isnt yours, is your name on it? no, its the beast's..render to ceasar what is ceasar's, render to god what is god's...the beast will take as much of your money as it wants, because it owns it.. it will continue to own you in every way, until you do something about it...applying for permits, registrations, and licenses of all types is only feeding the beast ...the beast master...but its not a cool 80's movie... its evil, and your falling for all its tricks
Here's a little news flash for ya, ole Barry - at a certain point WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE think you've TAKEN enough of OUR money!!! How's that hit ya, Obuma??
I think that after you make more profit per year than lets say 80% of the population, there should be a tax on the any money made after that, which should go back into reducing the cost of your products, benefiting both the community and the company.
We'll just because he's a millionaire doesn't mean his statement is false. It's true, after a certain point you have made enough money. Your telling me that athletes need million dollar contracts, while many in the community struggles to provide for their family? I guess baseball players play better when they go to home to their solid gold jacuzzi and 24/7 chef service. What you people don't realize is why everything cost so much money!!! Because people at the top are making way to much!
@Artisticer It has been proven that the richest 1% of people in the world, own 95% of the world's wealth. But I don't expect you to understand something simple mathematics; which is why I find it so amusing that you call me a communist. If your so sure I'm a communist, please explain why being a communist is so bad in the first place. Actually, I dare to even ask, do you even know what a communist is?
"It's true, after a certain point you have made enough money."
So obviously, after you've made enough money you should dissolve your business, right? Steve Jobs has enough money, so he should shut down Apple so you can't buy any new computers? Why work if he's made enough money?
@EGarrett01 Why do people that win the lottery quit their job? Because they have enough money to survive. Your argument makes no sense. There are a lot of reasons Steve Jobs doesn't quit. #1, he has a responsibly to the share holders. #2, he became rich because he had a drive and desire for money, once he's rich do you think that desire is going to go away? NO, it's just going to make him want all the things that most people can't get. BTW Obama agrees that he's one of the people that has enough
That's exactly what I'm saying. People who win the lottery quit their jobs because they "have enough money," right? If Steve Jobs has to keep working when he doesn't need the money because of shareholders, then that makes him a slave instead of a CEO. And if he still wants money or can use money, then how does he "have enough?" You're going to take his earnings now anyway,, so again, why keep working? He should shut down Apple so none of us get new Iphones.
@EGarrett01 You know most billionaires like Steve Jobs have millions/billions in assets and money that they will never even see,use or touch. It's more a thing of greed/pride then actually "need" If you had only 1 billion dollars, you could spend $10,000 a day, for 274 years. Or, if your more reckless, You might spend $100,000 grand EVERY day, for 27 years straight. And that's ONLY 1 billion dollars. I find it hard to believe that any human needs this much money to be satisfied with their life.
@EGarrett01 And you think Obama want's to "take away their earnings", and that is such a horrible thing? You get taxed by the government everyday, on everything you buy, Obama doesn't want to "rob them of all profits", just tax the rich people more, since they can afford it and have no use for the leftover money anyway. If anything, they should be grateful that America allowed them the opportunity to be rich, and should want to give back.
Answer my question please. If they have enough money then shouldn't they shut down their companies? Obviously Google has billions of dollars, so they should shut down youtube right now, right? They have enough money!
@EGarrett01 Hahaha, Google is not a person. It is a corporation. It is owned by the shareholders. Everything within any corporation is done in the interest of the primary shareholders. That's a fact. And why do you keep insisted that "someone has enough money" is equal to "they should dissolve their company"? All Obama and I are saying is that richer "INDIVIDUALS" and imo "WEALTHY CORPORATIONS" should be taxed more. No one's saying to shut down Google; stop jumping to crazy conclusions.
@EGarrett01 LMAO. Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you? Seriously. This is the last time I repeat myself for a complete moron like youself: TAX RICH PEOPLE MORE. Where in that 4 letter statement do you see "shut down company?" I think you need a dictionary, look up the definition of tax, you'll see its quite different than shutting down a company.
You can't answer the question, because you don't understand the basics of economics and what businesses do with their excess profits. You should shut the fuck up and read something before you waste any more people's time.
@EGarrett01 I have answered the question, you dumb fuck. Do I have to spell it out for you? I think you do, because you have clearly have the comprehension level of a grade 2 with down syndrome, I take that back, I'd be insulting the kid if I likened him to you. NO GOOGLE SHOULD NOT SHUT DOWN ITS COMPANY. THEY SHOULD BE TAXED MORE. You idiot, your a disgrace to humanity. Natural selection should fix this problem, just remember not to have kids, you don't wanna pass on your stupidity, do you?
I'm asking you FROM THE BUSINESS OWNER'S PERSPECTIVE, you know-nothing socialist fuck. If I owned the business and I had "enough money" I should shut it down based on your stupid reasoning that would do nothing but destroy society and leave everyone bankrupt. You can't answer this question or explain ANY reason why i shouldn't. I guarantee it you fucking idiot.
@EGarrett01 This is getting quite pathetic. I keep telling you Google should NOT shut down it's company, yet you keep insisting that it should. I think you suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, the words are right in front of you, yet you are reading something completely different. Based on my reasoning, companies would be TAXED MORE, not SHUT DOWN. Your complete ignorance of the subject has only lead me to conclude that you are a degenerate inbred piece of shit. Please do not respond.
@EGarrett01 Why, you ask? Plain and simple. Just because the rich are taxed more, that doesn't give them any reason to declare bankruptcy and dissolve the company. That would be equal to you selling your house, because your morgage rate went up, or your water bill was higher. It just doesn't follow. Sorry bud, your argument pretty much loses, no rational person would sell their company just because taxes went up.
It has nothing to do with taxes. Assume there ARE no taxes. Once you get to a certain point, if you have "ENOUGH money" then why waste time? All other work is of no benefit according to that idiot claim, so you might as well shut down the company. Do you want to just give up and have me tell you why they don't shut down and why "enough money" is a stupid concept made up by unproductive idiots?
@EGarrett01 What your trying to say is that there is no such thing as enough money? But why not? I would safely say 99.99% of billionaires will never spend their net worth in their lifetime. If you calculate eating,living,cleaning,entertainment,transportation,travelling expenses for an entire lifetime it will not add up to even 1 billion.. The thing is, we do not live in a fantasy world, where there is an infinite amount of time to spend, and an unlimited amount of resources and money.
This response here (99.99% of billionaires won't spend blahblah) just shows your true ignorance. They invest the money they don't spend, idiot. Even when it's sitting in the bank it ends up loaned out to entrepreneurs or others...in much more efficient fashion then when the government does it. It's not about spending the money, which shows you know shit and I hope you don't vote.
@EGarrett01 That's true, the bank uses that money to loan out to others, then they charge interest on the loaned money. It's funny that your so supportive of your banks loaning out money, your entire economic meltdown was caused by defaults on loans. Your whole system is flawed, and your trying to validate it by saying, "well, rich people do this and that for the ecomony, blah, blah, blah" I'm just one of those people who don't agree with authoritarian dictatorships like the USofA.
@EGarrett01 Eventually you get to a point where you will never feasibly run out of money, no matter how carefree you spend. Since money is not infinite, neither is life-span, so yes there is actually "enough money" to buy whatever you want. any money after that is just collecting dust. But people still don't shut down their company, for other reasons than money; because of power, passion, enjoyment, many reasons, money is just a trophy when your rich, you don't have to worry about running out.
Wrong. Running a huge company is hard work. They don't shut it down because they INVEST the extra money in new businesses or banks (creating jobs), build wealth for their children (creating wealth for the future) or give it to causes they believe in (and not lobbyists). These all help society. Much more so than the government taking it and throwing it around willy-nilly. Why don't you do some research about business spending vs government spending and which helps the economy more.
@EGarrett01 Saying businesses helps the economy is like saying eating helps you feel full. It's not only obvious but it is redundant, the economy is business. Their profits do go to lobbyists/campaigns, that's why politics is always interested in business and not in morality or making the country better for the citizens. I can see why you like businesses, some people like being slaves to their job, working to pay the bills, so they can brag about how much things they have. Suit yourself.
It's not because President Obama isn't good enough that we want him to resign; he's the greatest president we've ever had! It's just that we think, at a certain point, a president has been great enough that it's time for him to resign and leave the American People alone so they can get back to work cleaning up the mess. That's all we're about here. We just want President Obama to move on quickly to become the greatest former president we've ever had. We believe that would help everybody.
Why is this so unwelcomed? if you make 3 million a year, you wont notice if you get down to lets say 2 million. A lot of succes depends on luck too. So you cant say that everyone can make that much money. Someone gotta be the low payment recipients.
I wonder if he's told this to Oprah, Steven Spielberg, George Soros, Sean Penn and the rest of the liberal douchebags that refer to themselves as "limosine liberals"?
time the people stop putting faith into a government that is owned by bankers.
Remember what happened last time the government was overturned?? the people got what they wanted and what was best for them.....its time for something realistic. lets get organized people!
And expected to add $6.58 Trillion by the end of his first term. So let's hold everybody's feet to the fire. Obama is not a budget hawk to say the least. What is happening in Greece and spreading to other countries in Eurpoe is what happens when you have endless entitlement programs. How is it that more than half of Americans pay no income tax at all? USA Today: Americans get about 17% of their compensation from some sort of government entitlement (Soc Sec, Medicare, unemployment, ...)
@Simon333 You cannot get away with saying the federal deficit is only Bush's problem. He had a budget surplus until 9/11 and then wars started getting in the way (as well as other spending programs: Prescription Drug Plan for Medicare for example) but compared to Obama's spending in his first year is miniscule. Bush's first proposed budget had a cumulative national debt of $5.77 Trillion and left office with a $9.985 Trillion deficit ($4.215 T over 8 years). Obama added 2.4 T just last year...
At some point, I think you have spent enough time in the whitehouse. Why dont you and all your socialist friends get out of OUR house and give the power back to its rightful owners: WE THE PEOPLE!
@HandyMan101 The top 10% pay 72% of all federal income taxes in this country. The top 1% pay 40% of taxes. And 47% of wage-earners pay no federal income taxes... and that does not include welfare recipients, illegals, unions, students, retirees... A 10% flat tax on everyone, would be awesome. Oh, and by the way General Electric paid no taxes this past year... Karl Marx invented the progressive income tax...
Obama started out early in his campaign attacking big business. Apparently Obama does not know that Big Businesses does not pay taxes. They simply raise their prices. And who is it that get the short end of the stick? That's right! The same ones Obama is claiming, he wants to help.
you never see his $5million or any elitist limo liberal give back their millions, no thanks i've made enough. NEVER. but they sure want to tell you $ 20.00/hour is way too much but Franklin Raines Obama economy advisor Fannie Mae crook made $ 90 million of our tax money as Fannie CEO for only 5 years, F U OBAMA stop taking a salary fool, YOU MADE ENOUGH !!!!
simon333 If I am eating cat food then it's my own fault for not preparing for retirement. It's called self responsibility and taking care of yourself and not relying on the government to bail you out at every turn.
@simon333 Exactly. The concept of income imbalance was provided to you courtesy of politicians. The truth is that many executive positions are very profitable to a company. This is recognized more today than in the past. Thus, a high compensation pacakage. More than in the past.
Now, let me know what makes you so bitter about the success of others.
W wonder if he feels that way about athletes. Especially pro basketball. Maybe he should start there and start telling them to play for free now since they have made well over anything the average person should make!!!
"I do think at a certain point you've made enough money, but you know, part of the American way is, you can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product."
@Drummydrum hmmm... how does that change the statement?
Just because it IS the American way, doesn't mean he doesn't think "you've" made enough. There is no contradiction in his statements and nothing to be assumed about his core beliefs other than the fact that he understands his belief is not the american way.
@Drummydrum which basically means I don't think you should be making as much as you want, but we are americans (which he sees as a bad thing) so we have that right.
This is socialism/communism. In those governments they take your wealth and distribute it to others. It is the model that liberals and progressives want.
They don't realize that this form of government ends up in waste with no economic prosperity.
This is not a guess, it's a fact. Just look around the world.
I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth around" to people` who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy or stupid to earn it. GO GET BENT BARRY!!!
@slitmud How does wanting a level playing ground equate to nazi Germany? Nobody is killing capitalism. A public company is encouraged (in fact, obligated) to make as much money for their shareholders as possible. What about an individual? When too much wealth resides in a few individuals hands, we get an oligarchy. (almost like today). This is why there are laws on the books about taxing inheritances. These aren't new laws. It's 100% American and not against capitalism at all.
@libssuck55 yea yea Don't even mail me back. You fucking dip shit I'm in trucking so the next time you use Heinz tomato paste, ketchup whatever just remember your boy taxed the shit out of me. Tax break HA HA HA Call Steve (my accountant) ask him how much of a tax break I have received This year It's in the tune of 900,000 in taxes i'm sure next year I'll pay1.2 or more.Now your boy wants to tax me for running diesel??? save the world barry AND THANK YOU CALIFORNIA...
@libssuck55 Ok, next time I use ketchup I'll think of you and how make 5 times what I make. Gosh, I hope I don't get my french fries wet with my tears. Pfffffff
@simon333 good luck to you sir. I hope you make over a million some day so you yourself can watch your momey fly out of the door. When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. — Benjamin Franklin. I love that quote. ACORN and obama LIVE BUY IT.
@libssuck55 Yes, and good luck flaunting your wealth then crying when you're asked to pay your fair share of taxes. I'm sure you'll gain lots of sympathy. Trickle down Reganomics ... die by it
@HandyMan101 So on top of that, the millionaire shouldn't have to pay their fair share in taxes? Trickle down is the wool being pulled over your eyes. It comes down to this; do you want the wealth to reside with rich individuals or within our government coffers. I personally haven't given up on the idea that we the people, can run our own government. We need more transparency (initiatives that are being put in place) and more active participation. WE need to read the bills, not FOX or MSNBC
@simon333 You are worried about millionaires? what about billionaires? Gates, Buffet, Kerry, Feinstein, Rockefeller, the Googlegoons, the Hollywood pinkos, Kennedy etc. All radical left-wingers, every last one of them... why would the richest people in America all be "Democrats"? I thought that the Democrats were the party of the "poor", and the party of the "little guy"... why would all of these billionaires be Democrats (and in favor of higher taxes)? I'll let you put 2 and 2 together...
@SavagePatriotUSA If building companies that employ Americans, sending a man to the moon and passing fair treatment laws is what "radical left-wingers" do, well, sign me up! Democrats are the party of the high road, not the poor. Higher morals and ethics so means more empathy for the poor. You christian conservatives should try reading your bible ..specifically, what Jesus said about the poor.
@simon333 Who knows, and who cares. Glenn Beck is not the one proposing that enough is enough, so the comparison is not valid. I only brought it up because Obama is the one proposing de facto salary caps, and yet he is quite rich by any standard.
@Tylerxy He didn't propose a salary cap, he stated an opinion. Besides, if Obama made 5.5 million, wouldn't be in his best interest to cut taxes for the rich? ...Something else is going on here. There's an enormous income imbalance between the middle and upper class and it has nothing to do with hard work. Corporate interests have been in control too long via the Republican party (which I believe was hijacked). This is being changed and it's 100% patriotic to support it.
@simon333 That's why I said "de facto", not a true salary cap, yet. Statists like Obama have a double standard when it comes to regulations and salary. It's OK for them to make money, but not OK for others. I'd also check your data about so-called corporate interests. Check out how much lawyers and law firms gave to the Democrats in 2008 at opensecrets.
@IPSentry Yeah, pick any one of those. I'd say we should pass a law that says any publicly traded company CEO should have his/her total income (salary plus bonuses/comissions/stock options etc) approved by the shareholders.
A COO making $500k/year means that the CEO would have to make $186M/year to fit your arbitrary definition of this mythical "income imbalance" buzzword.
A corporation provides a wide range of jobs and wages based on skill and value to the corporation. I reject the concept of "income imbalance".
@IPSentry Mythical income imbalance? You're either joking or uninformed. Over the past 50 years the average income for CEO's has skyrocketed while income for nearly EVERY position below this has stagnated. Everyone knows this or feels it on some level. We currently have the largest disparity between the upper and lower class since the great depression. Fact. ...Reject this "concept" all you want. It's absolutely true and we the people have had enough
@IPSentry Are you willing to concede that the trend of CEO pay increases are considerably higher than that of the average worker and that this has been occurring year over year for the past half century?
@simon333 ... I didn't make any reference to average executive compensation levels vs. average worker compensation levels increasing at different rates. There are plenty of studies on that subject.
You stated "we the people have had enough". Enough of what? And how does the compensation of the nations top paid CEO's create a real problem for you?
I simply try to understand the thought process of those who would begrudge another American's success.
@IPSentry You said the income imbalance is "mythical" now you say you made no reference to "executive compensation levels vs. average worker compensation levels". You say something doesn't exist, then, when it does you don't admit you were wrong. You need to concede that there is in fact, an imbalance. Now, again, do you agree or disagree that compensation levels for executives has far outpaced average workers.
@slitmud ...as long as it's not Obama making 5.5 million? that's what were talking about son. If you;re gonna lean in from the kids table, try and catch the conversation from the beginning.
The National Enquirer has been working to confirm details of a presidential cheating scandal involving Barack Obama and former aide, Vera Baker. ...And now, a hush-hush security video that shows everything could topple both Obama's presidency and marriage to Michelle! LMAO, all Marxist have have bitches on the side didn't you know that!
Somebody should tell his friends Oprah, Bruce Springsteen, and the 5 million dollars that Obama made this year. Did they make too much or just enough????
The thing about this bill is it's going to give the banks more power. They're just acting like they don't want it, but they do, they help write these bills. It blows me away to no end how people are stupid enough to think this bill is going to be any kind of financial reform just because that's what name it is.
Lord, people think a bill with a good sounding name just HAS to be good.
I'm fine with getting rid of social security and SSI benefits. So your going to TAKE someone else's money WHO EARNED it and give it to someone who DIDN'T earn it????? Sounds like socialism to me.
Ohh please. You people throw out the word socialist without even understanding the policies and regulations of a socialist country. If you dislike socialism so much why don't you get rid of social security and SSI benefits?
@usaleftistsareidiots Hmm. Well I'm not sure most of Americans would agree with that. No country has true capitalism and no true socialism, they usually lean towards one of them but it is never a pure system. But you can make your case, you'll just have trouble convincing the elderly that their social security benefits need to be taken away.
@Thales880 Don't take it away. Pay the elderly what was stolen from them. Just let the 18 year old comming into the system opt out of it. You want to take a wild guess as to why Americans are given no choices in matters that concern that?
that's not his job to make that decision! all while the gulf is in real danger... 8 days for the marxist to comment on the gulf oil slick to say oh, i'm sending a bunch of underlings to find out what to do and report back in 30 days! at least president bush flew over katrina on day 2! this is obama's katrina and he is completely unfit to lead anything anywhere. no interest whatsoever in leading or being president, just too busy getting even with us!
you tell em obama, your speeches are gonna make em stop. on one hand you act all against wall street but you recive millions from them in campaign money. its all an act.
He made over 5 million last year and I think he has made enough money. Judging on his performance so far he does not even meet the standards to make minimum wage. Hows that federal response to the oil slick working for you Louisiana? It only took him 8 days to provide help and you all blamed Bush for Katrina, LMAO.
@micsc50 Yeah ...forget that the REPUBLICANS controlled the congress and White House the last 8 years and resided over the LARGEST national debt EVER. Facts are facts, no matter how much Glenn Beck crys
@simon333 So that gives Obama a pass for tripleing our debt. What the fuck! Thats like the pot calling the kettle black. You act like the democRATs have a free pass. What the fuck is wrong with you are you retarded? SIMON THE RETARD!
@micsc50 The national debt hasn't tripled in 1 year so you're making a "scarecrow argument". Republican logic ...it's baffling. Why weren't you up in arms about debt when Bush was charging the U.S. credit card for Iraq and medicare bills? Oh, because the economy was good. This is the pattern: Bribe the U.S. while robbing us blind, then leave the next administration with the bill. Then people like you, get mad at the new guy. ....short sightedness, this is the core problem.
@micsc50 HO! That's rich! How much was spent in Iraq??? or did you think that was all paid for in advance? BUSH was the one who signed the $750 million bailout. BUSH was the one who signed the MOST pork spending under ANY president. Get your facts straight. You can't just pretend facts don't exist because you don't like Democrats.
@simon333 That was the TARP bill or bank bailout you dumb ass. The porkulas or so called jobs bill was 850 billion. He paid off unions and anyone that helped get him elected. It was nothing but PORK. They even admit it didn't create any jobs.
@micsc50 Oh, so a bank bailout is A-OK but a jobs stimulus is not. How about the TRILLIONS in no-bid contracts the Rethuglicans gave in Iraq. All waste. Where's Osama? What did we get for our money? Where was your outrage while all THIS waste was going on?
@simon333 I don't agree with any of this spending. Let the banks fail. Obama voted in favor of every Bush spending bill. Obama is no better than Bush. He just lies and points his finger more than Bush. At least Bush spent money on something. Obama just threw it away paying off his croonies that voted for him. Mainly big unions.
@BeyondLame No, he only sat idle at the wheel while conditions deteriorated so when dems took the white house, they would have to spend the money to keep the country from the great depression 2.0. ...this is a typical Republican maneuver. Google which presidents spent the most in office. It's Reagan, Bush I, and Bush 2. Period. No spin is gonna help deny these FACTS
Oh, you want to talk facts. Here's a history lesson. Something liberals fail to comprehend. What Obama is doing is the same thing FDR did shortly before WWII, and we were on the verge of collapse due to his socialist-progressive policies. Look up the Recession of 1937.
And you are in denail that we are spending ourselves into collapse. If Mccain spent 2 trillion dollars (you probably treat it as pocket change) peopel like you would be calling for his head.
@BeyondLame So no comment on the biggest spenders (borrowers) being Regan, Bush 1 and Bush2? Nothing, just move on to another topic and hope those fact go away? Just change the topic when you have to concede a point? That's cowardice. Also, FDR's policies didn't cause the stock market collapse of 1929 that sparked the great depression. You can't just try to pin stuff of people you don't like. This isn't fox news.
1937 recession =/= 1929 recession, dumbass. I didn't say FDR's policies caused the Great Depression. Re-read my post again and read a history textbook.
@BeyondLame "on the verge of collapse"? The country HAD collapsed. Your man Hoover (1929-33) presided over the great depression (not recession). He stopped all social spending and the country ceased up. People starved and lived in shanty towns (Hoovervilles). Things didn't get better until FDR took office (1933-45). Put in place some social spending programs (still working today, mind you) and loosened the fiscal system from the strangle hold. FDR even got us through WWII.
@BeyondLame Does it make sense to artificially keep the economy stimulated by printing money? No. Does it make sense to spend 80% of all tax revenue on our military so we can be the world police? No. (But remember, when Bush2 took office, we had a _surplus_.) As far as fiscal solutions, I'm not sure there is one. Bush2 and the republican congress borrowed like there was no tomorrow, now we're painted into a corner. Guess you're happy a Dem is in the white house as the ship sinks though
@BeyondLame Do you understand the difference between National Debt and the national budget? The last year under Clinton the budget was balanced with _extra money_ (we call that a s-u-r-p-l-u-s ...say it with me). This was reported by the congressional budget office in 2000. - $236B. So, Bush walked into office with a budget that worked and extra money to apply towards debt. Wonder what happened.
i completely agree with obama's sentiment. i'm a capitalist, and there's nothing wrong with being rich. but if there's a $50M ceiling or a $100M ceiling, that's still capitalism. nobody's going to stop working because they can 'only' make $50M.
@kartan Agreed! These people carrying water for the super-rich, their owners, should realize that they will be their slaves soon if the gap between rich and the middleclass continues to grow. It's not about hating rich people, but it's also, more importantly, about not hating the working class. Because it seems like everytime a teacher, construction workers, farmer etc. wants more money, they are greedy, but when a billionarie wants more money, they deserve an endless supply.
@Wildkkat1 How many plummers do you know making $50M? Nobody's talking about taking money away from the middle class. They're talking about GIVING it to the middle class.
Capitalism is merely an economic system where the means of production are privately owned. The more successfully you produce, the more you make. Having a ceiling way the fuck up in the cosmos where 99.99% of people will never get is still capitalism for 99.99% of the participants.
Rather than a ceiling above 99.9%, what if the ceiling was set where 40% of the people hit it. Say we cap income at $150,000. Do you still think that sounds like capitalism?
Then what happens to the company who's projected profits would give their CEO a bonus over 100m? The company COULD grow and make more profits, providing hundreds more with jobs and expand the tax base, BUT the people running the corporation have no incentive to do so because they can't make MORE money. Besides, we demonize rich people TOO MUCH because theres many who take what they need and donate a LOT to charity.
@cameltoejoe69 I would say that in that case, they should expand and give their lower-paid employees a raise instead. Ideally, I think I'd like to see a law that says that the highest paid person in any organization isn't allowed to be paid more than, say, 100x as much as the lowest paid person. This would give big companies an incentive to distribute their earnings fairly across all employees. Maybe as long as your organization follows the 100x rule, the $50M cap could be removed?
talk is cheap; I will believe in my fellow citizens when owebama is voted out in 2012. Do your duty seniors, this guy wants to kill us off early.
joeasmythe 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Suspend and impeach O B O M B M A, arrest the top tier in the Federal Reserve, arrest Bush and his cronies, and vote Ron Paul it might not be too late.
Ahh shut up .. please just shup up and GTFO of the White house don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
Obama gives me the creeps just like Bush did.
God Bless you all if it is.
johnnycmajor 5 months ago
He is such a wonderful judge of when you've made enough money, yet this illiterate just can't comprehend when he has SPENT enough of our money.
09daytona 6 months ago 3
And liberals still try denying that he's a marxist.
1danyol1 7 months ago
I'm waiting for Mr. Obama to recommend a cut in his own salary. Needless to say I won't be holding my breath.
dfelcman 7 months ago
play the whole thing cause i know what he said nxt.....so miss leading is this vid
funboy69able 10 months ago
@funboy69able No, it's not misleading. This is what he thinks, but mainly only re: to those who don't support him or those whom he perceives as the peasantry out here in real America, he has reiterated it over and over and over via words and actions.
Artisticer 9 months ago
If Warren Buffett only pays 17% income tax and thinks the rich aren't paying enough in taxes, why does he take tax deductions?
nhteamom 1 year ago
@mattdd05....it's none of your business how much anybody makes unless you're paying the salary. If baseball teams can afford to play players enormous salaries then that's their business. If you don't like it then you can decide not to spend your money benefiting them in any way.
zzyzxblvd 1 year ago
@zzyzxblvd You have a good point. But you see, its not the team that pays the salary, its the fans. You think the owners use money out of their own pocket to pay salaries? Yeah right. Salaries come from TV contracts, ticket sales, merchandise, etc, all of which comes from the fans' wallets, not the owners. So yes, if I want, I can avoid watching baseball, but with other things such as food, taxes, house, clothing, we don't really have the choice of avoiding.
mattdd05 9 months ago
you silly fools, the money isnt yours, is your name on it? no, its the beast's..render to ceasar what is ceasar's, render to god what is god's...the beast will take as much of your money as it wants, because it owns it.. it will continue to own you in every way, until you do something about it...applying for permits, registrations, and licenses of all types is only feeding the beast ...the beast master...but its not a cool 80's movie... its evil, and your falling for all its tricks
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
Here's a little news flash for ya, ole Barry - at a certain point WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE think you've TAKEN enough of OUR money!!! How's that hit ya, Obuma??
phantomlord54 1 year ago
I think that after you make more profit per year than lets say 80% of the population, there should be a tax on the any money made after that, which should go back into reducing the cost of your products, benefiting both the community and the company.
mattdd05 1 year ago
We'll just because he's a millionaire doesn't mean his statement is false. It's true, after a certain point you have made enough money. Your telling me that athletes need million dollar contracts, while many in the community struggles to provide for their family? I guess baseball players play better when they go to home to their solid gold jacuzzi and 24/7 chef service. What you people don't realize is why everything cost so much money!!! Because people at the top are making way to much!
mattdd05 1 year ago
@mattdd05 You must be a communist. And, what it makes President Soetoro is a hypocrite.
Artisticer 9 months ago
@Artisticer It has been proven that the richest 1% of people in the world, own 95% of the world's wealth. But I don't expect you to understand something simple mathematics; which is why I find it so amusing that you call me a communist. If your so sure I'm a communist, please explain why being a communist is so bad in the first place. Actually, I dare to even ask, do you even know what a communist is?
mattdd05 9 months ago
@mattdd05
"It has been proven that the richest 1% of people in the world, own 95% of the world's wealth."
Which means absolutely nothing. There is no economic mean or proper wealth distribution.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@mattdd05
"It's true, after a certain point you have made enough money."
So obviously, after you've made enough money you should dissolve your business, right? Steve Jobs has enough money, so he should shut down Apple so you can't buy any new computers? Why work if he's made enough money?
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Why do people that win the lottery quit their job? Because they have enough money to survive. Your argument makes no sense. There are a lot of reasons Steve Jobs doesn't quit. #1, he has a responsibly to the share holders. #2, he became rich because he had a drive and desire for money, once he's rich do you think that desire is going to go away? NO, it's just going to make him want all the things that most people can't get. BTW Obama agrees that he's one of the people that has enough
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
That's exactly what I'm saying. People who win the lottery quit their jobs because they "have enough money," right? If Steve Jobs has to keep working when he doesn't need the money because of shareholders, then that makes him a slave instead of a CEO. And if he still wants money or can use money, then how does he "have enough?" You're going to take his earnings now anyway,, so again, why keep working? He should shut down Apple so none of us get new Iphones.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 You know most billionaires like Steve Jobs have millions/billions in assets and money that they will never even see,use or touch. It's more a thing of greed/pride then actually "need" If you had only 1 billion dollars, you could spend $10,000 a day, for 274 years. Or, if your more reckless, You might spend $100,000 grand EVERY day, for 27 years straight. And that's ONLY 1 billion dollars. I find it hard to believe that any human needs this much money to be satisfied with their life.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 And you think Obama want's to "take away their earnings", and that is such a horrible thing? You get taxed by the government everyday, on everything you buy, Obama doesn't want to "rob them of all profits", just tax the rich people more, since they can afford it and have no use for the leftover money anyway. If anything, they should be grateful that America allowed them the opportunity to be rich, and should want to give back.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
Answer my question please. If they have enough money then shouldn't they shut down their companies? Obviously Google has billions of dollars, so they should shut down youtube right now, right? They have enough money!
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Hahaha, Google is not a person. It is a corporation. It is owned by the shareholders. Everything within any corporation is done in the interest of the primary shareholders. That's a fact. And why do you keep insisted that "someone has enough money" is equal to "they should dissolve their company"? All Obama and I are saying is that richer "INDIVIDUALS" and imo "WEALTHY CORPORATIONS" should be taxed more. No one's saying to shut down Google; stop jumping to crazy conclusions.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
The owners of google have made billions of dollars. Should they shut it down?
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 LMAO. Dude, what the fuck is wrong with you? Seriously. This is the last time I repeat myself for a complete moron like youself: TAX RICH PEOPLE MORE. Where in that 4 letter statement do you see "shut down company?" I think you need a dictionary, look up the definition of tax, you'll see its quite different than shutting down a company.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
You can't answer the question, because you don't understand the basics of economics and what businesses do with their excess profits. You should shut the fuck up and read something before you waste any more people's time.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 I have answered the question, you dumb fuck. Do I have to spell it out for you? I think you do, because you have clearly have the comprehension level of a grade 2 with down syndrome, I take that back, I'd be insulting the kid if I likened him to you. NO GOOGLE SHOULD NOT SHUT DOWN ITS COMPANY. THEY SHOULD BE TAXED MORE. You idiot, your a disgrace to humanity. Natural selection should fix this problem, just remember not to have kids, you don't wanna pass on your stupidity, do you?
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
I'm asking you FROM THE BUSINESS OWNER'S PERSPECTIVE, you know-nothing socialist fuck. If I owned the business and I had "enough money" I should shut it down based on your stupid reasoning that would do nothing but destroy society and leave everyone bankrupt. You can't answer this question or explain ANY reason why i shouldn't. I guarantee it you fucking idiot.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 This is getting quite pathetic. I keep telling you Google should NOT shut down it's company, yet you keep insisting that it should. I think you suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, the words are right in front of you, yet you are reading something completely different. Based on my reasoning, companies would be TAXED MORE, not SHUT DOWN. Your complete ignorance of the subject has only lead me to conclude that you are a degenerate inbred piece of shit. Please do not respond.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
The question is WHY you dumb fuck. WHY they shouldn't. That's what you can't explain.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Why, you ask? Plain and simple. Just because the rich are taxed more, that doesn't give them any reason to declare bankruptcy and dissolve the company. That would be equal to you selling your house, because your morgage rate went up, or your water bill was higher. It just doesn't follow. Sorry bud, your argument pretty much loses, no rational person would sell their company just because taxes went up.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
It has nothing to do with taxes. Assume there ARE no taxes. Once you get to a certain point, if you have "ENOUGH money" then why waste time? All other work is of no benefit according to that idiot claim, so you might as well shut down the company. Do you want to just give up and have me tell you why they don't shut down and why "enough money" is a stupid concept made up by unproductive idiots?
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 What your trying to say is that there is no such thing as enough money? But why not? I would safely say 99.99% of billionaires will never spend their net worth in their lifetime. If you calculate eating,living,cleaning,entertainment,transportation,travelling expenses for an entire lifetime it will not add up to even 1 billion.. The thing is, we do not live in a fantasy world, where there is an infinite amount of time to spend, and an unlimited amount of resources and money.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
This response here (99.99% of billionaires won't spend blahblah) just shows your true ignorance. They invest the money they don't spend, idiot. Even when it's sitting in the bank it ends up loaned out to entrepreneurs or others...in much more efficient fashion then when the government does it. It's not about spending the money, which shows you know shit and I hope you don't vote.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 That's true, the bank uses that money to loan out to others, then they charge interest on the loaned money. It's funny that your so supportive of your banks loaning out money, your entire economic meltdown was caused by defaults on loans. Your whole system is flawed, and your trying to validate it by saying, "well, rich people do this and that for the ecomony, blah, blah, blah" I'm just one of those people who don't agree with authoritarian dictatorships like the USofA.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Eventually you get to a point where you will never feasibly run out of money, no matter how carefree you spend. Since money is not infinite, neither is life-span, so yes there is actually "enough money" to buy whatever you want. any money after that is just collecting dust. But people still don't shut down their company, for other reasons than money; because of power, passion, enjoyment, many reasons, money is just a trophy when your rich, you don't have to worry about running out.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
Wrong. Running a huge company is hard work. They don't shut it down because they INVEST the extra money in new businesses or banks (creating jobs), build wealth for their children (creating wealth for the future) or give it to causes they believe in (and not lobbyists). These all help society. Much more so than the government taking it and throwing it around willy-nilly. Why don't you do some research about business spending vs government spending and which helps the economy more.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
@EGarrett01 Saying businesses helps the economy is like saying eating helps you feel full. It's not only obvious but it is redundant, the economy is business. Their profits do go to lobbyists/campaigns, that's why politics is always interested in business and not in morality or making the country better for the citizens. I can see why you like businesses, some people like being slaves to their job, working to pay the bills, so they can brag about how much things they have. Suit yourself.
mattdd05 7 months ago
@mattdd05
A completely worthless response that shows no understanding of what I said.
EGarrett01 7 months ago
It's not because President Obama isn't good enough that we want him to resign; he's the greatest president we've ever had! It's just that we think, at a certain point, a president has been great enough that it's time for him to resign and leave the American People alone so they can get back to work cleaning up the mess. That's all we're about here. We just want President Obama to move on quickly to become the greatest former president we've ever had. We believe that would help everybody.
happystance6able 1 year ago
fucking Marxist .cannot believe American people fell so low to elect this socialist prick..
JohnGaltHasSpoken 1 year ago
In 2009, he made 5,500,000 dollars. When has Obama made enough money? O wait the messiah is special
rickyc777 1 year ago
I hate looking at his! How could Americans be so f...... stupid!?
fluffydanny 1 year ago
OBAMA=FRAUD
spokeshole 1 year ago
Himself is a millionaire.... fucking hypocrite.
glork2007 1 year ago 12
@glork2007 No actually Obama agrees that he is rich, and if his plan were allowed, he would be taxed more than the average middle-class person.
mattdd05 7 months ago
Talk, talk, talk. He's just another suit.
AmericanBadass44 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He is such a hypocrite. I bet anything if he was earning 2 million a day and they told him he'd earned his money, he'd be pissed.
LEFT4BASS 1 year ago
Why is this so unwelcomed? if you make 3 million a year, you wont notice if you get down to lets say 2 million. A lot of succes depends on luck too. So you cant say that everyone can make that much money. Someone gotta be the low payment recipients.
MrBlush11 1 year ago 2
@MrBlush11 Dude, thats money YOU worked for. The money you went to school for and the money you earned. Its yours. Not his
rickyc777 1 year ago
I wonder if he's told this to Oprah, Steven Spielberg, George Soros, Sean Penn and the rest of the liberal douchebags that refer to themselves as "limosine liberals"?
dalmatian847 1 year ago 19
time the people stop putting faith into a government that is owned by bankers.
Remember what happened last time the government was overturned?? the people got what they wanted and what was best for them.....its time for something realistic. lets get organized people!
wheelsnwood 1 year ago
@wheelsnwood I agree totally
LEFT4BASS 1 year ago
And expected to add $6.58 Trillion by the end of his first term. So let's hold everybody's feet to the fire. Obama is not a budget hawk to say the least. What is happening in Greece and spreading to other countries in Eurpoe is what happens when you have endless entitlement programs. How is it that more than half of Americans pay no income tax at all? USA Today: Americans get about 17% of their compensation from some sort of government entitlement (Soc Sec, Medicare, unemployment, ...)
Yeagermeister07 1 year ago
@Simon333 You cannot get away with saying the federal deficit is only Bush's problem. He had a budget surplus until 9/11 and then wars started getting in the way (as well as other spending programs: Prescription Drug Plan for Medicare for example) but compared to Obama's spending in his first year is miniscule. Bush's first proposed budget had a cumulative national debt of $5.77 Trillion and left office with a $9.985 Trillion deficit ($4.215 T over 8 years). Obama added 2.4 T just last year...
Yeagermeister07 1 year ago
What a hypocrite! You made 5.5 million on book sales. When is enough enough, Mr. Potato Head? How much did you give away?
wildetaube 1 year ago
OBAMA====FRAUD.
spokeshole 1 year ago
Ironic thing is, Obama was backed by many rich people, INCLUDING A BANK NAMED GOLDMAN SACHS!
BeyondLame 1 year ago
At some point, I think you have spent enough time in the whitehouse. Why dont you and all your socialist friends get out of OUR house and give the power back to its rightful owners: WE THE PEOPLE!
cameltoejoe69 1 year ago
Obama Rot in Hell you commie piece of shit and take Pelosi
and Reid with you!
spokeshole 1 year ago
yea and karl marx can rot in hell
we get fucked every pay check.
and the harder we work the more balls deep we take it.
HandyMan101 1 year ago
My mistake, its the top 10%
the tax system is messed dude. people who work hard get screwed, and half of us pay no income tax.
HandyMan101 1 year ago
@HandyMan101 The top 10% pay 72% of all federal income taxes in this country. The top 1% pay 40% of taxes. And 47% of wage-earners pay no federal income taxes... and that does not include welfare recipients, illegals, unions, students, retirees... A 10% flat tax on everyone, would be awesome. Oh, and by the way General Electric paid no taxes this past year... Karl Marx invented the progressive income tax...
SavagePatriotUSA 1 year ago
Obama started out early in his campaign attacking big business. Apparently Obama does not know that Big Businesses does not pay taxes. They simply raise their prices. And who is it that get the short end of the stick? That's right! The same ones Obama is claiming, he wants to help.
libssuck55 1 year ago
someone should call up obama and tell him that we think he's made enough money
and then see how he likes his wealth redistribution \ class warfare bullshit
HandyMan101 1 year ago
you never see his $5million or any elitist limo liberal give back their millions, no thanks i've made enough. NEVER. but they sure want to tell you $ 20.00/hour is way too much but Franklin Raines Obama economy advisor Fannie Mae crook made $ 90 million of our tax money as Fannie CEO for only 5 years, F U OBAMA stop taking a salary fool, YOU MADE ENOUGH !!!!
heyvvoodjabioeme 1 year ago
simon333 If I am eating cat food then it's my own fault for not preparing for retirement. It's called self responsibility and taking care of yourself and not relying on the government to bail you out at every turn.
ifixxu 1 year ago
@simon333 Exactly. The concept of income imbalance was provided to you courtesy of politicians. The truth is that many executive positions are very profitable to a company. This is recognized more today than in the past. Thus, a high compensation pacakage. More than in the past.
Now, let me know what makes you so bitter about the success of others.
IPSentry 1 year ago
W wonder if he feels that way about athletes. Especially pro basketball. Maybe he should start there and start telling them to play for free now since they have made well over anything the average person should make!!!
katmood 1 year ago
Here is the whole quote before they cut it off
"I do think at a certain point you've made enough money, but you know, part of the American way is, you can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product."
Morons.
Drummydrum 1 year ago
@Drummydrum hmmm... how does that change the statement?
Just because it IS the American way, doesn't mean he doesn't think "you've" made enough. There is no contradiction in his statements and nothing to be assumed about his core beliefs other than the fact that he understands his belief is not the american way.
IPSentry 1 year ago
@Drummydrum which basically means I don't think you should be making as much as you want, but we are americans (which he sees as a bad thing) so we have that right.
which he's in the process of taking away
HandyMan101 1 year ago
This is socialism/communism. In those governments they take your wealth and distribute it to others. It is the model that liberals and progressives want.
They don't realize that this form of government ends up in waste with no economic prosperity.
This is not a guess, it's a fact. Just look around the world.
gotitsussed 1 year ago
I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth around" to people` who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy or stupid to earn it. GO GET BENT BARRY!!!
libssuck55 1 year ago
@libssuck55 I'd bet you ANYTHING that you got a tax CUT this year. Go read a book and turn off FOX news ...it's the corporate commercial channel
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 When will you start wearing your SS insignia and putting the yellow stars on capitalist?
slitmud 1 year ago
@slitmud How does wanting a level playing ground equate to nazi Germany? Nobody is killing capitalism. A public company is encouraged (in fact, obligated) to make as much money for their shareholders as possible. What about an individual? When too much wealth resides in a few individuals hands, we get an oligarchy. (almost like today). This is why there are laws on the books about taxing inheritances. These aren't new laws. It's 100% American and not against capitalism at all.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 I'd bet ANYTHING I paid more this year than you have made in the last 5 years. And no i don't have time to watch foxx.
libssuck55 1 year ago
@libssuck55 yea yea Don't even mail me back. You fucking dip shit I'm in trucking so the next time you use Heinz tomato paste, ketchup whatever just remember your boy taxed the shit out of me. Tax break HA HA HA Call Steve (my accountant) ask him how much of a tax break I have received This year It's in the tune of 900,000 in taxes i'm sure next year I'll pay1.2 or more.Now your boy wants to tax me for running diesel??? save the world barry AND THANK YOU CALIFORNIA...
libssuck55 1 year ago
@libssuck55 Ok, next time I use ketchup I'll think of you and how make 5 times what I make. Gosh, I hope I don't get my french fries wet with my tears. Pfffffff
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 good luck to you sir. I hope you make over a million some day so you yourself can watch your momey fly out of the door. When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. — Benjamin Franklin. I love that quote. ACORN and obama LIVE BUY IT.
libssuck55 1 year ago
@libssuck55 Yes, and good luck flaunting your wealth then crying when you're asked to pay your fair share of taxes. I'm sure you'll gain lots of sympathy. Trickle down Reganomics ... die by it
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 the person who buys a several million dollar home has to employ workers to work the land
they have to employ workers to build the house
they have to go to get coffee every morning to work on the house
they have to get tools and buy those to work on the house
trickle down works.
when one person does well, there are all kinds of people below him that he gets good and services from
HandyMan101 1 year ago
@HandyMan101 So on top of that, the millionaire shouldn't have to pay their fair share in taxes? Trickle down is the wool being pulled over your eyes. It comes down to this; do you want the wealth to reside with rich individuals or within our government coffers. I personally haven't given up on the idea that we the people, can run our own government. We need more transparency (initiatives that are being put in place) and more active participation. WE need to read the bills, not FOX or MSNBC
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 If you knew the facts the top 1% pays over 70% of the tax burden as it is.
Sorry, but that's not fair.
Why should people who earn a lot pay more than the rest of us ?
If you want fairness, we should all pay the same tax rate.
HandyMan101 1 year ago
@HandyMan101 I call bullshit. What's your source.
simon333 1 year ago
Comment removed
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 You are worried about millionaires? what about billionaires? Gates, Buffet, Kerry, Feinstein, Rockefeller, the Googlegoons, the Hollywood pinkos, Kennedy etc. All radical left-wingers, every last one of them... why would the richest people in America all be "Democrats"? I thought that the Democrats were the party of the "poor", and the party of the "little guy"... why would all of these billionaires be Democrats (and in favor of higher taxes)? I'll let you put 2 and 2 together...
SavagePatriotUSA 1 year ago
@SavagePatriotUSA If building companies that employ Americans, sending a man to the moon and passing fair treatment laws is what "radical left-wingers" do, well, sign me up! Democrats are the party of the high road, not the poor. Higher morals and ethics so means more empathy for the poor. You christian conservatives should try reading your bible ..specifically, what Jesus said about the poor.
simon333 1 year ago
to much is never enough
larry267 1 year ago
Hey?,.. can we all agree that this affirmative action shit has gone to far? This is one dumb monkey!
LiberalsStillSuck08 1 year ago
The Words of a true take from the rich and give to the poor "FOOL"
2011Neal 1 year ago 2
Hey Obama, is the 5.5 million you made last year "enough"? Shouldn't you spread some of that wealth around?
Tylerxy 1 year ago
@Tylerxy How much did Glenn Beck make?
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 Who knows, and who cares. Glenn Beck is not the one proposing that enough is enough, so the comparison is not valid. I only brought it up because Obama is the one proposing de facto salary caps, and yet he is quite rich by any standard.
Tylerxy 1 year ago
@Tylerxy He didn't propose a salary cap, he stated an opinion. Besides, if Obama made 5.5 million, wouldn't be in his best interest to cut taxes for the rich? ...Something else is going on here. There's an enormous income imbalance between the middle and upper class and it has nothing to do with hard work. Corporate interests have been in control too long via the Republican party (which I believe was hijacked). This is being changed and it's 100% patriotic to support it.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 That's why I said "de facto", not a true salary cap, yet. Statists like Obama have a double standard when it comes to regulations and salary. It's OK for them to make money, but not OK for others. I'd also check your data about so-called corporate interests. Check out how much lawyers and law firms gave to the Democrats in 2008 at opensecrets.
Tylerxy 1 year ago
@simon333 Don't you think his opinion is telling? It's ok to admit you hate your country
slitmud 1 year ago
@simon333 , what exactly is an "income imbalance"?
IPSentry 1 year ago
@IPSentry When a CEO makes more in a day than his employees make in a year, that's an imbalance to me.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 ... Which employees exactly? Janitors? Sales Reps? Local Managers? Regional Managers? Supervisors? Machinists? COO? CFO? CIO? CTO? Ops Managers? HR Managers? Accountants? Secretaries? Data entry clerks? Programmers? Software Designers? Maintenance personnel? Regional sales reps, Marketing Staff, Marketing Directors? etc...
IPSentry 1 year ago
@IPSentry Yeah, pick any one of those. I'd say we should pass a law that says any publicly traded company CEO should have his/her total income (salary plus bonuses/comissions/stock options etc) approved by the shareholders.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 irrelevent.
A COO making $500k/year means that the CEO would have to make $186M/year to fit your arbitrary definition of this mythical "income imbalance" buzzword.
A corporation provides a wide range of jobs and wages based on skill and value to the corporation. I reject the concept of "income imbalance".
IPSentry 1 year ago
@IPSentry Mythical income imbalance? You're either joking or uninformed. Over the past 50 years the average income for CEO's has skyrocketed while income for nearly EVERY position below this has stagnated. Everyone knows this or feels it on some level. We currently have the largest disparity between the upper and lower class since the great depression. Fact. ...Reject this "concept" all you want. It's absolutely true and we the people have had enough
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 Enough of what exactly? How does the CEO of Oracle making $84M cause you a problem?
IPSentry 1 year ago
@IPSentry Are you willing to concede that the trend of CEO pay increases are considerably higher than that of the average worker and that this has been occurring year over year for the past half century?
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 ... I didn't make any reference to average executive compensation levels vs. average worker compensation levels increasing at different rates. There are plenty of studies on that subject.
You stated "we the people have had enough". Enough of what? And how does the compensation of the nations top paid CEO's create a real problem for you?
I simply try to understand the thought process of those who would begrudge another American's success.
IPSentry 1 year ago
@IPSentry You said the income imbalance is "mythical" now you say you made no reference to "executive compensation levels vs. average worker compensation levels". You say something doesn't exist, then, when it does you don't admit you were wrong. You need to concede that there is in fact, an imbalance. Now, again, do you agree or disagree that compensation levels for executives has far outpaced average workers.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 What does it matter? People are aloud to make money....you clearly have a problem with this.
slitmud 1 year ago
@slitmud ...as long as it's not Obama making 5.5 million? that's what were talking about son. If you;re gonna lean in from the kids table, try and catch the conversation from the beginning.
simon333 1 year ago
The National Enquirer has been working to confirm details of a presidential cheating scandal involving Barack Obama and former aide, Vera Baker. ...And now, a hush-hush security video that shows everything could topple both Obama's presidency and marriage to Michelle! LMAO, all Marxist have have bitches on the side didn't you know that!
dkkght46 1 year ago
what a douche! so at what point has HE made enouh money ??? and to top it all off he did NOTHING to earn it!
skygirl36 1 year ago 4
@skygirl36 Hey, give Obama a break. Tearing down the foundations of America is hard work. :)
goofyGAguy 1 year ago 14
@goofyGAguy
Why is it that when you can't beat someone's position you make one up for them?
Drummydrum 1 year ago
@Drummydrum To what are you referring?
goofyGAguy 1 year ago
@goofyGAguy He is such a hypocrite. I bet anything if he was earning 2 million a day and they told him he'd earned his money, he'd be pissed.
LEFT4BASS 1 year ago
@skygirl36
He did nothing? What alternate universe do you live in?
Drummydrum 1 year ago
obama hates america
gjtek2003 1 year ago 2
Somebody should tell his friends Oprah, Bruce Springsteen, and the 5 million dollars that Obama made this year. Did they make too much or just enough????
bette1122 1 year ago
I have got to find a another source for news,
shiddy67 1 year ago
The thing about this bill is it's going to give the banks more power. They're just acting like they don't want it, but they do, they help write these bills. It blows me away to no end how people are stupid enough to think this bill is going to be any kind of financial reform just because that's what name it is.
Lord, people think a bill with a good sounding name just HAS to be good.
TheBulleteer 1 year ago
I'm fine with getting rid of social security and SSI benefits. So your going to TAKE someone else's money WHO EARNED it and give it to someone who DIDN'T earn it????? Sounds like socialism to me.
ifixxu 1 year ago
@ifixxu You'd be one of those eating cat food upon retirement I'd bet.
simon333 1 year ago
Ohh please. You people throw out the word socialist without even understanding the policies and regulations of a socialist country. If you dislike socialism so much why don't you get rid of social security and SSI benefits?
Hypocrites.
Thales880 1 year ago
@Thales880 I agree but don't stop there. Any and all social programs need to be tanked..All of them!
usaleftistsareidiots 1 year ago
@usaleftistsareidiots Hmm. Well I'm not sure most of Americans would agree with that. No country has true capitalism and no true socialism, they usually lean towards one of them but it is never a pure system. But you can make your case, you'll just have trouble convincing the elderly that their social security benefits need to be taken away.
Thales880 1 year ago
@Thales880 Don't take it away. Pay the elderly what was stolen from them. Just let the 18 year old comming into the system opt out of it. You want to take a wild guess as to why Americans are given no choices in matters that concern that?
usaleftistsareidiots 1 year ago
that's not his job to make that decision! all while the gulf is in real danger... 8 days for the marxist to comment on the gulf oil slick to say oh, i'm sending a bunch of underlings to find out what to do and report back in 30 days! at least president bush flew over katrina on day 2! this is obama's katrina and he is completely unfit to lead anything anywhere. no interest whatsoever in leading or being president, just too busy getting even with us!
dgallegos4201 1 year ago
you tell em obama, your speeches are gonna make em stop. on one hand you act all against wall street but you recive millions from them in campaign money. its all an act.
hadessix 1 year ago
@hadessix You called it. Smoke and mirrors.This guy is full of SHIT!!
libssuck55 1 year ago
He made over 5 million last year and I think he has made enough money. Judging on his performance so far he does not even meet the standards to make minimum wage. Hows that federal response to the oil slick working for you Louisiana? It only took him 8 days to provide help and you all blamed Bush for Katrina, LMAO.
dkkght46 1 year ago
Obama just wants everyone equal EQUALLY POOR!
micsc50 1 year ago
@micsc50 Yeah ...forget that the REPUBLICANS controlled the congress and White House the last 8 years and resided over the LARGEST national debt EVER. Facts are facts, no matter how much Glenn Beck crys
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 Wrong...you should go ahead and research what you think you know. I won't tell you what you are wrong at.
slitmud 1 year ago
@simon333 So that gives Obama a pass for tripleing our debt. What the fuck! Thats like the pot calling the kettle black. You act like the democRATs have a free pass. What the fuck is wrong with you are you retarded? SIMON THE RETARD!
micsc50 1 year ago
@micsc50 The national debt hasn't tripled in 1 year so you're making a "scarecrow argument". Republican logic ...it's baffling. Why weren't you up in arms about debt when Bush was charging the U.S. credit card for Iraq and medicare bills? Oh, because the economy was good. This is the pattern: Bribe the U.S. while robbing us blind, then leave the next administration with the bill. Then people like you, get mad at the new guy. ....short sightedness, this is the core problem.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 Heres some democRAT logic. LETS SPEND OUR WAY OUT OF DEBT. Obama the king of PORKULAS has thrown billions of dollars away on nothing .
micsc50 1 year ago
@micsc50 HO! That's rich! How much was spent in Iraq??? or did you think that was all paid for in advance? BUSH was the one who signed the $750 million bailout. BUSH was the one who signed the MOST pork spending under ANY president. Get your facts straight. You can't just pretend facts don't exist because you don't like Democrats.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 That was the TARP bill or bank bailout you dumb ass. The porkulas or so called jobs bill was 850 billion. He paid off unions and anyone that helped get him elected. It was nothing but PORK. They even admit it didn't create any jobs.
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT YOU DEMO- CRAP
micsc50 1 year ago
@micsc50 Oh, so a bank bailout is A-OK but a jobs stimulus is not. How about the TRILLIONS in no-bid contracts the Rethuglicans gave in Iraq. All waste. Where's Osama? What did we get for our money? Where was your outrage while all THIS waste was going on?
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333 I don't agree with any of this spending. Let the banks fail. Obama voted in favor of every Bush spending bill. Obama is no better than Bush. He just lies and points his finger more than Bush. At least Bush spent money on something. Obama just threw it away paying off his croonies that voted for him. Mainly big unions.
micsc50 1 year ago
@simon333
Excuse me?
Bush didn't spend 2 trillion dollars in 16 months.
BeyondLame 1 year ago
@BeyondLame No, he only sat idle at the wheel while conditions deteriorated so when dems took the white house, they would have to spend the money to keep the country from the great depression 2.0. ...this is a typical Republican maneuver. Google which presidents spent the most in office. It's Reagan, Bush I, and Bush 2. Period. No spin is gonna help deny these FACTS
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333
Oh, you want to talk facts. Here's a history lesson. Something liberals fail to comprehend. What Obama is doing is the same thing FDR did shortly before WWII, and we were on the verge of collapse due to his socialist-progressive policies. Look up the Recession of 1937.
And you are in denail that we are spending ourselves into collapse. If Mccain spent 2 trillion dollars (you probably treat it as pocket change) peopel like you would be calling for his head.
Big govt=collapse
BeyondLame 1 year ago
@BeyondLame So no comment on the biggest spenders (borrowers) being Regan, Bush 1 and Bush2? Nothing, just move on to another topic and hope those fact go away? Just change the topic when you have to concede a point? That's cowardice. Also, FDR's policies didn't cause the stock market collapse of 1929 that sparked the great depression. You can't just try to pin stuff of people you don't like. This isn't fox news.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333
1937 recession =/= 1929 recession, dumbass. I didn't say FDR's policies caused the Great Depression. Re-read my post again and read a history textbook.
BeyondLame 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BeyondLame "on the verge of collapse"? The country HAD collapsed. Your man Hoover (1929-33) presided over the great depression (not recession). He stopped all social spending and the country ceased up. People starved and lived in shanty towns (Hoovervilles). Things didn't get better until FDR took office (1933-45). Put in place some social spending programs (still working today, mind you) and loosened the fiscal system from the strangle hold. FDR even got us through WWII.
simon333 1 year ago
@simon333
And let me ask you this, since I'm questioning your logistics or sanity or state of mind.
Does it make sense to spend ourselves out of debt?
BeyondLame 1 year ago
@BeyondLame Does it make sense to artificially keep the economy stimulated by printing money? No. Does it make sense to spend 80% of all tax revenue on our military so we can be the world police? No. (But remember, when Bush2 took office, we had a _surplus_.) As far as fiscal solutions, I'm not sure there is one. Bush2 and the republican congress borrowed like there was no tomorrow, now we're painted into a corner. Guess you're happy a Dem is in the white house as the ship sinks though
simon333 1 year ago
Comment removed
BeyondLame 1 year ago
@simon333
According to the U.S. Treasury archives on their website, there was never a surplus into Bush's first term.
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion
BeyondLame 1 year ago
@BeyondLame Do you understand the difference between National Debt and the national budget? The last year under Clinton the budget was balanced with _extra money_ (we call that a s-u-r-p-l-u-s ...say it with me). This was reported by the congressional budget office in 2000. - $236B. So, Bush walked into office with a budget that worked and extra money to apply towards debt. Wonder what happened.
simon333 1 year ago
i completely agree with obama's sentiment. i'm a capitalist, and there's nothing wrong with being rich. but if there's a $50M ceiling or a $100M ceiling, that's still capitalism. nobody's going to stop working because they can 'only' make $50M.
kartan 1 year ago 2
@kartan Agreed! These people carrying water for the super-rich, their owners, should realize that they will be their slaves soon if the gap between rich and the middleclass continues to grow. It's not about hating rich people, but it's also, more importantly, about not hating the working class. Because it seems like everytime a teacher, construction workers, farmer etc. wants more money, they are greedy, but when a billionarie wants more money, they deserve an endless supply.
Venue0309 1 year ago
@kartan Moron!, Hey Plummer you've made enough, you Carpender have made enough, brick-layer enough, Get it? That's enough!
Wildkkat1 1 year ago
@Wildkkat1 How many plummers do you know making $50M? Nobody's talking about taking money away from the middle class. They're talking about GIVING it to the middle class.
kartan 1 year ago
@kartan Hey Baseball players you have made enough, basketball players enough, football players enough! You're advocating Communism, bug-wit!
Wildkkat1 1 year ago
@kartan
I dont know where you were educated, but putting a ceiling on income is not capitalism.
78topper 1 year ago
@78topper I disagree.
Capitalism is merely an economic system where the means of production are privately owned. The more successfully you produce, the more you make. Having a ceiling way the fuck up in the cosmos where 99.99% of people will never get is still capitalism for 99.99% of the participants.
kartan 1 year ago
@kartan
So lets take your argument a step further.
Rather than a ceiling above 99.9%, what if the ceiling was set where 40% of the people hit it. Say we cap income at $150,000. Do you still think that sounds like capitalism?
78topper 1 year ago
@78topper Hey, I have a goldfish ...while we're talking about stuff that has nothing to do with anything
simon333 1 year ago
@kartan
Then what happens to the company who's projected profits would give their CEO a bonus over 100m? The company COULD grow and make more profits, providing hundreds more with jobs and expand the tax base, BUT the people running the corporation have no incentive to do so because they can't make MORE money. Besides, we demonize rich people TOO MUCH because theres many who take what they need and donate a LOT to charity.
cameltoejoe69 1 year ago
@cameltoejoe69 I would say that in that case, they should expand and give their lower-paid employees a raise instead. Ideally, I think I'd like to see a law that says that the highest paid person in any organization isn't allowed to be paid more than, say, 100x as much as the lowest paid person. This would give big companies an incentive to distribute their earnings fairly across all employees. Maybe as long as your organization follows the 100x rule, the $50M cap could be removed?
kartan 1 year ago