• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

Turtledude is arguing that these people pay more in taxes than they are getting back. You responded by arguing that they obtain all sorts of special benefits. My point is that they get those benefits if and when they choose to pay for them. They do not get those benefits automatically by virtue of paying more income taxes than other people. Accordingly, the argument that these people are getting special benefits in exchange for their increased tax burden is incorrect.
My argument is they DO get these benefits automatically by being wealthy and increasing the tax burden on them accordingly is a justifiable course of action
 
My argument is they DO get these benefits automatically by being wealthy and increasing the tax burden on them accordingly is a justifiable course of action

What an absolutely absurd argument to make. There is NO justification for forcing one person to pay more %wise of their income then another person.

I don't care if you make 15k or 150k, we should ALL pay an equal %. To say otherwise is to believe success should be punished.

And that's EXACTLY what you are doing.
 
My argument is they DO get these benefits automatically by being wealthy and increasing the tax burden on them accordingly is a justifiable course of action

Break down how that works, exactly and specifically.
 
My argument is they DO get these benefits automatically by being wealthy and increasing the tax burden on them accordingly is a justifiable course of action

Exactly how do those people get those benefits automatically? Every single example you've mentioned is something that people can choose to acquire, not something that is part of earning more money.
 
What an absolutely absurd argument to make. There is NO justification for forcing one person to pay more %wise of their income then another person.

I don't care if you make 15k or 150k, we should ALL pay an equal %. To say otherwise is to believe success should be punished.

And that's EXACTLY what you are doing.
20% of a person's income means a lot more when you're making $30,000 a year as opposed to $3,000,000 a year. I feel that if you have more to contribute, the benefits you gain by having that extra in our society means you should contribute more.

Break down how that works, exactly and specifically.
I've already laid it out previously, scroll back

Exactly how do those people get those benefits automatically? Every single example you've mentioned is something that people can choose to acquire, not something that is part of earning more money.
Favorable and preferential treatment by society is automatic
 
Favorable and preferential treatment by society is automatic

How do you figure? Again, none of the examples you mentioned are automatic.

If a rich person gets superior legal help, that's because they paid for a better lawyer. If they didn't, they'd get no legal help.

If a rich person gets better medical care, that's because they paid for it. If they didn't, they'd get no medical care.

If a rich person has better clothes, that's because they paid for them. If they didn't, they could shop at walmart like everyone else.
 
I've already laid it out previously, scroll back

I saw what you wrote; what I don't see is how it relates to what they pay in taxes or how it would be different if they didn't pay those taxes. And if it wouldn't be (which it wouldn't), then it has nothing to do with their taxes. So, wanna try again?
 
20% of a person's income means a lot more when you're making $30,000 a year as opposed to $3,000,000 a year. I feel that if you have more to contribute, the benefits you gain by having that extra in our society means you should contribute more.

And that means what to me? It's FAIR, it's MORAL and it's CORRECT.

What you advocate is theft of earnings because you think it's unfair someone makes more money then you do. That's all I'm seeing from you; envy, hate, arrogance, ignorance.
 
How do you figure? Again, none of the examples you mentioned are automatic.
As a wealthy person, you get automatically favorable treatment because of your wealth. People see you as a more valuable person or as more intelligent. Posts around this board alone help underscore that.

In the court of law, your wealth automatically earns you favorable treatment and a way to buy your way out of trouble.

Society in general takes a more positive view of you because of your wealth. Society is more permissive and less critical of negative behavior and social restrictions are far looser.

I saw what you wrote; what I don't see is how it relates to what they pay in taxes or how it would be different if they didn't pay those taxes. And if it wouldn't be (which it wouldn't), then it has nothing to do with their taxes. So, wanna try again?
I feel it's appropriate to ask for more in taxes considering the social bonuses one gets for extreme wealth, what more is there to say?

And that means what to me? It's FAIR, it's MORAL and it's CORRECT.
Translation: your mind is made up, **** everyone else.

What you advocate is theft of earnings because you think it's unfair someone makes more money then you do. That's all I'm seeing from you; envy, hate, arrogance, ignorance.
I'd be perfectly happy to pay taxes similar to what I suggest if I ever became a millionaire.

If you'd like, you can give me a couple million and try to prove me wrong.
 
Our social mentality about the rich is also quite generous; despite some leanings in the opposite direction, the majority of our society tends to think highly of someone with money

it's called respect, it starts with self respect

turtle dude, you are a stud
 
Last edited:
Translation: your mind is made up, **** everyone else.

No, I know what your stance is, it's jealousy driven. "Oh, they get advantages cause they are rich, so they should pay more"


Translation: Why can't I have nice things and get treated well??


It's immoral, and wrong to punish success. Period.
"Hey, you're doing well in life, that's not fair you should pay more then others cause you got it right!"
 
No, I know what your stance is, it's jealousy driven. "Oh, they get advantages cause they are rich, so they should pay more"
How is that jealousy driven?

Translation: Why can't I have nice things and get treated well??
Again, you're more than welcome to shower me with nice things to see if I change my viewpoint.

It's immoral, and wrong to punish success. Period.
"Hey, you're doing well in life, that's not fair you should pay more then others cause you got it right!"
You actually help prove my point, by saying that the wealthy "got it right", you consider the wealthy as "better" people for the sheer fact that they are wealthy.
 
How do you figure? Again, none of the examples you mentioned are automatic.

If a rich person gets superior legal help, that's because they paid for a better lawyer. If they didn't, they'd get no legal help.

If a rich person gets better medical care, that's because they paid for it. If they didn't, they'd get no medical care.

If a rich person has better clothes, that's because they paid for them. If they didn't, they could shop at walmart like everyone else.

the point I made in Post 169. The progressive income tax in a DE JURE burden on the wealthy. THERE ARE NO DE JURE benefits the GOVERNMENT gives to the rich as a result of shouldering that DE JURE soaking. HOplite, like many socialists, think that society and the government are exactly the same thing and assumes all wealth is owned by society first and when a person gains alot of wealth its not because they have traded for that wealth with something of equivalent value but rather they were GIVEN It by society and thus they should GIVE the government more with NOTHING additional in return
 
I feel it's appropriate to ask for more in taxes considering the social bonuses one gets for extreme wealth, what more is there to say?

Nothing, really, except that it's asinine, because it has no relationship to taxes or the government. The government isn't "society." You simply want to take, by force, from people who have more, simply because they have more. That's not tax policy. That's not funding the government or paying for services. That's just straight-up theft. No other way to spin it. :shrug: If you're comfortable with thievery, then so be it, but thievery is not a virtue.
 
Watch CNBC or Fox Business and you will understand. Companies have no clue what's coming next from this administration. They won't invest their money in their businesses or expand their workforce when they have no clue how much money this administration is going to make them pay in taxes, via Cap & Trade and Obamacare. As long as this anti-business environment exists, companies are going to continue to sit on their money.

Uh huh. Just so we are clear, you beleive that these corporations are laying people off by the thousands, then paying their CEOs millions of dollars as they head out the door, because the Obama administration might not extend their tax cuts?
 
In the court of law, your wealth automatically earns you favorable treatment and a way to buy your way out of trouble.

No, it absolutely doesn't. It only helps if you actually spend money on a good lawyer. A rich guy who hires a crap lawyer will do just as bad as a poor guy who hires a crap lawyer.

As a wealthy person, you get automatically favorable treatment because of your wealth. People see you as a more valuable person or as more intelligent. Posts around this board alone help underscore that.

Society in general takes a more positive view of you because of your wealth. Society is more permissive and less critical of negative behavior and social restrictions are far looser.

I feel it's appropriate to ask for more in taxes considering the social bonuses one gets for extreme wealth, what more is there to say?

Think about what you're saying - because rich people are treated better by society, we should tax them more. You know who else gets treated better in society? Big titted hot chicks and tall buff dudes. Should people be taxed more based on height and appearance?
 
No, it absolutely doesn't. It only helps if you actually spend money on a good lawyer. A rich guy who hires a crap lawyer will do just as bad as a poor guy who hires a crap lawyer.



Think about what you're saying - because rich people are treated better by society, we should tax them more. You know who else gets treated better in society? Big titted hot chicks and tall buff dudes. Should people be taxed more based on height and appearance?

I asked one of the socialists earlier if hot babes should pay more taxes to make ugly spinsters feel better

The socialist left cannot understand that there are De Jure duties imposed on net tax payers that do not result in ANY de Jure benefits

yet those who pay no taxes get all the de jure benefits that someone who pays a million a year in taxes gets
 
Again, you're more than welcome to shower me with nice things to see if I change my viewpoint.

what a bizarrely narcissistic expression of self centrality...

or something

why should anyone care about your viewpoint, of what possible worth could it possibly be to, y'know, someone else?

what'll you give me to change my viewpoint?

this is silly

note: a lotta you guys are studs, i see the arguments of one side growing immensely, overpoweringly strong

while the apologists, on the other hand, are coming off to me, bigtime, as increasingly squeaky and weird

oh well

to each his own

carry on
 
Last edited:
Well, if you needed confirmation that for many, socialism is about gettin' even wid da man, Hoplite is providing it in spades.
 
what a bizarrely narcissistic expression of self centrality...

or something

why should anyone care about your viewpoint, of what possible worth could it possibly be to, y'know, someone else?

what'll you give me to change my viewpoint?

this is silly

note: a lotta you guys are studs, i see the arguments of one side growing immensely, overpoweringly strong

while the apologists, on the other hand, are coming off to me, bigtime, as increasingly squeaky and weird

oh well

to each his own

carry on

Your a real hoot prof...it took you two minutes to edit this post so that even you could understand what you posted. :lamo
 
Liberals are death to business from what I have seen in this Forum. All businesses are EVIL and are cheating the employees and packing millions and millions of dollars of Gold in their basement vaults.

Hey all you Libs Let's see if you understand the barest minimum about business?

Answer the following Five Questions Please

Lets say you own a business making High Quality Wooden Yard Furniture and you sell to Home Depot, Lowes, Menards, Garden Centers, and other vendors. You have a recognized name brand and have 150 employees.
You sell over ten different price ranges and styles and have a complete line of everything that anyone might need for yard furniture.

Questions to answer!
1. Which employee is your most valuable?
2. Is the total of all the wages paid wages equal to the amount you need to earn as a company?
3. How much money do you think you should earn as the company owner of the below successful small business?
4. If the economy tightens or goes in a recession like we have, are you going to hire more employees, fire everybody that is not essential or go bankrupt?
4. For all the geniuses - How many employees do most Small Businesses have?


Those 150 employees are broken down as
3 secretary's
2 shipping clerk - shipping orders
5 salesman salary plus bonus
1 Office Manager
1 Warehouse manager
1 personal secretary
1 lumber procurement employee
90 various wood working machine workers
15 dyers, stainers finishers
15 Assemblers and packaging
10 Warehouse
4 maintenance mechanics
2 janitor

Let’s figure the Wages Paid
To simplify everything we will use an arbitrary average wage of $ 25 dollars per hour for all 150 employees when figuring their wage.
40 x 25 = $ 1,000 per employee / per week

TIMES 52 weeks = 52,000 paid to each employee yearly.

Times 150 employees = 7,800,000 a year.

Question - is $ 7,800,000 the minimum amount the companies needs to sell in order to break even?
Oh and the company has a health care plan for employees it provides free.

No it’s not
1.) The Employer is paying a Social Security contribution of 5.4 % = .......$421,200
In addition the Company is paying
2.) For the Health Care Plan - $2.00 per hour - (probably more) -
$ 2. X 40 = $ 80 X 52 weeks = $ 4,160 X 150 = .......................................$ 624.000
3. Paying for Workman's Compensation .50 per hour
40 x .50 = $20 per week x 52 weeks = $1,040 x 150 = ..............................$ 156,000

4. A sensible (Successful) Company must or should try to have at lease 6 months receipts in the bank to cover for slow periods, when the economy turns down so it doesn’t have to fire everybody.
That’s $ 7,800,000 x 6 = $ 46,800,000 dollars


THERE ARE VERY, VERY FEW COMPANIES THAT HAVE SIX MONTHS EARNINGS IN THE BANK.

So Business can quickly go bankrupt when times get tough and they are not selling the same amount of products.

5
additionally the company pays
A. Property taxes
B Business Loan payments
C. Electricity
D. Water
E. Workplace Liability Insurance
F. Product Liability Insurance
G. Building Maintenance expenses
H. New Technology Purchases machinery, robotics equipment, installation expenses, training expenses. Equipment and machines can be $50,000 to $1,000,000 dollars
I.) New hand tools, maintenance parts
J. Heating
K. Air Conditioning
L. Errors and Omissions Insurance
M. Attorney Expenses for Contracts
N. Attorney Expenses for Law suits
O. Salesman Travel Expenses
P. Bonuses
Q Unemployment Insurance
R. Lease / Rent or Mortgage payments
S. And many that I'm not listing

Answer >>>>>>>>>

1. The most valued employee?
It's the Owner. Without hIm there would be nothing. Without him the business would have never been built from virtually nothing.
Next to that it's probably the best experienced and highest producing Contract obtaining Salesman.
The Fortunes of the Company ride on the Salesmen being able to keep contracts and generate new orders. That’s why they often or usually are paid bonuses.
BONUSES IS ANOTHER WORD FOR MAJOR CONTRIBUTION TO PROFITS

2. Answer to - Is $ 7,800,000 the bare minimum the company needs to earn per year to stay afloat?

Obviously not You can easily add another 40 % needed to stay afloat - which is $3,120,000 dollars.
Total needed to stay afloat = $ 10,920,000 Per Year
THAT’S FOR A BORDER LINE 150 Employee SMALL Business using the $25.00 average wage

3. How much money do you think you should earn as the owner of this company?
I would like to hear the responses from the Liberals?

4. With no reasonable good business outlook like we currently have, particularly with two dozen new taxes staring you in the face, your certainly not going to hire. In fact you are probably going to soon lay off employees as continuing to pay them can push you rapidly on the way to insolvency. You will cut the number of your employees to the bone and then may have to lay many of them off as well. If you don't have six months of profits in the bank as a cushion that will be very, very soon. None of your fixed bills will decrease and you have a really big nut to hit every month whether your making money or not as a company.
The major reason for business bankruptcies are few of them have six month receipts in the bank as cushions to weather financial downturns

5. For all the Liberal Geniuses - How many employees does the average small business have?

The leftist Media / Press and Liberals are always criticizing Small and Large Business because they never tell the truth and don’t have a pimple of an idea what they are talking about.
I would like to hear the response from the Liberals on this?
I’m know that your all way, way off. I believe the answer will shock you.

Simply go to this website and the information will educate you.
Statistics about Business Size from the Census Bureau

Hint = 75% of all US Small Business has NO payroll.
 
Last edited:
Liberals are death to business from what I have seen in this Forum. All businesses are EVIL and are cheating the employees and packing millions and millions of dollars of Gold in their basement vaults.

Hey all you Libs Let's see if you understand the barest minimum about business?

Answer the following Five Questions Please

Lets say you own a business making High Quality Wooden Yard Furniture and you sell to Home Depot, Lowes, Menards, Garden Centers, and other vendors. You have a recognized name brand and have 150 employees.
You sell over ten different price ranges and styles and have a complete line of everything that anyone might need for yard furniture.

Questions to answer!
1. Which employee is your most valuable?
2. Is the total of all the wages paid wages equal to the amount you need to earn as a company?
3. How much money do you think you should earn as the company owner of the below successful small business?
4. If the economy tightens or goes in a recession like we have, are you going to hire more employees, fire everybody that is not essential or go bankrupt?
4. For all the geniuses - How many employees do most Small Businesses have?


Those 150 employees are broken down as
3 secretary's
2 shipping clerk - shipping orders
5 salesman salary plus bonus
1 Office Manager
1 Warehouse manager
1 personal secretary
1 lumber procurement employee
90 various wood working machine workers
15 dyers, stainers finishers
15 Assemblers and packaging
10 Warehouse
4 maintenance mechanics
2 janitor

Let’s figure the Wages Paid
To simplify everything we will use an arbitrary average wage of $ 25 dollars per hour for all 150 employees when figuring their wage.
40 x 25 = $ 1,000 per employee / per week

TIMES 52 weeks = 52,000 paid to each employee yearly.

Times 150 employees = 7,800,000 a year.

Question - is $ 7,800,000 the minimum amount the companies needs to sell in order to break even?
Oh and the company has a health care plan for employees it provides free.

No it’s not
1.) The Employer is paying a Social Security contribution of 5.4 % = .......$421,200
In addition the Company is paying
2.) For the Health Care Plan - $2.00 per hour - (probably more) -
$ 2. X 40 = $ 80 X 52 weeks = $ 4,160 X 150 = .......................................$ 624.000
3. Paying for Workman's Compensation .50 per hour
40 x .50 = $20 per week x 52 weeks = $1,040 x 150 = ..............................$ 156,000

4. A sensible (Successful) Company must or should try to have at lease 6 months receipts in the bank to cover for slow periods, when the economy turns down so it doesn’t have to fire everybody.
That’s $ 7,800,000 x 6 = $ 46,800,000 dollars


THERE ARE VERY, VERY FEW COMPANIES THAT HAVE SIX MONTHS EARNINGS IN THE BANK.

So Business can quickly go bankrupt when times get tough and they are not selling the same amount of products.

5
additionally the company pays
A. Property taxes
B Business Loan payments
C. Electricity
D. Water
E. Workplace Liability Insurance
F. Product Liability Insurance
G. Building Maintenance expenses
H. New Technology Purchases machinery, robotics equipment, installation expenses, training expenses. Equipment and machines can be $50,000 to $1,000,000 dollars
I.) New hand tools, maintenance parts
J. Heating
K. Air Conditioning
L. Errors and Omissions Insurance
M. Attorney Expenses for Contracts
N. Attorney Expenses for Law suits
O. Salesman Travel Expenses
P. Bonuses
Q Unemployment Insurance
R. Lease / Rent or Mortgage payments
S. And many that I'm not listing

Answer >>>>>>>>>

1. The most valued employee?
It's the Owner. Without hIm there would be nothing. Without him the business would have never been built from virtually nothing.
Next to that it's probably the best experienced and highest producing Contract obtaining Salesman.
The Fortunes of the Company ride on the Salesmen being able to keep contracts and generate new orders. That’s why they often or usually are paid bonuses.
BONUSES IS ANOTHER WORD FOR MAJOR CONTRIBUTION TO PROFITS

2. Answer to - Is $ 7,800,000 the bare minimum the company needs to earn per year to stay afloat?

Obviously not You can easily add another 40 % needed to stay afloat - which is $3,120,000 dollars.
Total needed to stay afloat = $ 10,920,000 Per Year
THAT’S FOR A BORDER LINE 150 Employee SMALL Business using the $25.00 average wage

3. How much money do you think you should earn as the owner of this company?
I would like to hear the responses from the Liberals?

4. With no reasonable good business outlook like we currently have, particularly with two dozen new taxes staring you in the face, your certainly not going to hire. In fact you are probably going to soon lay off employees as continuing to pay them can push you rapidly on the way to insolvency. You will cut the number of your employees to the bone and then may have to lay many of them off as well. If you don't have six months of profits in the bank as a cushion that will be very, very soon. None of your fixed bills will decrease and you have a really big nut to hit every month whether your making money or not as a company.
The major reason for business bankruptcies are few of them have six month receipts in the bank as cushions to weather financial downturns

5. For all the Liberal Geniuses - How many employees does the average small business have?

The leftist Media / Press and Liberals are always criticizing Small and Large Business because they never tell the truth and don’t have a pimple of an idea what they are talking about.
I would like to hear the response from the Liberals on this?
I’m know that your all way, way off. I believe the answer will shock you.

Simply go to this website and the information will educate you.
Statistics about Business Size from the Census Bureau

Hint = 75% of all US Small Business has NO payroll.

Hey genus, from your own link, small business represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms. Employ half of all private sector employees, Pay 44 percent of total private payroll, generated 64 percent of new jobs over the past 15 years, create more than half of the no farm gdp, plus they produce 13 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms.

My question to you is,why did the Republicans in the Senate block a bill to increase small business lending? Now do you want to debate this subject or are you here just to post s***while doing a drive by?
 
Last edited:
Thank you MSNBC you are:

master_of_the_obvious.jpg
 
Hey genus, from your own link, small business represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms. Employ half of all private sector employees, Pay 44 percent of total private payroll, generated 64 percent of new jobs over the past 15 years, create more than half of the no farm gdp, plus they produce 13 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms.

My question to you is,why did the Republicans in the Senate block a bill to increase small business lending? Now do you want to debate this subject or are you here just to post s***while doing a drive by?

Donc,

Probably because the GOP would prefer a TAX CUT for small business, where they ya know, keep more of their own money rather then giving them loans....

Silly to consider that logic, but hey, I guess if you think Business needs Gov't it does.
 
Back
Top Bottom