It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by badgerprints
Word play is a funny thing.
I dont think he meant to do that, but you got him with one of his own talking points.
Democrats need to make up their mind on the issues.
Rich people are only good when Obama makes them that way.
All the other ones were rich because of something that does not matter.
I will give you the reason for this though....and its not because Obama let them get rich by his own policies.
They got rich because THEY knew how to spend money, and knew how to run a profitable buisness.
"If you build it, they will come"
Obamas catch phrase should be "If you build it- we helped out too"
Im sick of people trying to convince me on how good Obama has done when his entire record speaks contradictory to that.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
I simply don't have the patience to repeat myself again and pick your post apart.
The economy is getting better, not worse...
The speed at which the economy is reemerging is due to extent of the damage, not to the lack
of desire or ability to repair the damage.
If a man was shot 25 times and he could not walk after a 10 hour surgery would you blame the doctor?
I looked up five companies that came to mind and ALL five that I thought of have increased in value.
If Obama was making America worse, these companies and their financial position would be worse.
It's not magic
Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by campanionator
Stock Market is based on expectations. If the thing is 'over performing' under Obama, what does that tell you about businesses's view of Obama.
I looked up five companies that came to mind and ALL five that I thought of have increased in value.
If Obama was making America worse, these companies and their financial position would be worse.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by campanionator
I looked up five companies that came to mind and ALL five that I thought of have increased in value.
If Obama was making America worse, these companies and their financial position would be worse.
Your error is thinking the stock market is the economy and that all jobs are equal. Sure, those five companies are doing better; I'll grant you that. I'll even grant you that jobs are being created under Obama. But those five companies stock price is a tiny fraction of the economy, and the jobs they create are not career-level well-paying jobs that can support a family. The economy is a sum total of all the citizens' economic status. Minimum wage jobs are not the only kind of jobs that are needed - they are not even the primary kind that are needed.
Again, I'm glad to hear you are doing well, and I'm happy these five companies are doing well. Someone wins every time the economy shifts; some even became wealthy during the Great Depression. The problem is not that no one is profiting, but that those profiting right now are a tiny percentage of the population. I would also say I do not attribute their success to Obama; I attribute their success to their own decisions. You said earlier that I shouldn't expect Obama to "save me", and you are correct. I am responsible for my own decisions. But neither then can you attribute individual success stories to Obama. One cannot receive credit without also accepting blame.
To clarify my position: Obama's policies of trying to micromanage the economy, from the bailouts of companies deemed "to big to fail" (which should IMO be "to big to exist"), to government support of "green" technology (most of which has failed miserably) and government blocking of oil-related industries (Keystone Pipeline), to attempts to impose a carbon credit, to a takeover of the medical industry and a forced profit via third-party taxation to reward insurance companies for political backing, have taken us farther and farther away from the principles that caused a rag-tag group of upstart colonists to rise into the greatest and most prosperous nation on earth.
I want a return to individual responsibility, individual achievement, individual self-purpose, and overall success. It worked for 200 years. What we have under this administration simply is not working for the vast majority of Americans.
Time for "hope for change" - "hope and change" has failed.
TheRedneck
Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by campanionator
I wonder.
How much revenue is from non U.S. operations ?
How many non U.S. employees do they have ?
Originally posted by campanionator
Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by campanionator
I wonder.
How much revenue is from non U.S. operations ?
How many non U.S. employees do they have ?
I don't think you wonder, you are trying to sow in doubt, like a greasy 70 year old lady who thrives on
inserting innuendo into ever discussion.
The upside of globalization.
A lot of U.S. firms ship American jobs overseas, but they also boost sales by selling their goods and services in many foreign markets. That’s one big reason that profits at U.S. companies are strong, even though the U.S. economy remains weak. Here’s how the top firms in 15 industries rely on foreign sales to stay healthy:
[slide show]
How 15 U.S. Firms Depend on Foreign Sales
[full article]
Why U.S. Companies Aren't So American Anymore
On Wednesday the Obama administration proposed a long-awaited cut in the top rate of U.S. corporate tax from 35 per cent to 28 per cent. But the White House also disclosed something more contentious. The administration is suggesting U.S. companies’ foreign earnings should be subject to a “minimum tax”.
The current system for taxing earnings of foreign subsidiaries controlled by U.S. companies is controversial and counterproductive. Such foreign earnings are theoretically taxed at a 35 per cent rate if brought back to the U.S., but not taxed at all by the U.S. as long as these earnings are kept abroad.
Faced with this choice, U.S. companies are unsurprisingly holding abroad more than $1.5tn in foreign profits. The current tax system thus discourages U.S. companies from using their foreign profits to build facilities in the U.S. or buy American companies. It also generates almost no tax revenues for the U.S. Treasury.,,,,
How to Tax U.S. Companies’ Foreign Profits
Originally posted by dcmb1409
Obama does not have a personal hand in growth of companies. In spite of Obama these companies are trying to grow and create wealth and jobs. How many times has he stated that wealth should be distributed among the masses?
Originally posted by Xtrozero
reply to post by campanionator
You are suggesting there is a correlation here, and a correlation is typically something very hard to do. In fact it is the hardest part to figure, but you, all by yourself have done it and we have "Proof". Lol geez
The other part of this is we have no proof that the market would not be at 16,000 now if Obama was not President, so any improvement is your proof. I guess we can then say that after 4 years employment has finally went below 8%, even though it was due to part time jobs, it means Obama is good for the recovery...
What was the correlation of Clinton walking into a huge Dot Com explosion that followed by a huge crash that handed Bush a recession?
I think you need to work on this more...
Why don't you find 5 companies that are doing worse since 01/23/2009, then you can show that my
claim is spurious.
For those who only hear about these failing companies one by one, the following is a list of all the clean energy companies supported by President Obama’s stimulus that are now failing or have filed for bankruptcy. The liberal media hopes you’ve forgotten about all of them except Solyndra, but we haven’t.
Evergreen Solar
SpectraWatt
Solyndra (received $535 million)
Beacon Power (received $43 million)
AES’ subsidiary Eastern Energy
Nevada Geothermal (received $98.5 million)
SunPower (received $1.5 billion)
First Solar (received $1.46 billion)
Babcock & Brown (an Australian company which received $178 million)
Ener1 (subsidiary EnerDel received $118.5 million)
Amonix (received 5.9 million)
The National Renewable Energy Lab
Fisker Automotive
Abound Solar (received $400 million)
Chevy Volt (taxpayers basically own GM)
Solar Trust of America
A123 Systems (received $279 million)
Willard & Kelsey Solar Group (received $6 million)
Johnson Controls (received $299 million)
Schneider Electric (received $86 million)
GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama Donors – 19 Companies Went Bust (Video)
80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX analyst says 70% but actually it is closer to 80%. And 19 companies have so far went bust. The government is spending $14 million on some of the green jobs. Solar power is 35 cents per kilowatt compared to coal, gas and oil that costs 5 cents per kilowatt.
I'm sorry but I just can't relate to you perspective, it sounds ridiculous to me and completely illogical
to blame the things you have on Obama.
Pick ten companies that were around in 2009, you will find that virtually ALL of them are doing MUCH better.
Bush and the entire body politic initiated the Bank bailouts.
Green technology is the future...
The government has the LARGEST amount of land open to oil exploration, in the nations history.
Source: cnsnews.com...
While President Obama has been touting in recent days that his administration is promoting oil drilling in the United States, oil production on federally owned lands has in fact declined by 17,000 barrels per day since he took office in 2009.
Source: cleantechnica.com...
For the first time since the 1920s, fees for oil drilling on public land are going up, in an Obama administration Interior Department rule that does not require congressional approval.
Clean Technica (s.tt...)
There have been an attempt to instate carbon credits for over a decade
The medical industry has been a corrupt system rescinding tens thousands of sick people's
policies to effectively let them die. Prices have been going up over 150% every decade for
two decades now
Originally posted by xuenchen
reply to post by campanionator
Why don't you find 5 companies that are doing worse since 01/23/2009, then you can show that my
claim is spurious.
Here are 19 at least.....
For those who only hear about these failing companies one by one, the following is a list of all the clean energy companies supported by President Obama’s stimulus that are now failing or have filed for bankruptcy. The liberal media hopes you’ve forgotten about all of them except Solyndra, but we haven’t.
Evergreen Solar
SpectraWatt
Solyndra (received $535 million)
Beacon Power (received $43 million)
AES’ subsidiary Eastern Energy
Nevada Geothermal (received $98.5 million)
SunPower (received $1.5 billion)
First Solar (received $1.46 billion)
Babcock & Brown (an Australian company which received $178 million)
Ener1 (subsidiary EnerDel received $118.5 million)
Amonix (received 5.9 million)
The National Renewable Energy Lab
Fisker Automotive
Abound Solar (received $400 million)
Chevy Volt (taxpayers basically own GM)
Solar Trust of America
A123 Systems (received $279 million)
Willard & Kelsey Solar Group (received $6 million)
Johnson Controls (received $299 million)
Schneider Electric (received $86 million)
GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Loans Went to Obama Donors – 19 Companies Went Bust (Video)
YouTube Caption:
80% of Green Energy loans went to Obama donors. The FOX analyst says 70% but actually it is closer to 80%. And 19 companies have so far went bust. The government is spending $14 million on some of the green jobs. Solar power is 35 cents per kilowatt compared to coal, gas and oil that costs 5 cents per kilowatt.
"GREEN SCAM: 80% of Green Energy Dollars Went to Obama Donors"
Originally posted by campanionator
It is common sense.