If obama is so awful for entrepreneurs

how come company profits along with executive bonuses, including the ventures of people whom loudly complain like the owner of Papa John were at record highs in 2012?

reply to post by Merinda


Hey, don't bring logic to a political fight!

Seriously, it doesn't matter what they make now. They want to make MORE!

The State is a means of protecting the capitalist order, so I'm not at all surprised that Obama has made it easier for businesses to operate. It's not as if Obama didn't sign into law various tax breaks for the middle class to encourage consumption, and various tax breaks for small business owners.

I don't think, though, that most right-libertarians are in the business of defending big business (although I could be wrong on that, considering some of the claims made by guys like Walter Block in the past.) The success of large corporations would, to them, speak more about 'crony capitalism' than what they conceive of as 'pure' capitalism, where the State plays little to no role in the economy, except to enforce contracts and property rights.

reply to post by Merinda




Im actually diving into the business world and starting a company this spring.
Ill be honest im nervous as hell. It actually made me think alot more about the canidates this year. I wanted to make sure I am in the best position possible to have a company that will prosper.

In the end morals and beliefs were the dominating factor not who is more business friendly. Hopefully my company is successful and I didnt shoot my self in the foot haha .

If I fail no foul, just gotta go back to working for the man. But I believe recovery is around the corner and that things will start looking up. I also believe that Obama is not bad for business I think greed and currency manipulation are bad as well as cronie capitalist who have self serving agendas. I know this is outside the opinion and general talk of doom and economic disaster here but its how I feel.

Wish me luck and remember buy made in the usa unless its vodka.

Like communism, unregulated capitalism is a nice idea that just does not work. With an oversupply of workers, workers keep offering lower and lower prices for their work, think illegal Mexicans. At first company profits would soar, but then they would plummet, as people do not earn enough to consume.

The country is bailing out companies in as such that it is re infusing the money into the system, that companies and entrepreneurs keep as profits. If one out of 10 working poor gets that iphone because he can due to footstamps its still a nice cut.

Both extremes do not work and idolizing Socialism or capitalism, is like idolizing a hammer and insisting on using a hammer, when you really need a screwdriver.

Originally posted by ManFromEurope
reply to post by Merinda

 

Hey, don't bring logic to a political fight!

Seriously, it doesn't matter what they make now. They want to make MORE!

Right? They're a bunch of crooks, politicians. If you become apart of it, you're doing a disservice to yourself and you're like minded countrymen. And by "apart of it" I mean putting a political sticker on your bumper. You put yourself in a group of people if you even pay attention to the mind f*ck media. Do yourself a favor...don't vote, protect your family and friends, and spread the word of the tyranny of the American Government.

Originally posted by Merinda
Like communism, unregulated capitalism is a nice idea that just does not work. With an oversupply of workers, workers keep offering lower and lower prices for their work, think illegal Mexicans. At first company profits would soar, but then they would plummet, as people do not earn enough to consume.

The country is bailing out companies in as such that it is re infusing the money into the system, that companies and entrepreneurs keep as profits. If one out of 10 working poor gets that iphone because he can due to footstamps its still a nice cut.

Both extremes do not work and idolizing Socialism or capitalism, is like idolizing a hammer and insisting on using a hammer, when you really need a screwdriver.

UNREGULATED CAPITALISM creates a division between the rich and the poor. The rich are free treat the common public like their little b*tches. Ain't that just swell?

Originally posted by Merinda
how come company profits along with executive bonuses, including the ventures of people whom loudly complain like the owner of Papa John were at record highs in 2012?

Because they're playing the favorites game. The hypocritical game.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then maybe we'll actually have a chance.."

reply to post by onceinalifetime


Completely unregulated capitalism wouldn't last very long, since claims to private property require a monopoly on force (i.e., a State) to have any legitimacy. I honestly wouldn't worry about anarcho-capitalists or agorists or whatever they call themselves today. They lack any kind of revolutionary praxis or organization, and thus consign themselves to the halls of academia.

Originally posted by onceinalifetime

Originally posted by Merinda
Like communism, unregulated capitalism is a nice idea that just does not work. With an oversupply of workers, workers keep offering lower and lower prices for their work, think illegal Mexicans. At first company profits would soar, but then they would plummet, as people do not earn enough to consume.

The country is bailing out companies in as such that it is re infusing the money into the system, that companies and entrepreneurs keep as profits. If one out of 10 working poor gets that iphone because he can due to footstamps its still a nice cut.

Both extremes do not work and idolizing Socialism or capitalism, is like idolizing a hammer and insisting on using a hammer, when you really need a screwdriver.

UNREGULATED CAPITALISM creates a division between the rich and the poor. The rich are free treat the common public like their little b*tches. Ain't that just swell?

Unregulated capitalism creates a division between the rich and the poor, then, without intervention, the economy collapses. Yes, it would work itself out and the economy will catch up again, but the process would wipe out almost everything that has been built in the cycle, not to mention famine.

reply to post by Merinda


Because it is all a political/status level farce. The small cluster of extremely wealthy, publicly traded corporation's CEOs and the like haven't been negatively impacted by Obama in the least, nor will they be. Ask yourself this: isn't it fascinating that the issue of the top tier tax rates and "pay their fair share" was never seriously breached during Obama's first 2 years in office, when he had a super majority in the House and Senate and could have easily raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans with virtually no lawmaker resistance? It hearkens one to the early years of George W Bush's presidency, when he had a GOP majority and yet not one serious effort was made to do anything about abortion in the US.

Lesson learned: the powers that be want the American people to believe that one party is fighting against the wealthy while the other party is all about protecting the American Dream and believes firmly in trickle down economics. In perpetuating this (and feel free to take this a prediction of what will transpire as we approach this fiscal cliff), it ensures the government (both parties) the ability to further fleece money from the middle class, America's life blood, while barely impacting the wealthy and simultaneously supporting the poor along with deeply entrenching their dependency upon the government's redistribution of the middle class' earned money.

Obama is AWFUL. Awful for America, awful for true entrepreneurs (small business owners), and awful for future generations who will ultimately get shafted with the bill for his malfeasance. But by God the guy has a hell of a racket, managing to massage the behind closed doors support of the upper crust alongside the full support of his personal army of financial dependents his handouts, direct and indirect in the form of lost jobs and sudden reliance on welfare, have created.

Ayn Rand was wrong. Atlas didn't shrug, Atlas got a cramp, shifted the globe slightly, and somehow managed to send the middle class spiraling towards the abyss.

My favorite example of this is Sheldon Adelson
the casino billionaire who spent over 100 million to defeat the president.

When Obama came in to office he was broke and in dire straits.
Within 3 years he's one of the wealthiest "business" owners around.

Originally posted by CitizenJack
reply to post by Merinda

 

Im actually diving into the business world and starting a company this spring.
Ill be honest im nervous as hell. It actually made me think alot more about the canidates this year. I wanted to make sure I am in the best position possible to have a company that will prosper.

In the end morals and beliefs were the dominating factor not who is more business friendly. Hopefully my company is successful and I didnt shoot my self in the foot haha

.

If I fail no foul, just gotta go back to working for the man. But I believe recovery is around the corner and that things will start looking up. I also believe that Obama is not bad for business I think greed and currency manipulation are bad as well as cronie capitalist who have self serving agendas. I know this is outside the opinion and general talk of doom and economic disaster here but its how I feel.

Wish me luck and remember buy made in the usa unless its vodka.

edit on 23-11-2012 by CitizenJack because: forgot obama

It isnt about morals and believes. In an economy of hire and fire, where people have to pay for their own everything and have little to no disposable income at all, or are even underwater, no business can prosper, let alone a start up, end of.

In my opinion...it's all malarky...BS...fulla-bulla. Obama is no more a threat to business than rainwater is to bottled water distributors.

I work for myself and over the last few months, things have gotten much better. I do not need the pundits and the MSM prophets of doom telling me how things are going...I have my own eyes, ears and experiences to base my perspective on.

It is ALL about controlling the mood and actions of the constituencies...that's it...period. They can pour out this propaganda fully knowing what certain percentages of people will do with it and how they will respond. Some will panic and jump around like their head is on fire and others will dig in and work harder while a few can see past the barbed curtain and see the little man pulling the strings.

Most people do not have their own true opinions. Their information sources are only sharing what they want you to know so therefore any opinion you develop is more than likely built on half truths, partial facts and false information. This is no one's fault really...well sort of. News and media is owned by something like 5 mega corporations...your kinda screwed on getting the facts about things.

I think that the the statistical breakdown of the subject matter is much more complicated that your one sentence, oversimplified, populist question.

reply to post by Merinda


Yes, good point. In a totally unregulated free market you have a "no rules, anything goes" type of game. Usually in those type of games the most ruthless and dirtiest players get biggest winnings.

Probably the closest we've (the US) have came to that was during the late 1800's with the rise of the "robber barons".

reply to post by Merinda




Oh really...?? Its impossible for a startup to make it?

As the great Barney Stintson would say " Challenge Accepted"!!!

I hope you enjoy the savory flavor of crow.

Originally posted by Merinda
how come company profits along with executive bonuses, including the ventures of people whom loudly complain like the owner of Papa John were at record highs in 2012?

Non-sequitor in my opinion. While I cannot subscribe to the fear that President Obama alone is "awful" to entrepreneurs, you are equating an established company and its profits to that of prospective entrepreneurs. The owner of Papa John's might complain because the political environment, such as regulations, taxes, and other bureaucratic 'hoops' is different now than it was then. when Papa John's first set off on their venture.

Another thing to note though is looking solely on profits and executive bonuses does not paint a clear picture or the health of a company. Most entrepreneurial start-ups see no profits nor have executive bonuses and operate at a loss. The less governmental hurdles that one has to overcome, ie, utilization of capital to satisfy regulatory or unnecessary paper-work requirements, the more likely they can become profitable quicker.

On the other hand I do understand what you are trying to say, I just think you said it poorly.

How the hell does anyone know what capitalism looks like?

It has not existed in over 100 years, the greatest "progress" have come at the hands of men like Rockefellar,Carnegie,Vanderbuilt,Ford etc.

Those people who had an idea and capitalized off it that provided jobs, that created wealth then came the anti trust laws,then came the federal reserve, then came every other stupidity that we all know today.

It really is amazing that people simple can not grasp that they have been regulating themselves out of existence.

The more regulations there has been a corresponding rise of social engineering as in programs.

Capitalism is pure darwinism you can either adapt or perish.which brings us back to people claim they know what capitalism is they don't.


Companies profits may be up because the consolidate their business, and cut costs, which means laying off people from all the most wonderful regulation.

Originally posted by CitizenJack
reply to post by Merinda

 

Oh really...?? Its impossible for a startup to make it?

As the great Barney Stintson would say " Challenge Accepted"!!!

I hope you enjoy the savory flavor of crow.

Its impossible for a startup to make it when people do not have money to spend, yes.