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 Garkiniss
The simplest concepts really do escape you, don't they? Believing in freedom doesn't mean you can't support consequences. The consequence in this case is regulation as a result of unethical and damaging business practices.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
And you're promoting slavery.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
Guess who maintains the moral high ground?
Originally posted by Garkiniss
So you admit it's a failed business model. Glad we can agree on something.
Originally posted by macman
Oh good hell.
The consequences of a bad business, is that the business fails.
With the last, and current Progressives in charge, business was not allowed to fail ,because it was deemed as too big and important.
Yep, because that is exactly what I said.
What is a failed business model? Be specific.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
I'm assuming you're talking about the bailouts, and I agree. They shouldn't of been bailed out. Doesn't really apply to the Wal-Mart scenario though, does it?
Originally posted by Garkiniss
You're defending a business that promotes indentured servitude.
I really don't see a difference.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
One that can't operate on its own without negatively affecting everything it touches.
I've, and several others, have already covered this. Do pay attention.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
As I've mentioned, you and I differ on opinions concerning what constitutes success.
I hold success to a higher standard. I suppose that's a Progressive ideal as well?
Originally posted by Garkiniss
And I know what an indentured servant is.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
Research the way Wal-Mart employees are treated abroad. How they're locked into barracks
and actually owe the company money.
Originally posted by Garkiniss
Walmart supports these business practices, so it reflects on their own morals. I.E. they're guilty.
Originally posted by doobydoll
You're wasting your time and energy my friend - He doesn't get it. He'll never get it because he doesn't want to.
Originally posted by doobydoll
I strongly suspect he is a boss of one of those taxpayer-robbing companies whose employees are underpaid and claiming benefits.
Originally posted by doobydoll
And according to his previous posts in answer to mine, he is now looking for professional advice with regard to dodging his own taxes, but has the neck to accuse poor folk of robbing the taxpayer.
Double-standards much?
Dodging taxes you say???
Originally posted by doobydoll
And according to his previous posts in answer to mine, he is now looking for professional advice with regard to dodging his own taxes, but has the neck to accuse poor folk of robbing the taxpayer.
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by doobydoll
Dodging implies that I am either doing something illegal or neglecting my responsibilities.
Please explain why I am financially responsible for low income people?
This is going to be a treat if you really want to explain it to me.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Are you or are you not seeking advice on how to avoid paying in future, some of your taxes which you pay now?
Originally posted by doobydoll
I'm not implying it's illegal because I know it isn't. The bottom line is you're looking for ways to get out of paying some taxes.
Originally posted by doobydoll
You said yourself you will soon be lobbying for these tax-dodges - or 'loopholes' as they like to call it so it doesn't sound criminal.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Yes it's legal. Legal fraud.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Oh for goodness sake what's wrong with you? I'm not gonna go through it all again. Go back and read my replies, your answer is there.
Myself and others have spent days explaining it to you over and over and over again but you're just too dense to get it.
Originally posted by doobydoll
I understand these 'loopholes' aren't illegal, but the point I'm trying to make is macman 'takes' tax money when he uses 'loopholes', he's committing no crime and legally entitled to do so.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Underpaid workers are 'taking' tax money when they get benefits, they're also committing no crime and legally entitled to do so.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Both instances leave the taxpayer pot short of a few dollar.
Originally posted by doobydoll
If he's saying they're wrong to claim benefits, then by his own logic he is also wrong to use loopholes.
Originally posted by doobydoll
Double standards, ok for him, not ok for others.
Originally posted by doobydoll
.....
If he's saying they're wrong to claim benefits, then he must also also wrong to use loopholes.
Originally posted by macman
With the last, and current Progressives in charge, business was not allowed to fail ,because it was deemed as too big and important.
Originally posted by macman
This is a very basic idea.
A company is there to make a profit for the owner(s).
A successful business is one that makes a profit and stay operational.
What you add really is opinion.
Obviously not, as you tried to apply it to a company operating within the US.
I don't care about other countries or their problems. It is none of my business.
Oh, so you are the Judge and Jury. I get it. Rights for everyone, except when you deem not for everyone.
Originally posted by doobydoll
reply to post by Garkiniss
You're wasting your time and energy my friend - He doesn't get it. He'll never get it because he doesn't want to.
I strongly suspect he is a boss of one of those taxpayer-robbing companies whose employees are underpaid and claiming benefits.
And according to his previous posts in answer to mine, he is now looking for professional advice with regard to dodging his own taxes, but has the neck to accuse poor folk of robbing the taxpayer.
Hypocrite or what?edit on 6-8-2013 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Garkiniss
...
And yet Wal-Mart's business model is failing now, and their sustainability is being brought into question.
Failed business model.