Things seem to be going quite well for Joe Biden

[6th Street 6692]

13 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

your numbers are wayyyyyyy off. But I guess if it’s immaterial I can just send you a bill for reimbursement right? I learned very early on not to determine the value of a dollar for someone else unless I was willing to give them that dollar.

Let me guess, you probably think China is paying billions in tariffs too huh?

[bad_teammate 13561]

Also, the beta energy behind, "Don't raise the taxes on my bosses! They might trickle less down to me!" is so strong my penis temporarily inverted.

Don't worry, though, it's back to a strong 5" semi.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6597]

1 minute ago, 6th Street said:

Let me guess, you probably think China is paying billions in tariffs and Mexico is paying for that wall too huh?

Fixed it for you.

[BradInATX 9208]

your numbers are wayyyyyyy off

How? Show your work. I did

[Thatguy 9398]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Know how I know you’ve never run a company?
 

We pay our staff a little bit more than the going rate. That’s not charity. It increases their productivity which increases our revenue. It increases their job satisfaction which improves their interactions with patients, so we get more word of mouth referrals, again meaning more revenue. And it leads to job loyalty so we have little turnover. It is very expensive to onboard and train new staff. 
 

I can’t imagine going to my staff and saying sorry guys but with these new tax laws we are all going to have to do some belt tightening. That would be disastrous to my bottom line

 

55 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Know how I know you didn’t understand the post or can think critically?

Do you think a 10, 20 or 50 employee company and employer runs the their business the same way one that has 10,000, 20,000, or 100,000 people? Do you think they hire or look at turnover the same way? 

And of course there is no memo that goes out that says guess what, we’re not paying the tax, you are, gotcha!!! It comes in the form of lower forecasted budget for variable compensation, merit raises etc and its spread out amongst the entire employee base which are all decided after partner distributions. 

    I have 100 employees and that's exactly the way I think, and run my business.

    Tenured employees are simply more productive than newly trained ones. Couple that with the fact that each new employee you train costs you thousands in both materials and wages. Therefore we track turnover rate to see how we are doing at retention, and we do exit interviews to nail down why people are seeking opportunities elsewhere. In my opinion, smaller companies should be even more concerned with employee retention due to their employees wearing more hats. HR reps at IBM are divided into sectors. Your HR dept at a small company could be two people. Lose one, and you have a huge problem.

    A large part of employee retention is competitive wages. At the end of the day people wanna get paid, and they know what the market looks like for their position. Pay a little bit more and you will retain a lot more people. If you pass losses down to the employees at your business then good luck long term.

[Thatguy 9398]

16 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

I have a different take on that. I think it objectifies black men even more. 

   That is correct.

[BradInATX 9208]

    I have 100 employees and that's exactly the way I think, and run my business.
    Tenured employees are simply more productive than newly trained ones. Couple that with the fact that each new employee you train costs you thousands in both materials and wages. Therefore we track turnover rate to see how we are doing at retention, and we do exit interviews to nail down why people are seeking opportunities elsewhere. In my opinion, smaller companies should be even more concerned with employee retention due to their employees wearing more hats. HR reps at IBM are divided into sectors. Your HR dept at a small company could be two people. Lose one, and you have a huge problem.
    A large part of employee retention is competitive wages. At the end of the day people wanna get paid, and they know what the market looks like for their position. Pay a little bit more and you will retain a lot more people. If you pass losses down to the employees at your business then good luck long term.

One of my biggest niches is doing cost benefit analyses of pay increases, variable pay, and conversion from PT to FT vs. associated employee retention. Tons of companies don't understand that correlation and that probably 90% of the time giving the employees more bread helps your bottom line. I just spent a year proving this to one of my clients via multiple pilots. The CEO just couldn't believe it even though the math was very easy to follow. He made us do 5 pilots before company wide implementation. This is a smart guy. CEO of a household name company. Lost millions of dollars waiting to implement because "I see the logic I just don't buy it". He also paid me about 3x the hours he should have so hey that's cool. But damn.

Point is that a lot of companies don't understand what you laid out. Stable happy employees = ROI. Lots of penny wise pound foolishness out there. That doesn't make Enchubben's bosses any less dickish nor does it prove anything he's saying, but it's worth pointing out. The only industry that seems to understand this is Tech.

[wildcat09 29595]

27 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

My experience is different. I don't see any practical way to pass on an increase in taxes. You pay the increases because you make more money. If you increase the amount of money you make (by shifting revenue from employees to partner distributions or salary), you pay more, not less, in taxes. Rather, if a partnership is faced with increased taxes, the best way to avoid the tax is to reinvest in the business rather than increase distributions. 

This. It will never stop being funny how little the Economic Brain Geniuses actually understand about taxes or running a business.

[Thatguy 9398]

10 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

One of my biggest niches is doing cost benefit analyses of pay increases, variable pay, and conversion from PT to FT vs. associated employee retention. Tons of companies don't understand that correlation and that probably 90% of the time giving the employees more bread helps your bottom line. I just spent a year proving this to one of my clients via multiple pilots. The CEO just couldn't believe it even though the math was very easy to follow. He made us do 5 pilots before company wide implementation. This is a smart guy. CEO of a household name company. Lost millions of dollars waiting to implement because "I see the logic I just don't buy it".

Point is that a lot of companies don't understand what you laid out. Stable happy employees = ROI. Lots of penny wise pound foolishness out there. That doesn't make Enchubben's bosses any less dickish nor does it prove anything he's saying, but it's worth pointing out.

   When I lived in LA the city of Santa Monica charged me per head for public transportation. It wasn't a lot of money, a few thousand bucks, but rather than pass it on to the employees I ate it. I also brokered a deal for parking, which if you know the area was huge for the employees, who were used to paying daily, or finding other means of transportation to avoid that hit. First year, 130% EBITDA. Hard to believe something so small to the company's bottom line could go so far in productivity.

Edited October 31, 2020 by Thatguy

[Enchubben 5600]

16 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

 

    I have 100 employees and that's exactly the way I think, and run my business.

    Tenured employees are simply more productive than newly trained ones. Couple that with the fact that each new employee you train costs you thousands in both materials and wages. Therefore we track turnover rate to see how we are doing at retention, and we do exit interviews to nail down why people are seeking opportunities elsewhere. In my opinion, smaller companies should be even more concerned with employee retention due to their employees wearing more hats. HR reps at IBM are divided into sectors. Your HR dept at a small company could be two people. Lose one, and you have a huge problem.

    A large part of employee retention is competitive wages. At the end of the day people wanna get paid, and they know what the market looks like for their position. Pay a little bit more and you will retain a lot more people. If you pass losses down to the employees at your business then good luck long term.

I don’t disagree with any of this, I’m just saying that’s not how this works with large companies.

[Dahobbs 18337]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I don’t disagree with any of this, I’m just saying that’s not how this works with large companies.

And I'm just saying you don't have any idea how it works with large companies. 

[Enchubben 5600]

12 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

One of my biggest niches is doing cost benefit analyses of pay increases, variable pay, and conversion from PT to FT vs. associated employee retention. Tons of companies don't understand that correlation and that probably 90% of the time giving the employees more bread helps your bottom line. I just spent a year proving this to one of my clients via multiple pilots. The CEO just couldn't believe it even though the math was very easy to follow. He made us do 5 pilots before company wide implementation. This is a smart guy. CEO of a household name company. Lost millions of dollars waiting to implement because "I see the logic I just don't buy it". He also paid me about 3x the hours he should have so hey that's cool. But damn.

Point is that a lot of companies don't understand what you laid out. Stable happy employees = ROI. Lots of penny wise pound foolishness out there. That doesn't make Enchubben's bosses any less dickish nor does it prove anything he's saying, but it's worth pointing out. The only industry that seems to understand this is Tech.
 

Your service offering is needed in the financial services industry.

[ChickenSandwich 9961]

43 minutes ago, The Ace of Aces said:

I live in a run if the mill nothing special whatsoever ~$250,000 house in Pennsylvania.You are the Louis Gohmert of this thread. 

250k home doesn’t put you in the top 12% effected by the cap  

 

The data tell a different story. Following the passage of the TCJA, average taxpayers in every congressional district and every state get a tax cut and more than 88 percent of individual taxpayers in every district and every state see a tax cut or no change in their 2018 tax liability.2

 

[UpperWestside 6284]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

This. It will never stop being funny how little the Economic Brain Geniuses actually understand about taxes or running a business.

I do not run a business, but I do understand the human side of this fairly well I believe. If you want highly motivated employees who feel like they have a personal stake in the success of the business you make sure they are compensated well. You make sure they know that the work they put in is appreciated through your words towards them as well. The concept is simple to grasp, but so many well off business owners have the Mack Brown mentality of selfishness. F you pay me is a disease.

[UpperWestside 6284]

9 minutes ago, Thatguy said:

   When I lived in LA the city of Santa Monica charged me per head for public transportation. It wasn't a lot of money, a few thousand bucks, but rather than pass it on to the employees I ate it. I also brokered a deal for parking, which if you know the area was huge for the employees, who were used to paying daily, or finding other means of transportation to avoid that hit. First year, 130% EBITDA. Hard to believe something so small to the company's bottom line could go so far in productivity.

You humanized yourself to your employees. Those little things add up in the mind and makes people want to go above and beyond to see the company do well. 

[Anastasis 23723]

Anyone that believes that the tax increases will be limited to those making over 400k is deluding themselves. 

We first and foremost need broad and deep spending reductions in certain expenditure categories.  Couple that with broad tax increases, and maybe we get somewhere.

 

 

[Thatguy 9398]

12 hours ago, Foosters said:

My house is burning down, but there were fires before this and there will be fires after. Think I'll just stand here and watch.

   I always wondered how you have so many rep points. Now I get it...

[Sawbonz 28234]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

And I'm just saying you don't have any idea how it works with large companies. 

Then those companies are already losing multiples of the delta between Trump’s and Biden’s tax plans just in diminished worker productivity. And the smart workers will continue to leave when better opportunities come along 

[Hefeweizen 5445]

13 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I don’t disagree with any of this, I’m just saying that’s not how this works with large companies.

You're wrong, sorry.  It may not work that way with your company, because as someone said, your bosses are dicks, but I guarantee you we are not planning to directly reduce any of our employees' compensation (merit bonuses or other contributions) as a result of this.  What cannot be predicted is what effect the revised tax code will have on overall business activity, or on specific sectors - that is where there may be indirect effects on variable compensation.

But the idea that there will be pay cuts is laughable in the context of a tax increase.  Companies that do that are a) poorly run b) not employee focused and c) not going to succeed in the long run.

 

[Sawbonz 28234]

11 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

250k home doesn’t put you in the top 12% effected by the cap  

 

The data tell a different story. Following the passage of the TCJA, average taxpayers in every congressional district and every state get a tax cut and more than 88 percent of individual taxpayers in every district and every state see a tax cut or no change in their 2018 tax liability.2

 

Well almost nobody criticizing Biden’s plan is making 400k+ so

[Thatguy 9398]

6 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

You humanized yourself to your employees. Those little things add up in the mind and makes people want to go above and beyond to see the company do well. 

   Correct. Then you can be a little bit of an asshole, and people chalk it up to "He just cares"....lulz

[Hefeweizen 5445]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Well almost nobody criticizing Biden’s plan is making 400k+ so

And this is the part that baffles the shit out of me.  I don't understand the Jedi mind trick to get people to vote against their own economic interest.  I always voted Republican because in the good old days low taxes and less regulation was great for me personally.  Somehow poor white people making 30-70k per year think that a tax increase on high earners, or an increase on capital gains, is going to hammer them. 

 

The Biden tax plan will definitely hurt me, but at this point I don't fucking care as long as the orange man is gone.  I can deal with paying more taxes.  I'll try to minimize it, but that's the game.

[Reynolds Woodcock 5098]

1 minute ago, Hefeweizen said:

And this is the part that baffles the shit out of me.  I don't understand the Jedi mind trick to get people to vote against their own economic interest.  I always voted Republican because in the good old days low taxes and less regulation was great for me personally.  Somehow poor white people making 30-70k per year think that a tax increase on high earners, or an increase on capital gains, is going to hammer them. 

 

The Biden tax plan will definitely hurt me, but at this point I don't fucking care as long as the orange man is gone.  I can deal with paying more taxes.  I'll try to minimize it, but that's the game.

Dave Chapelle summed this up perfectly.

 

Trump Supporter: "Man, Donald Trump's gonna go to Washington and he's gonna fight for us."

Chapelle: "And I'm standing there thinking in my mind, you dumb motherfucker" "You are poor! He's fighting for me!"

 

[bad_teammate 13561]

7 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Well almost nobody criticizing Biden’s plan is making 400k+ so

But they WILL be! A few more years of hard work and boy, 'ole Gil is really going to be in the money!

[Bozo_Casanova 26874]

22 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I don’t disagree with any of this, I’m just saying that’s not how this works with large companies.

Speaking as a former strategy and planning manager for a global business unit in a huge corporation, yes it does. 

HR's job is to pay you $1 more than the number that would make you seek employment elsewhere.  That number varies by job category, scarcity, location, and many other factors but isn't strongly influenced by the tax code until the code bends the demand curve for your work. Now maybe your company isn't well managed, or maybe your partners don't understand what their HR team does, or maybe you don't know what you are talking about. But big companies use industry benchmarks to hit the clearing price for the people in their employ. That's how it works. 

[Brisketexan 106952]

Know how I know you’ve never run a company?
 
We pay our staff a little bit more than the going rate. That’s not charity. It increases their productivity which increases our revenue. It increases their job satisfaction which improves their interactions with patients, so we get more word of mouth referrals, again meaning more revenue. And it leads to job loyalty so we have little turnover. It is very expensive to onboard and train new staff. 
 
I can’t imagine going to my staff and saying sorry guys but with these new tax laws we are all going to have to do some belt tightening. That would be disastrous to my bottom line

SEE!!! S O C I A L I S M WILL MAKE US SOFT!!! THINKING Of OTHERS IS WEAK!!! USA!

how people don't want to think what BTE2 expressed amazes me... In a sad, cynical way.

So you believe in trickle down economics also since what ever happens to your employer gets passed down to you?  If we give the rich people in this country lots of extra money (via the tax code) they will in turn give their employees higher wages and create more jobs by hiring more people.   I work for one of the companies that had their taxes lowered and it saved them billions of dollars and I am still waiting for them to come to me (an employee) and pass that down to me with better compensation.  You know this economic theory has been debunked and didn't/doesn't work.  The rich people keep the money and invest for themselves or buy luxury items/real estate/etc... for themselves.  Biden's tax plan will actually personally hurt me economically but I have the intellect to understand that it is all for the greater good of this country.  If I have to pay a little more money so be it.  If that enables the US to provide better services for its people I think that was a good trade off on my part.  If a little bit of my money leads to more people having an ability to live a better life and that makes the country I live in a better place then the extra taxes were worth it to me.  

I don’t disagree with any of this, I’m just saying that’s not how this works with large companies.

And I'm just saying you don't have any idea how it works with large companies. 

All of these. All of them.

The GOP, and particularly the Trump GOP, brings an approach that is all about short-term gain for the folks at the top, at the expense of long-term prosperity for everyone.

I’ve used the metaphor of eating out seed stock before, but goddamn is it accurate. They gorge today and get fat. They don’t share but a few crumbs, and we don’t have the seed stock for a good harvest in the years to come: that seed stock being a healthy, educated population that is not in financial dire straits.

I can fuck over my employees and make an extra $200k for a couple of years....and then have a hard time keeping my business going, and have some challenging revenue cycles. Or, I can pay them well and make a healthy profit for 20 years.

Don’t gorge on your seed stock and get fat today. Eat a satisfying meal every year, and keep doing so.

We are doubling down on an approach that has demonstrably failed over and over. We are the United States of Stupid.

[Lurch 5950]

Know how I know you didn’t understand the post or can think critically?
Do you think a 10, 20 or 50 employee company and employer runs the their business the same way one that has 10,000, 20,000, or 100,000 people? Do you think they hire or look at turnover the same way? 
And of course there is no memo that goes out that says guess what, we’re not paying the tax, you are, gotcha!!! It comes in the form of lower forecasted budget for variable compensation, merit raises etc and its spread out amongst the entire employee base which are all decided after partner distributions. 

If they could get away with paying you less now, why aren’t they?

[ndawg 1242]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

 

 

 

 

All of these. All of them.

The GOP, and particularly the Trump GOP, brings an approach that is all about short-term gain for the folks at the top, at the expense of long-term prosperity for everyone.

I’ve used the metaphor of eating out seed stock before, but goddamn is it accurate. They gorge today and get fat. They don’t share but a few crumbs, and we don’t have the seed stock for a good harvest in the years to come: that seed stock being a healthy, educated population that is not in financial dire straits.

I can fuck over my employees and make an extra $200k for a couple of years....and then have a hard time keeping my business going, and have some challenging revenue cycles. Or, I can pay them well and make a healthy profit for 20 years.

Don’t gorge on your seed stock and get fat today. Eat a satisfying meal every year, and keep doing so.

We are doubling down on an approach that has demonstrably failed over and over. We are the United States of Stupid.

 

 

 

 

 

And short-sightedness / failure to plan for the future is a hallmark trait of sociopathy.

Enchubben lives in a world where he willingly votes in the interests of his bosses, and his bosses also vote in their own interests. The only people in his world who are looking out for Enchubben’s interests are the people he’s arguing with.

I feel really bad for people who think like this. I also hate that I feel bad for them, because they are as responsible as anyone for this mess.

Three days before the fireworks start. I hope for Enchubben’s sake as well as ours that he doesn’t get his way.

[TwiceHorn 32087]

22 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

dude, you are being taken by unverified fake news. 

but let's say it's all true. hunter biden is a shitheel. maybe he is, i dunno. i don't really care. i've seen the president's son on tv coked out of his fucking gourd. they have business interests all over the world. if this shit matters to you, assuming any of the hunter biden bullshit is true, why do you not apply it consistently?

I won't say Hunter Biden is fundamentally a shitheel.

He is, however, an unrecovered addict.  I think I posted a New Yorker bio upthread, it's a sad story.  But an addict is going to act like a shitheel most of the time.

Does having a child or spouse with a substance-abuse problem present issues for a President or other high office holder?  Absolutely it does.  It could greatly compromise him or her.

Should it be a disqualifier?  I don't know.  That seems awfully inhuman.

[Zonahorn 8079]

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

One of my biggest niches is doing cost benefit analyses of pay increases, variable pay, and conversion from PT to FT vs. associated employee retention. Tons of companies don't understand that correlation and that probably 90% of the time giving the employees more bread helps your bottom line. I just spent a year proving this to one of my clients via multiple pilots. The CEO just couldn't believe it even though the math was very easy to follow. He made us do 5 pilots before company wide implementation. This is a smart guy. CEO of a household name company. Lost millions of dollars waiting to implement because "I see the logic I just don't buy it". He also paid me about 3x the hours he should have so hey that's cool. But damn.

Point is that a lot of companies don't understand what you laid out. Stable happy employees = ROI. Lots of penny wise pound foolishness out there. That doesn't make Enchubben's bosses any less dickish nor does it prove anything he's saying, but it's worth pointing out. The only industry that seems to understand this is Tech.
 

Do me a favor, and go have a chat with the FedEx CEO about this. Asking for... uh... a friend.

[TtomTerrific 200]

Quote

• Report post
•  
•  
•  
•  #7578

Posted 9 hours ago

  On 10/30/2020 at 5:44 AM, TtomTerrific said:

Glen Greemwald resigned from his own paper that HE CREATED SPECIFICALLY FOR JOURNALISTIC FREEDOMS....

*blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* 

Is there anything in the Constitution that you respect at all?

*blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* 

You know what the Constitution has to do with Glen Greenwald getting in a fight with his editors and resigning?

Did you ever take a single fucking college-level class that covers the US government and the Constitution?

Or even a high school-level class?

 

 

 

several - some in 2016 at the Master's level and I am sure that election interfernce is not Constitutional.  Neither is suppression of speech.

see, those are actually in there, you abolute moron.

Here's what NOT in there

a "right" to abortion"

a "right" to be married 

Edited October 31, 2020 by TtomTerrific

[totallynotabuttpirate 5486]

1 hour ago, Hefeweizen said:

The Biden tax plan will definitely hurt me, but at this point I don't fucking care as long as the orange man is gone.  I can deal with paying more taxes.  I'll try to minimize it, but that's the game.

Are you a nurse? 

[hobbes2702 13492]

20 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

 

 

 

several - some in 2016 at the Master's level and I am sure that election interfernce is not Constitutional.  Neither is suppression of speech.

see, those are actually in there, you abolute moron.

Here's what NOT in there

a "right" to abortion"

a "right" to be married 

[BradInATX 9208]

of speech.
see, those are actually in there, you abolute moron.
Here's what NOT in there
a "right" to abortion"
a "right" to be married 

You're going to have a bad time when Biden forces straight couples to abort all of their fetuses in the interest of fairness to same-sex couples who can't have children.

[TtomTerrific 200]

 

9 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

 

You're going to have a bad time when Biden forces straight couples to abort all of their fetuses in the interest of fairness to same-sex couples who can't have children.

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

This was funny

 

[Brisketexan 106952]

• Report post
•  
•  
•  
•  #7578

Posted 9 hours ago

  On 10/30/2020 at 5:44 AM, TtomTerrific said: Glen Greemwald resigned from his own paper that HE CREATED SPECIFICALLY FOR JOURNALISTIC FREEDOMS....
*blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* 

Is there anything in the Constitution that you respect at all?
*blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* *blah* 

You know what the Constitution has to do with Glen Greenwald getting in a fight with his editors and resigning?

Did you ever take a single fucking college-level class that covers the US government and the Constitution?
Or even a high school-level class?
 
 
 
several - some in 2016 at the Master's level and I am sure that election interfernce is not Constitutional.  Neither is suppression of speech.
see, those are actually in there, you abolute moron.
Here's what NOT in there
a "right" to abortion"
a "right" to be married 

You know what else isn’t in there? The GRANT of a single right to the people. Go ahead, re-read it. The whole thing. Cite one provision that GRANTS a single right to the people.

Yeah...you can’t. Because that’s not how the constitution works. It is a document FROM the people TO the government they are creating, not vice versa.

Rights are inherent in one’s status as a person. Some of those rights were important enough to merit special attention in a separate Bill of Rights that was added to the constitution. And you are approaching that exactly the wrong way, and exactly the way the founders explicitly cautioned against. Madison in particular was concerned about morons like you reading the BOR as a LIMITATION on the rights of the people. Jefferson acknowledged that concern, but in lobbying for the BOR, argued that nobody would be dumb enough to buy that approach, the constitution was CLEARLY a document that granted only limited rights to the government, and nobody would read the BOR as an exclusive and limiting list of the rights of the people.

Jefferson was wrong. Madison was right. Idiots are the problem. Idiots like you.

[TexEx15 17956]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I won't say Hunter Biden is fundamentally a shitheel.

He is, however, an unrecovered addict.  I think I posted a New Yorker bio upthread, it's a sad story.  But an addict is going to act like a shitheel most of the time.

Does having a child or spouse with a substance-abuse problem present issues for a President or other high office holder?  Absolutely it does.  It could greatly compromise him or her.

Should it be a disqualifier?  I don't know.  That seems awfully inhuman.

Have you seen Jr.?  

[Sawbonz 28234]

53 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

Here's what NOT in there

a "right" to abortion"

a "right" to be married 

Are you really trying to argue the only rights we have are those explicitly defined in the constitution?

[TexEx15 17956]

53 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

 

 

 

several - some in 2016 at the Master's level and I am sure that election interfernce is not Constitutional.  Neither is suppression of speech.

see, those are actually in there, you abolute moron.

Here's what NOT in there

a "right" to abortion"

a "right" to be married 

I assume you are talking about gay marriage here.  Curious about your thoughts on straight marriage and where the government’s power comes from in that regard.

[Sawbonz 28234]

2 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Have you seen Jr.?  

Yeah but Biden actually cares about his kids

[TexEx15 17956]

Just now, Sawbonz said:

Yeah but Biden actually cares about his kids

I don’t know man.  Loving embraces of his kids especially those battling their own demons seems... weird.  Seems like throwing money at them would be better.

[Eastwood 4394]

This pandemic has really laid bare why those making $400k or more get insanely wound up over tax increases: A lot of them are paycheck to paycheck just like poor people. They might have a $1.2 million home, a 5 series, and a Range Rover, but they are redlining just like the family of 5 in a rented 2 bedroom duplex with a 20 year old Camry with a busted out window. It was amazing to watch the hand wringing when the shutdown hit and people who should have the means to build up a year of expenses with no problem are suddenly claiming that the lockdown will break them. Let's lump corporate America in there, too. It's amazing to see companies with hundreds of millions in market cap all of a sudden pushed to the brink when 1 month of income went out the window.

As it turns out, we really are a welfare state. From the very bottom to the tip top.

Edited October 31, 2020 by Eastwood

[troph 25238]

That’s true and a lot of those people do have a year of worth of expenses saved but if you have to use it then when you get through it you’ve got to save again. No sympathy, at all, but any dip into that money sucks too just not as bad as having no money. It underscores that hard is not relative. His hard is hard, her hard is hard, my hard is hard and yours is too.

[Bullneck 19543]

16 hours ago, Bullneck said:

You said energy, but maybe you can explain how Biden will cripple the nuclear, wind, and solar industries.

You're amusing, enchubben.  You don't have an answer for this, do you?  

Spoiler alert: no one believes your "me and my partners are gonna be hurt by the Biden tax hikes" schtick either.

[Bullneck 19543]

10 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

This pandemic has really laid bare why those making $400k or more get insanely wound up over tax increases: A lot of them are paycheck to paycheck just like poor people. They might have a $1.2 million home, a 5 series, and a Range Rover, but they are redlining just like the family of 5 in a rented 2 bedroom duplex with a 20 year old Camry with a busted out window. It was amazing to watch the hand wringing when the shutdown hit and people who should have the means to build up a year of expenses with no problem are suddenly claiming that the lockdown will break them. Let's lump corporate America in there, too. It's amazing to see companies with hundreds of millions in market cap all of a sudden pushed to the brink when 1 month of income went out the window.

As it turns out, we really are a welfare state. From the very bottom to the tip top.

Corporate America pays out any extra cash in executive bonuses or stock buybacks (some of which becomes executive compensation).  

[RPM 26656]

 

[Eastwood 4394]

3 minutes ago, troph said:

That’s true and a lot of those people do have a year of worth of expenses saved but if you have to use it then when you get through it you’ve got to save again. No sympathy, at all, but any dip into that money sucks too just not as bad as having no money. It underscores that hard is not relative. His hard is hard, her hard is hard, my hard is hard and yours is too.

I'm talking the people who never had a year to begin with. Every penny that comes in goes out by the end of next month. I'm in the situation you describe, right now. It's going to suck building this all back up, but I'd rather be doing that than biting my nails down to nubs with worry over whether or not I'm able to pay my mortgage over the next 12 months.

[Fudge Nuggets 19465]

6 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

You're amusing, enchubben.  You don't have an answer for this, do you?  

Spoiler alert: no one believes your "me and my partners are gonna be hurt by the Biden tax hikes" schtick either.

Sounds like Biden’s tax plan will hurt the right people.  Good, fuck them.

[Brisketexan 106952]

Are you really trying to argue the only rights we have are those explicitly defined in the constitution?

Yes. He is. This is how stupid the people we’re dealing with are.

Trying to reason with them is like trying to build a house out of runny shit - it’s pointless, and everyone ends up smelling awful.