Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-26-2012, 09:09 PM   #31
Sarcastic
NBA Legend and Hall of Famer
 
Sarcastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: #KnicksTank
Posts: 22,684
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balla_Status
That was back when other countries weren't as well developed. Global economy changes. Just the way it is.


And that's even more of a reason that the government should protect jobs on our home soil.


With your line of reasoning, we would have 90% unemployment.
Sarcastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:11 PM   #32
Sarcastic
NBA Legend and Hall of Famer
 
Sarcastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: #KnicksTank
Posts: 22,684
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balla_Status
I'm sure corporations are smart enough to figure out how to "even the playing field."

If corporations don't care about employing Americans, then why would they care about evening the playing field? They are only chasing profit. They don't care where the source of labor is coming from.

It's up to government through regulations to make sure jobs stay inside its borders.
Sarcastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:12 PM   #33
johndeeregreen
Oh yeah, Mitch Kramer?
 
johndeeregreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,642
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by kentatm
what happens when all those high paying jobs leave and nothing replaces them?

oh yea, massive under/unemployment.

you should not go for higher profits just because you can get them.

you need to think about how shuttering a plant affects the communities, businesses, and people reliant on them.

Kill a car plant and you have hundreds out of work, which means they can't spend nearly as much money in the are they live, which means other businesses suffer, not to mention the lost taxes we need to keeps our infrastructure up and running.

So yea, I may be able to make an extra profit on top of my already profitable business returns if I ship it away but is that really the right thing to do?

I say no and anyone shipping jobs away is bad for the country. Tis a privilege to live here. We shouldn't drain it dry like a vampire does to an unfortunate victim.
I understand your point, and am interested in what sort of policy(ies) on this matter you yourself propose.

You have to understand the flip side of this, as well. Look at the steel industry or the auto industry. It's not merely just being able to make a bit more profit by shipping out jobs; it can be the difference between success and bankruptcy. Many Americans are used to getting paid a premium for a job that requires no skills or education, and now feel that it is their right to be paid $70k a year to do something anyone off the street could do.

I do agree that restrictions and penalties could be imposed on companies sending jobs overseas, but I'd be wary of going too far with that.

Just my opinion.
johndeeregreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:12 PM   #34
Balla_Status
______________________
 
Balla_Status's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,911
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcastic
And that's even more of a reason that the government should protect jobs on our home soil.


With your line of reasoning, we would have 90% unemployment.

Sure man. Whatever you believe a politician will say to get your vote.
Balla_Status is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:15 PM   #35
Balla_Status
______________________
 
Balla_Status's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,911
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcastic
If corporations don't care about employing Americans, then why would they care about evening the playing field? They are only chasing profit. They don't care where the source of labor is coming from.

It's up to government through regulations to make sure jobs stay inside its borders.

Uh, who's getting taxed for shipping american products overseas? The US government or the corporations?

That's what I meant about "even the playing field."

Government needs to stay the eff out of the corporations way.

Maybe the government gave tax breaks instead of levying taxes on corporations that outsourced, they may get somewhere.
Balla_Status is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:17 PM   #36
Jailblazers7
will-to-bigness
 
Jailblazers7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 23,191
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Foreign automakers operate plants in the US too and outscoring is becoming less and less profitable because of rising wages in developing countries and transportation costs.
Jailblazers7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:05 PM   #37
Nanners
College star
 
Nanners's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: rip city
Posts: 4,001
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Its funny that Mitt Romney is running for president a year after occupy wall street. Romney is basically the personification of wall street. I think it doesnt really matter whether we get Romney or Obama, red or blue the elite will continue to do well while the rest of the country suffers. I was just reading an article by Chris Hedges that seems applicable to this discussion on "success"

Quote:
When civilizations start to die they go insane. Let the ice sheets in the Arctic melt. Let the temperatures rise. Let the air, soil and water be poisoned. Let the forests die. Let the seas be emptied of life. Let one useless war after another be waged. Let the masses be thrust into extreme poverty and left without jobs while the elites, drunk on hedonism, accumulate vast fortunes through exploitation, speculation, fraud and theft. Reality, at the end, gets unplugged. We live in an age when news consists of Snooki’s pregnancy, Hulk Hogan’s sex tape and Kim Kardashian’s denial that she is the naked woman cooking eggs in a photo circulating on the Internet. Politicians, including presidents, appear on late night comedy shows to do gags and they campaign on issues such as creating a moon colony. “At times when the page is turning,” Louis-Ferdinand Celine wrote in “Castle to Castle,” “when History brings all the nuts together, opens its Epic Dance Halls! hats and heads in the whirlwind! Panties overboard!”

The quest by a bankrupt elite in the final days of empire to accumulate greater and greater wealth, as Karl Marx observed, is modern society’s version of primitive fetishism. This quest, as there is less and less to exploit, leads to mounting repression, increased human suffering, a collapse of infrastructure and, finally, collective death. It is the self-deluded, those on Wall Street or among the political elite, those who entertain and inform us, those who lack the capacity to question the lusts that will ensure our self-annihilation, who are held up as exemplars of intelligence, success and progress. The World Health Organization calculates that one in four people in the United States suffers from chronic anxiety, a mood disorder or depression—which seems to me to be a normal reaction to our march toward collective suicide. Welcome to the asylum.

When the most basic elements that sustain life are reduced to a cash product, life has no intrinsic value. The extinguishing of “primitive” societies, those that were defined by animism and mysticism, those that celebrated ambiguity and mystery, those that respected the centrality of the human imagination, removed the only ideological counterweight to a self-devouring capitalist ideology. Those who held on to pre-modern beliefs, such as Native Americans, who structured themselves around a communal life and self-sacrifice rather than hoarding and wage exploitation, could not be accommodated within the ethic of capitalist exploitation, the cult of the self and the lust for imperial expansion.

http://www.alternet.org/story/155213...america_insane

Last edited by Nanners : 07-26-2012 at 10:07 PM.
Nanners is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:21 PM   #38
Juges8932
Land of Ownst
 
Juges8932's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,112
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

It's real easy to say "oh, bad companies for outsourcing! Bad!" when you aren't the one who is running a company.

Hmmm, let's see. Let's say you go to the mall to buy a new cell phone; i.e iPhone for this example. Well there are two stores in the mall which sell the iPhone; one for $300 and one for $200. Which one are you going to buy? Why, the $200 one, of course. Why? Because it makes the most sense.

When you are running a business, your job is to ensure the success of that company and to do what you can do to maximize profits. And guess what? If companies stopped outsourcing and only did things within the country, then that $200 iPhone would now be $300 due to the extra costs the companies have to pay. But then of course they aren't going to sell as much of the product due to the increased price, so then they have to reduce the price in order to sell it. Then they are essentially losing money. It just doesn't make good business sense.

As far as taxes go, IMO, there should just be a flat tax. Everybody pays 25% (or whatever % you want to tax, IDC). None of this, pay 63% on the $500,000 you make between 500k and 1M or whatever the absurd marginal tax rates are, lol.
Juges8932 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:36 PM   #39
Godzuki
3-time NBA All-Star
 
Godzuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 10,624
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juges8932

As far as taxes go, IMO, there should just be a flat tax. Everybody pays 25% (or whatever % you want to tax, IDC). None of this, pay 63% on the $500,000 you make between 500k and 1M or whatever the absurd marginal tax rates are, lol.


we have to make up for the deficit so taxes have to be raised. if the rich vs poor gap continues to grow wider why shouldn't the rich pay more? the poor are barely surviving and keeping up with rent, food, etc. while the rich are flourishing buying yachts, second/third houses, etc. yeah nobody wants a dip in their lifestyles especially the rich but i just don't get why people think everyone should pay the same rate when you factor in the realities of life in America. many rich people aren't even struggling much in this economy while the poor have become poorer, lost their jobs and homeless. it just makes so much more sense for those already earning a lot and living well to sacrifice more than those struggling to survive. again taxes have to hit somebody to bring down the deficit, and the rich earn a significant proportion of America's wealth.

theres just too many generalizations made by the rich that every poor person doesn't work hard, is lazy, just hanging out on street corners collecting welfare, etc. and this idea people will all of a sudden stop trying to be successful because they'll be taxed more is so funny its stupid many Republican politicians insinuate that. lets be real, being rich and paying high taxes still means you're much better off than every poor person. there is just so many talking points they use that are so unrealistic but somehow work on most of America ...like the American Dream goes away if rich people are taxed higher, just unbelievable people buy into that. its criminal how they bamboozle people

Last edited by Godzuki : 07-26-2012 at 10:39 PM.
Godzuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:43 PM   #40
ProfessorMurder
I am your soldier!
 
ProfessorMurder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: In the year 2525
Posts: 29,109
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juges8932
Hmmm, let's see. Let's say you go to the mall to buy a new cell phone; i.e iPhone for this example. Well there are two stores in the mall which sell the iPhone; one for $300 and one for $200. Which one are you going to buy? Why, the $200 one, of course. Why? Because it makes the most sense.

Oh really? Then riddle me this. Why do people camp outside for 300 dollar cell phones when they can go buy a 40 dollar one at a kiosk?

There goes your stupid theory on people logically spending their money.
ProfessorMurder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:53 PM   #41
Juges8932
Land of Ownst
 
Juges8932's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,112
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzuki
we have to make up for the deficit so taxes have to be raised. if the rich vs poor gap continues to grow wider why shouldn't the rich pay more? the poor are barely surviving and keeping up with rent, food, etc. while the rich are flourishing buying yachts, second/third houses, etc. yeah nobody wants a dip in their lifestyles especially the rich but i just don't get why people think everyone should pay the same rate when you factor in the realities of life in America. many rich people aren't even struggling much in this economy while the poor have become poorer, lost their jobs and homeless. it just makes so much more sense for those already earning a lot and living well to sacrifice more than those struggling to survive. again taxes have to hit somebody to bring down the deficit, and the rich earn a significant proportion of America's wealth.

theres just too many generalizations made by the rich that every poor person doesn't work hard, is lazy, just hanging out on street corners collecting welfare, etc. and this idea people will all of a sudden stop trying to be successful because they'll be taxed more is so funny its stupid many Republican politicians insinuate that. lets be real, being rich and paying high taxes still means you're much better off than every poor person. there is just so many talking points they use that are so unrealistic but somehow work on most of America ...like the American Dream goes away if rich people are taxed higher, just unbelievable people buy into that. its criminal how they bamboozle people

How would you feel if that was your money though? I just don't see why it can't be fair and equal to all across the board. I mean, when it isn't your money being lost, sure it can be easy to say- "What's the big deal if they lose more money to taxes when they already have x amount?" But when it is your money that is being lost you might feel differently about it. So yes, it makes so much sense when you are not in their shoes.

Of course many people are not lazy, on welfare, etc. But why should somebody at Taco Bell have to pay a smaller percentage than the person who busted their ass through college and trying to make it for themselves? People wonder why a lot of wealthier people try to get out of paying taxes and honestly, can't really blame them.
Juges8932 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 10:55 PM   #42
Juges8932
Land of Ownst
 
Juges8932's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,112
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfessorMurder
Oh really? Then riddle me this. Why do people camp outside for 300 dollar cell phones when they can go buy a 40 dollar one at a kiosk?

There goes your stupid theory on people logically spending their money.

I'm comparing the same phone at two different locations in a hypothetical situation as a dual to companies outsourcing as opposed to keeping it in the country.

But please, continue insulting me, lol. It really helps your argument!
Juges8932 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:04 PM   #43
ProfessorMurder
I am your soldier!
 
ProfessorMurder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: In the year 2525
Posts: 29,109
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juges8932
I'm comparing the same phone at two different locations in a hypothetical situation as a dual to companies outsourcing as opposed to keeping it in the country.

But please, continue insulting me, lol. It really helps your argument!

Two different locations or two different products, doesn't matter. You can create a market no matter what if you know what you're doing.
ProfessorMurder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:18 PM   #44
rufuspaul
Kubla Kemba
 
rufuspaul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 20,299
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Romney was put in charge of a company whose job it was to either turn other companies around and make them profitable or cut their losses and sell off the assets. I'd say he did it pretty well.

Tax revenues in this country can more than pay for everything that the government needs. The evil people who make more than $250,000 (I'm in that bunch) already pay the bulk of income taxes collected annually. What is with this $250,000 deal anyways? They lump people like me, upper middle class at best, with the super rich. There's a huge difference between $250,000 and $2,500,000 but we're taxed at the same rate. WTF??? It's because Obama and co. have decided that $250,000 and above are evil, hoarding motherfuukers who hate America and the middle class.

Look, I don't like Romney. He's week and 2-faced. But guess what? I feel exactly the same about Obama. He's a total facade. So depressing.
rufuspaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:26 PM   #45
Juges8932
Land of Ownst
 
Juges8932's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,112
Default Re: Mitt Romney interview: "Stop attacking success"

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfessorMurder
Two different locations or two different products, doesn't matter. You can create a market no matter what if you know what you're doing.

It matters for what I am discussing because the dual is for companies producing product 'x' either here or outsourced to people who can buy the same product at several locations for different prices. Those companies who are looking to build product 'x' can either build it here in America or outsource it somewhere else. It is cheaper for them to have it made by outsourcing. Would they still have a demand for product 'x' if it were made in America and was more expensive? Yes, of course. But it would cost them more to make it and hence the price of x would go up. The problem isn't creating a market; it's how to create a market for the cheapest cost while maximizing profit.

You're essentially saying you can compare apples to oranges by trying to compare a $40 phone 'y' to another $300 phone 'z'.
Juges8932 is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:34 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy