Here is the real question that I would ask of any "Occupy Wall Street" supporter, who believe some people have too much wealth.
Let's say a person builds a certain item. It costs him $95 to manufacture, market and ship the item. Do you believe it is too much for him to ask and deserve a $5 profit for all his work and trouble?
Sane people would say a 5% profit is more than reasonable.
Now let's say his product is so useful and popular that he sells 10 million of those things (think Apple iPad). In the process, and directly because of his efforts and investment, he has to hire 1000 people to produce those items. Since his cost is $95 per unit, that means he is directly responsible for pumping $950 million into the economy for salaries, inventory, marketing, shipping etc. And he still gets $5 per unit. But that $5 per unit now comes to $50 million.
NOW you suddenly have a problem with him. But why? He has invested everything he has. He has worked hard. He has provided jobs for 1000 families. He pumps $950 million into the economy. And he is still only earning the same 5% he did in the beginning. Meanwhile, let us not forget that he has sold 10 million items - which means 10 million people now have a useful item they did not have before. All because of him. Thank GOD for him, and those like him!
And you begrudge him his profit!
And now for one last question - if we take away his right to earn that much, what are the odds he would have designed, built and marketed the first one? What are the odds he would have hired 1000 people, or pumped $950 million into the economy. If Steve Jobs could not hope to become wealthy, what are the odds we would have the iPad or iPhone today? I'll tell you the odds - about zero. No one will go to that much trouble, and risk their capital and sanity just to make a modest income that is no different from the income they could earn working in some factory.
If the world were to operate the way "Occupy" people and socialists want, the world simply would grind to a halt. It happened in the USSR. It is happening in the socialist nations of Europe as you read this.
One thing the "occupy" folks fail to acknowledge - it is "wealth" that is the incentive for progress, for innovation, for research and development. It is the promise of wealth that causes some to risk everything. Without that incentive, no one would put in the resources or effort. And there would be no iPads, smartphones or computers. There would never have been automobiles, airplanes or electric lights. All those things required risk, effort and capital. And no one would invest those things just to achieve a mediocre income. The short take -- If Bill is going to end up with everything that Joe has, why would Bill try harder. Why risk your capital, home, work, family etc. when you know that you will not get anything more for it - you will still have the same as Joe, the guy who is camping out in a park on Wall Street.
If the "occupy" bunch want to have what the so-called "1%" have, all they have to do is do what the 1%-ers have done. Risk everything you have, work a hundred ours a week, work harder and think smarter than most people, and drive yourselves nuts trying to beat your way to the top.
Anyone not willing to do that does not DESERVE to have what the 1%-ers have. And you won't get it by camping out in tents in a public park for months, making a mess, doing drugs and just complaining.
/
Friday, December 9, 2011
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The Way Romney Spins, You'd Think He Was A Liberal. Examples...
I always suspected Mitt Romney was a liberal in disguise, having come from being governor of the bluest state. And now that he is resorting to spinning the truth out of shape just like liberals do, his colors are showing. Here are just two of the latest examples...
Newt Gingrich says he wants to find a way to legalize - without citizenship - those illegals who have been here a long, long time, have raised their families here and have been good neighbors. That represents maybe one million folks. But today Romney stated that Gingrich "wants to legalize all 11 million illegals." And that is obviously a blatant lie - er, spin.
Newt also stated clearly that he thought some teens from poorer families might benefit from being given jobs as school janitors, to develop a work ethic, and earn them some money. I, myself, was assistant school janitor when I was 14 and it helped pay my way into college.
But Romney stated that Gingrich "wants to violate child labor laws." Again, liberal spinmeister crap. It is perfectly legal for young teens to work, provided they have permission (work papers) to insure it will not interfere with family or school. Romney purposely - and deceitfully - wants people to think Gingrich wants to force child labor of little children.
Here is the summary, folks, as I see it --- if a candidate has to spin, or be deceitful in order to earn votes, that candidate should not be getting any votes at all - and certainly will not get mine. I'm tired of having a liar in the White House.
/
Newt Gingrich says he wants to find a way to legalize - without citizenship - those illegals who have been here a long, long time, have raised their families here and have been good neighbors. That represents maybe one million folks. But today Romney stated that Gingrich "wants to legalize all 11 million illegals." And that is obviously a blatant lie - er, spin.
Newt also stated clearly that he thought some teens from poorer families might benefit from being given jobs as school janitors, to develop a work ethic, and earn them some money. I, myself, was assistant school janitor when I was 14 and it helped pay my way into college.
But Romney stated that Gingrich "wants to violate child labor laws." Again, liberal spinmeister crap. It is perfectly legal for young teens to work, provided they have permission (work papers) to insure it will not interfere with family or school. Romney purposely - and deceitfully - wants people to think Gingrich wants to force child labor of little children.
Here is the summary, folks, as I see it --- if a candidate has to spin, or be deceitful in order to earn votes, that candidate should not be getting any votes at all - and certainly will not get mine. I'm tired of having a liar in the White House.
/
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
What The Pundits Just Don't Understand About Gingrich...
It seems none of the pundits are capable of understanding the rapid rise of Gingrich, and it leaves them all scratching their (empty) heads. So, for those that may get wind of this blog, I'll try to explain it in terms that even pundits can comprehend.
Congress has the lowest approval rating in history - BOTH parties. The People do not like the politicians in Congress. That said, it is common knowledge that neither party in Congress has any love for Gingrich. That tells the People that maybe Gingrich is the man they are looking for. It's kinda like that old saw about "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
The People dislike Congress. Congress dislikes Gingrich. Hence, Gingrich is the guy they need to beat Congress into line (because that is what it will take).
So, when either party of Washington insiders trashes Gingrich, it actually HELPS him
It shows that Gingrich, though he knows his way around D.C., is still an outsider, because he is an outsider politically.
And that is what the folks are looking for - an outsider who has been inside long enough to know how it works and can get in there and repair some of the damage.
The fact that he is also the only one who can out-debate Obama doesn't hurt, either.
/
Congress has the lowest approval rating in history - BOTH parties. The People do not like the politicians in Congress. That said, it is common knowledge that neither party in Congress has any love for Gingrich. That tells the People that maybe Gingrich is the man they are looking for. It's kinda like that old saw about "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
The People dislike Congress. Congress dislikes Gingrich. Hence, Gingrich is the guy they need to beat Congress into line (because that is what it will take).
So, when either party of Washington insiders trashes Gingrich, it actually HELPS him
It shows that Gingrich, though he knows his way around D.C., is still an outsider, because he is an outsider politically.
And that is what the folks are looking for - an outsider who has been inside long enough to know how it works and can get in there and repair some of the damage.
The fact that he is also the only one who can out-debate Obama doesn't hurt, either.
/
Whose Awkward Moment Is This?..
Michele Bachmann was left speechless after an encounter with a young 8 year old activist named Elija.
"My mommy's gay but she doesn't need fixing," Elijah said to Bachmann, after some coaxing from his mother.
Then HuffPost goes on to claim this was an "awkward moment" for Bachmann. If you ask me, it was Elijah's mom, exploiting her own child who was having an awkward moment. Joined by the awkward moment of HuffPost/AOL for slanting the story in such a biased way.
/
"My mommy's gay but she doesn't need fixing," Elijah said to Bachmann, after some coaxing from his mother.
Then HuffPost goes on to claim this was an "awkward moment" for Bachmann. If you ask me, it was Elijah's mom, exploiting her own child who was having an awkward moment. Joined by the awkward moment of HuffPost/AOL for slanting the story in such a biased way.
/
Friday, December 2, 2011
Unemployment Rate Drops To 8.6% - NOT! Here's the truth...
Today the administration pointed out that the unemployment rate in November dropped to 8.6%. But did it?
Until the 1970's, the government counted all unemployed people in their calculation to determine unemployment rate. But under Carter, when the unemployment rate got out of control, it was decided to only count those who were collecting unemployment benefits. If a person was unemployed but was no longer collecting, that person would not be counted.
And that is how things are done to this day.
So, when the government says the unemployment rate has gone down, it is more likely that it actually went up, as people fall off the "collecting" list.
Also, this is the season where businesses hire a lot of temp help for the holidays. Even though those jobs will end in a month or two, the government still counts them, which also fraudulently reduces the unemployment figures.
I'm afraid the unemployment rate as stated by the government is just meaningless BS designed to help politicians paint a rosier picture. The true unemployment rate today is estimated at over 17%.
/
Until the 1970's, the government counted all unemployed people in their calculation to determine unemployment rate. But under Carter, when the unemployment rate got out of control, it was decided to only count those who were collecting unemployment benefits. If a person was unemployed but was no longer collecting, that person would not be counted.
And that is how things are done to this day.
So, when the government says the unemployment rate has gone down, it is more likely that it actually went up, as people fall off the "collecting" list.
Also, this is the season where businesses hire a lot of temp help for the holidays. Even though those jobs will end in a month or two, the government still counts them, which also fraudulently reduces the unemployment figures.
I'm afraid the unemployment rate as stated by the government is just meaningless BS designed to help politicians paint a rosier picture. The true unemployment rate today is estimated at over 17%.
/
Do We REALLY Need A Businessman As President? Think about this...
Mitt Romney, and most pundits, claim that Romney is the best GOP candidate because he is a businessman, and therefore knows how to create the jobs we need. But I have just one question...
How does a President, who does not have the authoritarian position of a CEO, go about creating jobs?
Look, businesses already know how to create jobs, and if the government will get out of their way, they will create all the jobs we need. We do not need a businessman President for that. What we need in a President is someone who knows enough about the lawmaking body to be able to direct Congress in getting out of the way of business.
No, we do not need a businessman in the Oval Office. We need a true conservative (which Romney is not) who will work with Congress to remove the government as an obstacle to businessmen who can and would create jobs.
Having looked over all the candidates carefully, only two stand out as persons who would reduce government interference - and knows HOW to do that - Gingrich and Santorum. Of the two, I believe only one has the legislative power and strength to succeed - Gingrich.
No, I do not like Newt's "smarter-than-thou" attitude. But I can put up with attitude if he will do what needs to be done! Besides, it is that very attitude that would benefit America in foreign affairs.
/
How does a President, who does not have the authoritarian position of a CEO, go about creating jobs?
Look, businesses already know how to create jobs, and if the government will get out of their way, they will create all the jobs we need. We do not need a businessman President for that. What we need in a President is someone who knows enough about the lawmaking body to be able to direct Congress in getting out of the way of business.
No, we do not need a businessman in the Oval Office. We need a true conservative (which Romney is not) who will work with Congress to remove the government as an obstacle to businessmen who can and would create jobs.
Having looked over all the candidates carefully, only two stand out as persons who would reduce government interference - and knows HOW to do that - Gingrich and Santorum. Of the two, I believe only one has the legislative power and strength to succeed - Gingrich.
No, I do not like Newt's "smarter-than-thou" attitude. But I can put up with attitude if he will do what needs to be done! Besides, it is that very attitude that would benefit America in foreign affairs.
/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)