Who Gets Credit for YOUR Success?

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

Okey dokey.

Well...I learned a lot from my dad. I'm very mechanically inclined thanks to him having the patience to suffer through my endless barrage of "How?" and "Why?" questions when I was a kid...and all he wanted to do was fix the car. He could have easily told me to go in the house and leave him alone...but he took the time to show me.

I owe my best friend Dan A LOT. He gave me a place to live when I was sleeping in my Camaro for a month, let me crash in his finished basement for 2 months even though he barely knew me. He gave me a job and taught me everything I know about plumbing. He's fronted me money for trucks and gave me $$$ when I started my electrical business. I always repaid him, but my life would be a WHOLE lot different were it not for his kindness.

Need anymore? I still have quite a few people in my life that I am very thankful to have had helped me over the years.

Obama would like to know the total dollar value of the assistance you received from Dan. You'll be hearing from the new and improved IRS.

[SafetyBlitz]

Originally Posted by shakin318

Obama would like to know the total dollar value of the assistance you received from Dan. You'll be hearing from the new and improved IRS.

Actually that sounds more like "broaden the base", which is a GOP idea.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

You asked me to tell you how my successes were owed to others. Which I did.

And as stated, in doing so you strongly, if unintentionally, supported my position.

For which I thanked you.

What any of that has to do with giving a toat, I must admit, you've got me confused.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

Oh please. No right to privacy is expected from your previously stated public admissions of "belief". You broadcast, un prompted, 24x7, on a soapbox how you're this and that, listen to this and that, and believe this and that for all to hear.

Same old same old every time.

I must say that your lack of knowledge.

Speaking of same old, yes, I understand. You think I'm stupid.

Good for you.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz

Actually that sounds more like "broaden the base", which is a GOP idea.

Actually, it has nothing to do with that at all. It has to do with Obama's IRS -- fresh with 15,000 additional newly hired vultures -- figuring out new ways to reach into our pockets.

But as long as you brought it up, the GOP idea of "broaden the tax base" is really just the most logical interpretation of Obama's plea for "everyone to pay their fair share." How paying zero taxes is "paying your fair share" only makes sense to the most ideologically saturated lefty.

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by Warfish

And as stated, in doing so you strongly, if unintentionally, supported my position.

For which I thanked you.

And I'm surprised as well...because your view unintentionally supports what Obama said.

Tsk, tsk Fish.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

And I'm surprised as well...because your view unintentionally supports what Obama said.

Tsk, tsk Fish.

No, it doesn't.

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by Warfish

No, it doesn't.

Originally Posted by Obama

...when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative...

[Trades]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Same old same old every time.



Speaking of same old, yes, I understand. You think I'm stupid.

Good for you.

No, when anyone posts like a dope or votes like a dope I think they're a dope.

No other conclusion can be drawn.

Again I ask you - how do you think jobs are created without the participation of the "wealthy" one way or the other.

Take your time.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

If thats what you got as the primary point out of what he said, I can't help you.

You do understand, the purpose of the portion of speech was in support of higher taxes, and the "help" he was discussing was from the Government, right?

Nevermind.

[SafetyBlitz]

Originally Posted by shakin318

Actually, it has nothing to do with that at all. It has to do with Obama's IRS -- fresh with 15,000 additional newly hired vultures -- figuring out new ways to reach into our pockets.

But as long as you brought it up, the GOP idea of "broaden the tax base" is really just the most logical interpretation of Obama's plea for "everyone to pay their fair share." How paying zero taxes is "paying your fair share" only makes sense to the most ideologically saturated lefty.

Income inequality is at it's highest since the 1920s.

But that's right, it's the working poor's fault. They don't pay any taxes!

[shakin318]

The irony of this line of reasoning coming from the man who would have you believe he singlehandedly flew the chopper, rappelled down the rope and killed bin laden with his bare hands....it's comical.

This guy is an absolute clownf-ck of a president

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

No, when anyone posts like a dope or votes like a dope I think they're a dope.

No other conclusion can be drawn.

Again I ask you - how do you think jobs are created without the participation of the "wealthy" one way or the other.

Take your time.

Jobs are created when there is more work to be done than current assets can handle, and a new hire will expect to result in a net profit or overall gain to the business, or whenever the Govt. decides it needs more workers to accomplish whatever task it is assigned to perform, and (one would hope) has the budget space to pay for.

Now, feel free to insult me again, talk about your business accumen, and explain how jobs are created when all wealthy people, even those not specificly investing in or owning business, pay less taxes.

[kennyo7]

When I had my own lab, I got essentially all of the credit while my students did most of the legwork. Likewise my mentor got most of the credit when I was up in the wee hours working in his lab.

In my field, the successes are few(unfortunately) but the credit is split between me and the drug. Do you think the professor who found the receptor that the drug targets (without him/her, the drug would not exist) gets any credit at all? No credit and certainly little monetary reward (the CEO of the pharma gets much more than all those who collaborated to make the drug, combined).

Obama is dead on right with this statement.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by kennyo7

Obama is dead on right with this statement.

From what you've said, you've spent almost your entire life in Public or Government service in one form or another.

And you are a self-described Socialist. You believe in the ideal of collectivism.

Of course you're going to agree Ken.

One has to ask though, why would you allow credit due your student to go to you instead? I assume, good collectivist that you are, that you compensated those students for that work fiscally, right, thus reducing inequallity of wealth and reducing their student loan debt? You certainly didn't profit from their work knowingly, did you, thus increasing unequal wealth distribution on the backs of your students labor?

How very Republican of you if you did. Someone should tell the State, so that credit and reward can be taken from you, and redistributed to those poor abused prole students you took advantage of and profited on.

(/endsarcasm)

[SafetyBlitz]

Originally Posted by Warfish

From what you've said, you've spent almost your entire life in Public or Government service in one form or another.

And you are a self-described Socialist. You believe in the ideal of collectivism.

Of course you're going to agree Ken.

One has to ask though, why would you allow credit due your student to go to you instead? I assume, good collectivist that you are, that you compensated those students for that work fiscally, right, thus reducing inequallity of wealth and reducing their student loan debt? You certainly didn't profit from their work knowingly, did you, thus increasing unequal wealth distribution on the backs of your students labor?

How very Republican of you if you did. Someone should tell the State, so that credit and reward can be taken from you, and redistributed to those poor abused prole students you took advantage of and profited on.

(/endsarcasm)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Jobs are created when there is more work to be done than current assets can handle, and a new hire will expect to result in a net profit or overall gain to the business, or whenever the Govt. decides it needs more workers to accomplishwhatever task it is assigned to perform, and (one would hope) has the budget space to pay for.

Now, feel free to insult me again, talk about your business accumen, and explain how jobs are created when all wealthy people, even those not specificly investing in or owning business, pay less taxes.

That's the liberal tack, to speak in generalities.

Although the rich in America pay the most taxes in total, even more of a % than they own, paying more taxes to B. Hussein and the Bloombergs and Cuomos of the world doesnt "create" jobs.

More work to be done than current assets can handle?

Current private sector labor assets are said to be already overdeployed, doing the work of 1.5/2 workers. (in libspeak, exploited) Try factoring in the costs of these workers. If 0 care makes it untenable to hire more on top of UI and employer taxes, more won't get hired. That is why so many sought waivers. Also the costs of doing business - utilities, gas, materials etc.

When govt. decides it needs more workers to accomplish whatever task it is assigned to perform, and (one would hope) has the budget space to pay for?

You've got to be kidding me! That's where the Hope stuff comes in
They are paid for w/ debt. Nothing to do with necessity, task completion, or budget.

Heading into Bit territory here...keep up the laffs!

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism

And your point is?

Originally Posted by wiki

Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human being. Collectivism is a basic cultural element that exists as the reverse of individualism in human nature (in the same way high context culture exists as the reverse of low context culture), and stresses the priority of group goals over individual goals.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet

That's the liberal tack, to speak in generalities.

I wouldn't describe it as a generality. it's the specific base-level context upon which hiring/labor use is built upon.

Although the rich in America pay the most taxes in total, even more of a % than they own, paying more taxes to B. Hussein and the Bloombergs and Cuomos of the world doesnt "create" jobs.

I agree. At no point have I contradicted that claim.

Heading into Bit territory here...keep up the laffs!

Thank you. I appreciate the compliment, for while Bit and I may be far apart in viewpoint, he was one of my most favorite people here to converse with.

I'd rather have him back at JI than just about anyone whose left us. I'd certainly trade any number of current posters to get him back. It's to my longstanding dissapointment that my own use of tactics similar to your own, I think, is in part responsible for his moving on to J.N permanently.

TLDR: I don't see being comapred to Bit as an insult. So thanks.