Obama: If you got a business, you didn't build that!

FN FS2000 said:
How do the local tribes and warlords succeed? Just because the level of success is different than would be expected here, doesn't mean that they did not achieve a higher standard of living for themselves.
Click to expand...

You have a point. Their methods may be different but it's still ripping off others.
 
apple0154 said:
Check out EKG's post, #136.

Are we to believe there are no entrepreneurs in Somalia and Ethiopia? None in Zimbabwe and Niger? Mali and Haiti and Uganda?
Click to expand...

In almost all those places the government provides roads, water, etc. Are we to believe that the roads really aren't the driving force in the success of the business?

Are you saying that there are no successful entrepreneurs in any of those places? No rich at all in Ethiopia? Not even a few in Uganda?
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
No, my claim is that it is entirely unclear that you are referring to people in this thread as opposed to making a larger point about what you claim Obama said.
Click to expand...
Again, I think it is pretty darned clear as the questions were directed at the claims of posters in this thread. I do not believe that you are too stupid to read the thread and recognize that those things were claimed.



Only if you pretend you don't know what "that" is in the context of Obama's remarks and ignore what he actually said, which was the initial mischaracterization.
Click to expand...

Which is pointless in the fact that I asked my questions of people who made those claims in this thread. That it was the fact that we built some roads that these people had success, that "we" provided water and cops (somehow these people were exempt from any contribution to those things and therefore can make no claim to their own success)...

Also, too:




In short, "You didn't get there on your own" is a lot different from "you aren't responsible for your own success." Mitt Romney agrees, by the way.
Click to expand...

Yet people in this thread claimed that success came from the water company, the roads and the police, they directly told me that this is what built the success of those girls in Texas with the lemonade stand...

My questions were directed at those comments. As I've now stated at least three times to you in the past few posts. If you want to read the thread and be the "mischaracterization" police then please do so... Just pull over the people who are doing it rather than trying to "get" the person who is pointing out their complete misunderstanding of success through questions.
 
Althea said:
Thanks for making Obama's point.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but what I said REJECTS Obama's point. History REJECTS Obama's point. The Erie Canal wasn't an idea of government, they rejected the idea, said it was stupid, refused to spend any money on it for years and years. If "corporations" had been removed from political influence like you idiots want, the government would have never built the Erie Canal, and New York would never have become the world center of trade.

It doesn't matter where the impetus comes from...it matters where the FUNDING comes from. Capitalists still want to reap the rewards today, as long as they don't have to take the risk.
Click to expand...

And ultimately the funding came from capitalists who profited and paid tax. The government has no source of income. It DOES matter where the impetus comes from, that is the whole entire argument here! You and Obama are saying we need government to provide the impetus, while me an others are saying... No, you don't... and here is historic accounts to prove it!

That's how nuclear power plants are built, satellites are put into space, etc..
Click to expand...

Again, these things are ultimately paid for by capitalists.

If creating the means to transport goods/svcs. was such a good idea then...at taxpayer expense...then why isn't maintaining them a good idea now?
Click to expand...

But the government didn't think it was a good idea, they thought it was a STUPID idea that wouldn't work! CAPITALISTS thought it was a good idea.

I keep saying it, and you boneheads on the right keep ignoring it...now that the means to make a profit are in place, you all want the govt. to step out of the way. It doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

What the hell do you mean it doesn't work that way, of course it does! Government doesn't provide a thing to make profits, and are totally NOT needed for that. They get their money from taxes on the profits, therefore, they DO need to get out of the way, and let capitalists profit.

And thanks for further disproving Bravo's lie about who built the roads.
Click to expand...

Well sorry you have trouble understanding this, but the government didn't build the roads. Government has no source of income, they can't fund a damn thing. We the People have incomes, businesses and industries make profits, and we pay taxes to the government, their revenue comes from our pockets, they don't create or produce anything.
 
Damocles said:
In almost all those places the government provides roads, water, etc. Are we to believe that the roads really aren't the driving force in the success of the business?

Are you saying that there are no successful entrepreneurs in any of those places? No rich at all in Ethiopia? Not even a few in Uganda?
Click to expand...

A lot fewer than here.
 
FN FS2000 said:
But that's impossible. I mean, how could they be rich without government to do it for them?
Click to expand...

As I said "a lot fewer". A lot fewer rich than if there were amenities like roads and running water and a decent communication system. Just consider what the internet has done for established businesses and, more relevant to this discussion, how one-person "hobbies" have ballooned into thriving enterprises. Where would eBay be if there wasn't any USPS?

I think one way Obama's comment has been misinterpeted is it's not just the government that has helped people. It's other people and businesses that have helped. Where would any mail order business be today without credit cards? It would take weeks for transactions to be completed as checks would have to clear the banks.

A quick summation. Let's say I want to open a mail order business. I need a credit card company and I need a transportation system. I will be using the inventions/businesses that other people operate so it's reasonable to say they helped me. If I want to advertize locally I need a newspaper business or a printing shop to make fliers.

That is the way I interpret what Obama said.
 
I'm still trying to locate all of these places on a map, where the jobs and economic prosperity are missing because we need more damn roads and bridges! Where are these people, who for want of a road or bridge, are not successful? Is there some economic paradise awaiting, if they only had a road to get to it? Are there places where the hardship can be attributed to their lack of a bridge? AND... for the 200+ years before now, when our Federal government wasn't the central controlling force who blesses us with roads and bridges, what did these poor people do? How have they managed and survived all these years? And I wonder how our country made it past the Appalachians, without government cutting roads through the mountains for them? How were the early pioneers able to do it? There was no 'government' to build roads and bridges in the 1600s, how did they manage to survive? I mean, they obviously DID survive, we're here now to talk about it. But up until a few years ago, most people believed roads and bridges were built by the state governments, or the local communities. It's never been something the people even expected the Federal government to do, up until Obama. Yet, somehow we managed!
 
apple0154 said:
As I said "a lot fewer". A lot fewer rich than if there were amenities like roads and running water and a decent communication system. Just consider what the internet has done for established businesses and, more relevant to this discussion, how one-person "hobbies" have ballooned into thriving enterprises. Where would eBay be if there wasn't any USPS?
Click to expand...

Using UPS, or FedEx...Which BTW, runs more efficiently than the USPS ever did. When I order something on E-bay, or Amazon, I never use the regular mail, they tend to break things.....

I think one way Obama's comment has been misinterpeted is it's not just the government that has helped people. It's other people and businesses that have helped. Where would any mail order business be today without credit cards? It would take weeks for transactions to be completed as checks would have to clear the banks.
Click to expand...

You can only arrive at that conclusion if you change what he said...Tell me, what examples did he use that were not government connected?

A quick summation. Let's say I want to open a mail order business. I need a credit card company and I need a transportation system. I will be using the inventions/businesses that other people operate so it's reasonable to say they helped me. If I want to advertize locally I need a newspaper business or a printing shop to make fliers.
Click to expand...

The credit card company makes a killing on interest charged its users. Transportation like trucks cost money, and starting out they will cost you a premium, and the government didn't create them. The inventions, and other businesses that you use in concert will cost you money to use them, and the labor you bring in requires a wage that the government will not pay. The newspaper you advertise in is not free. the Print shop is likewise neither free, nor government invented. In fact you have just made the argument where Obama was dead wrong...Thanks.
 
Dixie said:
I'm still trying to locate all of these places on a map, where the jobs and economic prosperity are missing because we need more damn roads and bridges! Where are these people, who for want of a road or bridge, are not successful? Is there some economic paradise awaiting, if they only had a road to get to it? Are there places where the hardship can be attributed to their lack of a bridge? AND... for the 200+ years before now, when our Federal government wasn't the central controlling force who blesses us with roads and bridges, what did these poor people do? How have they managed and survived all these years? And I wonder how our country made it past the Appalachians, without government cutting roads through the mountains for them? How were the early pioneers able to do it? There was no 'government' to build roads and bridges in the 1600s, how did they manage to survive? I mean, they obviously DID survive, we're here now to talk about it. But up until a few years ago, most people believed roads and bridges were built by the state governments, or the local communities. It's never been something the people even expected the Federal government to do, up until Obama. Yet, somehow we managed!
Click to expand...

The key word is "managed". How many people became wealthy? And what was wealth in those days anyway? How many people in NY State had fresh lettuce in January? No cars. No TV. No telephones. No cable. No hydro bill.

On the other hand considering there were no bills to pay I suppose a lot of them were wealthy. Hmmmm.
 
j-mac said:
You can only arrive at that conclusion if you change what he said...Tell me, what examples did he use that were not government connected?
Click to expand...

Here’s a rough excerpt of his speech. Start at 52:30 to 53:40. “There was a teacher somewhere along the way. Somebody created this American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. You never built that.

The internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the internet so companies can make money off the internet.”

The credit card company makes a killing on interest charged its users. Transportation like trucks cost money, and starting out they will cost you a premium, and the government didn't create them. The inventions, and other businesses that you use in concert will cost you money to use them, and the labor you bring in requires a wage that the government will not pay. The newspaper you advertise in is not free. the Print shop is likewise neither free, nor government invented. In fact you have just made the argument where Obama was dead wrong...Thanks.
Click to expand...

First you ask, "Tell me, what examples did he use that were not government connected?" and then post "The newspaper you advertise in is not free. The Print shop is likewise neither free, nor government invented. In fact you have just made the argument where Obama was dead wrong."

That's exactly what I was referring to when I wrote, "I think one way Obama's comment has been misinterpeted is it's not just the government that has helped people. It's other people and businesses that have helped."

I think you're a bit confused. :(

It costs money to get a truck to move your goods but there wouldn’t be any trucks if there weren’t any roads. You couldn’t advertise in a newspaper if there weren’t any newspapers.

You wrote, “The Print shop is likewise neither free, nor government invented.”

That’s exactly my point! It’s not just government. Many people have helped businesses thrive. The person who built the truck adds refrigeration so one can move produce. There would be neither trucks nor refrigerated trucks if there weren’t any roads.

Restaurants thrive because the goods are fresh. Imagine a truck load of fish in an unrefrigerated truck going from LA to NY in the current heat wave. :donotwant:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top