DEBATE

jpete wrote:

Flyer5 wrote:

jpete wrote:
Where is the documentation for this? I have heard this over and over. I have looked and never found.

I found this one fairly quickly. Don't know if there were others. I'm not that interested.

The problem is you didn't read the whole article. Ampad was going to fail anyway because of outside factors. That looks like poor timing on investments.
I found this quote interesting
''Frugal with his own money, Romney insisted that Bain Capital be especially careful with other people's money.''

But Smitty said "EVERY ONE" of the companies Bain took over came out a winner. Well clearly that isn't true.

I don't expect them all to be winners. It's illogical to think they will be. But the way Bain did it ensured THEY always won.

Through Ampad, Bain bought several other office supply makers, borrowing heavily each time. By 1999, Ampad's debt reached nearly $400 million, up from $11 million in 1993, according to government filings.

Sales grew, too - for a while. But by the late 1990s, foreign competition and increased buying power by superstores like Bain-funded Staples sliced Ampad's revenues.

The result: Ampad couldn't pay its debts and plunged into bankruptcy. Workers lost jobs and stockholders were left with worthless shares.

So unlike some people assert, Mitt didn't use HIS money. Ampad borrowed the money until they couldn't afford to pay it back anymore and then went belly up.

Not a nickel of Mitt's money was ever on the line.

I think he's a genius for mastering the game of "Heads I win, tails you lose" and apparently he's also a master of convincing people he took his own money out of his own pocket and did all this stuff. Nothign could be further from the truth but the "Anybody but Obama" crowd is too willfully ignorant to see it.[/quote]



I never stated he was 100% successful. I also didn't state he only used his money. Again you didn't read the whole thing that was quoted
''Frugal with his own money, Romney insisted that Bain Capital be especially careful with other people's money."
Even us ignorant people can understand the meaning of the quote and if you actually read the article in its entirety you can also see the context that it is used.
Hell if I was undecided that article that was attached to make Romney look bad would make me vote for Romney over Obama.

Like I said I have not found any proof that Romney is the Corp bustin villain that Obumma supporters are trying to make him.
If I look at just the parts of articles that make me see just what I want I may even convince myself that Obama has our best interests in mind.( Bad example ) Instead I like to see the big picture and the actual facts. By reading the entire article something is in so I can understand the context.

Face it the Debate was a battle of wits and Obama will always be unarmed.

I'm not even saying Mitt was "wrong" or "evil" for doing what his company did.

He made money in the system we live in. More power to him.

Which is why I think it's funny that so many people think he'll change the system he got rich under.

So many people demonize bankers for collapsing the economy or some other nonsense. I say getting mad at bankers for making money is like getting mad at your dog for licking its balls. It just what they do.

My argument is, was, and will always be with the SYSTEM. Like they say, don't hate the player, hate the game.

Fiat currency and fractional reserve banking is the problem. Not whichever figurehead is currently living in the White House.

jpete wrote:I'm not even saying Mitt was "wrong" or "evil" for doing what his company did.

He made money in the system we live in. More power to him.

Which is why I think it's funny that so many people think he'll change the system he got rich under.

So many people demonize bankers for collapsing the economy or some other nonsense. I say getting mad at bankers for making money is like getting mad at your dog for licking its balls. It just what they do.

My argument is, was, and will always be with the SYSTEM. Like they say, don't hate the player, hate the game.

Fiat currency and fractional reserve banking is the problem. Not whichever figurehead is currently living in the White House.

I can go along with this. Although the game is not so much the issue they are all like my 5yr old they just try to change the rules to there favor as they go. I do feel the Mitt can do better at creating jobs which is what we need more than anything. Obama had his 4 yrs, time to let the next kid try. I do think from everything I have read and researched Mitt can do the Job with Ryan behind him. I feel they will make a better team than the pair in there now. I still think Biden doesn't like Obama and does whatever he can do to help him look bad. LOL

A different take from a foreign view.
http://youtu.be/iNhUI8ktHuw

No need for me to watch any debates. I have been off of the “undecided” list for almost four years.

Flyer5 wrote:

jpete wrote:I'm not even saying Mitt was "wrong" or "evil" for doing what his company did.

He made money in the system we live in. More power to him.

Which is why I think it's funny that so many people think he'll change the system he got rich under.

So many people demonize bankers for collapsing the economy or some other nonsense. I say getting mad at bankers for making money is like getting mad at your dog for licking its balls. It just what they do.

My argument is, was, and will always be with the SYSTEM. Like they say, don't hate the player, hate the game.

Fiat currency and fractional reserve banking is the problem. Not whichever figurehead is currently living in the White House.

I can go along with this. Although the game is not so much the issue they are all like my 5yr old they just try to change the rules to there favor as they go. I do feel the Mitt can do better at creating jobs which is what we need more than anything. Obama had his 4 yrs, time to let the next kid try. I do think from everything I have read and researched Mitt can do the Job with Ryan behind him. I feel they will make a better team than the pair in there now. I still think Biden doesn't like Obama and does whatever he can do to help him look bad. LOL

But that's the point. Fiat currency is a loser from the word go. No one can "get the job done" in this system. It's like trying to bail the water out of the Titanic.

I know what I got with Obama as President for 4 years. NOTHING. At least with Mitt I have a 50/50 chance.
What people are forgetting is that Obama is blaming the Republicans. What about the first 2 years in office when you had a Democratic controlled house and senate?
You can lower taxes across the board and raise the amount of tax collected. But, you need to create jobs in order to do this. For example, and I came up with this quick.
How are you going to reduce taxes and pay down the deficit. Take a sample: 100 working people and 100 unemployed taking government assistance. Assume for simplicity a tax rate of 25%. Assume these working are making $50,000. 100 X $50,000.00 = $5,000,000.00 at a tax rate of 25% = $1,250,000.00 in taxes for those working. Taxes for those not working 100 X 0 = 0.
Lower taxes on workers to 20% : $5,000,0000 X 20% = $1,000,000 ($250,000 less in taxes they pay). Add those 100 unemployed into the workforce at even $20,000 a year jobs 100 X 20,000 = $2,000,000 at a tax rate of 20%: $2,000,000 X .20 = $400,000.00 in taxes raised. So add this to the $1,000,000 you get $1,400,000.00 an increase of taxes of $150,000 by lowering taxes and getting the unemployed working. Now if you take in to effect that the unemployed will no longer being taking the benefits from the government the savings is even more for the taxes that are collected. Imagine if these 100 people or even some of them got higher paying jobs. Granted the only way this is going to work is by creating jobs. But, Mr. President, I just did the math, and it works. I learned this math in elementary school. More taxes will be raised if even 64% of the unemployed find work.

Your exactly Johnny but the problem lies in jobs, one is gradually bringing jobs back without any help the other is a business creator for China & when he does save some jobs they are for the most part min.wage selling the stuff from China. We have enough Wal-Marts, Staples, Family Dollar & the like we have to start rebuilding this country with materials made in this country, if both sides would ever work together it will happen. Get the middle class going that will spend their money here & in turn create more demand or give the breaks to the wealthy that have already invested overseas & kept their money off shore. Take a look at how many times our Gov. has allowed money to be brought back in from off shore accounts for pennies on a dollar tax wise. Whenever the off shore money gets to be too great & they worry about losing some to a less than stable Gov. they like to bring it home & hide it here (tax deferred naturally).

NO ONE can "stop" the crash. Only delay the inevitable. Every fiat currency in history has inflated itself out of existence. The dollar will be no different and whatever they replace it with will also explode.

jpete wrote:NO ONE can "stop" the crash. Only delay the inevitable. Every fiat currency in history has inflated itself out of existence. The dollar will be no different and whatever they replace it with will also explode.

What is really needed is a separation of currency and state. Let everyone decide what they will accept as currency when left totally free to do so, and get the Federal Reserve and the government out of the magical money fabricating business. It was only with the coming of the Federal Income Tax that a Federal Reserve and its Federal Reserve Notes (FRN's) were required, and that only because the Government mandated that the Federal Income Tax was only payable in US Dollars, and US Dollars were simultaneously made to be merely FRN's.

When you are finally free to chose your own currency, you will be far more free than you are now.

The following video shows to what extent we have forgotten what real money might look like.

Ya know, when I started this topic, I wondered how long it would take to get OFF topic. I have got to say that I'm pretty happy that I am apparently as ignorant in the ways of the world as I am. If I were to take half this nonsense to heart, I think I'd just go up in the upper pasture & shoot myself. It strikes me that positive planning & faith have totally gone out the window. BUT, alas, (cool word) there is still a core of this population that still understands the concept. We and future generations are going to be fine. It's just the way it is & all this speculation is nothing more then BALDERDASH (another cool word) We are & always have been a Country of survivors, not quitters. Yep, Romney/ Ryan have the balls to get us back in the RIGHT direction

In my opinion from watching the debate, both Romney and Obama are convinced that government is the solution. I recall Reagan once stating that government is not the solution, it is the problem. How far we have come.

I never heard Romney say anything that resembled that. He did a few times mention that control of things needed to be left up to the individual States not the Feds??? Maybe I was watching a different debate??

Don't change the subject back to the subject Fred, I was about to pay my school tax with chickens. I love the barter system.

freetown fred wrote:I never heard Romney say anything that resembled that. He did a few times mention that control of things needed to be left up to the individual States not the Feds??? Maybe I was watching a different debate??

Go to 47 minutes and 20 seconds, and you will hear at least a one minute long repetition by Romney on the need for regulations, regulations, regulations... All he wants to do is replace one set of regulations with another set of regulations. Nowhere does he mention that we have a Constitution and that we should return to paying attention to it.