Goodbye Nancy

TheFlagIsUp · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:33 pm **Posts:** 2651

1/8-pole wrote:

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

1/4 Pole wrote:

I'm just happy Nancy is going to her lose her U.S.A.F. chauffeurs. Those whiskey, champagne, and in-flight lobster tabs going back and forth to California on my dime were pi$$ing me off as well. I despise that woman and those botox shots never helped.

Now it will just be a tan guy from Ohio burning up the money.

GOOD! Better than that hag from CALI!

perhaps he's a better type of criminal

1/8-pole · **Joined:** Wed May 20, 2009 2:25 pm **Posts:** 11598

If he is, Ohio got lots of places to put him. lol Can have my old spot at Belmont.

TheFlagIsUp · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:33 pm **Posts:** 2651

1/4 Pole wrote:

As an Independent I cast no votes yesterday for anybody under the elephant or donkey banners.

The Repubs lost their way with the spending under Bush and then the Dems under the clueless empty-suit community organizer took it to another level.

The entitled handouts have got to stop. As a good American, an old fart, and a veteran I would hate to leave here dead with my son, wife, and grandchildren saddled with enormous debt because of bums, breeders, slackers, and millions of "undocumented workers". And I fully expect to leave here "dead", just like everybody else does sooner or later.

How'd that "Stimulus" work out? Long Island got 300-feet of parkway on-ramp out of the deal while New York State swallowed up hundreds of millions of "scamulus" dollars to plug holes in it's "handout budgets" for both 2009 and 2010.

I couldn't agree with that more. that includes handouts to those at the top as well. in case people havent noticed, the total of American income concentrated more significantly during the past thirty years, and yet these people have supporters who make considerably less than say $250K per year. Why are so many people so sympathetic to a group of people who have concentrated power, wealth and control during the past decade?

I agree that Medicaid & SSI programs have to be significantly trimmed, but lets not act like our current fiscal difficulties are because we give too much to poor people.

TheFlagIsUp · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:33 pm **Posts:** 2651

1/8-pole wrote:

If he is, Ohio got lots of places to put him. lol Can have my old spot at Belmont.

That still cracks me up...what are the odds :lol:

1/8-pole · **Joined:** Wed May 20, 2009 2:25 pm **Posts:** 11598

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

1/8-pole wrote:

If he is, Ohio got lots of places to put him. lol Can have my old spot at Belmont.

That still cracks me up...what are the odds :lol:

Someone has a sense of humor. Out of the 32 prisons in ohio, They send me to f'ing Belmont. HAHA :lol:

1/4 Pole · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 1:21 pm **Posts:** 71536

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

...but lets not act like our current fiscal difficulties are because we give too much to poor people.

The bums, breeders, and slackers on the dole in New York who produce nothing and pay no taxes got cash "raises" of 10% and 5% in 2009 and 2010 respectively while businesses and the middle class continued to flee. How'd you do? The budget deficit (from just August 1st) is already projected to be $9 BILLION for 2011. Long Island is already starting to look like Brooklyn with the criminal "diversity" and illegal aliens on handouts. Just one American citizen anchor baby gets a lot of bennies for illegals in this sanctuary state. Twenty to a single-family house is becoming common in suburbia.

TheFlagIsUp · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:33 pm **Posts:** 2651

suffolk otb wrote:

Make money for its owners (i.e. shareholders).

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

What is the goal of a corporation?

would a corporation create jobs if it was not profitable to do so? In general?

Jay Trotter · **Joined:** Thu May 21, 2009 1:20 pm **Posts:** 975

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

suffolk otb wrote:

Make money for its owners (i.e. shareholders).

TheFlagIsUp wrote:

What is the goal of a corporation?

would a corporation create jobs if it was not profitable to do so? In general?

Of course not. Do you even need to ask this?

There's a great video on line of a recent CNBC interview with the co-founder of Home Depot (Bernie something (not Maddoff)), where he blasts the current adminstration for their lableing of corporations as "big, bad, greedy business". His reponse was something to the effec of, "yeah, I'm a terrible person; I've only created 300,000 jobs along the way." I'll try to post it when I get home.

TheFlagIsUp · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 12:33 pm **Posts:** 2651

Quote:

Companies are constantly looking to do more with less. They only create jobs if they can get a sizable return on their investment in the new position.

The name of the game is to do more with less.

So isn't it quite a leap for any politician to suggest to any voter that lowering taxes on corporations will lead to job creation when most likely it will just lead to higher income and better share value? I mean I realize that companies may create jobs if they can realize a profit from doing so (nothing at all wrong with that).

1/4 Pole · **Joined:** Tue May 19, 2009 1:21 pm **Posts:** 71536

Money-making corporations are not the problem here - it's the millions upon millions of Americans depending on Big Government to provide for them with handouts. Scope the "entitlements" inherent in your state and federal budgets. And I'm not only talking about the cash handouts to breeders on welfare - I'm talking about grants and non-profits and money pissed away to thousands of programs that do nothing to provide anything for the taxpayers. Half the people in this country that are working pay no taxes and are "entitled" to get a check back for all that is withheld and more. I see people in Escalades buying groceries with a food stamp card while my Social Security and pension are taxed to the max. My school taxes are more than my mortgage payments were but I have to educate illegals and bums and the spawn that the baby mamas drop with great regularity on my dime.

Goodbye Nancy

Who is online