[$tinkle]

liar.

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

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back. They know they didn?t -- look, if you?ve been successful, you didn?t get there on your own. You didn?t get there on your own. I?m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you?ve got a business -- you didn?t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn?t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don?t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

once again, he's

resistance is futile

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

he´s got a point. without gvmt investment and a efficient legal system, business would not survive.

try to start a successful a business in venezuela or somalia...
with no fair courts to settle disputes, bad infraestructure and worse property rights its almost impossible to do so, or be competitive.

 

[$tinkle]

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

nothing strikes you as offensive about that? why you try & tell your current or potential employer that? especially since you've been shopping around the past few weeks, i'm sure putting things as indelicately as this should have you ushered past the velvet rope straight away.

rugged individualists need not apply; we are a collective.

 

[scrider]

Because every business in this country was started in a vacuum, with out any outside factors influencing it's success or failure, right?

 

[syadasti]

So its bad phrasing but true. Business is product of a society. Not any more offensive than people who think they owe nothing to society.

 

[dante]

I was able to start my own business thanks to getting a great college education financed through federally subsidized loans. I also took small business classes at the local (public) University, and imported product that arrived via publicly-owned ports, and was shipped here via subsidized rail lines and trucked over public roads and bridges. I'm thankful that I don't have to pay bribes to Mexican warlords or to corrupt Russian officials. I sell a ton of bikes locally thanks to an incredible investment in bicycle infrastructure.

Obama (and Ms Warren before him) is spot on.

Then again, its been proven that right-wingers have no clue what government benefits they receive, so I'm not all that shocked at your outrage...

 

[stevew]

america.....fvck yeah!

 

[stevew]

I was able to start my own business thanks to getting a great college education financed through federally subsidized loans. I also took small business classes at the local (public) University, and imported product that arrived via publicly-owned ports, and was shipped here via subsidized rail lines and trucked over public roads and bridges. I'm thankful that I don't have to pay bribes to Mexican warlords or to corrupt Russian officials. I sell a ton of bikes locally thanks to an incredible investment in bicycle infrastructure.

Obama (and Ms Warren before him) is spot on.

Then again, its been proven that right-wingers have no clue what government benefits they receive, so I'm not all that shocked at your outrage...

but if you were lazy......and it failed....

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

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

nothing strikes you as offensive about that? why you try & tell your current or potential employer that? especially since you've been shopping around the past few weeks, i'm sure putting things as indelicately as this should have you ushered past the velvet rope straight away.

rugged individualists need not apply; we are a collective.

well, my employer is a japanese keiretsu, which is more than 400 years old and has like 40,000 employees... i doubt anybody would have the time and interest to take it personal.

on the other hand, i have just started a business, my first business venture. its a heavy machinery rental gig. i have just registered the name and incorporated the business this month, hopefully ill have it running by the end of the year.

my business idea would be nothing more than money sitting in the bank, if i didnt have a semi-functional judicial system in which to incorporate the company. it would be unviable if i didnt have access to courts where to enforce contracts. i wouldnt have many prospective clients, if there werent semi-functional roads to use to move my machinery.

did i paid for those roads or courts? hell no!, am just starting out, i have yet to pay a dime in corporate taxes, and those fixed costs have been largely paid for by people before me.
i recognize am not the god-like figure that makes everything happen. i dont find obama´s speech insulting, as i just take advantage of the investment made by society and afforded by its laws.

 

[$tinkle]

Because every business in this country was started in a vacuum, with out any outside factors influencing it's success or failure, right?

do you not see he's pandering to his base?

so if you successfully build a business, that wasn't by the sweat of your own brow, but if it fails (solyndra, enron, etc.), you better believe you own that. you simply pissed away the good fortune bestowed upon you by the government, which graced you with their kindness to allow you to draw breath under the shadow of freedom's wings.

he's perpetuating a very dangerous mentality: it's entitlement raised to the mob power

 

[$tinkle]

I was able to start my own business

no you weren't

that's precisely what he said

 

[$tinkle]

but if you were lazy......and it failed....

gtfo of my head

 

[dante]

no you weren't

that's precisely what he said

Hey look, you're taking quotes out of context again... Its no wonder you think that Obama's statement said that 0% of the success of starting a company is due to a person's hard work or ambition.

 

[$tinkle]

Hey look, you're taking quotes out of context again... Its no wonder you think that Obama's statement said that 0% of the success of starting a company is due to a person's hard work or ambition.

not exactly.

in order to harken back to my roots of american exceptionalism, i must first acknowledge no extra helping of agitprop can completely undo the individual's efforts

however, after ruminating on this, i have a few simple questions:
- when did success become something you ridicule people about?
- what groups that were previously separated does he now unite with these remarks?
- will he have us believe he's giving a civics lesson to people who are smart enough to generate business, yet paid no attention to the mountain of bureaucracy previously navigated?
- if the economy isn't where it needs to be, where then does the buck stop?
- with large businesses sitting on a mountain of cash, do these remarks inspire them to johnny appleseed their assets?
- how do his remarks affect those with an entitlement mentality?

i hope your business does well, if only for the reason of my own selfishness (free market bringing the best goods/svcs, blah, blah, blah...), but i can't imagine if you are considering starting out you would continue to feel this way after being manipulated by the 'great orator' of our time.

it's just bad form.

 

[dante]

Not sure if you're trolling or you honestly don't get it. I'll see if I can say it a bit clearer now I'm back on a computer and not typing on a phone: Government creates the environment in which businesses *can* succeed. They do this directly (SBA, for example) as well as indirectly (prohibiting monopolistic behavior by established companies). Some businesses will succeed. Most will fail. However, without the startup-friendly climate, NONE of them would survive. Without adequate security, there's no way to protect your goods. Without anti-monopolistic legislation, established companies can crush you easily. Without adequate infrastructure there's no way to move your goods from factory to retail. Without skilled employees (for manufacturing), there's no way to adequately produce your product.

Every small business owner that I know feels the same way, although some might disagree on what "startup-friendly climate" might entail (see: Mickey's feelings on having to buy health insurance). However, I can't imagine any of them getting "offended" by Obama's full quotes. The only ones who are running around screaming "he's anti-small business" are the mega-corporations who certainly don't want small businesses to succeed. You know, the "small businesses" that have up to 500 employees, $7-10m in revenue annual, etc.

 

[jimmydean]

Not sure if you're trolling or you honestly don't get it.

 

[$tinkle]

not trolling.

pointing out that in addition to what you're saying [or, re-wording what he said in his remarks in roanoke], he's also wagging his finger w/ manipulative language used to divide those who succeed from those would have the gov't further fund their [at times unearned] benefits

his remarks are demagogic, demeaning, and deprecating to the individual

america's got talent, not you

 

[dante]

Why are you "re-wording" what he says? That's even worse than taking things out of context. As I stated earlier, when you read the entire three paragraphs that you posted, what he's trying to say is perfectly clear. It's only when you take one sentence, from one speech, entirely out of context that you get "OMFG, Obama hates successful people!!"

The rest of what you're claiming is 100% false, at least from my perspective. His remarks aren't demeaning, demagogic or depreciating to me as a small business owner.

I'm guessing that you (as a small business owner) are offended somehow? Or are you just being offended on my behalf?

 

[syadasti]

Even better, I think he works in IT as a government contractor.

 

[dan-o]

i just take advantage of the investment made by society and afforded by its laws.

Things which are available to everyone within society; so why isn't everyone willing and/or capable of starting their own business? Every GMT thread has people bitching about some aspect of their jobs yet, despite the wealth of opportunity bestowed upon them by their forefathers, most just continue to muddle about and bitch rather than sack up and risk comfort to chase their vision. The fact is, most people aren't willing or able to make it happen. Discounting the efforts of those who try (and most will fail) is ridiculous.

When you strip away all the esoteric cornerstones of opportunity, again available to all, his message is nothing more than a veiled attack against the premise that romney's history of business success is an asset as President.

While I don't necessarily disagree with that, this message was not the best method of making the point.
Why would he risk alienating millions of business owners simply to slight romney?
As a business owner, my only reaction is "what a verbose douche". Pity he's likely the best choice for my vote.

 

[$tinkle]

"Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

a: dumber than bush?
b: dumber than n8?
c: dumber than DMG?

 

[ohio]

do you not see he's pandering to his base?

Do you not see that he is correct?

so if you successfully build a business, that wasn't by the sweat of your own brow, but if it fails (solyndra, enron, etc.), you better believe you own that.

United states corporate law disagrees with you. Thanks very specifically to our governments extremely friendly corporate and bankruptcy laws, people can try to succeed without risking the full weight of failure. It's a key to our economic engine.

however, after ruminating on this, i have a few simple questions:
- when did success become something you ridicule people about? around the same time intelligence, knowledge and education became something to ridicule.
- what groups that were previously separated does he now unite with these remarks? business owners with any shred of humility and introspection with their workers and their communities.
- will he have us believe he's giving a civics lesson to people who are smart enough to generate business, yet paid no attention to the mountain of bureaucracy previously navigated? it's a civics lesson for self-important pricks who never forget debts but are quick to forget favors.
- if the economy isn't where it needs to be, where then does the buck stop? if you're going to insist on reducing economics to a single entity or factor, I'm going with an obstructionist congress that very specifically has hurt the economy for political gain. See ridicule of knowledge and education above.
- with large businesses sitting on a mountain of cash, do these remarks inspire them to johnny appleseed their assets? maybe. what would?
- how do his remarks affect those with an entitlement mentality? you assume that folks with "an entitlement mentality" are significant in any kind of way other than sensationalist WSJ articles.

i hope your business does well, if only for the reason of my own selfishness (free market bringing the best goods/svcs, blah, blah, blah...), but i can't imagine if you are considering starting out you would continue to feel this way after being manipulated by the 'great orator' of our time.

it's just bad form.

signed,
faster-faster.com
(To date, we have not taken a penny of stimilus, grant, or loan money from any government source. We pay the highest local and state taxes I am aware of. I was educated thanks to federal loans and grants. Also, as noted above, I would not start this business in the absence of corporate protections and bankruptcy law).

 

[stevew]

As a business owner, my only reaction is "what a verbose douche". Pity he's likely the best choice for my vote.

he expects to be able to piss down your throat and you call it a micro brew.

 

[dan-o]

he expects to be able to piss down your throat and you call it a micro brew.

That explains his Blue Moon photo-ops

 

[dante]

Things which are available to everyone within society; so why isn't everyone willing and/or capable of starting their own business? Every GMT thread has people bitching about some aspect of their jobs yet, despite the wealth of opportunity bestowed upon them by their forefathers, most just continue to muddle about and bitch rather than sack up and risk comfort to chase their vision. The fact is, most people aren't willing or able to make it happen. Discounting the efforts of those who try (and most will fail) is ridiculous.

When you strip away all the esoteric cornerstones of opportunity, again available to all, his message is nothing more than a veiled attack against the premise that romney's history of business success is an asset as President.

While I don't necessarily disagree with that, this message was not the best method of making the point.
Why would he risk alienating millions of business owners simply to slight romney?
As a business owner, my only reaction is "what a verbose douche". Pity he's likely the best choice for my vote.

I see it as refuting the Republican mantra of "government is the problem, and absence of government is the solution". He's pointing out that successful people today were only able to do so because of taxpayer-funded services that allowed them to succeed (or fail) in the first place. Bain Capital started here, not Somalia...

 

[rockofullr]

While I don't necessarily disagree with that, this message was not the best method of making the point.
Why would he risk alienating millions of business owners simply to slight romney?
As a business owner, my only reaction is "what a verbose douche". Pity he's likely the best choice for my vote.

The point wasn't to "slight Romney" it was to push back against the whole "can't tax the rich because they make the jobs and are therefore super great and better than normal people who are worthless because they didn't start a business" stint.

Things which are available to everyone within society; so why isn't everyone willing and/or capable of starting their own business?Every GMT thread has people bitching about some aspect of their jobs yet, despite the wealth of opportunity bestowed upon them by their forefathers, most just continue to muddle about and bitch rather than sack up and risk comfort to chase their vision. The fact is, most people aren't willing or able to make it happen.

Not everyone wants to start a business. I for one just want to have enough money to enjoy my life (bike, ski, camp, and generally do the things that make me happy). I really dont give a sh!t how I get the $$ as long as it doesn't make me miserable.

 

[dante]

Fox News' take on the whole thing... Edit the whole speech down into 2 (non-connected) sentences and then be outraged, OUTRAGED!!!!!

 

[dan-o]

I see it as refuting the Republican mantra of "government is the problem, and absence of government is the solution". He's pointing out that successful people today were only able to do so because of taxpayer-funded services that allowed them to succeed (or fail) in the first place. Bain Capital started here, not Somalia...

Yeah, but why not just say that?
"Mitt, do you as a silver spoon-fed, fvck of a human honestly believe that your business success is void of any outside influences? Do you dress up as Rain Man when you and Ann play Whoopee, or whatever you backward assed MoMo's call it?"

Make him answer a direct question then skewer him with examples.
Don't drag millions of business owners into the fight with obscure and potentially alienating statements.
How did politics get so simultaneously vicious yet pussified at the same time?

 

[dan-o]

I for one just want to have enough money to enjoy my life (bike, ski, camp, and generally do the things that make me happy). I really dont give a sh!t how I get the $$ as long as it doesn't make me miserable.

I didn't start my business to get rich but rather to control my own destiny.
We have similar goals.

Obama should've just come out and said 'I will raise taxes on the mega rich if re-elected. Enough of this trickle down BS'.
But he won't, because he needs campaign money.

 

[dante]

Actually, did you watch the full(ish) speech at $tinkle's link? He pretty much said just that.

 

[stevew]

How did politics get so simultaneously vicious yet pussified at the same time?

when campaigning did not end when you were elected.

 

[rockofullr]

Obama should've just come out and said 'I will raise taxes on the mega rich if re-elected. Enough of this trickle down BS'.
But he won't, because he needs campaign money.

Actually, did you watch the full(ish) speech at $tinkle's link? He pretty much said just that.

yup...

He's been saying it for years stating with the first extension of the GWB tax cuts.

 

[dante]

yup...

He's been saying it for years stating with the first extension of the GWB tax cuts.

He also never mentions business/small business/small business owners/etc. He only refers "successful wealthy people." It's only the Republican's spin (lies?) that he's "demeaning small businesses"...

Edit: He does say "if you have a business" halfway through the quote, but if you watch/listen to the whole thing it's pretty apparent that he's talking to the "successful wealthy people" who "have a business".

 

[$tinkle]

Even better, I think he works in IT as a government contractor.

so?
i'm allowed to have a valid opinion, just like those who are without a uterus may comment upon women's rights issues

I see it as refuting the Republican mantra of "government is the problem, and absence of government is the solution".

or as we say in our sunday afternoon sewing circles, "unfettered gov't is the problem that needs to be reigned in by more powers divested to the individual"

He also never mentions business/small business/small business owners/etc. He only refers "successful wealthy people." It's only the Republican's spin (lies?) that he's "demeaning small businesses"...

so the message i hear is "keep your business' growth in check, or we will progressively increase your existing tax liability"

call me old fashioned, but i like keeping gov't growth in check.

 

[dante]

so the message i hear is "keep your business' growth in check, or we will progressively increase your existing tax liability"

call me old fashioned, but i like keeping gov't growth in check.

If by "progressively increase your existing tax liability" you mean "deign to repeal the Bush Tax Cuts for the richest Americans and go back to the 39.6% tax rate of the 1990s in an effort to reduce the federal deficit without taxing middle-income Americans more", then yes, that's exactly what Obama's proposing. The only problem is "rich white guys who inherited money, wealth and businesses from Daddy" don't usually engender sympathetic feelings from ordinary Americans, so the GOP/Fox News/Washington Times has to try to spin "wealthy, successful business owner" into "struggling, bootstrap entrepreneur". And some people fall for it....

 

[$tinkle]

it would be silly of me to throw out a tax rate, as it would be arbitrary, so i guess i have to go back & wonder:
- would an adjustment (up or down) significantly improve the business creation climate?
- why were things "better" (loaded term, also possibly arbitrary & highly subjective) under <enter administration of choice here>?
- who are these daddy war$ to whom you refer? tides foundation? catherine t macarthur foundation? robert wood johnson foundation? ford foundation? pew charitable trust? (forget the other cats & dogs i'm reminded to whom i should lavish praise before watching various PBS programming)


don't worry: i know the correct answer is koch bros.

 

[dante]

But but but.... I thought conservatives cared about the federal deficit? Is that not *actually* the case?

By the way, has Mr Magical Underpants actually released a full-on tax and budget plan that can be analyzed by a 3rd party yet? Or is he still claiming that he can:

Permanently extend the Bush Tax Cuts for everyone
Cut tax rates an additional 20% at all levels
Increase Military Spending
Balance the Budget

Without giving a single specific answer as to "how"?

 

[norbar]

do you not see he's pandering to his base?

so if you successfully build a business, that wasn't by the sweat of your own brow, but if it fails (solyndra, enron, etc.), you better believe you own that. you simply pissed away the good fortune bestowed upon you by the government, which graced you with their kindness to allow you to draw breath under the shadow of freedom's wings.

he's perpetuating a very dangerous mentality: it's entitlement raised to the mob power

I love you republicans. If it's the bible you can't read it literally but if it's Obama you have to nag at his every word. Though with being that rightwing bat**** crazy it's a bit like watching a really bad movie - you have to employ some selective thinking.

 

[$tinkle]

I love you republicans. If it's the bible you can't read it literally but if it's Obama you have to nag at his every word. Though with being that rightwing bat**** crazy it's a bit like watching a really bad movie - you have to employ some selective thinking.

not a republican. 'unaffiliated' is my voterID status (but don't ask for ID, you racist!)

also, i don't believe the earth (e: everything) was created in 144 hrs, but i could be wrong about that

you were saying...

 

[norbar]

not a republican. 'unaffiliated' is my voterID status (but don't ask for ID, you racist!)

also, i don't believe the earth (e: everything) was created in 144 hrs, but i could be wrong about that

you were saying...

I love how it's suddenly fashionable to be "independent" or "Unaffiliated" even though 99.9% of your beliefs goes along with the republican party. It's like saying you're not a christian because you like mixed fabric clothes. Get a grip Stinkie. You are a republican, you just prefer not to call yourself one because for some convoluted reason you find it uncool. You're basically like a hipster republican. Though I thought that's what the Tea Party standed for.