My man Jack Jodell has a great post up on why Mitt Romney would be a crummy president. The guy is a dishonest asshole but is blessed with nice posture and hair.
Mitt's company, Bain Capital, does what I call "money for nothing." And ironically, while this asshole calls for government to reduce it's debt and cut and all the other stuff, he made millions on BORROWED MONEY.
The words "debt" and "borrow" have been replaced in business lexicon with the word "leverage." That's all leverage is is borrowing. So just like righties are trained to use nice words that are either meaningless, or mean something other than their traditional meaning, leverage is the word used rather than borrowing because borrowing is now a dirty word.
Just as the term "job creators" makes the deluded happy because they think what the "job creators" are are benevolent job creators, rather than what they really are is American job destroying greedy bastards that don't give a rat's ass about anyone not belonging to the country club. "Leverage" makes the deluded and uneducated to what it is feel good about it. Like it's a wonderful business thing. The most dangerous is when a company is described as "highly leveraged." That means they owe a boatload of money.
Mitt had his wealthy investors to use as collateral to borrow, or leverage, from big banks so he could raid distressed companies that still had great asset value.
In essence, companies that had fallen on hard times selling their products, but still had great asset ts like land and equipment or patents. Mitt would use his investors cash as well as all he could get from the big banks and buy up these companies. Lay off workers. Raid their pensions. Sell off the assets and if the business was a dud, bankrupt it. Mitt and his pals took their profits from asset sales and laughed all the way to the bank. And of course Bain Capital profits were shielded from bankruptcy proceedings, the sap banks that loaned money to Mitt and his company were the ones getting screwed. In addition to the banks depositors and shareholders.
Good work if you have a bunch of rich buddies to invest and make your balance sheet look good the bank you're going to use to "leverage" your investments.
And as a lover of good irony, I love that Mitt made boatloads of money from borrowing. Typical republican hypocrite. And if anyone thinks this joker or any other republican will actually stop spending and borrowing and shoving the debts up the collective ass of the middle class is deluded.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
93 comments:
I wonder how the filthy rich democrats floating around made theirs.
perhaps you'll do a post on that one day as well.
Here's the difference RN: Warren Buffet doesn't whine for a tax cut like Romney and the rich republican ilk.
Here is what Warren Buffet, one of those "filthy rich democrats" has to say to republicans:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/11/us-buffett-idUSTRE80A24U20120111
Les makes a good point, Truth (I'm still busting a gut over that Barry White ditty, btw). Back when Obama trotted out that stimulus package, no less than 13 CEOs from major corporations were crawling all over the White House, all of which ended up profiting handsomely from it. You just gotta face it, bra, crony capitalism is alive and thriving in BOTH parties.
Joe,
i don't know where you get your information from or if you just make it up but if your post is any indication of your economics acumen i'd suggest going back to high school and getting some education.
where did you get the idea that borrowing was a dirty word for the "right" i have never heard anyone say that. in fact as far as i know the right will use both words, leverage and borrowing, when appropriate depending upon the context of the issue being discussed.
Tao,
i noticed he did not make that same challenge to Democrats which would be a far more appropiate and easier one since the Democrats are the ones who think that the rich are not paying enough taxes.
in fact i'd like to see him make that same challenge for every democrat in the nation.
i don't think that many would accept that challenge.
Joe - I'm glad you stepped up and blew the whistle on the person who will be making a run for the Presidency.
But the sad part is - if he doesn't do it someone else will and that someone else could be a lot worse.
So here we have a quandry - do we want the someone with good posture and nice hair to make a run for the Presidency - or do we want someone else who has equally bad or worse qualifications to make a run for the Presidency?
Decisions Decisions Decisions
The post is accurate Griper. My scholarship is of high level and unquestioned.
I am an ayatollah and professor as you know.
Hm, could it be that is the problem?
Note to Warren Buffett. You want to pay a little more in taxes, bra? What do you say that we start by ponying up on what you and your company, Berkshire Hathaway, ALREADY OWE? That and we'll definitely take it from there.
Warren Buffet would laugh at your description, Joe, and use you as an perfect example of what he means by the phrase, "...people who just really aren't as well adapted to the market system, and to capitalism,..."
which is his way of belittling people like you by saying that those who are not as smart as he is should be looked upon as like children instead of as adults.
Romney the aristocrat has no clue what most Americans' lives are like.
Neither did the Shrub. That worked out well, didn't it?
Warren Buffet called for higher taxes on the wealthy Griper.
And Will, he challenged the republicans in Congress to donate to reduce the deficit and said he would match their donations.
And another thing Griper, what happened to you? At one time I thought you were a man of reason and intelligence. What happened to that man? You haven't successfully refuted anything anyone has posted. You lamely attempt to twist the words of others. You're not very good at it. When I accepted your challenge on what we would do as dictator, you changed the rules each time I thumped you. You did apologise for one of your silly memes. I appreciate a man who can admit he's wrong. And that's why I admit I was wrong in my original assessment of you.
Shape up Griper. Whirling Dervish is kicking Will's intellectual ass and Will needs help. Dmarks is pathetic and the other righties at his sitearen't much better.
Great piece, Truth. Romney is a phony greedy conniver who doesn't care in the least about anyone but imself and his family. He most certainly doesn't belong back on the public payroll!
HOW DO I GET DRAGGED INTO IT? All that I did was mention how Obama is as much of a crony capitalist as his predecessors and that Mr. Buffett's company, Berkshire Hathaway, already owes back taxes.
American job destroying greedy bastards that don't give a rat's ass about anyone not belonging to the country club.
I think that just about sums it up :)
ohh, i think Will can handle himself just fine without me, Joe. if he needs help he can ask for it himself.
and where did i deny that Buffet called for higher taxes on the wealthy or even imply he did not?
he can call for it because he knows that higher tax rates will have no or very little effect on his bottom line.
he is a smart man and i respect him for that. and from his bottom line i can see he understands risks as well as human nature or else he wouldn't be the rich man he is.
his call for higher taxes and the challenge only affirms my point.
he knew that people like you, Tao and Dave would react just you have and it didn't cost him a dime. he knows human nature well enough so as to know that people like you, Tao, and Dave will accept his words on face value alone without questioning his motives. and you sure came through for him. i congratulate him on that.
he also knew that the republicans would react as they did so he wasn't really risking any of his own money.
the only thing i am watching for is to see if any of the bigwig republicans are smart enough to take his challenge and throw it back in his face as they very easily could.
Truth, Buffett is way wealthier than the Republican Senators (though, no, none of them are exactly hard up, either). In order for it to be a fair transaction, the ratio would probably have to be 30-40 to 1.......And, really, cutting a check to the government? With all of the outstanding charities out there, to me, it would mean a hell of lot more if these rich guys cut a check to the American Cancer Society, The Salvation Army, Wounded Warriors, The Humane Society, Habitat for Humanity, The March of Dimes, etc. than throwing significantly more money down a rat-hole. What, another Cash for Clunkers?
Warren Buffet and Berkshire pay all the taxes they are legally required to.
His point has always been that the wealthy can afford to pay more and its not the democrats that are blocking doing away with the BUSH era tax cuts; its the Republicans.
So, he threw the challenge exactly where the challenge needed to be; back to the republicans.
Warren Buffet knows capitalism, because he made his money the old fashioned way; he is a business man not a wall street blood sucker like Romney.
Glad he is a democrat and supports Obama! Same with Steve Jobs and Bill Gates....and the best the republicans can do is Romney, a guy who never made a dime creating anything but made millions destroying everything....
The thing is Joe - is that Mitt Romney will be shoving it up our *ss if we don't intervene.
And there is only one way we can stop him - and free Barack Obama from the shackles of the Presidency.
He has served his time - he has such a nice family - and four more years may push him over the edge - it might actually do him in.
We need someone who is not afraid of Congress, Lobbyists and the rest of those sons of bitches who have hijacked our Country.
And I'm talking about the Bad Democrats here.
i'll do it
I have been consistent for as long as I've been blogging on my calls for paying more taxes so my government can pay it's bills and keep it's promises. For you to call for republicans not to support the very government they helped bankrupt is troubling Will. You been listening to Griper or something?
And Warren Buffett doesn't have much use for Mitt and other private equity firms either. he also dislikes their use of high borrowing, I mean leverage, to take over businesses.
Sue used to live in Illinois like I do. She knows about bad democrats. We have some of the worst. Scum that used the party apparatus to enrich and empower themselves. A pox on them.
"I have been consistent for as long as I've been blogging on my calls for paying more taxes so my government can pay it's bills and keep it's promises."
on that statement i'll back you up all the way, Joe, in regards to consistency. the only thing i'll wonder about is for how long you'll take this stand before realizing its folly. you can only raise taxes up to 100%. and once that happens what will you tax next?
When did I ever call for raising taxes 100% ?
I would be content with eliminating the Bush tax cuts.
Yeah Joe - We're mad as hell and we aren't gonna take it anymore.
"Warren Buffet and Berkshire pay all the taxes they are legally required to." Apparently not, Tao. Apparently not. Even the Huffington Post acknowledges that BH is significantly in arrears in its taxes. Can you say yet another example of hard-core liberal hypocrisy?............Truth, you want me to admit that Bush screwed up? Wow, that's an easy one. Bush screwed up. The fellow started 2 idiotic wars and an expensive entitlement program that wasn't at all paid for. But, I don't know if you noticed this or not. He isn't the President anymore. Obama is. And it's Obama who's currently playing footsy with big business and bankrupting the country with out of control deficit spending.......And I challenge you, Truth, follow the money. The vast, VAST, percentage of it (the stimulus spending) went to big business and hardly any of it went to mom and pop. Face it, dude, this guy is every bit as much of a crony capitalist as Bush and Clinton were. He just gets away wit it better.
just eliminating the Bush tax cuts wouldn't pay the bills, Joe. if you are sincere about "your" government paying "its bills" you are going to have to raise taxes high enough so that revenues equals expenses.
grade school economics will teach you that. and just eliminating those tax cuts won't be enough to do it.
so, unless you begin to start advocating for this then your raising taxes is just empty rhetoric to hide the fact your real goal is income redistribution.
You're not going to pay off the deficit overnoight Griper. Economic reality and common sense tell you that.
But keep trying pal. But the deficit will be paid off long before you ever come close to making a sensible statement.
He grins as he reads Joe's last response,
Tao, instruct our friend, Joe, on the difference between the economic terms of "deficit" and "debt" and how they are used in the English language so he can present a half way logical response.
You're getting more pathetic every day Griper.
I've been polite to you all this time cause I thought you and RN were buddies and I like and respect RN.
The truth is the only things I've ever seen you suggest were elimination of Constitutional Amendments. One of them abolished slavery.
So I guess I shouldn't blame you for never saying what you would do or submit any ideas since that one was incredibly stupid.
You pathetically attempt to twist others words in a vain effort to make yourself feel like you have something of value to add. You add nothing.
Will: I've been tough on Obama. Damn few lefties have jumped his shit as much as I have. I was told to leave some left leaning blogs for that.
As for the stimulus going to the big banks, I don;t like it either but that's the way the finacial system is set up. You go to the bank. If it has no capital to lend you're screwed. Now if you support a single government run bank which is what the alternative would have been to keep lending and cash flow for businesses going, then let's talk.
Can't wait for silly Griper's lame attempt to call my comment a socialist manifesto.
It wasn't just big banks, Truth. It was big healthcare, big tech, big concrete, big coal, etc.. But, I'll tell you what, to match your conciliatory and nonpartisan response, I will concede here and now that, as oily as Mr. Obama may in fact be, Mr. Romney is probably worse - maybe much worse.
That's a helluva way we have to choose whom we vote for Will. Vote for this guy cause he's not as smelly a turd.
Oh well. Now Griper can say I support medium smelly turds.
well, Joe, if i add nothing then there is no sense of my saying anything.
btw, i see that S&P has downgraded the credit rating of some more of those nations who use your brand of economics. congratulations.
S&P downgraded our country first Griper.
You lose again dude.
i lost huh?
and how is the brand of economics different in this nation so as to make it my brand of economics rather than yours?
You have no brand, or any original thoughts Griper.
If you ever come up with one I'd like to hear it. Till then, you just keep trying to get someone to say something so you can make a lame attempt to attack it without ever offering any thoughts of your own.
Your strategy is neither new or of any intellectual value. It's a surrender to your own feelings of intellectual cowardice and inadequacy.
Joe,
a man who holds to the truth is not afraid to answer any and every question asked. for he knows that the truth is strong enough to defend itself against any and all possible attacks on it. thus his knowledge of the truth is affirmed.
a man who seeks the truth is not afraid to reveal his ignorance by asking questions. for by the recognition his own ignorance he will learn the truth. thus knowledge of the truth has been gained.
a man who refuses to do either is a man who is afraid to find out if his beliefs can withstand the scrutiny that all beliefs truthfully deserve.
since what a man says about another says more about himself than it does the other person all i can do is grin at your judgment of me.
I hate to say it, truth, but the only way that we're probably going to be able to get the dirty money out of politics is with public financing of elections. And NOBODY seems to want to do that (this despite the fact that it's probably cheaper than a couple of weeks of us being in Afghanistan).
I see the mor things change the more they stay the same.
Blogging is sort of like watching a soap opera.
The whole political scene unfortunately id deluded Truth(Joe), and none of them, especially on the right want to do a damn thing, but same ole same.
I hear Romney is the man this week, and he know's how to make million's (so would I if I had million's) ... he has a nice haircut I reckon ... Barry White also has a nice pop culture haircut ind smile in the photo above, and he has some million's too, maybe Barry could run with him, eh?
Just an idea Bud : )
I explained why you do what you do Griper. Now smile at that.
The more I look at things the more I appreciate the only statement William Buckley ever made that now hase some worth RN.
He'd rather trust Congress to the first 535 people in the Boston phone book.
Sadly, Barry is no longer with us RC. He would have been a great "vice" president.
Wonder how Griper will frame one of his questions around this?
PJoe,
i'm not the one who is refusing to answer another man's questions, you are.
if you feel that your answers are being attacked then it is only because they are too "inadaquate" to withstand the scrutiny that they deserve.
a philosophy teacher once pounded into my head the fact that there are no foolish questions, only foolish answers.
your problem with me is the fact you expect a debate of issues on your terms and i won't acommodate you and that frustrates you.
and it frustrates you because i force you to see your ideology from a different viewpoint and you don't like what you see.
Ah, Will...
Since you were not kind enough to provide a link but assumed that all of us liberals would naturally accept your " Even the Huffington Post acknowledges that BH is significantly in arrears in its taxes " just because you included "Huffington Post" in your comment please!
If you actually READ the article, which I did by searching Huff Pro and clicking on the link to follow where this information came from I found out that it came from the NEW YORK POST, you know the Murdoch owned piece of shit.
Second, Berkshire does not OWE BACK TAXES, but rather has disputed adjustments, which in other words means they were audited and or filed amended taxes for those years.
Nothing in the article states anything near the fact that you are trying to make; in fact the Huff Pro article was about what a piece of shit the journalism of the Murdoch rag NY Post is, and I guess since your reporting of "facts" is on level with the NY Post you need to get your thought process out of the gutter.
Griper,
The country that has practiced your brand of economics has never existed, because your brand, like that of RN, and all the Austrian School/Ayn Randians is a fantasy, contrived to to glorify theft and justify feudalism.
Go ahead and point to a REAL country and tell me we should follow them...
Point to something real as an example.
TAO : I swore I would never again respond to your idiocy. However , given your last billshit comment I simply mist say get your head out of your ass. Or find a pipe to suck on, preferably a co2 pipe.
"The country that has practiced your brand of economics has never existed..."
you know, Tao, have to admit i never thought of along those lines and i probably would agree with you on this. but will also say i'd disagree on your reasoning.
economics is the backbone of any and every nation.
i'd say the reason would be because politicians are into the idea of "power" that the seats of government gives them and don't have the strength of character necessary to apply them. and that has been the downfall of many a nation throughout history.
i could be wrong but have to say that would be a very interesting perspective of history to research.
You don't force me to do anything Griper. You frustrate me with your asking questions I've either answered before you asked them, or constantly trying to rephrase them so you don't look like an idiot for asking question that have been answered.
You stand for nothing. I stand for a better America.
Ah RN, you are such a fraudster!
Read your blog today, you want the republicans to get their best and brightest together to come up with ideas...
You realize that would be The Heritage Foundation, which in 1994 came up with what we now call "Obamacare" and actually Newt Gringrich is the "idea guy" or is considered the "deep thinker" of the Republican Party...
I think the world has had enough of the best and brightest of the Republicans because that is what got us where we are today, and I think the Democrats need to come up with their own ideas rather than stealing them from the Republicans.
Oh, and if you ever venture to a bookstore, you will find that Ayn Rand is in the FICTION section!
Fiction, like in fairy tale, not true, non factual, fantasy, science fiction....
As far as wrapping ones lips around a pipe...maybe your support for Ron Paul is due to the fact that what you wrap your lips around is called a bong by most people!
Joe - 'I stand for a better America'
and you know that I will always be Standing Right Up Next To You.
Nothing wrong with my reasoning Griper, why you miss the point is because you, like most of the folks on the deluded right, including RN, want to believe that its government and politicians that are the cause for all the evil economics.
The reality is they are pawns, that are bought and paid for. The folks that run the country figured out a long time ago that some people, are always going to vote Republican no matter how shitty the candidate is, and some people will vote Democrats; the only votes that really matter are independents and since states are winner take all and its not the total votes that matter but the state count they have learned how to play this thing called democracy.
Oh, they will let you have your Tea Party on an off year election like 2010 or your fringe candidate like Ron Paul, as long as he stays in the party, but its going to be Romney vs Obama in 2012.
If you get fed up and decide to vote your principles everyone will laugh at you and tell you that you are throwing away your vote, so you do like RN does and vote for the lesser of two evils.
Then shake your head and write a blog post about how our country is losing its values and principles that made it great.
IF YOU REALLY GIVE A DAMN AND IF VALUES ARE IMPORTANT THEN THROW YOUR FUCKING VOTE AWAY AND GO THIRD PARTY!
Its better to throw your vote away than give your country away to a bunch of WALL STREET financiers who care more about their profits from CHINA than they do about the future of this country.
If you truly believe that economics is the backbone of a country then buy only "MADE IN USA" and shop local, buy from your fucking neighbors not some corporation who doesn't give a damn about your community.
Nothing worse than a bunch of old white guys sitting on the internet blogging and whining go out and take Individual action! Be a libertarian and make something happen in your own life all by yourself.
I have not used a credit card in six months and I am at 90% of my purchases being Made in the USA, and every purchase I have made has been with a local company.
I decided to quit blogging and whining and rather spent the last six months practicing what I preached and it can be done.
RN, you are such a principled man and one with high moral values and a deep concern for the future of this country why don't you lay out a plan to "save" this country that will work and then see if you can live it.
If everyone paid cash RN their would be no need for the Federal Reserve....so, I am living Ron Paul's ideals...
I will warn you, paying cash for an airline ticket will put you on the TSA terrorist list faster than you can imagine....I know. Oh, and you cannot rent cars or hotel rooms.
So traveling is a big problem, take a car and stay with friends; oh, and paying utility bills now involves standing in line...because its cash, no banks, no checks and no debit cards.
Cash....try it for a month.
Then you will understand what is really wrong with this country, we don't like cash.....
Capitalism is based on CASH not credit.
Here is an article that EVERYONE SHOULD read and think about:
Shareholder Capitalism vs. Stakeholder Capitalism
Truth is a Stakeholder Capitalist:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/13/opinion/lind-romney-bain/index.html?hpt=hp_bn9
As TAO says, I am a stakeholder capitalist. And it's in the best interests of our Country that we all are.
Tao,
i never said there was anything wrong with your reasoning. i only said i disagreed but clearly acknowledged the possibility of being wrong.
in fact, we are in agreement by this statement of yours,
"The reality is they are pawns, that are bought and paid for."
who else but a man with a weak character would sell himself in the first place? and i'll admit it, i don't trust men of weak character. if you believe they are deserving of your trust then fine trust them.
and i never called economics evil under any circumstances, either explicitly or implicitly.
read your link:
"In some cases this might preserve jobs and factories at the expense of innovation and efficiency."
we already have the best example of how this works out. it is called government. and we see the end results of it now. so, no thanks.
i'll take my pink slip if it means a more efficient and innovative corporation.
Then Griper take your pink slip because if you look at the quote, it says "it might" and we all know that America was a stronger more self reliant nation when we practiced stakeholder capitalism
I also know that our standard of living was higher and we were the envy of the world.
Now with shareholder capitalism, which has made a very few very wealthy and the nation as a whole very poor you still want to gamble on "it might"
I hope it is worth the pink slip add your monthly social security check in the pot too.
take your pink slip because if you look at the quote, it says "it might"
yup i read that, Tao, and my response took that into consideration with this;
" i'll take my pink slip if it means a more efficient and innovative corporation."
the key word there is if
TAO - Wrong once again. Rand wrote fictional books, most of which I have read. She also wrote many non fictional books, most of which I would bet you have not only not read but probably never knew and still don't know exist.
So bong sucking dude it is you who needs to visit a bookstore. And damn fast I might add.
And now I am once again turning you off as though you don't exist.
Because you don't in the big scheme of of it all. Just as I don't. So have a merry life sucking on your bong bro.
RN, You need to develop a little discipline and only post comments when you can adequately perform the basics of keyboard manipulation. Please do reconstruct your fantasy reality without me.
Griper,
Thus you are not willing to gamble your job, your future on an "if."
So, in your manner you have agreed with me.
If corporations could innovate and be efficient then start ups would not exist. If corporations could innovate and be efficient then the concept of "too big to fail" would never have been thought of. If corporations could innovate and be efficient, then the need for protectionism and government established barriers would not be needed.
Its competition that makes corporations innovative and efficient but competition is also a threat to corporations thus they buy themselves politicians and lobby for preferential treatment so to ensure that they do not have competition and thus do not have to innovate and be efficient.
So, you want to gamble on an "if" and an "if" that the corporations see as a negative not a positive.
I wouldn't bet my dog being dependent upon someone else doing something they don't want to do.
You will take your pink slip because you have no choice in the matter Griper.
Unless of course you employ me as your union rep. I've saved the jobs of people far goofier than you pal.
TAO: will you just start another Google account please. Be far more convenient for you for follow up reasons.
Joe - I know now why I come to your Blog.
Because all of the really great Macho 'discussions' between you, Rational, Griper, Tao - and yes even Beach Bum and the Others - well they kinda get me...
s*x**ll* *r**s*d.
:]
Joe,
you are correct. under the capitalist system an employee would have no choice on the matter. there is an implicit clause in the contract that i agreed to that i can be given a pink slip on any day i come into work.
the owner of that business hired me without giving me reason, thus he can give me a pink slip without giving me reason. and greater efficiency of that business would be one reason that would justify it.
it is up to me to see to it i am a asset worth possessing rather than being a liability in order not to get a pink slip.
by that same line of reasoning i went to work for that employer with giving him reason as to why i chose him as an employer. therefore if he does not treat me in a manner that i feel i deserve i can give him my quitting papers at any time also without giving him reason. that is another implicit clause in that contract.
i'm not the kind of guy that will force an employer to hire or keep me as an employee when he does not want my services just as i do not want an employer that will force me to work for him when i no longer wish to provide him with my services.
that is the difference between a slave and a free man. that is one of those hidden benefits of the 13th amendment, Joe.
i am a strong enough man to not fear unemployment as apparently you think a man should. and i am strong enough so as to not be dependent upon men like you to represent me, Joe.
i don't trust people who would force me to rely on them as you would like everyone to do. a man who needs to force another man to abide by his ways is a man with a very weak character.
and it is use of that singular word, "force", that glaringly reveals the character of a man.
and it is the use of that singular word that differentiates your political ideology and philosophy of life from mine.
you see the use of force as a virtue. i see the use of force as an evil.
I am my brother's keeper Griper.
I want everyone to have meaningful work and sense of worth. I want everyone to be treated justly and compensated fairly.
"Thus you are not willing to gamble your job, your future on an "if."
So, in your manner you have agreed with me."
i never said that, Tao. i only acknowledged that hypothetical situation as one valid situation for a pink slip that i could not argue with.
and the only man who would is a man who feared unemployment. and it is under this hypothetical we can place that employee as one cause of inefficiency and lack of innovation.
Joe,
a slave performs meaningful work but force prevents him from having a sense of worth.
and if you are an advocate of the "people" that employer is as much your brother as is the employee. and i think your brother would resent you using force to get him to abide by your ways. i know mine would. and when i refer to the use of force i am referring to it in both the active as well as the passive sense.
Your ignorance is becoming legendary griper. I negotiate for better wages and benefits.
And your "ifs" are meaningless drivel as all they are are a way for you to wiggle out of silly statements.
And when your boss fires you because he feels like it then I'm sure you can sit in the unemployment line feeling good about your courage.
Put on a brave face Griper. You're a shining example that Mitt Romney could use when asked whom he liked to fire because you were brave. It gives Mitt and his kind comfort and validation.
bravery has nothing to do with it, Joe. self-confidence and self-respect is my motivation.
i am confident in myself as to not need to be dependent upon another and respect my own skills and knowledge so as to not fear unemployment.
and relying on those two attributes i can walk away from any employer if he does not desire my services anymore without malice towards him knowing that my future is secure.
the fact that you would be willing to force that employer to keep me on as an employee means little to me.
and you think of this. force is one attribute that is the first determinate of an injustice done.
that is the foundational basis of all just laws, to address the use of force, not to excuse its use.
and there is no amount of compensation by force that can replace a sense of self-worth lost.
So knowing your boss can mistreat you at his pleasure is comforting to you Griper?
You do have some crazy ideas dude. Your boss holds your job over your head to ensure your attendance and performance. That's force. Is it not?
You've had some inane talking points before but this is possible the silliest one yet Griper.
Truth - Just is a concept that has objective meaning as it relates to some defined standard. Fair is very subject as relates only to what each individual feels is fair.
You've been in negotiations RN. You know that there is a certain amount of vaguary in agreements.
Fair and just are whatever I can get my people and yours to agree to.
the right to mistreat me is not a part of the contract i agreed to, either explicitly or implicitly.
and that would be seen as breaking the contract we both agreed to thus justifying my resignation
my attendence and performance is a implicit clause in that contract which i agreed to willingly and consensually. and if i did not intend to abide by those clauses then i should not have entered into that contract in the first place.
so, Joe, nice try at a misleading argument. try again.
You have no contract Griper. You are an at will employee.
he chuckles,,,there is a contract, Joe, and it is legally enforcable in a court of law too.
if there wasn't you'd be foolish to offer your services to save my job as you did earlier.
the fact that you say that there is not just affirms my decision not to hire you.
hint:
there is another reason for you to go back to school. the class you need to take is "contract law 101"
You make zero sense griper. Proving yet again you have zero clue on anything you talk about.
Truth,
Griper is being argumentative, as is his nature. He has no point, he has no position, he just wants to argue for argument sake.
"At Will" or "Right To Work" are legal terms for "no contract."
As an employer in a right to work state I can walk up to Griper, who is a great employee, with perfect attendance and everything, and just fire him. Just because I wanted to.
Now, FEDERAL LAW requires that if I have a certain number of employees and I am closing a plant I must give them 90 day notice. But we know what conservatives think of the FEDERAL government.
If an employee quits their job and do not give me a two week notice, as per company policy, then I can withhold certain benefits and they are denied unemployment, no matter what their reason for quitting is.
But nothing says I have to give them a two week notice.
Of course Griper will respond that our handshake is our contract; nope our contract is you need money and thus you need a job and if jobs are hard to find you will do anything to keep your job.
Contracts are between people with equal standing, the employee does not have equal standing.
I enjoy The Griper but I realize he has no point, no ideas, no solutions, he just likes to poke around and stir things up, as that is his nature.
At least you always start letting everyone know where you are coming from!
Okay Truth, I got myself a new account, I hope that makes you happy!
"Contracts are between people with equal standing, the employee does not have equal standing."
false
and i'm being nice by just calling it false instead of calling it a lie.
he just laughs now. this coversation is getting too ridiculous now. if either of you would have taken the few minutes that was necessary to research the issue neither one of you would be painted in a corner now.
the fact that you did not just shows the arrogance and self-rightiousness that is the basis of your beliefs. here is just a couple of examples of what you would have found;
"Employment contracts come in all shapes and flavors. Everyone who works has, at least, an oral contract: “Work for me and I’ll pay you $xx.xx per hour.” That’s an oral contract. If you work, and don’t get paid, you have a contract claim even though nothing is in writing."
"An oral contract is a verbal agreement made between two or more people about an exchange of goods or services, or a guarantee on the quality of a product"
as an aside for anyone reading this, all contracts are essentially oral contracts. the written contract is just evidence, in times of dispute, of what is agreed upon orally in very specific terms.
it is also the basis of the old saying and the reason that people in the past considered it such an important vow, "my word is my bond"
and yes, Tao, the handshake was considered as a gesture of a legally binding contract entered into.
this is the third falsehood of yours that i have exposed in this thread alone.
so, Joe, this conversation proves that it isn't my questions that paint you in a corner. your own arrogance does.
i believe i have done enough damage to your reputation as a truth teller now.
I recall my grandpa telling me a man's handshake was his bond, his word coupled with his handshake was his contract. Sad there are not many men like my grandpa these days.
Funny think is... I still live by grandpa's crazy belief in honor. Dad lived by grandpa's sense of honor as well.
So, maybe Griper has a point you just don't recognize.
I see he has expounded on it a bit with his reference to the "verbal" contract.
Truth 101 chuckles as it is Griper who continually paints himself into corners then tries to wiggle his way out of them by chuckling to himself.
Tee hee hee.
TAO, Octo and perhaps Captain Fogg have the capacity to painty me into a corner. They're the only ones though. But I hoe Griper keeps trying as his intellectual clumsiness reminds me of the comic buffoonery of the Three Stooges.
Yes TAO. I am now happy. I'll be happier when my brother's tshirts I ordered many moons ago arrives also.
You shall shortly receive an ABUNDANCE of t shirts....
Wow, a t-shirt party! So very fitting...
Glad to see you have things under control TAO. Make money and don't buy Bank of America or Cheasapeake Energy.
Make money? Joe, with the way the 2012 election is shaping up I have decided that the Mayan prediction of the end of the world this year is the most humane thing that could happen to us!
All this talk about the future and our children, has anyone bothered to asked their kids if they really want this old sack of shit called THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
You might find out that your kids are secretly learning to speak Chinese; if Romney wins that will definitely be where all the jobs are in the future!
Sorry, Tao, but the Huffington Post did not dispute the facts of the New York Post story. They just took a different take on what it signified, typical of the HuffPo to try and spin bodaciously for liberal icons.............Disputed adjustments? Wow. So, if I ever get audited I can use that line, too?.............And, besides,if Mr. Buffett wants to pay taxes so much, then why in the hell is he "disputing" what the government says that he owes in the first place? It sounds to me like the guy might be flat-out full of shit.
Will,
You don't have a clue do you?
I am going to tax court next month to dispute $178,000 tax "adjustment" that the IRS determined was due.
The auditor added up all my deposits in my personal and business accounts and then decided that deposits were income.
Why? Because little hillbilly boy gets a payroll check that he deposits in his checking account and thus deposits are income.
So, when I sell $50,000 in stocks then transfer the funds to my personal account, as I should by IRS guidelines because I owned the stocks, then transfer funds to my business, that $50,000 personal loan to my business has now become a $100,000 worth of unreported sales.
Since this is from 2007 you would claim, much like the NY Post that I owe back taxes for 5 years!
Yep, a 23 year old IRS auditor with only 6 months experience also questioned expenses for advertising paid to Facebook, Yahoo, and Google.
Why? Because he doesn't pay anything to use Facebook, Yahoo, or Google.
I informed little hillbilly boy that the reason he gets to use the internet for FREE is because advertisers such as my company pay the cost of freeloaders like him.
The last time my business was audited it took them 5 years to complete and they went back 5 years so in effect we "owed" taxes for 10 years by the time they were done.
Just because you read something doesn't mean you know a thing....
Joe - When you get a chance there's a message for you - and anyone else for that matter - on my blog.
Check it out - please?
And I'm sure that Mr. Buffet's situation is EXACTLY like yours, Tao. And would the story have had MORE credence if it had appeared in the New York Times? Really?
And you're the one that doesn't have a clue, dude. What are Mr. Buffet and his minions over at Berkshire Hathaway saying here? THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY DON'T TRUST THE GOVERNMENT - this, while, at the same time, Buffet is demagoguing that he isn't paying sufficient taxes....to this very same government! Do you not see the irony there?......And, yes, I understand - not everything that I read is gospel (you might want to tell that to wd - he seems to take everything that thinkregress says as coming from Olympus). That's why I didn't go with the New York post piece until I also read it in the Huffpo (again, they didn't dispute a single fact from the Post story).
What, no response to Will's comment TAO?
Les, one of the years in question is 2002. 2002!! That's a decade ago. Either Berkshire Hathaway is trying to get away with something OR the federal government is totally incompetent. Or both.
Post a Comment