CPAPtalk.com

roster wrote:A lot of subpoints here, but the main point was why wasn’t Obama prepared to answer an obvious major question: Is it wise, considering the current state of the economy, to add more taxes at this time?

Thank you, Mr. President. We're honored to have you here today. I'm Joyce Reavis from Lake Wylie, South Carolina. I work at Celgard.
We have wonderful CEOs that take care of us and have really helped the company grow. My question is though, in the economy times that we have now, is it a wise decision to add more taxes to us, with the health care? Because it -- we are overtaxed as it is.

My take on it is that Obama did not expect any but softball questions and did not prepare properly. After all he just gave corporate welfare of $49 million to Celgard. Who would expect their employees to bite the hand that just fed them?

Of course I also believe the only honest straightforward answer Obama could give is, “No, it is not prudent to add more taxes at this time.”

$49 million to Celgard, a company with $1.5 billion in assets and excellent patents that nearly guarantee financial success????? I guess they had a hole in their roof!!!

Now there is a subpoint about my neighbor, Joyce Reavis. How long will Celgard continue to employee her?

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The White House didn't restrict reporters' access to the 300 to 400 employees who attended President Obama's appearance at Celgard LLC here on Friday. But the company did — unless you wanted to ask a worker how they "felt" about the president's speech and subsequent q-and-a.

Joyce Reavis, a Celgard worker who questioned Obama on high-earner tax hikes in his health reform package, made her way to the back of the room after the president left to do local TV, accompanied by a company flack.

In response to Reavis, Obama delivered one of the longest answers in recent presidential filibustering — a 15-minute dissertation of tax policy and coverage schemes that clocked in at 2,600 words on the transcript.

After the event, when reporters approached to ask Reavis whether she was satisfied with Obama's epic answer, she obliged, politely telling them that she appreciated his effort but still disagreed.

At that point, Celgard's communications director, Holly Hughes, intervened, saying that the company's policy was to bar employees from talking to the press.

Hughes said she would grant an exception only to workers who wanted to talk about "how they felt about the president's visit, but not about policy."

Reavis smiled uncomfortably and stopped talking.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm ... d8b89.html

A bump to get my friend Roster's comments on this page...

KarmicLynx wrote:What makes the market functional is greed. Me being greedy will demand that I get paid what I'm worth, a company will want a job done for the lowest cost. If they hire me, I make money. If they don't hire me but go somewhere cheaper then they get inferior product or I am trying to charge to much for my services. Greed, it may not be perfect, but it exists.

That's a perfect description of reasonable market-driven self incentive---not greed. Conscionable self-incentive is what makes the market functional. Rampant and unchecked greed, on the other hand, can literally break a free-market.

-SWS wrote:

roster wrote:A lot of subpoints here, but the main point was why wasn’t Obama prepared to answer an obvious major question: Is it wise, considering the current state of the economy, to add more taxes at this time?

Thank you, Mr. President. We're honored to have you here today. I'm Joyce Reavis from Lake Wylie, South Carolina. I work at Celgard.
We have wonderful CEOs that take care of us and have really helped the company grow. My question is though, in the economy times that we have now, is it a wise decision to add more taxes to us, with the health care? Because it -- we are overtaxed as it is.

My take on it is that Obama did not expect any but softball questions and did not prepare properly. After all he just gave corporate welfare of $49 million to Celgard. Who would expect their employees to bite the hand that just fed them?

Of course I also believe the only honest straightforward answer Obama could give is, “No, it is not prudent to add more taxes at this time.”

$49 million to Celgard, a company with $1.5 billion in assets and excellent patents that nearly guarantee financial success????? I guess they had a hole in their roof!!!

Now there is a subpoint about my neighbor, Joyce Reavis. How long will Celgard continue to employee her?

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The White House didn't restrict reporters' access to the 300 to 400 employees who attended President Obama's appearance at Celgard LLC here on Friday. But the company did — unless you wanted to ask a worker how they "felt" about the president's speech and subsequent q-and-a.

Joyce Reavis, a Celgard worker who questioned Obama on high-earner tax hikes in his health reform package, made her way to the back of the room after the president left to do local TV, accompanied by a company flack.

In response to Reavis, Obama delivered one of the longest answers in recent presidential filibustering — a 15-minute dissertation of tax policy and coverage schemes that clocked in at 2,600 words on the transcript.

After the event, when reporters approached to ask Reavis whether she was satisfied with Obama's epic answer, she obliged, politely telling them that she appreciated his effort but still disagreed.

At that point, Celgard's communications director, Holly Hughes, intervened, saying that the company's policy was to bar employees from talking to the press.

Hughes said she would grant an exception only to workers who wanted to talk about "how they felt about the president's visit, but not about policy."

Reavis smiled uncomfortably and stopped talking.
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm ... d8b89.html

A bump to get my friend Roster's comments on this page...

KarmicLynx wrote:What makes the market functional is greed. Me being greedy will demand that I get paid what I'm worth, a company will want a job done for the lowest cost. If they hire me, I make money. If they don't hire me but go somewhere cheaper then they get inferior product or I am trying to charge to much for my services. Greed, it may not be perfect, but it exists.

That's a perfect description of reasonable market-driven self incentive---not greed. Conscionable self-incentive is what makes the market functional. Rampant and unchecked greed, on the other hand, can literally break a free-market.

I dunno ... I think KarmicLynx makes a good point. Greed is a unique part of the human element. Everyone of us is genetically programmed to want more than what we have or need (ie. greed). Since only the human genome utilizes a market-driven self incentive, the market must therefore function on the basis of greed. What makes each of us different is that some of us are more greedy than others for whatever reason.

For me, the free market is perfectly natural and works very much like natural selection and I have no problem with that. What bothers me about a free market is that unnatural corporations have the human element of greed but without the other human elements like conscience, compassion, love, etc to balance against greed. Allowing corporations to participate in the free-market without regulation is what makes a free-market go bad.

DreamStalker wrote: I dunno ... I think KarmicLynx makes a good point. Greed is a unique part of the human element. Everyone of us is genetically programmed to want more than what we have or need (ie. greed). Since only the human genome utilizes a market-driven self incentive, the market must therefore function on the basis of greed. What makes each of us different is that some of us are more greedy than others for whatever reason.

For me, the free market is perfectly natural and works very much like natural selection and I have no problem with that.

I think many of us are bound to disagree about just where conscionable self-incentive becomes superseded by greed. But aside from those minor semantic differences, I think we're in agreement about your underlying points above. I would add that human genetics allow for an APD prevalence rate as high as 4% according to some experts (the APD link shows a lower estimate).

However, I suspect the prevalence rate of APD in corporate boardrooms runs much higher than 4%... APD's in charge of large corporations can single-handedly wreak large-scale disaster on the lives of many. Several APD's colluding pursuant rampant corporate greed are... repeated news stories unfortunately.

Dreamstalker wrote: What bothers me about a free market is that unnatural corporations have the human element of greed but without the other human elements like conscience, compassion, love, etc to balance against greed. Allowing corporations to participate in the free-market without regulation is what makes a free-market go bad.

I agree that corporations need to be regulated within reasonable limits.

-SWS wrote: I agree that corporations need to be regulated within reasonable limits.

Of course. We established this government to protect the rights of individuals to pursue (not have) happiness. If a corporation (or an individual) deceives, frauds, or physically injures or intimidates another corporation (or individual) they are in violation of the other's rights. That is the regulation and enforcement that is needed.

BTW, economists prefer the expression "enlightened self-interest".

If, in the act of commerce, you act in such a way as violate another's rights, you are not acting out of enlightenment.

Surpassing your competition by developing superior products and services at lower costs may "harm" your competition by damaging his products and even putting him out of business. But if you do this without violating his rights, you are not breaking the rule of enlightenment. This is the process of "creative destruction" and is one of the key ways that an economy advances and serves a society.

Enlightenment for me (like So Well) means I understand I have a Creator and this Creator expects me to behave in certain ways - be productive, respect others rights, use the fruit of your productiveness to help others, etc.

I have a distaste for what is going on with our government and Celgard. This distasteful activity has become rampant not only at the federal level but also at state, county and city levels. Build us a ballpark - Pah!

Where I disagree with DS is about where it should be stopped. It should be stopped at the government level. If the government stops handing out money and favorable regulations, the lobbyists will close shop in D.C. and close shop in our State capitals. Then business can get back to the business of competition and serving the customer.

But the governments are addicted - they cannot stop.

Mars, what about that intervention?

roster wrote:...If the government stops handing out money and favorable regulations...

Rooster, how $ is spent is determined by those who accept $ from biz...they aren't going to deny the hand that feeds 'em. Tax policy in hundreds of pages of exemptions for biz & special people/interests, a few pages apply to the rest of us. In the of the people, for the people, by the people really need to sub rich for people...we are a plutarchrasy now.

Muse-Inc wrote:

roster wrote:...If the government stops handing out money and favorable regulations...

Rooster, how $ is spent is determined by those who accept $ from biz...they aren't going to deny the hand that feeds 'em. Tax policy in hundreds of pages of exemptions for biz & special people/interests, a few pages apply to the rest of us. In the of the people, for the people, by the people really need to sub rich for people...we are a plutarchrasy now.

Exactly.

Where I disagree with the bird is that rather than keeping government out of business, business should be kept out of government. If business is prohibited from handing out money to government election campaigns in return for favorable regulations and corporate entitlements, the lobbyists will close shop in D.C. and close shop in our State capitals. Then business can get back to the business of competition and serving the customer and government can get back to protecting and serving the people.

Also, I found this rather interesting political metaphor on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwncrfHNEQQ.

And sometimes, a house with a hole in the roof, is just a house with a hole in the roof.

JennyE wrote:And sometimes, a house with a hole in the roof, is just a house with a hole in the roof.

... and the rain soaks all the tea bags and you then have a nut house.

JennyE wrote:And sometimes, a house with a hole in the roof, is just a house with a hole in the roof.

Do you mind if I forward that to Obama over a cup of tea with mixed nuts on the side?

I've enjoyed reading this for the humor, so I'll throw this one out for Comrade Rooster:

This morning I was woken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US DOE. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the NWS of the NOAA determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built and launched by NASA. I watched this while eating my breakfast of USDA inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the FDA.

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US congress and kept accurate by the NIST and the US naval observatory, I get into my NHTSA approved automobile and set out to work on roads built by the local, state and federal DOT, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality determined by the EPA, using legal tender issued by the federal reserve bank. On the way out the door, I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the USPS and drop the kids off at the public school.

My wife went to the OCC regulated bank today and deposited her Social Security check. After work, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to a house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and the fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all it's valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log onto the Internet which was developed by the DARPA and post on freerepublic.com and fox news forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

Let's say your electric bill is 300 a month. All of a sudden, it's 600 a month because you see that your neighbor has run an extention cord, wait, the government has run an extension cord from your electric box to your neighbors box who doesn't work and pay for electric. You see, he wants to be warm, too. So now I'm working 2 jobs to pay for my families electric and the neighbor as well. Heck, If I quit my job, the government will run an extension cord from my warm neighbor down the street, the Doctor who's working, to my house. I might just quit my jobs and suck off his electric teet for a wile. What? The Doctor quit? (Gee, that's a surprise) He needs a goverment extension cord now , too.

But...but...your neighbor has a RIGHT to be warm!

I'm sure it says so in the Constitution...probably in the Healthcare section. Look under Purfuit of Happineff.

neverbetter wrote:Let's say your electric bill is 300 a month. All of a sudden, it's 600 a month because you see that your neighbor has run an extention cord, wait, the government has run an extension cord from your electric box to your neighbors box who doesn't work and pay for electric. You see, he wants to be warm, too. So now I'm working 2 jobs to pay for my families electric and the neighbor as well. Heck, If I quit my job, the government will run an extension cord from my warm neighbor down the street, the Doctor who's working, to my house. I might just quit my jobs and suck off his electric teet for a wile. What? The Doctor quit? (Gee, that's a surprise) He needs a government extension cord now , too.

Well that settles that... The above metaphor perfectly describes why socialized medicine can't possibly work. There's clearly going to be too many people plugging into the resources of others. It just won't work as we can clearly read above.


...Oh wait! All those OTHER nations who are actually MUCH happier than Americans about their national health care apparently forgot to read how unfeasible their approach really is. They need to get on board.

neverbetter wrote:Let's say your electric bill is 300 a month. All of a sudden, it's 600 a month because you see that your neighbor has run an extention cord, wait, the government has run an extension cord from your electric box to your neighbors box who doesn't work and pay for electric. You see, he wants to be warm, too. So now I'm working 2 jobs to pay for my families electric and the neighbor as well. Heck, If I quit my job, the government will run an extension cord from my warm neighbor down the street, the Doctor who's working, to my house. I might just quit my jobs and suck off his electric teet for a wile. What? The Doctor quit? (Gee, that's a surprise) He needs a goverment extension cord now , too.

Can anybody say "stereotype".... I'm wondering what you might say if you were working 2 jobs and they still raise your electricity to $600... w/o any Healthcare Bill...

Nord