In other news….democrats block SEC rule to force companies to report worker work gap ratio. You know…for that lazy liberal you have to work beside. 4 smoke breaks a day, goes to the bathroom for hours on end, calls in sick and goes to the occasional communist organizer meetings during work hours.
Hey Jack, the political agenda of the Socialists/Communists in this administration is amazing. They want to bring down the job creators to the same level as the worker bees and make everyone equally poor. By the way, if the CEO screws up and the company fails, all the worker bees are out of a job.
Hey Jack, you didn’t make the mistake of hiring Stan did you? That would be your worst nightmare. It would almost be worth it to pay him unemployment to get him out of the office not to mention the E&O exposure if he screwed up on an account and left you exposed to suit.
So a secretary should make as much or at least half of what a CEO makes? I’m afraid this will be the new battle front for business owners at all levels of the business world.
Ridiculous. If employees are concerned with this, which most aren’t, they can look in the annual report. Do they really care about a “ratio” or is it the total pay of the CEO.
It’s a bigger problem than you think. And it’s not pennies either. I am not against a founder CEO or a CEO from a strong company being paid well. What irks people are all the weak CEOs being paid a boat-load for poor performance. Don’t believe me, just check out what’s happening to Coca-Cola.
Chicken, I saw a good bumper sticker the other day. Next to a picture of Obama, it said – I put America in the toilet, vote for Hilary and she will pull the handle.
You’re right, Nice Try – this was definitely posted by Agent! I don’t care what name he uses, sometimes you can’t hide behind the writing style. And Agent likes to tell about the funny quotes, articles, cartoons he has seen, etc. Ah, that tricky Agent!
agree w/ Nice Try & Busted – it reads perfectly like an Agent post. also, doesn’t hypocritical Agent make it a point to say he never posts as anything but Agent? sounds even more suspect than before this Independent comment.
August 5, 2015 at 4:40 pm
realist says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
89
18
What do you expect from a law written by two crooks?
Ah yes, Christopher Dodd and Bawney Frank after the mess they made with Fanny & Freddie on the sub prime mortgage mess. Dodd got favorable treatment on a home loan from Countrywide. Did he go to jail or pay a hefty fine? Bawny had a boyfriend at Freddie. Gee, why was there not an investigation on that? Democrats take the cake in fraud and corruption.
This is good news. Now the board can be held accountable when a failing company is paying their CEO lavishly for a bad performing company that’s losing share prices/revenue. It’s not only the employees that lose when weak CEOs are paid to much, it’s also the shareholders. This is going to be a D&O issue in the future.
Now a board can be held accountable when a highly successful company is remunerating a top CEO for helping make them successful and creating jobs. By all means, reduce the pay of highly successful executives. Jay Fishman, you only deserve a little more than a middle management officer. As the leftist President has said, at some point you have made enough. Time to level the playing field. That doesn’t apply to my buddie Jeffrey Immelt of GE who can make all he wants because he is my buddie.
This will incentivize:
A) publicly held companies buying back all their stock and going private
B) privately held companies will not go public (don’t expand, don’t look for investors: stay small and keep it all)
Question for those with more knowledge and business savvy than I:
If a company is performing poorly, is it always the CEO’s fault? Aren’t there more variables involved? As in the case of Mr. Obama, when the country is doing poorly, his supporters will say that it would have been even worse with another “CEO”? Or that the current CEO isn’t responsible, because he inherited a mess from the previous CEO? Maybe the whole thing is a lot simpler than I thought….
When the country has been doing as bad as it has been doing for 7 years, perhaps Obama’s salary and perks and use of AF1 should have been reduced as well. I say let him get by on $50,000 per year, have Obamacare for Health Insurance, fire most of the help including the dog walker that gets $102,000 of our taxpayer dollars.
JB, the buck stops at the top. The CEO has to answer for everything. If he don’t get the ship sailing correctly, he should pay with his job. If he inherited a mess, he gets time to right the ship. At some point, the honeymoon is over or the company fails.
That’s Business 101 in community college.
And now we need a law to do this when its already being done in the Company Financial Reports?
Socialist, liberal crap-tastic garbage. We are a CAPITALIST nation, and a stupid ruling like this only brings us closer to a socialist environment, which America doesn’t want. The lunatics are very few and very far between, yet very, very dangerous. And unfortunately, they are currently running the asylum. This will lose on appeal and the players in this administration will be fired soon enough. The SEC has lost all credibility, if they actually had any to begin with…
Actually UW, the SEC was asleep at the switch during the sub prime meltdown and was not monitoring what was going on or calling the players onto the carpet for their activities. Now, they are flexing their leftists muscles since they are just minions of the President like all the other federal agencies. Everything is political 24/7. It will be refreshing when a bunch of these idiots are shown the door in 17 months.
Relax, Obama Bashers, this rule actually stems from the Economic collapse of 2008 — the one in which greedy Wall Street CEO’s refuse to comply — they should have started reporting this in 2010 — but haven’t.
In 2013, the average Fortune 500 CEO made 331 times as much as the average worker, according to the AFL-CIO’s “Executive Paywatch” project.
The ratio of CEO pay to worker pay has blown up in the last thirty years. In 1983, the average CEO made 46 times the pay of the average worker, and this ratio would skyrocket through the boom years of the 90s, with CEOs making 455 times what workers made.
The overall upward trend is yet another example of growing inequality in America
What is this growing “inequality” you speak of? It’s an illusion created by people like you. We live in a free society and executives are paid what they’re worth. I’ve worked for myself, and I’ve worked for someone else. I have no qualms with my boss or company leader making a lot of money. That’s what their positions warrant. Period. Same with my position. I’m paid what I’m worth, as long as I have the wherewithal to negotiate the best I can for me. And if I don’t, I then have a choice to live with it or move on to better scenery. In fact, we each have choices to make. We can decide to be complacent and bitch about what someone else is making, or we can get off our asses and become those people who make a lot more money (if that’s your goal). I choose the latter because I care about my quality of life. It’s a pretty simple formula in the grand scheme of things, so this “inequality” you speak of is a falsehood. It’s just another way for people like Celtica to boost their own insecurities/jealousy onto the masses because somehow they believe they have a “right” to make a lot of money, or they have a “right” to demand that an executive shouldn’t make as much. Nobody has a “right” to make a lot of money. It has to be earned, and thank God we live in a country that allows us to earn what we deserve.
“Worth” is very subjective. How do you quantify “worth” and determine whether someone is making more than, less than or exactly what they are worth? Can there be factors that influence how much money someone makes beyond just their worth? For example, how much bargaining power does someone have in an environment with high unemployment and little to no prospects to “move on to better scenery”?
I do not begrudge anyone in making as much money as they possibly can. However, in my opinion, very few people make exactly or even close to what they are “worth”.
Nearly every person who is wealthy make what they are worth.
If it were not for these people, our entire society would be in shambles.
Do not say “same with the poor!”
These wealthy people are doing things the poor simply can’t, or won’t.
And due to their actions, like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, even Michael Dell, and several others, we have a thriving economy, and jobs.
Without them, there would be no jobs. Period. End of story.
These people fill roles, which is why the bible explains what their purpose is. They can be greedy, but they definitely fill their role, and have worth in society.
I personally would never say a rich person is worth less due to wealth, and at the end of your statement, try as you may to back pedal, you did.
Instead of “correcting”me, how about answering the question: How do you quantify “worth” and determine whether someone is making more than, less than or exactly what they are worth?
If not for the working poor, lower and middle classes, where would the wealthy get their money? They can’t just get it from each other.
So a CEO who is let go because a company is performing poorly, losing money, and laying people off becomes wealthy because of a golden parachute is worth millions? How about heirs to a fortune who do not do anything but live off of their family’s wealth? Is being born to the right family, in and of itself, worth millions?
What did you mean when you said, “I personally would never say a rich person is worth less due to wealth, and at the end of your statement, try as you may to back pedal, you did.”? I said no such thing. I actually believe that some rich people are worth more than they make.
August 7, 2015 at 3:15 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
116
49
Ron, are all the NY Yankees players worth what they are paid? A Rod? How about LeBron James at $22 million per year? The Cavaliers obviously think so or they wouldn’t offer that kind of money. The boards of companies make an assessment on executive salary and offer terms accordingly. If the guy doesn’t get the job done and the company goes south, he usually gets replaced. That is how Capitalism works and has worked for a very long time. Socialism, on the other hand is more about paying everyone an equally low salary which provides no incentive to the worker to try to do better. It didn’t work for the Soviet Union and it doesn’t work for any other country who has ever tried it. Get off your soap box for Socialism. It doesn’t wash in the USA.
It is very lazy to say that everybody is worth what they make. Do you honestly believe the Yankees made $29 million more with A-Rod than they would have with another player making $1 million?
You said, “The boards of companies make an assessment on executive salary and offer terms accordingly. If the guy doesn’t get the job done and the company goes south, he usually gets replaced.” True, but is he/she worth the multi-million dollar golden parachute when they have failed? I understand it is part of their contract, but that is not the discussion. This is solely about whether or not someone is worth their wealth.
Where did I advocate for everyone making the same money or anything else Socialist?
August 10, 2015 at 12:36 pm
FFA says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45
2
Its the American Dream being crushed. Class Warfare being created. Obamnites unite.
Why does the receptionist in the local union hall make as much as a Journeyman when she hasn’t set a single foot for so much as a minute in the field and don’t risk falling off ladders, getting electrocuted and any other injury associated with working off the groung?
I Think its more of the time served thing. Additionally, she is the union boss in law. Got the job as the cronyism and gets the pay cause she keeps the job.
I do think its the time served.
I have never stated the worth of someone who is lower class.
You’re just a mouthy brat.
August 11, 2015 at 1:28 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23
10
In fact, see my other post regarding wealth redistribution.
Here’s a hint: I don’t support it due to it not working.
Not due to not believing poor people need more.
I have said the poor cannot and do not build the economy. But this isn’t an insult, and it is biblical.
The role of the rich is essentially capital growth, leadership, and building.
I have never said that makes the poor bad. It is what it is.
August 11, 2015 at 1:45 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
7
6
Isn’t it frustrating when people tell you what you believe, when it’s definitely not what you believe nor anything you said, and then you have to defend yourself from folks saying things like “no bob, that’s not really what you meant – I know what you meant better than you”?
August 11, 2015 at 2:00 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
43
25
Excuse me Rosenblatt but I NEVER put words into people’s mouths with no basis whatsoever.
Ron just did. I have never even come close to stating it.
For example, when Ron says that most rich people aren’t worth what they are paid, he is for a fact, stating their worth.
I then point it out.
That is not putting words in his mouth.
So pardon my french, but @#%@ you!
This fake moderate crap you spew? Is getting really old kid.
GROW UP
August 11, 2015 at 2:04 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48
17
Another example:
When Ron says lies about his moderate behavior, and he has bluntly created a no win scenario for republicans he doesn’t hold for democrats, and I point that out,
It is not putting words in his mouth,
IT IS MAKING HIM ACCOUNTABLE for his words.
Which is what I do.
I AM A MODERATE. And you are not.
Your fraudulent crap is why I argue with you.
Here I am in the same post talking about BEING OK WITH DOING WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION WHEN IT WORKS because poor people shouldn’t be bad off,
And Ron in the SAME PAGE says I put people who are poor in low esteem, and am exactly like Agent.
It is a HUGE stretch to call me like agent. MONUMENTALLY HUGE and yet you and him do it!!!
I’M SICK OF IT.
I have been on here talking about being ok with a public option, I point out dependencies using facts, and I’m called a troll, who never has facts, and an extremist like Agent.
It’s pure BULL CRAP. I do NOT treat you two in this way.
I may be aggressive when fought with (WHICH IS WHAT YOU AND RON DO) but you two ARE DEFINITELY PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE.
YOUR CRAP DOES STINK NO MATTER HOW PRETTY YOU WRAP IT UP WITH BOWS!!!!
Fair enough. What do you believe is the worth of someone who is lower class?
If you support a flat tax, you support redistribution of wealth, upwards.
The rich cannot build the economy without the lower and middle classes.
The role of the lower and middle classes is to do the physical work that leads to capital growth. Vision and leadership are meaningless without the hard work of the lower and middle classes. Don’t you ever forget that.
August 11, 2015 at 2:26 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
94
37
Relax kiddo. I didn’t threaten to kill your first born son or Lorena Bobbitt you. I know Ron put words in your mouth. That’s exactly what I was commenting about. My comment could be interpreted solely as “you’ve done (what Ron did to you) to me before – isn’t it frustrating when someone does it to you?”
Now as for your rant, let me focus on just one of your lies:
“I do NOT treat you two in this way.”
You sir, are a liar. You may have a genius IQ and you may be a physical specimen of a man, but you are a big fat liar.
Many times I have explained my actual intent to you – even going so far as to say “if you answer yes, here’s my reply and if you answer no, here’s my reply so you know my intent” and you have said numerous times something along the lines of “that’s is not what you meant. you REALLY meant something completely different, and I know it.”
You are no better than anyone else regarding telling people what they really think or believe.
August 11, 2015 at 2:30 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30
20
Also,
More relevant to this, I tend to tell someone as they say something, that they are accountable for their words.
Ron above just said what I think of the poor, while I was saying NOTHING.
August 11, 2015 at 2:59 pm
bob says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
23
21
Ron,
I am not even reading your posts so don’t bother.
The only words for you here are : I AM WRONG and I AM SORRY.
That’s all.
No bullcrap.
I’m done arguing with someone who isn’t just stupid, but is also completely unethical, and a sleaze bag to boot.
August 11, 2015 at 4:10 pm
Confused says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48
16
bob – if you are not going to read Ron’s response, how will you know if he actually said he was wrong and apologized to you? wouldn’t you have to read his post to see that he capitulated to your request?
Here are a few of the ways you an Agent are very much alike:
1. poor reading comprehension
2. incorrectly assuming you know a person’s intent
3. incorrectly assuming you know someone’s beliefs and ideology
4. quick to jump to insults
5. unable to take personal responsibility when proven wrong
6. replying with irrational, unrelated rants
7. condescending language directed towards those with whom you disagree
8. complete and utter disrespect for anyone who is not wealthy or a business owner
9. lack of self awareness
You said, “Excuse me Rosenblatt but I NEVER put words into people’s mouths with no basis whatsoever.” Then,in the exact same post you said, “For example, when Ron says that most rich people aren’t worth what they are paid, he is for a fact, stating their worth.”
When did I say that most rich people aren’t worth what they are paid? Provide the quote, not your analysis of what you believe I meant.
I just proved you WRONG!!!!!!!!!!
I win, you lose…again!!
August 10, 2015 at 5:19 pm
Independent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
76
1
Class warfare personified FFA. Do you think the union bosses will reveal their inflated salaries to the rank and file of the unions? I think Jimmy Hoffa, Jr is doing quite well on the backs of the members.
They do show the monthly operating budget. The person I know in that union states they are operating $80,000 monthly in the red. Last union members meeting, the hall payroll came up in a very heated discussion as to how they can keep operating $80,000 in the red and how do they justify the Hall payroll while so many members are sitting at home on a call that isn’t coming. This is of course Illinois.
Stay tuned on this one. Writing on the wall – A local Imploding within in it self.
For the love of God Celtica…You are focusing on numbers that don’t matter.
Republicans are never for an across the board increase, and they often don’t care about people making more money in a capitalist society.
This is one area where I do diverge from republicans but you are not helping your case.
What I think we should do is:
Pass a law based on the profits, CEO pay, and number of employees. Here’s my example:
If a lumber company has 40 employees, and the owner of the company is making $10,000,000, I would find it fair to take a portion of the profits of the company and mandate it to be given to the employees, because it would actually help their pay by a large amount.
However, if the CEO makes $1/m a year, and has 30,000 employees, it wouldn’t matter so I wouldn’t be for it. What you will overwhelmingly find is most companies couldn’t possibly give an increase of any large degree as a side comment. Most franchises and corporate pay areas do in fact have a huge ratio, for example Papa Johns, but if you simply compare their revenues, profit margins, and to the owner’s pay, you quickly find they can’t give a huge raise based on profits. And the owner deserves what he makes, even if it is 300 times more.
You need to just understand how the world works more and not get so riled up about it.
From the other Socialist Leftist rag called Forbes based on a study from that well known Socialist Leftist learning institution in Utah:
“Across the board, the more CEOs get paid, the worse their companies do over the next three years, according to extensive new research. This is true whether they’re CEOs at the highest end of the pay spectrum or the lowest. “The more CEOs are paid, the worse the firm does over the next three years, as far as stock performance and even accounting performance,” says one of the authors of the study, Michael Cooper of the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of Business.
Here’s a tip for all you libtarded people complaining about what you get paid vs. someone else. Change jobs stupid ! Get off your lazy liberal A and do something about it. Or you can sit there and do what liberals do, expect someone else to fix it for you.
On another note….confused about your gender? Check your underwear. Here ends the lesson.
No one is complaining about their pay, only that corporations need to disclose their CEO to employee pay ratio to determine if employees even want to work there so that they can make their own decision.
On another note, please, please, please vote for Trump as the Republican candidate in 2016.
Celtica, anyone would be better than your heroine Hillary. She is under FBI investigation for her activities. Do you still think she is best for the job? The numbers are going down, down, down and Bernie Sanders, the left of left Socialist/Communist is giving her a run for her money in the polls.
I discovered why you love Donald trump so much. He wants to raise taxes on the bottom 43% so he can lower taxes on the top 57%. Sounds like a redistribution of wealth.
Ron, I know why you are an Obama lover since he wants to raise taxes on all businesses and lectures that “you didn’t do that or you didn’t build that”. By the way, you don’t even make enough to pay Federal Income tax so who are you to make any comment on taxation? We should have had a flat or fair tax a long time ago, but Progressives really like that Progressive tax and people like you have gotten off scot free.
August 6, 2015 at 6:39 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
64
32
Says the moderate.
The majority of the 43$ pay next to nothing in federal taxes. Social security taxes they do.
What matters here though is they use the federal benefits. They use them, they should pay for them.
Social security you use it, you pay for it.
All other things, they are getting wealth redistributed by paying nothing.
If paying for what you use is wealth redistribution in your mind…You can easily see the problem is…Your mind.
Further more I recently looked up how many people make over $100k per year. It’s about 5%. If you raised taxes on ALL of them by 50%, you wouldn’t put a dent in the debt.
In other words: In order to pay for something the middle class doesn’t pay for, you think the only way to pay for it is to tax the wealthy, which doesn’t have the possibility to pay for it, instead of cut the wasteful programs.
You said, “The majority of the 43% pay next to nothing in federal taxes. Social security taxes they do.”. I know. That is why I used that number in my post.
Where in my post did I advocate an increase in taxes on anyone? I just pointed out what Donald Trump wants to do as the president. I did not even say that I disagree with him. Can you ever just take a post for what it is without trying to make it more than that?
Is Donald Trump’s tax plan, which increase taxes on some in order to lower taxes on others, technically a redistribution of wealth? Yes or no?
You have indicated that you read all of my posts. Do you recall that my solution to the debt problem would be to cut spending first, then, if still necessary, look at tax reform.
August 7, 2015 at 6:20 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34
3
Let me simplify this:
Benefits are for the poor and are wealth redistribution. No matter how much you try to twist it and say that they are lowering taxes on the rich by raising them on the poor, it would never be redistribution to the rich.
It would be allowing them to keep their money. In no circumstances would it be redistributing to the rich, their own money.
And the alternate would always be redistribution: Lowering rates for the poor or giving more tax benefits by raising taxes on the rich.
Let me make this more complex, because it is not a simple issue. It is not just the poor that receive benefits from the government. For example, corporations making profits receive subsidies, receive government contracts, are allowed to write off expenses for moving jobs overseas, etc. Also, it is the wealthy that own shares in these corporations and benefit from dividends and increased share value.
In addition, when the poor receive benefits, what do they do? They purchase goods and services in the private sector. And who benefits? The wealthy. Sounds like they are already getting their tax dollars back.
Many of the poor also pay taxes, sales, property, payroll, etc. Some of that money is channeled to the wealthy (see above). Is that not also their money?
Now, I will simplify this for you. Either taking money from one group in order to benefit another is redistribution of wealth or it is not, period. End of story.
I don’t think the wealthy need any more advocates. They have already bought the lobbyists and politicians. For what do they need you?
August 10, 2015 at 9:46 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
12
5
Either taking money from one group in order to benefit another is redistribution of wealth or it is not, period.
phew. hard hitting analysis there. thanks for sharing.
August 11, 2015 at 6:35 pm
bob says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30
13
Confused,
In no way at all is lowering the taxes on the wealthy directly related to how much the poor pay, first of all.
Second of all, it is not related to wealth redistribution. See my first reply. It would be reducing wealth redistribution to lower taxes on the wealthy. You can’t twist it and then link middle class federal taxes (which most pay zero) compared to what they would be after a decrease or increase, and say the benefit difference means you are engaging in wealth redistribution by lowering taxes on the wealthy.
This is especially true given that taxes on the wealthy are not given to the wealthy. By allowing them to keep their money you are not redistributing. By making many people get more money in federal taxes than they put in, and many at 0% it is wealth redistribution by default. Increasing taxes on them at this point would be reducing redistribution. You had to come to some serious twists and turns to call lower taxes on the wealthy, wealth redistribution.
So to modify your quote: Either it is wealth redistribution or it is not: Yes. Taking money from one group to benefit another is wealth redistribution. And lowering taxes on the wealth is not taking from one group to give to another.
For every $100 you take from the rich you can barely give $1 to each American.
August 11, 2015 at 7:25 pm
Confused says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
50
37
thank you for that explanation, bob but i have one follow-up question. i understand lowering taxes on the rich is a not redistribution of wealth because it is their money. but what if the lowered tax is solely due to poor people having to pay more in taxes? would you say it would be redistribution of wealth then?
sticking to your math analogy – if rich folks paid $100 less in taxes only because the poor people paid $100 more in taxes – or a 3% increase and 3% decrease, whichever works out to be a net zero result – is that redistribution?
again forget variables like better investment income or appreciation of assets – the net zero result would solely be attributed to tax code changes – lower for the rich and higher for the poor.
August 6, 2015 at 4:00 pm
louie says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48
16
Man, I hate to do it, but i gotta agree with Celtica on this one. If the Repubs continue to take Trump seriously as a candidate, Hillary is a guaranteed, stone-cold lock. The man is one of the scummiest people on the planet. Just do a Google search of his business practices; do you really want someone like that actually representing America??? He has NO political experience (not even as a community organizer), has declared bankruptcy numerous times, run several businesses right into the ground, got a number of deferments to avoid serving in Vietnam while having the nerve to trash John McCain’s service…Unfortunately, I could go on and on. He makes all of us who lean even remotely to the right look bad.
I’m certainly no Hillary fan, but I think she could dismember a puppy on live TV and people would still vote for her. She is coated in Teflon…nothing will stick to her, no matter how heinous. Keep screaming about those emails. It IS a big deal, but mark these words: she’ll skate on this like she does everything else.
Sanders is rising in popularity, and that’s also scary. Here’s someone who doesn’t hide his Socialism but actually embraces it. I don’t see him as the nominee, personally.
I’d like to see Biden run, if nothing else than for the comedic aspect of it. He’s seems like a decent enough guy and I’d love to have a beer with him, but he’s not presidential material. Ain’t gonna happen.
Gonna be one BUMPY ride over the next 15 months. Hang on tight!
Louie, I hate to rain on your parade, but Hillary is going down. She is under Federal Investigation(FBI) now for releasing classified documents on her personal server. They have the emails and I want to see her squirm under oath when confronted by them. This is a criminal offense since the FBI doesn’t do civil offenses.
You said Trump was not qualified to serve. I think I would take my chances compared to the unbelievably unqualified Community Organizer we have had. I would not be opposed to Scott Walker if he steps forth in the debates. At least he has run a state and has a good grasp of issues. The debate season should be lively. Post again after tonight and see who you like.
Please, please please….let TX secede and then Trump can be your president….that seems like a match made in heaven.
August 6, 2015 at 5:42 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
113
63
How about that Nebraska, the land of the Cornhusker kickback on Obamacare. Aren’t you so proud to have had Nelson as your Senator?
August 7, 2015 at 7:53 am
louie says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
59
1
here’s my take on what I saw last night. I didn’t stay up for all of it, but i watched about an hour of it.
1). The moderators were excellent. Megyn Kelly asked some TOUGH questions. They should honestly consider having her on the panel during the Democratic debates
2). I thought Rubio, Cruz, and Walker were pretty good, and Jasich could also make an impact. I’d be ok with any of them running, honestly. Jeb seems like a decent guy but not a strong enough candidate to be the front runner. I could see him as a VP, though.
3). Chris Christie? Not a chance. He made some good points but he’ll never make it. His own state can’t stand him (I’m in the Philly area so you should see how he’s viewed out here). It was interesting when he got into it with Rand Paul.
4). Trump: pretty much everything you’d expect. His massive ego stole the show. I noticed he wasn’t able to provide any of his “evidence” about the Mexican government sending over their worst criminals. I thought it was funny what he said about Rosie O’Donnell, but I liked it from an entertainment aspect. The man is an ENTERTAINER, not a president. I wasn’t a huge fan of his response about what he’d do to fix the healthcare mess. I wasn’t satisfied with his responses as to why he gave money to the Clintons and Pelosi, and I’m honestly surprised he could call himself a republican after that. Unfortunately, I think he personifies everything the media likes to paint as what’s wrong with the GOP, and we need to change that.
Trump is not an idiot, but he’s not in the race to make the country a better place. I honestly think he’s in it for HIM, because he can’t stand not to be in the limelight. My prediction is that he’ll fizzle out pretty soon once people start finding out more about Trump the Man instead of Trump the Entertainer. He’ll keep himself in the limelight, but don’t be surprised if he ends up throwing his support behind Hillary when he’s not the nominee.
For all of you Trump supporters, he does not want to be the president. He is way too smart to not understand what it takes to get elected. He is going against the traditional game plan and knows it will lead to defeat. He just wants to get his name and ideas out there for PR and to say, “my ideas would have worked” without actually having to be held accountable.
August 7, 2015 at 11:35 am
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53
1
Hey Louie, aren’t you the one who is from Philadelphia and lamented the dismantling of the Phillies? By the way, we thank them for trading a great pitcher Hamel to the Rangers after he pitched a “no hitter”. The Rangers also got a good left handed reliever in the deal for prospects. The Rangers are now competitive to either win the division or the wild card. We thank the Phillies for this trade.
I have a little different take on the moderators. I thought they were a little over the top antagonistic and they discriminated against Dr. Carson by ignoring him for much of the debate. He did get a little jab in when they finally came back to him by saying – I wasn’t sure I would ever get to say anything again.
It will be interesting to see how the polls look after this debate. Carly Fiarina did extremely well in the first debate and hopefully she will be on the big stage next time. She is definitely the smartest woman running for President. Rubio was good, Cruz & Kasich handled themselves well and Trump had his moments. Considering it was the first time on the stage with professional politicians, he held his own. The big loser was Paul who is a dufus Libertarian and attack dog. We need to get down to about 5 serious contenders in the next few months to have serious debates on who we want for President.
August 10, 2015 at 5:52 pm
FFA says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33
0
Louie says ” I wasn’t satisfied with his responses as to why he gave money to the Clintons and Pelosi”
All you Hillary lovers out there, I read from the AP this AM, the CIA is involved and she had Top Level National Securities issues on her personal server. They took a random sample of 40 and found two of that nature.
August 6, 2015 at 5:04 pm
Celtica says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
47
56
Way to go, Louie. For the record, I would not vote for a person who dismembered a puppy on live TV. Or even c cat.
It’s not that the Republican establishment takes Trump seriously (they want him out) but the disaffected voters are tapping into the narrative that other Republican candidates have set over the last several years setting the stage for their own ascension to the White House. Trump is simply eaping what they sowed.
Maybe you should proof read before posting Celtica. I have news for you, Trump is being taken seriously by the other candidates. We are all tired of political double speak in this country. Democrats lead the league, but many RINO’s do the same thing. We want the truth spoken no matter who it is and quit trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
August 10, 2015 at 12:47 pm
FFA says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
61
9
Not if she is put on trial for violating nations security protocol. I am sure the Repubs will dig out her interview when she was complaining about being broke when the left the white house – crabbing about her mortgage payments when billy boy was bringing home almost half a million with no housing expense necessary.
Jack, this is guaranteed to get the libtards worked up, but I couldn’t care less.
I encourage anyone who has Google to google the following: Obama Kissing Man. Obama wants it taken off the internet, but it is there. It is about as french kiss as can be and much more passionate than the peck he gives Michelle. Is there any doubt why he is for gay marriage? Maybe he is a switch hitter.
Try another Google Rosenblatt and Google Obama & Larry Sinclair. There are plenty of examples about Obama’s sexual leanings and his affair with Sinclair.
I will do more googling if you admit that the picture of “Obama Kissing Man” that you wanted people to search for was 100% photo shopped and not real what so ever. Can you admit that for the class, please?
The Capitalist system has created the jobs in this country, not Progressive Socialism which only kills jobs, except for leech government jobs. Every job government created takes away from the private sector. End of lesson troll.
How is your post relevant to what I said? Demand is part of Capitalism, you idiot. No demand, no Capitalism.
Rosenblatt are I still waiting for you to explain how your statement, “If you have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”, is not implying that Rosenblatt is a child.
I’d be willing to bet that you and Rosenblatt will be waiting forever to get that answer.
agent – if you don’t want to look more like an uninformed hypocrite than normal, you may want to look up the definition of troll before you use it wrong in a sentence again. ron’s post was not trolling even by the biggest stretch of the imagination.
I am still waiting for you to say something intelligent Ron. It will be a very cold day in July before that happens. I responded to his all “Caps” statement which was a tantrum which many of you do when you are losing an argument. Are you and Confused going to fall on the floor kicking and screaming now if you don’t get agreement to your post? By the way, Keynsian spending/Progressive Socialism never created jobs or the Stimulus would have worked. It didn’t and the President you voted for twice admitted it on tape.
You (Agent) wrote “If you [Rosenblatt] have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”
THIS is the post where I think you called me a child.
I wrote in all capital letters one time that I had had enough of you saying I said & believed something when I had already told you two times that I felt & believed the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you erroneously thought.
“If you have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”
If you were not calling me a child as I think you were, what exactly were you calling me?
What are you trying to do Nebraskan, exceed boogereater, Ins102, Ron, Celtica a close race for troll of the year? It is not a noble title to have by the way. Their nasty posts are now legend on this blog. Keep it up and we will add you to the Poster Hall of Shame.
Rosenblatt, Naïve. You were the one throwing a tantrum, not me. You threatened and said you had enough in Caps. How am I supposed to interpret that? Your anger management issues need to be resolved.
I see you’re back on the theory that you think I believed you called me a child when you really just said I was naive. Okay. Here’s my reply to that.
~~~~~~~
Please read this post carefully, Agent.
You (Agent) wrote “If you [Rosenblatt] have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”
THIS is the post where I think you called me a child. The word “naive” doesn’t appear anywhere.
I don’t care if you called me naive about Obama and Kerry.
I wrote in all capital letters that I had had enough of you saying I said & believed something when I had already told you two times that I felt & believed the exact opposite.
So I state again:
Please tell me where the word “naive” appears in this sentence: “If you have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”
And if you were not calling me a child as I think you were, what exactly were you calling me?
In hopes you will provide a direct answer to my question, here is my direct answer to your “How am I supposed to interpret that?” presuming you meant my all-cap’s post.
You should interpret it exactly how I’ve explained it at least three times now: I wrote in all capital letters that I had had enough of you saying I said & believed something when I had already told you two times that I felt & believed the exact opposite.
Rosenblatt, your parsing of words on numerous topics is a very unattractive quality. You need to work on that flaw. For the “very” narrow one sentence reply, I responded to your tantrum in all Caps. I have called you naïve about three times now. Quit throwing tantrums and you won’t be called naïve.
How about we get off this merry go round and have you answer me at least one time whether you are still supporting Planned Parenthood after 5 destructive videos. You seem to be good at pulling info off of Google without ever expressing a personal opinion. Do it now!
You must be equally proud for being a word parsing liberal with no opinions on anything. Do you have any opinions or do you just stick with Google or some website to do your opinions for you?
August 7, 2015 at 2:06 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
41
35
I have lots of opinions! You either don’t ask me and instead tell me what I believe, or you just don’t comprehend what I’ve actually said.
Remember when you asked me if atheists always blame science when things go wrong? No google answer there!
Remember when you asked me if I thought Obama was a good president – and I ranked him a 3 out of 10? No google answer there!
It’s not my fault you can’t comprehend properly, only hear what you what to hear, don’t bother to pay attention to what someone actually says, and then you just regurgitate the same FOX-based talking points ad nauseum thereby distracting from the actual topic being discussed!
August 7, 2015 at 3:24 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
129
74
Congratulations Rosenblatt. You like to say I don’t comprehend what you say and you talk in circles and parse words. You don’t like my answers since I am Conservative and don’t agree with you on much, very similar to Ron. Everything goes right over his head or in one ear and out the other with nothing registered.
Are you going to give me a Google answer on Planned Parenthood or continue to ignore me? Don’t complain about me ignoring you on any topic if you have no answer or opinion.
You said, “You don’t like my answers since I am Conservative and don’t agree with you on much…”. That is not the issue. The problem is that your “answers” are just irrelevant rants or insults. Try to answer direct questions with relevant answers and maybe we could have an intelligent discussion.
August 7, 2015 at 3:44 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
64
71
I talk in circles, you say? If you can give me an actual example where I’ve done that, I will be happy to reply some more then.
August 10, 2015 at 4:46 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
64
64
Your silence is golden, Agent.
August 11, 2015 at 3:14 pm
bob says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
36
33
““I have called you naïve about three times now.”
Congratulations. You must be really proud of yourself.
”
He had an entire post with many sentences and areas and you only focused on the above.
That is not honest debate.
Stay on topic. His silence is due to being done with your stupidity.
You are wrong bob. Agent was the one deflecting conversation away from the actual topic we were discussing. He was the one debating dishonestly by making off-topic posts. Please allow Agent to speak for himself in the future.
I reiterate my last comment: If he can give me an actual example where I’ve talked in circles, I will be happy to reply to his off-topic question about Planned Parenthood.
August 7, 2015 at 2:54 pm
Peon says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
I got paid my $1.00 today!!! In cash!! WOO HOO!!!!!
All this talk about what CEO should or shouldn’t be paid is meaningless — until someone tries to regulate it.
Now as a consumer, investor or possibly a job applicant, I might like to see this next to all the other metrics. By itself -nothing, but if I see a Co with a poor P/E ratio, YOY revenue declines or expense growth, or stagnant book value with a high CEO pay ratio, might I not decide not to buy, invest or apply?
I would agree that’s what this matter is all about: transparency to help people make more informed decisions.
My belief here is one intent of this regulation is so people can say, for one example, “The median pay here is $20,000 and the CEO makes $20,000,000, so maybe we as shareholders should not vote for that proposed 10% increase in the CEO bonus.”
In addition to shareholders, you’re 100% correct that this ruling is also useful for investors. I mean, if you’re going to invest in a company and you know their combined ratio is 150% yet their CEO is making significantly more than the average employee, that information may sway your decision.
Ultimately, like you said, this is really just another data point to help folks make a more informed decision.
Insguy, your point is well taken that it is meaningless– until someone tries to regulate it which is what is going on with this action by SEC. They are nothing more than another tentacle of the Obama Administration trying to regulate, control all activities of business. That is also Progressive Socialism which is the hallmark of the Democratic Party in today’s world.
If I were a young man applying for a job with a very big company, I am not concerned with what the CEO makes. I am trying to get a job and provide for my family. Those, who are investors have plenty of information from brokers, Google or other sources to make a determination on whether to invest or not based on P&L statements, history, growth etc.
taking the leap from “businesses who already have to provide executive compensation pay disclosures must now also provide a CEO pay ratio too” to “the SEC will regulate CEO pay for all companies” is absurd.
How absurd was it for Obama to fire the head of GM & Chrysler and install his own minions to run them so that union contracts could be saved? Both companies should have taken orderly bankruptcy, cancelling all union contracts for their lavish benefit packages which were running the companies into the ground.
that had nothing to do with what we were talking about
August 10, 2015 at 11:12 am
InsGuy says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11
1
Agent: to a certain extent you may be right – eventually. But make no mistake — this is a ruling by the SEC for the traders and investors out there.
Alot of the stock of the big companies out there are held by the company. So who gets to exercise most of the “say on pay” votes? The CEO and Board – that’s who.
This will likely give another “tool in the bag” for shareholder lawsuits. Not the everyday guy like us, but the scum bags like Greenberg who think they are entitled to guaranteed returns.
Hey Jack, I can’t get Rosenblatt to condemn Planned Parenthood for their illegal and barbaric practices. What does that tell you about his leanings? Of course, he is an Atheist and a human has no soul so I suppose it is ok with him. Some of these liberal dudes are in need of a frontal lobotomy.
You’re not being fair, Agent. I asked you 2 questions you haven’t answered. You subsequently asked me 5+ questions and I answered each and every one. Each time I answer you, I ask you to reply to my questions.
I am again telling you that I’ll give you an answer to your Planned Parenthood question when you answer any one of the below that you’ve refused to answer
Tit-for-tat. I get an answer, you get answer. That’s fair, right? I answer 6 of your questions and you only have to answer 1 from me.
If you can give me an actual answer to any one of these, I will reply to your Planned Parenthood question:
(1a) Please tell me where the word “naive” appears in this sentence: “If you have had enough, leave the forum to the adults.”
(1b) And if you were not calling me a child with that quote as I think you were, what exactly were you calling me?
(2) Can you give me an actual example where I’ve talked in circles?
I’ll give you one thing Rosenblatt, you have a one track mind. Of course, you are demanding an answer already answered multiple times. No wonder Bob calls you a child. I responded to your tantrum when I told you to leave the forum to the adults. Tantrums in all Caps pi– me off. You have proven over several years now with your 8 paragraph posts that you talk in circles. I am not going to play that game. You don’t have to answer my simple question posed numerous times about Planned Parenthood. Your silence speaks volumes on that issue.
My list Ron:
1. Ron
2. Confused
3. Nebraskan
4. Captain Planet
5. Celtica
6. Boogereater (disguised)
7. Ins 102 (disguised)
8. Rosenblatt (Just added after a brief pause of civility)
No admission that “Obama Kisses Man” is a total lie yet you presented it to everyone here as truth, Agent?
That’s okay – that is the epitome of a troll post! And now I’m sure you’ll incorrectly start using the phrase “epitome of a troll post” in your comments from now on.
I overlooked another that goes by the moniker – fairplayingfield. Is that a dead give a way on a Progressive Socialist believer. How about “Comrade Anon”? He/she doesn’t post much but has the same agenda as most of you do. I would be willing to bet that none of you have ever owned a business and just sit in your cubicle posting trash all day long at the expense of your boss.
I would love to bet with you Agent! The only problem is you’d never admit you lost so I’d never get paid!
Me “Royal straight flush. I win.”
Agent “I have Ace high. I win.”
Me “RSF beats ace high”
Agent “No”
Me “We’re playing Texas Hold ’em. I win.”
Agent “No”
Me “How?”
Agent “I win”
Me “How?”
Agent “We’re playing my new game called ‘I win”
Me “Want to watch a 2 minute scene from ‘Big Daddy’ with me?”
August 12, 2015 at 3:27 pm
Agent says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
16
20
Sorry Rosenblatt, I don’t gamble so your analogy does not wash. Let me leave you with something from the Bible even though you don’t believe in it and are a confirmed Atheist. I paraphrase but it goes like this:
The Disciples had fished all night and cast their nets over the “left” side of the boat and caught not one fish. Jesus told them to cast their nets over the “right” side of the boat. They did and caught so many fish they couldn’t pull the net in. There is a message there, but I am sure you and your leftist colleagues will miss it.
August 12, 2015 at 3:31 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
8
BWAHAHAHAA, oh Agent, you are such a hypocrite.
You wrote “I would be willing to bet ….”
So I said I would love to bet with you
You then wrote “Sorry Rosenblatt, I don’t gamble”
I’m sure you don’t see anything contradictory in your posts though.
August 12, 2015 at 3:33 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
22
9
Since you’re so sure I won’t get the message, why don’t you help out your fellow human and nicely explain it to me?
August 14, 2015 at 2:42 pm
FFA says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Rose, no such thing as a Royal Straight Flush. Its either a Royal Flush (to the Ace) or its a straight flush (not to the Ace). In the event of wild cards (at my house) your Straight Flush can only be to the highest Natural Card. Of Course, a Straight Flush always beats 5 of a kind at my house. Unless your playing Poker with a Pinnacle Deck. Then its rock paper scissors as a tie breaker.
August 12, 2015 at 10:29 am
Rosenblatt says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
147
137
Agent – I will refrain from jumping down the troll hole if you could provide a simple yes or no answer to this new question:
background — above you said: “I encourage anyone who has Google to google the following: Obama Kissing Man. Obama wants it taken off the internet, but it is there.”
As requested, I googled that phrase and I found out that image is completely photo shopped; there is no real picture of ‘Obama Kissing Man.’
question — do you agree you asked people to search an image that turned out to be fake and there is no actual picture of ‘Obama Kissing Man’?
Rosenblatt, how is this for simple since you obviously didn’t understand? Right is the right way and left is the wrong way. It is a very simple concept and has applied for thousands of years. The Bible has a lot of wisdom in it. Perhaps you should delve into it sometime instead of telling me that humans are no different than dolphins and humans have no soul.
Actually Ron, I agree with much of what Cuban says. By the way, you misinterpreted once again which is a major flaw in your brain. He was criticizing main stream Republicans and not Conservatives, you know RINO’s that I have railed against for years. Trump is giving all the pundits big trouble because he is not a career politician and doesn’t fit in their little box. He is refreshing because we are so tired of political double talk. Perhaps the scene will change and force all politicians to speak truthfully.
You may have noticed that he said he didn’t want to be a Democ(rat). He knows how bad they are after witnessing what we have had for almost 7 years. By the way, Hilary begrudgingly has turned over the mystery server and the thumb drives held by her attorney. Why wasn’t this done when they were asked for to start with instead of doing all those email deletions? We may get to the bottom of her illegal activity yet. Maybe this is why her poll numbers are in the toilet now.
“If you don’t agree with every platform of the party, not only are you called a RINO, a ‘Republican in Name Only.’ You are considered unelectable in primaries and become a source of scorn on Fox News. That’s a problem.”
You calling every Republican who doesn’t agree with every platform of the party a RINO is exactly what Cuban was saying is wrong with the party.
I suggest googling “Popular Reading Comprehension Books”, buying and then reading one of those
Confused, how about you reading some self help books to deal your abrasive personality. By the way, Fox screwed up this debate royally. I thought I was watching CNN or MSNBC by the tone. They showed discrimination by forgetting Dr. Carson for long stretches and gave too much air time to Kasich since he was on home turf. Trump is making them crazy since he doesn’t fit into their little box. I understand that Roger Ailes called Megyn on the carpet and he called Trump later and said Fox would be fair from now on. We will see how that goes.
trying to turn the conversation to the FOX debate instead of disputing my point that you are exactly the kind of Republican Cuban was criticizing? as Rosenblatt wrote above, your silence is golden
August 12, 2015 at 4:44 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
57
31
Actually, I think if you are a RINO, you are agreeing with the party platform fashioned by the RINO leaders. That is what is making them crazy about Trump who is totally out of the mold of what they think a Republican should be. They want to spoon feed America political double talk. Conservatives are sick of it. We are doubly sick of Democrats/Socialists/Communists lying at every turn and hoping there are enough low information voters left to believe them. One interesting development is the Facebook/Social Media crowd who are on their cell 24/7 and are now getting more interested in what is going on. Carly Fiorina had 800,000 hits on Facebook after her win in the first debate. As a result, her poll numbers put her in position to be on the big stage next time. She is clearly the smartest woman running for President.
August 12, 2015 at 7:42 pm
Confused says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
106
24
you said….Actually, I think if you are a RINO, you are agreeing with the party platform fashioned by the RINO leaders
totally! you are 100% correct. so if I agree with the entire platform fashioned by the RINOs, which is not the entire platform of the rest of the republican party, I am a RINO.
to me, your post sounded like you are sick of what the RINOs are doing to the party and you don’t think a RINO would ever get elected.
so to you, RINO’s are considered unelectable in primaries and have become a source of your scorn. that mindset is the problem with the republican party according to Mark Cuban
August 13, 2015 at 3:44 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
once again rosenblatt was right, your silence is golden agent
August 13, 2015 at 9:36 am
Agent says:
Hot debate. What do you think?
16
9
Ron, if you agree with Cuban, why did you vote for Obama twice? Surely, any Republican from any state in any office would have done a better job than Obama has. Your belief system is all screwed up just like Confused and some of your other buddies on this blog.
I voted against McCain and Romney based mostly on what Cuban is saying. They both tried to cater to the far right (you and other Conservatives) during the primaries, then tried to walk back to the center during the general election. That is what Cuban is discussing.
agent doesn’t need to re-read the article to come to the same wrong conclusion again. it’s clear from the posts above that agent is exactly the type of person Cuban felt was wrong with the republican party. i’d be willing to bet his response to the cuban quote will continue to be greeted with silence and deflection away from that topic. and yes, i gamble, so i am willing to bet – unlike agent, i mean the things i say
August 13, 2015 at 6:09 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
8
0
Actually, Republican RINO’s have tried to cater to the liberals too much and the Independents like you who can’t make up their mind who to vote for, you know what I am talking about, the fence sitters who don’t know right from wrong. RINO’s try to reach across the aisle and end up going along with Progressive Liberals. Both parties are going bananas trying to figure out Trump. He doesn’t fit the political mold and it is time to shake up the political process and put people in their place.
August 13, 2015 at 6:10 pm
Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
11
0
Did Cuban make his remarks prior to the 08 & 12 election Ron? If so, I never saw it. Quit trying to use that excuse.
You said, “Actually, Republican RINO’s have tried to cater to the liberals too much and the Independents like you who can’t make up their mind who to vote for, you know what I am talking about, the fence sitters who don’t know right from wrong.” Actually, I, like most other people on this blog, do not know what you are talking about. All you ever do is ignore what people are saying, take things out of context, and insult anyone with whom you disagree.
Being Independent means that you are not beholden to any party or ideology. Independents do not know right from wrong any more or less than Republicans or Democrats, Liberals or Conservatives. We think it is important to let the full campaign process play out before making a decision.
Whether you like him or not, Trump will not win and will do nothing to shake up anything more than a bottle of salad dressing. He is a sideshow, there for entertainment purposes only. He cannot even get along with Fox News, the Republican’s biggest media ally.
You asked, “Did Cuban make his remarks prior to the 08 & 12 election Ron?” First,I do not know. Second, why does it matter? He was speaking to why Republican candidates could not even beat an inexperience community organizer for President of the United States. It is called analysis.
You said, “Quit trying to use that excuse.” When was I using that as an excuse? All I said was that Mark Cuban agrees with my assessment of why Republicans have lost the last 2 presidential elections. It was not due to low information voters, as you like to claim, they cannibalize each other in the primaries to the point they could not appeal to the general electorate.
August 14, 2015 at 6:06 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
8
0
Ron, I am trying to point out to you the error of your thinking and it continues to go in one ear and out the other. Try putting some cotton in one ear and maybe it will stay in longer. You made a big deal out of being politically savvy, doing research on candidates and finally making up your mind on who to vote for in the elections. Please explain how it is savvy to vote for Obama twice and somehow think he was the best choice given the mess made for 7 long years. Do you not have an ounce of common sense and I ask you once again, do you know right from wrong. Try reading Ecclesiastes 10:2 once again if you are a good Christian Catholic.
Meaningless metric meant only to stir more jealously and strife in the country. This is Obama’s America.
you’re a racist and it’s Bush’s fault Wayne. just thought I’d get that outta the way for the libtards.
In other news….democrats block SEC rule to force companies to report worker work gap ratio. You know…for that lazy liberal you have to work beside. 4 smoke breaks a day, goes to the bathroom for hours on end, calls in sick and goes to the occasional communist organizer meetings during work hours.
Hey Jack, the political agenda of the Socialists/Communists in this administration is amazing. They want to bring down the job creators to the same level as the worker bees and make everyone equally poor. By the way, if the CEO screws up and the company fails, all the worker bees are out of a job.
Did you just describe yourself?
Wow Jack- no because I’m the captain of the ship. I’m describing the one sorry ass liberal I hired by mistake. :)
Hey Jack, you didn’t make the mistake of hiring Stan did you? That would be your worst nightmare. It would almost be worth it to pay him unemployment to get him out of the office not to mention the E&O exposure if he screwed up on an account and left you exposed to suit.
Touche’. I will give you that one!
Another B.O, ruling thoroughly permeated by the stench from the sewer of socialism.
So a secretary should make as much or at least half of what a CEO makes? I’m afraid this will be the new battle front for business owners at all levels of the business world.
Ridiculous. If employees are concerned with this, which most aren’t, they can look in the annual report. Do they really care about a “ratio” or is it the total pay of the CEO.
It’s a bigger problem than you think. And it’s not pennies either. I am not against a founder CEO or a CEO from a strong company being paid well. What irks people are all the weak CEOs being paid a boat-load for poor performance. Don’t believe me, just check out what’s happening to Coca-Cola.
Should we have a ratio of Senator and Congressman pay and benefits to average Constituent pay and benefits?
Bobob… excellent suggestion
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! And it’s Obama’s fault!
Chicken, I saw a good bumper sticker the other day. Next to a picture of Obama, it said – I put America in the toilet, vote for Hilary and she will pull the handle.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
What do you expect from a law written by two crooks?
Ah yes, Christopher Dodd and Bawney Frank after the mess they made with Fanny & Freddie on the sub prime mortgage mess. Dodd got favorable treatment on a home loan from Countrywide. Did he go to jail or pay a hefty fine? Bawny had a boyfriend at Freddie. Gee, why was there not an investigation on that? Democrats take the cake in fraud and corruption.
This is good news. Now the board can be held accountable when a failing company is paying their CEO lavishly for a bad performing company that’s losing share prices/revenue. It’s not only the employees that lose when weak CEOs are paid to much, it’s also the shareholders. This is going to be a D&O issue in the future.
Now a board can be held accountable when a highly successful company is remunerating a top CEO for helping make them successful and creating jobs. By all means, reduce the pay of highly successful executives. Jay Fishman, you only deserve a little more than a middle management officer. As the leftist President has said, at some point you have made enough. Time to level the playing field. That doesn’t apply to my buddie Jeffrey Immelt of GE who can make all he wants because he is my buddie.
This will incentivize:
A) publicly held companies buying back all their stock and going private
B) privately held companies will not go public (don’t expand, don’t look for investors: stay small and keep it all)
Question for those with more knowledge and business savvy than I:
If a company is performing poorly, is it always the CEO’s fault? Aren’t there more variables involved? As in the case of Mr. Obama, when the country is doing poorly, his supporters will say that it would have been even worse with another “CEO”? Or that the current CEO isn’t responsible, because he inherited a mess from the previous CEO? Maybe the whole thing is a lot simpler than I thought….
When the country has been doing as bad as it has been doing for 7 years, perhaps Obama’s salary and perks and use of AF1 should have been reduced as well. I say let him get by on $50,000 per year, have Obamacare for Health Insurance, fire most of the help including the dog walker that gets $102,000 of our taxpayer dollars.
JB, the buck stops at the top. The CEO has to answer for everything. If he don’t get the ship sailing correctly, he should pay with his job. If he inherited a mess, he gets time to right the ship. At some point, the honeymoon is over or the company fails.
That’s Business 101 in community college.
And now we need a law to do this when its already being done in the Company Financial Reports?
Socialist, liberal crap-tastic garbage. We are a CAPITALIST nation, and a stupid ruling like this only brings us closer to a socialist environment, which America doesn’t want. The lunatics are very few and very far between, yet very, very dangerous. And unfortunately, they are currently running the asylum. This will lose on appeal and the players in this administration will be fired soon enough. The SEC has lost all credibility, if they actually had any to begin with…
Actually UW, the SEC was asleep at the switch during the sub prime meltdown and was not monitoring what was going on or calling the players onto the carpet for their activities. Now, they are flexing their leftists muscles since they are just minions of the President like all the other federal agencies. Everything is political 24/7. It will be refreshing when a bunch of these idiots are shown the door in 17 months.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
What is this growing “inequality” you speak of? It’s an illusion created by people like you. We live in a free society and executives are paid what they’re worth. I’ve worked for myself, and I’ve worked for someone else. I have no qualms with my boss or company leader making a lot of money. That’s what their positions warrant. Period. Same with my position. I’m paid what I’m worth, as long as I have the wherewithal to negotiate the best I can for me. And if I don’t, I then have a choice to live with it or move on to better scenery. In fact, we each have choices to make. We can decide to be complacent and bitch about what someone else is making, or we can get off our asses and become those people who make a lot more money (if that’s your goal). I choose the latter because I care about my quality of life. It’s a pretty simple formula in the grand scheme of things, so this “inequality” you speak of is a falsehood. It’s just another way for people like Celtica to boost their own insecurities/jealousy onto the masses because somehow they believe they have a “right” to make a lot of money, or they have a “right” to demand that an executive shouldn’t make as much. Nobody has a “right” to make a lot of money. It has to be earned, and thank God we live in a country that allows us to earn what we deserve.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Let me correct this for you:
Nearly every person who is wealthy make what they are worth.
If it were not for these people, our entire society would be in shambles.
Do not say “same with the poor!”
These wealthy people are doing things the poor simply can’t, or won’t.
And due to their actions, like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, even Michael Dell, and several others, we have a thriving economy, and jobs.
Without them, there would be no jobs. Period. End of story.
These people fill roles, which is why the bible explains what their purpose is. They can be greedy, but they definitely fill their role, and have worth in society.
I personally would never say a rich person is worth less due to wealth, and at the end of your statement, try as you may to back pedal, you did.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, are all the NY Yankees players worth what they are paid? A Rod? How about LeBron James at $22 million per year? The Cavaliers obviously think so or they wouldn’t offer that kind of money. The boards of companies make an assessment on executive salary and offer terms accordingly. If the guy doesn’t get the job done and the company goes south, he usually gets replaced. That is how Capitalism works and has worked for a very long time. Socialism, on the other hand is more about paying everyone an equally low salary which provides no incentive to the worker to try to do better. It didn’t work for the Soviet Union and it doesn’t work for any other country who has ever tried it. Get off your soap box for Socialism. It doesn’t wash in the USA.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Its the American Dream being crushed. Class Warfare being created. Obamnites unite.
Why does the receptionist in the local union hall make as much as a Journeyman when she hasn’t set a single foot for so much as a minute in the field and don’t risk falling off ladders, getting electrocuted and any other injury associated with working off the groung?
Because she has a good union rep?
I Think its more of the time served thing. Additionally, she is the union boss in law. Got the job as the cronyism and gets the pay cause she keeps the job.
I do think its the time served.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Oh that’s rich.
I have never stated the worth of someone who is lower class.
You’re just a mouthy brat.
In fact, see my other post regarding wealth redistribution.
Here’s a hint: I don’t support it due to it not working.
Not due to not believing poor people need more.
I have said the poor cannot and do not build the economy. But this isn’t an insult, and it is biblical.
The role of the rich is essentially capital growth, leadership, and building.
I have never said that makes the poor bad. It is what it is.
Isn’t it frustrating when people tell you what you believe, when it’s definitely not what you believe nor anything you said, and then you have to defend yourself from folks saying things like “no bob, that’s not really what you meant – I know what you meant better than you”?
Excuse me Rosenblatt but I NEVER put words into people’s mouths with no basis whatsoever.
Ron just did. I have never even come close to stating it.
For example, when Ron says that most rich people aren’t worth what they are paid, he is for a fact, stating their worth.
I then point it out.
That is not putting words in his mouth.
So pardon my french, but @#%@ you!
This fake moderate crap you spew? Is getting really old kid.
GROW UP
Another example:
When Ron says lies about his moderate behavior, and he has bluntly created a no win scenario for republicans he doesn’t hold for democrats, and I point that out,
It is not putting words in his mouth,
IT IS MAKING HIM ACCOUNTABLE for his words.
Which is what I do.
I AM A MODERATE. And you are not.
Your fraudulent crap is why I argue with you.
Here I am in the same post talking about BEING OK WITH DOING WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION WHEN IT WORKS because poor people shouldn’t be bad off,
And Ron in the SAME PAGE says I put people who are poor in low esteem, and am exactly like Agent.
It is a HUGE stretch to call me like agent. MONUMENTALLY HUGE and yet you and him do it!!!
I’M SICK OF IT.
I have been on here talking about being ok with a public option, I point out dependencies using facts, and I’m called a troll, who never has facts, and an extremist like Agent.
It’s pure BULL CRAP. I do NOT treat you two in this way.
I may be aggressive when fought with (WHICH IS WHAT YOU AND RON DO) but you two ARE DEFINITELY PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE.
YOUR CRAP DOES STINK NO MATTER HOW PRETTY YOU WRAP IT UP WITH BOWS!!!!
@%$@$ KID!
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Relax kiddo. I didn’t threaten to kill your first born son or Lorena Bobbitt you. I know Ron put words in your mouth. That’s exactly what I was commenting about. My comment could be interpreted solely as “you’ve done (what Ron did to you) to me before – isn’t it frustrating when someone does it to you?”
Now as for your rant, let me focus on just one of your lies:
“I do NOT treat you two in this way.”
You sir, are a liar. You may have a genius IQ and you may be a physical specimen of a man, but you are a big fat liar.
Many times I have explained my actual intent to you – even going so far as to say “if you answer yes, here’s my reply and if you answer no, here’s my reply so you know my intent” and you have said numerous times something along the lines of “that’s is not what you meant. you REALLY meant something completely different, and I know it.”
You are no better than anyone else regarding telling people what they really think or believe.
Also,
More relevant to this, I tend to tell someone as they say something, that they are accountable for their words.
Ron above just said what I think of the poor, while I was saying NOTHING.
Ron,
I am not even reading your posts so don’t bother.
The only words for you here are : I AM WRONG and I AM SORRY.
That’s all.
No bullcrap.
I’m done arguing with someone who isn’t just stupid, but is also completely unethical, and a sleaze bag to boot.
bob – if you are not going to read Ron’s response, how will you know if he actually said he was wrong and apologized to you? wouldn’t you have to read his post to see that he capitulated to your request?
I guess I won’t confused.
I’m just done with the BS for the moment.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Class warfare personified FFA. Do you think the union bosses will reveal their inflated salaries to the rank and file of the unions? I think Jimmy Hoffa, Jr is doing quite well on the backs of the members.
They do show the monthly operating budget. The person I know in that union states they are operating $80,000 monthly in the red. Last union members meeting, the hall payroll came up in a very heated discussion as to how they can keep operating $80,000 in the red and how do they justify the Hall payroll while so many members are sitting at home on a call that isn’t coming. This is of course Illinois.
Stay tuned on this one. Writing on the wall – A local Imploding within in it self.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
For the love of God Celtica…You are focusing on numbers that don’t matter.
Republicans are never for an across the board increase, and they often don’t care about people making more money in a capitalist society.
This is one area where I do diverge from republicans but you are not helping your case.
What I think we should do is:
Pass a law based on the profits, CEO pay, and number of employees. Here’s my example:
If a lumber company has 40 employees, and the owner of the company is making $10,000,000, I would find it fair to take a portion of the profits of the company and mandate it to be given to the employees, because it would actually help their pay by a large amount.
However, if the CEO makes $1/m a year, and has 30,000 employees, it wouldn’t matter so I wouldn’t be for it. What you will overwhelmingly find is most companies couldn’t possibly give an increase of any large degree as a side comment. Most franchises and corporate pay areas do in fact have a huge ratio, for example Papa Johns, but if you simply compare their revenues, profit margins, and to the owner’s pay, you quickly find they can’t give a huge raise based on profits. And the owner deserves what he makes, even if it is 300 times more.
You need to just understand how the world works more and not get so riled up about it.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Here’s a tip for all you libtarded people complaining about what you get paid vs. someone else. Change jobs stupid ! Get off your lazy liberal A and do something about it. Or you can sit there and do what liberals do, expect someone else to fix it for you.
On another note….confused about your gender? Check your underwear. Here ends the lesson.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Celtica, anyone would be better than your heroine Hillary. She is under FBI investigation for her activities. Do you still think she is best for the job? The numbers are going down, down, down and Bernie Sanders, the left of left Socialist/Communist is giving her a run for her money in the polls.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, I know why you are an Obama lover since he wants to raise taxes on all businesses and lectures that “you didn’t do that or you didn’t build that”. By the way, you don’t even make enough to pay Federal Income tax so who are you to make any comment on taxation? We should have had a flat or fair tax a long time ago, but Progressives really like that Progressive tax and people like you have gotten off scot free.
Says the moderate.
The majority of the 43$ pay next to nothing in federal taxes. Social security taxes they do.
What matters here though is they use the federal benefits. They use them, they should pay for them.
Social security you use it, you pay for it.
All other things, they are getting wealth redistributed by paying nothing.
If paying for what you use is wealth redistribution in your mind…You can easily see the problem is…Your mind.
Further more I recently looked up how many people make over $100k per year. It’s about 5%. If you raised taxes on ALL of them by 50%, you wouldn’t put a dent in the debt.
In other words: In order to pay for something the middle class doesn’t pay for, you think the only way to pay for it is to tax the wealthy, which doesn’t have the possibility to pay for it, instead of cut the wasteful programs.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Let me simplify this:
Benefits are for the poor and are wealth redistribution. No matter how much you try to twist it and say that they are lowering taxes on the rich by raising them on the poor, it would never be redistribution to the rich.
It would be allowing them to keep their money. In no circumstances would it be redistributing to the rich, their own money.
And the alternate would always be redistribution: Lowering rates for the poor or giving more tax benefits by raising taxes on the rich.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Either taking money from one group in order to benefit another is redistribution of wealth or it is not, period.
phew. hard hitting analysis there. thanks for sharing.
Confused,
In no way at all is lowering the taxes on the wealthy directly related to how much the poor pay, first of all.
Second of all, it is not related to wealth redistribution. See my first reply. It would be reducing wealth redistribution to lower taxes on the wealthy. You can’t twist it and then link middle class federal taxes (which most pay zero) compared to what they would be after a decrease or increase, and say the benefit difference means you are engaging in wealth redistribution by lowering taxes on the wealthy.
This is especially true given that taxes on the wealthy are not given to the wealthy. By allowing them to keep their money you are not redistributing. By making many people get more money in federal taxes than they put in, and many at 0% it is wealth redistribution by default. Increasing taxes on them at this point would be reducing redistribution. You had to come to some serious twists and turns to call lower taxes on the wealthy, wealth redistribution.
So to modify your quote: Either it is wealth redistribution or it is not: Yes. Taking money from one group to benefit another is wealth redistribution. And lowering taxes on the wealth is not taking from one group to give to another.
For every $100 you take from the rich you can barely give $1 to each American.
thank you for that explanation, bob but i have one follow-up question. i understand lowering taxes on the rich is a not redistribution of wealth because it is their money. but what if the lowered tax is solely due to poor people having to pay more in taxes? would you say it would be redistribution of wealth then?
sticking to your math analogy – if rich folks paid $100 less in taxes only because the poor people paid $100 more in taxes – or a 3% increase and 3% decrease, whichever works out to be a net zero result – is that redistribution?
again forget variables like better investment income or appreciation of assets – the net zero result would solely be attributed to tax code changes – lower for the rich and higher for the poor.
Man, I hate to do it, but i gotta agree with Celtica on this one. If the Repubs continue to take Trump seriously as a candidate, Hillary is a guaranteed, stone-cold lock. The man is one of the scummiest people on the planet. Just do a Google search of his business practices; do you really want someone like that actually representing America??? He has NO political experience (not even as a community organizer), has declared bankruptcy numerous times, run several businesses right into the ground, got a number of deferments to avoid serving in Vietnam while having the nerve to trash John McCain’s service…Unfortunately, I could go on and on. He makes all of us who lean even remotely to the right look bad.
I’m certainly no Hillary fan, but I think she could dismember a puppy on live TV and people would still vote for her. She is coated in Teflon…nothing will stick to her, no matter how heinous. Keep screaming about those emails. It IS a big deal, but mark these words: she’ll skate on this like she does everything else.
Sanders is rising in popularity, and that’s also scary. Here’s someone who doesn’t hide his Socialism but actually embraces it. I don’t see him as the nominee, personally.
I’d like to see Biden run, if nothing else than for the comedic aspect of it. He’s seems like a decent enough guy and I’d love to have a beer with him, but he’s not presidential material. Ain’t gonna happen.
Gonna be one BUMPY ride over the next 15 months. Hang on tight!
Louie, I hate to rain on your parade, but Hillary is going down. She is under Federal Investigation(FBI) now for releasing classified documents on her personal server. They have the emails and I want to see her squirm under oath when confronted by them. This is a criminal offense since the FBI doesn’t do civil offenses.
You said Trump was not qualified to serve. I think I would take my chances compared to the unbelievably unqualified Community Organizer we have had. I would not be opposed to Scott Walker if he steps forth in the debates. At least he has run a state and has a good grasp of issues. The debate season should be lively. Post again after tonight and see who you like.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
How about that Nebraska, the land of the Cornhusker kickback on Obamacare. Aren’t you so proud to have had Nelson as your Senator?
here’s my take on what I saw last night. I didn’t stay up for all of it, but i watched about an hour of it.
1). The moderators were excellent. Megyn Kelly asked some TOUGH questions. They should honestly consider having her on the panel during the Democratic debates
2). I thought Rubio, Cruz, and Walker were pretty good, and Jasich could also make an impact. I’d be ok with any of them running, honestly. Jeb seems like a decent guy but not a strong enough candidate to be the front runner. I could see him as a VP, though.
3). Chris Christie? Not a chance. He made some good points but he’ll never make it. His own state can’t stand him (I’m in the Philly area so you should see how he’s viewed out here). It was interesting when he got into it with Rand Paul.
4). Trump: pretty much everything you’d expect. His massive ego stole the show. I noticed he wasn’t able to provide any of his “evidence” about the Mexican government sending over their worst criminals. I thought it was funny what he said about Rosie O’Donnell, but I liked it from an entertainment aspect. The man is an ENTERTAINER, not a president. I wasn’t a huge fan of his response about what he’d do to fix the healthcare mess. I wasn’t satisfied with his responses as to why he gave money to the Clintons and Pelosi, and I’m honestly surprised he could call himself a republican after that. Unfortunately, I think he personifies everything the media likes to paint as what’s wrong with the GOP, and we need to change that.
Trump is not an idiot, but he’s not in the race to make the country a better place. I honestly think he’s in it for HIM, because he can’t stand not to be in the limelight. My prediction is that he’ll fizzle out pretty soon once people start finding out more about Trump the Man instead of Trump the Entertainer. He’ll keep himself in the limelight, but don’t be surprised if he ends up throwing his support behind Hillary when he’s not the nominee.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hey Louie, aren’t you the one who is from Philadelphia and lamented the dismantling of the Phillies? By the way, we thank them for trading a great pitcher Hamel to the Rangers after he pitched a “no hitter”. The Rangers also got a good left handed reliever in the deal for prospects. The Rangers are now competitive to either win the division or the wild card. We thank the Phillies for this trade.
I have a little different take on the moderators. I thought they were a little over the top antagonistic and they discriminated against Dr. Carson by ignoring him for much of the debate. He did get a little jab in when they finally came back to him by saying – I wasn’t sure I would ever get to say anything again.
It will be interesting to see how the polls look after this debate. Carly Fiarina did extremely well in the first debate and hopefully she will be on the big stage next time. She is definitely the smartest woman running for President. Rubio was good, Cruz & Kasich handled themselves well and Trump had his moments. Considering it was the first time on the stage with professional politicians, he held his own. The big loser was Paul who is a dufus Libertarian and attack dog. We need to get down to about 5 serious contenders in the next few months to have serious debates on who we want for President.
Louie says ” I wasn’t satisfied with his responses as to why he gave money to the Clintons and Pelosi”
Proves they can be manipulated for a price….
Uhhh, Agent, she isn’t under a criminal FBI investigation. Why don’t you fact check before misinforming people?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKU_FiWIzqU
All you Hillary lovers out there, I read from the AP this AM, the CIA is involved and she had Top Level National Securities issues on her personal server. They took a random sample of 40 and found two of that nature.
Way to go, Louie. For the record, I would not vote for a person who dismembered a puppy on live TV. Or even c cat.
It’s not that the Republican establishment takes Trump seriously (they want him out) but the disaffected voters are tapping into the narrative that other Republican candidates have set over the last several years setting the stage for their own ascension to the White House. Trump is simply eaping what they sowed.
Maybe you should proof read before posting Celtica. I have news for you, Trump is being taken seriously by the other candidates. We are all tired of political double speak in this country. Democrats lead the league, but many RINO’s do the same thing. We want the truth spoken no matter who it is and quit trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
Not if she is put on trial for violating nations security protocol. I am sure the Repubs will dig out her interview when she was complaining about being broke when the left the white house – crabbing about her mortgage payments when billy boy was bringing home almost half a million with no housing expense necessary.
Jack, this is guaranteed to get the libtards worked up, but I couldn’t care less.
I encourage anyone who has Google to google the following: Obama Kissing Man. Obama wants it taken off the internet, but it is there. It is about as french kiss as can be and much more passionate than the peck he gives Michelle. Is there any doubt why he is for gay marriage? Maybe he is a switch hitter.
Agent – do you really believe EVERYTHING you read on the internet? You are so gullible it’s actually amusing this time.
I encourage anyone who has Google to google the following: Obama Kissing Man and then CLICK THE RESULT FROM SNOPES.COM.
It is clearly photo-shopped and you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Try another Google Rosenblatt and Google Obama & Larry Sinclair. There are plenty of examples about Obama’s sexual leanings and his affair with Sinclair.
I will do more googling if you admit that the picture of “Obama Kissing Man” that you wanted people to search for was 100% photo shopped and not real what so ever. Can you admit that for the class, please?
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
The Capitalist system has created the jobs in this country, not Progressive Socialism which only kills jobs, except for leech government jobs. Every job government created takes away from the private sector. End of lesson troll.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I am still waiting for you to say something intelligent Ron. It will be a very cold day in July before that happens. I responded to his all “Caps” statement which was a tantrum which many of you do when you are losing an argument. Are you and Confused going to fall on the floor kicking and screaming now if you don’t get agreement to your post? By the way, Keynsian spending/Progressive Socialism never created jobs or the Stimulus would have worked. It didn’t and the President you voted for twice admitted it on tape.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
What are you trying to do Nebraskan, exceed boogereater, Ins102, Ron, Celtica a close race for troll of the year? It is not a noble title to have by the way. Their nasty posts are now legend on this blog. Keep it up and we will add you to the Poster Hall of Shame.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Rosenblatt, Naïve. You were the one throwing a tantrum, not me. You threatened and said you had enough in Caps. How am I supposed to interpret that? Your anger management issues need to be resolved.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Rosenblatt, your parsing of words on numerous topics is a very unattractive quality. You need to work on that flaw. For the “very” narrow one sentence reply, I responded to your tantrum in all Caps. I have called you naïve about three times now. Quit throwing tantrums and you won’t be called naïve.
How about we get off this merry go round and have you answer me at least one time whether you are still supporting Planned Parenthood after 5 destructive videos. You seem to be good at pulling info off of Google without ever expressing a personal opinion. Do it now!
“I have called you naïve about three times now.”
Congratulations. You must be really proud of yourself.
You must be equally proud for being a word parsing liberal with no opinions on anything. Do you have any opinions or do you just stick with Google or some website to do your opinions for you?
I have lots of opinions! You either don’t ask me and instead tell me what I believe, or you just don’t comprehend what I’ve actually said.
Remember when you asked me if atheists always blame science when things go wrong? No google answer there!
Remember when you asked me if I thought Obama was a good president – and I ranked him a 3 out of 10? No google answer there!
It’s not my fault you can’t comprehend properly, only hear what you what to hear, don’t bother to pay attention to what someone actually says, and then you just regurgitate the same FOX-based talking points ad nauseum thereby distracting from the actual topic being discussed!
Congratulations Rosenblatt. You like to say I don’t comprehend what you say and you talk in circles and parse words. You don’t like my answers since I am Conservative and don’t agree with you on much, very similar to Ron. Everything goes right over his head or in one ear and out the other with nothing registered.
Are you going to give me a Google answer on Planned Parenthood or continue to ignore me? Don’t complain about me ignoring you on any topic if you have no answer or opinion.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I talk in circles, you say? If you can give me an actual example where I’ve done that, I will be happy to reply some more then.
Your silence is golden, Agent.
““I have called you naïve about three times now.”
Congratulations. You must be really proud of yourself.
”
He had an entire post with many sentences and areas and you only focused on the above.
That is not honest debate.
Stay on topic. His silence is due to being done with your stupidity.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I got paid my $1.00 today!!! In cash!! WOO HOO!!!!!
Peon, if you worked at McDonald’s, you could demand $15 per hour to flip burgers. You picked the wrong industry, obviously.
All this talk about what CEO should or shouldn’t be paid is meaningless — until someone tries to regulate it.
Now as a consumer, investor or possibly a job applicant, I might like to see this next to all the other metrics. By itself -nothing, but if I see a Co with a poor P/E ratio, YOY revenue declines or expense growth, or stagnant book value with a high CEO pay ratio, might I not decide not to buy, invest or apply?
I would agree that’s what this matter is all about: transparency to help people make more informed decisions.
My belief here is one intent of this regulation is so people can say, for one example, “The median pay here is $20,000 and the CEO makes $20,000,000, so maybe we as shareholders should not vote for that proposed 10% increase in the CEO bonus.”
In addition to shareholders, you’re 100% correct that this ruling is also useful for investors. I mean, if you’re going to invest in a company and you know their combined ratio is 150% yet their CEO is making significantly more than the average employee, that information may sway your decision.
Ultimately, like you said, this is really just another data point to help folks make a more informed decision.
Insguy, your point is well taken that it is meaningless– until someone tries to regulate it which is what is going on with this action by SEC. They are nothing more than another tentacle of the Obama Administration trying to regulate, control all activities of business. That is also Progressive Socialism which is the hallmark of the Democratic Party in today’s world.
If I were a young man applying for a job with a very big company, I am not concerned with what the CEO makes. I am trying to get a job and provide for my family. Those, who are investors have plenty of information from brokers, Google or other sources to make a determination on whether to invest or not based on P&L statements, history, growth etc.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
How absurd was it for Obama to fire the head of GM & Chrysler and install his own minions to run them so that union contracts could be saved? Both companies should have taken orderly bankruptcy, cancelling all union contracts for their lavish benefit packages which were running the companies into the ground.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Agent: to a certain extent you may be right – eventually. But make no mistake — this is a ruling by the SEC for the traders and investors out there.
Alot of the stock of the big companies out there are held by the company. So who gets to exercise most of the “say on pay” votes? The CEO and Board – that’s who.
This will likely give another “tool in the bag” for shareholder lawsuits. Not the everyday guy like us, but the scum bags like Greenberg who think they are entitled to guaranteed returns.
Looking forward to seeing what the union executive makes compared to their average union member. Any bets that it is a huge difference also?
Plymn, the pay of executives of the big unions will not see the light of day. It would be interesting to see where all those dues go.
Hey guys…on another note, anyone need some never used baby parts? legs, arms, heart and lungs now on sale for 2 for a dollar.
liberalism is a mental disorder…seek help now!
Hey Jack, I can’t get Rosenblatt to condemn Planned Parenthood for their illegal and barbaric practices. What does that tell you about his leanings? Of course, he is an Atheist and a human has no soul so I suppose it is ok with him. Some of these liberal dudes are in need of a frontal lobotomy.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I’ll give you one thing Rosenblatt, you have a one track mind. Of course, you are demanding an answer already answered multiple times. No wonder Bob calls you a child. I responded to your tantrum when I told you to leave the forum to the adults. Tantrums in all Caps pi– me off. You have proven over several years now with your 8 paragraph posts that you talk in circles. I am not going to play that game. You don’t have to answer my simple question posed numerous times about Planned Parenthood. Your silence speaks volumes on that issue.
I am reluctantly feeding the troll
I reluctantly identify the trolls on this forum.
Shall I name names? You all know who you are and your posts give you away.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
My list Ron:
1. Ron
2. Confused
3. Nebraskan
4. Captain Planet
5. Celtica
6. Boogereater (disguised)
7. Ins 102 (disguised)
8. Rosenblatt (Just added after a brief pause of civility)
All are now in the Hall of Shame as posters now!
Agent,
Looks like all of the people who have proven you to be wrong, pointed out your poor reading comprehension, and called you out on your hypocrisy.
Did you read what Mark Cuban, Texas billionaire, said about the Republican Party? Very similar to what I have been saying for years.
No admission that “Obama Kisses Man” is a total lie yet you presented it to everyone here as truth, Agent?
That’s okay – that is the epitome of a troll post! And now I’m sure you’ll incorrectly start using the phrase “epitome of a troll post” in your comments from now on.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
I would love to bet with you Agent! The only problem is you’d never admit you lost so I’d never get paid!
Me “Royal straight flush. I win.”
Agent “I have Ace high. I win.”
Me “RSF beats ace high”
Agent “No”
Me “We’re playing Texas Hold ’em. I win.”
Agent “No”
Me “How?”
Agent “I win”
Me “How?”
Agent “We’re playing my new game called ‘I win”
Me “Want to watch a 2 minute scene from ‘Big Daddy’ with me?”
Sorry Rosenblatt, I don’t gamble so your analogy does not wash. Let me leave you with something from the Bible even though you don’t believe in it and are a confirmed Atheist. I paraphrase but it goes like this:
The Disciples had fished all night and cast their nets over the “left” side of the boat and caught not one fish. Jesus told them to cast their nets over the “right” side of the boat. They did and caught so many fish they couldn’t pull the net in. There is a message there, but I am sure you and your leftist colleagues will miss it.
BWAHAHAHAA, oh Agent, you are such a hypocrite.
You wrote “I would be willing to bet ….”
So I said I would love to bet with you
You then wrote “Sorry Rosenblatt, I don’t gamble”
I’m sure you don’t see anything contradictory in your posts though.
Since you’re so sure I won’t get the message, why don’t you help out your fellow human and nicely explain it to me?
Rose, no such thing as a Royal Straight Flush. Its either a Royal Flush (to the Ace) or its a straight flush (not to the Ace). In the event of wild cards (at my house) your Straight Flush can only be to the highest Natural Card. Of Course, a Straight Flush always beats 5 of a kind at my house. Unless your playing Poker with a Pinnacle Deck. Then its rock paper scissors as a tie breaker.
Agent – I will refrain from jumping down the troll hole if you could provide a simple yes or no answer to this new question:
background — above you said: “I encourage anyone who has Google to google the following: Obama Kissing Man. Obama wants it taken off the internet, but it is there.”
As requested, I googled that phrase and I found out that image is completely photo shopped; there is no real picture of ‘Obama Kissing Man.’
question — do you agree you asked people to search an image that turned out to be fake and there is no actual picture of ‘Obama Kissing Man’?
Rosenblatt, how is this for simple since you obviously didn’t understand? Right is the right way and left is the wrong way. It is a very simple concept and has applied for thousands of years. The Bible has a lot of wisdom in it. Perhaps you should delve into it sometime instead of telling me that humans are no different than dolphins and humans have no soul.
Seriously? I asked you to nicely explain it to me. Come on.
Agent,
Google: Mark Cuban: I want to be a Republican
If you will not listen to me, how about a billionaire businessman?
He is referring to you and all other Conservatives.
Actually Ron, I agree with much of what Cuban says. By the way, you misinterpreted once again which is a major flaw in your brain. He was criticizing main stream Republicans and not Conservatives, you know RINO’s that I have railed against for years. Trump is giving all the pundits big trouble because he is not a career politician and doesn’t fit in their little box. He is refreshing because we are so tired of political double talk. Perhaps the scene will change and force all politicians to speak truthfully.
You may have noticed that he said he didn’t want to be a Democ(rat). He knows how bad they are after witnessing what we have had for almost 7 years. By the way, Hilary begrudgingly has turned over the mystery server and the thumb drives held by her attorney. Why wasn’t this done when they were asked for to start with instead of doing all those email deletions? We may get to the bottom of her illegal activity yet. Maybe this is why her poll numbers are in the toilet now.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Confused, how about you reading some self help books to deal your abrasive personality. By the way, Fox screwed up this debate royally. I thought I was watching CNN or MSNBC by the tone. They showed discrimination by forgetting Dr. Carson for long stretches and gave too much air time to Kasich since he was on home turf. Trump is making them crazy since he doesn’t fit into their little box. I understand that Roger Ailes called Megyn on the carpet and he called Trump later and said Fox would be fair from now on. We will see how that goes.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Actually, I think if you are a RINO, you are agreeing with the party platform fashioned by the RINO leaders. That is what is making them crazy about Trump who is totally out of the mold of what they think a Republican should be. They want to spoon feed America political double talk. Conservatives are sick of it. We are doubly sick of Democrats/Socialists/Communists lying at every turn and hoping there are enough low information voters left to believe them. One interesting development is the Facebook/Social Media crowd who are on their cell 24/7 and are now getting more interested in what is going on. Carly Fiorina had 800,000 hits on Facebook after her win in the first debate. As a result, her poll numbers put her in position to be on the big stage next time. She is clearly the smartest woman running for President.
you said….Actually, I think if you are a RINO, you are agreeing with the party platform fashioned by the RINO leaders
totally! you are 100% correct. so if I agree with the entire platform fashioned by the RINOs, which is not the entire platform of the rest of the republican party, I am a RINO.
to me, your post sounded like you are sick of what the RINOs are doing to the party and you don’t think a RINO would ever get elected.
so to you, RINO’s are considered unelectable in primaries and have become a source of your scorn. that mindset is the problem with the republican party according to Mark Cuban
once again rosenblatt was right, your silence is golden agent
Ron, if you agree with Cuban, why did you vote for Obama twice? Surely, any Republican from any state in any office would have done a better job than Obama has. Your belief system is all screwed up just like Confused and some of your other buddies on this blog.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Actually, Republican RINO’s have tried to cater to the liberals too much and the Independents like you who can’t make up their mind who to vote for, you know what I am talking about, the fence sitters who don’t know right from wrong. RINO’s try to reach across the aisle and end up going along with Progressive Liberals. Both parties are going bananas trying to figure out Trump. He doesn’t fit the political mold and it is time to shake up the political process and put people in their place.
Did Cuban make his remarks prior to the 08 & 12 election Ron? If so, I never saw it. Quit trying to use that excuse.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Ron, I am trying to point out to you the error of your thinking and it continues to go in one ear and out the other. Try putting some cotton in one ear and maybe it will stay in longer. You made a big deal out of being politically savvy, doing research on candidates and finally making up your mind on who to vote for in the elections. Please explain how it is savvy to vote for Obama twice and somehow think he was the best choice given the mess made for 7 long years. Do you not have an ounce of common sense and I ask you once again, do you know right from wrong. Try reading Ecclesiastes 10:2 once again if you are a good Christian Catholic.