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

[Ravenman]

@Chessic_Sense

It’s pretty straight forward- Obama thinks that businesses and the rich aren’t paying enough in taxes.

To be fair, a plurality of Americans do, too. Cite.

It is funny how fiscal conservatives love to talk about how we’re being bought lock, stock and barrel by evil China, and our grandchildren won’t have two nickels to rub together, and the deficit is dooming every priest and nun to hell, right up until the issue of raising taxes on 2% of Americans come up. Then the gloom and doom is all out the window.

[China_Guy]

@Koxinga

The vast majority of any check you write to the IRS goes to supporting retirees and the Chinese government, and Guantanamo Bay and its associated fun-time activities.

Koxinga, you care to back up the claim on China big buddy? China holds roughly USD1.45T worth of treasuries out of USD14T in total treasuries. That works out to about 10% of treasury debt owned by China.

Lessee here, there was a spate of “I’m concerned threads” and “Rick Perry is actually liberal” threads during the primaries. Now it’s selectively edited quotes…let’s try not to make it ad nauseum, m’kay?

[Koxinga]

OK, the Chinese government among other holders of fourteen trillion dollars in debt. Added to Medicare, Medicaid, defense and other non-discretionary spending, it adds up to ~82 cents out of every dollar–a vast majority. The small slice of discretionary spending that’s left, and the sliver of infrastructure spending that could be scraped out of that, is only going to shrink. Let’s not kid ourselves that our taxes are going toward the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps, old chum.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

So what? The high marginal rates of the 1950s were primarily aimed at paying off war debt.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Sinaptics

I don’t get your meaning. Taxpayers are funding a service (free mail to blind, etc).

No, they aren’t.

A fund is a source of supply (of money and/or resources); the verb form has to do with providing monies or resources or setting them aside for a certain purpose (financing).

We “fund” NASA; we provide money (and resources) so that there is a place where people will do something we want, which otherwise would not happen.

The taco stand is open already, and provides a service (and product) for some form of compensation.

You “fund” things that you want but no one provides.

You “pay” for things that you want that some one provides for you.

In this example, the US Gov’t is paying the USPS for a service they provide. If they gave the USPS money so that some one was around to perform the service of free mail to the blind, that would be “funding” the USPS.

I have yet to find a dictionary that supports the idea that “funding” is at all the same as “compensating”. When you find one, please post a link.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

To expound:

The US Gov’t keeps a fund of monies from which it pays the USPS for services rendered.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Koxinga

OK, the Chinese government among other holders of fourteen trillion dollars in debt. Added to Medicare, Medicaid, defense and other non-discretionary spending, it adds up to ~82 cents out of every dollar–a vast majority. The small slice of discretionary spending that’s left, and the sliver of infrastructure spending that could be scraped out of that, is only going to shrink. Let’s not kid ourselves that our taxes are going toward the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps, old chum.

Being not terribly familiar with you, I’m wondering if you ever can keep a line of argument straight. It seems that instead of a linear, continuous chain of logic, each exchange with you results in a pivot to a separate, loosely related topic. It’s a bit like that game where you have to come up with a word that starts with the last letter of the word the person before you gave.

[Shodan]

@Voyager

But business owners did not do that, since the infrastructure had to be there before they were a success.

And successful business owners have paid enough in taxes both to support the existing infrastructure and to create new. Obama, however, implies that they didn’t.

Same as with paying for teachers. You have a moral obligation to pay for the next generation’s infrastructure in return for the last generation’s paying for yours.

You and Obama apparently think successful business owners aren’t paying their school taxes. And if Obama thinks federal income taxes are the primary source of funding for schools and teachers, he is an even bigger idiot than he appears.

I’m responding here because your misconception comes through very clearly.

I don’t have a misconception. Obama does. That’s why he is saying stupid things.

Actually he isn’t really under any misconception. As I said earlier, he is trying to raise taxes and is using this bait-and-switch to try to get his base, who are mostly envious, or simply economic idiots, to help him do it.

Obama is implying that successful business owners haven’t been taxed enough to pay for the infrastructure that they used to build up their business. [list=A][li]He’s wrong - they did, thru gasoline taxes and payroll taxes and local taxes and state taxes and every other kind of taxes.[]If Obama does get his tax increase, he isn’t going to spend it primarily on infrastructure - he is going to spend it on health care and tax cuts for some and higher salaries for public employees and so forth.[]Obama is an idiot who doesn’t have any business experience. Look at the Solyndra thing. Obama thought all you had to do was throw the taxpayer’s money at a business, and it would succeed. Net result: half a billion dollars wasted, and the loss of a thousand jobs. [/list]And Obama wants me to be wracked with guilt because I didn’t pay enough tax to support the infrastructure that allowed Solyndra to succeed. Only, not. [/li]
Regards,
Shodan

[Fear_Itself]

@Shodan

And successful business owners have paid enough in taxes both to support the existing infrastructure and to create new.

The deficit says you are wrong.

[tim-n-va]

And successful business owners have paid enough in taxes both to support the existing infrastructure and to create new. Obama, however, implies that they didn’t.

They haven’t paid enough or there wouldn’t be a deficit.

Taxes are the means to pay for what the goverment does. There is no magic number that you pay in taxes and can then say that’s enough.

Most people would like to personally pay lower taxes but no one wants to cut a program that they benefit from. It is easy to pick something that doesn’t affect you and say “cut that”.

There should be a rule that any official who says we need to cut government spending be required to say specifically what he wants to cut that benefits his district.

The drastic impact cited of higher taxes on the upper income levels (say to the Clinton levels, don’t cite some extreme value of the curve) isn’t believable. We have record low taxes and the “job creators” aren’t creating.

[Finagle]

@Shodan

If Obama does get his tax increase, he isn’t going to spend it primarily on infrastructure - he is going to spend it on health care and tax cuts for some and higher salaries for public employees and so forth.[li]Obama is an idiot who doesn’t have any business experience. Look at the Solyndra thing. Obama thought all you had to do was throw the taxpayer’s money at a business, and it would succeed. Net result: half a billion dollars wasted, and the loss of a thousand jobs. [/list]And Obama wants me to be wracked with guilt because I didn’t pay enough tax to support the infrastructure that allowed Solyndra to succeed. Only, not. [/li]
Regards,
Shodan

There’s a lot of weapon’s grade Fox news talking points in there, Shodan.

Small business tax cuts, pushed by the Obama admin and axed by the GOP in the senate.

Solyndra – initiated by the Bush admin.

In the 2013 budget, Obama is asking for a whopping 0.5% increase in federal salaries after a two year pay freeze.

Infrastructure – who’s the roadblock in the highway bill reauthorization? Hint: it’s not Obama.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Finagle

There’s a lot of weapon’s grade Fox news talking points in there, Shodan.

A Shodan’s gotta… shoad, I guess. It’s a feature, not a bug.

[Try2B_Comprehensive]

@zoid

Agreed. The OP is the most tortured argument I’ve seen this week, about on par with this.

You ought to wait for the full exposition of what I have to say on that topic. You’re off base.

[Shodan]

@tim-n-va

They haven’t paid enough or there wouldn’t be a deficit.

So you apparently believe the current federal budget deficit is caused by too much spending on infrastructure and education.

If that’s the case, and you are interested in spending on infrastructure, there’s a bridge in Brooklyn I could sell you.

Regards,
Shodan

[John_Mace]

I think it’s pretty clear that Obama was referring to infrastructure. Why even mention it if he was referring to the business itself? I don’t see anything wrong with what he said, although the choice of wording wasn’t all that great. It sounds too preachy for my tastes, and neglects the fact that business have contributed to building and maintaining the infrastructure. “You didn’t build that” might be better worded as “We all built that together”.

But that’s a minor nit pick, and it might even be that Obama was speaking more to his base than to anyone else. That seems to be the plan right now-- rally the base.

This outrage du jour will be long forgotten come November.

Keep in mind that we’re not even into the campaign silly season yet (August). I’m much more interested in seeing what these come up with after Labor Day.

[Shodan]

That’s a lot of Huffington Post level foolishness in there, Finagle.

@Finagle

Small business tax cuts, pushed by the Obama admin and axed by the GOP in the senate.

So Obama was lying when he claimed that business owners were not paying enough in taxes? I’m glad to see that we agree.

Solyndra – initiated by the Bush admin.

Actually, initiated and shelved by the Bush administration, then pushed thru by the Obama administration, whereupon it went belly-up, costing the aforesaid half billion and a thousand jobs.

In the 2013 budget, Obama is asking for a whopping 0.5% increase in federal salaries after a two year pay freeze.

Again, I am glad to see that we agree - Obama is not spending this money on infrastructure, but on pay raises for public sector union employees. No doubt his desire to throw a sop to unions has nothing to do with it.

Infrastructure – who’s the roadblock in the highway bill reauthorization? Hint: it’s not Obama.

Hint: if you want to post links alleging roadblocks in infrastructure spending, and blame it on Republicans, you might not want to use an article that starts off

Congressional leaders have tentatively agreed on a two-year bill to overhaul federal highway programs that drops a requirement that the government approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

unless you think that the oil pipeline was a Democratic requirement, or that pipelines aren’t infrastructure, or that blocking infrastructure consists of making changes that

would reduce the average time it takes to complete a highway project from 15 years to about eight years.

Oh those eeeeevil Republicans, speeding up highway construction and pushing for energy infrastructure.

Again,

Regards,
Shodan

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

Just for completeness, here’s the broader section of the text of the speech from Obama on this point. It really serves to hammer home the point that the OP and those arguing for varying interpretation are simply being misleading and disingenuous:

But you know what, I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them. So I’m going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way. We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more. (Applause.) And, by the way, we’ve tried that before – a guy named Bill Clinton did it. We created 23 million new jobs, turned a deficit into a surplus, and rich people did just fine. We created a lot of millionaires.

 There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back.  They know they didn’t -- look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.  You didn’t get there on your own.  I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.  There are a lot of smart people out there.  It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.  Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.  (Applause.)

 If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.  There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.  Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges.  If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.  The Internet didn’t get invented on its own.  Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

 The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.  There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own.  I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service.  That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires. 

So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President – because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together. (Applause.)

So all these issues go back to that first campaign that I talked about, because everything has to do with how do we help middle-class families, working people, strivers, doers – how do we help them succeed? How do we make sure that their hard work pays off? That’s what I’ve been thinking about the entire time I’ve been President.

You’re not on your own. We’re in this together. We rise or fall together as one nation as as one people.

United we stand, divided we fall. It’s not a novel concept, and it shouldn’t be a point of contention. Not if you love America.

eta: link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Shodan

Actually, initiated and shelved by the Bush administration

This is a straight-up falsehood.

[Marley23]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

Being not terribly familiar with you, I’m wondering if you ever can keep a line of argument straight.

Keep the personal comments out of this forum, please. Save them for The Pit.

[Czarcasm]

Consensus: Talking point fail.
I can’t wait for the next one.