Well, in his defense (not that I’m mounting an overall defense of the douchebag, just saying in this case), if he owns a couple of fast food franchises then he probably employs a lot of part time minimum wage workers who’d be lucky to be making $100 a week. So, yeah, a lot of those workers could very well be making much less than $12k a year.
GODWIN!
What do I win ?
Anyway, there you have it, peeps. Increasing taxes on the upper 0.1% is the Holocaust. In principle. By translation. Through a slippery slope. Or something.
Rand Rover: eat a grenade, please. Do it. Now. DAS IST EIN BEFEHL !
What is the relationship here between “shoot for” and “achieve.”
The fact that most businesses would like to achieve a profit of 20% doesn’t mean that this is the typical business profit rate. What is the typical, actual (as opposed to “this is how much i would like to make”) profit margin for businesses of the size owned by Fleming?
Also, some industries have different levels of profitability than others. How does his Subway profit compare with the overall profit in that particular industry?
I do not know. I do know that 20% is viewed as realistic. Achievable. Unlike 100%!, or even 50. It’s a number I’ve heard thrown out for years and years.
He’s not an ordinary small businessman? No shit, sherlock. I don’t think then he is “just sharing the reality of a small businessman.” as you so delicately put it. He’s sharing the reality of “Not an ordinary small businessman”. One who has 500 employees. One of the very few small businessmen who do so.
Since you don’t know stuff, and clearly can’t be assed to look anything up:
statistics about business size
78% of the 27,281,452 firms have no payroll; they are mainly self-employed and operating unincorporated businesses. So let’s discount those folks, to be generous. Let’s say they are not “businessmen”
Of the remaining 5,930,132 firms, 4,661,829 or 78.6% have Fewer than 10 employees. 5,911,663, or 99.7% have fewer than 500 employees.
So no, Rep. “cry poverty” is not typical. He represents the top 0.3% of firms that have employees.
Typical made up “fact”. It has that ring of truthiness about it.
Then he should argue the case that the policy would lead to bad things, instead of crying about how he “only” has $400,000 left over at the end of the year to buy gold plated golf clubs and massages from rubber suited dominatrixes. (dominatrices?)
He should provide solid evidence for his thesis that an increased tax rate on income over $1,000,000/year will lead to job losses. Evidence. Not whining.
**He’s **the one who brought his personal situation into the debate, and that is what he is being pitted for.
Well, when you present such a convincing argument, what can i do except concede your point?
Do I detect a note of sarcasm?
Of course he has more to offer to the tax coffers than, say, a person scraping by on jobs barely above minimum wage. But at this point you’re simply misrepresenting the argument. Complaining about “only” having 400k at the end of the year makes you an asshole, especially when 50% of the country doesn’t even make enough to qualify for income taxes. This man is, by any definition of the word, rich. He has massive assets, he has several businesses that he leads and could liquidate if he needed to, he brings home 600k a year, of which 200k goes into food/housing/etc. (I think I’m not going to be too far off the mark when I say that that’s a good 5-10 times as much as most people spend on such things), and he has a gross income of $6m. And then he has the gall to complain that he has to give a little bit back into the system? Oh no, he can’t afford another yacht!
I don’t see this as the end of the world. If we had our places swapped, I would gladly deal with getting 70-90% of everything I earn (net) past $250k taken by the government, and I’m sure over half of Americans would as well. In fact, I’m pretty sure most of them would accept 100% taxation beyond that point if it meant actually ever reaching the point where they pull in $250k a year. I certainly would, because right now my family pulls down just enough to get by; if we had $400k (or even just $200k before housing/food/utilities), I could afford to go to the college I want to go to, get a driver’s license and a car, and maybe even go to the big Super Smash Bros Brawl tournament in New Jersey I’d kill to get to (APEX 2012, in case anyone is wondering). But no, we get something like 20-30k per year, before taxes. Not 100% sure on that figure, but it’s in the right ballpark. The whole point is, bitching about a slight increase in your taxes at that level (from… what, 15%?) is selfish, dickish, and out of touch with the current economic situation in the states. When you are making about 20 times what the average person makes in the country you live in, you damn well shouldn’t be complaining that the community wants you to give some back in the form of taxes.
Since conservatives are so big on “tightening your belt” why doesn’t he save some money among his various businesses before whining about taxes? It can’t punish the employees since Subway workers all get minimum wage.
Hmmm. “Minimum wage”, you say… Hmmmmm.
Oh yeah, and just because it really should be said: the OP is badly made. Please put more thought into sourcing and the like before making a thread.
So, since businessguys are “job creators”, did he mention how he immediately plowed that $400K into creating a dozen more well-paying jobs for people?
He didn’t? He bitched about how it wasn’t enough? Strange, I was assured that rich people are all about the job creation. But they’ve found one who’s just a hoarder?
He must be the only one. I mean, Fox News wouldn’t lie to me…
Only if you listen.
Only a Republican could use only and $400,000 in the same sentence.
But surely there are some people who are even better off than he is. There must be multi-millionaires and even billionaires losing sleep at night because they just aren’t creating enough jobs with their money. They’d be falling all over themselves to lend Flemming money if they knew it would create jobs.
We don’t really want that, either. If he had to start liquidating his businesses to pay his tax burden, that would have negative consequences. I think the point of this thread is that people who make more than a million dollars a year could afford to pay a bit higher tax rate on that money without it impacting the core of their business and ability to continue hiring and operating.
Right, especially since any money that is actually put back into things like new plant, more staff, etc. isn’t taxed as profit or income.
If only I had $400,000, I’d… oh, SHIT.
Been at work.
Quit bitching, the lot of you. I don’t make a habit of posting an OP without links. I’m well aware of the etiquette. This isn’t fucking GD anyway. They were not available when I posted, which was not terribly long after the live interview. In fact it was not posted on their website until about an HR after my OP. I stepped in after a few posts to add information when I figured out which douchebag in particular I was referring to, and I l’ll freely admit I got the network wrong. They are next to each other on my system ch. 41/42. I thought I was on CNN, It was MSNBC. Not that any of that is really* relevant to the point*. I didn’t misrepresent the guy.