Monday, October 20, 2008

"TERRY THE TRUCKER" DEFENDS "JOE THE PLUMBER"

My blog is fast becoming exactly what I wanted to avoid. When I started, I knew I wanted to refrain from letting my blog turn into just another Obama bashing venue. Unfortunately, I can't justify letting Barak Obama get away with pulling the wool over the eyes of the American people without at least writing about it.
Last week, one man's life was turned upside down after a game of football with his son turned into an international incident. Plumber Sam Wurtzelbacher was in his front yard with his son when none other than the Messiah himself came walking down his street on a door to door stump campaign. What happened next could only be described as "my wildest dream".
"Joe the plumber" as he is now known, was hand-delivered televised face time with "Comrade Hopeski" and didn't miss a beat. As if coached by Carl Rove, Joe told Obama about his ambition to buy the company he's currently employed at, and how Obama's economic plan would make that dream much harder to realize. As if coached by Karl Marx, Obama replied with a flowery salesman-like explanation of how he wants to take from Joe's pocket and give it to the slackers of America. Obama actually used the term "spread the wealth around". The whole scene was caught on camera and later that day was seen by everyone.

Since then, Obama's droids have taken to publicly ridiculing "Joe the plumber" and have given him a full media rectal exam for all the world to see. And for what? Having the audacity to ask "His Hopeness" a question. Was it Joe's fault that Obama let the commie cat out of the bag with his less-than-stealthy answer? Was it Joe's fault that he just happens to understand basic economics?
You see, Joe understands what Obama supporters don't. Small businesses commonly far exceed the $250,000 mark that Obama is claiming to propose. Even a small plumbing company can pass that number with little trouble at all. By the time you add the expenses of a small fleet of stocked service trucks, employees to drive them, insurance, payroll, warehousing space, clerical space and assorted other incidentals, your assets and capital can go well beyond $250,000 in no time.
The other dirty little secret that Obama "hopes" you don't know is that companies do not pay taxes. That's because taxes are just another business expense and are passed onto the consumer as part of their product or service's price. Companies also cover tax burden by cutting back on perks and benefits to their employees. They also tend to purchase less equipment and innovative technology if they have to pay more taxes. That means less jobs for those who would have made those particular technologies. So when Obama tells you that he is only going raise taxes on the rich, remember that everything you buy is made by a "rich" guy somewhere, and part of the cost of that product is going to passed right onto you.
I guess as long as you're not a rich guy, work for a rich guy, or buy a product from a rich guy, you probably don't have to worry about Obama's economic policy.

Rather than expose these little facts to the public though, the media has decided that we need to know all about "Joe the plumber's" dirty laundry. In all actuality, it wouldn't have mattered if Charles Manson had asked Obama those questions, they were valid questions and were answered like a true socialist would.
Posted by at

5 comments:

Dwane T. said...

I understand your point about the small business owners. Taxes are not a great thing, but without a distribution of wealth, and I use that term rather than a more flowery one, we will not continue to function as a society.

We are in a global economy. Major companies understand that, and they are capitalizing on it more than ever. You have large companies making record profits, and their executives reaping record wealth. Tax cuts for those folks are destroying the economy faster than the ability of small business to make it up. The so-called jobless economic recovery that we experienced in Bush’s early years was not jobless. It is impossible to have a jobless recovery. As you stated, when a business expands, it buys more trucks and equipment, hires more workers, etc. A smart business will get the cheapest parts and labor possible. We got ours over seas, in China and India among other places. Trickle down economics works like a ball coming down a pinball machine... you know its coming down, but you don’t know where. So we have been building up other countries citizens at the expense of our own. In the Black community, it is well known that a dollar circulates one time before it leaves the community, where a dollar in a White community will circulate seven times. And when a dollar leaves, it seldom comes back. The economics of the Black community has become the economics of America at the hands of big business, with many of our dollars gone, and never to return.

Small businesses will not be able to compensate for 100,000+ manufacturing jobs that have left the North Carolina in the last eight years and gone overseas. I work at a community college that is retraining these displaced workers to become entrepreneurs. But there is not enough money in the state to get or keep most of these folks in business with the degrees they have. If we can get factories to reopen here, or God forbid, get more government funded jobs for people, the money that is brought back into the state will fund a new wave of small business owners. My father taught me that you can’t spend the same dollar twice... simple, but valuable lesson. If we can change the laws and bring company jobs back from overseas, and we tax more individual “rich people”, or at least take away their loopholes so they pay their fair share, then those dollars can go into the hands of American citizens who can spend them through small businesses. The Chinese worker that makes a dollar making products for a US company is not going to spend the money at a small business in Kansas. The corporate executive making $250,000a year is more likely to vacation overseas than at a US resort, and the money his Madrid waiter makes is not going to be spent at Wal*Mart in Mount Pleasant, Iowa.

Obama is not into Socialism, he is into investing in our economy. You cannot invest money you don’t have, so he is trying to get the money. Why a $250,000 a year small business? Because economics is not an exact science, it’s all relative. Folks who work hard for $7.00 an hour think rich is a lot less than that. Folks who make $200,000 know an extra 50G’s is not going to put them into Bill Gates land. But you have to draw a line in the sand and make a decision. Obama had the guts to do it. We will never have Socialism here, large corporations will never let it happen, and they do have more influence than any “Union” of Joes... Sixpacks, Plumbers, or Teamsters. Like in the movie Bulworth, corporate America will put an old school “hit” on Obama or anyone else who tries to take that much power (beyond just the money) out of their hands. Right now, building our country is the best and fastest way to build our economy. Small businesses are not going to fund building new roads or repairing bridges, but if the government has the money, they can employ the people. Those bridge builders are more likely to hire Joe the Plumber than a corporate executive. Money in the hands of the poor and middle class, not tax cuts for big businesses, will allow Joe to make enough money to buy his bosses business. Joe was right in asking the question he asked, and Obama was right in giving the answer he gave. It was a simple question, but the answer is more complex than what Obama gave because the answer is part of a strategy, and not just a stand alone concept. So he gave the simple form, and just like Joe, Obama has suffered for it. Neither of them did anything wrong, but both are being wronged for what they did.

I agree with what you say about small businesses being the backbone of our economy. I also agree that I don’t want to take care of people that don’t want to work. But I saw too many farmers in Iowa and factory workers in NC that wanted to work and couldn’t. And unlike you and me, it was not because they blew chances to do things a better way throughout their lives. They bought into the brand of the American Dream that was sold in the communities they grew up in, and against their will their dreams were stolen and sold overseas. You and I know what opportunities are out there, and have worked hard despite some mistakes, but we can’t be so fearful that some slacker may get something for nothing that we keep those who have worked harder for less from the support we need to show them as fellow Americans. I may complain about high gas prices, but I will never complain about high taxes as long as it goes toward paying for unemployment insurance or a job for my fellow Americans who need it. That’s not Socialism, that patriotism (which is what Biden was trying to say). I believe that’s what Obama means by “spreading the wealth.”

Take care my brother.

October 21, 2008 at 7:05 AM
Roadhouse said...

Dwayne T.,
Thanks for the thoughtful response. You're forgetting about a few factors though. You need to look at why corporations leave the country in the first place. Cheap labor is a factor, but excessive taxation and over-regulation are the predominant factors.
You can't mandate their return. If somehow forced to come back, they'll simply close their doors. When business is no longer profitable, there is no motivation to stay in business. Obama fails to understand this.
He also fails to understand that government is powered by the people's money, not the treasury's.
Unlike your "pinball machine" example, economic dynamics are pretty easy to trace.
The money follows those who are willing to work for it and better their circumstances. To issue checks or "spread the wealth around" removes the motivation for people to better themselves and creates dependance on government for their very existance. In short, it returns the people to a beurocratic, big government form of slavery.
Also, when executives spend money, the "spread the wealth" to exactly where it should go.
The landscaper and all related equipment manufacturers.
The tennis court builder and all related equipment manufacturers.
The yacht builder...
The sports car builder...
The caterer...
The maid...
The art dealer...
The pilates instructor...
The realtor...
The contractor...
The shipper...
The warehouser...
The security company...
The clothing store...
The electronics store...
The restaurant...
The car dealership...
and so on and so on.

All along the way, jobs are created and people make the choices.

This is how commerce works. Obama's plan destroys this dynamic and puts the power into the hands of the government rather than the hands of the people where it belongs.

October 21, 2008 at 8:32 PM
Dwane T. said...

I understand your model, but the main factor that you left out that can never be discounted is human greed and competitive nature. Your model works when the management of the company has the goal of growing the company and expanding the business. But too many have taken the mindset of hoarding profits, tanking the company, taking the money and runninng. It has nothing to do with government regulation, it is purely greed. And everything you cited has been happening, but it has been happening for:

The yacht builder overseas...
The sports car builder overseas...
The caterer overseas...
The maid overseas...
The art dealer overseas...
The pilates instructor overseas...
etc.

If we lowered minimum wage to $4.00 an hour, we still could not compete with factory workers in foreign countries who make less than $1.00 per hour. Even after shipping costs, there is stil a profit in overseas labor. And the average American would still not make enough money to survive. There has to be some loyalty and accountability on the part of the businesses to hire American just as we like to encourage patriotism in buying American. I can't accept an 18 year old being told he should be willing to die for his country, but a 58 year old can't sacrifice a percentage of his profit for the same country.

As far as businesses closing their doors, that is happening now in the midst of more deregulation than there was ten years ago. You can't legislate integrity, but you can penalize people when their lack of integrity brings down whole communities by factories leaving and going overseas. The majority of companies will stay, because the majority of their executives want to live here, and moving the corporate offices overseas would mean hiring more foreign middle management... in essence making it a foreign company. Business loves foreign labor, not foreign leadership. I would love to see us operated as a purely capitalist country, but that economic model will never work as long as we expouse being a Christian country, but not run busines on Christian principals (and the Bible is full of business principals). Whenever there is competition, there HAS to be rules (regulations), or their will be anarchy on some level. I fear the day when the international markets get together and make the rules, I would rather have the American government do it. I trust our three branches of government to protect my interest more than I trust Alcoa, Dow, and Ford.

As for what Obama is doing, it is exactly what FDR did. If the market didn't crash in 1929 and people were doing well, FDR would have probably have left it alone, but he did what had to be done "for those times and circumstances". Things like the Youth Conservation Corp and WWII manufacturing put Americans back to work then, and has to be done now... not forever, but now. When we are solvent, we can go back to what we have, but right now, it just ain't workin'.

October 22, 2008 at 6:12 AM
Roadhouse said...

Dwane T.,
You can't force a company to stay here if they don't want to. If you want them to stay, you have to give them a reason to. That means electing business-friendly legislators. There is nothing business-friendly about raising taxes and excessive regulation.

People talk about greed and then demand other people's money be taken by government and given to them, or slackers.

Business is run by humans, not robots. Humans will react as humans do. If you kick them around enough, they will leave you. And they will take their jobs with them.

Politicians (even McCain)like to brag about "taking on" this or that corporation or industry. They call them "fat cats" and then whine when they go elsewhere to do business.

FDR gave us Social Security and generations of entitlement mentality. A great war-time President for sure, but clueless on domestic policy.

October 22, 2008 at 8:32 PM
JMK said...

I'm a little late to this, but the reason why higher income tax rates for "the rich" doesn't work is because people respond to incentives.

That is, the top 10% of income earners (virtually NONE of whom are among the top 10% of the wealthiest Americans, by the way, as income is one of the poorest generators of wealth there is) already pay nearly 70% of all the income taxes.

These people also tend to have more disposable income (income above what is needed to maintain their basic living expenses) and so, as tax rates rise, such people are INCENTIVIZED to "save" or defer more of their income in various "tax-deferred vehicles, like 457s and 402-k's etc.

Even when tax rates are hiked on the 90% of the rest of Americans, tax revenues FALL.

WHY?

Because when those who pay 70% of the income taxes defer more of their money to avoid a higher tax bite, that reduction in revenues cannot be made up from those now paying the other 30%.

When tax rates are lowered (down to about the 20% level) tax revenues INCREASE, which is why tax revenues soared after Bush Jr's tax cuts early in his administration.

The income tax is a poor means of generating revenues and it punishes/burdens PRODUCTIVITY/income.

A better tax policy would be some form of Consumption tax - like the Fair Tax.

As bad as the current credit crisis is in America, we are FAR better off than ANY of the more Keynesian nations;

Great Britain's short-term credit problem is 156% of GDP, and national debt is 368% of GDP.

France's short-term debt problem is 60% of GDP and national debt is 128% of GDP.

Germany: 60% and 167% respectively.

Iceland: 211% and 480% respectively.

Switzerland: 260% and 1,273%.

Belgium: 285% and 367%.

The ill-conceived Keynesianism we had under Jimmy Carter, which is the same Keynesianism that the Pelosi-Reid Congress began embarking on, in January 2007, and which Barack Obama fully supports!

October 27, 2008 at 5:04 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)