Ted Murphy - Latest Comments in Earn the Wealth

Re: Earn the Wealth

Swing Trading — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:46:42 -0000

Interesting post. I have made a twitter post about this. My friends will enjoy reading it also.

Re: Earn the Wealth

steveedee — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:38:53 -0000

Capitolism is the only way to go. Without it like you said, it's the single most reason why the world wants to live in America. That's enough for me to be proud to have been born here in the first place. YOU ROCK TED!!!

Re: Earn the Wealth

jeremyhilton — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:44:26 -0000

Which of you who received a economic stimulus check sent it right back to the government and said "No thanks, but I don't take government handouts. It is against my political beliefs."?

And please be honest. If you kept the check, let everyone know.

I'm interested to see how many of you actually put your money where your mouth is.

Re: Earn the Wealth

blm03 — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 17:34:03 -0000

I'm not 100% thrilled about Obama either, but for my family, he's best for my family. though I have to applaud everyone here that these comments didn't turn into a screaming namecallling match.

Re: Earn the Wealth

blm03 — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 17:30:35 -0000

Right, but my husband's salary is not going up what they were paying for health insurance. So I'll end up worse off than I am now (which I didn't believe would be possible)

Re: Earn the Wealth

blm03 — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 17:29:16 -0000

You got exactly what I meant :)

Re: Earn the Wealth

Penny Raine — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 12:26:12 -0000

Amen and Amen, you work, you eat

blessings, Penny Raine
http:/pennyraine.com/blog

Re: Earn the Wealth

ted murphy — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 06:27:58 -0000

I find the political focus of these comments fascinating. I barely mention Obama or McCain in my post, because I don't really like either choice. There is so much passion on both sides of the fence, right or wrong I love how supportive people are of their candidate.

Re: Earn the Wealth

jeremyhilton — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 21:02:25 -0000

Ted,

Barack Obama is a reformer. The notion that he is anything else was birthed by the McCain campaign's fear and smear machine.

Re: Earn the Wealth

dew — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 19:37:40 -0000

Right on Ted. The whole system's screwed. Neither candidate will be able to fix it, It's doubtful anybody will be able to fix it.

Ron Paul!

Re: Earn the Wealth

BrianCombs — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:53:02 -0000

I could get more on board with your arguments if I believes that Obama was really going to get us out of Iraq. I hope I wrong, but I don't see him pulling the troops very soon.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Kelly Feller — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:42:47 -0000

Unfortunately you have bought into the Republican rhetoric that incorrectly defines Obama's tax plan as "socialism." Don't you know they have conjured up that idea to scare you? His plan simply revokes Bush's corporate welfare of the last 8 years, funded in part by the Asian government. You want to see socialism at work? Check out Alaska where oil profits are taken and redistributed to citizens.

Resources:
"Is Obama A Socialist?" http://www.salon.com/opinio...
"Sarah Palin The Socialist: Spreading The Wealth in Alaska" http://teamsugar.com/group/...
http://www.taxfoundation.or...

Re: Earn the Wealth

Dominick — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:40:35 -0000

Obama is not the gateway to socialism and you confuse socialism with communism. Socialism is a stepping path to communism, where everyone makes the same amount and no one wants for anything. True communism could and would NEVER work in this world. People are too greedy for that.

The real issue is people assume their taxes will be lower under McCain. It's all about Me, Me, Me. What do I have to pay? What break do I get? In the end, what it becomes is nobody makes any money and everyone suffers because there is no money to be made and there are no people to support those making money.

I'm hearing more and more people say they can no longer afford cable TV. Next it will be the internet. Hollywood will fall apart because no one will be going to see movies or buying DVDs. The Internet will have fewer travelers so everyone with online jobs won't be making ad money, money from marketing, etc. because no one will be online to use said services.

Most everyone agrees that Bush has helped to ruin America. The country is falling apart and has been for the last eight years...and you want to elect a man who has a proven record of voting 90% of the time with this moron? You reap what you sow. If McCain gets in then we all suffer and I'm seriously considering moving from the U.S. because I fear for my safety and the safety of my child.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Tina Kubala — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:20:29 -0000

Socialism or capitalism is the only real issue in this election. I'm for the freedom to make it or not based on my own work.

One thing no one has mentioned is that the government isn't very good at doing the jobs they already have. The roads? We had a major bridge collapse in Minnesota a couple years ago. Social Security? My generation isn't going to see a dime of the money we've paid in due to mismanagement. And people want to give them more money and power. No thanks.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Carri — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:14:42 -0000

"You, your friends, and I own a bit of a lot of banks and financial institutions. Soon, we'll own GM and Chrysler. We own AIG to the tune of $130 billion."

Yes, this is exactly the point. I don't think anyone believes that this is Obama's ultimate goal. But I also don't think most people fully realize that under true socialism, you and your friends would NOT own a bit of this and that, the STATE would. There would be no such thing as personal wealth or intellectual property or dividends or private ownership or patents or rights or royalties. The job you do, how you do it, what you can learn and acheive and how quickly, becomes meaningless once it is devalued by the fact that you will never acheive better than the drooling moron asleep at the desk next to you.
So, while I don't think this extreme is Obama's ultimate plan, and I don't love McCain, McCain it's going to have to be because I just cannot help but feel that Obama opens the door. He's the gateway politician to socialism and in a few years, no one will notice that they are slowly ceding more and more control because the masses are lulled by the dulcet tones of his golden voice...

Re: Earn the Wealth

Tina Kubala — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:14:19 -0000

People who play the system drive me nuts. I'm all for a safety net, but the system is bankrupted by those folks who make it a lifestyle.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Matunos — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:41:53 -0000

Your argument contains a couple of rhetorical fallacies here. First off, you provide a definition of socialism which is as good as any (it is, after all, Wikipedia), and then conclude that because socialism wants to evenly spread wealth, any attempt to "spread the wealth" must be socialism. This is an associative fallacy. Socialism is much more than seeking to "spread the wealth"- socialism in its raw form charges that the only way to "spread the wealth" as it were, is for the state or collective to own the means of production. That means, that the state controls all of the factories, all of the companies, etc.

When parsing someone's words, it is important to keep in mind the context of what they're saying. Robin Hood of legend also wanted to spread the wealth, but he was hardly socialist: the reason he spread the wealth was because John of England and the Sheriff of Nottingham were oppressing the commoners and stealing their wealth.

When Sen. Obama said he wanted to "spread the wealth" he was speaking with respect to his tax policy. Sen. Obama's proposed tax plan would cut taxes for most people, especially those in the middle class, and the tradeoff is that for families making more than $250k, their tax rates will revert to pre-Bush levels, specifically from a 36% to a 39% marginal tax rate.

Is a 39% marginal tax rate socialist? If so, then Eisenhower must have been a socialist, because during his presidency, the top marginal tax rate was 91%. After Reagan's first term, the top tax rate was 50%. Compared to them, Senator Obama must seem like Gordon Gekko.

Given a "wealth spreading" litmus test, all progressive taxation would be considered socialist, because it calls upon those of higher incomes to draw a greater percentage of their income to fund the government. Is that a reasonable conclusion then? Well, that might be news to Adam Smith, the celebrated proponent of laissez-faire capitalism, who wrote in support of a progressive tax in his Wealth of Nations.

Another fallacy here is the naturalistic fallacy. Your assumption is that everyone who is wealthy must have earned it, and everyone who is not wealthy must be deficient. You call the American workforce "complacent, lazy and self righteous" and blame them for our economic downturn; but in fact our current economic crisis was brought about by rich investment bankers creating risky derivatives and then over-leveraging their companies in exchange for fat bonuses. They were creating wealth alright- by spreading it from the market, and their own employers, to their personal bank accounts, and then leaving the credit market for the tax payers to clean up.

I think we would agree that preserving entrepreneurial incentive, driven by private risk and reward is important for our society to thrive. Where we differ, however, is that I recognize that there is value in society preserving for people the opportunities for them to seek those incentives, regardless of the strata of society in which they were born. I am not a proponent of egalitarianism, but neither am I proponent of devil-take-the-hindmost.

When it comes to tax policy today, I believe that reducing taxes for the middle class is more important and offers more benefits than for the rich, even if that means a slight increase for the rich. The middle class is where that industrial spirit thrives the most- this is where our workers, our inventors, our small business owners live. This is where people have to achieve in order to make a good life, and increasingly under the Republican fiscal policies, this is where the people have been squeezed to an unacceptable point.

On the one hand, we have a candidate who is proposing to offer a significant tax cut for the middle class, and on the other hand, we have a candidate who is offering a tax cut that primarily benefits the rich and barely touches the middle class. For me, the choice is clear.

Re: Earn the Wealth

TripTheLady — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 15:33:19 -0000

I voted McCain too. While I don't agree with everything he stands for I do agree with him more than Obama. I work damn hard for my money, often putting in 60-80 hours a week. Then I have employees come tell me to cut their hours because they're making too much and they're going to lose their food stamps? WTF? I busted my ass to get where I am and I am proud of it and I don't want to share my earnings to support those less aggressive at supporting themselves.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Steven Rosenbaum — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 14:57:46 -0000

i'm a bit surprised to see all this focus on taxes, given what seems to me to be so many more urgent and potentially life-threatening situations. I would suggest that the impact of global warming and the war and iraq combined to create any number of potentially world ending scenarios. Weather disasters, nuclear war, and the rising anger of a global underclass makes the debate about tax policy somewhat moot. At the end of the day - either candidate is going to be faced with staggering deficits and unbalanced budgets. States are going to look to the Federal Government for help, unemployment is going to rise, and crime is going to go up. I'm a lifelong entrepreneur, having built 3 businesses. But I can't help but look at the rising profits at Exon/Mobile and the rapid unraveling of the US economy and wonder if the price of oil couldn't somehow be tied to the challenges faced by average American's. Given McCain's public support of big oil ("Drill, baby drill") and his VP, I'm not sure how comparing tax policies makes any difference at the end of the day. The Republican's have run on a platform of small government, less taxes, and more personal responsibility while overseeing the largest growth in Government in modern history. What makes you that McCain will be any different? Can McCain's 'anti-pork' policies really change anything as long as we're in Iraq, and as long as Big Oil and Big Military rule the day? Ted, your taxes are going up. Unless you've found some way to get inside the protective bubble of a handful of industries - someone is going to pay the bill for the check we just wrote to the Banking Industry. I'd bet it's going to be you and I. Can you come up with any other candidates to pay that bill?

Re: Earn the Wealth

ted murphy — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 14:15:52 -0000

"McCain is proposing $5000 for insurance when people are getting it free through work, but could lose said free insurance under his plan."

There is no such thing as free insurance. If your employer pays for it you pay for it one way or another.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Marc — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 14:02:06 -0000

Bob Barr supports something along the lines of a fair tax. Look into him if that interests you.

Re: Earn the Wealth

MarinaMartin — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:59:35 -0000

The point was that we do not make 100% of cars domestically. That would not be in our best interest, because we'd have to divert our resources to meet 100% of our automotive needs, when currently other countries can make some cars better. We do not have enough resources to grow all our own good, make all our own cars, etc.

Also, if we don't buy foreign goods, foreigners can't buy our goods because they don't have access to dollars to pay for them. Would it be good for the county to have zero exports?

The majority of Americans used to be farmers. Some lost their jobs when the Industrial Revolution came around and changed that. Then that changed when computers were developed. Somehow, despite the loss of those jobs, we have MORE jobs now than ever before. Would you prefer that we have saved all those farmers' jobs and never have entered the Industrial Revolution? (Hint: that would mean you'd be out on a farm right now and there'd be no computers and no Internet.)

The people who lose jobs to outsourcing find other jobs, same as the farmers and factory workers found other jobs. Not every single person will, but most will - and the industries that are outsourced will make better, more affordable items that can be more easily afforded by lower-income people. If America made 100% of everything Americans consume, prices would be significantly higher than they are today, and the poor would be far worse off.

PLEASE read "The Choice" by Russell Roberts. It's short, and it explains this in greater length and better than I can. Your intentions are in the right place, but your proposed method actually works against your goal.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Dominick — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:49:26 -0000

Cars aren't really a good example. We weren't originally importing them (unless you're talking fancy, non-American cars). The vast majority of Americans drive GM, Jeep, Chrysler, Ford, etc. All of these companies were (and some still are) all American so the point where you say "we're importing cars anyway" doesn't make sense.

I live in Michigan and grew up in Toledo. Within a two hour vicinity I have GM, Chrysler, Ford, and Jeep. I grew up in a town right outside Toledo surrounded by train tracks, which used to load up the Jeeps and ship them out to other parts of the country. In fact, my paternal grandfather worked on said railroad. This part of the country was thriving under the industrial revolution, back when people produced and bought cars from America because that was where the cars were made. Taking something so American out of America is just plain unjust.

As for food, I would rather pay a little extra to eat organic or choice US meat, etc. than eat food that has been imported. How many cases of salmonella have broken out from food imported from Mexico, China or elsewhere? If food is going to be diseased, forget outsourcing. Bring back good ol' American food.

I support my local farmer's market!

And finally, who, pray tell, is going to pay for all the items being imported when all the poor/middle class folks who lost their jobs due to outsourcing can't afford to pay for them? If you take jobs from America that isn't good for America. It means less jobs, less money and less spending on anything whether it is domestic or imported.

Re: Earn the Wealth

Dominick — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:39:39 -0000

McCain is proposing $5000 for insurance when people are getting it free through work, but could lose said free insurance under his plan. Honestly, $5000 wouldn't buy insurance for someone like me, with a pre-existing condition. I'm better keeping the insurance I get through my dad, which I don't have to pay for. For the average American, insurance costs upwards of $12,000 per year. State line crossing or not, his plan isn't going to help anyone. More people will lose insurance under him than gain it.

Nobody said that Ted is singing McCain's praises. I believe that both myself and Lisa were pointing out there are many other reasons NOT to Vote (or to vote depending on your belief in the issues) for McCain as opposed to deciding to vote for him based on one issue (taxes). If I mistook Lisa's intent sorry about that, but I believe she was saying that she was voting against McCain due to all the reasons she listed.

Re: Earn the Wealth

ted murphy — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:31:34 -0000

"That said, I don't like either Obama or McCain all that much."

I am with you.