• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

NY Times/538 Projections of GOP Candidates vs. Obama

PhDeac said:
So can somebody tell me why diehard Republicans in the private sector would have any motivation to hire instead of just letting their money stay on the sidelines?
Click to expand...

Simple.....the primary and nearly only motivation to hire in any business....increased profit. Business people in the private sector care about making money not whether a candidate has a R or D next to their name.
 
Tea Partiers would vote for the GOP over Obama, they wouldn't come out in the sheer numbers they would if Bachmann were running but they would show up at the polls. Don't kid yourself.
 
HowardDeanSux said:
Simple.....the primary and nearly only motivation to hire in any business....increased profit. Business people in the private sector care about making money not whether a candidate has a R or D next to their name.
Click to expand...

Right. And they're Republicans because they believe they'd be more profitable with a Republican in the White House.
 
For the hidden taxes to be taken out of the cost of goods, your salary will have to be reduced to your take home pay.
 
Go said:
I do know what is happening today. We have corporations with billions of dollars sitting in overseas accounts, waiting to be spent in the United States or elsewhere. Right now our tax system is so messed up, that money will never make it here. Something's got to give.
Click to expand...


And there are plenty of ways to solve that without giving the superwealthy ginormous tax cuts and pushing all of the tax burden on the middle class.
 
PhDeac said:
Right. And they're Republicans because they believe they'd be more profitable with a Republican in the White House.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but they might know that their business has a competitor headed by a damn liberal who is poised get the jump on some market.
 
It's not too disimilar to Suck for Luck. Sounds likely in theory, but the individual actors (coaches/players) probably don't find it in their own best interests.
 
PhDeac said:
Right. And they're Republicans because they believe they'd be more profitable with a Republican in the White House.
Click to expand...

Business men who hire employees usually vote for the candidate who is best for "doing business" and making the most profit for the business. In pursuit of this profit they do things such as expand their business and hire more people if their business model indicates this will create more profit. You have identified the Republican party as the party which is best for increasing profit and hiring more people. I suspect you are correct, but they do not vote for candidates based upon their party affiliation.
 
TuffaloDeac10 said:
Yeah, but they might know that their business has a competitor headed by a damn liberal who is poised get the jump on some market.
Click to expand...

Liberals don't own businesses. C'mon, Tuff.

HowardDeanSux, what are your thoughts on the Tea Party Nation small business pledge?

"I, an American small business owner, part of the class that produces the vast majority of real, wealth producing jobs in this country, hereby resolve that I will not hire a single person until this war against business and my country is stopped.I hereby declare that my job creation potential is now ceased.

'I'm on strike!'"
 
PhDeac said:
So can somebody tell me why diehard Republicans in the private sector would have any motivation to hire instead of just letting their money stay on the sidelines?
Click to expand...

Why on earth do you think it is only diehard Republicans who run businesses that are remaining as liquid as possible until after the election? What sort of stereotypical nonsense is that? You must have read this somewhere?
 
It's stereotypical to think that people act on their political beliefs?

And I posted one example above that I read somewhere.
 
Go said:
RJ, I think you're mixing numbers up in that analysis, but I see what you're saying and basically the answer is that you and I have no idea what would happen.

I do know what is happening today. We have corporations with billions of dollars sitting in overseas accounts, waiting to be spent in the United States or elsewhere. Right now our tax system is so messed up, that money will never make it here. Something's got to give.
Click to expand...

Correct. Most estimates put the embedded taxes at somewhere around 22% by the time a product gets through the full supply chain. So rj's analysis competely understates (shocking!) the impact that this plan or something like the Fair Tax would have, not to mention the billions of dollars saved in compliance costs every year.
 
So the embedded taxes are 22%. Seems like if businesses keep the prices the same and just tack on 9%, that's a pretty handy profit throughout the supply chain without having to do a thing.
 
PhDeac said:
So the embedded taxes are 22%. Seems like if businesses keep the prices the same and just tack on 9%, that's a pretty handy profit throughout the supply chain without having to do a thing.
Click to expand...

This post is how I know you never took an econ class at Wake. Never knew someone who had so little faith in the laws of supply and demand.
 
84Deac said:
This post is how I know you never took an econ class at Wake. Never knew someone who had so little faith in the laws of supply and demand.
Click to expand...

Good thing you don't know me then.

I'll respond in more detail later. With my basic understanding of supply and demand, it seems like a good bet to keep prices the same and pocket the difference.
 
PhDeac said:
It's stereotypical to think that people act on their political beliefs?

And I posted one example above that I read somewhere.
Click to expand...

It is stereotypical because you imply that Republican captains of industry are the only ones who are thinking in the best interest of their companies by remaining liquid in an uncertain economy and election year. That's it.
 
DirkTheDeac said:
It is stereotypical because you imply that Republican captains of industry are the only ones who are thinking in the best interest of their companies by remaining liquid in an uncertain economy and election year for political gain. That's it.
Click to expand...

Tell me I'm wrong.

And I don't buy this uncertainty BS. Life is uncertain. Anything we've been certain about has been a bubble. They're just waiting for the next bubble to come around. That's not good business.
 
I really would like for Hunstman to get his chance to shine. If he can win New Hampshire it would be huge. I know he is investing a lot of resources into that state.
 
Wrangor said:
I really would like for Hunstman to get his chance to shine. If he can win New Hampshire it would be huge. I know he is investing a lot of resources into that state.
Click to expand...

LOL the funny thing is people like expect their opinions to be taken seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top