Sunday July 15, 2012
Over 20 people fainted during this speech in Roanoke, Va., probably from his “awesomeness”.
No one stayed up until 2am working on projects for my clients but me. I pay my bills, taxes, and buy all my own equipment and materials to do my work myself. I have taken no handouts. No one pays any of my expenses or fees to do business except me. Yet if I fail to build my business, no one will bail me out either and that’s fine.
His bottom line argument is bullshit. It’s a thinly veiled form of easy to swallow socialism wrapped in a thin veneer of common sense no one can deny, but has very little to do with actually building a business and running it day to day. Which he’s never done in his life.
Obama may be OK with taking a helping hand at each stage of his life to move him into new arenas of power (Which is not a business BTW) but I’d prefer not co-horting with known bombers and commie huggers to embolden my desired future.
Yes, maybe you did build your business all on your own. But his argument is far from BS. Many, if not most businesses are built on the hard work of others. This is almost totally true of today’s multinationals. The owner(s) hire some people for their ideas, others to build a factory (usually in a third-world country where people are more easily exploited) and then they borrow still other people’s money to make it all happen. At the end of it all, they sit back and collect the wealth created by the hard work and money of so many others. This, sadly, is what has become of our system of capitalism.
Which came first, the People or the Government?
That’s easy. The people came first.
Just look at the poor dumb asses who came to places like Jamestown Virginia in 1607. They were pretty much without any kind of government when they first arrived. So you pretty much have to say that the people came first.
But in the case of Jamestown around 1610, most of them died. And the reason they died was because no one really knew how to effectively work the land or how to prepare for the future by setting enough supplies aside for the winter months. They also believed their new leaders had all the answers and would actually make things better once new rules (laws) were imposed too. But we now know it only sped things up because almost everyone died of starvation. Even the few people who were actually producing something died because they weren’t allowed to keep anything for themselves.
Sound a little familiar?!
The people of Jamestown were told at the outset that they would be travelling to a land of milk and honey where the fish jump out of the rivers into the frying pan and the natives are friendly and educated in agriculture and the streets are paved in gold and life in paradise could be theirs for a small investment.
They were duped by bankers and speculators.
40 people fainted from the heat. it wasn’t the heat, it was the overpowering stench of all the fresh bullshit
I would like to hear the full quote. Not some bias edit.
It’s not had to find and it’s not a bias edit. Obama has no idea how the real world work because he has always had someone helping him move up the ladder. He thinks that how everyone gets a head.
Poor idiot that thinks this has been taken out of context.
So Brug, You mean the full quote that has him calling for para-legals to assist the fainted? The full quote that has him calling a stick shift a “clutch car”? The full quote where he states the US has 58 states? The full quote where a so-called ChiSox fan calls Comiskey Park, “Cominsky Park” – REALLY? You mean those full quotes?
….and I don’t want my President to throw a baseball like a girl, good grief.
So every musician that made it didn’t spend hours “woodshedding” to get good at his craft. Someone handed him his talent? hmmmmm
Context people, context. I could snatch ten words from your mouth and make you sound any way I wanted you to sound. Stupid bull crap that should never even have been posted.
That’ exactly how I feel about your comment
Excellent speech by Comandante Obama. No wonder he said he was going to talk to Kin Yong Un and the likes.
Next time, he should wear an olive green uniform. His words will carry more weight then
Haven’t heard the speech in its entirety but the 1st thought that came to mind by that excerpt was you can’t have a business without customers no matter how business savvy you might be.
And who’s the customer, the government?
What came first, cars or freeways etc?
Cars, therefore they necessitated roads.
Therefore, private business, inventing cars, created wealth from raw materials, money from what had no value until processed…
This led to millions of jobs in the auto and highway construction industry, paid for largely by taxes and use fees paid by private business, that benefited the public.
THAT Obama used rent free when he rabble roused as a community organizer, freeloading on the rest of us leading them to the nearest welfare office, in a Cloward and Piven strategy to bankrupt Capitalist America.
Like a dues paying member of the “New Party” would.
The Federal Highway Administration invites you to explore this Web site devoted to the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways.
From the start on June 29, 1956, the Eisenhower Interstate System has been known as the Greatest Public Works Project in History.
“Our unity as a nation is sustained by free communication of thought and by easy transportation of people and goods. The ceaseless flow of information throughout the Republic is matched by individual and commercial movement over a vast system of interconnected highways crisscrossing the country and joining at our national borders with friendly neighbors to the north and south.
Together, the united forces of our communication and transportation systems are dynamic elements in the very name we bear—United States. Without them, we would be a mere alliance of many separate parts.”
– President Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) February 22, 1955
I don’t know the context of this speech, but the statement itself is true.
I started a business, but it was the customers that made it happen.
If he was referring to a corporation, the shareholders and the customers make it happen.
If I write a book, the publisher and the readers make it happen.
I suppose one could argue what he meant by “make it happen.”
I tried to post the entire paragraph it came from but the site won’t let me. You can find the speech on the White House site. Basically he goes from teachers helped you become what you are to the government helped you become successful. At the end he says that the internet came from government research. True it did come from government research but in the end it was the telecoms that made internet around the US a reality… with some tax dollars which was wasted. He was trying to spin the facts to his advantage like any other candidate.
I think people shouldn’t make money with commercial aviation. It was government research that make jet propulsion possible
While I understand the idea that government is responsible for much of the infrastructure that a supply chain requires to sustain business, and that consumers supply the demand for products that grow and cause business to profit, there is no denying that if NOBODY bothers to open a business, then that business will not exist.
An entrepreneur may do market studies and look at transportation costs, but the bottom line is that if he decides that the outlook for profitability is poor, he won’t do it.
For example, a government is completely free to build a network of dirigible mooring stations across the country, and then to provide subsidies for their own perceived demand for slow, cumbersome, lighter-than-air travel. If a company doesn’t think there is any profit in it, then all the government infrastructure isn’t going to create a growing, profitable business. In this case, government created an environment for a business, but they created nothing of worth.
This is an example of how Obama doesn’t understand how business works.
Do tell, George. What network of dirigibles has Obama proposed?
Your passive-aggressive approach is a very lame way to dodge the subject.
No, go back to lick Comandante Obama’s shoes after such a magnificent speech.
You were an ass two years ago and you still are an ass today.
Grow up, you idiot.
What I can grow on is being a big pain for idiots like you.
Thanks for your unique contributions to this blog, pedro.
Now George — are you going to answer? Obama says it takes government-provided infrastructure for businesses to be successful, and you’re babbling about dirigibles. What is Obama doing that indicates he doesn’t understand how business works?
If you don’t understand the value of government-provided infrastructure, looks like you don’t understand how business works.
That’s not what Obama said.
Obama said that businesses owners are not responsible for building that business but that it was built by somebody else. That is incorrect.
From Da Brad Man’s more complete quote:
“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.
And now the quote that y’all are getting your panties in a twist about:
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.
I think it’s pretty clear Obama meant to say that no one is solely responsible for building their own business. But you go ahead and keep believing that he’s a commie socialist based on that one sentence taken out of context.
Obama’s not any kind of liberal, and I’m not a big fan, but really, the wingnut irrational hatred is getting pretty bad.
You think wrong. Obama just became the first POTUS in telling people you owe the government whatever you are when it’s the other way around.
The government works for the people, not the other way around.
But I do understand your lefty-caviar views makes you agree with Obama even though you’re trying to protect him by spinning otherwise.
Thanks again for your unique contributions, pedro.
Good Fido evading me an other posters. If you’re gonna chicken out then don’ get in the kitchen
No, the government invented the Internet so they would have a secure method of communications if the rest of the infrastructure went down.
As for the rest of your argument, it’s just that and not a very good one. Yes, genius groups exist but to claim nobody does anything on their own is pure and utter BS. I’m the one who worked nights and weekends to Build my product. Yes, I used somebody else’s tool, MSVC, but I had to buy it. To claim that I didn’t invent my product because the computer I invented it on was invented by someone else is ludicrous.
That would be like saying you are not the father of your children because you get your genes from someone else.
LL, you’re whacking at straw men again. No one’s saying you didn’t invent your product. We’re just saying without the help of that EEEVIL GUVMINT you wouldn’t have been successful. Success needs both, the individual initiative and the infrastructure support.
Though I know that’s hard for you government haters to accept.
Why do some people think that if they get any help from anyone else, their accomplishments are meaningless? Oh well. That black-and-white thinking again.
Because Obomba’s argument is not black & white. I guess there are shades of grays in that “you didn’t build it” statement. Care to enlighten us n those shades?
OMG a somewhat coherent pedro posting! Good job!
Yes, pedro, I will enlighten you. It’s called “context”. He was speaking without a script. His comments before and after the “you didn’t build it” comment clearly indicated the point he was making is that government spending on infrastructure helps people succeed, and that they can’t succeed on their own. He clearly meant “you didn’t build it on your own“, as this sentence just previous indicates: “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.”
Glad to help, pedro.
That’s not what he is saying. I’ve read it numerous times (Mainly because I refuse to believe somebody could be that … Dumb?) and he may be trying to soften the message but he definitely feels that nobody deserves credit for what they’ve accomplished.
We’re going to have to agree to disagree.
I will leave you with this final thought: would it be easier to convince the mob they have a right to my life’s work if they think they were the one who actually created it
To convince people that those who invent and produce deserve a larger slice of the pie?
LL, maybe you believe that
“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help”
“if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own”
are equivalent to
“nobody deserves credit for what they’ve accomplished.”
But I think the majority of rational people would disagree.
But that’s what puts you on the fringe. Where you belong. Looking at the world thru your distorted Libertarian lens.
“the mob”… oh dear, someone really has OD’ed on Ayn Rand. Tsk.
If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.
You forgot the crux of the argument.
These two sentences were the climax to his point.
If they had been the beginning and he said, “Let me explain,” I would probably give him the benefit of the doubt. But it wasn’t. It was the final nail in his statement.
It was not a slip of the tongue due to the lack of a teleprompter. It was two complete, coherent thoughts expressed in a logical order.
Do you believe you have a right to the fruits of my mind or do you believe I should get a bigger slice of the pie?
Well, I tried. People see what they want to see. Glad you enjoy feeling persecuted LL — everyone’s gotta have a hobby.
Quit running from the question, coward.
Oh that’s right, I forgot… you’re a real tough guy too, LL. Very impressive.
We’ve been through all this already, tough guy. You’re just jerkin’ off now. Libertarianism has huge flaws, that’s why it’s a fringe movement. None of you libertarians have been able to address the issues that numerous people, not just me, have brought up. That’s just the way it is. So you get off on acting tough on these anonymous discussion boards. Like I said… everyone’s gotta have a hobby. Go ahead, act tough. Have fun.
Keep playing the idiot defense Fido, It suits you very sell plus you get extra Kennel ration from you Obomba.
These lefties love to project. It’s like watching lefty Europeans talk about political issues over some caviar & champaign
pedro, I will always harbor the sneaking suspicion that you’re a liberal playing a wingnut doofus for laughs.
Wow, what an inferiority complex if you think I was being a bully.
I was stating a fact.
You are afraid to go on record.
Do you think I should receive a bigger slice of the pie or do you think you deserve the right to my inventions?
It’s a really simple question.
You can use check boxes if it will make it easier for you.
Sorry LL, I know libertarians reeeeeeally want to be taken seriously, but I just can’t do it. Gave up trying years ago. With you in particular. Our “debates” always ended up with you slinking away after I noted some glaring idiocy in libertarian theory. But you always come back, I’ll give you credit for persistence.
… not that I am claiming to be particularly smart. The glaring idiocies in libertarianism are well known, anyone can google it.
Actually, if you review all past comments, you’ll note that when confronted with logic, you revert to personal attacks. This is the standard ad hominem fallacy.
“Although some faulty arguers may call attention to distasteful features of their opponents in order to manipulate the responses of their audience, most abusers apparently believe that such characteristics actually provide good reasons for ignoring or discrediting the arguments of those who have them. Logically, of course, the fact that any of these characteristics might fit an opponent provides no reason to ignore or discredit his or her arguments or criticisms.”
(T. E. Damer, Attacking Faulty Reasoning. Wadsworth, 2001)
You are the one refusing to answer a simple question. Even if you feel you are right, your responses are consistent with somebody who doesn’t understand basic human interaction.
Prove me wrong. Answer the question.
Should I benefit more from one of my inventions than everybody else or not?
I’m sure you’re a very nice person, LL. But your belief in libertarianism makes you vulnerable to questions about your cognitive abilities.
To put it simply, your belief in such a silly-ass philosophy as libertarianism (which has been debunked many times by many people) makes you look like a fool. Arguments in favor of libertarianism simply do not deserve serious consideration.
You are not making any reasonable intellectual arguments when you babble your libertarian BS. So the only thing left to ponder on my part is whether you’re a misguided fool or truly cognitively impaired. You may construe this as ad hominem attacks.
Let’s see what Wikipedia has to say:
Abusive ad hominem (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one’s opponent in order to attack his claim or invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out true character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent’s argument. This is logically fallacious because it relates to the opponent’s personal character, which has nothing to do with the logical merit of the opponent’s argument
Since there is no logical merit to your argument it’s hard to see any ad hominem fallacy here. If someone believes in fairy tales, is calling them a fool an ad hominem fallacy because you don’t take their fairy tales seriously?
You can’t simply declare something illogical because you don’t want to answer the question. That is called the irrelevant conclusion fallacy.
Answer the question.
You are correct. I’m not declaring it illogical just because I don’t want to answer the question. I’m declaring it illogical because there are many smarter people than me who have written extensively and clearly on what a load of hooey libertarianism is.
Ah, the old appeal to authority fallacy.
You are still trying to redirect by changing the subject to libertarianism.
This is either a classic redirection fallacy or a formal fallacy. I suspect the former because by this stage you know this isn’t about libertarianism.
In addition, you are committing the Repetition fallacy.
How many more fallacies are you going to commit just to avoid answering the question?
… and ending with a nice word salad. Thanks for playing, LL.
I guess you are trying for the argument from silence fallacy again — you run off when you are out of ways to hide.
Answer the question, please.
Without the TAXES to hand out to the cousins and cronies who built the roads and “crumbling infrastructure” where else would the government come up with the money? And if you look at the history of paved roads – those were PRIVATE enterprises, including the Pennsylvania Turnpike. And if we’re going to look at the history of governments moving people and goods along – let’s have that argument. How’s the Post Office doing? How’s Chicago’s CTA doing right now?
I have seen lots of useful points on your site about computers. However, I’ve the view that netbooks are still more or less not powerful adequately to be a good option if you normally do jobs that require lots of power, just like video editing and enhancing. But for internet surfing, word processing, and quite a few other popular computer work they are perfectly, provided you never mind your little friend screen size. Many thanks sharing your thinking.
Click here to cancel reply.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Notify me of followup comments via e-mail
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Tweets by @THErealDVORAK
© 2008 Copyright Dvorak News Blog