So, what many people don't seem to realize is that the really really rich Republicans, are only republicans for the sake of money. Despite what you believe, it's true. A very rich republican votes for Bush, so he/she can get that little tax cuts to make his/her numbers go up. Thats really annoying.
Not only do they get tax cuts, but they already pay very little in taxes. Many rich people are very succesful stock brokers. They don't pay taxes because well, stocks aren't taxed anymore. So thats one problem. The second problem is that rich people can hire army of accountants to grab every single penny the government, "takes," from them. Ok, so I'm exaggerating, but they really do find every single penny possible. With enough pennies saved, it becomes a dollar. And so on. Other times, they just, "donate," their money to a non-profit organization and lists that as a donation to the government. However, their so called non-profit organization is something like their little golf club. That by it self, means that they save alot of money. They don't pay taxes, and the money their supposed to pay taxes are just returned to them.
Bush gives tax cuts. At notoriously bad times. But that has already be written. Bush's idea of a tax cut is the guy on the bottom benefits the most. The person who gets paid minimal wage gets something like a 50% tax cut (not real number), and the person on top gets a 2% tax cut. Well, a guy who gets the highest tax cut saves maybe around...500 ish dollars? The person with the lowest tax cut gets something around, 20 000 dollars. Saved.
Not only that, but Congress has also cut funds for the IRS. Resulting in MORE rich people getting away with tax evasion. The IRS can't catch everybody. If they get little funds, they can't catch anybody. This was caused by politicians (rich people) in congress. Damn politicians.
So I say, we should have a flat tax. Everybody pays whatever percentage, regardless of their income. Not only that, but the money made by stocks should also be taxed. All the money from this, would go a really long way in paying out national debt...That was caused by Bush.
Friday, January 21, 2005
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Conservatives Are Stupid
At least, all of the ones in my school.
One who justifies the invasion of Iraq with "freeing Iraqi people from a dictator and making their lives better," when it's obvious that thanks to the insurgents, they have a shorter expected lifespan. Their lives are also much more dangerous and fear filled since they are never sure of when someone will blow up a car they try to get into or fire a rocket at a nearby vehicle.
One who doesn't think that 400 tons of explosives is "a lot." One who probably doesn't realize that 400 tons is enough to level New York entirely. One who claims that Democrats live in a "imaginary world, where everything is safe and happy." One who doesn't realize the true problems of the world.
And the last. This one can't seem to grasp the concept of "the rich want to pay less taxes" theory. He seems to think that only John Kerry found legal loopholes within the tax code to prevent the payment of much of his taxes. He doesn't understand that people don't like taxes, especially people like George W. Bush, who gets a tax writeoff from a lumber company that he owns which is a "small business."
These three can't seem to get the fact that other arguements exist, and their interpretation of anything is not the final truth.
One who justifies the invasion of Iraq with "freeing Iraqi people from a dictator and making their lives better," when it's obvious that thanks to the insurgents, they have a shorter expected lifespan. Their lives are also much more dangerous and fear filled since they are never sure of when someone will blow up a car they try to get into or fire a rocket at a nearby vehicle.
One who doesn't think that 400 tons of explosives is "a lot." One who probably doesn't realize that 400 tons is enough to level New York entirely. One who claims that Democrats live in a "imaginary world, where everything is safe and happy." One who doesn't realize the true problems of the world.
And the last. This one can't seem to grasp the concept of "the rich want to pay less taxes" theory. He seems to think that only John Kerry found legal loopholes within the tax code to prevent the payment of much of his taxes. He doesn't understand that people don't like taxes, especially people like George W. Bush, who gets a tax writeoff from a lumber company that he owns which is a "small business."
These three can't seem to get the fact that other arguements exist, and their interpretation of anything is not the final truth.
Monday, January 10, 2005
CEO...WHY?
We have this omnipotent figure in todays world. The CEO. He/she has the ability to utterly own your company. So my question is, why would you even want a CEO? You hire a CEO in order to run your company. Where did the boss go? Where did the guy who was EDUCATED in the field go?
We have many problems with it comes to CEOs.
First thing is that CEO's get paid around 50 million dollars a year. Thats over kill. The president doesn't get paid that much. A CEO should get paid around 700,000? That would be ok. You save millions of dollars that you can use to spend on other things, such as research.
Two, CEOs are usually not E-D-U-C-A-T-E-D when it comes to their field. Look at the CEO for HP. Does she know anything about computers? No. She doesn't. She ran HP into the ground. Look at the CEO for Apple? She ran apple into the ground. Now that the boss has come back and kicked her out of the CEO position, Apple is doing decently now. Why? Because the owner of the company actually knows something more than Excel about computers.
Management is highly overrated. Sure, it is important to some point, but certainly not 50 million dollars worth. Too much management and too little workers will not run a company. Especially if the leaders don't know jack about their field.
Take this example. You have a CEO that tells you to make a computer can float. You can't do this. Why? It's impossible with todays technology. Not only is it impossible, but it is also impractical. What the hell are you going to do with a floating computer? The CEO won't care. He/She will just fire you if you don't want to do it. If you do a bad job at it, he/she will fire you.
We have many problems with it comes to CEOs.
First thing is that CEO's get paid around 50 million dollars a year. Thats over kill. The president doesn't get paid that much. A CEO should get paid around 700,000? That would be ok. You save millions of dollars that you can use to spend on other things, such as research.
Two, CEOs are usually not E-D-U-C-A-T-E-D when it comes to their field. Look at the CEO for HP. Does she know anything about computers? No. She doesn't. She ran HP into the ground. Look at the CEO for Apple? She ran apple into the ground. Now that the boss has come back and kicked her out of the CEO position, Apple is doing decently now. Why? Because the owner of the company actually knows something more than Excel about computers.
Management is highly overrated. Sure, it is important to some point, but certainly not 50 million dollars worth. Too much management and too little workers will not run a company. Especially if the leaders don't know jack about their field.
Take this example. You have a CEO that tells you to make a computer can float. You can't do this. Why? It's impossible with todays technology. Not only is it impossible, but it is also impractical. What the hell are you going to do with a floating computer? The CEO won't care. He/She will just fire you if you don't want to do it. If you do a bad job at it, he/she will fire you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
