Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

Why is it

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 3:23:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

That's a sweeping generalization. There are conditions that warrant blaming the boss and conditions that warrant thanking the government, considered outside that relative context your question is utterly meaningless.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 3:25:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because bosses can only ruin things. They ruin everything, unless the workers manage to overcome their ineptitude with the help of the government and bring the business to success anyway.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 3:30:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Easy counter:

Go find what Democrats say about successful businesses run by women or minorities ;)
imabench
Posts: 21,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 4:48:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

No its just what Democrats always say.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 4:50:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

And you could literally switch things around so that;

Why is it when a business fails republicans blame the employees or government who made them fail. However if a business succeeds, the republicans claim it was the bosses that made them succeed.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 5:29:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 4:50:48 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

And you could literally switch things around so that;

Why is it when a business fails republicans blame the employees or government who made them fail. However if a business succeeds, the republicans claim it was the bosses that made them succeed.

^this.

It's the kind of hasty generalisation that one puts in textbooks and points to undergrads who study logic as saying "this is wrong", because one can find a democrat who disagrees with ease. Similarly one can find a republican who disagrees with ease.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
WW
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 5:55:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Why is it that when business fail, republicans blame the government but when it succeeds, they chant "we did build it"?
imabench
Posts: 21,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 6:03:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 5:29:29 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:50:48 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

And you could literally switch things around so that;

Why is it when a business fails republicans blame the employees or government who made them fail. However if a business succeeds, the republicans claim it was the bosses that made them succeed.

^this.

It's the kind of hasty generalisation that one puts in textbooks and points to undergrads who study logic as saying "this is wrong", because one can find a democrat who disagrees with ease. Similarly one can find a republican who disagrees with ease.

Making both of generalizations wrong and retarded to say in the first place, yes?
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 9:33:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't think this way at all.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 10:01:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

Creating jobs is more often than not a conscious decision. Firing people is not.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 10:13:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

How about, when a CEO buys a company, saves it from liquidation, and makes it profitable, they blame him for being a vulture?

Hypocrisy exists on both sides... business just tends to be an area where there are more lame attacks from the left.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/7/2012 11:25:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 10:01:29 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

Creating jobs is more often than not a conscious decision. Firing people is not.

Firing people is not a conscious decision?!? It is just as much as a decision as if to hire people. So you think that the 1% decide to employ people, but it is not their decision when they fire people?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 8:28:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 4:50:48 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

And you could literally switch things around so that;

Why is it when a business fails republicans blame the employees or government who made them fail. However if a business succeeds, the republicans claim it was the bosses that made them succeed.

That is so not true. I wonder how many business people you hang with, but I know that most who look at a poorly run company, they blame management. Take Polaroid, does anyone blame the employees or government? How about Digital or Wang? All have management to blame, and I've never heard anyone blame government or the workforce for their failures. Whereas, those companies who have been agile and remained competitive are praised for having a managment team that has a vision.
Chaos88
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 3:58:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

There is truth to this.
If a business fails, it is the fault of the boss. They hired the bad employees. They made bad investments/decisions. They started a business with a poor model/not enough capital.

If a business succeeds, it is definitely in part of the employees (assuming there are any), as without them, there would be no work getting done. However, this also means the boss did some right things as well (such as hiring good employees).

I think people who consciously make this comparison (I think most don't put the two separate thought together), focus on the will of the people, and try to minimize the power of an individual. These are likely the same people who think that businesses are greedy, because they want profits, yet employees are not, even though they demand higher wages. Also, that governments are infalliable, because when they lay people off, it is for the best, but when a CEO does it, it is to get a bonus.
Chaos88
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 4:33:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/8/2012 8:28:06 AM, innomen wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:50:48 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/7/2012 4:28:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because thats not what we think at all....

And you could literally switch things around so that;

Why is it when a business fails republicans blame the employees or government who made them fail. However if a business succeeds, the republicans claim it was the bosses that made them succeed.

That is so not true. I wonder how many business people you hang with, but I know that most who look at a poorly run company, they blame management. Take Polaroid, does anyone blame the employees or government? How about Digital or Wang? All have management to blame, and I've never heard anyone blame government or the workforce for their failures. Whereas, those companies who have been agile and remained competitive are praised for having a managment team that has a vision.

it was more of a criticism of DanT then what I actually believe.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 5:23:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Why is it that when a businessman gets a tax break he's a smart businessman but when someone gets help because they're hungry they're a muncher?

We don't do that at all. In fact we acknowledge what a leader can and will do. We just put the importance on workers because we understand that without them the profits the CEO makes wouldn't be there ...

on another note. I like how this nonsense keeps coming up from the person who thought democrats are fascist. This guy is an idiot.
Thank you for voting!
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 6:51:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM, Chaos88 wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 7:12:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/8/2012 6:51:50 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM, Chaos88 wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

Loans.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.

Who provides loans?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 7:24:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

Loans.

Banks don't give money to anybody. Usually people need "collateral" or a steady income to secure a loan. Also, even if someone has capital, they may not have the ability (training, network, skills) to start a business.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.
aa
Who provides loans?

Financial institutions. So, in the case of 2008, where financial institutions gave out too many loans and crashed the economy, the financial institutions are to blame. If financial institutions are responsible for creating low unemployment, they are also responsible for creating high unemployment.
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2012 11:31:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/8/2012 7:12:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/8/2012 6:51:50 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM, Chaos88 wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

Loans.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.

Who provides loans?

Ahhh yes the stupidity of LK strikes again
couple issues
1) Most banks will NOT give out a loan to an individual without a job of some sort with a minimum income (to ensure they don't get f*cked over) to make minimum payments
2) Small business incentives are not always enough to assist those in need for starting a business due to the qualifications needed
3) What kind of credit rating would you have if you're unemployed, have student loans, have a mortgage (or rent), own a vehicle, etc...? Who in their right minds would give you a loan?

Give your head a shake man. You have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

LK logic:
In debt? Lets go further in debt! LOL
Thank you for voting!
Chaos88
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 2:56:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/8/2012 6:51:50 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM, Chaos88 wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

I never said this. My point is that the upper tier is responsible for employing many, many people; however, many people are self-employed (and the vast majority of SE people have no employees).
Also, I would like to point out that you do not need much capital. I operate a tax preparation business, which I have spent about $1,000 on (using credit cards), and my wife runs a dog grooming shop out of our garage (spent about $4,000 on credit cards). We don't make much money, as evidenced that I still work full-time, but we do have profits.

One could walk dogs, babysit or daycare, cook for others, be a maid, perform lawncare, or paint (artist or house) with little start-up costs besides transportation. Think about it: if I work six days/week making $80/day in profit (low expenses if offering a service), that is $24,960/year. $80/day could be picking up dog crap at 16 houses that pay $5/visit, clean one house as a maid, mow eight yards, groom two dogs, cut five people's hair, or give one tattoo.
After a short time, this could get bigger and operations expand.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.

True, the 1% is not solely responsible for job creation, nor unemployment. However, the 1% is more responsible for job creation because they actually hire employees, and less responsible for unemployment, as many people can have a at-home business and are not considered unemployed, by definition of what unemployment measures.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 7:49:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago

I never said this. My point is that the upper tier is responsible for employing many, many people; however, many people are self-employed (and the vast majority of SE people have no employees).
Also, I would like to point out that you do not need much capital. I operate a tax preparation business, which I have spent about $1,000 on (using credit cards), and my wife runs a dog grooming shop out of our garage (spent about $4,000 on credit cards). We don't make much money, as evidenced that I still work full-time, but we do have profits.

I see what you mean, but most people would be still underemployed. Most will probably make less money on their "side business". Also, people will be reluctant to drop $1000, or $4000 on a side business, if they believe it is a temporary thing till they find a job again. And, they may be taking someone else s business or job. Someone may already babysit, mow that lawn ect, now they are out of work.


True, the 1% is not solely responsible for job creation, nor unemployment. However, the 1% is more responsible for job creation because they actually hire employees, and less responsible for unemployment, as many people can have a at-home business and are not considered unemployed, by definition of what unemployment measures.

I guess, the unemployment rate is not the best stat to judge the economy. A better statement would be "if the top 1% are responsible for a strong economy, they are also responsible for a weak economy.". Because, I suppose unemployed can find employment through underemployment.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 8:20:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/7/2012 3:25:23 PM, AlwaysMoreThanYou wrote:
At 10/7/2012 3:19:24 PM, DanT wrote:
Why is it when a business fails democrats blame the boss but when it is successful they claim it was the employees or government who made them successful.

Because bosses can only ruin things. They ruin everything, unless the workers manage to overcome their ineptitude with the help of the government and bring the business to success anyway.

You think the federal government is smarter than the private sector, really?

What planet are you talking about?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 8:42:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/9/2012 8:20:21 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
You think the federal government is smarter than the private sector, really?

No. Don't worry.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2012 12:18:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is so retarded. Please pursue a major that is actually not idiotic so that you can educate yourself.

At 10/8/2012 11:31:28 PM, TheHitchslap wrote:
At 10/8/2012 7:12:03 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/8/2012 6:51:50 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 10/8/2012 4:15:59 PM, Chaos88 wrote:
At 10/7/2012 9:25:03 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
Most liberals do not believe this.

How about "if the top 1% are responsible for creating jobs, should the top 1% be blamed for unemployment?"

No, because far more than the 1% are able to self-employ and/or are employers.

I have my own business and so does my wife; I also work full-time as an employee. So, if I were laid off, I would not contribute to the unemployment numbers.

Many people don't have the capital or ability to start there own business without help. Just because you and your wife do, does not mean everyone does. Most do not. The position that "all unemployed should just start their own business", does not make sense.

Loans.

Also, if low unemployment was because lower class people starting their own business, the top 1% would not be responsible for job creation, lower class people starting their own businesses would.

Who provides loans?

1) Most banks will NOT give out a loan to an individual without a job of some sort with a minimum income (to ensure they don't get f*cked over) to make minimum payments

Nobody is expecting a bank to give loans to someone who just has a business idea- that is ludicrous. The whole point of a small business is that you start it up with your own financial capital and then when you show that you can get some profit, the bank/investors give you loans. If you can show that your business idea will provide some profit, most banks will be happy to lend you money.

2) Small business incentives are not always enough to assist those in need for starting a business due to the qualifications needed

Qualifications? Some of the most successful businesses were started by drop-outs or otherwise perceived failures. All you need is motivation and a half-decent idea; no formal degree is needed.

3) What kind of credit rating would you have if you're unemployed, have student loans, have a mortgage (or rent), own a vehicle, etc...? Who in their right minds would give you a loan?

If you can show that your business idea will generate profit, then it really doesn't matter what your credit score is. Credit scores only matter if you are getting a loan for a general purpose.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."