I'm not questioning the stupidity of the statement, but I'm hella surprised that he mashes together his personal take-home with the ongoing costs of running the business.
Yeah, I hope he's just oversimplifying to make his point, and he probably is.
Flames wouldn't be eternal if they actually consumed anything.
Lilah ,'Not Fade Away'
Natter 68: Bork Bork Bork
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
JenP - Sep 19, 2011 8:43:06 am PDT #27223 of 30001
Allyson - Sep 19, 2011 8:44:07 am PDT #27224 of 30001
Wait, is this real-world child support, where the money goes to buy food for the kids, or MRA fantasyland child support where the women just buy Ferraris and cocaine? -Jessica
And WHY, again, do people living below the poverty level continue to vote for these assholes? WHY?!? Because they DO. They just. keep. voting. for assholes who literally don't care if their constituents starve to death. WHY?
Because of the babies, Steph. It's because of the unborn babies.
Kate P. - Sep 19, 2011 8:44:33 am PDT #27225 of 30001
That's the pain / That cuts a straight line down through the heart / We call it love
BECAUSE IT COSTS $200K TO FEED HIS FAMILY.
OK, but to be fair, he might have been using "feed my family" to mean "feed, house, clothe, and educate my family," don't you think? Not that $200K isn't a lot of money even for all that, but one or two kids in college, say, would take up a significant chunk of that cash.
Steph L. - Sep 19, 2011 8:45:07 am PDT #27226 of 30001
I look more rad than Lutheranism
And WHY, again, do people living below the poverty level continue to vote for these assholes? WHY?!? Because they DO. They just. keep. voting. for assholes who literally don't care if their constituents starve to death. WHY?
Because of the babies, Steph. It's because of the unborn babies.
Oh, yeah! Who can starve to death once they make it out of the birth canal.
Jesse - Sep 19, 2011 8:52:40 am PDT #27227 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
OK, but to be fair, he might have been using "feed my family" to mean "feed, house, clothe, and educate my family," don't you think? Not that $200K isn't a lot of money even for all that, but one or two kids in college, say, would take up a significant chunk of that cash.
Of course. Mostly I just think he was stupid for talking about all of it. When she started with "your businesses brought in $6.3m last year," he should have just said that was gross not net, and shut it down.
JenP - Sep 19, 2011 8:53:19 am PDT #27228 of 30001
Yeah, Kate, I agree (edited to take out the part where I decided your rigthness, which I'm pretty sure you didn't need me to do). I think his point about $6.3M actually ending up as $200K for him is one maybe worth making in terms of understanding what owning a business really means. I think not understanding how it would sound and be reported was his mistake here. I mean, dude, you make 4x median(?) income just from your businesses -- understand that it will be hard for most people to sympathize. But, maybe the reporter was asking about him specifically.
What I want to know, really, is how much does he pay in business taxes, and how much would an increase of x% really affect his bottom line -- how much would it actually affect that final number? Would he really have to lay off people? Sure, his business decisions might be affected, but does that just mean you don't replace some equipment as soon as you'd like?
JenP - Sep 19, 2011 8:53:19 am PDT #27229 of 30001
Jessica - Sep 19, 2011 8:55:58 am PDT #27230 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Your business made $6.3 million. He says, Sure, but after I pay the employees, etc., my takehome is only a fraction of that -- $600K. So then by the time he feeds his family, he only has $400K left to reinvest in the business.
I'ma go out on a limb and say that a $6.3 million/year business is not "small" in any sense of the word that matters.
le nubian - Sep 19, 2011 9:06:42 am PDT #27231 of 30001
"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."
guess what, it just meets the definition of small business:
under 500 employees, making less than $7 million.
Sophia Brooks - Sep 19, 2011 9:13:34 am PDT #27232 of 30001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
And WHY, again, do people living below the poverty level continue to vote for these assholes? WHY?!? Because they DO. They just. keep. voting. for assholes who literally don't care if their constituents starve to death. WHY?
I think part of it is that they are choosing between a well-oiled PR machine that is channeling their anger toward people in the same class and poorer while also intimating that they could aspire to be the $6.3 million dollar man and telling them that progressives think they are stupid, and progressives calling them stupid. We do not have the same well-oiled PR machine.
I think the left should start fighting on a morals basis. Not exclusively religious morals, but we could point out how Jesus' teachings align with helping the poor. If people want to get all het up about immorality, let them get het up about the immorality of convincing people to take mortgages they know they can't afford, taking bailout money and then not paying taxes, taking tax cuts made for "job creation" and then making people work longer and harder for less money, or sending work overseas, of letting people who do not have health insurance die or go bankrupt, of letting children in what is supposed to be the "best country in the world" have such a high poverty rate/