SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Gersh Avery who wrote (76098)7/24/2012 4:26:45 PM
From: chartseer  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 103300
 
What effect will the gravity of every planet in our universe have on our sun and that shotgun??? Think I should go short the market if the world is going to end, I want to go out short. That will comfort me in paradise.



To: Gersh Avery who wrote (76098)7/24/2012 10:28:56 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Respond to of 103300
 
Businesses Aren't The Problem, They're The Solution

Lately, it seems that the only form of acceptable hate speech left in America is hostile invective heaped upon entrepreneurs and innovators by a vocal minority of pundits, and increasingly, political leaders who should know better.

At the core of the great American experiment is the fundamental belief that the freedom to create and build businesses serves us all.

The greatest of our founding fathers, George Washington, once wrote:

"A people who are possessed of the spirit of commerce, who see, and who will pursue their advantages, may achieve almost anything." If there is a secret to America's success, it is this.

Alarmingly, the great ideas of our founders are being forgotten by some of our nation's most prominent leaders. Throughout American history, the enterprise of commerce, and those who practice it, have been celebrated as the engines of prosperity.

Yet in today's national dialogue, they are too often vilified as the source of our ills.

For those of us who have taken risks, put our family's financial well-being on the line, lived in near-poverty during the hard times so that our employees would be paid, or toiled on the frightening brink of failure fueled only by the hope of someday creating something great, this all comes as a painful slap in the face.

A case in point was Elizabeth Warren's introductory speech at a fundraiser for President Obama in Boston.

"Corporations are NOT people," she pronounced.

"People have hearts. They have kids. They get jobs. They get sick. They love and they cry and they dance. They live and they die. Learn the difference."

The audience ate it up.

Perhaps President Obama, a Harvard Law School graduate and former constitutional law professor who well knows the legal case for corporate personhood, would clear up Warren's condescending attack.

But he didn't. And recently, he added to the insult, telling an audience in Roanoke, Va.:

"If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

The idea that businesses are people isn't a new concept. Indeed, it's been around for almost two hundred years as a matter of law.

As far back as 1819, in Dartmouth College v Woodward, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized corporations as having the same rights as every other American citizen to enter into and enforce contracts secured under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Years later in a separate case, The Supreme Court returned to the corporate personhood well again, saying this:

"Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a private corporation is included (in the Fourteenth Amendment). Such corporations are merely associations of individuals united for a special purpose and permitted to do business under a particular name and have a succession of members without dissolution."

But the concept of personhood for corporations isn't merely established law. It's common sense.

Who starts a corporation but people? Who started Apple and IBM and McDonald's and Domino's Pizza and Facebook but people? And who starts the local auto body shop and the local Italian restaurant and the local charitable organization or church but people?

Corporations hire people, and feed families, they do charity work and community service. Of course corporations are people.

So why did Warren say what she said?

Is it inexperience? Is it a lack of substantive contact with American business?

Or a deliberate attempt to somehow strip corporations of their humanity?

Any why didn't our president clear the air, and the record?

That is for others to decide.

But for the entrepreneurs who have built, run, and grown small businesses, we don't need more anti-corporate rhetoric these days.

Instead, we need a better understanding from our nation's leaders of what makes businesses work and what doesn't. We need to recognize what inhibits growth and what stimulates it.

We formed Job Creators Alliance to be an advocate for small businesses — because small businesses that grow into big businesses are the engine that powers our American economy and embody the "spirit of commerce" George Washington praised.

The time has come for the job creators to have a voice, in the halls of power and throughout this great land, that government will not solve what ails our economy and is actually making things worse with its unprecedented regulatory assault on the free enterprise system.

In the end, corporations — and the people who run them and work for them — are not the problem with our economy.

We are the solution.

• Leven is the president and chief operating officer of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation.



To: Gersh Avery who wrote (76098)7/24/2012 10:30:36 PM
From: Hope Praytochange  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 103300
 
President's Attack On Success Shows U.S. Falling, Not Rising

In a speech on July 13 in Roanoke, Va., President Obama said this about successful people: "You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hard-working people out there. ... If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help."

Why limit the discussion to the United States?

Everywhere on our planet, there are smart and hard-working people striving for success and a decent life. Like in the United States, every country has people building roads and using these roads to get to places of work; some people are good teachers, some are good farmers, etc. Most human societies have the same general components.

I am sure Barack Obama saw plenty of smart and hard-working people in Indonesia, where he lived as a child. Why is Indonesia, a country very rich in natural resources, poor?

My husband, our friends and I worked hard in the USSR. Fresh from college, full of enthusiasm, we were in our prime years.

Soviet communists had created a system according to teachings by Karl Marx. This system was based on the principles of equality: Rich exploiters (private business owners) didn't have a place in this "workers' paradise." Therefore, entrepreneurs were outlawed.

There were many talented inventors in the Soviet Union. To register their invention and obtain a patent, they had to include names of official communist leaders as co-creators, putting their names above their own. If government leaders could not comprehend the idea or its relevance to the future, the invention died.

The same applied to works of art. In this "just society," people were whipped into conformity. Smart or not smart, all were equally poor.

Government central planners in the USSR, or China, or Cuba, didn't invent modern technology, and Soviet-made computers of the late 1970s were imitations of IBM's, created from stolen blueprints.

Today, the modern Russian language is full of modified English terminology for all high-tech gadgets.

An Associated Press article dated June 4 and titled "Is Obama a Socialist?" stated:

"In much of today's world, socialism lacks the contentious overtones that it has in America."

Are they talking about Europe, where younger generations are realizing that their parents bankrupted their countries?

How come only the U.S. was (at least before this president) the land of opportunities for all? What made this country different?

In the same speech in Roanoke, President Obama actually had an answer:

"Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive."

Why, then, does he want to fundamentally transform this country?

In contrast to all centrally governed countries, U.S. government directives are not required to implement new ideas. Most of the time, venture capitalists or banks finance the progression of an idea to the final outcome.

If an enterprise is successful — all benefit: the inventor, the venture capitalist and the society.

Why, then, do the president, his campaign apparatus and media demonize the very system that is the engine of American progress?

On his campaign bus tour, in early July, the president said: "I believe we rise or fall as one nation, as one people."

It's very strange to hear a president talking about the fall of the nation he presides over.

It is diametrically opposite to Ronald Reagan's inspiring vision of the United States — "a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed and teeming with people of all kinds." It's also so different from the declaration of statesmen such as Winston Churchill: "We shall never surrender!"

Under this president, which direction are we moving "forward" to: the rise or the fall?

When more workers joined the federal government's disability program in June than the number of jobs created by the economy — were we rising or falling?

When enrollment in the food-stamp program increased by 44% from 2009 to 2011, were we rising or falling.?

When in a very dangerous world the U.S. military is weakened and the borders are not protected — are we rising or falling?

When a growing web of government agencies and tsars are taxing, penalizing, mandating, forbidding and limiting citizens' liberties, and when entrepreneurship is demonized — are we rising or falling?

For those who study world history, the difference between government planners vs. private entrepreneurs is dramatically apparent.

Knowledge of world history and the fate of people around the world put America's uniqueness in perspective.

Did Barack Obama study any history? Hard to say, as his college records are sealed.

• Kunin lived in the Soviet Union until 1980, working as a civil engineer. She is now a retired software developer living in Connecticut