Elizabeth Warren

"The rest of us"? Ms. Warren implies that the guy who started the business and built the fatory didn't also contribute to the roads, education, security by paying his taxes for years before he opened his business.
The marauding bands are now the EPA and EEO along with every restrictive regulation the Feds have enacted.
And thank you Ms. Warren for giving the business owner who is creating jobs and thereby tax payers permission to "keep a chunk" of what he created. You neglect to mention of course how big a hunk because in your world that depends on how much you'd like to redistribute.

So does she mean like the "banks" and "financial institutions" we all "built together. I mean we wouldn't want to let them fail, where would we be without them.

Utter non-sense, this leads to "too big to fail".

Solyndra was built with us all coming together right?

So there's that.

It also stands to reason that when Ms. Warren references "paying it forward for the next kid", she essentially means giving the federal government it's "hunk" to redistribute as part of the "underlying social contract". And if that's the case, is she then advocating for a change in the way we fund police and fire services? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those services currently funded through state and local tax dollars?

And what if some of those workers went to private schools? Will Ms. Warren return a piece of that "hunk" because the rest of us didn't have to pay to educate them?

I have to give her credit though, she was succinct. Succinctly stupid.

Another reason to end public money for ALL COMPANIES.

If the Fed didn't reap the fortunes of the States and then get to dole out people's hard earned tax dollars in the first place this wouldn't be such a big deal, something about the 10th Amendment I hear is pretty solid.

If Ohio got to keep it's tax dollars we wouldn't be beholden to get down and beg to get them back.

When I have a business that fails, will the "everyone" she refers to come running with checkbooks open to make me whole? Or will I be personally responsible for the loss to my investors?

Oh I see, that door only swings one direction.

Except on Wall Street. How does she feel about the Wall Street/bank bailouts?

BTW, by "paying a hunk", did she also include all the donations most major companies and "the rich" make to social institutions in a community? Or is the "social contract" only taxation? You know, because "the rich" are such selfish bastards that not only do they pay a far greater percentage of taxes (see RBancroft video above and other sources), but also provide a great deal of operating income for the type of things I'm sure the erudite Ms. Warren loves:

The Toledo Symphony donors
WGTE Public Television donors
Toledo Art Museum donors
University of Toledo donors
Bowling Green State University record-amount donation
Ronald McDonald House donations/sponsorship opportunities
Ford Foundation grantee list

Yeah, they do it for a tax deduction in a lot of cases. Is that not "paying a hunk" for the "social contract" for the next kid/person who comes along?

Not to mention that "the rich" and non-rich alike donate to places like:

Cherry Street Mission
Toledo Northwestern Ohio FoodBank

...and various church charities.

Success should be appreciated, rather than torn down. And just because someone has money does not mean someone who does not have money is entitled to it through some vague "social contract".

Looks like I'm the odd person out here. But here are my opinions.

The reason so many do not pay income tax is because they are too poor! As a retiree I fall into that category. I would gladly pay if my income was higher.

Zero interest is great for borrowers but terrible for those who invested in CD's for supplement income. The same is true of any money invested in the stock market.

...working conservatives into a frothy santorum...

After typing this, you are upbraiding someone for class?

OHT, one was direct personal reference to someone and one was used in the abstract and frankly in jest.

Wow, a liberal chastizing me for not being classy?

Pot calling the kettle black.

Or is that a racist statement now too?

HILARIOUS!

Elizabeth Warren is running for senate in Massachusetts, yet she is stirring up debate in Toledo.

P.S.

She must be a huge threat to Reptiles. Rush Limbaugh spent an hour yesterday talking about how Warren is a "parasite" on America. Under Rush's rationale, we are all "parasites."

"What a dumb bitch." -- dell_diva

Really classless. And, Warren is 100x smarter than any intelligence level you could ever attain.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Intelligence is knowing how to put all of your thoughts into one post instead of three in a row.

""The rest of us"? Ms. Warren implies that the guy who started the business and built the fatory didn't also contribute to the roads, education, security by paying his taxes for years before he opened his business. " -- fred

The "rest of us," from my understanding, is not exclusive of another. "The rest of us" simply means that others have contributed, but not that another person is being excluded from the contributing.

A basic English and logic class is in order.

"Intelligence is knowing how to put all of your thoughts into one post instead of three in a row." -- dell_diva

I'd rather not live by your definition of intelligence, since it is obviously a failure.

Which part do you find funny JJ? The initial post that started the debate or that there are people who disagree with it?

That people find so much interest in a senate race in Massachusetts while Toledo lingers in mediocrity.

And, yes, I do agree with her statement, which is not the initial post.

Not so sure about that one, seeing as Ms. Warren doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on how some of the most basic functions provided by government are funded.

If you condone calling a senatorial candidate who has taught at Harvard and has written the most followed book for bankruptcy law a "dumb bitch," then I think you're equally classless.

Just because she wrote a book that students are forced to buy by other elitist professors doesn't make her a leader.

Did I say she was a leader because she wrote a book? Where are you getting that statement from??!??!?

You forget JJFad, conservatives look to the deep intellects of failed vice presidential candidate and half term governor Sarah Palin and pray away the gay and vaccines cause retardation in teens representative Michele Bachmann for their guidance…

Sensor and JJ being intelligent like you two assume you are doesn't stop you from being stupid. And her statement is so out of touch with reality its borders on the ignorant let alone stupid. What she is condoning is just plain socialism. Last I checked socialism didn't work, ask the Russians how it worked out for them.

How is it condoning socialism?

You and I hear completely different things Linecrosser...what she descripted is how we as a nation have functioned up until the 80’s. Corporation used to pay taxes. Today most don’t and you have multiple presidential candidates arguing that corporations who do pay taxes shouldn’t have to pay any taxes at all.

Conservatives argue that the federal deficit is the number threat that the United States faces, but when millionaires are asked to pay the same tax rate they paid during the booming Clinton presidency, back when we were on our way to actual pay off our debt, conservative scream socialism.

Please find me time or country where extreme conservative Libertarianism was successful?

Go back and read the comments prior to you letting us all know how hilarious this is and tell me how many times someone mentioned the Senate race?

I'd venture a guess that most people are finding interest in what she actually said.

But why is she being mentioned? Maybe because she's in the senate race, no?

I don't condone calling any woman a "dumb bitch". But if we're going to play the wild accusation game; if you condone calling a woman who isn't a Senate candidate, didn't teach at Harvard and didn't write a book about bankruptcy a "dumb bitch", then I think you have problems, personal and otherwise, because you just insulted almost every man's wife, daughter, girlfriend, etc.

My comment was merely based on your completely subjective comparison of intelligence levels. Though I must say, it is somewhat funny how interesting you find this campaign while Toledo lingers in mediocrity.

"if you condone calling a woman who isn't a Senate candidate, didn't teach at Harvard and didn't write a book about bankruptcy a "dumb bitch"" --RBancroft

WHAT THE FUCK? Where is your logic? Is this some flawed attempt at a contra-postive? This is possibly the worst reply I have ever read on toledotalk... but it's nice to know I've gotten under your skin.

She is clearly educated and I don't doubt she is fairly intelligent, you can't skate through Harvard. But just because someone is "smart" doesn't mean their right I mean Bill O'Reilly got a MPA at Harvard I don't hear you raising his ideas as gospel truth.

Great book on the educated elite who can't really function in the "real world". Blind Spots: Why Smart People Do Dumb Things Because they lived their lives inside classrooms, you can create the impossible when all your life is theory and zero time spent in application.

She's obviously smart. It's not that I would raise her ideas as truth. I vote libertarian, for god sakes. However, to call someone a "dumb bitch" who went to taught at Harvard and is the most respected figure in her field is asinine.

As far as for her functioning in the "real world," who knows. THAT is a valid argument, but to say she is dumb is just fucking ridiculous.

Agreed

OMG JJFad, you have got to be either the biggest liar on the planet or a total hypocrite. You seriously vote libertarian but agree with this, um, "lady"?? This rant that she presented is the most UN-libertarian of a statement as you can get!

And you have such a problem with me calling her a dumb bitch but I bet you're the one cheering the loudest at the people who call Palin a "whore" or Bachmann a "cunt."

Neither liar nor hypocrite.. perhaps next I'll be a "dumb bitch?"

I could care less about Palin and Bachmann.

The "rant" is not UN-libertarian. What would go against my beliefs is if Warren stated that she would like to make laws that push people to give. I believe that her statement is correct. People should give back to the community.

"couldn't care less" rather

We should give back but there is no charity at the barrel end of an IRS agent's Sig.

This isn't an "all about me" rant but Obama's new plan reduces tax deductions to non-profits. Make every dollar you give to those in need a 100 pecents tax deductable with no cap. People helping people works far better than a federal money game of 52 pickup.

Corporations don't pay taxes that is a cost that is passed onto consumers. I'm waiting to hear you espouse an argument about the government taking over all private business and allocating all profit as the government sees fit. Making all labor positions into a government work force and allocating jobs by a central committee. Next all food and living supplies will be free, just have to wait in line.

Key words in the posted picture and statement are the words "social contract".

Nice try JJ, but just remember the logic is all yours. You were the one who set the qualifiers for condoning derogatory language, I was just playing along. I can see why you only copied the part of my comment you thought you could take out of context though, because that meant this was left out; "I don't condone calling any woman a "dumb bitch"."

All that aside, what really seems illogical is that you appear to have more of a problem with her being called dumb than you do with her being called a bitch.

And don't worry, you haven't gotten under my skin. Though I must say your intelligence worship is somewhat disturbing.

Pink what will happen is the cost to do business will become so high they will move to another country or go out of business. Nice way to create jobs eh?

Linecrosser, it's more likely that companies go out of business due to lack of demand or competition. It's also more likely that they move jobs overseas due to labor costs.

"Nice try JJ, but just remember the logic is all yours. You were the one who set the qualifiers for condoning derogatory language, I was just playing along." -- RBancroft

OH! Titillating!

So, let's play. Please give a brief description of my logic "qualifiers" that make your statement ("if you condone calling a woman who isn't a Senate candidate, didn't teach at Harvard and didn't write a book about bankruptcy a "dumb bitch", then I think you have problems, personal and otherwise, because you just insulted almost every man's wife, daughter, girlfriend, etc.") logical.

Patiently waiting your reply.

So how about your Progressive leader now?

Wall Street money for Warren

More of the same shit we heard from Barry about "getting dem dar evil bankers" while you roll in their money.

The Washington Uni-Party strikes again.

Yawn...

I've given money to the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee as well; so she must be masive progressive liberal too...

Name ONE person in Congress or the Cabinet that's not taken Wall Street money at any point before or during their current job. (Wall Street includes all banks, funds, and insurers, and their affiliated PACs.)

hey dbw - i don't know if you saw this a couple weeks ago - it faded very quickly after i posted it.

it is a harvard law school interview with jack abramoff, the convicted lobbyist, discussing how the entire congress is bought and paid for - the washington uni-party you reference. all the vitriol on both sides is exactly what large monied interests want... they don't care who is in office as long as they can control them. they are stealing the goose while everyone else is arguing over table scraps.

http://youtu.be/pkvIS5pZ0eI

personally, i do hope warren gets elected... everyone runs for office under existing rules... to not get money in the same manner as opponents puts one at a huge disadvantage.

but i have great hopes based on her past record that she will have significant impact on campaign reform, consumer protection, and a whole range of progressive ideas.

"In that case, since society should get a piece of the upside, should they also cover my downside?"

I believe we do. When a company fails it can affect a lot of people. Not only do we lose our income when it fails, those that provide materials and services to that company also take a pinch. So there is a vested interest in keeping sound companies going. imho

I hope any pol elected to office does some "good", it's kind of the reason we send them to the capital. You just look like a fool when you slam "wall street" every chance you get and then take back door payments from them. Look how well that worked with Barry.

INC - Hundreds of thousands of people work in the banking and finance industry so why would you be mad about the bank bailouts? I mean don't those people need to eat too? See most people hate bailouts till one of them or their buddies is getting saved by one. The problem is how long should the taxpayer be on the hook for poor run companies, where the CEO's and high value stock owers have golden parachutes and get paid no matter how the company performs. Bailouts cause business leaders to take undue risk with the companies assets (which hurt the worker in the short and long run) because they know daddy government is going to come along with someone else's money and make everything all right in the name of "protecting the working class". It's a nanny system that does nothing but keep the fat cats with cash in hand.

END ALL PUBLIC MONEY FOR PRIVATE COMPANIES.

It's not the company's assets when you talk about banks... unless they own whatever I have on deposit. Sure, the bailouts saved untold numbers of part-time teller jobs, then again, under Sarbanes-Oxley the CEOs signed statements under penalty of law that their filings were true, and NOT ONE has been prosecuted.

Here's an experiment for you. Pick 10 Fortune 500 companies, look up who sits on the board of directors for each, and then look up what other boards each of them sits or has sat on. I'll make it easier, just go to TheyRule.net and start messing around, you'll see just how many people can magically find time to sit on the board of directors for multiple Fortune 500 and other companies. Here's how you fix some of the problem: A simple law that says no one can serve on the board of directors of multiple companies at the same time. Or you just specify a limit of two for-profit and two non-profit, or restrict by size/market cap.

AC I understand your valid argument but nothing you stated stops bankrupt Solyndra seeking to pay bonuses.

Thats right taxpayer "stimulus"/bailout funds going straight to the fat cats all in thanks for Barry. You can keep attacking the private market all you want (a good chunk of it is deserved) but without taxpayer dollars to be spread around Solyndra would never be this big of a taxpayer funded black hole. Government money doesn't create jobs, just problems.

END PUBLIC MONEY FOR ALL PRIVATE COMPANIES.

I agree!

Solyndra? How about the grand defense contracts for Halliburton, Blackwater, et al? LET'S HAVE A COUPLE BULLSHIT WARS SO OUR BUDDIES IN OIL AND DEFENSE CAN MAKE MORE DOUGH IN NO-BID CONTRACTS! So don't just center on the stimulus/bailout there dbw. Both sides do it.

Both sides do it. - I agree a 100%, it's why I will not vote for Obama or Romney.

Just trying to illustrate that government handouts don't save jobs, it just keeps the cash flowing to the 1%.