Frogboy, you spent a lot of time making assumptions and listing off business 101 issues. I don't feel this thread is about teaching everyone about business affairs, etc. etc. But to make things crystal clear...

I have built LLCs (like the one in November), S-Corps, and C-Corps. 

I have been the founder/President/CEO handling day-to-day operations for most of them.  I've been the Chairman of the Board for more than one.

Some of these companies have come and gone.  Some have been in business for almost 20 years.  And one is a household name.

Some have received outside seven and eight figure investments. Some have been single-project funded.

Some have collapsed in partnership disputes, while other have been bought and sold.

But there's lots of businesses and lots of businessmen.  Economics is more art than science, more opinion than tried and true.  If it wasn't, we wouldn't have booms and recessions, would we? 

Regardless, I've dealt with everything you've dealt with on a day to day basis, for years, and then I've dealt with the next orders of magnitude.

(now on to the rest of your post)

Since when did this post become a 'Mine is bigger than yours' and 'I'm right and the rest of you are idiots'? Arrogance is not an appealing quality and the magnitude that has been shown in a few of your comments tends to bring out the shovels and galoshes.

Let us hope that Obama will not mimic what you have shown so far here.

Humilty brings cooperation, arrogance brings disdain.

Seems like everyone except you thinks the way you handle yourself reflects badly on you.

Fits in with your everyone else is wrong and I'm right logic perfectly doesn't it?

Here.. have some more rope... on me. 

Um, I shouldn't have to explain that THIS is our system of government.  If you want complete laissez fair capitalism, you might want to try moving operations to Russia.  Ironic isn't it?   Regardless, I believe the next administration will be better than the last, and will guide the congress better than the past.  I believe there will be push back on any excessive attempts at taxation.  Time will tell.

As I mentioned earlier, you are confusing my tax rate position with my health care cost position.  I never said what you keep mentioning, nor implied it.  As such, all I can do is keep telling you that you are repeating the same error.

Ah, so YOU (as the boss) are paying less for your premiums.  Guess who is picking up the difference?!  Just because the costs have SHIFTED from you to your employees doesn't mean the coverage is comparable in cost or value. 

This is why you dodged my point that I don't believe Americans are getting the same quality of care for even the same premium costs, with no change in deductibles, co-pays, reduction in things covered, etc. 

It's not just about how much you are paying out of pocket.  It's about the coverage and care your employees are getting and the costs they are bearing compared to 10, 20, 30 years ago.

Can you point me to the website of your plan provider (private message if you'd prefer), because I just don't buy that you and your EMPLOYEES are NET paying less than they were 10, 20, 30 years ago for the same health care.

All I see in the latest Blue Cross plans is a whole lot of shitty plans, none of which are as good as what I had personally a decade ago.  It's just a lot of obfuscation masked as "choices" that we should never even have to worry about making.  It's all a shell game, and everyone knows it now.

Oh. and btw, health savings accounts are a SCAM.  The HMOs get to earn interest on your employees' money while they hold onto it and if your employee doen't spend it the HMO gets to keep the remainder too.  It's designed to look like they are helping you, but in fact, they are just guaranteeing you WILL pay X dollars into the system, whether you need it or not.  It's an illusion of choice and help when all it's doing is screwing you out of your own money for health care charges only this country makes you pay yourself in the first place.

Meanwhile, the HMOs continue to shift costs from themselves (and employers) to the employees, putting yet an ever-increasing squeeze on the middle class. 

And, in previous posts, I've agreed they indeed might.  AND you even quote me as saying such above!  That IS my answer!

But for the records, my position is that a stronger economy with more consumer spending should more than offset with INCOME what you will lose in TAXATION - and the country as a whole will be healthier for it. 

But before that happens, we get to live the aftermath of Hurricane Bush for 2+ years.  Which, no doubt, you will blame on Obama.

Just check the news...daily, amigo.  I'm not alone in this assertion.  Honestly.  Does this even bear a cursory examination?  Do you not hold the GOP (with control/veto power of the White House to the present and both houses of congress through 2006) responsible for this additional $7 trillion in debt?  Are you one of those 7% who think the country is on the right track?  Honestly?!

And the majority just voted for the guy who thinks the way I (and Warren Buffet) think - the exact opposite of you.  Respect it.

I said, specifically, the right-wing posters in this thread.  They, and yourself, keep stating "I get to decide who eats my apples" etc. etc.  Well, X% of your apples are going to The Man.  That's the way this country works, like it or not.  And The Man gets to decide who gets those apples, because they have become His apples, OUR collective apples.  If you don't like it, you get to vote for The Man every four years.  It's a representative democracy...and you just lost some representation.  Not all of it, mind you, just some.

So you are going to compare the charitable giving rates of one of the wealthiest senators in the world, John McCain, who is married to an heiress (and doesn't need one penny of his annual income and can give it all away to charity), to a freshman senator and his wife and kids who are only now making real money thanks to the sales of his books last year?  Really?!

If you make the (false) assumption that donating money to charity is what I've been talking about.  It isn't.  It's what YOU used to define this, and so you choose supporting evidence to back up your position. 

My point about compassion was social/civil rights oriented, not financially.

I have NEVER connected the "me, me, me" of the right wing posters in this thread with their charitable giving rates/amounts.   YOU have.  And you keep trying to hoist me upon your own pitard.  Not...gonna...happen.

People make charitable donations for many reasons. Some do it because someone they know has been affected by a disease, for example.  Others do it as a form of pennance to alleviate guilt.  Some because they have come to believe in their chosen cause.  Others because their financial advisor wants them to take another write-off.

Regardless, it doesn't matter to me.  ALL charity is a universal good thing in my opinion.  

And, for the most part, I'm just repeating the answers I've given before.  If you care not to read my posts in their entirety, I can't be held accountable if you fail to realize I have been actually answering you.

But don't claim I am not answering you just because you don't agree with my answer. 

And I held Hillary accountable for the same mumbo jumbo in my earlier post.  For precisely that reason.  Ignorance is ignorance.

And it doesn't mean he isn't able to do both though.  My focus for the past decade, for example. has been as a content creator in my personal life and as a businessman and entrepreneur professionally. 

I have been fortunate to be successful in five different careers, soon to be six (fingers crossed). 

With that I agree with you 100%.

And yet, my karma keeps climbing...daily.  Even from those I disagree with.  Thanks to everyone who hates me! 

Regardless,  as I said before, the "everyone thinks" argument is fallacious and poor debate tactics.  You have no idea how many private responses I am getting regarding this thread.  1 or a 100.  Nor does it matter to the weight or rationality of my position.

You can keep trying to make this a personal attack thread all you want.  I'm going to keep discussing the ever-morphing issues. 

Because of the non-threaded nature of this forum, I have no idea who you are addressing with this.

Dont flatter yourself,  5 of those were pity points from me.

But you don't say why you believe this.  Your argument is that we should give more money to the federal government.

No one is denying that the federal government has the power to tax. It could, for instance, lower taxes to 0% if it wanted to or raise taxes to 100%. But that doesn't mean it would be a good idea either way.

You are saying it would be a good idea to give more money on the argument that it's good when the government spends our money rather than individuals.  You have even gone so far as to say that giving the government money shows ones compassion.