http://goo.gl/WGwMY

That is all.

the Secret Service does not approve of the thread title

 

Originally Posted by SluggerWV

the Secret Service does not approve of the thread title

Wynn is right.

Wynn blames Obama for not "wrangling" both sides in the debt ceiling discussions. What exactly are the Republicans offering to make Obama want to cooperate? Negotiations are give and take and since the Republicans only want to see give, Wynn knows the odds are greater that there will be no deal.

If you think Obama is bad for the casino business now, wait until the debt ceiling doesn't get raised. That's gonna really fuck up business. That's the basis to Wynn's rant. Thinking of himself first.............standard.

 

What exactly are the Republicans offering to make Obama want to cooperate? Negotiations are give and take and since the Republicans only want to see give

Haven't the Republicans given up bigger "cuts", setling for just 300 billion per year or so out of a 1 trillion plus yearly deficit? As if the minority party is dictating policy to the president...

 

Originally Posted by Willywoo

Wynn is a pawn of Frank Luntz and other Republican message crafters.

Ha. Frank Luntz is a massive tard though.

 

Originally Posted by Willywoo

"Economic uncertainty is a myth term created Frank Luntz and other Republican message crafters to politicize economic data. If you are listening to the radio, reading the Internet, or watching TV and you see or hear the term economic uncertainty be aware that Republicans are trying to emotionally manipulate you on an unconscious level."

Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman has to be the most smug person in the world.

 

Originally Posted by Willywoo

fyp

forgetting someone?

 

Originally Posted by gamma21

Paul Krugman has to be the most smug person in the world.

Don't Keynesian's believe in "animal spirits"?

 

Originally Posted by anderson_mr

I own a business in the real world. Economic uncertainty is certainly more than some phrase invented by republicans. Ask my friend who sold his business to his competitor earlier this year. Just not worth the risk, hassle or uncertainty anymore. The competitor absorbed the business and only added one job to his existing business. That meant about 20 jobs lost in this area.

I'm certainly not hiring anyone. In fact I keep looking for ways of operating with less people.

Your liberal idealism is real nice and all, but people who live in the real world don't have the benefit of living in your fantasy world.

That's Capitalism! Those who cant stand the risk or turn a profit get bought or go under. Nothing to do with the Govt creating economic uncertainty.

This is so bogus. The only economic uncertainty is the hope held out by the Steve Wynn's of the world that the slice of he pie they get will get even bigger, and then, by how much. I too own a business and understand enough to know that if we stop the oppressive bickering and try to resolve problems, the economy will grow, folks will have jobs and spend more money as a result.

Wynn, GM and I are all in the same boat ( admittedly, really an enormous stretch), if the President, House and Senate actually represented the people and resolved these issues, we'd all be dollars ahead.

wynn sounds ridiculous. he decries "regulations" yet ignores the reasons why regulations exist: to protect the public. conservatives won't understand this until they find themselves in need of protective regulations that hold any business accountable. typical.

you liberal fucking pussies, cant run a fuckin country..... I DECLARE WAR ON ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY!!!!!! its about jobs mr president.

 

Originally Posted by above_films

wynn sounds ridiculous. he decries "regulations" yet ignores the reasons why regulations exist: to protect the public. conservatives won't understand this until they find themselves in need of protective regulations that hold any business accountable. typical.

Where does he ignore the reasons why regulations exist?

When I read the article it seems he was more interested in the uncertain environment relating to future regulation, healthcare costs and the redistribution of wealth.

It would seem that for the reasons Dyz mentioned he is not concerned about regulation per se. This is supported by the fact that he gives money to both Democrats and Republicans in order to make sure his bread is buttered on the correct side. What he is concerned about is the overall philosophy of this President, his attitude toward business in general and the purpose of his policies.

Besides you miss the point of the article which is a businessman setting forth facts as to why businesses are not investing the money they are accumulating. It doesn't matter much that you might not agree, and like Obama might think we should "do something" to these businesses that do not reinvest their money, Wynn states why it is and there is no counter argument because it is a fact and as long as Obama is President our economy will not expand and grow.

Steve Wynn is entitled to his opinion, but I don't see why it should be afforded any more attention than anyone else's. The OT conservatocracy seem to think maybe because he's really rich that his opinion means more. Not surprising. But there are other rich people that disagree with him, so ultimately, it's just one man's opinion. He's been going on Fox News with Cavuto and the rest for a couple years now, so I'm not sure why his latest tirade should be taken any more seriously than his previous ones. Because he claims to be a Democrat? So does kowboy8686, ffs.

"Shots fired!" tho.

Are we having a battle of billionaires? Sounds fun.

My side: Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, George Soros (!!!).

Evil billionaires: Koch brothers, Steve Wynn, the Wal-Mart Waltons, I'm sure I'm missing a bunch.

Partly evil, partly good billionaires: Mark Cuban?

Hmmm, maybe billionaires are just like normal people and they have different opinions like everyone else? Nah! They're special!