[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] What do you think of businesses spending tax payer money on expensive escorts and gambling? What do you think of people living outside their means? The first question was answered in my original post....... The second question I don't see how it is relevant. So answer to the first question is yes then? That's really the only answer I could get out of your first post which was just spin about Obama hating vacations or some such. Not going to answer? It's a "gotcha" question, isn't it? My first response to you...... A companies goal is to maximize profit If the meeting would not generating profit, their bonuses will be smaller. So, if they were not to have said meeting the CEOs and management would all be better of financially. The logical choice then is to not have the meeting and receive bigger bonus checks. Conclusion: They are having the meeting to generate profit or they wouldn't be having them.
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] The first question was answered in my original post....... The second question I don't see how it is relevant. So answer to the first question is yes then? That's really the only answer I could get out of your first post which was just spin about Obama hating vacations or some such. Not going to answer? It's a "gotcha" question, isn't it? My first response to you...... A companies goal is to maximize profit If the meeting would not generating profit, their bonuses will be smaller. So, if they were not to have said meeting the CEOs and management would all be better of financially. The logical choice then is to not have the meeting and receive bigger bonus checks. Conclusion: They are having the meeting to generate profit or they wouldn't be having them. Yup I'm sure those meetings are to maximize profits. That's why they take place in the worlds biggest adult playground where there's as many distractions to them as possible rather than at the home office. In conclusion your conclusion goes against reality.
Of course Vegas would be mad, their entire industry is based on tourism and feeding off 'lavish' corporate trips. That being said, I agree with him. Maybe we shouldn't be shelling out these huge lavish trips for higher ups a business' on the companies dime. Its an easy way to trim expenses.
[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] So answer to the first question is yes then? That's really the only answer I could get out of your first post which was just spin about Obama hating vacations or some such. Not going to answer? It's a "gotcha" question, isn't it? My first response to you...... A companies goal is to maximize profit If the meeting would not generating profit, their bonuses will be smaller. So, if they were not to have said meeting the CEOs and management would all be better of financially. The logical choice then is to not have the meeting and receive bigger bonus checks. Conclusion: They are having the meeting to generate profit or they wouldn't be having them. Yup I'm sure those meetings are to maximize profits. That's why they take place in the worlds biggest adult playground where there's as many distractions to them as possible rather than at the home office. In conclusion your conclusion goes against reality. If we make the assumption that all companies have the infrastructure in place at their home office to host large conventions you are correct........... Last post though gtg
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] My first response to you...... A companies goal is to maximize profit If the meeting would not generating profit, their bonuses will be smaller. So, if they were not to have said meeting the CEOs and management would all be better of financially. The logical choice then is to not have the meeting and receive bigger bonus checks. Conclusion: They are having the meeting to generate profit or they wouldn't be having them. Yup I'm sure those meetings are to maximize profits. That's why they take place in the worlds biggest adult playground where there's as many distractions to them as possible rather than at the home office. In conclusion your conclusion goes against reality. If we make the assumption that all companies have the infrastructure in place at their home office to host large conventions you are correct........... Last post though gtg Hahaha wow that is a truly amazing response.
[QUOTE="scorch-62"] Okay and? He didn't enforce anyone to do anything. He just made a sensible suggestion for a nation going through economic turmoil.xaos
It was bad publicity for Nevada at the worst time. They now have the highest unemployment rate in the country.
I don't live there but I think Obama is toast because of his comments.
Yes, that certainly seems like the most likely outcome. :|It's pretty sad when the pres gets flak for good advice.
Pres: "don't blow all your money in vegas so you can go to college"
nevada officials: "Hurp Durr, no, sacrifice your future otherwise we lose monies, DURR"
Obama: "People should wash their hands after going to the washroom"
Conservatives of OT: "WTF?!?! Who does Obama think he is telling us what to do?!?! The anti-biotic companies will go bankrupt!!! He'll never last as president!"
Obama: "People should wash their hands after going to the washroom"
Conservatives of OT: "WTF?!?! Who does Obama think he is telling us what to do?!?! The anti-biotic companies will go bankrupt!!! He'll never last as president!"
redstorm72
"He shouldn't be allowed to say things like that!" Sadly I think the irony is too present there to ignore no matter how bias you are with party lines.
[QUOTE="scorch-62"]Oh wow, he wagged his presidential finger. Big whoop. This is the very definition of making mountains out of molehills.KC_Hokie
Tourism is Nevada's biggest industry. They also now have the highest unemployment rate in the entire country. of course, when people have less money to spend, tourism is first hit.
The nerve of Obama. Telling people to use their money over something like a edumacation. Who needs an edumacation when you can just gamble all your money.
[QUOTE="Ace6301"]Give sensible advice, lose votes. Good stuff.topsemag55
Doesn't go over very well in a city that depends upon tourism to survive. Nevada has amongst the top unemployment in the nation.
...Because it's the entertainment, gambling, and sexual capital of the US. The economy is crap right now. Even gambling addicts don't have the money all the time for gambling. People aren't dumb. When money is tight, people save more of it. Especially when it comes to gambling. If Nevada can't adapt to the economy and society's changes, it's going to fail with or without the president's help.
How dare he recommend saving money for raising education costs instead of blowing it on binge drinking and gambling?
Dark_Knight6
if that is what he was recommending then he should have pushed for higher interest rates to give people a reason to save. "save money so it can devalue quicker than it grows" is a mentally deficient message.
The nerve of Obama. Telling people to use their money over something like a edumacation. Who needs an edumacation when you can just gamble all your money.MgamerBD
soeducation or really anything you do is not a gamble in and of its self ?
How dare he recommend saving money for raising education costs instead of blowing it on binge drinking and gambling?
surrealnumber5
Why is it when Bill Cosby made a similar comment, he was lambasted? because bill cosby is blackBut...... I thought that......... I just......... but......... :(
Sounds like good advice. Las Vegas' loss is probably the gambler's/tourist's local economy's gain. I guess party politics won't let even simple advice go unpunished.
How dare he recommend saving money for raising education costs instead of blowing it on binge drinking and gambling?
Why is it when Bill Cosby made a similar comment, he was lambasted? Probably for the same reason Michelle Obama was attacked for advising kids to eat healty.
Sounds like good advice. Las Vegas' loss is probably the gambler's/tourist's local economy's gain. I guess party politics won't let even simple advice go unpunished.
EsYuGee
Local economy's gain? What about the people that work in the casinos? The people that work in the hotels? The people that work in the restaraunts? The people that work in the souvenier shops?
Aside from playing a few slot machines on a trip to Foxwoods once, I'm not much of a gambler. But just because it's not an activity I fully endorse, does not mean I should dictate how other people spend their time and money. (Yeah, 'dictate' is probably too strong of a word).
Sounds like good advice. Las Vegas' loss is probably the gambler's/tourist's local economy's gain. I guess party politics won't let even simple advice go unpunished.
Local economy's gain? What about the people that work in the casinos? The people that work in the hotels? The people that work in the restaraunts? The people that work in the souvenier shops?
Aside from playing a few slot machines on a trip to Foxwoods once, I'm not much of a gambler. But just because it's not an activity I fully endorse, does not mean I should dictate how other people spend their time and money. (Yeah, 'dictate' is probably too strong of a word).
What about the people who work in Las Vegas' casinos, hotels and restaurants? Doesn't matter to me. If they were in my hometown, then I might care more. I'd rather support the people that work in my local grocery store, gas station or restaurant when times are tough. Call me crazy, but I'd rather visit local attractions and keep my money circulating somewhat close to home. Heck, if there was a casino here I might even support that (even though I don't gamble). The point isn't about gambling. It's about where you spend your money.
Sounds like good advice. Las Vegas' loss is probably the gambler's/tourist's local economy's gain. I guess party politics won't let even simple advice go unpunished.
EsYuGee
Local economy's gain? What about the people that work in the casinos? The people that work in the hotels? The people that work in the restaraunts? The people that work in the souvenier shops?
Aside from playing a few slot machines on a trip to Foxwoods once, I'm not much of a gambler. But just because it's not an activity I fully endorse, does not mean I should dictate how other people spend their time and money. (Yeah, 'dictate' is probably too strong of a word).
What about the people who work in Las Vegas' casinos, hotels and restaurants? Doesn't matter to me. If they were in my hometown, then I might care more. I'd rather support the people that work in my local grocery store, gas station or restaurant when times are tough. Call me crazy, but I'd rather visit local attractions and keep my money circulating somewhat close to home. Heck, if there was a casino here I might even support that (even though I don't gamble). The point isn't about gambling. It's about where you spend your money.That's why it's the people IN Vegas who were ticked off. The comments were (or could be) a hindrance to THEIR economy/livelihood.
(Although, to be candid, I can't really see anyone listening to Obama or any politician when it comes to how and where they spend their money. Perhaps I'm underestimating the ObamaZombie affect).
[QUOTE="EsYuGee"][QUOTE="Planet_Pluto"]Local economy's gain? What about the people that work in the casinos? The people that work in the hotels? The people that work in the restaraunts? The people that work in the souvenier shops?
Aside from playing a few slot machines on a trip to Foxwoods once, I'm not much of a gambler. But just because it's not an activity I fully endorse, does not mean I should dictate how other people spend their time and money. (Yeah, 'dictate' is probably too strong of a word).
Planet_Pluto
What about the people who work in Las Vegas' casinos, hotels and restaurants? Doesn't matter to me. If they were in my hometown, then I might care more. I'd rather support the people that work in my local grocery store, gas station or restaurant when times are tough. Call me crazy, but I'd rather visit local attractions and keep my money circulating somewhat close to home. Heck, if there was a casino here I might even support that (even though I don't gamble). The point isn't about gambling. It's about where you spend your money.That's why it's the people IN Vegas who were ticked off. The comments were (or could be) a hindrance to THEIR economy/livelihood.
(Although, to be candid, I can't really see anyone listening to Obama or any politician when it comes to how and where they spend their money. Perhaps I'm underestimating the ObamaZombie affect).
Yeah, I don't think many people listen to politicians when it comes to things like vacation, etc. Nope, you're not underestimating the Zombie effect. Although it's both ways. More like an IdeologyZombie effect. (there has to be a cathier way of saying that)
If a couple budgets X-thousand dollars for a vacation. What is the difference if they allot X-dollars for gambling opposed to the same amount for other activites at other locations (perhaps taking scuba-diving lessons, renting jet-skis, etc)?
If a couple budgets X-thousand dollars for a vacation. What is the difference if they allot X-dollars for gambling opposed to the same amount for other activites at other locations (perhaps taking scuba-diving lessons, renting jet-skis, etc)?
Planet_Pluto
Large casinos are often owned by billionairs and corporations that are headquartered in other countries. If you are taking scuba lessons, renting equipment, etc, then the money is likely going to small business and staying in the local economy. Yes, there are employees at casinos that benefit from you going there, but the actual profits are going elsewhere.
If a couple budgets X-thousand dollars for a vacation. What is the difference if they allot X-dollars for gambling opposed to the same amount for other activites at other locations (perhaps taking scuba-diving lessons, renting jet-skis, etc)?
Engrish_Major
Large casinos are often owned by billionairs and corporations that are headquartered in other countries. If you are taking scuba lessons, renting equipment, etc, then the money is likely going to small business and staying in the local economy. Yes, there are employees at casinos that benefit from you going there, but the actual profits are going elsewhere.That's a bit of a stretch. The same 'evil corporations' that own hotels in Vegas owns resorts in other Destination Cities as well. So to single out Vegas makes no sense. There is no difference between Vegas and any other vacation-spot in that regard (other than perhaps you grasping to defend an Obama-position).
And again, the people most ticked off were the people IN Vegas. I gather they don't mind if a company out there, somewhere, is making profits, so long as they continue to bring home the bacon for themselves and their families.
That's a bit of a stretch. The same 'evil corporations' that own hotels in Vegas owns resorts in other Destination Cities as well. So to single out Vegas makes no sense. There is no difference between Vegas and any other vacation-spot in that regard (other than perhaps you grasping to defend an Obama-position).
And again, the people most ticked off were the people IN Vegas. I gather they don't mind if a company out there, somewhere, is making profits, so long as they continue to bring home the bacon for themselves and their families.
Planet_Pluto
I did not categorize the corporations as evil. I did, however, state that you are likely pumping money into a large, multi-national corporation rather than assisting small business enterprises (using your examples). I prefer to do the latter; some people have no preference. You asked the difference.
This is laughable. Knowing people in general and Americans in particular, I don't think that a statement from a president would affect people's choice of where to spend their money. Anyone that says otherwise is simply fooling himself because you can't convince me otherwise.
That's a bit of a stretch. The same 'evil corporations' that own hotels in Vegas owns resorts in other Destination Cities as well. So to single out Vegas makes no sense. There is no difference between Vegas and any other vacation-spot in that regard (other than perhaps you grasping to defend an Obama-position).
And again, the people most ticked off were the people IN Vegas. I gather they don't mind if a company out there, somewhere, is making profits, so long as they continue to bring home the bacon for themselves and their families.
Engrish_Major
I did not categorize the corporations as evil. I did, however, state that you are likely pumping money into a large, multi-national corporation rather than assisting small business enterprises (using your examples). I prefer to do the latter; some people have no preference. You asked the difference.The term 'evil' notwithstanding, you don't seem to acknowledge that the resorts in Vegas are owned by similar (possibly foreign owned) corporations to those in other locations.
The term 'evil' notwithstanding, you don't seem to acknowledge that the resorts in Vegas are owned by similar (possibly foreign owned) corporations to those in other locations.
Planet_Pluto
I do acknowledge that. And if you wish to go stay at Disney World and their kin, then my distinction is void, I agree. But I used your two examples which would likely be administered by small, local businesses. That can be done in Vegas too, of course, but most people (I bet) will stay at the large casinos. Of course you can always go to an Indian reservation to gamble, which actually helps them out. I'm no expert on the subject though.
The term 'evil' notwithstanding, you don't seem to acknowledge that the resorts in Vegas are owned by similar (possibly foreign owned) corporations to those in other locations.
Engrish_Major
I do acknowledge that. And if you wish to go stay at Disney World and their kin, then my distinction is void, I agree. But I used your two examples which would likely be administered by small, local businesses. That can be done in Vegas too, of course, but most people (I bet) will stay at the large casinos. Of course you can always go to an Indian reservation to gamble, which actually helps them out. I'm no expert on the subject though.I'd just say that if people weren't staying in the smaller, privately owned hotels in Vegas, they wouldn't exist. Same for other tourist attractions there.
Same here on the Indian Reservations. I don't know much about the dynamics there, so I can't make any thoughtful comment.
Isn't the president supposed to encourage everyone and everything to spend everything they have and more (credit) in order to, you know, to increase spending? Paradox of thrift and so forth.
Isn't the president supposed to encourage everyone and everything to spend everything they have and more (credit) in order to, you know, to increase spending? Paradox of thrift and so forth.
coolbeans90
he is telling them to spend it. Just on things that tend to have a high chance of leading to more money to spend as opposed to gambling which has a low chance for high return.
Isn't the president supposed to encourage everyone and everything to spend everything they have and more (credit) in order to, you know, to increase spending? Paradox of thrift and so forth.
Serraph105
he is telling them to spend it. Just on things that tend to have a high chance of leading to more money to spend as opposed to gambling which has a low chance for high return.
IIRC, the comment was made in a tightening the belt buckle sense, so no.
How dare he recommend saving money for raising education costs instead of blowing it on binge drinking and gambling?
Serraph105
Tourism is a big part of Nevada's economy. No brainer. it may bug the people of Vegas, but he's still right.Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
Isn't the president supposed to encourage everyone and everything to spend everything they have and more (credit) in order to, you know, to increase spending? Paradox of thrift and so forth.
Serraph105
he is telling them to spend it. Just on things that tend to have a high chance of leading to more money to spend as opposed to gambling which has a low chance for high return. and what would this wise investment be from obama, the man who has shown to be such a wise investor.? school? OWS says hai! housing? prices sill have not deflated to demand. GM cars? yea they appreciate well. fraudulent "green" companies? i know! welfare, he wants us to invest in government handouts, BRILLIANT those expenditures have wildly increased over the past few years.
[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Tourism is a big part of Nevada's economy. No brainer.CaveJohnson1
it may bug the people of Vegas, but he's still right.Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
it may bug the hell out of both of you but neither of you nor obama knows how people SHOULD spend their money, and thinking you do just shows how little all three of you know about economics.
This is laughable. Knowing people in general and Americans in particular, I don't think that a statement from a president would affect people's choice of where to spend their money. Anyone that says otherwise is simply fooling himself because you can't convince me otherwise.GazaAli
"you can't convince me otherwise" that line always means a few things: 1) no one should try 2) you are unreasonable 3) possibly crazy 4) unwilling or able to learn
i doubt you are any of those gaza, but that phrase is indicative of all of those things.
[QUOTE="Serraph105"] it may bug the people of Vegas, but he's still right.surrealnumber5
Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
it may bug the hell out of both of you but neither of you nor obama knows how people SHOULD spend their money, and thinking you do just shows how little all three of you know about economics. fine then. prove me wrong. Go gamble your life savings away and tell me how it pays off.
[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
Serraph105
it may bug the hell out of both of you but neither of you nor obama knows how people SHOULD spend their money, and thinking you do just shows how little all three of you know about economics. fine then. prove me wrong. Go gamble your life savings away and tell me how it pays off. Gamble away? that assumes i lose, it also assumes i think gambling on games is my best bet, or that i would do it for reasons other than enjoyment. the choices people make with their work is their choice and whatever comes from it is what they have to work with in the future. there are no safe bets and if everyone did what one person said to do there would be no market for whatever that advice was making that product worthless. in other words if everyone but one gambler stopped what they were doing and wet to college instead per obamas advice, it is more likely than not that the gambler would come out of that situation far better than all the people who now have no marketable skills because all but one person have the same skill set. it is better people seek their own fortune than to follow the "right path" as set by the governors.
[QUOTE="Serraph105"] it may bug the people of Vegas, but he's still right.surrealnumber5
Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
it may bug the hell out of both of you but neither of you nor obama knows how people SHOULD spend their money, and thinking you do just shows how little all three of you know about economics.I know it's better to spend it on college rather than blow it gambling...
[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]Makes me think of when Obama said you can save on gas by having well inflated tires and people went nuts.
Smart comments never go through well with certain groups....
CaveJohnson1
it may bug the hell out of both of you but neither of you nor obama knows how people SHOULD spend their money, and thinking you do just shows how little all three of you know about economics.I know it's better to spend it on college rather than blow it gambling...gambling gain (losses) 10000 to (10000) depending on the person and luck. college (6000) to (30000) per semester, neither guarantees a return but one guarantees a hefty upfront loss.
Log in to comment