how about just a billion?

[daniel]

Originally Posted by schinia

... does anyone need that much money???

Originally Posted by fulltank

I think once you get into the billions 'need' turns into 'want'

Originally Posted by schinia

they asked a billionaire once, how much more money do you need? he said he "needed" just a little more. he didn't use the word "want"

Leaving aside the political questions, need and want are very different things. Window shopping with my sister once, long ago, she pointed to a big-screen TV and said "I need one of those." I replied, "You don't need it; you want it." She replied with a vehemence that surprised me: "No, I NEED it."

There's a story about a discussion over how much land a man needs. A certain man thought he needed as much land as he could walk around in a day. But he over-estimated his stamina and it turned out that all he really needed was a plot six feet by three feet.

We need a certain amount of food and water and a constant supply of oxygen. We need shelter and clothing to suit the climate. Everything else is merely a want. I want considerably more than I need, but I'm satisfied with how much I have. I still want a girlfriend, though. That, too, is a want, though it feels like a need.

[schinia]

Originally Posted by amm0bob

I disagree with the entire premis, especially in a Republic like ours Bra. It is only put simply like that by simple minded folks.

While it IS true, money can mean power (and the buying of influence) the SCOTUS says that corporations are equal to a person in their right to voice an opinion... do you also believe that corporations/companies should be limited in their ability to gather coins... for example, once ten billion iPads are sold, should they just give away any more money they receive. How about the fella that got your sister to buy that pet rock... after all, he was just reselling small rocks at a tremendously inflated price.

I'm not your Bra !!

[amm0bob]

Originally Posted by schinia

I'm not your Bra !!

YHGTBFKM... ANOTHER FLEDGLING THAT DOESN'T GET IT.

Do you own a Prius... then you are... unless you're female, THEN I'll call ya Sis...

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by prj

Years ago, I read about Jim Clark, who financed Netscape, among other companies. As he made more money, his goals kept getting bigger. Finally, it was to make a billion dollars. Then once he got there, the goal was a billion after taxes.

From the book "The New New Thing"

I reminded Clark that after he had said that once he became a real after-tax billionaire he'd retire. He said, without missing a beat, "I just want to make more money than Larry Ellison. Then I'll stop."

Originally Posted by edthefox5

The problem is they don't pay there fair share of taxes.That's why we are in the mess we are in.
The USA has reached a breaking point in greed. And you keep voting them back in.
And envy by the "tax and spend" advocates. Christ don't make me laugh.

George Bush: Spend and then tax the ham & eggers to pay for it. The rich rode off into the sunset with there money in the Caymans.
We will be paying for his uproarious 8 years of fun for the next 20. You too.

And what a great choice you have this year:

Newt Gingrich and Mitt. How will you ever decide?

I loved the State of the Union.. Obama called for fairness in the tax code. All the Democrats rose off there seats in applause. Not one of your buddies stood up. Fairness in the tax code?
My god...that's almost un american.

Republican's did not applaud because they know Obama and the D's have no intention of addressing the unfair tax code. It may have sounded like he called for fair tax code but the fact of the matter is, he did not. Obama called for a different tax rate, i.e. raise taxes, big difference. If Obama and the Democrats thought that the tax code was so unfair why didn't they do one thing about it as they have had control of congress since 2007? Are the D's that inept?

You blame bush for spending and taxing the ham and eggers, yet there's nothing to back your statement. Go get some evidence/facts/links and then come back. By the way Bush spent $4 Trillion dollars in 8 years time, Obama has spent wasted $5 Trillion in 3 years time. Additionally, tax revenue under the Bush administration went up IIRC.

Who Spent More? Average Bush Vs. Average Obama Spending Per Day Proves Obama Most Reckless And Irresponsible EVER « Start Thinking Right

One last thing, prj you're attacking those who drove the largest economic expansion of our time?

Originally Posted by SageBrush

Only Merkins can even consider voting in the same group of clowns that brought the economy to the verge of collapse not 4 years ago.

BTW, Presidents are not in charge of the purse strings, congress and only congress has that power. During Bush's tenure and Republican control of Congress the deficit was cut year by year until 2007 right before the D's took over control of Congress the deficit was down to $162 billion per year.

So answer me this, if Bush and the R's cut taxes thus lowering revenue and spent like a drunken sailor, as you all say. How was this possible?

[qbee42]

You guys want to take this over to Fred's House of Politics? A discussion of budgets and economics is one thing, but once we start laying blame this thread is going to become ugly in record time.

Tom

[daniel]

Originally Posted by qbee42

You guys want to take this over to Fred's House of Politics? A discussion of budgets and economics is one thing, but once we start laying blame this thread is going to become ugly in record time.

Tom

Absolutely!

This thread was about how big a bilion is. Who's responsible for the debt and the state of the economy is a discussion that belongs over in the politics forum!!!

[hyo silver]

Politics is a disease. The afflicted should be confined to their own ward.