Steve Wynn, Democrat, entrepreneur and visionary

[Boffo]

• Tweet

"total lack of leadership from the President"

"And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime."

"Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration"

"And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America."

"And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President."

"The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists."

"And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs."

any questions?
http://www.businessinsider.com/wynn-ceo-steve-wynn-conference-call-transcript-obama-2011-7

[IM2]

Who cares what Steve Wynn has to say?  Entrepreneurs are not all experts on economics buffy. Just the other day I saw a story about 1-800 Junk. The guy did not even graduate from high school. In fact he was a high school drop out who had an idea and it worked.   

I don't think you would take the opinon of a normal high school dropout seriously, and so maybe you shouldn't take what Wynn says seriously just because he's rich.

After all Steve Wynn runs Gambling Casinos, he studied English Lit and cultural anthropology, not economics. He may know a lot about gaming, but I don't think he knows all that much about running a country that was damn near in a depression. Nor does he know how to get it out of a depression.

But hey, you'll listen to any opinion just as long as it's anti Obama regardless of whether its true.  You did it with that Breitbart shit, and you did it with the ACORN lie too.

Simpleton.

[Malone22]

IM2 wrote:

but I don't think he knows all that much about running a country that was damn near in a depression. Nor does he know how to get it out of a depression.

Apparently he has a lot in common with Obama..Obama is a well educated man, but it's hasn't helped him much.

[Pepsi]

I don't care if the guy is a democrat or republican, his commentary has no basis in reality.    What speeches about "redistribution"?   Perhaps someone who supports his claim can reference these speeches?

And yes, businesses are sitting on piles of cash, but their investment in new capacity needs to be spurred by demand.    Without increasing demand there won't be new investment in capacity to meet that demand.   

Really the underpinnings of the economic weakness is still based in the US real estate market.    We are still dealing with the aftermath of the real estate bubble which George Bush presided over.   There is still too much capacity in the housing market and there are still too many home owners under water because the value of their houses has plummeted.   

[IM2]

Malone,

Apparently you do not seem to understand just how much Obama has done to save this countries economy. Afer all we could have gone into a depression and we were headed in that direction but somehow it did not happen. That was not just luck.

[foodserver]

What speeches about "redistribution"?   Perhaps someone who supports his claim can reference these speeches?

Obama Mocks Joe the Plumber, Crowd Laughs	Small | Large

[Pepsi]

"The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution"

-well, has there been a single speech like that?   Hmm, as I said, this guys rant has no basis in "reality"

[Observer]

I don't care if the guy is a democrat or republican, his commentary has no basis in reality.    What speeches about "redistribution"?   Perhaps someone who supports his claim can reference these speeches?

Are you saying that Obama has never made a speech in which he has called for increased taxes on the wealthy and increased benefits for those beneath a certain income level.

THAT is "redistribution", Pepsi.

[Pepsi]

Are you saying that Obama has never made a speech in which he has called for increased taxes on the wealthy and increased benefits for those beneath a certain income level.

THAT is "redistribution", Pepsi.

I guess you can call it that.. but then you'd have to say Republicans want to "redistribute" wealth (upward) by cutting social safety nets and cutting taxes on the wealthy.     

[Pepsi]

Isn't it kind of funny that "Joe the plumber", centerpiece of the 2008 McCain/Wackjob ticket, isn't named Joe and isn't a plumber?   

[foodserver]

I guess you can call it that.. but then you'd have to say Republicans want to "redistribute" wealth (upward) by cutting social safety nets and cutting taxes on the wealthy.      

  What do you mean you guess you can call it that.  What else  could you call it. (please don't-I meant that rhetorically,  liberals have been calling it "something else" for eternity, you needn't prove that here) Actually Pepsi, if you give that a little more thought, I think you'll see you mean, "re-re-distribute".  The tax money wasn't "born" their and "taken away" from it's recipients.  It was redistributed to them in the first place.  "Cutting social safety nets", merely redresses the original redistribution.

No biggie.  You meant no deception or inconsistency.  Your reaction was completely consistent with your mindset.  However words do mean things and no, allowing income earners to keep more of their income is not more "redistribution" but less.

[foodserver]

Isn't it kind of funny that "Joe the plumber", centerpiece of the 2008 McCain/Wackjob ticket, isn't named Joe and isn't a plumber?   

Since you ask, no. 

Nor is it important.  The existence of Joe the Plumber isn't required to establish that Obama supports redistribution, as you already have conceded in your previous post.

[Pepsi]

Actually Pepsi, if you give that a little more thought, I think you'll see you mean, "re-re-distribute".  The tax money wasn't "born" their and "taken away" from it's recipients.  It was redistributed to them in the first place.  "Cutting social safety nets", merely redresses the original redistribution.

No biggie.  You meant no deception or inconsistency.  Your reaction was completely consistent with your mindset.  However words do mean things and no, allowing income earners to keep more of their income is not more "redistribution" but less.

Semantics.. the end result of his policies were that the top 1% had a larger share of total wealth and the bottom 95% had a lower share.     And the changes to the tax code were not income taxes on wages, they were capital gains and estate taxes.     

[foodserver]

Semantics.. the end result of his policies were that the top 1% had a larger share of total wealth and the bottom 95% had a lower share.     And the changes to the tax code were not income taxes on wages, they were capital gains and estate taxes.     

   The other "end result" is that people get to keep the money they earn.  I realize this is a minor point to you but quite a few people have given up their lives for this principle and probably wouldn't appreciate it being referred to as "semantics".

[Observer]

I guess you can call it that.. but then you'd have to say Republicans want to "redistribute" wealth (upward) by cutting social safety nets and cutting taxes on the wealthy.     

See... this is a fundamental difference between Conservatives and Liberals. You actually believe that allowing people to KEEP THEIR OWN MONEY is taking something away from you.

I am glad you concede that Obama does indeed support redistribution of wealth by using the force of government and its laws and guns to take money from one person under threat of violence to give it to someone who didn't earn it.