Joe the Plumber (page 4)

dawg

Guys, "Joe the Plumber" has a house that may be worth 150K at most, he's not licensed as a Plumber in the state of Ohio. That was on NSNBC just a few minutes ago. LOL!

I know a damn sight more than Burns about plumbing, in the state of Georgia, to do any kind of plumbing you have to be licensed-period... I suspect it's similar in Ohio... only a commercial company can make 250K a year in profit. You have to be licensed in any state to do commercial! LOL!

That means they own equipment, that kind of equipment is worth a damn sight more than 250K... you'd probably need over a $1 million to buy such a company and old Joe owns a house maybe worth 150K... this story is a damned lie, and Joe will be vetted.

This will end up being one of the biggest stories in the campaign when the press gets through vetting this uneducated fool... LOL! And damn right, we have a right to know the facts if he's going to get on TV and talk such foolishness! LOL!

Just like fact checking Burns, you always come up with disingenuous information, this Joe character will not check out... bank on it!

slimboyfat

Is he a plant?

brinjen

He sounds like a politician to me... talking fluff and side stepping the questions he didn't like.

sir82

Is he a plant?

Either that, or he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27207215/?GT1=43001

In Toledo on Sunday, Wurzelbacher told Obama that he was preparing to buy the plumbing company, which earns more than $250,000 a year, and said: "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"

Wurzelbacher, 34, said he doesn't have a good plan put together on how he would buy Newell Plumbing and Heating in nearby Toledo.
He said the business consists of owner Al Newell and him. Wurzelbacher said he's worked there for six years and that the two have talked about his taking it over at some point.

works for a small plumbing company that does residential work. Because he works for someone else, he doesn't need a license, he said.

Wait a minute...we've gone from "I'm preparing to buy a company which grosses $250K a year"....to "I don't have a plan to buy it" and "we've talked about taking it over at some point"?

How exactly does that work?

Something doesn't smell right here, and it's not the green cheese in the back of the fridge....

sammielee24

Something doesn't smell right here, and it's not the green cheese in the back of the fridge

First Palin and now the Plumber...bye bye McCain.....sammieswife.

Dagney

Ahh okay.

$250K gross sounds about right for a two man show, and an apprentice at that. So he has no tax worries or fines to worry about. McCain should know that.

Marvin Shilmer

Regarding Joe the plumber,

I do not know Joe the plumber, or whether he is formally trained, self taught or otherwise intelligent or unintelligent. Joe does not speak for me, or anyone else that I know of other than him. But Joe has become somewhat of rallying point for those concerned with Obama’s promise to raise taxes.

What resonates in my mind listening to all this fuss is that I would rather determine who spreads my hard earned money around rather than the government deciding how to spread my hard earned money around. If this is what Joe the plumber is concerned about, then he and I share common concern.

What is America telling tradesman, perhaps like Joe the plumber, when assuming the risk of starting their own business results in higher tax rates if, God forbid, they are actually successful in their hard work? Why should “Joe’s” hard earned cash be taken at a higher rate because of success from working smart and working hard? Small business owners across the United States depend on successful business succession for their own financial futures, and up-and-comers likewise depend on this. If assuming business risks bring higher tax rates for success then small business owner’s futures will get tougher, and up-and-comers’ enthusiasm to take the risk will be dampened.

From a different perspective, since any successful business owner’s objective is to substantially improve his standard of living with higher income, higher tax rates will necessarily become an expense compensated for with higher prices. Guess who will pay these higher prices? Worse, these customers will be paying the higher prices with POST tax dollars! Do that math.

Finally, and somewhat off topic, besides his promise to raise tax rates on anyone who works hard enough to earn more than two hundred and fifty grand, what menaces my mind is the question “What has Obama actually done in terms of leadership during his U.S. Senatorial tenure as an employee of the U.S. Tax Payer’s Association?”

Obama’s web site names one and only one law passed that he sponsored. Voting for or against a bill may or may not indicate leadership. But sponsoring a bill from the get-go tells Americans quite a bit about a Senator’s leadership. The one bill successful bill offered on Obama’s web site is one that passed the Senate unanimously, passed the House unanimously, and was then signed into law by our Chief Executive, the President. What does this mean? It means the best sort of example Obama could offer to show his leadership as a Senator (a successful bill he sponsored) was a bill that anyone could have pushed through congress with a feather. How much leadership does this demonstrate? None. This is what bothers me about Obama. We have been paying him as a Senator for a few years now. What has he done? What tough and successful legislation did he sponsor?

What bothers me about Obama’s Senatorial record is the dearth in his record, according to his own presentation no less. I would have expected a real leader to have jumped into the fray of sponsoring tough but necessary bills and then worked his peers to build a consensus without including a whole herd of pig flesh. I see not a single instance of this in Obama’s case. This bothers me.

MaCain? I have problems with him too. Mostly my concern swirls around his failure to articulate distinction between himself and Obama when it comes to demonstrated national leadership. If he cannot articulate this then what kind of president would he make? Our Chief Executive must be a good communicator in order to succeed.

As for Bush, from a financial perspective he is a traitor to the American people. I say this not because of the current economic Armageddon. I say this because of all the years he failed to say no to spending requests. They guy stuttered spend, spend, spend for years. Oh, and by the way, Dubyah is very well educated.

Marvin Shilmer

sammielee24

What is America telling tradesman, perhaps like Joe the plumber, when assuming the risk of starting their own business results in higher tax rates if, God forbid, they are actually successful in their hard work? Why should “Joe’s” hard earned cash be taken at a higher rate because

Follow the leader I guess. What has America told investors? That they can take a risk and make money but it's not really a risk because we'll make sure that you don't lose - we'll force the taxpayers to pony up. That's right folks - including Joe the Plumber - get up at 5 am, shovel the snow off the car and get your lazy ass of to work because I just sent you a bill for $90,000, oh and by the way, those 3 kids you got and the little wife? they got the same bill so you owe me $360,000 this year.

In essence, not one person in the US has a right to their own money by writ of G Bush and the US government. Nobody has asked all those CEO's or those hedge fund owners to pony up...why not claw back a big percentage of their millions to help out? Because it doesn't work that way. There is no clearer message than has been had this past month and that is, all your saving, all your hard work, all of what you have been taught and believe in as far as working and paying your own way, has been tossed out the window. It doesn't work any more. The rules have changed. That's what America has been told. Voting Obama isn't going to change the path that Bush and his policies have put us on but McCain will just dig the hole deeper. sammieswife.

dawg

Marvin, this is simple and doesn't take 4 paragraphs to understand....

You are paying more percent of your income after deductions than the highest wage earners in America... if you don't "want the government telling you what to do with YOUR money" then neither candidate is for you, if you want to keep more of your money then Obama's the candidate for you if you make less than 250K a year.

It's that simple bro. All parties want to take some of your money... how they use it and how the taxes are collected is the debate here... "your" money is going to be taken in taxes... period!

What's so hard to understand about this?

And as for "Joe the plumber" he's become a metaphor for folks that don't understand how the taxes are to be cut for the middle class under Obama's plan... that makes him relevant... why you can't see that, who knows?

And it shows the lengths of deceit that McCian has stooped to to try and win this election... it's plain really!

TopHat

I like Joe the plumber, he is just a regular guy struggling to make a living like the rest of us.

Joe the Plumber

Share this