Tiger's Next Major Win Will Be Billionaire Status

[Middle Finger]

Talk about success in sports!

Woods is on track to pass $1 billion in career earnings by 2010. Becoming a billionaire--that is, having a net worth above $1 billion--will take slightly longer, since a sizable chunk of Woods' prize and endorsement money is eaten up by taxes and management fees--we estimated 45%. We also credited Woods with annualized investment returns of 8%.

Full story HERE.

[LuMPyPussy]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

[Lady Cop]

who gives a shit?

[Sinister]

This should be in "Assholes in the news" if you ask me. M is right. OBSCENE.

[Middle Finger]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

::lmao::

[Liquid]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

[Cynical Ninja]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

[Cynical Ninja]

Talk about success in sports!

Woods is on track to pass $1 billion in career earnings by 2010. Becoming a billionaire--that is, having a net worth above $1 billion--will take slightly longer, since a sizable chunk of Woods' prize and endorsement money is eaten up by taxes and management fees--we estimated 45%. We also credited Woods with annualized investment returns of 8%.

Full story HERE.

yeah.

What do you call 100 white men chasing a black man?

The PGA tour.

[Middle Finger]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

[Cynical Ninja]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

The ideas derided as "trickle-down economics" are often seen as a major rhetorical variant of "what's good for business and the rich is good for the country." In this form they have been ridiculed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt as "toryism." The economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory": "if you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows." Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the Panic of 1896.[13]

Proponents of Keynesian economics and related theories often criticize tax cuts for being "trickle down"; however, Keynesian theory actually holds that tax cuts can be used as an economic stimulus. Keynesians generally argue for broad fiscal policies that are direct across the entire economy, not towards one specific group. Supply-siders, on the other hand, argue that tax cuts for the rich promotes investment, which in turn promotes growth. It is this sort of targeted tax cut that is derided as trickle down since many in the economy do not directly reap benefits from the cut, and many may not see any benefit at all unless the cuts "trickle down" to them.

[Middle Finger]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

The ideas derided as "trickle-down economics" are often seen as a major rhetorical variant of "what's good for business and the rich is good for the country." In this form they have been ridiculed by [color="#ff8000"]Franklin Delano Roosevelt[/color] as "toryism." The economist [color="#ff8000"]John Kenneth Galbraith[/color] noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory": "if you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows." Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the [color="#ff8000"]Panic of 1896[/color].[color="#ff8000"][13][/color]

Proponents of [color="#ff8000"]Keynesian economics[/color] and related theories often criticize tax cuts for being "trickle down"; however, Keynesian theory actually holds that tax cuts can be used as an economic stimulus. Keynesians generally argue for broad [color="#ff8000"]fiscal policies[/color] that are direct across the entire economy, not towards one specific group. Supply-siders, on the other hand, argue that tax cuts for the rich promotes investment, which in turn promotes growth. It is this sort of targeted tax cut that is derided as trickle down since many in the economy do not directly reap benefits from the cut, and many may not see any benefit at all unless the cuts "trickle down" to them.

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. It all just magically stayed in the pockets of Tiger Woods. ::nuts::

[Cynical Ninja]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

The ideas derided as "trickle-down economics" are often seen as a major rhetorical variant of "what's good for business and the rich is good for the country." In this form they have been ridiculed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt as "toryism." The economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory": "if you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows." Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the Panic of 1896.[13]

Proponents of Keynesian economics and related theories often criticize tax cuts for being "trickle down"; however, Keynesian theory actually holds that tax cuts can be used as an economic stimulus. Keynesians generally argue for broad fiscal policies that are direct across the entire economy, not towards one specific group. Supply-siders, on the other hand, argue that tax cuts for the rich promotes investment, which in turn promotes growth. It is this sort of targeted tax cut that is derided as trickle down since many in the economy do not directly reap benefits from the cut, and many may not see any benefit at all unless the cuts "trickle down" to them.

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. It all just magically stayed in the pockets of Tiger Woods. ::nuts::

Maybe after a "panic of 2009" you might stop buying Official Tiger woodsgolf ball holders?

[Middle Finger]

Please explain your moronic comment in a way that normal people can understand. I am not only unsure about what you are saying, I can't even see a remote connection to my point.

[Cynical Ninja]

I can't even see a remote connection.......

Why does this notsuprise me?

::dunno::

[Middle Finger]

I can't even see a remote connection.......

Why does this notsuprise me?

::dunno::

Because I'm educated enough to use a fucking 2008 spell-checker that automatically highlights misspelled words like "suprise" before I post them while putting down others.

[Cynical Ninja]

I can't even see a remote connection.......

Why does this notsuprise me?

::dunno::

Because I'm educated enough to use a fucking 2008 spell-checker that automatically highlights misspelled words like "suprise" before I post them while putting down others.

So this is now your tactic in your pitiful attempts to appear to be more intelligent than me? ::lmao::

OP has made a spelling mistake!, aha !, that'll show him!

sad, truly sad.

[Liquid]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

The ideas derided as "trickle-down economics" are often seen as a major rhetorical variant of "what's good for business and the rich is good for the country." In this form they have been ridiculed by [color="#ff8000"]Franklin Delano Roosevelt[/color] as "toryism." The economist [color="#ff8000"]John Kenneth Galbraith[/color] noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory": "if you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows." Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the [color="#ff8000"]Panic of 1896[/color].[color="#ff8000"][13][/color]

Proponents of [color="#ff8000"]Keynesian economics[/color] and related theories often criticize tax cuts for being "trickle down"; however, Keynesian theory actually holds that tax cuts can be used as an economic stimulus. Keynesians generally argue for broad [color="#ff8000"]fiscal policies[/color] that are direct across the entire economy, not towards one specific group. Supply-siders, on the other hand, argue that tax cuts for the rich promotes investment, which in turn promotes growth. It is this sort of targeted tax cut that is derided as trickle down since many in the economy do not directly reap benefits from the cut, and many may not see any benefit at all unless the cuts "trickle down" to them.

I have no idea at all what you are talking about. Tiger promotes products that have huge sales numbers including cars, clothing, golf equipment, Nike, etc etc etc. those companies pay him to promote their stuff and to date it has been successful. For his efforts he gets paid a lot.

Who gives a flying fuck about your trickle down bullshit or pointless history lesson. the fact is he IS SUCCESSFUL in promoting these products which results in massive sales.

Your comments, while masked with a little bit of info you stole from Wikipedia scream of JEALOUSY.

[Middle Finger]

I can't even see a remote connection.......

Why does this notsuprise me?

::dunno::

Because I'm educated enough to use a fucking 2008 spell-checker that automatically highlights misspelled words like "suprise" before I post them while putting down others.

So this is now your tactic in your pitiful attempts to appear to be more intelligent than me? ::lmao::

OP has made a spelling mistake!, aha !, that'll show him!

sad, truly sad.

No, it's not my "tactic," it was my response to your idiotic belief that there wasn't a lot of job and economic related benefits to many others (people and companies) besides Woods.

[Middle Finger]

It's obscene that a man that hits a little ball around with a stick has been showered with riches because of his freak ability.

While I agree with your comment above 100%, the amount of money he generates for others is far far far greater then what he is getting paid.

You do know that the "trickle down" theory is a load of fucking shit don't you?

Right, because all those people and companies that generated wealth didn't buy things, travel, create jobs, pay employees, or buy services from others. ::nuts::

The ideas derided as "trickle-down economics" are often seen as a major rhetorical variant of "what's good for business and the rich is good for the country." In this form they have been ridiculed by [color="#ff8000"]Franklin Delano Roosevelt[/color] as "toryism." The economist [color="#ff8000"]John Kenneth Galbraith[/color] noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory": "if you feed enough oats to the horse, some will pass through to feed the sparrows." Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the [color="#ff8000"]Panic of 1896[/color].[color="#ff8000"][13][/color]

Proponents of [color="#ff8000"]Keynesian economics[/color] and related theories often criticize tax cuts for being "trickle down"; however, Keynesian theory actually holds that tax cuts can be used as an economic stimulus. Keynesians generally argue for broad [color="#ff8000"]fiscal policies[/color] that are direct across the entire economy, not towards one specific group. Supply-siders, on the other hand, argue that tax cuts for the rich promotes investment, which in turn promotes growth. It is this sort of targeted tax cut that is derided as trickle down since many in the economy do not directly reap benefits from the cut, and many may not see any benefit at all unless the cuts "trickle down" to them.

I have no idea at all what you are talking about. Tiger promotes products that have huge sales numbers including cars, clothing, golf equipment, Nike, etc etc etc. those companies pay him to promote their stuff and to date it has been successful. For his efforts he gets paid a lot.

Who gives a flying fuck about your trickle down bullshit or pointless history lesson. the fact is he IS SUCCESSFUL in promoting these products which results in massive sales.

Your comments, while masked with a little bit of info you stole from Wikipedia scream of JEALOUSY.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. His comments, from this economic BS to his anti-American BS, all scream of anger from jealousy. I think this bitch-sponge wants to be a golf-playin, Muslim-American PC elite, to be honest.

[LuMPyPussy]

Our favorite little British psycho is from a Socialist society and he obviously has problems comprehending the finer points of Capitalism.

Pity him.