| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 19:29:28 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: After the current "crisis" is over, and Shell, BP and ExxonMobile have secured their 30-year contracts on Iraqi oil, crude prices will likely settle back down to around $20-25 level. What's the saying--even paranoids have enemies? Something like that. lol The Shell/BP/ExxonMobil contracts are in the works as we speak (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...le2132569.ece), and it's unlikely that the bill will not pass through the Iraqi government more or less intact. The price projection is based upon historic chart data (http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1947.gif). |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
KLC Lewis wrote: "xorbit" wrote in message ... Larry wrote: Alaska needs to get in the refining business, then tell America what it wants for gas and diesel...(c;....instead of just giving crude away until it's gone. Larry My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to drill the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That won't change because the environmental movement would never allow it. I'll bet Russia would be amenable to building refineries in Siberia, just across the straights... Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from Valdez compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North Pacific / Bering Sea? Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Steve Thrasher wrote: xorbit wrote: My understanding is that won't happen. As part of the agreement to drill the north slope, no refineries would be allowed in Alaska. That won't change because the environmental movement would never allow it. Here is part of an article published: January 23, 2007 in The Anchorage Daily News: NORTH POLE -- A small fire that broke out Sunday at Alaska's largest crude oil refinery did not interrupt production and refining operations, officials said. There were no injuries resulting from the fire at the Flint Hills Refinery in North Pole. There's more if you want to go to the web site at www.adn.com Now, it's MY understanding that none of the North Slope oil can be exported. It's all for domestic use. Federal law of some sort. I stand corrected. Thanks you for the information. I knew there was some reason why the Alaska crude was shipped to the lower 48. I just had the wrong reason. My information came from some of the residents of Cordova, Alaska on one of our visits. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"xorbit" wrote in message ... .... Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from Valdez compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North Pacific / Bering Sea? Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia. Sure, the lower 48 are closer, but Russia has that old entrepreneurial spirit (and lack of regulation) that no longer exists in the US. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
KLC Lewis wrote: "xorbit" wrote in message ... ... Just across the straights? Have you measured how far that is from Valdez compared to, say, Seattle? Against the current in the open North Pacific / Bering Sea? Valdez is a LOT closer to the lower 48 than Siberia. Sure, the lower 48 are closer, but Russia has that old entrepreneurial spirit (and lack of regulation) that no longer exists in the US. Spent some serious time in Russia second half of last year. It might be called "entrepreneurial" by some. We called it organized crime. Its an academic discussion if federal law requires all the crude for U.S. domestic use. |
Skype
Gordon wrote in
: Larry, Larry, Larry! Tell me it isn't true. You're still using Skype even after it was bought out by big business (EBAY) and raised it's rates? I'm disappointed in you. Better look at voipbuster! Gordon Yes. I'm forced to spend $28 (Skype Out) plus $15 (Skype In) = $43/YEAR for home telephone service. Isn't it just AWFUL?! Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
xorbit wrote in :
Does Japan pay more for oil? Do you have some numbers on this or a reference? Nope. I just assume someone selling a product for $4/gallon has a margin that can pay more for the product than someone selling it for $1.99/gallon. He'd be willing to pay more, wouldn't he? If he offered to pay more for it, to divert it away from the USA for instance, I'd certainly SELL it to him, if it were mine to sell, right? Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Larry wrote:
xorbit wrote in : Does Japan pay more for oil? Do you have some numbers on this or a reference? Nope. I just assume someone selling a product for $4/gallon has a margin that can pay more for the product than someone selling it for $1.99/gallon. He'd be willing to pay more, wouldn't he? If he offered to pay more for it, to divert it away from the USA for instance, I'd certainly SELL it to him, if it were mine to sell, right? Larry But Japan isn't paying any more for oil than the rest of the world except to cover transportation to the island. Oil exporting countries doesn't care who they sell to, just the highest bidder. Unless they have long-term contracts. But since all the Alaskan crude is only for U.S. domestic consumption, it doesn't matter whether you COULD sell it to Japan or not. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:57:16 GMT, "Dennis Pogson" said: $6.50 per US gallon here in UK. How much of that is tax? Around 82%, between fuel tax and vat. It's added as a precentage rather than a fixed amount per gallon so that when the refineries put their prices up due to oil price increases, the Government wins, hands down! The next scam will soon be "road charges", levied on a GPS-assessed figure of how much mileage you do, and when. (Go to work at 3am and you get a discount!) It will soon be better not to work but to go on welfare here in the UK, so long as you drive to collect your welfare check at 3am. This is all rather arbritrary anyway, since the more you give the Government whilst you are alive, the less you are left with to give them when you die (currently 40% on anything you leave over £285k, including your home). DP |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote in news:3h6kr29dd19fsch4t8f7cj03h2cbvk6c35@
4ax.com: How much of that is tax? Around 82%, Give the Democrats here a little time and we'll be at that figure too. You're in for a shock. We're already at that figure.... Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 23:03:13 -0600, xorbit said: all the Alaskan crude is only for U.S. domestic consumption What is the basis for that conclusion? Actually, if Alaska crude is designated for US consumption only, doesn't that mean we MAY have to pay higher prices because we are required to use it? Gordon |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Larry wrote: Dave wrote in news:3h6kr29dd19fsch4t8f7cj03h2cbvk6c35@ 4ax.com: How much of that is tax? Around 82%, Give the Democrats here a little time and we'll be at that figure too. You're in for a shock. We're already at that figure.... Larry So you're saying the democrats will up the ante? Can you provide a breakdown so we can all have the same insight as you? |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote: On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 23:03:13 -0600, xorbit said: all the Alaskan crude is only for U.S. domestic consumption What is the basis for that conclusion? Earlier post in the thread. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
xorbit wrote in :
So you're saying the democrats will up the ante? Can you provide a breakdown so we can all have the same insight as you? Democrats? Republicans? Surely, you don't believe these political front groups are in control of the money and have anything to do with money's value, do you? They haven't been in control of the money since 1913, when the bankers bribed their way into the Federal Reserve Bank Corporation, who print the money, control its value and have us nearly $US10T in debt to them! The Democrats and Republicans even turned over the gold reserves at Fort Knox to the bankers for "safe keeping", giving them even more power and control, the power to ruin. I'm not sure who controls Canada's money, I know the Bank of England isn't controlled by the Parliament. It's another private corporation, too. The media propaganda machine makes like politicians control the economy, here in the USA. It's BS! The big bankers who own the Federal Reserve Corporation control the economy in my USA, since way before I was born. This is why there are constant wars requiring the government to come to them and borrow more and more and more to run the wars. Wasn't it Meyer Rothchild who said, "Let me control the money in any country and I care NOT who makes its laws." He was absolutely correct.... 100% of the money collected by the tax gestapo's income tax goes straight to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bankers. Not a penny of it goes into infrastructure and services to the American people. Larry -- Federal Reserve Bank Corporation has as much to do with the Federal Government as Federal Express Corporation.... |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote in news:gjmkr25pu1c0geb07plugk6jp78t4dt231@
4ax.com: Been reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion again, Larry? Aaron Russo's "America - Freedom to Fascism" Documentary film about the Fed, IRS, income taxes, Verichip implantation of humans (Mark of the Beast), and more. Very interesting when it slaps you right in the face and IRS bureaucrats refuse to talk to a Hollywood producer of Russo's stature with so many famous films. Lotsa Jews in the film. Is that ok with you? Does that help? Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Where Does Alaskan Oil Go? was " Gas $1.99/gallon!"
For what it's worth, as of 1999, most Alaskan oil was shipped to "US
Markets" (http://www.anwr.org/features/pdfs/flyerexports.pdf). That was as of 1999, and I can't find reliable information that's any newer. Also, it doesn't say that the oil STAYS in the US, or what happens to it after it's refined. However the report does mention that while 876,397 barrels of Alaskan oil per day were shipped to the West Coast, 236,000 barrels per day were Exported from the West Coast. So it's possible that there's some manipulating of figures going on. Alaskan oil can be said to be shipped "almost entirely to the US West Coast," which is true. Only then it's exported. Maybe. Finding out what really happens with oil is a pretty slippery business. Karin "Larry" wrote in message ... Dave wrote in news:gjmkr25pu1c0geb07plugk6jp78t4dt231@ 4ax.com: Been reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion again, Larry? Aaron Russo's "America - Freedom to Fascism" Documentary film about the Fed, IRS, income taxes, Verichip implantation of humans (Mark of the Beast), and more. Very interesting when it slaps you right in the face and IRS bureaucrats refuse to talk to a Hollywood producer of Russo's stature with so many famous films. Lotsa Jews in the film. Is that ok with you? Does that help? Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote:
Hmm. A very authoritative source. Not. He based it on what I said. It looks like right now I was wrong (at least temporally I appear to have been right). 1996 - U.S. Congress lifts the ban on exportation of Alaska crude oil. As edited from the site http://sled.alaska.edu/akfaq/akchron.html |
Where Does Alaskan Oil Go? was " Gas $1.99/gallon!"
"KLC Lewis" wrote:
For what it's worth, as of 1999, most Alaskan oil was shipped to "US Markets" (http://www.anwr.org/features/pdfs/flyerexports.pdf). Be advised that your source is not reliable. Arctic Power, the owner of that web site is a lobbying organization mostly supported by the Republican party majority in the Alaska Legislature. Their sole purpose is to lobby for the opening of ANWR, and they have a long reputation for less than accurate statements. The cited PDF is no exception. Among the errors in that particular document: Opponents to oil and gas exploration in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge tell people that 100 percent of the oil produced on Alaska's North Slope is being exported. A strawman argument. *They* made that one up, not "opponents". Note that they fail to mention the reason no oil has been exported since 2000 is simply because, well, shucks... the oil companies got caught manipulating crude supplies in California to boost the price of refined products, and had to promise Congress that they will not export ANS crude (Alaska North Slope crude). There is a chance that very large oil and gas fields, similar to the Prudhoe Bay area further west, could be discovered in ANWR's coastal plain. The chances of that are virtually *zero*. Nobody is suggesting otherwise. The oil predicted to exist in ANWR is expected to be in multiple small fields. Oil and gas deposits have been discovered near ANWR's western border, and a recent oil discovery may result in the first pipeline built to western boundary of the Coastal Plain. That's some sort of a joke I guess. The Badami field is the closest producing oil field to ANWR. It has been a very disappointing project, and was actually totally shutdown for an extended period (indeed, when that document was published, Badami was turned off). The oil has a high percentage of wax and is very difficult to pump. ANWR development could create 736,000 new jobs Those numbers have been totally discredited; it was an invalid study. It has been demonstrated that the actual number of jobs would be, at most, about 1/10th of that number. Only a small percentage of Coastal plain, about 2,000 acres, would be impacted by oil development; Totally bogus claim... The 2000 acre figure is the "footprint", which is the amount of land that the North Slope Borough would be able to levy a property tax on. It includes the area touched by pipeline supports, but not the area under the pipe, for example. It includes parts of airports, but not all of it. It includes the drill pad, and land under a building, but not roads, not garbage dumps, and not gravel pits. While the taxible area might be 2000 acres, the *impacted* area would be nearly the entire 1,500,000 acres of the 1002 Area on the coastal plain. The coastal plain is not a pristine wilderness: Another total joke. I've been there, and let me tell you flat out that the coastal plain of ANWR is the most pristine wilderness anywhere it the US today. That was as of 1999, and I can't find reliable information that's any newer. Also, it http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSrep...l/nrgen-25.cfm http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/0425mal.PDF It isn't much newer, but there has been no change since. doesn't say that the oil STAYS in the US, or what happens to it after it's refined. However the report does mention that while 876,397 barrels of Alaskan oil per day were shipped to the West Coast, 236,000 barrels per day were Exported from the West Coast. So it's possible that there's some manipulating of figures going on. Alaskan oil can be said to be shipped "almost entirely to the US West Coast," which is true. Only then it's exported. Maybe. Finding out what really happens with oil is a pretty slippery business. Welllll, that's a bit of wild speculation; and there is nothing to support the idea. ANS crude is *not* being exported from the west coast, it is being refined there. We do in fact export some refined products, but not much. For all practical purposes it is exactly as described: Alaska crude is shipped to and used by the West Coast US Domestic market to the tune of virtually 100%. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:24:49 -0500, Larry said: Documentary film about the Fed, IRS, income taxes, Verichip implantation of humans (Mark of the Beast), and more. Very interesting when it slaps you right in the face Before you end up behind bars, let me recommend you expand your reading to this: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsieg.../IncomeTax.htm All well and good, but the writer neglects to address the most important point: What is "Income," how is it defined and who is considered to have it? Note that I am NOT discussing the definition of "Gross Income"; "Gross Income" is defined as " All Income...from whatever source derived." The "Income Tax" is not levied upon "Income," it is levied upon "Gross Income." Legal weaseling? Not all all. An extremely important distinction. So what, exactly, is "Income"? The IRS won't tell you. Karin |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 10:28:39 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: The "Income Tax" is not levied upon "Income," it is levied upon "Gross Income." Prof. Griswold, the author of one of the classic treatises on the federal income tax used to start his first day of class with the following advice: "Before you sit down and think great thoughts, read the Code. Then read the regulations. Then read the cases. Then if you haven't found the answer you can sit down and think great thoughts." Note that he didn't mention some lunatic's blog (well, in fairness when I sat through his class there were no such things as blogs). Before pontificating based on some lunatic's blog, I suggest you read Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code. Then read Section 63, and finally Section 61. Then maybe, just maybe, you can tell us what the income tax is levied on. Actually, no. I've been studying the Income Tax for over ten years, as a Citizen layperson, and still cannot find any definition, in that code, of the word "Income." They have power on their side, so I pay the taxes. But I still agree with the "tax protesters" on a fair number of their arguments. Compare this issue to that of "Marriage." There is currently a flurry of activity in the various State legislatures, modifying their laws so that "Marriage" is defined as "...the Union between One Man and One Woman." Why? Because without the word "Marriage" being defined, the courts are rightly ruling that to deny marriage to Gays is unconstitutional (for that matter, denying it to Gays will be unconstitutional anyway, but I digress...). When ambiguity exists, it is incumbent that the words being used are precisely defined. This ambiguity is made apparent by the definition of the phrase "Gross Income," but not the word, "Income." All of my research into this area shows that the only entities originally intended to be considered as having "Income" were corporations -- not individuals. Karin |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 11:15:01 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Actually, no. I've been studying the Income Tax for over ten years, as a Citizen layperson, In that case I suggest you kick back, have a martini, and join Larry in wallowing in your victimhood, because you're clearly beyond your depth. Apparently you stopped reading after my first sentence. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 11:41:16 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Actually, no. I've been studying the Income Tax for over ten years, as a Citizen layperson, In that case I suggest you kick back, have a martini, and join Larry in wallowing in your victimhood, because you're clearly beyond your depth. Apparently you stopped reading after my first sentence. On the contrary. The balance of your post confirmed my suspicions beyond all doubt. Okay, then it's a reading comprehension problem. Sorry. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 11:59:08 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Okay, then it's a reading comprehension problem. Yes. If you can't comprehend after 10 years of effort, it's a fool's task. You, of course, know everything about it. So enlighten us poor dunderheads, why don't you? Or is posting links to sites written by others the extent of your "knowledge"? |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 13:46:54 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Or is posting links to sites written by others the extent of your "knowledge"? I'm not a great fan of reinventing the wheel. It's a waste of time. Particularly when addressing utter nonsense. Especially when you cannot answer the question. Don't take it so personally -- no one else can, either. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote in
: Aaron Russo's "America - Freedom to Fascism" Now there's an authoritative source. When you get sick do you go to a witch doctor? I've definitely got a bridge that would make a great investment. One question - Have you watched it? I suspect not or you wouldn't make this stupid statement. Russo is simply the interrogator. Interrogator of current and former IRS officials who seemed terrified of him, so terrified they tried to stop the filming ON THE SIDEWALK! Go watch it, then we can discuss it..... Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote in news:10umr2l9lgv1dmc7am4epn7ed0psl3h02s@
4ax.com: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsieg.../IncomeTax.htm "26 U.S.C. § 61 [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"KLC Lewis" wrote in
et: In that case I suggest you kick back, have a martini, and join Larry in wallowing in your victimhood, because you're clearly beyond your depth. Apparently you stopped reading after my first sentence. In any discussion with a True Believer, whether it be about the IRS or the Southern Baptists, they always stop reading soon after the first sentence because their belief system is so entrenched they cannot possibly believe so many people so wrong for so long.....some over 2000 years!... Discussion is fruitless. MILLIONS of American workers, those who can avoid forced extraction of wages before the fact, don't pay income taxes and JURIES, to the amazement of judges who have threatened them, have found the accused NOT GUILTY. In Russo's movie, he interviews many jurors who so voted. Judges told the jurors they did not NEED to see the law or refused to let the law into their courtrooms! Their exact statements are quoted in Russo's movie. The movie is NOT an editorial...it's an investigative report of FACTS and cases. Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Larry wrote:
Dave wrote in news:10umr2l9lgv1dmc7am4epn7ed0psl3h02s@ 4ax.com: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsieg.../IncomeTax.htm "26 U.S.C. § 61 [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Larry So what do you think "(but not limited to)" means? And isn't salary and/or wages forms of "compensation for services"? |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote in
: Yes. If you can't comprehend after 10 years of effort, it's a fool's task. Screw this, Dave. POST THE LAW...post a pointer to the law that STATES I owe income tax on WAGES AND LABOR, not capital gains, corporate profits, interest and rental income....... WAGES AND LABOR......IT ISN'T THERE!! Larry -- Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on who's for dinner. Liberty is when the sheep has his own gun. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Larry wrote:
Dave wrote in news:10umr2l9lgv1dmc7am4epn7ed0psl3h02s@ 4ax.com: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsieg.../IncomeTax.htm "26 U.S.C. § 61 [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Larry A wage is a compensation which workers receive in exchange for their labor. Same as 1 "compensation for services". |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
krj wrote:
Larry wrote: Dave wrote in news:10umr2l9lgv1dmc7am4epn7ed0psl3h02s@ 4ax.com: http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsieg.../IncomeTax.htm "26 U.S.C. § 61 [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Larry A wage is a compensation which workers receive in exchange for their labor. Same as 1 "compensation for services". Larry contradicted his own point of view. This branch of the thread is dead. And I won't be asking Larry for help with my taxes. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
RW Salnick wrote:
Larry inscribed in red ink for all to know: RW Salnick wrote in news:ep8tbu$v5j$1 @gnus01.u.washington.edu: Maybe it is just SouthernBigOil that got the message. Sunoco? Sun Oil was from Pennsylvania, last time I checked...(c; Gas is cheaper in Charleston because we are a gas dump from the ships. I like to take those buying Exxon or Shell down to the Hess Oil storage place to show them all the different oil company trucks lined up at 4AM to put the same Hess gas in all the tanks...at higher prices, of course... Larry Then, as Seattle is the "dump" point for all the Alaskan crude, we should have the same thing here... Instead, the sign right outside my window still says $2.79 this morning bob s/v Eolian Seattle Problem is that you get Alaskan "crude". Charleston gets refined product krj |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:01:10 -0500, Larry said: [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Hate to burst your bubble, Larry, but wages are compensation for services--the first item mentioned. Naturally. The lawyers who wrote it didn't include "wages," "labor," or "salary" for the simple reason that they had never heard those words before. But they *would* have included them if they had ever heard about them. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"KLC Lewis" wrote in message et... "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:01:10 -0500, Larry said: [G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends;" The point EXACTLY. INCOME has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAGES.... IT DOESN'T SAY WAGES....IT SAYS INCOME FROM PROFITS! Hate to burst your bubble, Larry, but wages are compensation for services--the first item mentioned. Naturally. The lawyers who wrote it didn't include "wages," "labor," or "salary" for the simple reason that they had never heard those words before. But they *would* have included them if they had ever heard about them. Item #2 is particularly amusing: "Gross income means all income derived from...Gross income derived from business." Yeah. Exactly. lol |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:02:31 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Item #2 is particularly amusing: "Gross income means all income derived from...Gross income derived from business." Guess you should have spent some of those 10 years studying grammar. The proper formulation of the language, as shortened, would be "[G]ross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) ... Gross income derived from business Guess you should have spent your life studying the proper form of a definition: One cannot define a word by restating that word. My editing of the quoted material did not make any difference to the flaw to which I was drawing attention. Are you always such an insulting boor? |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:05:55 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Are you always such an insulting boor? Not at all if I'm dealing with someone with half a brain. Of course. If you can't challenge the argument, insult the person. End of line. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
KLC Lewis wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:05:55 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Are you always such an insulting boor? Not at all if I'm dealing with someone with half a brain. Of course. If you can't challenge the argument, insult the person. End of line. I didn't take it that way at all. It sounds to me that Dave can only deal with people with half a brain. Since you seem to have quite a bit more than that, he's probably having a little trouble relating. But then maybe I'm applying more logic to his statement than is justified. |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
"xorbit" wrote in message ... KLC Lewis wrote: "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:05:55 -0600, "KLC Lewis" said: Are you always such an insulting boor? Not at all if I'm dealing with someone with half a brain. Of course. If you can't challenge the argument, insult the person. End of line. I didn't take it that way at all. It sounds to me that Dave can only deal with people with half a brain. Since you seem to have quite a bit more than that, he's probably having a little trouble relating. But then maybe I'm applying more logic to his statement than is justified. Ha! Thanks, xorbit. lol |
Gas $1.99/gallon!
Dave wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:21:02 -0600, xorbit said: I didn't take it that way at all. It sounds to me that Dave can only deal with people with half a brain. Hey, that comment isn't even third class sophistry, but I see it's sufficient to amuse Karin. You're right. You're original message to which I responded didn't rate third-class sophostry. I apologize for giving you too much credit. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com