OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Mar 23, 12:21*am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message

....
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message

bush was president for about 2800 days.

obama's been president for 60.

even you should be able to do the math.

republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country..
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.

bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price

Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of..

gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.

He

was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom

that's called the 'economy'. it happens.

Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.

iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.

and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next *year or so. that's called a 'budget'.

What are

your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-

keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.

**************

The Trillion is not the budget. *That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -


to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Mar 23, 12:21 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message

bush was president for about 2800 days.

obama's been president for 60.

even you should be able to do the math.

republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.

bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price

Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even
worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.

gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.

He

was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom

that's called the 'economy'. it happens.

Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less
in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.

iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.

and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.

What are

your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-

keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.

**************

The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -


to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.

****
to you it is ignorance.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
...

You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where central
planning and tight government control has brought the kind of
prosperity that the USA has seen to this point. All I am looking for is
the name of the country that is socialist or communist that has a
higher standard of living than the USA.


Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your two
BMWs and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less than
$70K per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.


Richard did not come from wealth from what I read. He worked hard, took
chances and scored. Took a lot of years. I worked and paid my way
through university. Took 10 years. I worked overtime, bought a business
that my buddy and I ran that for years while still keeping our other
jobs. I am comfortable, maybe not as comfortable as Eisboch, but he
worked hard. You, on the other hand, were a 40 hour a week if that Crown
Employee. Did not gamble a lot of your money and assets on running a
business or growing a business. Did not work 60-80 hours a week working.
My nephew, works a couple days a week, did not finish college, and
complains of no money. No work ethic. A major problem in the poor in
this country. Why work hard when society will give you the equivalent of
about $18k a year, including medical. And you can work side jobs for
cash. Why we have 4 and 5 generation welfare families. An about 60%
high school drop out rate in areas of the country. Lots of families live
on less than $50k a year. But they do not buy expensive cars, or even new
economy cars. They live in 1100 ' sq houses, and not McMansions. They
live within their means. Too many want the life style of the rich and
famous without the work required. Some are there because of
circumstances. A bad illness in the family, etc. But those are a
minority. Most are there because of a bad work ethic. Even the lower IQ
people hold a lot of decent paying jobs. They can not be an electrical
engineer, but they can clerk at a department store, take money at the
7/11, etc. Why do we see so many immigrants running grocery stores,
donut shops, nail salons, and other hard, time consuming business
endevors. Because they have a work ethic. Plus they do not overspend.
Live within their means. You leased a truck 3 years ago. Now bought a
Rav4. How much a year has those vehicles cost you? I just bought a new
Vensa for the wife. Nice car by the way. $38k sticker. Replacing a 1996
car with 145k miles. What is my cost of vehicles per year?

Drinking again Kalif Swill??
I was replying to..and referring to *BAR* with my comments.


I would have assumed you were drinking, but I think you are just stupid.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Mar 23, 6:07*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 23, 12:21 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message

....
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message

....
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message

bush was president for about 2800 days.

obama's been president for 60.

even you should be able to do the math.

republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.

bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price

Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even
worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.

gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.

He

was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom

that's called the 'economy'. it happens.

Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less
in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.

iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.

and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.

What are

your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-

keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.

**************

The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -

to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.

****
to you it is ignorance.-

IOW you've never taken an economics course...

figures. that's why you believe the right wing lunacy

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
m...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"BAR" wrote in message
...

You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where
central planning and tight government control has brought the kind of
prosperity that the USA has seen to this point. All I am looking for
is the name of the country that is socialist or communist that has a
higher standard of living than the USA.


Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your two
BMWs and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less than
$70K per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.


Richard did not come from wealth from what I read. He worked hard, took
chances and scored. Took a lot of years. I worked and paid my way
through university. Took 10 years. I worked overtime, bought a
business that my buddy and I ran that for years while still keeping our
other jobs. I am comfortable, maybe not as comfortable as Eisboch, but
he worked hard. You, on the other hand, were a 40 hour a week if that
Crown Employee. Did not gamble a lot of your money and assets on
running a business or growing a business. Did not work 60-80 hours a
week working. My nephew, works a couple days a week, did not finish
college, and complains of no money. No work ethic. A major problem in
the poor in this country. Why work hard when society will give you the
equivalent of about $18k a year, including medical. And you can work
side jobs for cash. Why we have 4 and 5 generation welfare families.
An about 60% high school drop out rate in areas of the country. Lots of
families live on less than $50k a year. But they do not buy expensive
cars, or even new economy cars. They live in 1100 ' sq houses, and not
McMansions. They live within their means. Too many want the life style
of the rich and famous without the work required. Some are there
because of circumstances. A bad illness in the family, etc. But those
are a minority. Most are there because of a bad work ethic. Even the
lower IQ people hold a lot of decent paying jobs. They can not be an
electrical engineer, but they can clerk at a department store, take
money at the 7/11, etc. Why do we see so many immigrants running
grocery stores, donut shops, nail salons, and other hard, time consuming
business endevors. Because they have a work ethic. Plus they do not
overspend. Live within their means. You leased a truck 3 years ago. Now
bought a Rav4. How much a year has those vehicles cost you? I just
bought a new Vensa for the wife. Nice car by the way. $38k sticker.
Replacing a 1996 car with 145k miles. What is my cost of vehicles per
year?

Drinking again Kalif Swill??
I was replying to..and referring to *BAR* with my comments.


I would have assumed you were drinking, but I think you are just stupid.

Don't think...it's not your strong suit!

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

Calif Bill wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
...
You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where central
planning and tight government control has brought the kind of
prosperity that the USA has seen to this point. All I am looking for is
the name of the country that is socialist or communist that has a
higher standard of living than the USA.

Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your two
BMWs and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less than
$70K per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.

I don't have two BMWs. I have a 1997 Dodge Grand Caravan, 2001 Ford
F-150, and a 2009 Jeep Patriot. 15% of my income goes into a 401k before
it ever hits my bank account, I don't have a retirement plan I have to
fund my own. I put another large chunk of my after tax money into 529's
for my daughters college educations. What's left over is what I have to
live on. You try living with a wife who gives all of your money to
charity and daughters who give what's left over of your money to various
clothing vendors at the local mall.

When I have talked about the money I earn I do so to let the Harry
Krause know that even though he has his alleged "Ivy League" education
that little old me with just a high school diploma can succeed in life
with hard work and determination.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

wf3h wrote:
On Mar 23, 6:07 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Mar 23, 12:21 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"wf3h" wrote in message
....
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
....
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
bush was president for about 2800 days.
obama's been president for 60.
even you should be able to do the math.
republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.
bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price
Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even
worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.
gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.
He
was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom
that's called the 'economy'. it happens.
Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less
in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.
iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.
and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.
What are
your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-
keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.
**************
The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -
to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.

****
to you it is ignorance.-

IOW you've never taken an economics course...

figures. that's why you believe the right wing lunacy

What class do you need to take to know that increasing taxes depletes
the available capital for private sector growth.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

On Mar 23, 8:18*pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Mar 23, 6:07 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

....
On Mar 23, 12:21 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message
.....
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
....
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
bush was president for about 2800 days.
obama's been president for 60.
even you should be able to do the math.
republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.
bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price
Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even
worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.
gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.
He
was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom
that's called the 'economy'. it happens.
Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less
in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.
iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.
and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.
What are
your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-
keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.
**************
The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -
to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.

****
to you it is ignorance.-

IOW you've never taken an economics course...

figures. that's why you believe the right wing lunacy

What class do you need to take to know that increasing taxes depletes
the available capital for private sector growth.-

which, of course, is wrong. this is as stupid as saying that entropy
always increases.

taxes can INCREASE capital if they are an investment in a 'common
good' like a road, hospital or school

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

wf3h wrote:
On Mar 23, 8:18 pm, BAR wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Mar 23, 6:07 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
....
On Mar 23, 12:21 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
.....
On Mar 22, 12:49 am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
....
On Mar 21, 9:52 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
bush was president for about 2800 days.
obama's been president for 60.
even you should be able to do the math.
republicans reagan, bush and bush have nearly bankrupted this country.
clinton was the only president in recent history to balance the
budget.
bush starved the middle class to feed his friends at exxon. now we're
paying the price
Clinton did not balance the budget!!! He looked like it, but even
worse
he
allowed spending to grow a lot more under his watch than it should of.
gee whiz...how much is 'than it should have'? because bush ballooned
the budget out of control with his war in iraq, his tax cuts for the
super rich, etc.
He
was the fortunate recipient of tons of revenue from the Dot.com boom
that's called the 'economy'. it happens.
Nope, it was a financial disaster. Similar to what we have now, not as
big.
And caused by the same Fed screw ups on interest rates. Iraq cost less
in
7
years than Obama and this Congress have spent in the last 60 days.
iraq costs are estimated anywhere from 1-3 trillion dollars. and
you're saying that's irrelevant? i dont think so.
and they did not 'spend' this in the last 60 days. this will be spent
over the next year or so. that's called a 'budget'.
What are
your feelings one what that is going to do for the "Economy"?-
keynesian economics works. milton friedman's monetary policy worked to
a certain degree but the fed is out of options at this point since its
interest rate is now about zero.
**************
The Trillion is not the budget. That is separate pork.- Hide quoted text -
to a keynesian, it's irrelevant.
****
to you it is ignorance.-
IOW you've never taken an economics course...
figures. that's why you believe the right wing lunacy
What class do you need to take to know that increasing taxes depletes
the available capital for private sector growth.-

which, of course, is wrong. this is as stupid as saying that entropy
always increases.

taxes can INCREASE capital if they are an investment in a 'common
good' like a road, hospital or school

Taxes are an expense.

OT Confiscatory taxation
 

BAR wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
...
You claim to follow economics so please tell us a country where
central planning and tight government control has brought the kind
of prosperity that the USA has seen to this point. All I am
looking for is the name of the country that is socialist or
communist that has a higher standard of living than the USA.

Maybe you feel you have a high standard of living..what with your
two BMWs and excessive income ( as you boast about).
What about all the American families that have to get by on less
than $70K per year....or even $50K?
I'm sure they don't feel their standard of living is all that great.

I don't have two BMWs. I have a 1997 Dodge Grand Caravan, 2001 Ford
F-150, and a 2009 Jeep Patriot. 15% of my income goes into a 401k before
it ever hits my bank account, I don't have a retirement plan I have to
fund my own. I put another large chunk of my after tax money into 529's
for my daughters college educations. What's left over is what I have to
live on. You try living with a wife who gives all of your money to
charity and daughters who give what's left over of your money to various
clothing vendors at the local mall.

When I have talked about the money I earn I do so to let the Harry
Krause know that even though he has his alleged "Ivy League" education
that little old me with just a high school diploma can succeed in life
with hard work and determination.


I'm dutifully unimpressed with you and your money.