Obamanomics....
 

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.

And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.

Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.

Obamanomics....
 

On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.

And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.

Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.

I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.

Obamanomics....
 

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.

I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.

As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.

Obamanomics....
 

On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.

I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.

As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.

Just like torture.

Obamanomics....
 

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.

Just like torture.

Legal is legal regardless of the activity.

Obamanomics....
 

On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:35:14 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.

Just like torture.

Legal is legal regardless of the activity.

Subject to misinterpretation by the highest legal authorities in the
land.

It's also legal to have a PO box in the Cayman Islands to avoid
taxation in the US.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

Obamanomics....
 

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:35:14 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.
Just like torture.
Legal is legal regardless of the activity.

Subject to misinterpretation by the highest legal authorities in the
land.

It's also legal to have a PO box in the Cayman Islands to avoid
taxation in the US.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

Scummy is not a legal opinion.

Obamanomics....
 

On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:09:56 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:35:14 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.
Just like torture.
Legal is legal regardless of the activity.

Subject to misinterpretation by the highest legal authorities in the
land.

It's also legal to have a PO box in the Cayman Islands to avoid
taxation in the US.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

Scummy is not a legal opinion.

No, it's a moral choice.

Just like it's okay to torture but it's not okay to have Arab
translators in the military who admit to being gay.

Tax evaders are scummy, even if their methods are legal.

Obamanomics....
 

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:09:56 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:35:14 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.
Just like torture.
Legal is legal regardless of the activity.
Subject to misinterpretation by the highest legal authorities in the
land.

It's also legal to have a PO box in the Cayman Islands to avoid
taxation in the US.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.
Scummy is not a legal opinion.

No, it's a moral choice.

I didn't know law was based upon morality? Who arbitrates morality
within the law?

Just like it's okay to torture but it's not okay to have Arab
translators in the military who admit to being gay.

Change the law. It is that simple.

Tax evaders are scummy, even if their methods are legal.

Killing babies still in the womb may be legal but it is scummy.

The knife cuts both ways.

Obamanomics....
 

On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:52:32 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:09:56 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:35:14 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 10:03:51 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:24:30 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:58:56 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 19:37:06 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:40:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On May 8, 8:22 am, BAR wrote:
... trickle up poverty.
the rich have just given us trickle down poverty

payback's a bitch
Rich people employ poor people. Poor people employ no one.
Poor people service rich people. The world wouldn't work very well
without poor people. Rich people are far more expendible, as the
French proved.
I am now forced to ask when are you going to go the way of the rich French?
I'm not rich. I'm comfortable but far from rich.
Sucks to be you.
And you're clearly in the **** hauling business. Can't stay away from
sniffing people's asses on usenet.
Where did you get that, fruitcake? You know enough about what I do.
Remember the S corp discussion?

Sucks to be you.
I'm sure it's something equally as foul, as to match your personality.

I recall the S corp discussion wherein we established that its use by
you is for avoidance of the corporate tax rate.
As long as it is legal you have noting to whine about.
Just like torture.
Legal is legal regardless of the activity.
Subject to misinterpretation by the highest legal authorities in the
land.

It's also legal to have a PO box in the Cayman Islands to avoid
taxation in the US.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.
Scummy is not a legal opinion.

No, it's a moral choice.

I didn't know law was based upon morality? Who arbitrates morality
within the law?

Just like it's okay to torture but it's not okay to have Arab
translators in the military who admit to being gay.

Change the law. It is that simple.

When those whose interests are best served by leaving well enough
alone and they're the ones with the resources to sway opinion, guess
what happens.

That's right, the laws that would serve the greater good get thwarted.


Tax evaders are scummy, even if their methods are legal.

Killing babies still in the womb may be legal but it is scummy.

The knife cuts both ways.

Glad your wife or daughter were never raped and impregnated.