![]() |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
HK wrote:
Maybe you can find a girl to pick on. Wow, remember how you stalked madcow all over usenet? Johnson |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
"TopBassDog" wrote in message
... On Feb 19, 8:15 pm, jps wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:26:17 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Feb 19, 5:05 wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 14:14:13 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Feb 19, 3:16 wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:50:37 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Feb 19, 2:33 wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 08:38:40 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Feb 19, 9:32 wrote: On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 01:06:58 -0800 (PST), Tim wrote: On Feb 19, 12:19 am, "nom=de=plume" wrote: "jps" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:12:45 -0700, Canuck57 wrote: I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. The appathetic sheep in US and Canada should wake up and assert economic freedom to the governments. Make the crooked *******s in our society pay with their lives. Ah, Canadian al Qaeda. You're just as insane as we've come to expect. If it's Tim McVeigh or that assholes in Kansas who thinks he was right in killing the abortion doctor, it's just a crime. If a brown person does it on behalf of Allah, they're a terrorist. There's no difference between this asshole and bin Laden apart from the sizes of their organizations. Good grief... Canuck thinks that a beef with the IRS means it's ok to kill people. That's just sick. -- Nom=de=Plume He said this: "I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. The apathetic sheep in US and Canada should wake up and assert economic freedom to the governments. Make the crooked *******s in our society pay with their lives. " Do you see ANYTHING there that promotes murder? C'mon.... Uh, it's not what he wrote that's affecting people the most, it's the innocent victims in the IRS office who did nothing to deserve being killed or injured. But feel free to join the al Qaeda-like thinking Tim. And certainly do promote among your friends and family. I don't like fundies and I think they're screwing up our country. Should I drive my car into the nearest fundie church with a load of explosives?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No you shouldn't unless you feel for some mad reason it's justifiable. There's famous leftists college professors that believe in it, so, why shouldn't you? One did bomb people and has little regrets and I believe his name is Ayers. Oh, so you're endorsing the practice? Seems you agree with the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building, killing innocent people. You most likely agree with the Kansas City killer for taking out the abortion doctor. Based on my hatred of fundies, you're saying I should feel free to exercise my anger by delivering a car bomb or some other destructive force to a fundie center near me? Because I'm tired of fundies screwing up our country?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Whatever you wish to think. That is your option. ?;^ ) Yours is a no-response. Incapable of saying anything to further your "argument" or refute mine? That's just what I expected. Your children will watch the downfall of their father's country for lack of reason. You're a prime example.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I don't argue, and I don't insult either. But thanks for giving me that option. ?;^ ) You have the option of refuting the argument without insulting me. We each show our passion in different ways, we each show our intellectual capabilities in different ways. Turning the other cheek isn't going to save our country from going down the ****ter and your complicit agreement with this bloody lunatic is among the reasons this country is taking a dive. Make sure to tell your kids that you're part of the problem, if they don't already know. Oh believe me. I most certainly will! LOL! Let Jesus know next time you pseudo talk to him. Say hi to J for me and let him know that he's a pussy too. I'm sure he's loving the IRS kamikazi as much as you. Pseudo libertarians. I'd like to send a few Seattle anarchists your way. They'd make you crap your pants before you ever got close to your cache of weapons. "Are you attempting a personal attack?" -- Nom=de=Plume Wow... now we know who's been doing all the spoofing... -- Nom=de=Plume |
Nom da plume off topic as usual
"anon-e-moose" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:02:12 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: Adams had no military experience and didn't engage in war while president. He was a lawyer and a diplomat. But in the British eyes, a treasonous traitor. By your logic, Osama Bin Laden didn't pull the trigger either. Has lots of degrees including economics. Don't get me wrong, if I saw Osama and could kill him, I would. But the point is, one sides hero is the other sides enemy. It is relative to your position in the field. By most intelligent people's logic, you're a ninny. -- It is always true that one man's terrorist is another man's patriot. The winner also always gets to decide how that person goes down in history. The Vietnamese named their capital city after Ho Chi Minh. If things had turned out the other way it might be Johnsonville or Nguyen Van Thiu City and 80,000 Vietcong would have been rounded up and shot.. Ummm... being a "treasonous traitor" (which is fairly redundant but look who wrote it) is quite different than being a terrorist. Ummm... did I mention you're not too bright. That's on-topic for sure! -- Nom=de=Plume |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 20/02/2010 11:22 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 11:10 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 2:52 AM, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. Lib - Ever wonder the percentage of IRS agents who are lib? Bet most are. Better than 1/2 any way. Because they work for the government, right? Yep. Ever work for the government? What a mess, as a consultant I was glad I had a term engagement and could get out. So, you worked for the government? Hard to believe, but if so, you must be a liberal! Now that's funny! Government and I have crossed paths on a few occassions. Nope, not a liberal. In each contact I got the impression dysfunctional politics was more important than rationality. I can't see how anyone would ever last 30-40 years in government without going insane. Maybe they're tougher than you. So, did you or did you not work for the gov't? You must be a liberal, since you're a "consultant." -- Nom=de=Plume |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 19/02/2010 11:10 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 2:52 AM, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. Lib - Ever wonder the percentage of IRS agents who are lib? Bet most are. Better than 1/2 any way. Because they work for the government, right? Yep. People tend to gravitate towards their environment, and government saying to itself we must become smaller, leaner and rationalize what we do it not an intrinsic traight. More likely, whining and polics to justify bigger, fatter more in your face government is the norm. And liberals and statists get along better than say a conservative and statist. Or a Libratarian and Liberal... Yep, I would say yes. So, if you work for the government, you're a liberal. That includes all the Republican appointees and in fact all gov't workers back to the founding. You're blatantly stupid. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 21/02/2010 3:50 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:26:04 -0700, wrote: Government and I have crossed paths on a few occassions. Nope, not a liberal. In each contact I got the impression dysfunctional politics was more important than rationality. I can't see how anyone would ever last 30-40 years in government without going insane. and i used to work for ATT. they went under. free market capitalism, unregulated, aint no great deal either ATT was like government, fat and lethargic. I worked for a company that loved competing with ATT, we used to joke, "It isn't that we are so good, it is that they are far worse." ROFLMAO!! hey genius...that's EXACTLY my point. you guys who have more faith in the free market than a saint has in christ kinda forget about the FAILURES in the market I worked for NorTel as we smashed ATT's Western Electric into the ground. Free market capitalism rocks. The lethargic idiots made a product that no one wanted and we made ones companies wanted. Their appathy was their doom. ROFLMAO!!!! you were one of the companies that helped drive ATT into the ground!!! |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, Canuck57 wrote: On 21/02/2010 3:50 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:26:04 -0700, wrote: Government and I have crossed paths on a few occassions. Nope, not a liberal. In each contact I got the impression dysfunctional politics was more important than rationality. I can't see how anyone would ever last 30-40 years in government without going insane. and i used to work for ATT. they went under. free market capitalism, unregulated, aint no great deal either ATT was like government, fat and lethargic. I worked for a company that loved competing with ATT, we used to joke, "It isn't that we are so good, it is that they are far worse." ROFLMAO!! hey genius...that's EXACTLY my point. you guys who have more faith in the free market than a saint has in christ kinda forget about the FAILURES in the market I worked for NorTel as we smashed ATT's Western Electric into the ground. Free market capitalism rocks. The lethargic idiots made a product that no one wanted and we made ones companies wanted. Their appathy was their doom. ROFLMAO!!!! you were one of the companies that helped drive ATT into the ground!!! I don't know when you joined ATT. I worked at Bell Labs starting in 1964. In my opinion, the reson ATT went down hill after the breakup is that there was no "marketing" expertise. After being a regulated monopoly for so long there was no one with the company that had a clue as how to survive in a competitive market place. It took a long time for the "design to last 20 years" mentality to be put aside. So blame ATT, not its competitors. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On 21/02/2010 4:55 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, wrote: On 21/02/2010 3:50 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:26:04 -0700, wrote: Government and I have crossed paths on a few occassions. Nope, not a liberal. In each contact I got the impression dysfunctional politics was more important than rationality. I can't see how anyone would ever last 30-40 years in government without going insane. and i used to work for ATT. they went under. free market capitalism, unregulated, aint no great deal either ATT was like government, fat and lethargic. I worked for a company that loved competing with ATT, we used to joke, "It isn't that we are so good, it is that they are far worse." ROFLMAO!! hey genius...that's EXACTLY my point. you guys who have more faith in the free market than a saint has in christ kinda forget about the FAILURES in the market Free markets kill dog companies and replace them with producers all the time. Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. I worked for NorTel as we smashed ATT's Western Electric into the ground. Free market capitalism rocks. The lethargic idiots made a product that no one wanted and we made ones companies wanted. Their appathy was their doom. ROFLMAO!!!! you were one of the companies that helped drive ATT into the ground!!! |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On 21/02/2010 4:35 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 11:10 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 2:52 AM, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. Lib - Ever wonder the percentage of IRS agents who are lib? Bet most are. Better than 1/2 any way. Because they work for the government, right? Yep. People tend to gravitate towards their environment, and government saying to itself we must become smaller, leaner and rationalize what we do it not an intrinsic traight. More likely, whining and polics to justify bigger, fatter more in your face government is the norm. And liberals and statists get along better than say a conservative and statist. Or a Libratarian and Liberal... Yep, I would say yes. So, if you work for the government, you're a liberal. That includes all the Republican appointees and in fact all gov't workers back to the founding. You're blatantly stupid. de-fumer I didn't say it meant you were, just the probabilities of being liberal are there. It isn't all or nothing like your pea sized brain incinuates. Cucumber is in the bottom left crisper. Good night. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:44:55 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, Canuck57 I worked for NorTel as we smashed ATT's Western Electric into the ground. Free market capitalism rocks. The lethargic idiots made a product that no one wanted and we made ones companies wanted. Their appathy was their doom. ROFLMAO!!!! you were one of the companies that helped drive ATT into the ground!!! I don't know when you joined ATT. I worked at Bell Labs starting in 1964. In my opinion, the reson ATT went down hill after the breakup is that there was no "marketing" expertise. After being a regulated monopoly for so long there was no one with the company that had a clue as how to survive in a competitive market place. actuallly they had a business model based on a 1970 market rather than a 1990 one. they did things extremely well..won more nobel prizes than any other company, and more than most universitiesl...but still had to transition to a non regulated environment It took a long time for the "design to last 20 years" mentality to be put aside. yep...that was a problem. So blame ATT, not its competitors. ?? that's kind of the way the free market works, right? |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 21/02/2010 4:55 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, wrote: ROFLMAO!! hey genius...that's EXACTLY my point. you guys who have more faith in the free market than a saint has in christ kinda forget about the FAILURES in the market Free markets kill dog companies and replace them with producers all the time. which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
"Canuck57" wrote in message
... On 21/02/2010 4:35 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 11:10 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On 19/02/2010 2:52 AM, Jim wrote: Canuck57 wrote: I must admit, I agree with this guys letter. Lib - Ever wonder the percentage of IRS agents who are lib? Bet most are. Better than 1/2 any way. Because they work for the government, right? Yep. People tend to gravitate towards their environment, and government saying to itself we must become smaller, leaner and rationalize what we do it not an intrinsic traight. More likely, whining and polics to justify bigger, fatter more in your face government is the norm. And liberals and statists get along better than say a conservative and statist. Or a Libratarian and Liberal... Yep, I would say yes. So, if you work for the government, you're a liberal. That includes all the Republican appointees and in fact all gov't workers back to the founding. You're blatantly stupid. de-fumer I didn't say it meant you were, just the probabilities of being liberal are there. It isn't all or nothing like your pea sized brain incinuates. Cucumber is in the bottom left crisper. Good night. As usual, if you can't support your argument with facts, you lie. Typical. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, wrote: On 21/02/2010 4:55 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:29:13 -0700, wrote: ROFLMAO!! hey genius...that's EXACTLY my point. you guys who have more faith in the free market than a saint has in christ kinda forget about the FAILURES in the market Free markets kill dog companies and replace them with producers all the time. which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and growth go to those producting something people want. Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? Not for long, they tend to disappear and die. Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste. But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks. When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less to spend. Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their community to employ people. Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts. From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born. Sorry, Obama is screwing all Americans for CAW and Banks. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:04:48 -0700, Canuck57
wrote: On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, wrote: which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and growth go to those producting something people want. and next year a bunch of companies will still go bankrupt Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? Not for long, they tend to disappear and die. until someone else comes along and goes bankrupt Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste. But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks. and when banks lend to bankrupt companies...as they did they did last year...then they drain the economy as well inefficiency is the same whether it's govt or private sector. it's waste the free market doesnt elminate it. When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less to spend. uh no. more of your fundamentalism consider a well run black businesses...for example in rosewood, fl in, say 1923. and a bunch of white guys decide it's too well run. so they destroy rosewood. should the govt sit back and do nothing because govt interference is always wrong? what about toyota? should the govt do nothing? and we have welfare...for the rich. Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their community to employ people. GM got 25B. big deal. Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts. all of a sudden you're concerned about unemployment. what would unemployment be if we HADNT bailed out the banks? you, apparently, have never heard of 1929. From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born. really? the govt cant create wealth? ever hear of UC berkeley? the U of michigan? my own undergrad school, the U of pittsburgh, where the salk polio vaccine was invented? all examples of govt created wealth. you're an economic cripple. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On 22/02/2010 4:20 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:04:48 -0700, wrote: On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, wrote: which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and growth go to those producting something people want. and next year a bunch of companies will still go bankrupt Prunes the weak. Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? Not for long, they tend to disappear and die. until someone else comes along and goes bankrupt Yep. It is inevitable. Losers pay the price, or they don't learn. Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste. But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks. and when banks lend to bankrupt companies...as they did they did last year...then they drain the economy as well And Obama rewarded them for doing such a stupid move. And Congress encouraged it. And bankers get their bonuses courtesy of working people makeing a whole let less than any who approved it. And you vote for the idiots, incling LOL Obama. inefficiency is the same whether it's govt or private sector. it's waste the free market doesnt elminate it. Noting eliminates it completely. But free market does better than any other system in eliminating waste. When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less to spend. uh no. more of your fundamentalism Show me a successful "government company"... cite please. I live in Canada where government does this often, and not a one has every done anything other than suck the taxpayers wealth. consider a well run black businesses...for example in rosewood, fl in, say 1923. Doesn't ahve to be black you racist. should the govt sit back and do nothing because govt interference is always wrong? Everyone looses but for the corrupt when government bails out, props up bad busines spracives and lines peoples pockets. what about toyota? should the govt do nothing? Toyota is being persecuted. Governmetn Motors and NHFSA report to the same people, no arms length in there. And look at GM issues still not fixed. But then again, people expect that from GM, broken manifolds, engine fires etc. and we have welfare...for the rich. Yep, Obama dishes it out. Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their community to employ people. GM got 25B. big deal. Funny, GM got a lot more than that. Add in GMAC which was blead dry, just got another $6 on its fourth bailout. The Delco spin off. And the bond holder buy outs and Canadian add ins. Tops over $100 billion! Not only that, pensioners and others holding bonds took close to a $100 billion more in write downs. Obama didn't even give bond holders the traditional day in court. Add in the other companies that laid off people and went bankrupt because GM didn't pay them. If I owned a business today, I would only deal with GM new if it was certified check or we are not shipping. Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts. all of a sudden you're concerned about unemployment. what would unemployment be if we HADNT bailed out the banks? The jobs were lost 5 years ago at GM. GM still is a dead man a walking. you, apparently, have never heard of 1929. Sure have, but I read up on it. Government tried the same **** back then, didn't work. More than 10 years later it ended because of WW II. From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born. really? the govt cant create wealth? Yep. Governmetn can't create wealth. It is an economics question actually. If you don't know why, just means you are big mouth shooting off the mouth. ever hear of UC berkeley? the U of michigan? my own undergrad school, the U of pittsburgh, where the salk polio vaccine was invented? all examples of govt created wealth. you're an economic cripple. Obviously you never attended any of them. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
Canuck57 wrote:
On 22/02/2010 4:20 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:04:48 -0700, wrote: On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, wrote: which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and growth go to those producting something people want. and next year a bunch of companies will still go bankrupt Prunes the weak. Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? Not for long, they tend to disappear and die. until someone else comes along and goes bankrupt Yep. It is inevitable. Losers pay the price, or they don't learn. Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste. But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks. and when banks lend to bankrupt companies...as they did they did last year...then they drain the economy as well And Obama rewarded them for doing such a stupid move. And Congress encouraged it. And bankers get their bonuses courtesy of working people makeing a whole let less than any who approved it. And you vote for the idiots, incling LOL Obama. inefficiency is the same whether it's govt or private sector. it's waste the free market doesnt elminate it. Noting eliminates it completely. But free market does better than any other system in eliminating waste. When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less to spend. uh no. more of your fundamentalism Show me a successful "government company"... cite please. I live in Canada where government does this often, and not a one has every done anything other than suck the taxpayers wealth. consider a well run black businesses...for example in rosewood, fl in, say 1923. Doesn't ahve to be black you racist. should the govt sit back and do nothing because govt interference is always wrong? Everyone looses but for the corrupt when government bails out, props up bad busines spracives and lines peoples pockets. what about toyota? should the govt do nothing? Toyota is being persecuted. Governmetn Motors and NHFSA report to the same people, no arms length in there. And look at GM issues still not fixed. But then again, people expect that from GM, broken manifolds, engine fires etc. and we have welfare...for the rich. Yep, Obama dishes it out. Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their community to employ people. GM got 25B. big deal. Funny, GM got a lot more than that. Add in GMAC which was blead dry, just got another $6 on its fourth bailout. The Delco spin off. And the bond holder buy outs and Canadian add ins. Tops over $100 billion! Not only that, pensioners and others holding bonds took close to a $100 billion more in write downs. Obama didn't even give bond holders the traditional day in court. Add in the other companies that laid off people and went bankrupt because GM didn't pay them. If I owned a business today, I would only deal with GM new if it was certified check or we are not shipping. Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts. all of a sudden you're concerned about unemployment. what would unemployment be if we HADNT bailed out the banks? The jobs were lost 5 years ago at GM. GM still is a dead man a walking. you, apparently, have never heard of 1929. Sure have, but I read up on it. Government tried the same **** back then, didn't work. More than 10 years later it ended because of WW II. From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born. really? the govt cant create wealth? Yep. Governmetn can't create wealth. It is an economics question actually. If you don't know why, just means you are big mouth shooting off the mouth. ever hear of UC berkeley? the U of michigan? my own undergrad school, the U of pittsburgh, where the salk polio vaccine was invented? all examples of govt created wealth. you're an economic cripple. Obviously you never attended any of them. Canuck, this guy is like Harry, bragging about "education." We know the libs are always playing that card against us. All lies anyway. Same deal with the race card. Like we don't respect negroes. More lies. But libs are niggardly with the truth. Another thing I noticed is he keeps repeating himself, and always comes back with the same answer. Can't help but wonder if this is what Joe Stack faced from the IRS, a well-known lib organization. Is it any wonder Joe took action? Lib - What I say three times is true. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On 23/02/2010 5:32 AM, Jim wrote:
Canuck57 wrote: On 22/02/2010 4:20 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:04:48 -0700, wrote: On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote: On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700, wrote: which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right? Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and growth go to those producting something people want. and next year a bunch of companies will still go bankrupt Prunes the weak. Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to wake up. you think companies dont do this? Not for long, they tend to disappear and die. until someone else comes along and goes bankrupt Yep. It is inevitable. Losers pay the price, or they don't learn. Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste. But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks. and when banks lend to bankrupt companies...as they did they did last year...then they drain the economy as well And Obama rewarded them for doing such a stupid move. And Congress encouraged it. And bankers get their bonuses courtesy of working people makeing a whole let less than any who approved it. And you vote for the idiots, incling LOL Obama. inefficiency is the same whether it's govt or private sector. it's waste the free market doesnt elminate it. Noting eliminates it completely. But free market does better than any other system in eliminating waste. When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less to spend. uh no. more of your fundamentalism Show me a successful "government company"... cite please. I live in Canada where government does this often, and not a one has every done anything other than suck the taxpayers wealth. consider a well run black businesses...for example in rosewood, fl in, say 1923. Doesn't ahve to be black you racist. should the govt sit back and do nothing because govt interference is always wrong? Everyone looses but for the corrupt when government bails out, props up bad busines spracives and lines peoples pockets. what about toyota? should the govt do nothing? Toyota is being persecuted. Governmetn Motors and NHFSA report to the same people, no arms length in there. And look at GM issues still not fixed. But then again, people expect that from GM, broken manifolds, engine fires etc. and we have welfare...for the rich. Yep, Obama dishes it out. Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their community to employ people. GM got 25B. big deal. Funny, GM got a lot more than that. Add in GMAC which was blead dry, just got another $6 on its fourth bailout. The Delco spin off. And the bond holder buy outs and Canadian add ins. Tops over $100 billion! Not only that, pensioners and others holding bonds took close to a $100 billion more in write downs. Obama didn't even give bond holders the traditional day in court. Add in the other companies that laid off people and went bankrupt because GM didn't pay them. If I owned a business today, I would only deal with GM new if it was certified check or we are not shipping. Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts. all of a sudden you're concerned about unemployment. what would unemployment be if we HADNT bailed out the banks? The jobs were lost 5 years ago at GM. GM still is a dead man a walking. you, apparently, have never heard of 1929. Sure have, but I read up on it. Government tried the same **** back then, didn't work. More than 10 years later it ended because of WW II. From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born. really? the govt cant create wealth? Yep. Governmetn can't create wealth. It is an economics question actually. If you don't know why, just means you are big mouth shooting off the mouth. ever hear of UC berkeley? the U of michigan? my own undergrad school, the U of pittsburgh, where the salk polio vaccine was invented? all examples of govt created wealth. you're an economic cripple. Obviously you never attended any of them. Canuck, this guy is like Harry, bragging about "education." We know the libs are always playing that card against us. All lies anyway. Same deal with the race card. Like we don't respect negroes. More lies. But libs are niggardly with the truth. Another thing I noticed is he keeps repeating himself, and always comes back with the same answer. Can't help but wonder if this is what Joe Stack faced from the IRS, a well-known lib organization. Is it any wonder Joe took action? Lib - What I say three times is true. Yep, if you push thinking people past the breaking point, you can expect a reaction. IRS certainly is liberally taxing to deal with. The job of IRS is to bilk you for as much as they can. And Stack had too many corrupt **** on him and decided enough was enough. Agreed with the race card, leftie-libs use it as a crutch and pretty obvious bpubic does not have education beyond high school, might not have completed that either. Certainly is a clueless **** economically. |
Austin plane crash: Full text of Joe Stack online suicide note
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 06:32:34 -0600, Jim "Jim wrote:
Canuck, this guy is like Harry, bragging about "education." We know the libs are always playing that card against us. that's true. your kids can always work for the indian and chinese engineers. we don't need no education in the US. we got limbaugh All lies anyway. Same deal with the race card. Like we don't respect negroes. More lies. But libs are niggardly with the truth. Another thing I noticed is he keeps repeating himself, and always comes back with the same answer. Can't help but wonder if this is what Joe Stack faced from the IRS, a well-known lib organization. Is it any wonder Joe took action? right wingers...traitors to america next thing they'll be telling us how wonderful al qaida is Lib - What I say three times is true. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com