![]() |
Logic question
"Larry" wrote in message ... YukonBound wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... I think Harry is telling Bob to post various articles and argue a point. Bob does so, not realizing the article doesn't support his point. Bob doesn't read the article 'cause Harry said it was OK. That's what I think. -- John H Don't attempt to "think". It's not your strong suit! You stole that line from me, dummy. I was using that line when you were soiling diapers... or is that 'Depends'? |
Logic question
"Larry" wrote in message ... YukonBound wrote: "Harry " wrote in message ... On 8/18/10 10:38 PM, YukonBound wrote: "Jack" wrote in message ... On Aug 18, 6:45 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:22:16 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: On Aug 18, 5:56 pm, bpuharic wrote: On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 20:40:12 -0400, Larry wrote: Jack wrote: On Aug 17, 5:48 pm, wrote: What about "a *decrease* in married-couple households who tend to have two earners" does your dumb ass not understand? From YOUR OWN LINK!! Seriously bob, you're mental. Deranged. Retarded. cya While every thing you said is true, Bob is incapable of understanding it. ah. so fairy tales are true? no wonder the right has run the US into the ground It was your own link, bob. Are you in the habit of posting fairy tales? you never learned to read in school, did you? because this is NOT an isolated piece of data, as you seem to think. it has to be linked with OTHER data on individual income vs family income, the changes in demographics (dual vs single income households), and changes in income by income group. that's why right wingers are losers. you guys can't think. You are hilarious. You're the one that screams "where's the data! here's mine!", and then your own data proves your statements wrong. Reading your posts are like watching a really funny trainwreck in slow motion. Please don't stop! You find train wrecks funny? You're one weird goofball. He is just another right wing POS. When are you heading up to the Yukon? -- More like 'out to the Yukon'..... refers to my boat, a Princecraft Yukon Say what? Quit using my lines, dummy! |
Logic question
|
Logic question
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 04:19:47 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote: On Aug 18, 9:30*pm, bpuharic wrote: On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:27:46 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: IOW you think EVERYONE in the middle class is in a household hmmm...seems you left out ALOT of people. Leaves out almost no one. Figure out the definition of a "household" in this context and get back to us. Hint: The quantity of wage-earners and presence of children do not enter into the equation. gee. guess you forgot that MEN"S wages stagnated. can't handle the truth, eh? |
Logic question
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 06:55:18 -0400, John H
wrote: I think Harry is telling Bob to post various articles and argue a point. Bob does so, not realizing the article doesn't support his point. Bob doesn't read the article 'cause Harry said it was OK. That's what I think. if you thought at all you wouldnt be a redneck |
Logic question
On 8/20/10 12:02 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 06:55:18 -0400, John wrote: I think Harry is telling Bob to post various articles and argue a point. Bob does so, not realizing the article doesn't support his point. Bob doesn't read the article 'cause Harry said it was OK. That's what I think. if you thought at all you wouldnt be a redneck I see herring is lying again. I'm not telling "bob" to post or not post...anything. |
Logic question
|
Logic question
YukonBound wrote:
"Larry" wrote in message ... YukonBound wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... I think Harry is telling Bob to post various articles and argue a point. Bob does so, not realizing the article doesn't support his point. Bob doesn't read the article 'cause Harry said it was OK. That's what I think. -- John H Don't attempt to "think". It's not your strong suit! You stole that line from me, dummy. I was using that line when you were soiling diapers... or is that 'Depends'? I'm at least 20 years younger than you so I don't have your problems. |
Logic question
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote: On Aug 14, 7:42*am, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:05:44 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: h Try it this time instead of knee-jerking. *You may, with hard work, overcome your many deficiencies. guess you missed the part that the rich get a 3.8% tax cut the middle class? 1.5%. this is why the economy collapsed. the middle class gets zip. we cant spend because the weatlhy keep taking more and more. try looking at the figures yourself. *a guy making 50K gets 772 in tax cuts. a person making a million gets far far more. Wrong. The family making 50k got a 48% reduction in taxes. All of the other giveaways are phased out by the time you hit $200k or so. You just don't want to see (or are incapable of seeing?) the big picture. But you are a good parrot of the liberal lies. nope. the numbers don't lie. why not post 'em here? or are you too busy makin' 'em up to bother? the GOP has never proposed a tax cut that didnt favor the rich |
Logic question
On Aug 25, 9:37*pm, bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: On Aug 14, 7:42*am, bpuharic wrote: On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:05:44 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: h Try it this time instead of knee-jerking. *You may, with hard work, overcome your many deficiencies. guess you missed the part that the rich get a 3.8% tax cut the middle class? 1.5%. this is why the economy collapsed. the middle class gets zip. we cant spend because the weatlhy keep taking more and more. try looking at the figures yourself. *a guy making 50K gets 772 in tax cuts. a person making a million gets far far more. Wrong. *The family making 50k got a 48% reduction in taxes. *All of the other giveaways are phased out by the time you hit $200k or so. You just don't want to see (or are incapable of seeing?) the big picture. *But you are a good parrot of the liberal lies. nope. the numbers don't lie. why not post 'em here? or are you too busy makin' 'em up to bother? the GOP has never proposed a tax cut that didnt favor the rich- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Here you go liar... http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...#ixzz0wUUgcEqB Read, get informed, grow a spine and start telling the truth even if it doesn't fit your self indulgent, progressive agenda... |
Logic question
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:07:04 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote: On Aug 25, 9:37*pm, bpuharic wrote: On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote: this is why the economy collapsed. the middle class gets zip. we cant spend because the weatlhy keep taking more and more. try looking at the figures yourself. *a guy making 50K gets 772 in tax cuts. a person making a million gets far far more. Wrong. *The family making 50k got a 48% reduction in taxes. *All of the other giveaways are phased out by the time you hit $200k or so. You just don't want to see (or are incapable of seeing?) the big picture. *But you are a good parrot of the liberal lies. nope. the numbers don't lie. why not post 'em here? or are you too busy makin' 'em up to bother? the GOP has never proposed a tax cut that didnt favor the rich- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Here you go liar... http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...#ixzz0wUUgcEqB which has NOTHING to do with the FACT a 50K wage earner gets 1.5% of his income back in taxes and a guy with a 1M income gets almost 4%. oh well. guess you dont read your own references Read, get informed, grow a spine and start telling the truth even if it doesn't fit your self indulgent, progressive agenda... |
Logic question
bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:07:04 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: On Aug 25, 9:37 pm, wrote: On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 07:24:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: this is why the economy collapsed. the middle class gets zip. we cant spend because the weatlhy keep taking more and more. try looking at the figures yourself. a guy making 50K gets 772 in tax cuts. a person making a million gets far far more. Wrong. The family making 50k got a 48% reduction in taxes. All of the other giveaways are phased out by the time you hit $200k or so. You just don't want to see (or are incapable of seeing?) the big picture. But you are a good parrot of the liberal lies. nope. the numbers don't lie. why not post 'em here? or are you too busy makin' 'em up to bother? the GOP has never proposed a tax cut that didnt favor the rich- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Here you go liar... http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...#ixzz0wUUgcEqB which has NOTHING to do with the FACT a 50K wage earner gets 1.5% of his income back in taxes and a guy with a 1M income gets almost 4%. oh well. guess you dont read your own references Can you explain how people get a percentage of their earnings "back in taxes"? That is just bizarre. |
Logic question
bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 20:03:37 -0400, wrote: bpuharic wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:07:04 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote: nope. the numbers don't lie. why not post 'em here? or are you too busy makin' 'em up to bother? the GOP has never proposed a tax cut that didnt favor the rich- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Here you go liar... http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...#ixzz0wUUgcEqB which has NOTHING to do with the FACT a 50K wage earner gets 1.5% of his income back in taxes and a guy with a 1M income gets almost 4%. oh well. guess you dont read your own references Can you explain how people get a percentage of their earnings "back in taxes"? That is just bizarre. too complicated for you? tax cut isn't understandable? It's not too complicated. It doesn't make any sense. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com