On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 10:55:02 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:


****ing IDIOT

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...10-taxes_N.htm

am i EVER wrong? no.

YOU guys are IDIOTS

Because people are unemployed idiot. Your average household has much
less than 2/3rd the dollars coming in today than in 2006. Unless your a
government civil servant that is, they just kept on growing.

so let's see. you lied about the level of taxes. that's no
surprise...you're right wing. you always lie. then you proved you
didn't know **** about taxes. no surprise there either. the right wing
doesnt know **** about taxes

Spoken like a envious gutter slug.

i
so let's see...you spout right wing cliches. have no evidence. lie.
then get aggravated because someone tells you the facts...


and the reason we dont have money in the US middle class? because in
the last 30 years the richest 1% have had a 500% pay increase. that's
where the money went.

How much did you save? Oh, you screwed it away on toys and are now
broke. Got it.

sorry sport. we were talking about the american economy or did you
forget?


so you dont know **** about the economic profile of the US, taxes or
govt

no surprise. you're right wing

Conservative economics just works better. No ****.

really? then why has the US GDP increased faster with DEMOCRATIC
presidents than GOP presidents??

oh. you didnt know that.

and THIS ECONOMY WE HAVE NOW is due to CONSERVATIVE ECONOMICS.

the US has the most right wing economy in the western world

how we doing?


now you forgot it. again. you're right wing alright

Taxes are low as people lost their jobs and unemployment is 1929 levels.

ah. so you finally admit all the bull**** you've been saying about the
US being taxed to death is just

bull****

thanks. i knew that.

On 10/07/2011 11:38 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/07/2011 7:38 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 21:10:06 -0400, L wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:12:15 -0600,
wrote:

the govt is the smallest it's been in 60 years. to the right that's
too big since it means they can still examine wall street

Post proof or retract.

you really are ****ing stupid, aren't you? you right wngers have NO
****ing idea about you views, what the facts are, etc. you just have
your cliches and that's it

****ing IDIOT

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...10-taxes_N.htm

am i EVER wrong? no.

YOU guys are IDIOTS

Because people are unemployed idiot. Your average household has much
less than 2/3rd the dollars coming in today than in 2006. Unless your a
government civil servant that is, they just kept on growing.

so let's see. you lied about the level of taxes. that's no
surprise...you're right wing. you always lie. then you proved you
didn't know **** about taxes. no surprise there either. the right wing
doesnt know **** about taxes

Spoken like a envious gutter slug.

and the reason we dont have money in the US middle class? because in
the last 30 years the richest 1% have had a 500% pay increase. that's
where the money went.

How much did you save? Oh, you screwed it away on toys and are now
broke. Got it.

so you dont know **** about the economic profile of the US, taxes or
govt

no surprise. you're right wing

Conservative economics just works better. No ****. Told me to watch for
2008....while your liberal economic idiot deer were on the tracks in a
comatose state, staring at the freight train.

Going to get worse too. As government gets bigger, people get smaller.

gee. taxes are the lowest they've been in 60 years. you just admitted
that

now you forgot it. again. you're right wing alright

Taxes are low as people lost their jobs and unemployment is 1929 levels.
Unemployed without alternative sources of income don't pay taxes. They
are not lower for an individual that is working.



During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.

Funny, at this point let the tax greed go rampant as by itself, it is
****ing in the wind but if it makes fleabaggers happy. Will just
accelerate the downfall of the USA. Because I don't believe congress
has the guts to do what is needed. Or perhaps they realize it is past
the tipping point of no return? Hopelessness? Could be.

Arguing with you fleabaggers is well, hopeless too. Your lack of
understanding basic economics and fairness was displaced by greed, envy,
debt and other such sins. Fact is your f'ed and just don't just realize
it yet.
--
Now the real war is on Obama-debt, to save America's future.
And do it for your kids sake....and ignore the selfish fleabags...

On 7/10/11 3:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:

Arguing with you fleabaggers is well, hopeless too. Your lack of
understanding basic economics and fairness was displaced by greed, envy,
debt and other such sins.

That's rich, Canukee. I haven't seen anyone arguing with you...I have
seen a lot of posts pointing out and laughing at your ignorance, hatreds
and insanities.

Perhaps if the economy improves in your area, you can get a job clerking
the midnight shift at the local convenience store. That is, if you can
be trained to operate a cash register.





--
Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where
personal insults are not allowed?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing

On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:34:17 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 10/07/2011 11:38 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:


During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.

Funny, at this point let the tax greed go rampant as by itself, it is
****ing in the wind but if it makes fleabaggers happy. Will just
accelerate the downfall of the USA. Because I don't believe congress
has the guts to do what is needed. Or perhaps they realize it is past
the tipping point of no return? Hopelessness? Could be

gee. no one seems to agree with you.

not conservatives
not liberals
not economists

ever get the idea you dont know what the hell you're talking about?

oh....the lunatics

they DO agree with you

On 10/07/2011 1:45 PM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/10/11 3:34 PM, Canuck57 wrote:

Arguing with you fleabaggers is well, hopeless too. Your lack of
understanding basic economics and fairness was displaced by greed, envy,
debt and other such sins.

That's rich, Canukee. I haven't seen anyone arguing with you...I have
seen a lot of posts pointing out and laughing at your ignorance, hatreds
and insanities.

Perhaps if the economy improves in your area, you can get a job clerking
the midnight shift at the local convenience store. That is, if you can
be trained to operate a cash register.

Funny, all those posts came from 3 fleabags, yourself, wtf3 and defumer.
Hurts my feelings NOT.

No need for me to work for a wage again. Byproduct of having no debt
for so long, investing in myself and productive parts of the economy.

--
Now the real war is on Obama-debt, to save America's future.
And do it for your kids sake....and ignore the selfish fleabags...

On 10/07/2011 3:19 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:34:17 -0600,
wrote:

On 10/07/2011 11:38 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:


During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.

Funny, at this point let the tax greed go rampant as by itself, it is
****ing in the wind but if it makes fleabaggers happy. Will just
accelerate the downfall of the USA. Because I don't believe congress
has the guts to do what is needed. Or perhaps they realize it is past
the tipping point of no return? Hopelessness? Could be

gee. no one seems to agree with you.

not conservatives
not liberals
not economists

ever get the idea you dont know what the hell you're talking about?

oh....the lunatics

they DO agree with you

Funny, would those be the same idiots that had your pension in Wall
Street carnage of Sept/Oct/Nov 2008?

Hahahaha...I saw it as a buying opportunity in the middle of 2009 Q1.
Made off like a bandit because I see liberalism in economics, I flush it
like a turd.

Now if I could short the value of a USD, that would be cool.

--
Now the real war is on Obama-debt, to save America's future.
And do it for your kids sake....and ignore the selfish fleabags...

On 7/10/11 6:18 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 3:19 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:34:17 -0600,
wrote:

On 10/07/2011 11:38 AM, Harryk wrote:
On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:


During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.

Funny, at this point let the tax greed go rampant as by itself, it is
****ing in the wind but if it makes fleabaggers happy. Will just
accelerate the downfall of the USA. Because I don't believe congress
has the guts to do what is needed. Or perhaps they realize it is past
the tipping point of no return? Hopelessness? Could be

gee. no one seems to agree with you.

not conservatives
not liberals
not economists

ever get the idea you dont know what the hell you're talking about?

oh....the lunatics

they DO agree with you

Funny, would those be the same idiots that had your pension in Wall
Street carnage of Sept/Oct/Nov 2008?

Hahahaha...I saw it as a buying opportunity in the middle of 2009 Q1.
Made off like a bandit because I see liberalism in economics, I flush it
like a turd.

Now if I could short the value of a USD, that would be cool.



I don't think you have two nickels to rub together. What did you buy in
2009? A pack of bubble gum?

There's no evidence in rec.boats that you have or had the brain power to
do much more than minimum wage work. You're probably on disability.

--
Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where
personal insults are not allowed?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing

On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 16:18:18 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 10/07/2011 3:19 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:34:17 -0600,
wrote:


gee. no one seems to agree with you.

not conservatives
not liberals
not economists

ever get the idea you dont know what the hell you're talking about?

oh....the lunatics

they DO agree with you

Funny, would those be the same idiots that had your pension in Wall
Street carnage of Sept/Oct/Nov 2008?

HAHAHAAH uh no. YOU GUYS...the RIGHT..raped the US and NOW you're
saying you had nothing to do with it!!

Hahahaha...I saw it as a buying opportunity in the middle of 2009 Q1.
Made off like a bandit because I see liberalism in economics, I flush it
like a turd.

l love these little reader's digest stories. the right wing cant
handle facts so they make up little fairy tales. is your mommy going
to burp you before she puts you to bed?

"Harryk" wrote in message ...

On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/07/2011 7:38 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 21:10:06 -0400, L wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:12:15 -0600,
wrote:

the govt is the smallest it's been in 60 years. to the right that's
too big since it means they can still examine wall street

Post proof or retract.

you really are ****ing stupid, aren't you? you right wngers have NO
****ing idea about you views, what the facts are, etc. you just have
your cliches and that's it

****ing IDIOT

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...10-taxes_N.htm

am i EVER wrong? no.

YOU guys are IDIOTS

Because people are unemployed idiot. Your average household has much
less than 2/3rd the dollars coming in today than in 2006. Unless your a
government civil servant that is, they just kept on growing.

so let's see. you lied about the level of taxes. that's no
surprise...you're right wing. you always lie. then you proved you
didn't know **** about taxes. no surprise there either. the right wing
doesnt know **** about taxes

Spoken like a envious gutter slug.

and the reason we dont have money in the US middle class? because in
the last 30 years the richest 1% have had a 500% pay increase. that's
where the money went.

How much did you save? Oh, you screwed it away on toys and are now
broke. Got it.

so you dont know **** about the economic profile of the US, taxes or
govt

no surprise. you're right wing

Conservative economics just works better. No ****. Told me to watch for
2008....while your liberal economic idiot deer were on the tracks in a
comatose state, staring at the freight train.

Going to get worse too. As government gets bigger, people get smaller.

gee. taxes are the lowest they've been in 60 years. you just admitted
that

now you forgot it. again. you're right wing alright

Taxes are low as people lost their jobs and unemployment is 1929 levels.
Unemployed without alternative sources of income don't pay taxes. They
are not lower for an individual that is working.



During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.

--
Want to discuss recreational boating and fishing in a forum where
personal insults are not allowed?

http://groups.google.com/group/rec-boating-fishing


Reply:
We really did not have a budget surplus. Congress spent all the extra
money, and committed it to future spending also. The extra revenues were
from a bubble. dot.com options taxed when awarded, were the big revenue
generator, not any real job growth.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 09:35:07 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Harryk" wrote in message ...

On 7/10/11 12:55 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/07/2011 9:38 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:23:22 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/07/2011 7:38 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 21:10:06 -0400, L wrote:

wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:12:15 -0600,
wrote:

the govt is the smallest it's been in 60 years. to the right that's
too big since it means they can still examine wall street

Post proof or retract.

you really are ****ing stupid, aren't you? you right wngers have NO
****ing idea about you views, what the facts are, etc. you just have
your cliches and that's it

****ing IDIOT

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...10-taxes_N.htm

am i EVER wrong? no.

YOU guys are IDIOTS

Because people are unemployed idiot. Your average household has much
less than 2/3rd the dollars coming in today than in 2006. Unless your a
government civil servant that is, they just kept on growing.

so let's see. you lied about the level of taxes. that's no
surprise...you're right wing. you always lie. then you proved you
didn't know **** about taxes. no surprise there either. the right wing
doesnt know **** about taxes

Spoken like a envious gutter slug.

and the reason we dont have money in the US middle class? because in
the last 30 years the richest 1% have had a 500% pay increase. that's
where the money went.

How much did you save? Oh, you screwed it away on toys and are now
broke. Got it.

so you dont know **** about the economic profile of the US, taxes or
govt

no surprise. you're right wing

Conservative economics just works better. No ****. Told me to watch for
2008....while your liberal economic idiot deer were on the tracks in a
comatose state, staring at the freight train.

Going to get worse too. As government gets bigger, people get smaller.

gee. taxes are the lowest they've been in 60 years. you just admitted
that

now you forgot it. again. you're right wing alright

Taxes are low as people lost their jobs and unemployment is 1929 levels.
Unemployed without alternative sources of income don't pay taxes. They
are not lower for an individual that is working.



During the Clinton years, when taxes on the wealthy were a bit higher,
we had a budgetary surplus. Bush cut those slightly higher taxes on the
wealthy and now we have deficits. D'oh.
Reply:
We really did not have a budget surplus. Congress spent all the extra
money, and committed it to future spending also. The extra revenues
were from a bubble. dot.com options taxed when awarded, were the big
revenue generator, not any real job growth.

As usual, you know your facts about as well as you know how to post
the right way.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the...under-clinton/