Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/6/2013 6:21 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 17:32:09 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/4/2013 9:14 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:42:41 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Anecdotes don't "prove" much of anything

Julie's flaw is she is using the current tax going forward. There is
NO baby boomer who paid more than $104,000 between 1966 and 1996 (both
employer and employee contribution)
I have my SSA statement in my hand and I paid the max every one of
those years. Prior to 96 the cap was $4800 and the tax rate was lower
so those will be very small numbers.

I agree a Gen Xer probably won't get back all he paid in and may not
really get much of anything. Sorry.


Don't point out Julie Morse's flaw.
Urin Asshole is invested in what she wrote as the gospel and will not
entertain any evidence that she could be wrong.

Also did you find any way to contact her?
I want her to set the record straight, but find no email
or any way to subscribe to the webpage.

SS payments are progressive, meaning the more you pay in
the longer it takes to get it back, and the less you pay
in the the shorter your payback time.

Mikek

PS Urin, please don't recycle the tired old names you've been calling
me, be a little creative. :-)

Ok. Go **** yourself. Do you feel better now?

SS benefits are based on your highest earning 35 years. You don't know
anything about how SS works. Yeah, if you pay in more it takes longer
to get it all back. No ****.

You say I don't know anything about how SS works, and then go on with a
long winded explanation to say SS is progressive.
Odd, you agree with me but still make it an argument.

Have a happy* day, Mikek

* or spew anger all day if you want.

Why we can't have good things
 

On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 08:27:06 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 6:21 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 17:32:09 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/4/2013 9:14 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:42:41 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Anecdotes don't "prove" much of anything

Julie's flaw is she is using the current tax going forward. There is
NO baby boomer who paid more than $104,000 between 1966 and 1996 (both
employer and employee contribution)
I have my SSA statement in my hand and I paid the max every one of
those years. Prior to 96 the cap was $4800 and the tax rate was lower
so those will be very small numbers.

I agree a Gen Xer probably won't get back all he paid in and may not
really get much of anything. Sorry.


Don't point out Julie Morse's flaw.
Urin Asshole is invested in what she wrote as the gospel and will not
entertain any evidence that she could be wrong.

Also did you find any way to contact her?
I want her to set the record straight, but find no email
or any way to subscribe to the webpage.

SS payments are progressive, meaning the more you pay in
the longer it takes to get it back, and the less you pay
in the the shorter your payback time.

Mikek

PS Urin, please don't recycle the tired old names you've been calling
me, be a little creative. :-)

Ok. Go **** yourself. Do you feel better now?

SS benefits are based on your highest earning 35 years. You don't know
anything about how SS works. Yeah, if you pay in more it takes longer
to get it all back. No ****.

You say I don't know anything about how SS works, and then go on with a
long winded explanation to say SS is progressive.
Odd, you agree with me but still make it an argument.

Have a happy* day, Mikek

* or spew anger all day if you want.

Long winded???? Compared to your bull**** number crunching that went
on for 10 paragraphs?

Stop being deliberately stupid. You don't need to go beyond natively
stupid.

Why we can't have good things
 

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 01:53:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 14:44:12 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

My wife can kick your ass and I don't take you seriously in any way.
What's your point?

How many guys' asses has she kicked?

More than a few.

Is she pretending to be a guy now?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Why we can't have good things
 

On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 11:29:58 -0400, Hank© wrote:

On 4/6/2013 10:48 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/6/13 10:44 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...



We used to see the active proselytizers at the front door several times
a month when we lived in the south, but not so much here. If the
doorbell rings during the day, the odds are the callers are from a local
church whose members are out trying to drum up business for Sunday. I
don't mind that. If the "door cam" tells me they're black, I'll usually
answer and open the door and say hello, because I know a few of the
black ministers down here and it is likely the callers are from one of
those churches.

---------------------------------------

Merrily we troll along .... troll along ..... troll along ....


Saying that I don't mind the occasional callers trying to drum up Sunday
business is trolling?

Well, you did throw in the *black* qualifier a couple of times, Mr.
Harry Krause the racist.

No, no. He can say whatever he wants.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/7/2013 12:39 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 08:27:06 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 6:21 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 17:32:09 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/4/2013 9:14 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:42:41 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Anecdotes don't "prove" much of anything

Julie's flaw is she is using the current tax going forward. There is
NO baby boomer who paid more than $104,000 between 1966 and 1996 (both
employer and employee contribution)
I have my SSA statement in my hand and I paid the max every one of
those years. Prior to 96 the cap was $4800 and the tax rate was lower
so those will be very small numbers.

I agree a Gen Xer probably won't get back all he paid in and may not
really get much of anything. Sorry.


Don't point out Julie Morse's flaw.
Urin Asshole is invested in what she wrote as the gospel and will not
entertain any evidence that she could be wrong.

Also did you find any way to contact her?
I want her to set the record straight, but find no email
or any way to subscribe to the webpage.

SS payments are progressive, meaning the more you pay in
the longer it takes to get it back, and the less you pay
in the the shorter your payback time.

Mikek

PS Urin, please don't recycle the tired old names you've been calling
me, be a little creative. :-)

Ok. Go **** yourself. Do you feel better now?

SS benefits are based on your highest earning 35 years. You don't know
anything about how SS works. Yeah, if you pay in more it takes longer
to get it all back. No ****.

You say I don't know anything about how SS works, and then go on with a
long winded explanation to say SS is progressive.
Odd, you agree with me but still make it an argument.

Have a happy* day, Mikek

* or spew anger all day if you want.

Long winded???? Compared to your bull**** number crunching that went
on for 10 paragraphs?

Oh, sorry if I offended you.
Mikek

Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/6/2013 6:23 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 17:37:41 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/4/2013 11:58 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 20:44:34 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 22:03:28 -0400, wrote:


Ok Mr. ****head. Is that your name? It's certainly your bull****.

I think enough about my opinions that I sign them with my real name.

Feel free to invite all the crazies to your house. I think enough
about my and my family's well being to be a bit more prudent.

Cowardly punk hiding in your basement spewing bull**** anonymously.



That is why we don't really take you seriously.


Could we just start with his screen name.

Yeah, AMDX... what does that stand for... Am Mostly Dense eXactly.

Sorry, buy that's not really very clever, I wouldn't mention it but
you were trying to be.
Mikek
trying

Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/7/13 2:05 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 01:53:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 05 Apr 2013 14:44:12 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

My wife can kick your ass and I don't take you seriously in any way.
What's your point?

How many guys' asses has she kicked?

More than a few.

Is she pretending to be a guy now?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

Are you?

Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/7/13 2:06 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 11:29:58 -0400, Hank© wrote:

On 4/6/2013 10:48 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/6/13 10:44 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...



We used to see the active proselytizers at the front door several times
a month when we lived in the south, but not so much here. If the
doorbell rings during the day, the odds are the callers are from a local
church whose members are out trying to drum up business for Sunday. I
don't mind that. If the "door cam" tells me they're black, I'll usually
answer and open the door and say hello, because I know a few of the
black ministers down here and it is likely the callers are from one of
those churches.

---------------------------------------

Merrily we troll along .... troll along ..... troll along ....


Saying that I don't mind the occasional callers trying to drum up Sunday
business is trolling?

Well, you did throw in the *black* qualifier a couple of times, Mr.
Harry Krause the racist.

No, no. He can say whatever he wants.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.


In my experience, the black church people who knock on doors here aren't
looking for converts, but the white church people are. I find
proselytizers disgusting.

Why we can't have good things
 

On 4/7/2013 4:01 PM, amdx wrote:


Could we just start with his screen name.

Yeah, AMDX... what does that stand for... Am Mostly Dense eXactly.

Sorry, buy that's not really very clever, I wouldn't mention it but
you were trying to be.
Mikek


kevin has never been that sharp anyway... he draws what they tell him to
draw, using the constraints of what they have told him to use... It's
like putting together a model car, you just take the pieces and put them
in place...

Why we can't have good things
 

On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 14:18:23 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 4/7/2013 12:39 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 08:27:06 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/6/2013 6:21 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 17:32:09 -0500, amdx
wrote:

On 4/4/2013 9:14 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:42:41 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Anecdotes don't "prove" much of anything

Julie's flaw is she is using the current tax going forward. There is
NO baby boomer who paid more than $104,000 between 1966 and 1996 (both
employer and employee contribution)
I have my SSA statement in my hand and I paid the max every one of
those years. Prior to 96 the cap was $4800 and the tax rate was lower
so those will be very small numbers.

I agree a Gen Xer probably won't get back all he paid in and may not
really get much of anything. Sorry.


Don't point out Julie Morse's flaw.
Urin Asshole is invested in what she wrote as the gospel and will not
entertain any evidence that she could be wrong.

Also did you find any way to contact her?
I want her to set the record straight, but find no email
or any way to subscribe to the webpage.

SS payments are progressive, meaning the more you pay in
the longer it takes to get it back, and the less you pay
in the the shorter your payback time.

Mikek

PS Urin, please don't recycle the tired old names you've been calling
me, be a little creative. :-)

Ok. Go **** yourself. Do you feel better now?

SS benefits are based on your highest earning 35 years. You don't know
anything about how SS works. Yeah, if you pay in more it takes longer
to get it all back. No ****.

You say I don't know anything about how SS works, and then go on with a
long winded explanation to say SS is progressive.
Odd, you agree with me but still make it an argument.

Have a happy* day, Mikek

* or spew anger all day if you want.

Long winded???? Compared to your bull**** number crunching that went
on for 10 paragraphs?

Oh, sorry if I offended you.
Mikek

So, you're just ****ing stupid. That's not offensive. That's sad.