| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Social Security and Libertarians
Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security
has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. |
Social Security and Libertarians
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ------------------------------------------- By law, any surplus goes into the general fund from which the government is required to buy US Government Securities. It's the main reason Clinton was able to claim a "surplus" during the last years of his administration (except his *last* budget that didn't come close to balancing). The Government sold these securities (funded by the SS surplus) to pay down the debt. Problem is, it didn't. The government still "owes" the money. Little bit of voo-doo economics, but it sure sounded good. Still does to many people. The problem with SS is that the "in's" no longer add up to the "out's" as of 2010. The "surplus" that the government is supposed to have (but doesn't) is now being used to augment payments ... on paper anyway. Actually, all it does is increase the debt. It is estimated that by 2033 or sooner, it will not be able to pay 100 percent of the obligations. Benefits will have to be reduced. |
Social Security and Libertarians
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ----------------------------------------- I'll add to my previous post: The "dot com" era was kind to Bill Clinton. Lot's of people made a lot of money for producing nothing. The result was a strong revenue stream of Social Security payments that created a large surplus. The government simply "borrowed" that money to apply to the debt which balanced the budget and reduced the deficit. Or at least it looked that way on paper. Good for legacy stuff and all. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:31:25 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ------------------------------------------- By law, any surplus goes into the general fund from which the government is required to buy US Government Securities. It's the main reason Clinton was able to claim a "surplus" during the last years of his administration (except his *last* budget that didn't come close to balancing). The Government sold these securities (funded by the SS surplus) to pay down the debt. Problem is, it didn't. The government still "owes" the money. Little bit of voo-doo economics, but it sure sounded good. Still does to many people. The problem with SS is that the "in's" no longer add up to the "out's" as of 2010. The "surplus" that the government is supposed to have (but doesn't) is now being used to augment payments ... on paper anyway. Actually, all it does is increase the debt. It is estimated that by 2033 or sooner, it will not be able to pay 100 percent of the obligations. Benefits will have to be reduced. Yes, after 2033 or thereabouts if nothing is done (and I mean NOTHING), then benefits would need to reduced by about 5%. It would continue from there pretty much forever, with another small decrease. It is not a short term crisis that it's made to be by those who know better. You think Clinton said this? It was Reagan, the patron saint of the right wing. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:39:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ----------------------------------------- I'll add to my previous post: The "dot com" era was kind to Bill Clinton. Lot's of people made a lot of money for producing nothing. The result was a strong revenue stream of Social Security payments that created a large surplus. The government simply "borrowed" that money to apply to the debt which balanced the budget and reduced the deficit. Or at least it looked that way on paper. Good for legacy stuff and all. Thus, the debt is a bunch of nonsense. It's not a terrible problem, and whether or not you're correct that it was applied to the debt is not relevant to it being solvent and paying 100% for a couple of decades to come and slightly less than that forever after. |
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:31:25 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ------------------------------------------- By law, any surplus goes into the general fund from which the government is required to buy US Government Securities. It's the main reason Clinton was able to claim a "surplus" during the last years of his administration (except his *last* budget that didn't come close to balancing). The Government sold these securities (funded by the SS surplus) to pay down the debt. Problem is, it didn't. The government still "owes" the money. Little bit of voo-doo economics, but it sure sounded good. Still does to many people. The problem with SS is that the "in's" no longer add up to the "out's" as of 2010. The "surplus" that the government is supposed to have (but doesn't) is now being used to augment payments ... on paper anyway. Actually, all it does is increase the debt. It is estimated that by 2033 or sooner, it will not be able to pay 100 percent of the obligations. Benefits will have to be reduced. Yes, after 2033 or thereabouts if nothing is done (and I mean NOTHING), then benefits would need to reduced by about 5%. It would continue from there pretty much forever, with another small decrease. It is not a short term crisis that it's made to be by those who know better. You think Clinton said this? It was Reagan, the patron saint of the right wing. --------------------------------------------------------------- It's more like reducing benefits by 25%, not 5%. (100% to 75%) But this is what the blowhard politicians are telling you. Read up on it. There are many very qualified economists who are at odds with each other in terms of what the future holds. Math is supposed to be a precise discipline. The numbers aren't supposed to lie. Why are so many varied but qualified economic forecasts being made then? It's because the numbers don't lie ... the politicians lie. They treat the public like mushrooms .... keep 'em in the dark and feed them bull****. Clinton or Reagan said "what"? Don't know what you are referring to. |
Social Security and Libertarians
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:11:44 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You're going to argue the tired argument of returning to the gold standard? That's a dead horse and is completely nonsensical. ----------------------------------------------- Your first sentence is a question. The answer is no. I never said that. "There is no short term debt crisis, there's a short term employment crisis, and even that is mostly improving." Bull****. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:20:47 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:31:25 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: "Urin Asshole" wrote in message . .. Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once in for all…Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security trust fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing the budget or erasing or lowering the deficit. ------------------------------------------- By law, any surplus goes into the general fund from which the government is required to buy US Government Securities. It's the main reason Clinton was able to claim a "surplus" during the last years of his administration (except his *last* budget that didn't come close to balancing). The Government sold these securities (funded by the SS surplus) to pay down the debt. Problem is, it didn't. The government still "owes" the money. Little bit of voo-doo economics, but it sure sounded good. Still does to many people. The problem with SS is that the "in's" no longer add up to the "out's" as of 2010. The "surplus" that the government is supposed to have (but doesn't) is now being used to augment payments ... on paper anyway. Actually, all it does is increase the debt. It is estimated that by 2033 or sooner, it will not be able to pay 100 percent of the obligations. Benefits will have to be reduced. Yes, after 2033 or thereabouts if nothing is done (and I mean NOTHING), then benefits would need to reduced by about 5%. It would continue from there pretty much forever, with another small decrease. It is not a short term crisis that it's made to be by those who know better. You think Clinton said this? It was Reagan, the patron saint of the right wing. --------------------------------------------------------------- It's more like reducing benefits by 25%, not 5%. (100% to 75%) But this is what the blowhard politicians are telling you. Read up on it. There are many very qualified economists who are at odds with each other in terms of what the future holds. Math is supposed to be a precise discipline. The numbers aren't supposed to lie. Why are so many varied but qualified economic forecasts being made then? It's because the numbers don't lie ... the politicians lie. They treat the public like mushrooms .... keep 'em in the dark and feed them bull****. Read up where? Which right-wing conspiracy blog do you think is worth reading? Clinton or Reagan said "what"? Don't know what you are referring to. Reagan... the original post that's at the top of the article. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:44:28 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:11:44 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You're going to argue the tired argument of returning to the gold standard? That's a dead horse and is completely nonsensical. ----------------------------------------------- Your first sentence is a question. The answer is no. I never said that. You said ever since we got off the gold standard. Are you arguing for us to return to "sanity"? "There is no short term debt crisis, there's a short term employment crisis, and even that is mostly improving." Bull****. Citation?? Or is this your opinion? Or, wait.. are you saying there is a short term debt crisis? Or, are you saying there isn't a short term employment crisis? |
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. |
Social Security and Libertarians
"Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/13 4:43 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. Further, most of the flies on **** in this newsgroup are on the far right, like Herring, FlaJim, and even W'hine when he starts babbling about how the poor could be rich if only they started up their own shoeshine business and addressed him as "Massa." |
Social Security and Libertarians
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 4/7/13 4:43 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. Further, most of the flies on **** in this newsgroup are on the far right, like Herring, FlaJim, and even W'hine when he starts babbling about how the poor could be rich if only they started up their own shoeshine business and addressed him as "Massa." -------------------------------------------- Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/6/2013 11:44 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:11:44 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You're going to argue the tired argument of returning to the gold standard? That's a dead horse and is completely nonsensical. ----------------------------------------------- Your first sentence is a question. The answer is no. I never said that. "There is no short term debt crisis, there's a short term employment crisis, and even that is mostly improving." Bull****. Gee Eisboch, how can you say this great and powerful economy is not improving, it produced 88,000 jobs last month. We only need about 175,000 to keep up with population growth. Mikek, dripping with sarcasm |
Social Security and Libertarians
"Eisboch" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 4/7/13 4:43 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. Further, most of the flies on **** in this newsgroup are on the far right, like Herring, FlaJim, and even W'hine when he starts babbling about how the poor could be rich if only they started up their own shoeshine business and addressed him as "Massa." -------------------------------------------- Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. We aim to please...or not. 😃 |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/2013 4:02 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. Urin Asshole Plume loogie picker Basskisser...... And doubling now that he is unemployed as IBoater. There you go... |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message m... On 4/7/13 4:43 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. Further, most of the flies on **** in this newsgroup are on the far right, like Herring, FlaJim, and even W'hine when he starts babbling about how the poor could be rich if only they started up their own shoeshine business and addressed him as "Massa." -------------------------------------------- Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... |
Social Security and Libertarians
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. If you notice, the only people he personally "trashes" are those who either initiate or return the favor. Tit for Tat. You do it. I do it sometimes, but I try not to make it mean spirited or personal. If I can, I try to inject some humor, but not always with good results. Overall, I've been able to carry on reasonable and civil discussions with Harry over the years even though we quite often see things in different ways. I have a very good friend .... a retired lawyer ..... who is so far to the left that he makes Harry sound like Barry Goldwater. His practice consisted mostly of workmans' comp lawsuits and in representing unions in both contract negotiations and lawsuits. I see this lawyer friend at least twice a week and we often "get it on" discussing politics, unions and the state of the world. In the end, we still remain friends and often crack a few jokes about each other's positions on things. You just shouldn't take this stuff so seriously. It's a newsgroup for cripe's sake. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:50:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
"Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. ==== That would make perfect sense if they we're both your sock puppets which is entirely possible. Are you taking another course in creative writing? |
Social Security and Libertarians
Wayne B wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:50:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. ==== That would make perfect sense if they we're both your sock puppets which is entirely possible. Are you taking another course in creative writing? Humor is not your forte. Whatever their thoughts and I often agree with them, they both are sloppy writers. It is *were,* by the way. 😄 |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0500, amdx wrote:
On 4/6/2013 11:44 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:11:44 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You're going to argue the tired argument of returning to the gold standard? That's a dead horse and is completely nonsensical. ----------------------------------------------- Your first sentence is a question. The answer is no. I never said that. "There is no short term debt crisis, there's a short term employment crisis, and even that is mostly improving." Bull****. Gee Eisboch, how can you say this great and powerful economy is not improving, it produced 88,000 jobs last month. We only need about 175,000 to keep up with population growth. Mikek, dripping with sarcasm You're definitely dripping with something... I think most people call it drooling and displaying your lack of mental abilities. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:02:36 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. Who the **** is D'Plume? Wherever she is she obviously got it right about you. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 16:43:37 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Wayne B" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. That's supposed to be a compliment... I get it. Thanks. Maybe Wayne is looking for a woman. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 17:08:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote in message om... On 4/7/13 4:43 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Wayne B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. ------------------------------------------------ For a while I suspected that "Urin" was D'Plume. Very similar use of certain expressions and style of writing. But, after many exchanges with Urin lately, I am not so sure anymore. I think D'Plume was a little smarter overall. "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. Further, most of the flies on **** in this newsgroup are on the far right, like Herring, FlaJim, and even W'hine when he starts babbling about how the poor could be rich if only they started up their own shoeshine business and addressed him as "Massa." -------------------------------------------- Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. Maybe he's D'Plume? |
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 18:24:38 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:50:47 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote: "Urin" isn't Ms. Plume. ==== That would make perfect sense if they we're both your sock puppets which is entirely possible. Are you taking another course in creative writing? That's it! FOAD is plume. You are an idiot. Seems fair. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/2013 6:00 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:31:03 -0500, amdx wrote: On 4/6/2013 11:44 PM, Eisboch wrote: "Urin Asshole" wrote in message ... On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 00:11:44 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You're going to argue the tired argument of returning to the gold standard? That's a dead horse and is completely nonsensical. ----------------------------------------------- Your first sentence is a question. The answer is no. I never said that. "There is no short term debt crisis, there's a short term employment crisis, and even that is mostly improving." Bull****. Gee Eisboch, how can you say this great and powerful economy is not improving, it produced 88,000 jobs last month. We only need about 175,000 to keep up with population growth. Mikek, dripping with sarcasm You're definitely dripping with something... I think most people call it drooling and displaying your lack of mental abilities. LOL! you are so easy to draw out! I hope your having as much fun as I am. Mikek |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/2013 6:23 PM, Eisboch wrote:
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. Bull****.. He attacks religion when Tim is here to hurt Tim... He does motorcycles to hurt me, guns John..... Everything he says is to hurt someone back... Tim left, he let off the religion, I leave he will never trash a motorbike again....But you can see it your way. Personally I think you take his crap too seriously, seriously enough to spend time and energy discussing something with someone whos only point of view is to start an argument... or **** with someone... |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/7/2013 7:00 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:02:36 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. Who the **** is D'Plume? Wherever she is she obviously got it right about you. You were the plum, before that loogie, before that basskisser.... you still are not fooling anybody... |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/8/13 1:43 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/7/2013 6:23 PM, Eisboch wrote: "JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. Bull****.. He attacks religion when Tim is here to hurt Tim... He does motorcycles to hurt me, guns John..... Everything he says is to hurt someone back... Tim left, he let off the religion, I leave he will never trash a motorbike again....But you can see it your way. Personally I think you take his crap too seriously, seriously enough to spend time and energy discussing something with someone whos only point of view is to start an argument... or **** with someone... You're just so wrong about everything, the only conclusion can be that your psychosis permeates every thought that bounces around your brain. I don't have any problem with Tim discussing he religious beliefs. I do draw the line, though, when someone tries to push his or her religious beliefs onto the general public through legislation. As far as I know, Tim doesn't do that. I don't recall "trashing" motorbikes, and since you told us your kid was *not* a professional racer, I don't think I have mentioned her in a racing or actually any other context. John Herring is a racist asshole and deserves whatever grief he gets in open discussion boards. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/8/13 1:44 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/7/2013 7:00 PM, Urin Asshole wrote: On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:02:36 -0400, Wayne B wrote: On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:29:53 -0700, Urin Asshole wrote: The US is in debt up to its ears. It would take us 5 years or more to get out of debt if we spent all federal revenue on paying off the federal debt. Are you willing to suffer the chaos. As I said, you're no economist... just an idiot. ==== "You're an idiot" - Nom D'Plume's favorite tag line in a losing argument. Good grief. "She(?) is back, and still chasing her(?) logical tail with a new handle. Why does this group attract so many flys? Does Harry draw them in just like flys on sh*t ? Just a guess. Who the **** is D'Plume? Wherever she is she obviously got it right about you. You were the plum, before that loogie, before that basskisser.... you still are not fooling anybody... Any of my cats could fool you. They have higher IQ's than you, and they're not psychotic. |
Social Security and Libertarians
The only thing Harry is guilty of is exposing your endless faults, lies and general insanity.
Most would call that a community service. |
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 18:23:16 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. If you notice, the only people he personally "trashes" are those who either initiate or return the favor. Tit for Tat. You do it. I do it sometimes, but I try not to make it mean spirited or personal. If I can, I try to inject some humor, but not always with good results. Overall, I've been able to carry on reasonable and civil discussions with Harry over the years even though we quite often see things in different ways. I have a very good friend .... a retired lawyer .... who is so far to the left that he makes Harry sound like Barry Goldwater. His practice consisted mostly of workmans' comp lawsuits and in representing unions in both contract negotiations and lawsuits. I see this lawyer friend at least twice a week and we often "get it on" discussing politics, unions and the state of the world. In the end, we still remain friends and often crack a few jokes about each other's positions on things. You just shouldn't take this stuff so seriously. It's a newsgroup for cripe's sake. I agree. I think Harry is an inspiration to all of us. He exudes knowledge on a tremendous range of subjects, has had experiences most of us can only dream of, and, most enjoyably, unselfishly shares his knowledge with us. His expertise in the areas of boats, guns, cameras, politics, judgment of men, organized religion, generators, barn construction, computers, writing, and owls is simply admirable. He is to be emulated. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand. |
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
|
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/8/2013 1:43 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 4/7/2013 6:23 PM, Eisboch wrote: "JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. Bull****.. He attacks religion when Tim is here to hurt Tim... He does motorcycles to hurt me, guns John..... Everything he says is to hurt someone back... Tim left, he let off the religion, I leave he will never trash a motorbike again....But you can see it your way. Personally I think you take his crap too seriously, seriously enough to spend time and energy discussing something with someone whos only point of view is to start an argument... or **** with someone... Eisboch usually presents valid thoughtful arguments but in this case I think he misjudges Harry and you have made valid observations. |
Social Security and Libertarians
On 4/8/2013 9:39 AM, Hank© wrote:
On 4/8/2013 1:43 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 4/7/2013 6:23 PM, Eisboch wrote: "JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message ... On 4/7/2013 5:08 PM, Eisboch wrote: Harry, I've known you and your writing via rec.boats for a long time. Since 1995 in fact. I still get a kick out of your interpretation of what some people say and your stereotyping of what makes them tick. But, that's you. You do understand that everything he says is an attempt to really hurt someones feelings or cause emotional pain... Doesn't matter what the subject is. When Tim was here he trashes his belief system, for me it's my kids, for you it's your money and hard work ethic... Doesn't really matter, just look at the gun issue. He says hateful things about anybody else who has a gun but he of course is a model citizen... He just wants to hurt somebody and will turn on anybody who is still here to read his posts.... -------------------------------------------- Nope, I don't agree. First of all, Harry has never "trashed" me for any success I may have had in life. To the contrary, I think he respects hard work and perseverance by anyone. I don't think he has "trashed" Tim personally either. He may trash organized religion per se, but that's his right. I think Harry has respect for Tim, even though they may disagree. As for the gun issue, he has his beliefs and frankly, I tend to agree with him. There's nothing wrong with arguing a case. Bull****.. He attacks religion when Tim is here to hurt Tim... He does motorcycles to hurt me, guns John..... Everything he says is to hurt someone back... Tim left, he let off the religion, I leave he will never trash a motorbike again....But you can see it your way. Personally I think you take his crap too seriously, seriously enough to spend time and energy discussing something with someone whos only point of view is to start an argument... or **** with someone... Eisboch usually presents valid thoughtful arguments but in this case I think he misjudges Harry and you have made valid observations. Thanks, hate arguing with Dick... Because I know what he is, how he got there and how generous he is to those around him including strangers. I like math, math is constant... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:45 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com