Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Your argument that somehow I receive more direct, or indirect (I'll
allow you that) benefits than others is silly and I've proved it.

No, you haven't "proved" anything other than that you are unable to
consider what the gov't does and what it costs.

Here's the deal- the fed, state & local gov't all do a *huge* number of
things. Some are beneficial to just a few (the SEC), some benefit all
(the EPA), some waffle back & forth, some don't do anything.

Because a very small part of the gov't gives money to poor people, and
you're not poor, you assume that the whole assembly is useless,
wasteful, and you think your share of the cost is unfair.

Pardon me for being blunt, but that's stupid & short sighted. However,
let me congratulate you on being right in style... stupid & short
sighted is the new way to be cool.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Your argument that somehow I receive more direct, or indirect (I'll
allow you that) benefits than others is silly and I've proved it.

No, you haven't "proved" anything other than that you are unable to
consider what the gov't does and what it costs.

Here's the deal- the fed, state & local gov't all do a *huge* number of
things. Some are beneficial to just a few (the SEC), some benefit all (the
EPA), some waffle back & forth, some don't do anything.

Because a very small part of the gov't gives money to poor people, and
you're not poor, you assume that the whole assembly is useless, wasteful,
and you think your share of the cost is unfair.

Pardon me for being blunt, but that's stupid & short sighted. However, let
me congratulate you on being right in style... stupid & short sighted is
the new way to be cool.

DSK


Thought I would give you a second chance but I see that you are just as
obnoxious as ever....back to the bozo bin you go.

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:51:16 -0500, DSK wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Your argument that somehow I receive more direct, or indirect (I'll
allow you that) benefits than others is silly and I've proved it.

No, you haven't "proved" anything other than that you are unable to
consider what the gov't does and what it costs.

Here's the deal- the fed, state & local gov't all do a *huge* number of
things. Some are beneficial to just a few (the SEC), some benefit all
(the EPA), some waffle back & forth, some don't do anything.

Because a very small part of the gov't gives money to poor people, and
you're not poor, you assume that the whole assembly is useless,
wasteful, and you think your share of the cost is unfair.

Pardon me for being blunt, but that's stupid & short sighted. However,
let me congratulate you on being right in style... stupid & short
sighted is the new way to be cool.

Clearly you are the superior intellect here.

Later,

Tom