"BAR" wrote in message
...
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
As to Obama saying he is going to cut taxes for 95% of the
people.
Impossible. Only 45% pay income tax in the first place.
You just said a mouthful.

He's really describing another form of government, namely
Socialism.

All his speeches, writings and comments drip of the signals. If he
is
elected and the Dems truly get control of the Congress, we are in
for
some
major "Changes".

Eisboch
I hope so. Anything would be better than the bull**** we have seen
for
the
last 8 years that, evidently, dumbasses like you have supported. In
case
you
have been blindered by the propaganda, Bush has made every effort to
make
our republic into a dictatorship. Try your fear tactics somewhere
else.
I guess personal responsibility and self sufficiency is lost on a
majority of the US population. Soft and lazy and always with your
hand
out for another crumb from the government.
I totally disagree. If you looked at the real numbers spent on social
welfare, it amounts to 3 B2 bombers.
a


href="http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/72/How-Much-Does-Nation-Spend-on-Wel
fare.html"How
Much Does the Nation Spend on Welfare? - Public Aid, State Expenditures
For Social Welfare, Private Welfare Expenditures, Welfare-reform
Legislation/a

You only believe what you wrote because people with hate agendas are
trying
to point the finger at someone so you have a place to focus your anger
instead of realizing the government is the one ripping YOU off. How
much
of
your tax money goes to feeding kids every month? What would you think?
50
cents? A dollar? And you think that is an issue? Our "great" country
has
been brought to its knees by whom? Poor people? Meanwhile, the Iraqi
government has a surplus of cash, yet we are still footing the bill
for
this
"war".
I would rather that my money only go to constitutionally mandated
expenditures.

Thankfully, selfish pricks like you are a minority in this country. Get
over
yourself.

You are free to give your money to any one or any organization you
choose. Why won't you extend me the same courtesy?

You have it. Don't put words in my mouth. I am just so tired of
self-absorbed assholes like you who had their personalities beaten out of
them as children. That whole, "I have mine, **** everyone else" attitude is
old. What happened to you? What was taken from you as a child that you are
so paranoid now?

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Sep 14, 2:56 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:

Actually a lot of our problems are because Chairman Greenspan of the Fed
screwed the pooch. Maybe 20 years ago, he was good but the last 10 or so of
his reign was a disaster. Lets the Dot.bomb debacle get going, and then in
the final year of Clinton's term to stop an economic complete meltdown from
the dot.bomb disaster, freed up way too much easy money, with few controls
giving us the subprime mortgage disaster. Did not matter who was POTUS with
the Fed's money actions, we were going to be Boom and Bust. While at the
same time, Congress, Dem and Repub controlled have overspent. Baseline
budgeting with a built in 13% growth factor is criminal. If you cut a
budget 8% the program still gets 5% more money. You budget like that in
your life? Only thing that gave the Clinton years a semi balanced budget,
was a huge influx of money from the taxes on options. The Fed's could not
raise spending fast enough to use it all. Calif, raised spending as fast as
it came in and set it so the spending was required at that level. I.D. Ten
error. (ID 10 T) The next President we elect should be for cutting excess
spending, and cutting size of government. And Obama is for making the the
Government even more of a caretaker of the people. Socialism by definition.

Calif Bill wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Sep 14, 2:56 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
Actually a lot of our problems are because Chairman Greenspan of the Fed
screwed the pooch. Maybe 20 years ago, he was good but the last 10 or so of
his reign was a disaster. Lets the Dot.bomb debacle get going, and then in
the final year of Clinton's term to stop an economic complete meltdown from
the dot.bomb disaster, freed up way too much easy money, with few controls
giving us the subprime mortgage disaster. Did not matter who was POTUS with
the Fed's money actions, we were going to be Boom and Bust. While at the
same time, Congress, Dem and Repub controlled have overspent. Baseline
budgeting with a built in 13% growth factor is criminal. If you cut a
budget 8% the program still gets 5% more money. You budget like that in
your life? Only thing that gave the Clinton years a semi balanced budget,
was a huge influx of money from the taxes on options. The Fed's could not
raise spending fast enough to use it all. Calif, raised spending as fast as
it came in and set it so the spending was required at that level. I.D. Ten
error. (ID 10 T) The next President we elect should be for cutting excess
spending, and cutting size of government. And Obama is for making the the
Government even more of a caretaker of the people. Socialism by definition.



Actually, it isn't. But you wouldn't know that.

Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
As to Obama saying he is going to cut taxes for 95% of the
people.
Impossible. Only 45% pay income tax in the first place.
You just said a mouthful.

He's really describing another form of government, namely
Socialism.
All his speeches, writings and comments drip of the signals. If he
is
elected and the Dems truly get control of the Congress, we are in
for
some
major "Changes".

Eisboch
I hope so. Anything would be better than the bull**** we have seen
for
the
last 8 years that, evidently, dumbasses like you have supported. In
case
you
have been blindered by the propaganda, Bush has made every effort to
make
our republic into a dictatorship. Try your fear tactics somewhere
else.
I guess personal responsibility and self sufficiency is lost on a
majority of the US population. Soft and lazy and always with your
hand
out for another crumb from the government.
I totally disagree. If you looked at the real numbers spent on social
welfare, it amounts to 3 B2 bombers.
a

href="http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/72/How-Much-Does-Nation-Spend-on-Wel
fare.html"How
Much Does the Nation Spend on Welfare? - Public Aid, State Expenditures
For Social Welfare, Private Welfare Expenditures, Welfare-reform
Legislation/a

You only believe what you wrote because people with hate agendas are
trying
to point the finger at someone so you have a place to focus your anger
instead of realizing the government is the one ripping YOU off. How
much
of
your tax money goes to feeding kids every month? What would you think?
50
cents? A dollar? And you think that is an issue? Our "great" country
has
been brought to its knees by whom? Poor people? Meanwhile, the Iraqi
government has a surplus of cash, yet we are still footing the bill
for
this
"war".
I would rather that my money only go to constitutionally mandated
expenditures.
Thankfully, selfish pricks like you are a minority in this country. Get
over
yourself.
You are free to give your money to any one or any organization you
choose. Why won't you extend me the same courtesy?

You have it. Don't put words in my mouth. I am just so tired of
self-absorbed assholes like you who had their personalities beaten out of
them as children. That whole, "I have mine, **** everyone else" attitude is
old. What happened to you? What was taken from you as a child that you are
so paranoid now?

Who ****ed in your cornflakes this morning.

You need to get off your ass and help yourself and stop relying upon
everyone else to do everything for you.

On Sep 14, 4:57*pm, "Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall, Marquies of
Anglesea, Sir Reginald P. Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. "
wrote:
wf3h wrote:

then, pray tell, why are virtually no students admitted to ivy league
schools from working class families? what do you do with places like
findlay, ohio, or pittsburgh that are wiped out by corporate
abandoment?

I hate to tell you, but Ivy League schools are FULL of middle class
families.

really? care to prove it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/op...e%20University

In 2004, Lawrence Summers, then Harvard’s president, pointed out that
three-fourths of the students at selective colleges come from the top
income quartile and only 9 percent from the bottom two quartiles
combined.


*My father, definitely working class went to Yale, myself and
my son are definitely middle class graduated from Columbia. *Since the
60's, Ivy League schools don't discriminate due to income,

except, of course, that's not what the evidence shows. your elevated
and holy opinion notwithstanding.

you seem to agree with mccain that $5M is middle class

and the
economic demographics of an Ivy League school represent the economic
demographics of America. *Ivy League schools will actually give working
and poor students academic considerations they don't give to middle
class and above students to make sure they do have a balanced class.
Sure there are many wealthy at the schools, but the middle class,
working class and below are the majority of those attending Ivy League
today. * *Starting 2 years after my son started school, all admitting
freshman whose family income was below $75,000 got a 100% scholarship.

20 years ago when I took my niece on a tour of princeton, the guide
said that only 3% of students came from working class families. seems
lawrence summers agrees.

you, of course, with your mcbush view of the world, parrot the rush
limbaugh/fox news view of the world



Your understanding of Ivy League schools is a complete as your
understanding of world economics.

golly. you're right. all i have are the facts

you have truthiness.

On Sep 14, 7:11*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:


*The next President we elect should be for cutting excess
spending, and cutting size of government. *And Obama is for making the the
Government even more of a caretaker of the people. *Socialism by definition.

says the ardent socialist....who says screw the middle class, it's the
RICH who deserve to be taken care of by the govt.

On Sep 14, 6:12*pm, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 06:16:40 -0700, wf3h wrote:
On Sep 14, 12:03*am, Curly Surmudgeon wrote:

Precisely, everyone should pay an equal tax.

'equal' does not necessarily mean 'fair'. you were right the 1st time:
everyone should *pay a fair tax

*Any disparity, any
exclusion, deduction, exemption, credit, or dependency allowance creates
special interests and an inequity.

that's true. and we, as a society, have decided that things like raising
kinds, health insurance, having a viable middle class, are values that we
want to promote via having them as special interests. and that is fair.

Via legalized theft. *Do not expect the victim to remain passively silent.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Roy Blankenship" wrote in message
m...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
As to Obama saying he is going to cut taxes for 95% of the
people.
Impossible. Only 45% pay income tax in the first place.
You just said a mouthful.

He's really describing another form of government, namely
Socialism.

All his speeches, writings and comments drip of the signals. If
he
is
elected and the Dems truly get control of the Congress, we are in
for
some
major "Changes".

Eisboch
I hope so. Anything would be better than the bull**** we have seen
for
the
last 8 years that, evidently, dumbasses like you have supported. In
case
you
have been blindered by the propaganda, Bush has made every effort
to
make
our republic into a dictatorship. Try your fear tactics somewhere
else.
I guess personal responsibility and self sufficiency is lost on a
majority of the US population. Soft and lazy and always with your
hand
out for another crumb from the government.

I totally disagree. If you looked at the real numbers spent on social
welfare, it amounts to 3 B2 bombers.
a


href="http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/72/How-Much-Does-Nation-Spend-on-Wel
fare.html"How
Much Does the Nation Spend on Welfare? - Public Aid, State Expenditures
For Social Welfare, Private Welfare Expenditures, Welfare-reform
Legislation/a

You only believe what you wrote because people with hate agendas are
trying
to point the finger at someone so you have a place to focus your
anger
instead of realizing the government is the one ripping YOU off. How
much
of
your tax money goes to feeding kids every month? What would you
think?
50
cents? A dollar? And you think that is an issue? Our "great" country
has
been brought to its knees by whom? Poor people? Meanwhile, the Iraqi
government has a surplus of cash, yet we are still footing the bill
for
this
"war".

I would rather that my money only go to constitutionally mandated
expenditures.

Thankfully, selfish pricks like you are a minority in this country. Get
over
yourself.


He can't.
Ask Bertie (BAR) how much money he makes. He'll boast & brag about that
at
the drop of a hat.


Wow. Thank you for that...

I manufacture a product and have a lot of known clients. One guy was testing
my product and his tech called me and said he wanted it but was only willing
to pay XXX dollars for it. I said, "I have a problem with people who have
$100 million dollars and want to grind the little guy. Bring it back".

How much is enough? What happens to people that their egos are never
satiated? More! More! More!

Peter Skelton wrote:

:On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 13:15:13 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote:
:
:Peter Skelton wrote:
:
::On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 08:55:18 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote:
::
::Peter Skelton wrote:
::
:::On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 22:00:23 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote:
:::
:::Taxes based on income should be flat. They distort the economy the
:::least that way and allow it to function closer to its optimum levels.
:::
:::
:::That, of course, is a religious statement, devoid of proof and
:::unprovable.
:::
::
::No, Peter, that is a basic fact, as you would know if you knew
::anything at all about Economics.
::
::Another religious statement, followed by a flat lie. If you have
::a proof, show it.
::
:
:No 'religious' statement and no lie.
:
:Where and when did you get your degree in economics, Peter?
:
:So now you're attempting to appeal to expertisde gained in your
:time in the seminary? Religious statement followed by lie, as I
:said.
:

First time I ever heard anyone call CU Boulder a "seminary". So far
the only lies here seem to have Peter tracks on them.

:
:One can find economists who agree with Fred on this, and others
:who don't. It is trivial to prove that, in a very low income
:society, a flat tax doesn't work. It's also not hard to prove
:that, in a very high income society, it's the best. As there is
:no proven definition for high or low income in the context of
:these theories, and no way to prove such a definition belief in
:their application to the US is religious, not scientific.
:

Peter, as usual, is confused. He appears to be trapped in normative
economics, which is not what is being discussed. The statement was
that a flat tax is LESS DISTORTIVE of the economy, leading to
generally more optimal economic market choices. This is regardless of
income of the society. Certainly lower taxes (of any kind) are less
distortive than higher taxes, but that's rather irrelevant to the
discussion.

This is not opinion and you're not going to find any competent
economists who disagree with it. Note that the statement being made
is not the same as saying it is 'best'. That is a normative judgment.
It is also, apparently, how, in his ignorance of the subject, Peter is
interpreting the actual statement being made.

--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
Roy Blankenship wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
As to Obama saying he is going to cut taxes for 95% of the
people.
Impossible. Only 45% pay income tax in the first place.
You just said a mouthful.

He's really describing another form of government, namely
Socialism.
All his speeches, writings and comments drip of the signals. If
he
is
elected and the Dems truly get control of the Congress, we are in
for
some
major "Changes".

Eisboch
I hope so. Anything would be better than the bull**** we have seen
for
the
last 8 years that, evidently, dumbasses like you have supported.
In
case
you
have been blindered by the propaganda, Bush has made every effort
to
make
our republic into a dictatorship. Try your fear tactics somewhere
else.
I guess personal responsibility and self sufficiency is lost on a
majority of the US population. Soft and lazy and always with your
hand
out for another crumb from the government.
I totally disagree. If you looked at the real numbers spent on
social
welfare, it amounts to 3 B2 bombers.
a


href="http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/72/How-Much-Does-Nation-Spend-on-Wel
fare.html"How
Much Does the Nation Spend on Welfare? - Public Aid, State
Expenditures
For Social Welfare, Private Welfare Expenditures, Welfare-reform
Legislation/a

You only believe what you wrote because people with hate agendas are
trying
to point the finger at someone so you have a place to focus your
anger
instead of realizing the government is the one ripping YOU off. How
much
of
your tax money goes to feeding kids every month? What would you
think?
50
cents? A dollar? And you think that is an issue? Our "great"
country
has
been brought to its knees by whom? Poor people? Meanwhile, the Iraqi
government has a surplus of cash, yet we are still footing the bill
for
this
"war".
I would rather that my money only go to constitutionally mandated
expenditures.
Thankfully, selfish pricks like you are a minority in this country.
Get
over
yourself.
You are free to give your money to any one or any organization you
choose. Why won't you extend me the same courtesy?

You have it. Don't put words in my mouth. I am just so tired of
self-absorbed assholes like you who had their personalities beaten out
of
them as children. That whole, "I have mine, **** everyone else" attitude
is
old. What happened to you? What was taken from you as a child that you
are
so paranoid now?

Who ****ed in your cornflakes this morning.

You need to get off your ass and help yourself and stop relying upon
everyone else to do everything for you.

What a predictable answer. I have my own company, jerkoff, I work 7 days
week and have for years because I LOVE IT. Sometimes it gets tiresome being
the last word, but the prospect of having to tolerate someone like you as a
boss keeps me at it.

What a buffoon. Wrong on every count.