From: mikey4 on

"John A." <john(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news:mplab5tfo2a70shou0keppqfqi0e9b2amm(a)4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:22:41 -0500, "mikey4" <lakediver(a)dd..net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>news:4ab5180c$0$1630$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>> Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>>><stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:h916ml$lne$3(a)news.albasani.net...
>>>
>>>>> Well I was pissed watching GWB spending BILLIONS on a war while giving
>>>>> MASSIVE tax breaks to the wealthy. I was pissed watching him do
>>>>> NOTHING
>>>>> other than watching the economy fail. Were you? Some of us didn't just
>>>>> "wake up" because a republican wasn't in the white house. If Obama had
>>>>> been handed a healthy country and done this, I'd be pissed right there
>>>>> with ya, but that isn't what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephanie
>>>>I still don't understand about these, "massive tax cuts to the wealthy".
>>>>the
>>>>last time I checked, the more money you make, the greater percentage you
>>>>have to pay, .....that's what the tax tables in the form 1040 tell
>>>>me.....
>>>
>>> That's the sort of ignorant thinking that gets rightards into trouble.
>>>
>>> There are many ways the wealthy get to pay lower taxes. Her's one:
>>> Long-term capital gains and dividens aren't taxed as regular income.
>>> It's a flat 15% even before you find any deductions. So, if you own a
>>> ton of stock that pays you $250/yr in dividends then you pay no more
>>> than 15% of that as income tax. If you are given $100,000,000 in
>>> stock by the company and you sell it a year later, you pay 15%.
>>>
>>> --
>>Mean while dip sh.t, the liberal government you love so much just keeps
>>right on spending.
>
> Not as much as the conservative government you love, though, yet
> somehow we in this country get more out of what the liberals spend
> money on.

I have little to no love or most of the congress or senate. As for the
amount of money being thrown at the problems that may or may not need it, we
should know if there is a real payoff in a few years.









From: mikey4 on

"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4ab55888$0$1607$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>
>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>news:4ab55513$0$1607$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:4ab51751$0$1630$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>>>>><stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> mikey4 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> People are pissed because "they" have finely woke up to the fact
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> "government" is out of control and has been for a very long time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well I was pissed watching GWB spending BILLIONS on a war while
>>>>>>>>> giving
>>>>>>>>> MASSIVE tax breaks to the wealthy. I was pissed watching him do
>>>>>>>>> NOTHING
>>>>>>>>> other than watching the economy fail. Were you? Some of us didn't
>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>>>> "wake up" because a republican wasn't in the white house. If Obama
>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> been handed a healthy country and done this, I'd be pissed right
>>>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>> with ya, but that isn't what happened.
>>>>>>>>> Stephanie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My point here Stephanie is that this entire mess is a result of
>>>>>>>>*both*
>>>>>>>>parties screwing the pooch for *years and years and years*.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is a fundamental policy of republicans to cut taxes for the rich
>>>>>>> and reduce or eliminate government regulation while allowing
>>>>>>> corporations free reign. Those policies cause this current economic
>>>>>>> climate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lack of regulation allowed the finanicial collapse. Cutting taxes
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> the rich left the middle class further in debt. Free reign for
>>>>>>> corporations allowed them to cut worker salaries in order to give
>>>>>>> countless millions to execs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And when the middle class doesn't have money to spend, and when the
>>>>>>> financial industry collapses, and when the rich ship their money out
>>>>>>> of the country, then you get an economy that's in the toilet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>Here we go with rays typical response. There was no lack of
>>>>>>regulation
>>>>>>ray,
>>>>>>you really need to read up on the SEC and how it came about.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the stupid: There were insufficient regulations to control the
>>>>> sort of financial instruments that led to the collapse.
>>>>>
>>>>For the putz, next time say so.
>>>
>>> Obviously I need to dumb it down to the 4th grade level for you.
>>>
>>You made a blanket statement and when I proved you wrong
>
> And there's the classic whine of the idiot. If mikey is stupid then
> it MUST be somebody else's fault for not dumbing it down to his level.
>
> --
there ya go again


From: Bill Graham on

"Rol_Lei Nut" <Speleo_Karstlenscap(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7hk75eF2t5rb9U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Bill Graham wrote:
>
>> Nonsense! - this is an unenforceable law....Nobody knows what I have in
>> my pocket, and they aren't likely to ever know. I have been carrying a
>> gun all of my adult life, and I have always refused to get a permit for
>> it. Why? Because such permits are unconstitutional, and therefore
>> illegal. I even took one to Europe with me back in the late 1980's. And
>> carried it all over there, too. Sure, I could have been busted, but it is
>> better to be alive and on trial for murder than it is to be dead, while
>> someone else is on trial for your murder. Or, as someone said once,
>> "Better the man catches you with it, than the boy catches you without
>> it."
>
> Bill,
>
> However much I (very)-(strongly)-(extremely)-(emphatically) disagree with
> you on almost anything, I still wouldn't be happy if the debate ended
> because you got arrested for *any* of the several crimes you are *publicly
> confessing to* on an *international public forum*!!!!
>
> Logic isn't your strongest quality, but do try to stay out of jail for a
> good part of the rest of your life (and, no, you wouldn't be a *martyr*
> for your "cause"). You might not realize it, but most of you actions and
> reasonings are quite silly and really not worth it.
>
I am 74, and quite healthy, and one of the chief reasons for that is that I
carried a gun for over 50 years. This is a fact, and knowing and telling the
truth has always been one of my strong points....Why would I lie about
something that is so logical and reasonable, as well as being very
constitutional? It says right there, in black and white: "The right of the
people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I know what that means,
and I simply took advantage of it, and I want the whole world to know it.

From: Bill Graham on

"John A." <john(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news:2it9b5haf2k7muslnua4oj9a2kbkkrvjh6(a)4ax.com...
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 01:05:44 -0700, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>><stephe_k(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:h916ml$lne$3(a)news.albasani.net...
>>> mikey4 wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> People are pissed because "they" have finely woke up to the fact that
>>>> the
>>>> "government" is out of control and has been for a very long time.
>>>
>>> Well I was pissed watching GWB spending BILLIONS on a war while giving
>>> MASSIVE tax breaks to the wealthy. I was pissed watching him do NOTHING
>>> other than watching the economy fail. Were you? Some of us didn't just
>>> "wake up" because a republican wasn't in the white house. If Obama had
>>> been handed a healthy country and done this, I'd be pissed right there
>>> with ya, but that isn't what happened.
>>>
>>> Stephanie
>>I still don't understand about these, "massive tax cuts to the wealthy".
>>the
>>last time I checked, the more money you make, the greater percentage you
>>have to pay, .....that's what the tax tables in the form 1040 tell me.....
>
> The rates were reduced. What's to understand?

THE MORE YOU MAKE THE GREATER PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME THAT YOU HAVE TO
PAY. That's regressive taxation in anyone's book. When the government
protects a high income person, does their Army work harder for them? - No.
but still, they not only pay more in taxes....They pay a GREATER PERCENTAGE
OF THEIR INCOME. What's so hard about that to understand?

From: Bill Graham on

"Rol_Lei Nut" <Speleo_Karstlenscap(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7hkfjnF2q39ojU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Bill Graham wrote:
>> If I were a professional house breaker, I would go to some country where
>> no one is allowed to own a gun. That's just good common sense.
>
> Unfortunately for you, those are the countries where neighbours are
> friendly and look out for each other....

Well, it's a good thing they do, because its not logical to keep the people
from keeping guns in their homes for their own protection. Suppose, for
example they are invaded by a foreign army? How will they protect themselves
when the brown-shirts come a bangin' at the door? I can tell you this. When
that happens (should it ever happen) here in the US, they will NEVER WIN.
They might do it some other way....With poison gas, or a neutron bomb, or
some other WMD, but they will never be able to do it on a man-to-man basis.
There just aren't enough soldiers in the entire world.