[Guest]

This bill cuts:

1. Child Support Enforcement
2. Medicaid
3. Medicare
4. Student Aid
5. Food Stamps
and more!

Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
for multiple felony violations.

Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
provisions remain intact.

Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).

 

[Guest]

On 21 Dec 2005 08:10:21 -0800, "Learning Richard"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>This bill cuts:
>
>1. Child Support Enforcement
>2. Medicaid
>3. Medicare
>4. Student Aid
>5. Food Stamps
>and more!
>
>Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
>broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
>for multiple felony violations.
>
>Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
>provisions remain intact.
>
>Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
>again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
>the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).

and ...

"President Bush said Saturday he personally has authorized a secret
eavesdropping program in the U.S. more than 30 times since the Sept.
11 attacks."
-- Associated Press, 12/18/05


"Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap,
it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed,
by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re
talking about getting a court order before we do so."
-- President Bush, 4/20/04 in a RECORDED news conference.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/20/bush-caught-on-tape/

Watch the neocons say the tape was doctored or somehow what he said
wasn't what he meant.

--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Learning Richard wrote:

> This bill cuts:
>
> 1. Child Support Enforcement
> 2. Medicaid
> 3. Medicare
> 4. Student Aid
> 5. Food Stamps
> and more!
>
> Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
> broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
> for multiple felony violations.
>
> Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
> provisions remain intact.
>
> Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
> again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
> the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).
>

I was always interested in the whole phrase "working" families. The
fact remains, if you pay little in taxes the same percentage benefits
you with less of a return. Interesting that the animal kingdom
understands well what the liberals have not, making another case against
evolution: If you keep throwing a dog a bone for certain behavior, they
keep repeating that behavior. Amazing how many humans repeat the same
behavior.

The Bible teaches self-responsibility, like you should work to eat in
addition to being kind to the poor. Difference is, the government does
few things well, and learning who and how to give it out is impossible
for them. The church can do this better, on an individual basis.
Difference is, they can deal with a man or woman's spirit. However, if
the athiests left-wing religious want to become a charity to help out
others, as they don't want to be exposed to another opinion (Christian),
they can.

 

[Guest]

Don't bother pointing out the concept of personal responsibility to
Richard, I've already tried. He's still counting on Social Security,
but undoubtedly will blame George Bush 30 years hence when his SS check
isn't enough to buy a decent meal.

 

[Guest]

Sliderbot wrote:
> Learning Richard wrote:
>
> > This bill cuts:
> >
> > 1. Child Support Enforcement
> > 2. Medicaid
> > 3. Medicare
> > 4. Student Aid
> > 5. Food Stamps
> > and more!
> >
> > Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
> > broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
> > for multiple felony violations.
> >
> > Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
> > provisions remain intact.
> >
> > Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
> > again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
> > the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).
> >
>
> I was always interested in the whole phrase "working" families.

Me too.

> The
> fact remains, if you pay little in taxes the same percentage benefits
> you with less of a return.

The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I know,
society has NEVER worked that way... America is the closest we've
gotten thus far, which explains why the USA is the world's only
remaining superpower.

Not everyone chooses the path of sound investments and savings, for
reasons all their own. You are a fool to place such people in the
focus of your own eyes only.

> Interesting that the animal kingdom
> understands well what the liberals have not, making another case against
> evolution:

I don't find that interesting at all. Human beings have taken a
different course from most of the rest of the animal kingdom.

Indeed, those animals we think of as being of "higher intelligence"
tend to have complex, sophisticated social structures where the weak
are taken care of, and equitable return for work is the rule rather
than the exception.

Hitler would've never made it as a gorilla, is one novel conclusion one
can draw from this.

> If you keep throwing a dog a bone for certain behavior, they
> keep repeating that behavior. Amazing how many humans repeat the same
> behavior.

Again, humans are not dogs. Apples and oranges, if you will (though
I'm sure you will not).

>
> The Bible teaches self-responsibility, like you should work to eat in

Evolution, then the Bible? Are you familiar with Himmler's views on
Christianity? Your views sound markedly similar.

> addition to being kind to the poor. Difference is, the government does
> few things well, and learning who and how to give it out is impossible
> for them. The church can do this better, on an individual basis.

The same Church that espouses "Intelligent Design" as a sound
scientific theory? Or do you speak of a different Church?


> Difference is, they can deal with a man or woman's spirit. However, if
> the athiests left-wing religious want to become a charity to help out

Are all left-wingers athiest? Are all those who hold different views
left-wingers? Are you always quite so mentally lazy?

> others, as they don't want to be exposed to another opinion (Christian),
> they can.

You know little about Christianity. Then again, I know little about it
as well.

 

[Guest]

Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
<[email protected]> wrote:

> The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
> equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
> know, society has NEVER worked that way...

Why is this a fact?

This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
society than you put into it? Why should people bother working at all
if they can depend on handouts from government. People work hard and
harder to better their own place in society and to enrich their
family's lifestyle. If you would like society to give you more then go
move to France or Germany where people with your mentality are
prevalent. In America we practice Capitalism which has been proven to
be the most successful type of economics ever derived.

--
"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the
support of Paul." ~ George Bernard Shaw

 

[Guest]

badgolferman wrote:
> Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
> > equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
> > know, society has NEVER worked that way...
>
> Why is this a fact?
>
> This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
> society than you put into it?

More?? No, that's how it works NOW. The 5% at the top gets MUCH MORE
from society than they put into it. Those at the bottom get MUCH LESS
from society than they put into it. And, those at the TOP expect those
of us in the MIDDLE to foot the bill for those at the BOTTOM and for
those at the TOP. Hence my big ass tax bill in spite of the Senate
cutting taxes for the RICH.

You get it now? I know its a bit confusing. Try to not think about
the Rove/Limbaugh sound bytes for a second and wrap your head around
the above.

 

[Guest]

"Learning Richard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> badgolferman wrote:
>> Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
>> > equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
>> > know, society has NEVER worked that way...
>>
>> Why is this a fact?
>>
>> This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
>> society than you put into it?
>
> More?? No, that's how it works NOW. The 5% at the top gets MUCH MORE
> from society than they put into it. Those at the bottom get MUCH LESS
> from society than they put into it. And, those at the TOP expect those
> of us in the MIDDLE to foot the bill for those at the BOTTOM and for
> those at the TOP. Hence my big ass tax bill in spite of the Senate
> cutting taxes for the RICH.
>
> You get it now? I know its a bit confusing. Try to not think about
> the Rove/Limbaugh sound bytes for a second and wrap your head around
> the above.
>

What do the top 5% get more from society than the put into it? I have busted
my ass to go through college, by first being in the Military - cuz my
parents could not afford school. I then went to go get my masters. Yes, I
have a 6 figure salary, but I have busted my ass to get to this point, and
yes I vote for whoever doesn't raise taxes.

I don't get jack shit from society. I get a paycheck for a job that I do.

 

[Guest]

Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:52:19 PM,
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
> badgolferman wrote:
> > Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
> > > equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
> > > know, society has NEVER worked that way...
> >
> > Why is this a fact?
> >
> > This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
> > society than you put into it?
>
> More?? No, that's how it works NOW. The 5% at the top gets MUCH MORE
> from society than they put into it. Those at the bottom get MUCH LESS
> from society than they put into it. And, those at the TOP expect
> those of us in the MIDDLE to foot the bill for those at the BOTTOM
> and for those at the TOP. Hence my big ass tax bill in spite of the
> Senate cutting taxes for the RICH.
>
> You get it now? I know its a bit confusing. Try to not think about
> the Rove/Limbaugh sound bytes for a second and wrap your head around
> the above.

There is something definitely wrong with your thinking. The rich pay
way more taxes to the government than the poor or middle class do.

The top 1% of income earners pay 34% of total taxes. The top 5% pay
54% of taxes. The top 10% pay 64% of taxes.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/03in05tr.xls

Your class envy is just as bad as Art's. With your cushy job in
Washington you probably make near 100K which is considered rich by the
government; you are not middle-class. This is probably why you think
you are paying too much taxes, you're in a higher tax bracket!

--
"Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially
denied." ~ Otto Von Bismark

 

[Guest]

Re: OT SENATE PASSES A WORKER FRIENDLY BUDGET BILL

More lies and left wing propaganda. There are NO cuts in the amount of
money the government will spend. What is being reduced is the amount of the
annual increases, built into government expenses, by $1 of every $1,000
spent That will help reduce the budget deficit that is so much of a
problem for those on the left, yet they voted against doing so.

History proves that ever time tax rates and capital gains taxes, the seed
corn of any economy that will produce new jobs, have been reduced it has
resulted in more income to the US treasury, not less. Japan does not tax
capital at all. Japan in fact offers a tax credit for capital earned in
other countries, that is returned to Japan. Even when it is earned as tax
free profits in other countries like the US. The recent US tax RATE cuts,
that went to every taxpayer in the US, is the engine that has been driving
the current robust economy since 9/11. Failing to make those reductions
permanent and reducing the budget will hurt the ever expanding income to the
treasury, further increasing the budget deficit and reducing the capital
that has been increasing the millions of new jobs for the so called working
man in the US.


mike hunt


"Learning Richard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> This bill cuts:
>
> 1. Child Support Enforcement
> 2. Medicaid
> 3. Medicare
> 4. Student Aid
> 5. Food Stamps
> and more!
>
> Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
> broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
> for multiple felony violations.
>
> Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
> provisions remain intact.
>
> Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
> again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
> the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).
>

 

[Guest]

Re: OT SENATE PASSES A WORKER FRIENDLY BUDGET BILL

Mike Hunter wrote:
> More lies and left wing propaganda. There are NO cuts in the amount of
> money the government will spend. What is being reduced is the amount of the
> annual increases, built into government expenses, by $1 of every $1,000
> spent That will help reduce the budget deficit that is so much of a
> problem for those on the left, yet they voted against doing so.

I usually try to ignore you "Mike Kunt", since you are so ridiculously
STUPID.

If the inflation index is 5%, and the Senate reduces entitlement
increases to 4%, who is losing then, you stupid racist lump of rotting
flesh?

 

[Guest]

badgolferman wrote:
> Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:52:19 PM,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > badgolferman wrote:
> > > Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
> > > > equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
> > > > know, society has NEVER worked that way...
> > >
> > > Why is this a fact?
> > >
> > > This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
> > > society than you put into it?
> >
> > More?? No, that's how it works NOW. The 5% at the top gets MUCH MORE
> > from society than they put into it. Those at the bottom get MUCH LESS
> > from society than they put into it. And, those at the TOP expect
> > those of us in the MIDDLE to foot the bill for those at the BOTTOM
> > and for those at the TOP. Hence my big ass tax bill in spite of the
> > Senate cutting taxes for the RICH.
> >
> > You get it now? I know its a bit confusing. Try to not think about
> > the Rove/Limbaugh sound bytes for a second and wrap your head around
> > the above.
>
> There is something definitely wrong with your thinking. The rich pay
> way more taxes to the government than the poor or middle class do.

As a percentage of their income? You mean to tell me that folks who
get 7 and 8 figure salaries actually deserve to pay such a paltry
pennance of their wealth?

>
> The top 1% of income earners pay 34% of total taxes. The top 5% pay
> 54% of taxes. The top 10% pay 64% of taxes.
> http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/03in05tr.xls

Point? You're still dealing in absolutes. Even though your numbers
appear to be relative, they are deceiving... they were calculated from
absolute inputs and therefore are misleading and flawed.

In fact (and I digress slightly), the middle class gives a much larger
percentage of their income to charity (I've hear 2.4%, whereas those
who make over 150k give about 0.8%).

The rich Neocons are lying to the middle class.

>
> Your class envy is just as bad as Art's. With your cushy job in

Class envy? What is it that you think I "envy"?

> Washington you probably make near 100K which is considered rich by the
> government; you are not middle-class. This is probably why you think

That's only so Bush can fuck me with that AMT bullshit. It takes a
busload of creative accounting for folks like me to get by (and save
for the future). And hell, I have a degree in math. What does the
average sod do?

> you are paying too much taxes, you're in a higher tax bracket!

Yeah and I benefit from capital gains tax reductions as well, but I
don't deserve those benefits if it means that the parent of a poor
child has to skip her dinner so her kid can eat, after she spent a day
serving up combo meals at McDonalds, because suddenly she earns too
much for food stamps.

 

[Guest]

Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 2:24:51 PM,
<[email protected]> wrote:

> > There is something definitely wrong with your thinking. The rich
> > pay way more taxes to the government than the poor or middle class
> > do.
>
> As a percentage of their income? You mean to tell me that folks who
> get 7 and 8 figure salaries actually deserve to pay such a paltry
> pennance of their wealth?

Deserve? Are you still in the entitlement mode? Regardless, we both
know that the tax laws will never change to anything resembling a Fair
Tax. The rich will always have to pay a larger percentage of their
income compared to the rest. There will always be the assumption that
"they have more money so they can give up more", similar to the
entitlement mentality.

> In fact (and I digress slightly), the middle class gives a much larger
> percentage of their income to charity (I've hear 2.4%, whereas those
> who make over 150k give about 0.8%).

I give nearly 10% -- who are the other slackers. When it comes to
charity, the donee is more interested in the amount given rather than
the percentage of the person's income. Bill Gates' billion dollar
donations are much more substantial than my few thousand dollar
donations. What I give to my church is because of my desire to help
with God's work. If the government mandated I give so much to my
church (or any other organization) I would resent that tremondously.

> Yeah and I benefit from capital gains tax reductions as well, but I
> don't deserve those benefits if it means that the parent of a poor
> child has to skip her dinner so her kid can eat, after she spent a day
> serving up combo meals at McDonalds, because suddenly she earns too
> much for food stamps.

If you don't deserve those benefits pass them on to a charity where
they will be used to feed that woman. Stop passing the buck and do
something yourself to help others.

--
"I do not belong to any organised political party: I'm a democrat." ~
Will Rogers

 

[Guest]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 12:03:04 -0600, "Dan J.S." <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Learning Richard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>>
>> badgolferman wrote:
>>> Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 12:11:42 PM,
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > The other fact, is that you should receive FROM society a more
>>> > equitable payment for the SWEAT you give TO society. As far as I
>>> > know, society has NEVER worked that way...
>>>
>>> Why is this a fact?
>>>
>>> This is the model of Socialism that you prescribe to. Get more from
>>> society than you put into it?
>>
>> More?? No, that's how it works NOW. The 5% at the top gets MUCH MORE
>> from society than they put into it. Those at the bottom get MUCH LESS
>> from society than they put into it. And, those at the TOP expect those
>> of us in the MIDDLE to foot the bill for those at the BOTTOM and for
>> those at the TOP. Hence my big ass tax bill in spite of the Senate
>> cutting taxes for the RICH.
>>
>> You get it now? I know its a bit confusing. Try to not think about
>> the Rove/Limbaugh sound bytes for a second and wrap your head around
>> the above.
>>
>
>What do the top 5% get more from society than the put into it?

Because the rich have better lobbyists than the poor, duh.

--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Re: OT SENATE PASSES A WORKER FRIENDLY BUDGET BILL

On 21 Dec 2005 11:12:43 -0800, "Learning Richard"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mike Hunter wrote:
>> More lies and left wing propaganda. There are NO cuts in the amount of
>> money the government will spend. What is being reduced is the amount of the
>> annual increases, built into government expenses, by $1 of every $1,000
>> spent That will help reduce the budget deficit that is so much of a
>> problem for those on the left, yet they voted against doing so.
>
>I usually try to ignore you "Mike Kunt", since you are so ridiculously
>STUPID.
>
That's why I killfiled the fucking fool. He really _IS_ that fucking
stupid.

>If the inflation index is 5%, and the Senate reduces entitlement
>increases to 4%, who is losing then, you stupid racist lump of rotting
>flesh?

He knows. He just doesn't care.
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================

 

[Guest]

Re: OT SENATE PASSES A WORKER FRIENDLY BUDGET BILL

The train from the east will meet the train from the west at some point east
of Chicago, at 2:00 PM on a Tuesday LOL

mike hunt



"Learning Richard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected].googlegroups.com...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> More lies and left wing propaganda. There are NO cuts in the amount of
money the government will spend. What is being reduced is the amount of the
annual increases, built into government expenses, by $1 of every $1,000
spent That will help reduce the budget deficit that is so much of a
problem for those on the left, yet they voted against doing so.

History proves that ever time tax rates and capital gains taxes, the seed
corn of any economy that will produce new jobs, have been reduced it has
resulted in more income to the US treasury, not less. Japan does not tax
capital at all. Japan in fact offers a tax credit for capital earned in
other countries, that is returned to Japan. Even when it is earned as tax
free profits in other countries like the US. The recent US tax RATE cuts,
that went to every taxpayer in the US, is the engine that has been driving
the current robust economy since 9/11. Failing to make those reductions
permanent and reducing the budget will hurt the ever expanding income to the
treasury, further increasing the budget deficit and reducing the capital
that has been increasing the millions of new jobs for the so called working
man in the US.


> I usually try to ignore you "Mike Kunt", since you are so ridiculously
> STUPID.
>
> If the inflation index is 5%, and the Senate reduces entitlement
> increases to 4%, who is losing then, you stupid racist lump of rotting
> flesh?
>

 

[Guest]

In article <[email protected]googlegroups.com>,
"Learning Richard" <[email protected]> wrote:

> This bill cuts:
>
> 1. Child Support Enforcement
> 2. Medicaid
> 3. Medicare
> 4. Student Aid
> 5. Food Stamps
> and more!
>
> Neocons and Republicans are trumpeting the passage -- the tie was
> broken by Dick Cheney, who for some reason has not been arrested yet
> for multiple felony violations.
>
> Meanwhile, capital gains tax cuts and other "Wealthy-Friendly"
> provisions remain intact.
>
> Republican claims to be for "the average working person", though once
> again proven to be lies, have gone unanswered and without comment by
> the Senate Elite Neocons (see Bill Frist, et al).

we are all going to go to hell.
--
"Once you learn to quit, it becomes a habit."

Vince Lombardi

 

[Guest]

The more one make in the US the more one pays in taxes. Not only do you pay
more, you pay taxes at a higher tax RATE as well. According to the IRS site
more than 45% of workers in the US pay little or no taxes and the truly poor
not only do not pay any taxes the get TAX rebates in a greater amount than
was withheld, as well as checks from the state and federal governments.
When I was a kid there was little work for most people and even less for
blacks and there were no checks from the government. Still my mom and dad
kept us in food and clothing till the WWII made real work.


mike hunt


"Gary L. Burnore" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>
>>
>>What do the top 5% get more from society than the put into it?
>
> Because the rich have better lobbyists than the poor, duh.
>
> --
> gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> How you look depends on where you go.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
> | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
> Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
> | ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
> Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
> ===========================================================================

 

[Guest]

badgolferman wrote:
> Learning Richard, 12/21/2005, 2:24:51 PM,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > There is something definitely wrong with your thinking. The rich
> > > pay way more taxes to the government than the poor or middle class
> > > do.
> >
> > As a percentage of their income? You mean to tell me that folks who
> > get 7 and 8 figure salaries actually deserve to pay such a paltry
> > pennance of their wealth?
>
> Deserve? Are you still in the entitlement mode? Regardless, we both
> know that the tax laws will never change to anything resembling a Fair
> Tax. The rich will always have to pay a larger percentage of their
> income compared to the rest.

hah! You believe that?

> There will always be the assumption that
> "they have more money so they can give up more", similar to the
> entitlement mentality.

So, you don't like living here? You don't like being a member of
humanity? You're right I don't like giving entitlements to those who
don't need them -- for instance Exxon Mobil, or Halliburton.

>
> > In fact (and I digress slightly), the middle class gives a much larger
> > percentage of their income to charity (I've hear 2.4%, whereas those
> > who make over 150k give about 0.8%).
>
> I give nearly 10% -- who are the other slackers. When it comes to

Some folks are too leveraged to their SUVs and HDTVs to give more.

> charity, the donee is more interested in the amount given rather than
> the percentage of the person's income. Bill Gates' billion dollar
> donations are much more substantial than my few thousand dollar
> donations. What I give to my church is because of my desire to help
> with God's work. If the government mandated I give so much to my
> church (or any other organization) I would resent that tremondously.

Why do you keep bringing God into the discussion? Your relationship
with God is your business, not mine.

>
> > Yeah and I benefit from capital gains tax reductions as well, but I
> > don't deserve those benefits if it means that the parent of a poor
> > child has to skip her dinner so her kid can eat, after she spent a day
> > serving up combo meals at McDonalds, because suddenly she earns too
> > much for food stamps.
>
> If you don't deserve those benefits pass them on to a charity where
> they will be used to feed that woman. Stop passing the buck and do
> something yourself to help others.

You make such absurd assumptions -- its funny, they're here in black
and white, I don't need to comment on them.