Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Deficit, minus $10 trillion swing under Bush

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 12:59:18 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And why you
ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could give 30% of his
tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year, or $576 per hour in terms
normal people can understand. Of the current $422+ billion dollar deficit, $270
billion is specifically because of Bush tax cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of this
went to millionaires. So we are in essence borrowing money -- that our
grandchildren will have to pay back -- to finance tax kickbacks to millionaires!

So while high energy and health care costs are killing lower and middle class
Americans, Bush chose to borrow $81 billion dollars to give to millionaires
making $576 per hour. Can you imagine making that kind of money? You could work
four hours and you have your house mortgage and car payment taken care of!! I'm
really glad Bush chose to borrow our money to help these people. These
millionaires were hurting big time!

When GW Bush was elected 3 1/2 years ago, the projected 10 year "surplus" was
predicted to be 4 or 5 trillion dollars (That's right, SURPLUS.) The prediction
right now is for a "deficit" of over 2 trillion dollars 10 years from now. Here
is the scary part. If Bush's tax cuts, which predominantly go to the super rich,
are made permanent, the projected 10 year deficit is almost 5 trillion dollars.

So this is a potential 10 trillion dollar negative swing with Bush in office!
This idiot has driven the country right into a ditch, and in the process he is
siphoning money from the middle and lower class to the ultra rich. If this
continues, the only way the country will be able to keep it's head above water
is to cuts all the safety nets of the middle and lower class, which is social
security and Medicare.

30% of the Bush tax cuts went to the upper 1%. This is actually better than it
could have been. If all of Bush's tax cuts had been enacted as he wanted, fully
45% of his tax cuts would have gone to the super wealthy.

We are going into deep debt, borrowing money to finance tax cuts for
millionaires. And these millionaires are rewarding us by sending money to tax
free accounts in the Cayman Islands and shipping decent paying manufacturing
jobs to China and decent paying IT jobs to India.

Bush and Cheney are practicing bait and switch on a massive scale

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-de..."...anew
report from the Congressional Budget Office projects a $422-billiondeficitthis
year and $2.3 trillion over the next decade, even if the currenttax
cuts,technically set to expire over the next few years, are not extended.If they
are,it projects a tab of $4.5 trillion. The $2.3 trillion is alreadyhigher than
theoffice's previous estimate in March because of increasedspending by
Congress,which is stuck with paying for, among other things,prolonged wars in
Iraq andAfghanistan. In other words, this deficit, unlikeprevious ones, is not a
blip,but a.....Even the CBO's $4.5-trillion deficit over 10 years is almost
surelytoooptimistic - it's based on the assumption that funding for
domesticprogramswill not rise faster than inflation and not keep pace with
populationgrowth."
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 2:08:34 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
> history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And
> why you ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could
> give 30% of his tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year, or
> $576 per hour in terms normal people can understand. Of the current $422+
> billion dollar deficit, $270 billion is specifically because of Bush tax
> cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of this went to millionaires. So we are in
> essence borrowing money -- that our grandchildren will have to pay back --
> to finance tax kickbacks to millionaires!
>
> So while high energy and health care costs are killing lower and middle
> class Americans, Bush chose to borrow $81 billion dollars to give to
> millionaires making $576 per hour. Can you imagine making that kind of
> money? You could work four hours and you have your house mortgage and car
> payment taken care of!! I'm really glad Bush chose to borrow our money to
> help these people. These millionaires were hurting big time!
>
> When GW Bush was elected 3 1/2 years ago, the projected 10 year "surplus"
> was predicted to be 4 or 5 trillion dollars (That's right, SURPLUS.) The
> prediction right now is for a "deficit" of over 2 trillion dollars 10
> years from now. Here is the scary part. If Bush's tax cuts, which
> predominantly go to the super rich, are made permanent, the projected 10
> year deficit is almost 5 trillion dollars.
>
> So this is a potential 10 trillion dollar negative swing with Bush in
> office! This idiot has driven the country right into a ditch, and in the
> process he is siphoning money from the middle and lower class to the ultra
> rich. If this continues, the only way the country will be able to keep
> it's head above water is to cuts all the safety nets of the middle and
> lower class, which is social security and Medicare.

As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful look
at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are paying
more than their fair share of the nations tax burden. This has been true all
of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity. The higher income
group still pay much more than their fair share. They don't use up any more
of the nations police, fire, and military services than does anyone else,
but they pay through the nose for it. Most of them got rich by risking their
money to go into business, and the businesses they started create most of
the nations jobs. If everyone were to just work for someone else, and never
take a chance, this country would have died a long time ago.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 6:17:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:08:34 -0800, "William Graham"
<weg9@comcast.net> wrote:

>As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful look
>at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are paying
>more than their fair share of the nations tax burden. This has been true all
>of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
>income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity. The higher income
>group still pay much more than their fair share. They don't use up any more
>of the nations police, fire, and military services than does anyone else,
>but they pay through the nose for it. Most of them got rich by risking their
>money to go into business, and the businesses they started create most of
>the nations jobs. If everyone were to just work for someone else, and never
>take a chance, this country would have died a long time ago.


Bull. The rich get corporate welfare in a million ways.

Their servants and the workers in their factories drive
to work on roads paid for by taxes. Taxpayers subsidized
the stadium that made W's baseball team a big hit.
W walked away from that deal $12 million richer.
Taxpayers subsidized the government program that
made Ross Perot a rich man.

Your home mortgage deduction is a subsidy for bankers.

Towns and cities all over the USA are subsidizing
WalMart stores so that the Walton family can be the
richest on the planet.

US taxpayers have paid $170 Billion so far for our
latest adventure in Iraq. Who benefits? Halliburton,
Bechtel, Lockheed-Martin. Their CEOs make millions
in salaries, while young men die in Fallujah.

The corporate share of the US tax burden has been
declining steadily for the last forty years.

And in fact, the rich typically get much better
government services than the poor, whether it be
in road maintenance, police protection, workplace
safety, schools, environmental enforcement, etc.

How long did you stand in line to vote on Nov. 2?
You probably breezed in and out in matter of minutes.

Folks in downtown Cleveland waited hours and hours.

The rich didn't make America great. Working
Americans did -- all of them, in the millions --
not just the millionaires.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
Related resources
January 22, 2005 6:17:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

rafe bustin wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:08:34 -0800, "William Graham"
> <weg9@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful
>>look at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are
>>paying more than their fair share of the nations tax burden.
>
>
> Bull. The rich get corporate welfare in a million ways.
>


Wow we agree on something. That's scary! Shame our opinion means nothing and
people can't seem to understand what's happening, too late by the time "4
more years" has past it might be too late.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 10:23:15 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

Those 10 year surplus projections from early 2001 weren't worth the
paper they were printed on. It is simply too complicated a problem to
correctly forecast the fiscal situation more than 6 months down the
road, and even that is usually wrong, often by a substantial amount.
This is not a partisan statement, it is just a fact of reality.

People who think there was some $6 trillion surplus out there which
Bush magically squandered really don't have a clue. Congress would
have spent EVERY SINGLE PENNY of that surplus on useless government
programs. Believing otherwise is delusional.

Personally, I really don't care if Democrats spend the next 4 years
beating up on Bush. He is not running again, so it doesn't matter,
other than making Democrats look like spoiled children who aren't
getting their way.

Here is a suggestion to Democrats if they want to regain politcal
relevance. Think of some policies that don't involve higher taxes or
bigger government. You are smart people, I am sure you could do it if
you tried.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 10:39:27 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"William Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MdKdnSfCxLFuZmzcRVn-sg@comcast.com...
>
> "K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> > Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in
the
> > history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And
> > why you ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could
> > give 30% of his tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year, or
> > $576 per hour in terms normal people can understand. Of the current
$422+
> > billion dollar deficit, $270 billion is specifically because of Bush tax
> > cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of this went to millionaires. So we are in
> > essence borrowing money -- that our grandchildren will have to pay
back --
> > to finance tax kickbacks to millionaires!
> >
> > So while high energy and health care costs are killing lower and middle
> > class Americans, Bush chose to borrow $81 billion dollars to give to
> > millionaires making $576 per hour. Can you imagine making that kind of
> > money? You could work four hours and you have your house mortgage and
car
> > payment taken care of!! I'm really glad Bush chose to borrow our money
to
> > help these people. These millionaires were hurting big time!
> >
> > When GW Bush was elected 3 1/2 years ago, the projected 10 year
"surplus"
> > was predicted to be 4 or 5 trillion dollars (That's right, SURPLUS.) The
> > prediction right now is for a "deficit" of over 2 trillion dollars 10
> > years from now. Here is the scary part. If Bush's tax cuts, which
> > predominantly go to the super rich, are made permanent, the projected 10
> > year deficit is almost 5 trillion dollars.
> >
> > So this is a potential 10 trillion dollar negative swing with Bush in
> > office! This idiot has driven the country right into a ditch, and in the
> > process he is siphoning money from the middle and lower class to the
ultra
> > rich. If this continues, the only way the country will be able to keep
> > it's head above water is to cuts all the safety nets of the middle and
> > lower class, which is social security and Medicare.
>
> As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful
look
> at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are
paying
> more than their fair share of the nations tax burden. This has been true
all
> of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
> income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity. The higher income
> group still pay much more than their fair share. They don't use up any
more
> of the nations police, fire, and military services than does anyone else,
> but they pay through the nose for it. Most of them got rich by risking
their
> money to go into business, and the businesses they started create most of
> the nations jobs. If everyone were to just work for someone else, and
never
> take a chance, this country would have died a long time ago.
>
Billy. What do you consider to be a fair share? Someone making $20,000 a
year and paying half in taxes? That's what we have today. I'm not just
talking about just income taxes but payroll taxes, sales taxes, real estate
taxes. It is the middle and lower classes who are paying MORE than their
fair share. Also, this myth you hold dear about people risking their money
to form businesses...Those people did not do so in a vaccuum. They depended
on services provided by the government (roads and other infrastructure,
railroad system, telephone system) all of which were paid for by tax
dollars. So anyone who profits from the system should pay back into the
system. That's fair.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 10:39:28 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"Daniel Green" <Dgreeny_111@prodigy.com> wrote in message
news:p qnId.18118$wi2.9161@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "William Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:MdKdnSfCxLFuZmzcRVn-sg@comcast.com...
>>
>> "K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
>> > Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in
> the
>> > history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch.
>> > And
>> > why you ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could
>> > give 30% of his tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year,
>> > or
>> > $576 per hour in terms normal people can understand. Of the current
> $422+
>> > billion dollar deficit, $270 billion is specifically because of Bush
>> > tax
>> > cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of this went to millionaires. So we are in
>> > essence borrowing money -- that our grandchildren will have to pay
> back --
>> > to finance tax kickbacks to millionaires!
>> >
>> > So while high energy and health care costs are killing lower and middle
>> > class Americans, Bush chose to borrow $81 billion dollars to give to
>> > millionaires making $576 per hour. Can you imagine making that kind of
>> > money? You could work four hours and you have your house mortgage and
> car
>> > payment taken care of!! I'm really glad Bush chose to borrow our money
> to
>> > help these people. These millionaires were hurting big time!
>> >
>> > When GW Bush was elected 3 1/2 years ago, the projected 10 year
> "surplus"
>> > was predicted to be 4 or 5 trillion dollars (That's right, SURPLUS.)
>> > The
>> > prediction right now is for a "deficit" of over 2 trillion dollars 10
>> > years from now. Here is the scary part. If Bush's tax cuts, which
>> > predominantly go to the super rich, are made permanent, the projected
>> > 10
>> > year deficit is almost 5 trillion dollars.
>> >
>> > So this is a potential 10 trillion dollar negative swing with Bush in
>> > office! This idiot has driven the country right into a ditch, and in
>> > the
>> > process he is siphoning money from the middle and lower class to the
> ultra
>> > rich. If this continues, the only way the country will be able to keep
>> > it's head above water is to cuts all the safety nets of the middle and
>> > lower class, which is social security and Medicare.
>>
>> As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful
> look
>> at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are
> paying
>> more than their fair share of the nations tax burden. This has been true
> all
>> of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
>> income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity. The higher income
>> group still pay much more than their fair share. They don't use up any
> more
>> of the nations police, fire, and military services than does anyone else,
>> but they pay through the nose for it. Most of them got rich by risking
> their
>> money to go into business, and the businesses they started create most of
>> the nations jobs. If everyone were to just work for someone else, and
> never
>> take a chance, this country would have died a long time ago.
>>
> Billy. What do you consider to be a fair share? Someone making $20,000 a
> year and paying half in taxes? That's what we have today. I'm not just
> talking about just income taxes but payroll taxes, sales taxes, real
> estate
> taxes. It is the middle and lower classes who are paying MORE than their
> fair share. Also, this myth you hold dear about people risking their money
> to form businesses...Those people did not do so in a vaccuum. They
> depended
> on services provided by the government (roads and other infrastructure,
> railroad system, telephone system) all of which were paid for by tax
> dollars. So anyone who profits from the system should pay back into the
> system. That's fair.
>
I would be a lot more sympathetic to your position if I wasn't paying double
taxes on my corporate income. But that's exactly what the dividend taxes
amount to. Also, when I die, the government will get a portion of my estate
before it gets distributed to my kids. This is money that has already been
taxed once, so it also constitutes double taxation. It won't affect me and
my kids very much, because I am not that rich. But for those with estates
that are significantly over a million dollars, it can be quite a bite. The
point is, there is no justification for taxing anyone twice. It's like if
you had to pay taxes on your income, and then, when you gave some of it to
your wife to buy groceries with, she had to pay taxes on it again. You
wouldn't like that would you? - Well, that's the way I feel when the
corporations I own pay income taxes, and then when they distribute what's
left over to me, I have to pay taxes on it again. the only thing that has
happened to that money is it has been moved from the companies account to
mine. Also, when I saved for my retirement, my kids went without some things
because our spendable income was a little less. (about 10%) Now, when I die,
those kids should get that money, because they were deprived of it when I
first saved it. Their peers got more things than they got, because their
fathers didn't save a dime. Now, when their fathers are, "poor", (compared
with me) the government hits my estate up for taxes again on that money. It
should go to my kids, who didn't get to spend it the first time around. In
many ways we, "rich" get screwed by the system, and the liberal Bush bashers
just sweep that under the rug. I am damn tired of the liberal robin hood
give away programs. It is very easy for the government to spend my money on
anything and everything that they think will buy them more votes. It is like
a breath of fresh air to get someone like G. Bush in office every 20 years
or so, who will help to slow down the drain on my pocketbook a little bit. I
made my money by saving it straight from a standard, average engineers
salery. I didn't steal it from anybody. Anyone I worked with could have done
the same thing that I did, but they spent their money like there was no
tomorrow. Now, I just want the government to leave me alone and let me enjoy
my retirement without having to pay for all those hangers on. - Is that too
much to ask?
January 22, 2005 10:53:26 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

What does this have to do with photography, video or woodworking?

"K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
> history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And
why you
> ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could give 30%
of his
> tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year, or $576 per hour in
terms
> normal people can understand. Of the current $422+ billion dollar deficit,
$270
> billion is specifically because of Bush tax cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of
this
> went to millionaires. So we are in essence borrowing money -- that our
> grandchildren will have to pay back -- to finance tax kickbacks to
millionaires!
>
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 2:40:35 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:59:18 -0800, "K Kesey McMurphy"
<nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote:

>Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
>history of the world.

Seems only right that he should do that, after all, he screwed up
every other company he ran.......


Pete S.

www.derwentelec.clara.co.uk
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 4:23:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>What do you consider to be a fair share? Someone making $20,000 a
>year and paying half in taxes? That's what we have today. I'm not just
>talking about just income taxes but payroll taxes, sales taxes, real estate
>taxes. It is the middle and lower classes who are paying MORE than their
>fair share. Also, this myth you hold dear about people risking their money
>to form businesses...Those people did not do so in a vaccuum. They depended
>on services provided by the government (roads and other infrastructure,
>railroad system, telephone system) all of which were paid for by tax
>dollars. So anyone who profits from the system should pay back into the
>system. That's fair.


When you talk about someone making 20K a year and spending half on assorted
taxes... it brings a tear to my eye. the truth is these taxes you speak of
"payroll taxes, sales taxes, real estate taxes" Are all taxes that a "rich
person" pays more of. A rich person makes more money so pays more Payroll tax,
a rich person buys more expensive items so pays more in sales tax, and a rich
person lives in a more expensive home and pays more property tax. The 20K
person you speak of if the do thier taxes correctly will get most if not all of
thier federal withholding back, the percent of sales tax is the same regardless
of being rich or poor, and for property tax... at 20K this person is
renting and not paying that tax.

And this twisted sense of risk taking... if you really look how tax is
structured you will see that in most states there is a tax on GAS to pay for
new roads and infrastructure. so the guy thats out there taking risk and
moving product is Paying his share of these expenses. You buy what 20 gallons
of gas a week? how much does a local hub of UPS purchase in a week? Believe
me they pay!
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 4:26:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

rafe bustin wrote:
>
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:08:34 -0800, "William Graham"
> <weg9@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful look
> >at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are paying
> >more than their fair share of the nations tax burden. This has been true all
> >of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
> >income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity. The higher income
> >group still pay much more than their fair share. They don't use up any more
> >of the nations police, fire, and military services than does anyone else,
> >but they pay through the nose for it. Most of them got rich by risking their
> >money to go into business, and the businesses they started create most of
> >the nations jobs. If everyone were to just work for someone else, and never
> >take a chance, this country would have died a long time ago.
>
> Bull. The rich get corporate welfare in a million ways.
>
> Their servants and the workers in their factories drive
> to work on roads paid for by taxes.

so do the poor.

that is such a clueless thoughtless statement.
you should pay another 5% on top for thinking like that.

> Taxpayers subsidized the stadium that made W's
> baseball team a big hit. W walked away from that deal
> $12 million richer.

how much tax did w pay on that?
what tax bracket is he in?

> Taxpayers subsidized the government program that
> made Ross Perot a rich man.
>
> Your home mortgage deduction is a subsidy for bankers.
>
> Towns and cities all over the USA are subsidizing
> WalMart stores so that the Walton family can be the
> richest on the planet.

that is such a clueless thoughtless statement.
you should pay still another 5% on top for thinking like that.

>
> US taxpayers have paid $170 Billion so far for our
> latest adventure in Iraq. Who benefits? Halliburton,
> Bechtel, Lockheed-Martin. Their CEOs make millions
> in salaries, while young men die in Fallujah.

that is such a clueless thoughtless statement.
you should pay another 5% on top for thinking like that.

>
> The corporate share of the US tax burden has been
> declining steadily for the last forty years.
>
> And in fact, the rich typically get much better
> government services than the poor, whether it be
> in road maintenance, police protection, workplace
> safety, schools, environmental enforcement, etc.
>
> How long did you stand in line to vote on Nov. 2?
> You probably breezed in and out in matter of minutes.
>
> Folks in downtown Cleveland waited hours and hours.
>
> The rich didn't make America great. Working
> Americans did -- all of them, in the millions --
> not just the millionaires.
>
> rafe b.
> http://www.terrapinphoto.com
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 5:50:14 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

On a sunny day (Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:59:18 -0800) it happened "K Kesey
McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in
<FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com>:
inflation will bail him out.
When the US dollar goes to 0 Euro, he has no debt at all :-)
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:34:19 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

In article <1106407395.423274.199300@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
sorry_no_email@yahoo.com says...
> Subject: Re: Deficit, minus $10 trillion swing under Bush
> From: "BrianEWilliams" <sorry_no_email@yahoo.com>
> Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa, rec.photo.digital, rec.video.desktop, alt.woodworking, rec.photo.equipment.35mm
>
> Those 10 year surplus projections from early 2001 weren't worth the
> paper they were printed on. It is simply too complicated a problem to
> correctly forecast the fiscal situation more than 6 months down the
> road, and even that is usually wrong, often by a substantial amount.
> This is not a partisan statement, it is just a fact of reality.
>
> People who think there was some $6 trillion surplus out there which
> Bush magically squandered really don't have a clue. Congress would
> have spent EVERY SINGLE PENNY of that surplus on useless government
> programs. Believing otherwise is delusional.
>
> Personally, I really don't care if Democrats spend the next 4 years
> beating up on Bush. He is not running again, so it doesn't matter,
> other than making Democrats look like spoiled children who aren't
> getting their way.
>
> Here is a suggestion to Democrats if they want to regain politcal
> relevance. Think of some policies that don't involve higher taxes or
> bigger government. You are smart people, I am sure you could do it if
> you tried.
>
>


All they have to do to win next time is crawl father to the right than
the Republicans. Then they might be called neo-replublicans, or
communists by the actual republicans, but evangelicals will probably
vote for them and aparently that is the only vote you really need in the
USA.

--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
http://www.ramsays-online.com
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:53:45 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

BrianEWilliams wrote:
> Those 10 year surplus projections from early 2001 weren't worth the



_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:55:42 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Chris Phillipo wrote:

> All they have to do to win next time is crawl father to the right than


_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:56:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Steven M. Scharf wrote:
>
> But the red states, otherwise


_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 9:07:50 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"BrianEWilliams" <sorry_no_email@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106407395.423274.199300@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Those 10 year surplus projections from early 2001 weren't worth the
> paper they were printed on. It is simply too complicated a problem to
> correctly forecast the fiscal situation more than 6 months down the
> road, and even that is usually wrong, often by a substantial amount.
> This is not a partisan statement, it is just a fact of reality.
>
> People who think there was some $6 trillion surplus out there which
> Bush magically squandered really don't have a clue. Congress would
> have spent EVERY SINGLE PENNY of that surplus on useless government
> programs. Believing otherwise is delusional.
>
> Personally, I really don't care if Democrats spend the next 4 years
> beating up on Bush. He is not running again, so it doesn't matter,
> other than making Democrats look like spoiled children who aren't
> getting their way.
>
> Here is a suggestion to Democrats if they want to regain politcal
> relevance. Think of some policies that don't involve higher taxes or
> bigger government. You are smart people, I am sure you could do it if
> you tried.
>
If it weren't for higher taxes and bigger government, there wouldn't even be
any Democrats........
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 12:50:55 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

It's too bad Bush didn't spend some of that money on a cure for stupid
people who post their political tantrums on a site devoted to digital
photography.
Dennis D. Carter

"K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
> history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And
> why you ask would our fearless president do this? He did it so he could
> give 30% of his tax cuts to millionaires making 1.2 million per year, or
> $576 per hour in terms normal people can understand. Of the current $422+
> billion dollar deficit, $270 billion is specifically because of Bush tax
> cuts. 30%, or $81 Billion of this went to millionaires. So we are in
> essence borrowing money -- that our grandchildren will have to pay back --
> to finance tax kickbacks to millionaires!
>
> So while high energy and health care costs are killing lower and middle
> class Americans, Bush chose to borrow $81 billion dollars to give to
> millionaires making $576 per hour. Can you imagine making that kind of
> money? You could work four hours and you have your house mortgage and car
> payment taken care of!! I'm really glad Bush chose to borrow our money to
> help these people. These millionaires were hurting big time!
>
> When GW Bush was elected 3 1/2 years ago, the projected 10 year "surplus"
> was predicted to be 4 or 5 trillion dollars (That's right, SURPLUS.) The
> prediction right now is for a "deficit" of over 2 trillion dollars 10
> years from now. Here is the scary part. If Bush's tax cuts, which
> predominantly go to the super rich, are made permanent, the projected 10
> year deficit is almost 5 trillion dollars.
>
> So this is a potential 10 trillion dollar negative swing with Bush in
> office! This idiot has driven the country right into a ditch, and in the
> process he is siphoning money from the middle and lower class to the ultra
> rich. If this continues, the only way the country will be able to keep
> it's head above water is to cuts all the safety nets of the middle and
> lower class, which is social security and Medicare.
>
> 30% of the Bush tax cuts went to the upper 1%. This is actually better
> than it could have been. If all of Bush's tax cuts had been enacted as he
> wanted, fully 45% of his tax cuts would have gone to the super wealthy.
>
> We are going into deep debt, borrowing money to finance tax cuts for
> millionaires. And these millionaires are rewarding us by sending money to
> tax free accounts in the Cayman Islands and shipping decent paying
> manufacturing jobs to China and decent paying IT jobs to India.
>
> Bush and Cheney are practicing bait and switch on a massive scale
>
> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-de..."...anew
> report from the Congressional Budget Office projects a
> $422-billiondeficitthis year and $2.3 trillion over the next decade, even
> if the currenttax cuts,technically set to expire over the next few years,
> are not extended.If they are,it projects a tab of $4.5 trillion. The $2.3
> trillion is alreadyhigher than theoffice's previous estimate in March
> because of increasedspending by Congress,which is stuck with paying for,
> among other things,prolonged wars in Iraq andAfghanistan. In other words,
> this deficit, unlikeprevious ones, is not a blip,but a.....Even the CBO's
> $4.5-trillion deficit over 10 years is almost surelytoooptimistic - it's
> based on the assumption that funding for domesticprogramswill not rise
> faster than inflation and not keep pace with populationgrowth."
>
>
January 23, 2005 1:22:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Crownfield wrote:

> rafe bustin wrote:

>>
>> Bull. The rich get corporate welfare in a million ways.
>>
>> Their servants and the workers in their factories drive
>> to work on roads paid for by taxes.
>
> so do the poor.
>

Actually most poor people ride the bus.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 1:26:51 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

On a sunny day (Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:45:28 -0500) it happened Alan Browne-
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
<ZPzId.67984$Vr6.1995907@weber.videotron.net>:
> /| /| | |
> ||__|| | Please do not |
> / O O\__ | feed the |
> / \ | Trolls |
> / \ \|_____________________|
> / _ \ \ ||
> / |\____\ \ ||
> / | | | |\____/ ||
> / \|_|_|/ | _||
> / / \ |____| ||
> / | | | --|
> | | | |____ --|
> * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
>*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
> / _ \\ | / `'
>* / \_ /- | | |
> * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
>
YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
MAYBE IT IS A WART?
DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY NOT MAKE
A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT COMPLETE
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US.
;-)
TROLALA
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 3:08:32 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"K Kesey McMurphy" <nospam@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:FIadnY2x_8EydmzcRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> Yes, President Bush has turned the US into the worst debtor nation in the
> history of the world. He has drive the economy right into the ditch. And
why you

You get what you voted for. Live with it.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 3:09:30 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"Dennis D. Carter" <dennis.carter@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3VzId.14278$8u5.10560@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> It's too bad Bush didn't spend some of that money on a cure for stupid
> people who .....

..... top-post and don't snip.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 3:11:52 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY NOT MAKE
> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT COMPLETE
> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US.

Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 3:25:56 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

On a sunny day (Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000) it happened "Stu Dapples"
<me@example.com> wrote in <SO6dnaITcNchdm_cRVnyiw@pipex.net>:

>
>"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
>> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
>> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
>> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY NOT MAKE
>> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT COMPLETE
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US.
>
>Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
DID YOU NOT NOTICE I USED ONE?
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 3:25:57 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Jan Panteltje wrote:
>
> On a sunny day (Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000) it happened "Stu Dapples"
> <me@example.com> wrote in <SO6dnaITcNchdm_cRVnyiw@pipex.net>:
>
> >
> >"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
> >> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
> >> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
> >> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY NOT MAKE
> >> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT COMPLETE
> >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US.
> >
> >Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
> DID YOU NOT NOTICE I USED ONE?

he assumed that you were smart, and had made a mistake.
they were unfounded assumptions...
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 7:55:07 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Crownfield wrote:
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >
> > On a sunny day (Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000) it happened "Stu
Dapples"
> > <me@example.com> wrote in <SO6dnaITcNchdm_cRVnyiw@pipex.net>:
> >
> > >
> > >"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > >> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
> > >> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
> > >> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
> > >> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY
NOT MAKE
> > >> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT
COMPLETE
> > >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF
ALL OF US.
> > >
> > >Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
> > DID YOU NOT NOTICE I USED ONE?
>
> he assumed that you were smart, and had made a mistake.
> they were unfounded assumptions...

NOW EXPLAIN TO ME WHY A SMART PERSON WOULD MAKE A MISTAKE.
if you can.
WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF ASSUME.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 11:56:44 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

panteltje@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Crownfield wrote:
> > Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > >
> > > On a sunny day (Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000) it happened "Stu
> Dapples"
> > > <me@example.com> wrote in <SO6dnaITcNchdm_cRVnyiw@pipex.net>:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > >> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A TROLL?
> > > >> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
> > > >> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
> > > >> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO WHY
> NOT MAKE
> > > >> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT
> COMPLETE
> > > >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF
> ALL OF US.
> > > >
> > > >Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
> > > DID YOU NOT NOTICE I USED ONE?
> >
> > he assumed that you were smart, and had made a mistake.
> > they were unfounded assumptions...
>
> NOW EXPLAIN TO ME WHY A SMART PERSON WOULD MAKE A MISTAKE.
> if you can.
> WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF ASSUME.

you are right. he was wrong.
you did not make a mistake, you were just not smart.
he was wrong to ASSume that you were smart.

and a clueless net newbie to boot.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 12:41:40 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Crownfield wrote:
> panteltje@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > Crownfield wrote:
> > > Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On a sunny day (Sun, 23 Jan 2005 00:11:52 -0000) it happened
"Stu
> > Dapples"
> > > > <me@example.com> wrote in <SO6dnaITcNchdm_cRVnyiw@pipex.net>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Jan Panteltje" <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > >> YES THAT IS A NICE ONE, SUCH A CHARMING DOG, OR IS IT A
TROLL?
> > > > >> I DID NOT KNOW THEY HAD NOSES THAT BIG.
> > > > >> MAYBE IT IS A WART?
> > > > >> DO YOU HAVE MORE ART LIKE THAT FOR REC.VIDEO.DESKTOP? IF SO
WHY
> > NOT MAKE
> > > > >> A WEBSITE AND ADD A REAL PICTURE OF GWB ON IT, TO MAKE IT
> > COMPLETE
> > > > >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TROLLING CONTRIBUTION ON BEHALF
OF
> > ALL OF US.
> > > > >
> > > > >Don't they have caps lock keys where you come from?
> > > > DID YOU NOT NOTICE I USED ONE?
> > >
> > > he assumed that you were smart, and had made a mistake.
> > > they were unfounded assumptions...
> >
> > NOW EXPLAIN TO ME WHY A SMART PERSON WOULD MAKE A MISTAKE.
> > if you can.
> > WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF
ASSUME.
>
> you are right. he was wrong.
> you did not make a mistake, you were just not smart.
> he was wrong to ASSume that you were smart.
>
> and a clueless net newbie to boot.
Dear TROLL I am sorry about your boot.
I did not know TROLS had boots.
AS YOU PROBABLY NOW FIGURED OUT THIS THREAD WILL CONTINUE INDEFINITELY
BECAUSE IF ONE HAS ALL THE ANSWERS THEN THERE IS NO END.
SO YOUR DEEPEST TROLLLLLLL WISHES HAVE COME TRUE JUST KEEP ASKING.
FIGHT THE WHITE HOUSE TROLLLLLL
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 1:07:56 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

William Graham wrote:

> I would be a lot more sympathetic to your position if I wasn't paying
double
> taxes on my corporate income. But that's exactly what the dividend
taxes
> amount to. Also, when I die, the government will get a portion of my
estate
> before it gets distributed to my kids. This is money that has already
been
> taxed once, so it also constitutes double taxation. It won't affect
me and
> my kids very much, because I am not that rich. But for those with
estates
> that are significantly over a million dollars, it can be quite a
bite. The
> point is, there is no justification for taxing anyone twice. It's
like if
> you had to pay taxes on your income, and then, when you gave some of
it to
> your wife to buy groceries with, she had to pay taxes on it again.
You
> wouldn't like that would you? - Well, that's the way I feel when the
> corporations I own pay income taxes, and then when they distribute
what's
> left over to me, I have to pay taxes on it again. the only thing that
has
> happened to that money is it has been moved from the companies
account to
> mine. Also, when I saved for my retirement, my kids went without some
things
> because our spendable income was a little less. (about 10%) Now, when
I die,
> those kids should get that money, because they were deprived of it
when I
> first saved it. Their peers got more things than they got, because
their
> fathers didn't save a dime. Now, when their fathers are, "poor",
(compared
> with me) the government hits my estate up for taxes again on that
money. It
> should go to my kids, who didn't get to spend it the first time
around. In
> many ways we, "rich" get screwed by the system, and the liberal Bush
bashers
> just sweep that under the rug. I am damn tired of the liberal robin
hood
> give away programs. It is very easy for the government to spend my
money on
> anything and everything that they think will buy them more votes. It
is like
> a breath of fresh air to get someone like G. Bush in office every 20
years
> or so, who will help to slow down the drain on my pocketbook a little
bit. I
> made my money by saving it straight from a standard, average
engineers
> salery. I didn't steal it from anybody. Anyone I worked with could
have done
> the same thing that I did, but they spent their money like there was
no
> tomorrow. Now, I just want the government to leave me alone and let
me enjoy
> my retirement without having to pay for all those hangers on. - Is
that too
> much to ask?

Sorry Bill. You don't count (as a rich). You made your money by saving
it from a regular employee salary.

However you want to break it, it's well established that since the
magna carta, the tax system has been favored the rich.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 5:41:31 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106503676.541576.61930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> William Graham wrote:
>
>> I would be a lot more sympathetic to your position if I wasn't paying
> double
>> taxes on my corporate income. But that's exactly what the dividend
> taxes
>> amount to. Also, when I die, the government will get a portion of my
> estate
>> before it gets distributed to my kids. This is money that has already
> been
>> taxed once, so it also constitutes double taxation. It won't affect
> me and
>> my kids very much, because I am not that rich. But for those with
> estates
>> that are significantly over a million dollars, it can be quite a
> bite. The
>> point is, there is no justification for taxing anyone twice. It's
> like if
>> you had to pay taxes on your income, and then, when you gave some of
> it to
>> your wife to buy groceries with, she had to pay taxes on it again.
> You
>> wouldn't like that would you? - Well, that's the way I feel when the
>> corporations I own pay income taxes, and then when they distribute
> what's
>> left over to me, I have to pay taxes on it again. the only thing that
> has
>> happened to that money is it has been moved from the companies
> account to
>> mine. Also, when I saved for my retirement, my kids went without some
> things
>> because our spendable income was a little less. (about 10%) Now, when
> I die,
>> those kids should get that money, because they were deprived of it
> when I
>> first saved it. Their peers got more things than they got, because
> their
>> fathers didn't save a dime. Now, when their fathers are, "poor",
> (compared
>> with me) the government hits my estate up for taxes again on that
> money. It
>> should go to my kids, who didn't get to spend it the first time
> around. In
>> many ways we, "rich" get screwed by the system, and the liberal Bush
> bashers
>> just sweep that under the rug. I am damn tired of the liberal robin
> hood
>> give away programs. It is very easy for the government to spend my
> money on
>> anything and everything that they think will buy them more votes. It
> is like
>> a breath of fresh air to get someone like G. Bush in office every 20
> years
>> or so, who will help to slow down the drain on my pocketbook a little
> bit. I
>> made my money by saving it straight from a standard, average
> engineers
>> salery. I didn't steal it from anybody. Anyone I worked with could
> have done
>> the same thing that I did, but they spent their money like there was
> no
>> tomorrow. Now, I just want the government to leave me alone and let
> me enjoy
>> my retirement without having to pay for all those hangers on. - Is
> that too
>> much to ask?
>
> Sorry Bill. You don't count (as a rich). You made your money by saving
> it from a regular employee salary.
>
> However you want to break it, it's well established that since the
> magna carta, the tax system has been favored the rich.
>
That's strange. I looked over the tax forms very carefully, and no where on
the form is there any place for me to tell the government how I got my
money. The form, (just like you) assumes that I stole it from someone else,
and should have to pay more taxes on the income I derive from it. It doesn't
matter whether I got a million dollars from doing a gig at Hollywood Bowl,
or saved my way to it by putting 10% of my income away during my entire
working life. I still have to pay double taxes on the income it earns me.
Anonymous
January 23, 2005 9:26:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 14:41:31 -0800, "William Graham"
<weg9@comcast.net> wrote:


>That's strange. I looked over the tax forms very carefully, and no where on
>the form is there any place for me to tell the government how I got my
>money. The form, (just like you) assumes that I stole it from someone else,
>and should have to pay more taxes on the income I derive from it. It doesn't
>matter whether I got a million dollars from doing a gig at Hollywood Bowl,
>or saved my way to it by putting 10% of my income away during my entire
>working life. I still have to pay double taxes on the income it earns me.


Oh bull. The nature of income is distinguished
in a myriad of ways. If all you file is 1040 or
1040 EZ, you're a wage earning prole, plain and
simple.

If you file form C, you have a business of some
sort.

If you have interest or dividend income, that's
spelled out in form B and all its supplemental
forms. The interest and dividend income (on
state forms) is further subdivided by its source --
ie., in-state income taxed at a separate rate
from out-of state; dividends on state/municipal
bonds taxed differently from dividends from stock.

If you have significant deductions (eg. interest
on a home loan) that's known through form A,
and again that reflects your social status,
giving you an advantage proportional to the
debt you can carry.

Etc. and so on.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 6:23:28 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

American politicians are all in the pockets of major enterprises. How
can you support that kind og government ?
regs,

Mads (From Scandinavia)
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 2:00:11 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Ray Fischer wrote:


> Smirk. "Fair" share.


Do you always reply to troll induced, off topic, cross posted trash?




_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 2:16:08 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

BrianEWilliams <sorry_no_email@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Those 10 year surplus projections from early 2001 weren't worth the
>paper they were printed on.

Well of course. Just because Bush was projecting big surpluses in
order to justify tax cuts doesn't mean that he was telling the truth.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 2:16:09 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Ray Fischer wrote:

> Well of course. Just because Bush was projecting big surpluses in



_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 4:39:39 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

On 23 Jan 2005 04:55:07 -0800, panteltje@yahoo.com wrote:

>WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF ASSUME.

He becomes an As?
What's that?
--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 5:57:06 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

"William Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:o 9CdnWWVoZi73WTcRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
>
> "Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:ctaiep$2dh$1@bolt.sonic.net...
>> William Graham <weg9@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a careful
>>>look
>>>at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the, "rich" people are
>>>paying
>>>more than their fair share of the nations tax burden.
>>
>> Smirk. "Fair" share.
>>
>> Did you also look at the capital gains tax rate? 15%. Before
>> deductions. How about that inheritance tax? Zip.
>>
>> Meanwhile, those who are rich use far more in government services.
>>
>>> This has been true all
>>>of my adult life. (I am 69 years old) All Bush's tax cuts for the upper
>>>income group did was to partly alleviate this inequity.
>>
>> Oh boo hoo. The CEO who earns $1,000,000 a year has to pay $150,000
>
> Why should he have to pay one dime more than you or I do? Does the Army
> shoot their bullets faster when the enemy attacks his town? Does the fire
> department use more water putting out the fire in his house?

Does he gain more from the infrastructure and support services and lose more
if the fire department doesn't come by? Well...yeah.
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 6:43:59 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

In article <v96dnQOoBe4MY2XcRVn-gg@bright.net>, "Steve Young"
<bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> says...
> Subject: Re: Deficit, minus $10 trillion swing under Bush
> From: "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet>
> Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa, rec.photo.digital, rec.video.desktop, alt.woodworking, rec.photo.equipment.35mm
>
> "Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote
>
> > William Graham <weg9@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>As usual, you are not telling the whole story. - If you take a
> >>careful look at the form 1040 tax tables, you will see that the,
> >>"rich" people are paying more than their fair
> >>share of the nations tax burden.
>
> > Smirk. "Fair" share.
>
> Exactly
> Question, which is larger $1,500 or $150,000?
>

I think it's the 50 billion dollars in corporate bailouts so that CEOs
of car companies, Airlines etc. wouldn't ahve to take a pay cut.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
http://www.ramsays-online.com
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 6:45:10 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

In article <v96dnQOoBe4MY2XcRVn-gg@bright.net>, "Steve Young"
<bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> says...
> Let's see, one worker pays $1,500
> and the other worker pays $150,000
>
> What say we split the inequity and each worker pays $75,750?
>

The "worker" that pays $150,000 probably owe's his remaining $800,000 to
the sweat of a couple hundred of those taking home $18,500. Get it?
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
http://www.ramsays-online.com
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 6:45:11 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"Chris Phillipo" <cphillipo@ramsays-online.com> wrote >

In article <v96dnQOoBe4MY2XcRVn-gg@bright.net>, "Steve Young"
> <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> says...
>> Let's see, one worker pays $1,500
>> and the other worker pays $150,000
>>
>> What say we split the inequity and each worker pays $75,750?

> The "worker" that pays $150,000 probably owe's his remaining $800,000
> to the sweat of a couple hundred of those taking home $18,500. Get it?

nope! you don't Take an MD for example.
Humongous educational cost and personal sacrifice the $18,500 worker is
simply unwilling to bear. However, don't let that stop them from pounding
a physician's malpractice insurance cost into the ionosphere or sticking
the hospital with the bill.

Who consumes more government paid medical?
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 6:49:20 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

In article <mbkiv0phg4hq3pttsag4i0emlu1bkcqoa7@4ax.com>,
Big Bill <bill@pipping.com> wrote:

> On 23 Jan 2005 04:55:07 -0800, panteltje@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF ASSUME.
>
> He becomes an As?
> What's that?

Better the first 2 then the first 3.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 7:06:43 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Chris Phillipo wrote:

> the sweat of a couple hundred of those taking home $18,500. Get it?



_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 7:07:03 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Chris Phillipo wrote:

> of car companies, Airlines etc. wouldn't ahve to take a pay cut.


_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `'
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 10:01:12 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

In article <fJ6dnUxRzINWi2TcRVn-gA@bright.net>, "Steve Young"
<bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> says...
> nope! you don't Take an MD for example.
> Humongous educational cost and personal sacrifice the $18,500 worker is
> simply unwilling to bear. However, don't let that stop them from pounding
> a physician's malpractice insurance cost into the ionosphere or sticking
> the hospital with the bill.
>
> Who consumes more government paid medical?
>
>
>

You are blaming the patient for the doctor's mistakes? Nice.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
http://www.ramsays-online.com
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 10:29:14 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
news:fe8Kd.6595$8i7.126441@wagner.videotron.net:

> Ray Fischer wrote:
>
>
>> Smirk. "Fair" share.
>
>
> Do you always reply to troll induced, off topic, cross posted
trash?
>
>
>
>
> _____________________
> /| /| | |
> ||__|| | Please do not |
> / O O\__ | feed the |
> / \ | Trolls |
> / \ \|_____________________|
> / _ \ \ ||
> / |\____\ \ ||
> / | | | |\____/ ||
> / \|_|_|/ | _||
> / / \ |____| ||
> / | | | --|
> | | | |____ --|
> * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
> *-- _--\ _ \ | ||
> / _ \\ | / `'
> * / \_ /- | | |
> * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
>

No, I don't. In fact I usually ignore these huge off-topic threads,
except when I'm in a silly enough mood. As a result, I suspect that
I'm happier than you (in this one area at least).

Just ignore the thread. It will go away, possibly even before
Christmas :-)

Cute sig, BTW.

Gino

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) phone 650.966.8481
letters617blochg3251 (replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 1:44:40 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

On a sunny day (Thu, 27 Jan 2005 13:39:39 -0700) it happened Big Bill
<bill@pipping.com> wrote in <mbkiv0phg4hq3pttsag4i0emlu1bkcqoa7@4ax.com>:

>On 23 Jan 2005 04:55:07 -0800, panteltje@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>WHEN ONE ASSUMES ONE CAN EASRLY BECOME THE FIRST 2 LETTERS OF ASSUME.
>
>He becomes an As?
>What's that?
phonetics
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 1:44:42 AM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking (More info?)

On a sunny day (Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:06:43 -0500) it happened Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
<CJcKd.11524$8i7.206295@wagner.videotron.net>:

>Chris Phillipo wrote:
>
>> the sweat of a couple hundred of those taking home $18,500. Get it?
>
>
>
> _____________________
> /| /| | |
> ||__|| | I am GW Bush |
> / O O\__ | I will NUKE |
> / \ | The WORLD |
> / \ \|_____________________|
> / _ \ \ ||
> / |\____\ \ ||
> / | | | |\____/ ||
> / \|_|_|/ | _||
> / / \ |____| ||
> / | | | --|
> | | | |____ --|
> * _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
>*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
> / _ \\ | / `'
>* / \_ /- | | |
> * ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
>
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 9:14:15 PM

Archived from groups: soc.culture.usa,rec.photo.digital,rec.video.desktop,alt.woodworking,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

>
> > The "worker" that pays $150,000 probably owe's his remaining $800,000
> > to the sweat of a couple hundred of those taking home $18,500. Get it?
>
> nope! you don't Take an MD for example.
> Humongous educational cost and personal sacrifice the $18,500 worker is
> simply unwilling to bear. However, don't let that stop them from pounding
> a physician's malpractice insurance cost into the ionosphere or sticking
> the hospital with the bill.
>
> Who consumes more government paid medical?
>
> And how many doctors are overeducated idiots,
who owe their whole practice to insurance companies and pill kickbacks? "I
got anxiety doc". How many tell the receptionist to farm out ( refer to a
real doctor ) any body who happens to really be sick. They hate that. Half
this neighborhood is a bunch of zombies behind these guys. They don't get
sued, 'cause they never treat anybody for anything. Bob Hickey
!