No. of Recommendations: 84
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. She considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, but her father was a staunch Republican. One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to high taxes and welfare programs.

He stopped her and asked how she was doing in school. She answered that she had a 4.0 GPA, but it was really tough. She had to study all the time and never had time to go out and party. She didn't have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. On top of that, the part-time job her father insisted she keep left absolutely no time for anything else.

He then asked, "How is your friend Mary?"

She replied that Mary was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, but was very popular on campus, didn't have a job, and went to all the parties. She was always complaining about not having any money, but didn't want to work. Why, she often didn't show up for classes because she was hung over.

Dad then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and request that 1.0 be taken off her 4.0 and given it to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a respectable 3.0 GPA.
Then, she could also give her friend half the money she'd earned from her job so that her friend would no longer be broke.

The daughter angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair. I worked really hard for my grades and money, and Mary just loafs. Why should her laziness and irresponsibility be rewarded with half of what I've worked for?"

The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 96
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."


<><>

You like millions of others are being duped into thinking that the Republican party is protecting your hard earned dollars when in reality they are protecting the interests of a select few oil barons while piling up debt like crazy for your grandkids to pay off. Pull your head out of ....um....the sand.


scm
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 39
She replied that Mary was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, but was very popular on campus, didn't have a job, and went to all the parties. She was always complaining about not having any money, but didn't want to work. Why, she often didn't show up for classes because she was hung over.


Sounds like she spent a lot of time in W's dorm room.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
Sounds like she spent a lot of time in W's dorm room.


<><>

If Mary's father was rich and famous and a republican her grades really wouldn't matter

scm
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I'm lactose intolerant.To many cheeses on this post <grin>tm

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Pull your head out of ....um....the sand.
scm


says the blind man that has his/her head out of the sand, yet can not see
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 100
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

And the daughter kept working hard and getting good grades but the father was diagnosed with Alzheimer's at exactly the moment when his pension stopped coming due to the incompetence of the managers of the company from which he'd retired early.

He was man enough, even with the ravages the disease had taken on his brain not to take up the dreaded "leftie" phrase, "It isn't fair, s'not my fault" when he could no longer afford medical treatment and ended up homeless.

The daughter considered helping the old man, after all, she was by now a partner in a law firm and making way more money than she could ever spend, but really, what kind of lesson would that set for her children, Ayn and Ayndrew Rand who were finally grasping the tough love/reap what you sow of "hey it's my money, and it ain't my fault you didn't plan better."

She still thought fondly of the old man, and when her husband left her for a hot member of the ACLU, she smiled at dad's advice to pre-nup the guy back in the day. So the deadbeat ex-husband and kids (who were really interfering with her career anyway) would be on their own now. Serves them right for preferring the company of an aspiring novelist and his pinko new wife to the wealth she had amassed through her own talents and the good fortune to have been born in the land of opportunity.

Skipping into her corner office one day, she was amazed to find that the senior partner's nephew had co-opted her position and she, having learned from long dead addle-brained daddy, did not say that it wasn't fair that all her hard work had now landed her on her middle-aged butt. Her golden parachute would keep her warm and as she stepped over homeless people (who probably all have town homes in Florida or spend the money they receive from soft hearted folk on drugs and alcohol) to get to the trendy bar on the corner, she knew that all wasn't lost. She had a few drinks and on the way home she ran into Mary, her old college roommate, now a successful Independent Filmmaker. Mary mentioned that she was shooting a film about corporate raiders and needed a legal consultant for the flick. But her old roommate, who by now had spoken via cell phone to seven headhunters not at all interested in hiring a 40+ woman who'd been dismissed from her last position, wasn't going to beg, she merely stated her impressive credentials. Mary was cordial but nonplussed. "I'd love to help a sister out, but frankly, I only hire people with positive energy, people who energize me and make the picture a more positive experience."

What leftie/new age crappola. The daughter, who still referred to herself that way as her relationship with abandoned late father was the only one she could remember without feeling loss and regret. She was jobless and couldn't make anyone understand that she was willing to work hard. Unemployable and undateable at 40, a mom whose children wanted nothing to do with her and who had never wanted the distraction or bother of friends, she sat down on a park bench next to a homeless man. The man had clearly seen better days, he was reading a dog-eared copy of Ulysses and did not hesitate one moment before offering half his cheese sandwich and the last swig of beer to the daughter. She hadn't until that moment realized how hungry, thirsty, and lonely she had been. She also realized she hadn't checked her stock market holdings all day. Maybe it really didn't matter that she continue to lord it over those with less. And maybe there was something to this reaching out and helping those perceived as needing something we could give. This man was giving at great cost to himself, unlike the money she could have offered her father years ago, which she never would have missed. Like the Grinch at Christmas, her heart swelled and she turned to the man with tears in her eyes and tried to find the words to thank him.

"Don't go there." he said. "Just remember this next time you have a chance to be a human being instead of a judge of the worth of your fellow man."

She bowed her head in prayer and thanks.

"Oh, and one more thing", the man added, "welcome back to the Democratic Party."

MrsFourStarDave
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Those surely were alot of words,welcome back hocus.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 26
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."

And the daughter kept working hard and getting good grades. She was hired on her merits and ability into an excellent position.

Years later, her father was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease. Unfortunately, his company had just goine bust due to the new Democratic administration requiring that all companies provide totally paid for health care, and as 10% of all the corporations in America going bankrupt that year, her father's long established small business couldn't bear the tremendous cost of health care.

However, her father was wise, lived below his means, and had accumulated and excellent 401K account. He knew that the profigate spending of the democrats would make Social Security likely inadequate to live on, even though millions of lower and middle income folks hadn't bothered to save enough. He had also purchased an 'old age' care policy, which would take care of his expenses, so he wouldn't be a burden upon his children. He knew that his own health and well being were his responsibility, and had told his daughter so many times. He had prepared.

When her husband left her , she smiled at dad's advice to pre-nup the guy back in the day. She knew it was both parents responsibility and obligation to raise their kids, save for an education for them, and provide health care. She also knew that life was a balance of both career and family life. SHe and her husband had set up their own retirement accounts, and a college fund for their daughter and other children. Yes, she and her husband, like 50% of folks marrying, had decided to split, but they were both financially prepared and able to do so with minimal impact. And, at 40, she was confident she'd find other interesting people, since she and her husband had many varied interests, and weren't couch potatoes glued to Prime Time TV like the neighbors across the street.



Meanwhile, the folks across the street, lifelong democrats, who had sponged off welfare and assistance to 'poor kids' and everything else, who weren't married since they collected more benefits, decided to split. The dad became homeless, and the mom and 8 kids had to go to Section 8 housing, since the mother had little education, didn't think it was worth anything, and had been raised in a home where it was expected the 'government would provide'. She hated to see a family torn apart, but they had lived beyond their means, had gone into debt, always had fights over money, and never assumed responsibility, and it showed especially in their children, who were in and out of juvie hall all the time, with nothing but a slap on the wrist....after all, they were 'deprived' , even though they lived in a nice neighborhood.

She fondly remembered the lessons she had learned growing up, about responsibility, getting a good education, having family values, planning for the future, and living below your means. She recalled the conversations about saving for retirement, providing medical insurance, and keeping current in job skills.

She bowed her head in prayer and thanks. And she was glad she was a Republican....



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
telegraph,

You are a fine writer, touche.

It reminds me of a bit Reena, a comedian friend of mine does.

***
So like everyone else in L.A. I wrote a one-woman show, I called it, "My mother ruined my life." But unlike all my lucky comedian/actor friends, *my* mother is a performer herself so a week after my show, *she* is doing a show next door called, "I did not." So my rebuttal show, "You did so and it's not fair you get more industry out to your show." And my mother, never one to let anyone else have the last word, comes out with her show, "And YOU try dealing with getting pregnant at 16 and then finding out your daughter wants to be a comedian." I give up. My mother will probably be the next Roseann.
***

Something like that.

Anyway, thanks for taking my ride and thanks all for not slamming me for barging into your board.

For the record though, I'm NOT hocus.

MrsFourStarDave

P.S. Who is hocus?
P.P.S. I suppose I *could* be hocus if y'all want me to.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
hocus is a guy who would had issues with briefness.Your show reminds me of the Seinfeld episode with Kathy Griffin in which she has the "I Hate Jerry Seinfeld" show.Good luck with your comedy,i'm a big comedy fan.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Thanks 2828,

I'm actually not a career comedian, I have only been on stage once. My late husband was a standup and I'm toying with the idea of entering the arena myself. But I'm really a writer and gambler. So thanks for your criticism of my writing style, it's always good to know what I'm doing wrong so I can attempt to make it right.

MrsFourStarDave, slinking back into lurking mode here since I'm not really a poster girl for retiring early with piles of cash but I am in awe of all of you for your success (if not your political leanings :))
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You did nothing wrong it's just that i'm a republican.It's amazing how much more you can read when it is in agreement with your beliefs.No need to lurk here you can post on any topic you like and get a varied response.Good thing about posting here is everyone has plenty of time to read posts and is quite constructive,except me.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
MrsFourStarDave said,

I'm actually not a career comedian, I have only been on stage once. My late husband was a standup and I'm toying with the idea of entering the arena myself. But I'm really a writer and gambler.

When my oldest was 3 or 4, we got him involved with swim classes. After a few years watching him learn how to swim and after watching him grow and appear to have my basic slim, bony, body style, I got an idea.

The idea was that if he could become a good swimmer, then maybe, just maybe, this ex-runner who could splash around and sink with the best of them in the water, could learn to swim.

2 years later, here I sit typing resting as I just got back from a nice, swimming workout at the pool.

Now, the boys are getting involved with the theater. Heh, heh....guess what ol' Dad is thinking about?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oh, yes!
You all have made my w/e!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Those surely were alot of words,welcome back hocus.

Peterman! <ROFL>

Golfwaymore
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
How did you get that cool crown?I thought intercst was the only one allowed to use that.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<2 years later, here I sit typing resting as I just got back from a nice, swimming workout at the pool.

Now, the boys are getting involved with the theater. Heh, heh....guess what ol' Dad is thinking about?
>>


My eleven year old nephew has been taking acting lesson for a couple of years, and recently performed as the Mayor on Munchkinland in a community theater production of "The Wizard of Oz." What fun!



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
MrsFourStarDave: For the record though, I'm NOT hocus.

P.S. Who is hocus?
P.P.S. I suppose I *could* be hocus if y'all want me to.


One *hocus* in the world is enough.....more than enough.

Hocus was one who could get into an argument with himself, and 10,000 words later, lose that argument.......

He left here to go to the 'nofee' retire early boards, and after a while and running around in the same circles there, left that board for his 'own' board.

He promised that someday he would write a book......

T.

P.S. I think you'll find nearly all the people here believe that you are primarily the one responsible for your own life, education, career, health care, retirement, and financial planning.

For me, I know that for every dollar sent to Washington, collected by Washinton, or otherwise gotten by Washington DC, less than a quarter comes back in actual benefits to anyone. 3/4th of it is 'expenses' to run a humongeous gov't bureacracy. The less money sent to the feds the better. The state might actually get 50 cents on the dollar returned, and local gov'ts 70 cents on the dollar.

Too many irresponsible folks expect gov't to provide everything for them, from housing to healthcare to free food/food stamps for the situations they find themselves in....

T.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Hocus was one who could get into an argument with himself, and 10,000 words later, lose that argument.......
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh Lordy did i laugh on that one.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Hocus was one who could get into an argument with himself, and 10,000 words later, lose that argument..... ,/i>

Ah, so telegraph wasn't just saying that I'm verbose, but also that I am a contentious, self-centered blowhard.

Got it.

Not the first time I was dissed on a message board but I think this is a new record for speed with which it happened combined with lack of feistiness on my part.

MrsFourStarDave, taking her victories as she finds them and wishing everyone a happy Sunday night
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
No i think he was just reminded of hocus by the length of the post and the fact that i conjered up his name.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
MsFourStarDave: Hocus was one who could get into an argument with himself, and 10,000 words later, lose that argument..... ,/i>

Ah, so telegraph wasn't just saying that I'm verbose, but also that I am a contentious, self-centered blowhard.


No, telegraph didn't call you a hocus...someone else invoked that *curse* and said it could have 'hocus' like qualities.....and YOU thought that *hocus* might be a good thing....

I just explained it so you wouldn't be confused with the *hocus*, also knowned as YKW (yu-no-who) when no one wanted to invoke the 'name', sort of like Beelzebub.....

Don't shoot the messenger.....

And don't blame telegraph for the *hocus* connection...twasn't me!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So sorry telegraph, it was 2828 who called me hocus.

I am so sorry.

But still dissed.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
But still dissed.

There, there, Mrs4*. You still got a lot of recs for your piece. Don't that count fer somethin'?

ILC
deftly avoiding the political squabble cuz, for me, it's one big food fight and i'm jes' watchin' the back 'n' forth, gettin' tennis neck, and tryin' to duck outta the way o' them mashed taters
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Hocus was one who could get into an argument with himself, and 10,000 words later, lose that argument..... ,/i>

Ah, so telegraph wasn't just saying that I'm verbose, but also that I am a contentious, self-centered blowhard.

Got it.

Not the first time I was dissed on a message board but I think this is a new record for speed with which it happened combined with lack of feistiness on my part.

MrsFourStarDave, taking her victories as she finds them and wishing everyone a happy Sunday night


Don't go.

I liked your post.

Just p-box telegraph if he bugs you. I do it frequently.

vickifool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
She bowed her head in prayer and thanks.

"Oh, and one more thing", the man added, "welcome back to the Democratic Party."


<As a single, large tear drops from my eye>

<Sniffle-Sniff>

I've finally seen the light. I don't want to retire early anymore. I simply want to take what I've accumulated so far and hand it out to all the charity cases who deserve it so much more than I and my family do.

Please, form a line, and I'll get right to the handouts as soon as I cash out my 401k. Now-now, let's be orderly about this; surely some of you are more deserving than the others - let them in front...

Draggon
- Puhhhhh-LEASE!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 14
Profligate spending by democrats. Nah.

Profligate spending by republicans. Nah.

What a bunch of crap. Everyone should get it right. Profligate spending by Government.

They're trying to buy your support with other people's money - all of them are, with almost no exceptions.

The solution isn't to turn out the Reps for the Dems, or vice versa. The solution is to turn out the Republicrat party all together and bring in some new blood that genuinely believes in dismantling a lot of the government.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
The daughter considered helping the old man, after all, she was by now a partner in a law firm and making way more money than she could ever spend, but really, what kind of lesson would that set for her children, Ayn and Ayndrew Rand who were finally grasping the tough love/reap what you sow of "hey it's my money, and it ain't my fault you didn't plan better."

You can slam her all you want, but she has had a far greater impact on the WORLD of which you can merely DREAM.

You show a true ignorance of her philosophy. The daughter would not have consider it a sacrifice to assist her father.

Do you envy those willing to take responsibility for their lives? Do you envy the good for being good?

In your world, who pays the bills? The attitude of your post spits in the face of all those who have overcome the level of poverty to achieve success. I don't like someone spitting in my father's face.

tngirl
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
The greatest problem I have with the Democratic party is I am being forced to support the people "who cannot support themselves".

It should be my choice and not the directive from some overpaid, socialistically bent, purveyor of "the greater good".

JB
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
The greatest problem I have with the Democratic party is I am being forced to support the people "who cannot support themselves".


You think Republicans are incapable of using force? Tell it to the millions who have lost their jobs while watching the rich count their billions in tax cuts. I don't recall them having much choice in the matter. Most of them, after all, voted for the other guy, if memory serves.

If the system isn't working for working Americans, can you blame them for doubting the sanctity of Republican doctrine?

Oh yeah, if they don't have jobs, it's their own damn fault. The highest-quality, most productive work force the world has ever known, and corporate America can't find anything to do with them. Never mind.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<<The greatest problem I have with the Democratic party is I am being forced to support the people "who cannot support themselves".

It should be my choice and not the directive from some overpaid, socialistically bent, purveyor of "the greater good".

JB
>>


Worse than that, we are being forced to subsidize the well off middle class through very high payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.

At least there is an argument for paying a benefit to the indigent elderly, but not to the well off middle class. All that does is help build an ever expanding cruise ship industry.

The profligacy of the Democrats has paid out a stupendous treasure to the WWII generation through Social Security and Medicare, leaving these programs grossly underfunded for the 'boomer generation that will be flooding into them in upcoming decades. This will either cause benefits to be cut or taxes to soar a lot further on the backs of people who are working.

Unfortunately, the elderly lobby has primarily been a greedy and irresponsible raid on the pocket books of working people.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<Oh yeah, if they don't have jobs, it's their own damn fault. The highest-quality, most productive work force the world has ever known, and corporate America can't find anything to do with them. Never mind.

Cheeze
>>


Highest quality and most productive ---perhaps. And most overpaid as well by world standards.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
tngirl,

I'm so terribly sorry I offended you, I was attempting humor by making the liberal position as appealing and black and white as the conservative one Seattle Pioneer posted. Off topic, but his was, in my opinion, a cleaner piece of writing.

I am sure that partners in law firms have far greater impacts on the world of which I can only dream. I spent my life supporting myself and my late husband so that he could fulfill his tiny dreams of making people laugh (he was a stand-up comedian). I never made much money, devoted myself to my relationship and have not had any demonstrative effect on the world. Point taken.

I do not envy those willing to take responsibility for their lives and I do not envy the good for being good. I consider myself a very compassionate person who takes complete responsibility for my own life. Since my husband's death, I do not depend on anyone for my emotional support and I have not depended on anyone for financial support since I was 18 years old.

In my world, *I* pay the bills. I have supported myself for my entire life, and my husband for the 12 years we were married. I also support my cat.

I never meant to spit in the face of those of you who are rich, I respect that choice and admire your success. I don't know your father, but I assure you, I never meant a silly parody of what seemed an overstatement of the conservative viewpoint to be spitting in your father's face. Please accept my sincere apologies and my promise not to intrude on this board.

Regretfully and respectfully,
MrsFourStarDave, not nearly as funny as she thought she was
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
The greatest problem I have with the Democratic party is I am being forced to support the people "who cannot support themselves".

The greatest problem I have with the Republican party is I am being forced to support the people who plenty of money already.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
The greatest problem I have with the Republican party is I am being forced to support the people who plenty of money already.

If only you were doing so, then I, for one, would be most happy. Trouble is you aren't, so I just have to keep on supporting myself along with those who don't -- or won't -- take care of themselves.

Regards...Pixy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
You know, this little parable always bothered me because it's so black and white. It never mentions her friend Sarah, who also has no extracurricular life (and who she sees more of these days because she is always at the library with her and works the same job.) Yet, despite all her hard work, Sarah's still only got a 2.0 GPA. Nor does it mention Dick, the class clown, who gets a 3.5 GPA because his professors are constantly reminded by the administration that his father is a major contributor to the universisty and has promised a new gymnasium this year if Dick graduates in the upper half of his class.

How would RepDad and DemDaughter feel about them?

pix
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"You can slam her all you want, but she has had a far greater impact on the WORLD of which you can merely DREAM."

I read her book "Atlas Shrugged" but I can't say I am impressed with her work or her philosophy. I don't see why you'd get upset if other people aren't impressed with her. Most liberals don't get upset if the rightwing disparages someone like Foucault or Chomsky-- and in fact they expect it.

Her protagonist and villain are too black and white and her philosphy of individualism is too simplistic. He novel didn't have any subtleties in message, driving home the message like with a repeated strikes of a bat on the reader's head.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Cheeze: You think Republicans are incapable of using force? Tell it to the millions who have lost their jobs while watching the rich count their billions in tax cuts. I don't recall them having much choice in the matter. Most of them, after all, voted for the other guy, if memory serves.

Last I checked, no 'republican' was going around 'terminating' jobs.

Probably 'most of them' who voted for the other guy don't pay any taxes, or pay $1000/yr or something like that...and a large percentage likely pay nothing, or even get money back in 'earned income' credit.

So you want to give a $1000/yr tax break to those paying that much, and give a $10,000 tax break to someone making $1,000,000 and already paying $370,000 in taxes????

Sounds like you envy 'wealth'. Yes, some are going to make more than others, unless you live in a communist type 'welfare state' where the gov't confiscates everything above $25,000, so everyone lives in the same state of 'wealth'.

Maybe you can show us exactly how 'tax breaks' has resulted in job losses? WHo is buying less now because they have more money in their pocket after getting money back from the tax folks, and paying less each week? Please explain?

Please explain the exact link between tax cuts and job losses. I'm curious.

If the system isn't working for working Americans, can you blame them for doubting the sanctity of Republican doctrine?

ANd the way for everyone to pay less taxes is to stop all the 'give away' programs that reward people for doing little or nothing to better themselves,and who encourage generation after generation of welfare weenies.....


Oh yeah, if they don't have jobs, it's their own damn fault.

Last I checked, Europe and Japan and other societies are having problems too....and forcing more 'welfare stuff' on employers, like paid healthcare for every worker, at employer expense, will merely accelerate the fleeing of jobs overseas.

We had recessions in 1974, 1982-83 and other times where millions of folks became unemployed in various industries. The 'oil' industry has lost over 1/2 million jobs since the 1960s.

Maybe it is too many 'irresponsible' parents raising too many 'don't care' kids who fail to get a decent education, then expect 'society' to provide them a $50,000/yr 'professional' job with their less than high school academic abilities????? AFter all, everyone is a 'victim' and are 'entitled' to a job, benefits, healthcare, subsidized housing, regardless of their lack of education, willingness to work, and responsibility for their own financial success or lack thereof.

Maybe it is a generation of uneducated weenies that is causing America to lose it's productive edge, along with other circumstances???? Maybe it is a generation of 'take the easy way' teenagers who don't go into medicine and engineering and physics and integrated circuit design and optical technologies, where others in foreign countries are willing to tackle the difficult subject areas????



So exactly what would YOU have done to stop the loss of jobs, other than 'trade barriers' which really do little other than drive up prices for everyone else. And 'trade barriers' would also likely result in lower exports, resulting in an equivalent job loss to those jobs 'saved' by import restrictions.... so what is YOUR answer NOW?



The highest-quality, most productive work force the world has ever known, and corporate America can't find anything to do with them.

Could it be that the liberal 'spend all you can afford and then more' has tapped out American wealth? People can't 'afford' any more goodies since they are paying for the goodies they bought yesterday? And the rampant budget deficiets - federal, state, and gov't, are crimping social welfare/make work programs, putting more people out of work, because the 'spend all you can' democrats have so many entitlement programs in place there is no money to actually do anything productive????


T.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<<Her protagonist and villain are too black and white and her philosphy of individualism is too simplistic. He novel didn't have any subtleties in message, driving home the message like with a repeated strikes of a bat on the reader's head.
>>


Judging from the number of hard headed liberals where the message never penetrated, it wasn't pounded home hard enough!

Personally, I'm "on strike" in ways and for reasons that are described in "Atlas Shrugged." High tax rates have caused me to sharply cut back my work efforts, and I estimate that as a result I will avoid paying taxes on a half million dollars in earned income over my remaining lifetime.

At marginal tax rates of more than forty percent including payroll taxes, that's a good chunk of money the government will never collect.


So I think there is a good deal of truth to be found in Ayn Rand's novels, even if you may not want to swallow them whole or consider them great works of fiction.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
MsFourStarDave:
I never meant to spit in the face of those of you who are rich, I respect that choice and admire your success. I don't know your father, but I assure you, I never meant a silly parody of what seemed an overstatement of the conservative viewpoint to be spitting in your father's face. Please accept my sincere apologies and my promise not to intrude on this board.


Oh, I think you take the comments here too seriously...we have fun poking fun at folks who espouse the 'I'm entitled' line.....since most of us, like you, have taken responsibility for our education, financial success, and choices in life. Things don't always turn out the way we want, but we 'bounce back' from what has happened, and don't expect "Uncle Sam" to be constantly bailing us out, holding our hand, etc. And we face problems in a financially responsible manner, living within our means.

Likely, most here are a bit sensitive, and tired of those promoting 'wealth tax', take from the rich, 'they already have too much and I'm entitled to some of it!' and similar threads...so when you posted your parody, you prompted a response.....

Not to worry...without some lively reparte, the board would go the way of the dinosaurs.....

So welcome to the REHP....and don't get flustered when a zinger comes your way.....twasn't personal, just a zing on the subjectj being discussed...... <grin>

Telegraph


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Please accept my sincere apologies and my promise not to intrude on this board.

Regretfully and respectfully,
MrsFourStarDave, not nearly as funny as she thought she was


You, MrsFourStarDave, are an incredibly "large" person, and I mean that in only the best way. Life is not black and white. In fact, if one could measure what we really do know about life, it would be like comparing a teacup of water to the ocean. All we know and have is what we've been taught, and that seems to be very little indeed. - Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Life is not black and white. In fact, if one could measure what we really do know about life, it would be like comparing a teacup of water to the ocean. All we know and have is what we've been taught, and that seems to be very little indeed. - Art

How is it that the world/reality is not black & white? What has changed since the first human became conscious of his surroundings? To survive, we have to eat and maintain a reasonable body temperature while breathing oxygen. That's it. Man lived with a hand to mouth existence for thousands and thousands of years. Is my life somehow different from his because I have a dishwasher and SUV?

Avoiding bacteria, viruses and critters bigger and stronger than we are is also beneficial. I have never understood where the gray area is that everyone is always referring to? Isn't that just another way of saying, "You have to decide how you are going to live your life."

On my 18th birthday, my daddy told me, "From here on out, it's all by choice." It has been. Every choice I've made has determined who I've become (and yes, I have called 1-800-DADDY several times). And I certainly didn't make all the right choices, but I know/knew I'm not omniscient. Only hind sight is 20-20, but where is the gray in choice? That is just as black and white as it can be. I know I must be missing something in my thinking process, but what is it?

Why is my teacup so different from your ocean? You only get gray by mixing black and white.

tngirl
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That is just as black and white as it can be. I know I must be missing something in my thinking process, but what is it?

Why is my teacup so different from your ocean? You only get gray by mixing black and white.

tngirl


I suppose it's because you and I look at the world very differently.
The older and I get, and the more I study it, the more convinced I become of the spiritual nature of life and the Universe. I've been reading quite a few books about quantum physics and just how weird this physical universe is. Ernst Schroedinger made the statement, "If your not shocked by quantum physics, then you don't understand it!" It has changed my whole perception of reality. This physical Universe may not be as "real" as what our brains tell us it is. It may all be an illusion.

I'm not as sure about a lot of things as you are. In fact, I'm not 100% sure about anything. I'm 99.97% that there is some form of "life after death", but not 100% sure. I'm 99.97% sure that there is some form of omnipotent consciousness that controls the Universe, but not exactly sure what form it takes or why or how it does it, only that people who come back from near death experiences talk about having seen the Light and talked to super "beings of light" who act and look like they were Angels (whatever that means). I believe that they've brought back enough "evidence" to convince me at least that there may be some validity to what they say. - Art

The Universe as a Hologram
Does Objective Reality Exist, or is the Universe a Phantasm?

In 1982 a remarkable event took place. At the University of Paris a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect performed what may turn out to be one of the most important experiments of the 20th century. You did not hear about it on the evening news. In fact, unless you are in the habit of reading scientific journals you probably have never even heard Aspect's name, though there are some who believe his discovery may change the face of science.


http://www.earthportals.com/hologram.html


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I suppose it's because you and I look at the world very differently.
The older and I get, and the more I study it, the more convinced I become of the spiritual nature of life and the Universe. I've been reading quite a few books about quantum physics and just how weird this physical universe is. Ernst Schroedinger made the statement, "If your not shocked by quantum physics, then you don't understand it!" It has changed my whole perception of reality. This physical Universe may not be as "real" as what our brains tell us it is. It may all be an illusion.


Well, thanks for trying to explain.

tngirl
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I guess I agree with Art on this one. Of course, alot of things ARE black & white, but certainly everything is not.

The older I get, I'm more frightened by those who DO think that everything can be boiled down to black & white.

As time goes on, I'm starting to understand Grandpa saying, "I dont understand half of what I know." <grin>

Golfwaymore
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Mrs4StarDave:
I never meant to spit in the face of those of you who are rich, I respect that choice and admire your success. I don't know your father, but I assure you, I never meant a silly parody of what seemed an overstatement of the conservative viewpoint to be spitting in your father's face. Please accept my sincere apologies and my promise not to intrude on this board.

Don't take too much offense from the beyond the pale religious right that infests this board. Many of them would be willing to sell their grandmother to the glue factory if it would bring them a bigger tax cut. Not all of us who make a high income have sold our souls to the devil (h3ll they didn't even become amazing blues musicians for the price either!).

Hang out and pick up some of the scarce breadcrumbs of RE advice. You don't have to be rich to retire early (though it helps). Some here are not and have done it or are on the way. Listen particularly to mazske and ariechert for the low budget advice.

Welcome,
Hyperborea

P.S. That reminds me of a joke. Did you hear about the dyslexic blues man who went down to the crossroads and sold his soul to Santa?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Don't take too much offense from the beyond the pale religious right that infests this board. Many of them would be willing to sell their grandmother to the glue factory if it would bring them a bigger tax cut. Not all of us who make a high income have sold our souls to the devil (h3ll they didn't even become amazing blues musicians for the price either!).

Not withstanding the fact that Seattle Pioneer finds your language above offensive...

Tngirl, who the reply was intended to, is about as far from the religous right as one can get. I follow her posts with great interest as a lurker over on the Atheist Fools board.

Golfwaymore
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Listen particularly to mazske and ariechert for the low budget advice." - Hyperborea

Or you can listen to ariechert for weird, wacky, bizarre, advice. Especially anthing pertaining to near death experiences or the holographic universe! - Art

My two favorite online sites:

http://www.near-death.com/

http://www.earthportals.com/hologram.html


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Tngirl, who the reply was intended to, is about as far from the religous right as one can get. I follow her posts with great interest as a lurker over on the Atheist Fools board.

Golfwaymore


So do I! I have to hit myself in the foot with a hammer to keep from posting stuff there. I read it, and then try and not respond! - Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Tngirl, who the reply was intended to, is about as far from the religous right as one can get. I follow her posts with great interest as a lurker over on the Atheist Fools board.

I'm pretty sure that she's claimed before to be an acolyte of Rand. That requires a lot of faith.

Hyperborea
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Or you can listen to ariechert for weird, wacky, bizarre, advice. Especially anthing pertaining to near death experiences or the holographic universe! - Art
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Art,

If you dropped acid you'd explode.

2828

PS-don't eat the frowning clowns.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
Could it be that the liberal 'spend all you can afford and then more' has tapped out American wealth? People can't 'afford' any more goodies since they are paying for the goodies they bought yesterday? And the rampant budget deficiets - federal, state, and gov't, are crimping social welfare/make work programs, putting more people out of work, because the 'spend all you can' democrats have so many entitlement programs in place there is no money to actually do anything productive????


You forget that the "rampant budget deficits" are a REPUBLICAN mess, produced by idiotic fiscal policies and a delusional foreign policy that will cost us perhaps even in the trillions of dollars before we clean up Bush's mess. You forget that the Bush Tax Cut was the biggest shell game in American history, shoving billions upon billions of dollars into the pockets of the wealthy while handing the IOU to working people and their children. You forget that "entitlements" work both ways, that the rich have their entitlements, like the free ride that George W. got getting into Yale and out of the ROTC, not to mention his fancy back-door dance into the Oval Office. You forget that a working society depends on supplying the basic needs for all its members, and if society does not provide that, in a democracy we have a right to reshape the system until it does -- even if that frightens the rich who think their dollars entitles them to make all the decisions in spite of annoying inconveniences like honest elections and civil liberties.

I am sick to death of this "you envy the rich" argument. Hide behind that all you want. Sing yourself to sleep every night with that song, whistle it as you walk past the cemetary, because the truth is that you do not so much scorn envy as fear justice, and you hear that wave rising to wash over you and your own self-rightous sense of entitlement.

Your argument amounts to "working people are overpaid as it is, and they don't deserve more." You've stated it almost as baldly as that. See how well that argument plays at election time.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
in a democracy we have a right to reshape the system until it does

The big, weak point in all your argument is that America is NOT a democracy. It never was. It was never intended to be one. It's a republic, and they work differently.

The Pledge of Allegiance even states "...and to the Republic for which it stands..." !
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I guess I agree with Art on this one. Of course, alot of things ARE black & white, but certainly everything is not.

Just as long as you have enough liability insurance to cover the gray areas, things should be okay. ;-)

As time goes on, I'm starting to understand Grandpa saying, "I dont understand half of what I know."

Mine always said, "Nothing stays the same except the smell of apple blossoms." Poor Grandpa never suspected biotechnology would be able to change that.

tngirl
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm pretty sure that she's claimed before to be an acolyte of Rand. That requires a lot of faith.

Just wondering if you can back this up with some facts?

tngirl

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
You forget that the "rampant budget deficits" are a REPUBLICAN mess, produced by idiotic fiscal policies and a delusional foreign policy that will cost us perhaps even in the trillions of dollars before we clean up Bush's mess. You forget that the Bush Tax Cut was the biggest shell game in American history, shoving billions upon billions of dollars into the pockets of the wealthy while handing the IOU to working people and their children. You forget that "entitlements" work both ways, that the rich have their entitlements, like the free ride that George W. got getting into Yale and out of the ROTC, not to mention his fancy back-door dance into the Oval Office. You forget that a working society depends on supplying the basic needs for all its members, and if society does not provide that, in a democracy we have a right to reshape the system until it does -- even if that frightens the rich who think their dollars entitles them to make all the decisions in spite of annoying inconveniences like honest elections and civil liberties.

I am sick to death of this "you envy the rich" argument. Hide behind that all you want. Sing yourself to sleep every night with that song, whistle it as you walk past the cemetary, because the truth is that you do not so much scorn envy as fear justice, and you hear that wave rising to wash over you and your own self-rightous sense of entitlement.

Your argument amounts to "working people are overpaid as it is, and they don't deserve more." You've stated it almost as baldly as that. See how well that argument plays at election time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd hate to have been on your little league team when you lost.Ease up on the cheeze and get outside and enjoy the day.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<<You forget that the "rampant budget deficits" are a REPUBLICAN mess, produced by idiotic fiscal policies and a delusional foreign policy that will cost us perhaps even in the trillions of dollars before we clean up Bush's mess. >>


Heh, heh!™ Hearing the Dems complain about excessive government spending and deficits is a reral knee slapper. It merits a vote for the Republicans next year for that reason alone!



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Heh, heh!™ Hearing the Dems complain about excessive government spending and deficits is a reral knee slapper.

Only because you don't have children and grandchildren unto 7 generations who will be paying the tab.

It was during the reign of Ronnie the Absent Minded that the U.S. went from being the world's largest creditor nation to being the world's largest debtor nation.

It used to be everybody owed us. Now it's the other way around.

Pees
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
CHeeze: You forget that the "rampant budget deficits" are a REPUBLICAN mess, produced by idiotic fiscal policies and a delusional foreign policy that will cost us perhaps even in the trillions of dollars before we clean up Bush's mess.

Seems it was Congress, of elected representatives from EVERY state and districut, who passed the spending bills and tax cuts, wasn't it? The President has little power to 'spend'. That is left up to Congress. SO please put the blame where it belongs, on the ELECTED members of COngress who approve such spending. And tax cuts. Methinks it is more 'runaway giveaway programs' by both political parties to keep getting elected that is the problem, regardless of party...



CHeeze: You forget that the Bush Tax Cut was the biggest shell game in American history, shoving billions upon billions of dollars into the pockets of the wealthy while handing the IOU to working people and their children.

Seems that everyone is going to have to pay off all the IOUs, and especially the wealthly since they already pay TONS more than 'working people'. But since 'working people' are the big majority of the folks in the country (like 95% of them) and since most taxes come from 'working folks' whether they be $25,000 or $500,000 earners, you are going to get 'most' of your taxes from 'working people'. Plain and simple. Even if you tax the 'rich' at 100% of income, you could reduce the average tax bill by about $10/yr. Do the math.

ANd again, it comes down to WEALTH envy. All you seem to be concerned about is the 'wealthy', not those who earn a lot, and already pay a lot in taxes. Seems to me, at the 37% tax bracket, those earning several hundred thousand a year are paying $100,000 in taxes. And still you bitch.

You aren't interested in their tax rate, but in confiscating their wealth. It is obvious from your posts that it is 'wealth envy', and the fact they earn a lot.

And if Bill GAtes makes 5 billion a year, and pays 1.5 billion in income taxes, you want him to pay even more, huh? Just because he is 'wealthy'. Does he really get 1.5 billion in 'services' from the gov't????


You forget that "entitlements" work both ways, that the rich have their entitlements, like the free ride that George W. got getting into Yale and out of the ROTC, not to mention his fancy back-door dance into the Oval Office.

Seems that a majority of the electoral college voted for Bush, which is how the election process works.....

And yes, folks who are alumni of a university seem to have a preference over those whose kids are not. So? Get over it. Alumni often provide significant financial aid and other aid (such as 'status' of alumni and ranking in ratings). Most colleges are PRIVATE, not public. Now are you going to tell me Yale is a 'public' college and cannot be selective in how it choses those who it admits and who it doesn't?

I'd bet the kid whose father is in a union,and who can get his kid into the union shop, where as someone else, regardless of money, is denied, would fit your category of 'free ride' and 'wealth entitlement' as well? Get over it..... many groups in America have selective acceptance, based upon WHO you know....from $25,000/yr union jobs to college admissions.



You forget that a working society depends on supplying the basic needs for all its members, and if society does not provide that, in a democracy we have a right to reshape the system until it does -- even if that frightens the rich who think their dollars entitles them to make all the decisions in spite of annoying inconveniences like honest elections and civil liberties.

Really? Where did that get codified.....'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'.....where in the Constitution and Bill of Rights did I read everyone is entitled to lobster and steak, a full paid educaton through PhD level, and a guaranteed job making $100,000/yr, an SUV at age 16, and a five bedroom house with white picket fence????

If you want a 'socialist' gov't, you might be right. The US was set up based upon a system of 'rights'...as codified in the Constitution, Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments.

There were no income taxes 200 years ago when the country was founded. THere was no 'welfare' and no social security and no medicare and no SEction 8 housing. You took care of yourself and your family.

Civil liberties don't include Section 8 housing, an SUV in every driveway, or 'entitlements'. Or wealth redistribution.

Sounds like you would enjoy living in a communist society more.


I am sick to death of this "you envy the rich" argument.

But that is all you write about, and promote by your very posts!

the truth is that you do not so much scorn envy as fear justice,


OK...exactly WHICH federal rule are we talking about when it comes to 'wealth distribution'???? Justice involves a legal matter and concern, not the feelings that 'the poor' are 'entitled' to 'share' in the 'wealth' of others.


Your argument amounts to "working people are overpaid as it is, and they don't deserve more."

I fail to see where your logic has caused you to spew forth the above. The working people are going to receive the 'going wage' for their skill, education, and training. To mandate 'more' in a global economy just means that the jobs will migrate to other places, or even more 'efficiency' will be put in place to reduce labor costs. Plain simple economics.

Now, if your idea is 'they deserve more' at the expense of those willing to work harder, or those who sacrificed and got more education while the others partied away their college years, or high school years, or grew up in disfunctonal homes, then I will continue to disagree.....

They are not 'entitled' to more simply because they work. THey are not 'entitled' to share in the wealth of others.

See how well that argument plays at election time.

Yes, unfortunately, we've gotten to a point where the 'gimme welfare class' has expanded to such a point that they will vote themselves even more perks, until manufacturers flee en mass (ala Calif and mandatedhealth expenses) to overseas markets...... and where folks will decide that their capital can earn more ELSEWHERE in the global economy....... and where 'wealthy' folks decide that they don't need to start businesses and create value HERE.

It's stupid to think that everyone can vote themselves $10,000/yr in benefits, knowing that since they pay almost no taxes, that 'others' will have to pay for it.....and when it is 70% expecting that, the other 30% aren't going to either want to support them, or be able to support them...

T.


Cheeze

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The Fool: If given a second chance, what financial decision would you have made differently?
TMFCheeze: Two words: rich parents.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

You do envy the rich.From your foolish interview.

2828
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
SP writes:

Hearing the Dems complain about excessive government spending and deficits is a reral knee slapper. It merits a vote for the Republicans next year for that reason alone!

Yeah, I'm getting a large chuckle out of it, too. Nevertheless, despite the fact TMF Cheeze is as far left of Atilla as I am to the right, I'll still defend his right to be totally in error in what he says. That's especially true when he says "See how well that argument plays at election time." And yes, I deliberately quoted that out of context. <g>

Regards...Pixy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
"Seems it was Congress, of elected representatives from EVERY state and districut, who passed the spending bills and tax cuts, wasn't it? The President has little power to 'spend'. That is left up to Congress. SO please put the blame where it belongs, on the ELECTED members of COngress who approve such spending."

Spending bills have to be signed by the president just like other bills. The president has the ability to veto any spending bill he chooses. Congress can override this veto of course. In post Vietnam times I don't think congress has ever overridden presidential veto on any budgetary bill. So it is fairly safe to say that the president has had the final approval (or at least agreed to) over federal spending. The government (in general) cannot spend without his approval. So it is a bit disingenuous of you to pass the buck and not hold presidents accountable for spending under their watch.

If a president doesn't like the way congress spends, veto it and send it back. Clinton did (or threatened to if he didn't like what was coming). There are many reasons for the deficits we are currently running (not all the fault of Bush), but Bush is responsible all the same. He signed the spending bills.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Heh, heh!™ Hearing the Dems complain about excessive government spending and deficits is a reral knee slapper. It merits a vote for the Republicans next year for that reason alone!


If memory serves, it was Bush who just asked for $87 billion to pay for his Iraqi adventure. And it's not the top 1% he's asking to pony up that amount, either.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'd hate to have been on your little league team when you lost.Ease up on the cheeze and get outside and enjoy the day.


You enjoy it your way, I'll enjoy it mine.

:-)

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<The big, weak point in all your argument is that America is NOT a democracy. It never was. It was never intended to be one. It's a republic, and they work differently.


Blah blah blah. I am tired of hearing this nonsense, as if it actually represents an intelligent counterargument.

The United States of America is a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC. That means we choose our representatives DEMOCRATICALLY, rather than having them appointed or granted by title or inheretance or some other method.
>>


Well, we WERE a republic. Then we became a democratic republic, just as you say. But now we are a classical aristocrisy as defined by Aristotle, with judges who are appointed for life empowered to appoint politicans and decide for everyone what their rights, powers and obligations will be.

When Benjamin Franklin was asked what the contitutional convention had produced for a government, he replied, "A REPUBLIC, if you can keep it!"


We didn't. We lost it.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
And if Bill GAtes makes 5 billion a year, and pays 1.5 billion in income taxes, you want him to pay even more, huh? Just because he is 'wealthy'. Does he really get 1.5 billion in 'services' from the gov't????


That is quite the point. Bill Gates doesn't pay $1.5 billion in taxes he earns, because he hasn't paid a dime in taxes on the Microsoft stock he holds. Those are unrealized capital gains, and they aren't subject to taxes of any kind unless he sells them. Warren Buffett has never paid a dime in taxes on his tens of billions in Berkshire Hathaway wealth, and likely never will.

These are two of the most successful capitalists in the history of money, and I applaud their success. But beyond their mere ability to generate value and build institutions that really serve a network of millions of stakeholders in their enterprises -- shareholders, employees, customers, and the communities that surround them -- these great entrepreneurs have a real sense of civic duty. They understand that capitalism has its limits, and that there is a place for taxes and governments, and sound reason for giving back to the society that made it possible for them to build the great fortunes they have created. Both of these great business leaders have therefore been staunch advocates of liberal tax policies, most especially with regard to estate taxes -- the tax slandered by conservatives as the "death tax" -- understanding that its repeal would unfairly allow them to escape taxation altogether (the right wing's wet dream, but quite obviously an unfair way to build a responsible society).

You go look at the dollar in your pocket. It doesn't say "This Belongs To Telegraph" on it. It says "Federal Reserve Note." That means it is not merely a possession of yours to be wilfully hoarded. What it is is a social contract, a guarantee to all who use these dollars that it will represent some kind of social value, an expectation that the system of exchange it makes possible will allow commerce to take place. It only has value because of a grand social agreement, and your sense of entitlement -- yes *YOUR* sense of entitlement, telegraph -- that your mere ownership of that dollar grants you the expectation of a certain privilege, exists only as long as that system functions for the benefit of everybody. When those dollars are used as instruments of exploitation, and when those dollars are used unfairly to warp the system and exempt people from their responsibility to create a just and reasonable society, you can expect your entitlements to be stripped away from you. And all your outrage and indignation and your belief in yourself as more worthy of society's gifts than the rest of us will serve you for nothing, because you placed yourself in claim of something that never belonged to you, at least not merely for the possession of these little scraps of paper. Because, ultimately, you cannot buy respect, and no amount of money will entitle you to launch an immoral war, or to strip people of their dignity, to deny education to the poor, to deny health care to children or to the elderly, to tear down a neighborhood because you want to build a golf course, to block citizens for buying prescription drugs from overseas because it hurts profits, to bulldoze a national park if it drops another percent or two to the bottom line.

Entitlement? Don't preach to me about entitlement. Take the rich off welfare and the poor won't need it.

Cheeze
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Yeah, I'm getting a large chuckle out of it, too. Nevertheless, despite the fact TMF Cheeze is as far left of Atilla as I am to the right, I'll still defend his right to be totally in error in what he says. That's especially true when he says "See how well that argument plays at election time." And yes, I deliberately quoted that out of context. <g>


Oh yeah? Well, sez you!

Just remember, Pixy: I made you, and I can break you.

Cheeze
;-)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
<<
That is quite the point. Bill Gates doesn't pay $1.5 billion in taxes he earns, because he hasn't paid a dime in taxes on the Microsoft stock he holds. >>


Bill Gates has been selling off significant amounts of Microsoft stock for many years on a regular basis. You are correct that he still doesn't pay much in Federal income taxes despite that because he is donating billions of dollars to various charities, and is well along on his stated intention to donate almost all of his stupefying wealth to charities during his lifetime.


<<You go look at the dollar in your pocket. It doesn't say "This Belongs To Telegraph" on it. It says "Federal Reserve Note." That means it is not merely a possession of yours to be wilfully hoarded. What it is is a social contract, a guarantee to all who use these dollars that it will represent some kind of social value, an expectation that the system of exchange it makes possible will allow commerce to take place. It only has value because of a grand social agreement, and your sense of entitlement -- yes *YOUR* sense of entitlement, telegraph -- that your mere ownership of that dollar grants you the expectation of a certain privilege, exists only as long as that system functions for the benefit of everybody. When those dollars are used as instruments of exploitation, and when those dollars are used unfairly to warp the system and exempt people from their responsibility to create a just and reasonable society, you can expect your entitlements to be stripped away from you. >>


What a socialist crock.



Seattle Pioneer


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
You go look at the dollar in your pocket. It doesn't say "This Belongs To Telegraph" on it. It says "Federal Reserve Note." That means it... Blah, blah, blah, blah

They're coming to take me away, HA-HA!
They're coming to take me away, HO-HO!
HEE-HEE, HAA-HAA
To the Happy Home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket-weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, HA-HAHAAA...

Draggon
- first thing that came to mind...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Or are you arguing that our elections are just a formality, and that there's some ruling class that has political ascendency over the rest of us?


Yes, the electors of each state.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Cheeze: That is quite the point. Bill Gates doesn't pay $1.5 billion in taxes he earns, because he hasn't paid a dime in taxes on the Microsoft stock he holds. Those are unrealized capital gains, and they aren't subject to taxes of any kind unless he sells them. Warren Buffett has never paid a dime in taxes on his tens of billions in Berkshire Hathaway wealth, and likely never will.

And, believe it or not, MOST Americans who own a house will never pay any taxes on their 'unrealized gains'. Yet, I don't see you going after them!!!!!

THe average American buys a house, lives in it for years and years....until recently, one could 'roll over' the gains and never pay taxes....now, you have a $250,000/$500,000 gain exemption, for which I doubt Bill GAtes qualifies, but MOST homeowners do. And since only 2% of folks pay 'estate taxes', that means that 98% of folks don't.

Now, would you care to try that again, and explain why 'unrealized gains' are so terrible?

Anyone pays taxes immediately on salary, and on exercised options. Bill GAtes has sold billions in stock, paying capital gains taxes just like you and me. If he sold options, he paid regular tax rates on it, just like you and me.

Get over it.

Again, you are going after 'wealth'. Half the folks here retired because they had stock held during the 1990s, that went up by a factor of 10 or more. They have lots of unrealized gains.

ALl your 401Ks and IRAs are nothing but a lot of 'unrealized' gains after 10-20-30 years.....oh, you want that 'wealth' taxed, right????
They saved and invested, but you didn't, so now you want your 'share' of their wealth??

Both of these great business leaders have therefore been staunch advocates of liberal tax policies, most especially with regard to estate taxes -- the tax slandered by conservatives as the "death tax" -- understanding that its repeal would unfairly allow them to escape taxation altogether (the right wing's wet dream, but quite obviously an unfair way to build a responsible society).

That is a separate matter....and you are talking about 0.0001% or less of the US population.

Most folks in this category will die 'broke' with most of their money in trusts for their kids educations, for their wives or others who need care, and in FOUNDATIONS that are essentially untaxed 'unrealized gains'. You simply keep donating stocks to your charitable foundation, and most of it is untaxed anyway.

So????

EVer hear of the Ford Foundation? Carnegie Foundation? All that is unrealized capital gains...... Going back more than 100 years...


You go look at the dollar in your pocket. It doesn't say "This Belongs To Telegraph" on it. It says "Federal Reserve Note." That means it is not merely a possession of yours to be wilfully hoarded.

And I don't hold a whole lot of 'dollars' in my pocket..if you find me with more than $100 in the wallet, it is probably a special occasion....

I hold 'assets'...stocks, bonds, or have my money in the bank where it is loaned out to fund capitalism......

And I could hold Euros or Deutsch Marks just as easily....or have 90% of my assets invested overseas......so?


What it is is a social contract, a guarantee to all who use these dollars that it will represent some kind of social value, an expectation that the system of exchange it makes possible will allow commerce to take place.

NO, a dollar is a currency.....at one time backed by silver...but simply a currency...there is no 'contract', and their is no intrinsic value.....(well, old silver coins and gold coins yes, but paper and new coins, no).....it is no different from Saudi Riyals or Japanese Yen.....

There is no 'social' contract implied by a 'dollar'.

Where did you find this 'factoid'? reference please!

It only has value because of a grand social agreement, and your sense of entitlement -- yes *YOUR* sense of entitlement, telegraph -- that your mere ownership of that dollar grants you the expectation of a certain privilege, exists only as long as that system functions for the benefit of everybody.


Wrong...a dollar could care less who possesses it at any time, whether there are 50 billion deposited in Saudi and Qatari banks, or 50 billion in the treasury of the Sultan of Brunei, or in your pocket or mine. It is no different than you having 20 lbs of gold in your safe.....or 10 million in diamonds. It is simply a currency.

You attach all sorts of 'signficance' to dollars. Please explain, then, the 'social contract' part of the Mexican Peso and Chinese Yuan in the same terms. Or better yet, the German Mark during the reign of Hitler and the Ruble during the Cold WAr?

Did folks who owned them have a social contract? Did folks who smuggled in dollars into these countries have a US social contract?

When those dollars are used as instruments of exploitation, and when those dollars are used unfairly to warp the system and exempt people from their responsibility to create a just and reasonable society, you can expect your entitlements to be stripped away from you.

Sounds like communist babble to me...'exploitation of workers'....'warp the system'. Would it be any different with Yen? Please explain....is it different to be exploited by Pesos in Mexican sweatshops? or in Indonesia with their currency? Please explain!


And all your outrage and indignation and your belief in yourself as more worthy of society's gifts than the rest of us will serve you for nothing, because you placed yourself in claim of something that never belonged to you, at least not merely for the possession of these little scraps of paper.

Again, you have a 'wealth envy' that appear so big as to be totally amazing. I could, at this point, care less whether my assets are in acres of real estate, oil revenues or mineral rights, diamonds, gold, or silver.

The important thing is I worked and saved to accummulate them. You seem to deny me the fact, that as I worked, I paid hundred of thousands in taxes along the way, and paid my way and fair share. now that I have successfully accumulated enough 'assets' to retire, you are so enviously of 'my assets' that you are driven nuts about it...


Because, ultimately, you cannot buy respect, and no amount of money will entitle you to launch an immoral war, or to strip people of their dignity, to deny education to the poor, to deny health care to children or to the elderly, to tear down a neighborhood because you want to build a golf course, to block citizens for buying prescription drugs from overseas because it hurts profits, to bulldoze a national park if it drops another percent or two to the bottom line.

OK...how about a 'moral war'? And whose definition of 'moral' vs 'immoral' since these have to do with religion, and if you are a regular reader, you will know that telegraph is an atheist, so 'morals' are for the religious folks primarily....we go by 'ethics' not based upon fantasies of the god-thingies.

And your diatribe about 'health care' for the eldery, well, that is up to how much society can and is willing to afford..there is not infinite money for infinite health care. Sorry. It will have to be rationed....

Tear down neighborhoods? oh, section 8 housing....if you are an economist, you will find that property is put to the most cost effective use. If landlords decide to sell and build golf courses instead, why are you denying them the rights to do with their property what they want? If folks agree to sell their homes for a golf course, or set of condos, so what? Been happening for 500 years. What else is new.... eminent domain???? well, some is justified. I have heartburn with other uses to build shopping malls.....




Entitlement? Don't preach to me about entitlement. Take the rich off welfare and the poor won't need it.

Again, 'wealth envy'. There aren't enough 'rich' to take care of the 90% who would be 'poor' if they knew everything would be provided..they would save nothing....arriving at 65 having spent 100 or 110% of what they make, never saving a dime, since they knew Uncle Sam was going to give them housing, give them food stamps and food, give them medical care, and provide recreation for them.

Sorry, you are responsible for your financial well-being.

T.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
telegraph writes,

<<Cheeze: That is quite the point. Bill Gates doesn't pay $1.5 billion in taxes he earns, because he hasn't paid a dime in taxes on the Microsoft stock he holds. Those are unrealized capital gains, and they aren't subject to taxes of any kind unless he sells them. Warren Buffett has never paid a dime in taxes on his tens of billions in Berkshire Hathaway wealth, and likely never will.>>

And, believe it or not, MOST Americans who own a house will never pay any taxes on their 'unrealized gains'. Yet, I don't see you going after them!!!!!

THe average American buys a house, lives in it for years and years....until recently, one could 'roll over' the gains and never pay taxes....now, you have a $250,000/$500,000 gain exemption, for which I doubt Bill GAtes qualifies, but MOST homeowners do. And since only 2% of folks pay 'estate taxes', that means that 98% of folks don't.


Most Americans pay property taxes on their home each year. In most jurisdictions, property taxes are assessed based on the value of the home which makes it basically a "wealth tax". Bill Gates isn't paying a "wealth tax" on the value of his MSFT shares.

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
intercst: Most Americans pay property taxes on their home each year. In most jurisdictions, property taxes are assessed based on the value of the home which makes it basically a "wealth tax". Bill Gates isn't paying a "wealth tax" on the value of his MSFT shares.

And most folks demand services for their home, including but not limited to:

1) roads to get to and from their house
2) fire and police protection
3) zoning regulation and enforcement
4) building codes and inspections
5) animal control/pest control
6) garbage collection
7) regulation/permitting of utilities and utility rights of way
8) Parks and recreation facilities, public buildings/meeting facilties
9) waste disposal - tree removal - litter pickup -
10) water supplies, or regulation thereof of private systems....
11) sewerage systems

I leave the 'education' part out since that can be local or state based, and based upon real estate taxes, sales taxes, state income taxes, corproate taxes, misc fees, etc. franchise taxes, or a combination of all of them....


Last I checked, owning 'stock', other than a gov't function of the SEC to insurce proper financial reporting to investors (well, hopefully for the most part), doesn't require the above.......no sewer system or water supplies or 'highways' to your door or driveway.....no one to catch rabid dogs, or spray for West Nile virus laden misquotoes...

Or owning other assets, such as gold or silver or overseas land or otherwise......requires none of the above.....

SO if there is 'cost' of maintaining an asset, why shouldn't it be paid yearly?

If there is no 'cost' , then why should there be a 'wealth tax'? (and your mutual fund will skim off some 'tax' if you will for fund expenses each year....as a 'fee'....for their costs of maintaining your investments, should you have funds).....

And even renters pay 'real estate taxes' indirectly through their monthy rent checks, as the apartment needs roads and police services and fire protection and spraying for misquotoes.....

T.


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Heh, heh!™ Hearing the Dems complain about excessive government spending and deficits is a reral knee slapper. It merits a vote for the Republicans next year for that reason alone!

If memory serves, it was Bush who just asked for $87 billion to pay for his Iraqi adventure. And it's not the top 1% he's asking to pony up that amount, either.


I believe that in time, and down through history, Republicans will resent W because he has effectively cost them the banner of fiscal responsibility.

It's really bad when Democrats can run under that same banner and the crowd can keep a straight face. I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime, to be honest.

I've only voted for Republican presidential candidates in the past, and if I had my 2000 vote over, I'd still vote for Bush; right person, right time. But barring some miracle, there's no way I will vote for him in 2004, his time is over.

I think there's a "silent majority" in the country that is coming to that same conclusion.

Golfwaymore


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Most Americans pay property taxes on their home each year. In most jurisdictions, property taxes are assessed based on the value of the home which makes it basically a "wealth tax". Bill Gates isn't paying a "wealth tax" on the value of his MSFT shares.

intercst
>>


Heck, you aren't paying a wealth tax on your shares, are you. I know I am not. But Bill Gates pays taxes on the home he lives in, while you don't do that, at least not directly.

If you want to promote the idea of a wealth tax, talk to Gray Davis. It looks as though both of you will have some spare time to work on politics.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<I believe that in time, and down through history, Republicans will resent W because he has effectively cost them the banner of fiscal responsibility.

It's really bad when Democrats can run under that same banner and the crowd can keep a straight face. I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime, to be honest.

I've only voted for Republican presidential candidates in the past, and if I had my 2000 vote over, I'd still vote for Bush; right person, right time. But barring some miracle, there's no way I will vote for him in 2004, his time is over.

I think there's a "silent majority" in the country that is coming to that same conclusion.

Golfwaymore
>>


Bush tax cuts are aimed at getting the economy out of recession, a problem so severe you were convinced we would have slid back into a double dip recession by this time.

The war on terrorism has been expensive. Wars frequently are. I hyappen to support that and am not going to count the change on a vital national security issue.

And on issues like the Medicare drug benefit, that is an issue Dems have been trumpeting and to which Republicans have agreed to support.


That covers the cause of most of the government deficit problem, and I think it's quite defensible, so far.

When we are definitely out of recession, that will be the time to deal with deficits.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Bush tax cuts are aimed at getting the economy out of recession, a problem so severe you were convinced we would have slid back into a double dip recession by this time.

As you know, I still feel that we're headed back into recession.

The war on terrorism has been expensive. Wars frequently are. I hyappen to support that and am not going to count the change on a vital national security issue.

But the expense of the terror war, nor the tax cuts can be reconciled with the ordinary spending increases.

Under the cloud of the war on terror, this president has allowed the rest of the *non-war* budget to explode and grow out of control. It has successfully been backdoored and camo'd by the arguements that you made.

Golfwaymore



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
{{Dad then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and request that 1.0 be taken off her 4.0 and given it to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a respectable 3.0 GPA.
Then, she could also give her friend half the money she'd earned from her job so that her friend would no longer be broke. }}

I know I have said this before, but I had a political science teacher hwo kept going on and on about how it was impossible for anyone who grew up in a apalachia to succeed. He talked about how hard it was to grow up in a mobile home and that these people needed government handouts.

I then raised my hand in class and asked him "Since I have been so clearly disadvantaged growing up in a mobile home in apalachia, will you give me some more points on my exam?

Needless to say the extra points were not forthcoming.


c

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
{{The greatest problem I have with the Republican party is I am being forced to support the people who plenty of money already. }}

Yeah, I hate supporting people by letting them keep their own money. I would rather support people by paying them a tax credit for having paid no taxes.



c
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I've only voted for Republican presidential candidates in the past, and if I had my 2000 vote over, I'd still vote for Bush; right person, right time. But barring some miracle, there's no way I will vote for him in 2004, his time is over.

So which of the nine are you going to vote for ?

What if Dean is nominated, would you vote for him ?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
So which of the nine are you going to vote for ?

What if Dean is nominated, would you vote for him ?


I will probably vote Democrat if Clark, Lieberman, or Dean is nominated.

Dean would be my least desirable of the three, as he's by far the furtherest to the left. However, his record in his state is hard to argue with, on the issues that are important to me at the current time.

If anyone else is nominated, I'll likely write in John McCain, whom I'm still pissed at for not running as an Independent in the last election.

Golfwaymore
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
{{I am sick to death of this "you envy the rich" argument. Hide behind that all you want. Sing yourself to sleep every night with that song, whistle it as you walk past the cemetary, because the truth is that you do not so much scorn envy as fear justice, and you hear that wave rising to wash over you and your own self-rightous sense of entitlement.}}


What is truly scary is that you think a person has does not have the right or even the entitlement to keep their own money that they ahve earned.


c
truly scared by you
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
{{. Both of these great business leaders have therefore been staunch advocates of liberal tax policies, most especially with regard to estate taxes -- the tax slandered by conservatives as the "death tax" -- understanding that its repeal would unfairly allow them to escape taxation altogether }}

I have a pretty different view of the death tax. Having grown up on a farm,I have seen a number of farms decimated because of death taxes. The land and equipment was worth a lot of money, but their was very little cash. The farms then had to be divided up and sold. Now the only things these old farms grow is houses. The death tax literally means the death of many farms that have been in families for generations. This si not just a publicity stunt, it really happens.


c
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<So which of the nine are you going to vote for ?

What if Dean is nominated, would you vote for him ?>>

I will probably vote Democrat if Clark, Lieberman, or Dean is nominated.


Same for me, except that I would not vote for Dean under any circumstances. I will also not vote for either of them if Hilary is their running mate.

Dean would be my least desirable of the three, as he's by far the furtherest to the left. However, his record in his state is hard to argue with, on the issues that are important to me at the current time.

You call that a State :-) ? I think they don't even have a million people there.

Also, when someone presents his economic message with 90% of the presentation as an attack on someone elses policy and only 10% on his own policy, there is something wrong.

See - http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_economy

Heck, I think all his policy statements start (and mainly consist of) such negative statements. Every policy statement mentions the current president in the first two or three paragraphs; I want to know what he is for first, and only later do I want to know what he is against. I think a policy statement should be just that, a statement. Later on, after the statement, a description of how it differs with the opposition view is warranted.

If anyone else is nominated, I'll likely write in John McCain, whom I'm still pissed at for not running as an Independent in the last election.

If you are going to "throw your vote away" anyway, why not throw it at the Libertarians ?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
If anyone else is nominated, I'll likely write in John McCain, whom I'm still pissed at for not running as an Independent in the last election.

If you are going to "throw your vote away" anyway, why not throw it at the Libertarians ?


I like some of the Libertarian ideals, but not all of them.

My biggest hangup with them seems to be the prevailing belief that there is absolutely no useful function for government whatsoever.

I dont fully subscribe to that.

Golfwaymore
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<<<If anyone else is nominated, I'll likely write in John McCain, whom I'm still pissed at for not running as an Independent in the last election.>>>

<<If you are going to "throw your vote away" anyway, why not throw it at the Libertarians ?>>

I like some of the Libertarian ideals, but not all of them.

My biggest hangup with them seems to be the prevailing belief that there is absolutely no useful function for government whatsoever.

I dont fully subscribe to that.


I also don't completely agree with them, and probably wouldn't vote for them, but I think you mischaracterize their goals by stating they believe "there is absolutely no useful function for government whatsoever".

This is from their website - http://www.lp.org/issues/cut-taxes.html

"Libertarians believe that if government's role were limited to protecting our lives, rights and property, then America would prosper and thrive as never before."
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
{{My biggest hangup with them seems to be the prevailing belief that there is absolutely no useful function for government whatsoever. }}

I think you are confusing anarchists with libertarians. Libertarians believe that the useful functions of the federal government were spelled out in the Constitution. However at the state and local level, more government participation is waranted.



c
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
MrsFourStarDave wants to know:

Who is hocus?



He is our troll emeritus.

-
Print the post Back To Top