Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Allan, I never said it was a garden of eden. I've lived (for short periods of time) with indigenous people in both north america, and southeast asia, and I have slept in the jungle without a mosquito net in asia and the yucatan. My best friend has been living with a remote tribe in Fiji for two years as part of peace corps, and is now marrying a woman from the tribe and got his time extended. On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:23 PM, Allan Streib wrote: What you call a wild animal existence isn't as horrible as most people from our civilized society imagine. It's very different (and not without serious disadvantages and shortcomings), but not inherently inferior. I know a few people from civilized society whom have gone to live with indigenous peoples to do humanitarian or environmental work, and decided they preferred living that way and didn't want to come back to civilized society. Neither is it the garden of eden you seem to think it is. Hey if you want to go live in a hut in the jungle and swat mosquitoes all night and hope you don't get malaria because we're not allowed to use DDT anymore (a decision that has probably killed more humans than all the wars of the 20th century combined), be my guest. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
There are no remote tribes in Fiji (I was there as a PCV for 3+ years). There are remote villages, but when I was there the indigenous Fijians were never considered pas belonging to different tribes. Several PCVs in my vintage married local girls, of varying ethnicity (Indian, Fijian, Chinese, and mixed race).. On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Allan, I never said it was a garden of eden. I've lived (for short periods of time) with indigenous people in both north america, and southeast asia, and I have slept in the jungle without a mosquito net in asia and the yucatan. My best friend has been living with a remote tribe in Fiji for two years as part of peace corps, and is now marrying a woman from the tribe and got his time extended. On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:23 PM, Allan Streib wrote: What you call a wild animal existence isn't as horrible as most people from our civilized society imagine. It's very different (and not without serious disadvantages and shortcomings), but not inherently inferior. I know a few people from civilized society whom have gone to live with indigenous peoples to do humanitarian or environmental work, and decided they preferred living that way and didn't want to come back to civilized society. Neither is it the garden of eden you seem to think it is. Hey if you want to go live in a hut in the jungle and swat mosquitoes all night and hope you don't get malaria because we're not allowed to use DDT anymore (a decision that has probably killed more humans than all the wars of the 20th century combined), be my guest. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
You're right, they're a village, not a tribe. Sounds like you'd know a lot more about this than I do! I've never even been to Fiji, but I hope to go over to attend his wedding next year. The village has a diesel generator which they don't really use because they can't afford fuel for it, and don't have vehicles to get the fuel with. I'm hoping to help them make their own fuel for the generator from coconut oil either as biodiesel or SVO On Aug 22, 2008, at 10:01 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: There are no remote tribes in Fiji (I was there as a PCV for 3+ years). There are remote villages, but when I was there the indigenous Fijians were never considered pas belonging to different tribes. Several PCVs in my vintage married local girls, of varying ethnicity (Indian, Fijian, Chinese, and mixed race).. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
You will enjoy the kava once you get used to it. It looks like well-used dishwater but tastes like a blend of Lavoris and white pepper. On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 1:13 PM, Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're right, they're a village, not a tribe. Sounds like you'd know a lot more about this than I do! I've never even been to Fiji, but I hope to go over to attend his wedding next year. The village has a diesel generator which they don't really use because they can't afford fuel for it, and don't have vehicles to get the fuel with. I'm hoping to help them make their own fuel for the generator from coconut oil either as biodiesel or SVO On Aug 22, 2008, at 10:01 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: There are no remote tribes in Fiji (I was there as a PCV for 3+ years). There are remote villages, but when I was there the indigenous Fijians were never considered pas belonging to different tribes. Several PCVs in my vintage married local girls, of varying ethnicity (Indian, Fijian, Chinese, and mixed race).. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
We found a fijian store in Portland, OR that sells it. It's interesting, but I'd say it tastes like muddy water, other than the numbness/tingling. I'm sure I'd eventually began to like it if I drank as much as they apparently do in the villages! So which corps re-entry group were you in? I'd join if I could get my wife to go with me, but she's busy with graduate school. Tyler On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:12 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: You will enjoy the kava once you get used to it. It looks like well- used dishwater but tastes like a blend of Lavoris and white pepper. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Fiji III, 1969 - 1972 (geologist) On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We found a fijian store in Portland, OR that sells it. It's interesting, but I'd say it tastes like muddy water, other than the numbness/tingling. I'm sure I'd eventually began to like it if I drank as much as they apparently do in the villages! So which corps re-entry group were you in? I'd join if I could get my wife to go with me, but she's busy with graduate school. Tyler On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:12 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: You will enjoy the kava once you get used to it. It looks like well- used dishwater but tastes like a blend of Lavoris and white pepper. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I am not picking or choosing who goes or stays. There are too many folks around and sooner or later there will be a rebalancing. I suspect it will be really messy and will take a very long time to crawl back out of. Sad to see all the accumulated knowledge going missing again, as it did when Rome fell and Alexandria was sacked for the last time. clay On Aug 20, 2008, at 10:05 AM, Tyler Backman wrote: Clay, You have an unstated premise in your arguments: That the purpose of human life is to contribute to economic prosperity, and the value of each persons life is proportional to their relative contribution. This is an inherently flawed way of looking at it, because economic systems are tools developed by people to improve their lives, not the other way around. An economic system has no value unless it's providing a benefit to humans, but humans still can have intrinsic value without providing a benefit to economic systems. This type of thinking is what leads to justification of gross injustice (see the Summers memo at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summers_Memo) . Nevertheless, it's clear that our planet is far above it's sustainable carrying capacity, at least with the levels of resource consumption people currently have (see http://jclahr.com/bartlett/). That still doesn't give you a right to play god by using your own value system to decide who lives or dies. I highly suggest reading the writings of Professor Albert A. Bartlett (see previous url) for some insight into the causes and solutions to the overpopulation problem that don't involve you becoming king of the world and executing people based on their relative economic contributions. Also, these people that you say aren't keep[ing] the economy chugging along and should be let go are also likely consuming much less resources, and contributing less to both global warming and over- consumption of resources than those who are. By your own logic (which I want to be clear that I disagree with) you are choosing the wrong group of people to let go. There is a single proven sustainable way to live on our planet: the way that indigenous peoples have been living around the world for thousands of years. I am guessing that the people that you say are smart, well fed, well resourced people are living the least like the indigenous peoples, and are contributing the most to the problem. If I've misunderstood what you're saying please let me know, but it comes across as self-contradictory the way I'm reading it. Sincerely, Tyler On Aug 19, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Redghost wrote: come on Luther! There are 6.x BILLION humans around. How many of the 300 million Americans are actually holding down a job that serves to make the nation better or even keeps the economy chugging along? I am thinking there are a few million folks on the mainland that could be let go and we would not even feel a hiccough in the national fabric. Could have a huge rebound effect on the amount of funds needed to support them that is now available for roads, schools, infrastructure upgrades or defense. Could pay teachers and nurses a decent wage for the work they do to strengthen our kids and health care. Just think, SMART and HEALTHY citizens! What of the drain all the underproductive people worldwide are having? Can these african nations truly support millions of starving people? Can the Amazon support all the folks going in to clear, burn, and leave sterile after a few years? Can the world support that kind of abuse and not have a very bad reaction down the road? All this whining about global climate change is not going to quiet down until there are fewer humans suckling at the drying out teat. When business and such goes bad in your town, most folks just pick up and move on to where there are resources to support them. Where is that place now? Not China. Not India, Not Africa. Not even Latin America. You plan on heading north to Canada when the heat gets unbearable? I am sure a couple hundred million other citizens are looking at that too. Sadly the land there will not support such an influx of refugees. This planet does not even support the current population and we continue to spew more people out. The rich will continue to prosper and the poor will breed themselves into horrors we have not seen on a global scale. Soon enough there will not be enough smart, well fed, well resourced people left to keep the global economy in motion. Then there will be a massive collapse and what you feel is moral will be about as important as the dust in a holed bucket. I really like the way my life is going and do not wish any of the horrors I have seen afflict my fellow man. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that what I want is really insignificant in the grand scope of the universe. At any given time there is just so much to go around. When it is gone, it is gone and you have to pass GO to
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
No society is truly sustainable for any great length of time. Stuff happens, people and cultures rise and fall. Big winds or waters sweep the land and mess with life. Most of the indigenous peoples have figured out a manner to survive these catastrophes as a whole, but still the Maya, Anasazi, egyptians, zulu, ad infinitum are gone as dominant cultures clay On Aug 20, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Allan Streib wrote: Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Does that clarify what I mean by sustainable, what exactly is being sustained, and why? Not really, because if the primitive indigenous lifestyle is sustainable, then why do so few of these societies still exist? It seems that they are by their absence NOT sustainable Allan ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I think we should look are moving a bit of genetic material away from this little rock and seeding a few other rocks. Just in case and all that. clay On Aug 20, 2008, at 3:31 PM, Tyler Backman wrote: I don't think he meant that the planet could stop existing, but rather that we could stop existing if we don't live sustainably. Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 2:50 PM, Allan Streib wrote: andrew strasfogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The planet, obviously. Of course, in the ideal Fairtax world we can all strive to earn and KEEP enough $$s to afford our own personal planet. News flash, the planet is not going anywhere no matter what we do. And if it is, we can't stop it. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
clay monroe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No society is truly sustainable for any great length of time. Stuff happens, people and cultures rise and fall. Big winds or waters sweep the land and mess with life. Absolutely agree. As I said think this sustainable living movement is just another codeword for a larger agenda. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
clay monroe wrote: I think we should look are moving a bit of genetic material away from this little rock and seeding a few other rocks. Just in case and all that. Something we agree on! ;) Hopefully the technology or political environment (or both) will encourage this sooner rather than later. John ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
That's why I wrote the post that clarified the difference between sustainable and immortal. There's too many different definitions of the word sustainable to use it without an accompanying clarification IMO. Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 11:22 PM, clay monroe wrote: No society is truly sustainable for any great length of time. Stuff happens, people and cultures rise and fall. Big winds or waters sweep the land and mess with life. Most of the indigenous peoples have figured out a manner to survive these catastrophes as a whole, but still the Maya, Anasazi, egyptians, zulu, ad infinitum are gone as dominant cultures clay ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Now we have gotten past the semantics, to the real philosophical disagreement :) ... living on whatever food you can find, or eeking out a living raising crops on a small plot of land, hoping there's not a drought this year, living long enough to hopefully reproduce at least a few offspring since infant mortality is in the ballpark of 50%, reaching age 45 or so if you're lucky... Sustainable in the sense that your species continues to exist, i guess pretty much a wild animal existence... You are illustrating a fundamental philosophical difference between our culture and that of cultures that live sustainably. Our society believes that we somehow are able to exist as an isolated entity without dependence on the natural environment for survival. We have an illusion that it's our own sheer will and ability to control and manipulate nature that keeps us alive, as opposed to seeing ourselves as a member of an ecological community for whom we depend on. This different world-view results in two totally different systems of environmental ethics, and two different ways of interacting with the natural environment. We either abuse and exploit it, or protect it such that we can't use it's resources at all, while they use the resources responsibly. I believe that this difference in world-view is what makes a sustainable society different from ours, and needs to change if we are going to avoid wiping ourselves out. You also mentioned that our society is thriving and continually improving [its] standard of living. This is something that is impossible to prove unless you experience it firsthand, but the overall happiness and quality of life is often higher for most indigenous people that that of people in industrialized society, despite higher mortality disease and short life-spans. What use is a big expensive house, and excellent medical care when we have high depression rates and the people in our culture are just generally unhappy? We constantly strive for more technology, money, and material possessions in hope that it will give us a level of contentment with our lives that they already have without such things. Perhaps that's why they never felt the need to develop them? I don't think this is because indigenous people are noble savages but because there is something fundamentally wrong with our culture that conflicts with the way our minds work, and the way we evolved to live. What you call a wild animal existence isn't as horrible as most people from our civilized society imagine. It's very different (and not without serious disadvantages and shortcomings), but not inherently inferior. I know a few people from civilized society whom have gone to live with indigenous peoples to do humanitarian or environmental work, and decided they preferred living that way and didn't want to come back to civilized society. Also, most indigenous cultures are not without agriculture, technology, or medicine. Depending on where and how they live, many indigenous people are able to obtain everything they need for survival in a much smaller portion of their time than it takes most people in industrialized society to make a living, leaving a lot of time for developing art, technology, medicine, and just enjoying life and spending time with your family/community. They're not making computers, but I think you'll find that many indigenous people have found ingenious ways to get food that take up very little of their time, and have discovered a wide variety of medicines (many modern pharmaceuticals were discovered based on herbal remedies used by indigenous people). Many also have developed ways to store water and preserve food to mitigate the effects of environmental fluctuations such as drought. deliver clean water and fresh food in abundance, defend themselves against enemies Often, the need for us to address these issues is a result of problems that could have been prevented. If you have low populations and don't pollute your water, don't wipe out natural animal and plant populations, and don't try to pick fights with your neighbors these are non-issues. The point I am trying to make isn't that we should give up our modern society and live as indigenous people, but that we should have more respect for them, and realize that there is a lot we could learn from them about how to improve our quality of life and to live sustainably. In return, they could also benefit from our medicine, and technology without abandoning their culture. We are essentially at war with our natural environment, and on a path to quickly wipe ourselves out unless we learn from our mistakes and make some major changes to how we live. On Aug 20, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Allan Streib wrote: For example, say (hypothetically) that you are member of a small tribe in the Amazon that has been living off the land in the same way for
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
All well and good for the environment where there is no competition, but we have outgrown that stage. We are now in a place where we all are wanting the same resources and those are becoming far more scarce. What happens when you exceed your bid? This came to me while I was at the auction watching folks bidding up stuff to over retail prices. B-i-L wants a plasma cutter. Nice new hypertherm 350 he decided I should bid to $400. A woman took it all the way to $700 + after four of us bowed out at $450. Water, fuel and food will be handled in a less civilized manner in a few years when we all want it. clay On Aug 21, 2008, at 9:57 AM, Tyler Backman wrote: Now we have gotten past the semantics, to the real philosophical disagreement :) ... living on whatever food you can find, or eeking out a living raising crops on a small plot of land, hoping there's not a drought this year, living long enough to hopefully reproduce at least a few offspring since infant mortality is in the ballpark of 50%, reaching age 45 or so if you're lucky... Sustainable in the sense that your species continues to exist, i guess pretty much a wild animal existence... You are illustrating a fundamental philosophical difference between our culture and that of cultures that live sustainably. Our society believes that we somehow are able to exist as an isolated entity without dependence on the natural environment for survival. We have an illusion that it's our own sheer will and ability to control and manipulate nature that keeps us alive, as opposed to seeing ourselves as a member of an ecological community for whom we depend on. This different world-view results in two totally different systems of environmental ethics, and two different ways of interacting with the natural environment. We either abuse and exploit it, or protect it such that we can't use it's resources at all, while they use the resources responsibly. I believe that this difference in world-view is what makes a sustainable society different from ours, and needs to change if we are going to avoid wiping ourselves out. You also mentioned that our society is thriving and continually improving [its] standard of living. This is something that is impossible to prove unless you experience it firsthand, but the overall happiness and quality of life is often higher for most indigenous people that that of people in industrialized society, despite higher mortality disease and short life-spans. What use is a big expensive house, and excellent medical care when we have high depression rates and the people in our culture are just generally unhappy? We constantly strive for more technology, money, and material possessions in hope that it will give us a level of contentment with our lives that they already have without such things. Perhaps that's why they never felt the need to develop them? I don't think this is because indigenous people are noble savages but because there is something fundamentally wrong with our culture that conflicts with the way our minds work, and the way we evolved to live. What you call a wild animal existence isn't as horrible as most people from our civilized society imagine. It's very different (and not without serious disadvantages and shortcomings), but not inherently inferior. I know a few people from civilized society whom have gone to live with indigenous peoples to do humanitarian or environmental work, and decided they preferred living that way and didn't want to come back to civilized society. Also, most indigenous cultures are not without agriculture, technology, or medicine. Depending on where and how they live, many indigenous people are able to obtain everything they need for survival in a much smaller portion of their time than it takes most people in industrialized society to make a living, leaving a lot of time for developing art, technology, medicine, and just enjoying life and spending time with your family/community. They're not making computers, but I think you'll find that many indigenous people have found ingenious ways to get food that take up very little of their time, and have discovered a wide variety of medicines (many modern pharmaceuticals were discovered based on herbal remedies used by indigenous people). Many also have developed ways to store water and preserve food to mitigate the effects of environmental fluctuations such as drought. deliver clean water and fresh food in abundance, defend themselves against enemies Often, the need for us to address these issues is a result of problems that could have been prevented. If you have low populations and don't pollute your water, don't wipe out natural animal and plant populations, and don't try to pick fights with your neighbors these are non-issues. The point I am trying to make isn't that we should give up our modern society and live as indigenous people, but that we should
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What you call a wild animal existence isn't as horrible as most people from our civilized society imagine. It's very different (and not without serious disadvantages and shortcomings), but not inherently inferior. I know a few people from civilized society whom have gone to live with indigenous peoples to do humanitarian or environmental work, and decided they preferred living that way and didn't want to come back to civilized society. Neither is it the garden of eden you seem to think it is. Hey if you want to go live in a hut in the jungle and swat mosquitoes all night and hope you don't get malaria because we're not allowed to use DDT anymore (a decision that has probably killed more humans than all the wars of the 20th century combined), be my guest. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Clay, You have an unstated premise in your arguments: That the purpose of human life is to contribute to economic prosperity, and the value of each persons life is proportional to their relative contribution. This is an inherently flawed way of looking at it, because economic systems are tools developed by people to improve their lives, not the other way around. An economic system has no value unless it's providing a benefit to humans, but humans still can have intrinsic value without providing a benefit to economic systems. This type of thinking is what leads to justification of gross injustice (see the Summers memo at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summers_Memo) . Nevertheless, it's clear that our planet is far above it's sustainable carrying capacity, at least with the levels of resource consumption people currently have (see http://jclahr.com/bartlett/). That still doesn't give you a right to play god by using your own value system to decide who lives or dies. I highly suggest reading the writings of Professor Albert A. Bartlett (see previous url) for some insight into the causes and solutions to the overpopulation problem that don't involve you becoming king of the world and executing people based on their relative economic contributions. Also, these people that you say aren't keep[ing] the economy chugging along and should be let go are also likely consuming much less resources, and contributing less to both global warming and over- consumption of resources than those who are. By your own logic (which I want to be clear that I disagree with) you are choosing the wrong group of people to let go. There is a single proven sustainable way to live on our planet: the way that indigenous peoples have been living around the world for thousands of years. I am guessing that the people that you say are smart, well fed, well resourced people are living the least like the indigenous peoples, and are contributing the most to the problem. If I've misunderstood what you're saying please let me know, but it comes across as self-contradictory the way I'm reading it. Sincerely, Tyler On Aug 19, 2008, at 5:52 PM, Redghost wrote: come on Luther! There are 6.x BILLION humans around. How many of the 300 million Americans are actually holding down a job that serves to make the nation better or even keeps the economy chugging along? I am thinking there are a few million folks on the mainland that could be let go and we would not even feel a hiccough in the national fabric. Could have a huge rebound effect on the amount of funds needed to support them that is now available for roads, schools, infrastructure upgrades or defense. Could pay teachers and nurses a decent wage for the work they do to strengthen our kids and health care. Just think, SMART and HEALTHY citizens! What of the drain all the underproductive people worldwide are having? Can these african nations truly support millions of starving people? Can the Amazon support all the folks going in to clear, burn, and leave sterile after a few years? Can the world support that kind of abuse and not have a very bad reaction down the road? All this whining about global climate change is not going to quiet down until there are fewer humans suckling at the drying out teat. When business and such goes bad in your town, most folks just pick up and move on to where there are resources to support them. Where is that place now? Not China. Not India, Not Africa. Not even Latin America. You plan on heading north to Canada when the heat gets unbearable? I am sure a couple hundred million other citizens are looking at that too. Sadly the land there will not support such an influx of refugees. This planet does not even support the current population and we continue to spew more people out. The rich will continue to prosper and the poor will breed themselves into horrors we have not seen on a global scale. Soon enough there will not be enough smart, well fed, well resourced people left to keep the global economy in motion. Then there will be a massive collapse and what you feel is moral will be about as important as the dust in a holed bucket. I really like the way my life is going and do not wish any of the horrors I have seen afflict my fellow man. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that what I want is really insignificant in the grand scope of the universe. At any given time there is just so much to go around. When it is gone, it is gone and you have to pass GO to get anymore. clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 15:54, Luther wrote: You, my friend, might be one of those that needs to be shipped off to your own Soylent Green Factory since your brain has ceased to use logic. Sometimes your logic works and is ok, but when you are way off base and far out in your radicalism, you are beyond help. Luther ___
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: There is a single proven sustainable way to live on our planet: the way that indigenous peoples have been living around the world for thousands of years. Sustainable for who (or what?). Not the people Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
The planet, obviously. Of course, in the ideal Fairtax world we can all strive to earn and KEEP enough $$s to afford our own personal planet. On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Allan Streib [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: There is a single proven sustainable way to live on our planet: the way that indigenous peoples have been living around the world for thousands of years. Sustainable for who (or what?). Not the people Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I'm not quite sure what you're asking. It's sustainable in that most indigenous peoples (the ones that are still around) have found a way to use their natural resources almost indefinitely without depleting them, and consequently wiping themselves out. Any culture that has been living almost the same way for thousands of years must have found a way to use it's resources sustainably, or else it would have wiped itself out long ago, as my (our?) society is working on doing. I define sustainability in terms of three factors: cultural, economic, and environmental. Cultural sustainability means that a culture is able to continue to exist with regard to its own value system (things it wishes to stay the same do so). Economic sustainability means that the people are able to maintain sufficient economic prosperity to survive. Environmental sustainability means that the environment and ecosystem isn't being destroyed or changed in ways that eliminate the resources people need to obtain food, water, and shelter. A sustainable way of living needs to be sustainable with regard to all 3 factors, which are inter-related, and can't exist without one another. Does that clarify what I mean by sustainable, what exactly is being sustained, and why? Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 10:44 AM, Allan Streib wrote: Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: There is a single proven sustainable way to live on our planet: the way that indigenous peoples have been living around the world for thousands of years. Sustainable for who (or what?). Not the people Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Does that clarify what I mean by sustainable, what exactly is being sustained, and why? Not really, because if the primitive indigenous lifestyle is sustainable, then why do so few of these societies still exist? It seems that they are by their absence NOT sustainable Allan ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Allan Streib wrote: Not really, because if the primitive indigenous lifestyle is sustainable, then why do so few of these societies still exist? Lack of ability to defend the community from other groups of humans? Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Essentially the entire world was covered by indigenous societies, already living at the maximum sustainable carrying capacity of the land (for how they lived) until the Neolithic Revolution in the middle east from which eventually came cultures that spread around the world forcefully wiping out other cultures by various means (violence, disease, etc.) both intentionally and non-intentionally. Interestingly, very few indigenous cultures have ceased to exist because it's members decided to adopt another way of life on their own free will. There is a distinction between sustainable and immortal. A sustainable culture is not immortal can still be wiped out by external forces such as natural disasters, and other people. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of indigenous cultures that have wiped themselves out because of non-sustainable ways of life, but there are also thousands who did not (the ones that existed for tens of thousands of years, and have been only recently wiped out). Nevertheless, many indigenous cultures still exist around the world, although they are still disappearing rapidly. The United Nations estimates that there are about 300 million indigenous people living in the world today (about the population of the United States) in their traditional manner. I realize that the term indigenous is somewhat vague, and this number probably changes rapidly depending on your definition of the word. Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Allan Streib wrote: Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Does that clarify what I mean by sustainable, what exactly is being sustained, and why? Not really, because if the primitive indigenous lifestyle is sustainable, then why do so few of these societies still exist? It seems that they are by their absence NOT sustainable Allan ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Mitch Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Lack of ability to defend the community from other groups of humans? Lions and tigers and bears, too... Is not the defense of your tribe/village/country against enemies an element of sustainability? Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
andrew strasfogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The planet, obviously. Of course, in the ideal Fairtax world we can all strive to earn and KEEP enough $$s to afford our own personal planet. News flash, the planet is not going anywhere no matter what we do. And if it is, we can't stop it. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I suppose it depends on your definition of sustainability, but I don't think it makes any sense to lump that in. By my definition, a sustainable way of living doesn't necessarily include an ability to mitigate risks from major unforeseen events, but rather an ability to continue to exist in the absence of them. For example, say (hypothetically) that you are member of a small tribe in the Amazon that has been living off the land in the same way for thousands of generations, and suddenly the Portuguese arrive with guns, and half your tribe dies from diseases for which you have no immunity, and the other half is enslaved to plant sugar cane to send back to Portugal. Does this mean that you never had a sustainable way of life? If you say no, perhaps either you or I should use a different word than Sustainable to go with our definition, because we're clearly not talking about the same thing. Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Allan Streib wrote: Is not the defense of your tribe/village/country against enemies an element of sustainability? ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I don't think he meant that the planet could stop existing, but rather that we could stop existing if we don't live sustainably. Tyler On Aug 20, 2008, at 2:50 PM, Allan Streib wrote: andrew strasfogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The planet, obviously. Of course, in the ideal Fairtax world we can all strive to earn and KEEP enough $$s to afford our own personal planet. News flash, the planet is not going anywhere no matter what we do. And if it is, we can't stop it. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I don't think he meant that the planet could stop existing, but rather that we could stop existing if we don't live sustainably. Perhaps. However I think that sustainability as it is used in recent times is a code word for something else. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Tyler Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: For example, say (hypothetically) that you are member of a small tribe in the Amazon that has been living off the land in the same way for thousands of generations, ... living on whatever food you can find, or eeking out a living raising crops on a small plot of land, hoping there's not a drought this year, living long enough to hopefully reproduce at least a few offspring since infant mortality is in the ballpark of 50%, reaching age 45 or so if you're lucky... Sustainable in the sense that your species continues to exist, i guess pretty much a wild animal existence... and suddenly the Portuguese arrive with guns, and half your tribe dies from diseases for which you have no immunity, and the other half is enslaved to plant sugar cane to send back to Portugal. Does this mean that you never had a sustainable way of life? If you say no, perhaps either you or I should use a different word than Sustainable to go with our definition, because we're clearly not talking about the same thing. I say no because you are unable to sustain your existence (or freedom) in the face of a foreseeable threat. Compare this to the society that develops agriculture, then industry and is thereby able to utilize the resources of the environment to support the development of science, medicine, and other technologies; eliminate most death by injury and disease, deliver clean water and fresh food in abundance, defend themselves against enemies, perhaps abusing or misusing certain resources along the way but able to change and adapt as mistakes are recognized. Not just sustaining their existence, but thriving and continually improving their standard of living. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. I'd love to see, just once, somebody substantiate the 'tax breaks for the rich, higher taxes for the poor' allegations that keep getting parroted as fact. BTW, do you know anything about McLame's tax plans, or are you just projecting your feelings about Bush onto him? Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
It's a Republican mantra to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy, and/or not to close the loopholes that let this class of corporations/citizenry keep more of their income/wealth and maintain their lifestyles. Or do I have to prove this to you as well? On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Mitch Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. I'd love to see, just once, somebody substantiate the 'tax breaks for the rich, higher taxes for the poor' allegations that keep getting parroted as fact. BTW, do you know anything about McLame's tax plans, or are you just projecting your feelings about Bush onto him? Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
What is a fair tax for all to pay -- % of income and total amount? Real hard numbers, not some vague generalities please. Reason I ask is that I always hear paying their fair share etc. and I never hear any of them say what fair is. I suppose it depends on where you fall on the political and income spectrum, but that word is un- or ill-defined. I ask my more liberal friends and they launch into long-winded vague responses that don't answer the question, making me think that they don't have one other than more money. My sense is that people of lower income consume similar or more proportional to their income of tax-provided services than do higher-income people, so I wonder why higher-income people should pay for that. Amounts of money spent on various programs targeted at lower-income people for the last, say, 40 years have shown no benefit in reduction of poverty or crime or unstable families, and in fact many of these measures show increases in such problems despite almost continuous economic growth over that time period. Not a lot of incentive to keep paying for those failures. There appear to be a lot of people still standing at the station while the trains keep leaving, and they aren't getting on them. Part of the reason is that it is sorta easy to stay on the platform due to various programs, and part of it is that there is just a portion of the population that is going to be lazy no-count dumbasses no matter what. Some people have legitimate needs that should be supported, others just don't make an effort to elevate themselves (or take advantages of opportunities to do so). --R andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
andrew strasfogel wrote: It's a Republican mantra to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy, and/or not to close the loopholes that let this class of corporations/citizenry keep more of their income/wealth and maintain their lifestyles. Or do I have to prove this to you as well? Yes, you have to prove it, your constant repetition of it does not serve as evidence of any factual basis. Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Rich Thomas wrote: What is a fair tax for all to pay -- % of income and total amount? Real hard numbers, not some vague generalities please. I read of an opinion poll a couple of decades ago, asking what a fair total tax burden for somebody making X income would be, and the answers tended to be around X/4, without as much variance as you'd expect from changing X. This was total, income tax, property tax, etc all included. It wasn't multiple choice, the subject's response was totally his own. I wish I could remember who did that poll. Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
andrew strasfogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: It's a Republican mantra to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy, and/or not to close the loopholes that let this class of corporations/citizenry keep more of their income/wealth and maintain their lifestyles. Or do I have to prove this to you as well? This maintenance of their lifestyles tends to create a lot of jobs for other people. Or in the case of corporations, it provides more value to shareholders, which tend to comprise (in large part) pension funds for retirees, IRAs, and 401ks. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes - Fair Tax
Rich - Watch your language there. Fair Tax is pretty exactly defined in a book of the same name. To eliminate ALL other taxes and go with a sales tax to the final consumer only [no tax on business to business sales or used items] the estimate is somewhere in the low 20's% [don't recall exactly]. No income tax, no inheritance tax, no taxes on anything except sales to final consumer. BillR -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Thomas Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:30 AM To: Mercedes Discussion List Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes What is a fair tax for all to pay -- % of income and total amount? Real hard numbers, not some vague generalities please. Reason I ask is that I always hear paying their fair share etc. and I never hear any of them say what fair is. I suppose it depends on where you fall on the political and income spectrum, but that word is un- or ill-defined. I ask my more liberal friends and they launch into long-winded vague responses that don't answer the question, making me think that they don't have one other than more money. My sense is that people of lower income consume similar or more proportional to their income of tax-provided services than do higher-income people, so I wonder why higher-income people should pay for that. Amounts of money spent on various programs targeted at lower-income people for the last, say, 40 years have shown no benefit in reduction of poverty or crime or unstable families, and in fact many of these measures show increases in such problems despite almost continuous economic growth over that time period. Not a lot of incentive to keep paying for those failures. There appear to be a lot of people still standing at the station while the trains keep leaving, and they aren't getting on them. Part of the reason is that it is sorta easy to stay on the platform due to various programs, and part of it is that there is just a portion of the population that is going to be lazy no-count dumbasses no matter what. Some people have legitimate needs that should be supported, others just don't make an effort to elevate themselves (or take advantages of opportunities to do so). --R andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I am coming around to thinking it has to do with a moral defect in liberals and some religious nuts that all human life is worthy of saving. Provide all sorts of crutches so that they can continue to wander the earth and one day something grand may come of it. Fallacy We humans are no more special than cattle. As long as we provide some value, then it is worth keeping us around. Once we no longer provide milk, or calves, or ... poop, ship off to the rendering plant. Same sort of message this jewish boy had about giving fish v. teaching to fish. I can see providing a very short term support so that fishing is learned, and then kicking them out of the nest. If you are too brain dead to figure it out though, off to the Soylent Green factory with you. Right now we have increasing unemployment, so this mass of people are not really spare labor to take up the slack. Heck, there are just to dang many of them to really be a reserve labor pool. What is being done is to ship jobs to china and then provide cash so the excess humans can purchase crap to keep wallyworld afloat or the dollar stores shoveling toxins out the door. Maybe if the imported low quality crap were taxed in a manner that supported job creation in USA it would be good for all involved. Your craptacular Dollar store or wallyworld would have a higher tax burden than a retailer selling US made goods. Sliding tax scale based on percentage of non US goods sold. All the excess corn and soy products could be made into fuel or plastics and used here instead of sent to a third world nation that will lose it or waste it such that it never is seen or used by the starving masses it is trying to feed. Somalia or Ethiopia are growing crops and selling them on the world market to the tune of almost the same tonnage as we donate to them in food aid. What does that food aid do? It teaches the local dark skinned farmer to sit on his butt instead of growing a crop because he can not compete with FREE food. Then he moves on and that skill set is lost, the poor hungry coloreds get poorer and hungrier and we send them food as their economy and government become unstable. Just about time to let the excess human population go through a correction. Nature should be allowed to run her course. Cull the herd, rebalance the system and get back to a truly self regulating program. Get out of the business of fighting forest fires, supporting non essential personnel, paying farmers to not grow crops, or business to engage in make work projects. Sweep up the unused population and set them to repairing or building bridges and highways. No work, no food, no luck, go to the Soylent Green factory for repurposing. just my $0.02 clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 07:29, Rich Thomas wrote: What is a fair tax for all to pay -- % of income and total amount? Real hard numbers, not some vague generalities please. Reason I ask is that I always hear paying their fair share etc. and I never hear any of them say what fair is. I suppose it depends on where you fall on the political and income spectrum, but that word is un- or ill-defined. I ask my more liberal friends and they launch into long-winded vague responses that don't answer the question, making me think that they don't have one other than more money. My sense is that people of lower income consume similar or more proportional to their income of tax-provided services than do higher-income people, so I wonder why higher-income people should pay for that. Amounts of money spent on various programs targeted at lower-income people for the last, say, 40 years have shown no benefit in reduction of poverty or crime or unstable families, and in fact many of these measures show increases in such problems despite almost continuous economic growth over that time period. Not a lot of incentive to keep paying for those failures. There appear to be a lot of people still standing at the station while the trains keep leaving, and they aren't getting on them. Part of the reason is that it is sorta easy to stay on the platform due to various programs, and part of it is that there is just a portion of the population that is going to be lazy no-count dumbasses no matter what. Some people have legitimate needs that should be supported, others just don't make an effort to elevate themselves (or take advantages of opportunities to do so). --R andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
But a great many of the republican voters around here are not actually rich, they just like to have very little big brother intervention in their lives. There are jobs they create, but that is so the farm continues to run. The really rich may have created jobs for servants. There are precious few of those jobs around anymore. Technology has gobbled them up and we import the products from China to clean dishes, wash clothing, sweep the floor, cook the food, tend the yard. Many a household had in home workers when I was small. Not anymore. So today we are far more productive and get all things done that we would not have before. Cooking a meal now is a matter of ripping the plastic off and tossing it in the nuker. No time spent chopping veggies, making bread, harvesting the fruits of the land or preserving it for use in winter. Just amble to the store and haul it back, toss it into the freezer and pop into a self cooker. Making a real meal took hours, now you have maybe three minutes involvement. And nobody knows how to cook anymore. Except LT DON, who is a paragon of virtues. If fewer people had appliances, more people would have jobs. clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 08:59, Allan Streib wrote: andrew strasfogel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: It's a Republican mantra to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy, and/or not to close the loopholes that let this class of corporations/citizenry keep more of their income/wealth and maintain their lifestyles. Or do I have to prove this to you as well? This maintenance of their lifestyles tends to create a lot of jobs for other people. Or in the case of corporations, it provides more value to shareholders, which tend to comprise (in large part) pension funds for retirees, IRAs, and 401ks. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
You, my friend, might be one of those that needs to be shipped off to your own Soylent Green Factory since your brain has ceased to use logic. Sometimes your logic works and is ok, but when you are way off base and far out in your radicalism, you are beyond help. Luther Redghost wrote: I am coming around to thinking it has to do with a moral defect in liberals and some religious nuts that all human life is worthy of saving. Provide all sorts of crutches so that they can continue to wander the earth and one day something grand may come of it. Fallacy We humans are no more special than cattle. As long as we provide some value, then it is worth keeping us around. Once we no longer provide milk, or calves, or ... poop, ship off to the rendering plant. Same sort of message this jewish boy had about giving fish v. teaching to fish. I can see providing a very short term support so that fishing is learned, and then kicking them out of the nest. If you are too brain dead to figure it out though, off to the Soylent Green factory with you. Right now we have increasing unemployment, so this mass of people are not really spare labor to take up the slack. Heck, there are just to dang many of them to really be a reserve labor pool. What is being done is to ship jobs to china and then provide cash so the excess humans can purchase crap to keep wallyworld afloat or the dollar stores shoveling toxins out the door. Maybe if the imported low quality crap were taxed in a manner that supported job creation in USA it would be good for all involved. Your craptacular Dollar store or wallyworld would have a higher tax burden than a retailer selling US made goods. Sliding tax scale based on percentage of non US goods sold. All the excess corn and soy products could be made into fuel or plastics and used here instead of sent to a third world nation that will lose it or waste it such that it never is seen or used by the starving masses it is trying to feed. Somalia or Ethiopia are growing crops and selling them on the world market to the tune of almost the same tonnage as we donate to them in food aid. What does that food aid do? It teaches the local dark skinned farmer to sit on his butt instead of growing a crop because he can not compete with FREE food. Then he moves on and that skill set is lost, the poor hungry coloreds get poorer and hungrier and we send them food as their economy and government become unstable. Just about time to let the excess human population go through a correction. Nature should be allowed to run her course. Cull the herd, rebalance the system and get back to a truly self regulating program. Get out of the business of fighting forest fires, supporting non essential personnel, paying farmers to not grow crops, or business to engage in make work projects. Sweep up the unused population and set them to repairing or building bridges and highways. No work, no food, no luck, go to the Soylent Green factory for repurposing. just my $0.02 clay ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Their fair share would be if we switched to the Fairtax. Then everyone would pay their fair share. Rich Thomas wrote: What is a fair tax for all to pay -- % of income and total amount? Real hard numbers, not some vague generalities please. Reason I ask is that I always hear paying their fair share etc. and I never hear any of them say what fair is. I suppose it depends on where you fall on the political and income spectrum, but that word is un- or ill-defined. I ask my more liberal friends and they launch into long-winded vague responses that don't answer the question, making me think that they don't have one other than more money. My sense is that people of lower income consume similar or more proportional to their income of tax-provided services than do higher-income people, so I wonder why higher-income people should pay for that. Amounts of money spent on various programs targeted at lower-income people for the last, say, 40 years have shown no benefit in reduction of poverty or crime or unstable families, and in fact many of these measures show increases in such problems despite almost continuous economic growth over that time period. Not a lot of incentive to keep paying for those failures. There appear to be a lot of people still standing at the station while the trains keep leaving, and they aren't getting on them. Part of the reason is that it is sorta easy to stay on the platform due to various programs, and part of it is that there is just a portion of the population that is going to be lazy no-count dumbasses no matter what. Some people have legitimate needs that should be supported, others just don't make an effort to elevate themselves (or take advantages of opportunities to do so). --R andrew strasfogel wrote: And if you want the less wealthy to pay proportionately more in taxes, then McCain's your man. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want more taxes on people who really make this country run - working Americans - to support yet another generation of sit-on-your-[butt]-and-collect-a-check slackers, then Obama's your man! http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/27063739.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.5/1619 - Release Date: 8/18/2008 5:39 PM -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 92 300SD, 92 300E 4Matic, 91 300D, 91 300E, 89 560SEL, 87 300SDL x2, 86 560SL, 86 300E, 85 380SE 5.0 Euro, 85 190D, 84 300D euro manny, 81 240D, 80 240D, 76 240D, 76 300D, 72 250C, 69 250, 66 220SEb http://www.okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes - Fair Tax
I am more concerned about the definition of the word fair when applied to the concept of taxation by those who want to take more in taxes from people who make more money. Since fair changes with a change in income, I would like to see those who use that word define it, ideally in a table of income v. tax by % and total amount, kinda like what the 1040 instruction book has in it. It's a real simple question, but no proponent of fair share taxation has been able to tell me what they mean by that word. In some ways, I'm a simple-minded kind of guy, so simple answers help me understand things better. Like, I make X, how much is 'fair' for me to pay in taxes? And then, So, how did you come up with that number? [Answer probably takes a bit more explanation] So, to Andrew -- if I made $150k per year how much would my fair tax be? $50k, 75k, 100k, 200k, 250k just to round it out a bit. --R Obamanomics Is a Recipe for Recession By *MICHAEL J. BOSKIN* July 29, 2008; Page A17 [nowides] What if I told you that a prominent global political figure in recent months has proposed: abrogating key features of his government's contracts with energy companies; unilaterally renegotiating his country's international economic treaties; dramatically raising marginal tax rates on the rich to levels not seen in his country in three decades (which would make them among the highest in the world); and changing his country's social insurance system into explicit welfare by severing the link between taxes and benefits? The first name that came to mind would probably not be Barack Obama, possibly our nation's next president. Yet despite his obvious general intelligence, and uplifting and motivational eloquence, Sen. Obama reveals this startling economic illiteracy in his policy proposals and economic pronouncements. From the property rights and rule of (contract) law foundations of a successful market economy to the specifics of tax, spending, energy, regulatory and trade policy, if the proposals espoused by candidate Obama ever became law, the American economy would suffer a serious setback. To be sure, Mr. Obama has been clouding these positions as he heads into the general election and, once elected, presidents sometimes see the world differently than when they are running. Some cite Bill Clinton's move to the economic policy center following his Hillary health-care and 1994 Congressional election debacles as a possible Obama model. But candidate Obama starts much further left on spending, taxes, trade and regulation than candidate Clinton. A move as large as Mr. Clinton's toward the center would still leave Mr. Obama on the economic left. Also, by 1995 the country had a Republican Congress to limit President Clinton's big government agenda, whereas most political pundits predict strengthened Democratic majorities in both Houses in 2009. Because newly elected presidents usually try to implement the policies they campaigned on, Mr. Obama's proposals are worth exploring in some depth. I'll discuss taxes and trade, although the story on his other proposals is similar. First, taxes. The table nearby demonstrates what could happen to marginal tax rates in an Obama administration. Mr. Obama would raise the top marginal rates on earnings, dividends and capital gains passed in 2001 and 2003, and phase out itemized deductions for high income taxpayers. He would uncap Social Security taxes, which currently are levied on the first $102,000 of earnings. The result is a remarkable reduction in work incentives for our most economically productive citizens. /(Continued below.)/ [Boskin] The top 35% marginal income tax rate rises to 39.6%; adding the state income tax, the Medicare tax, the effect of the deduction phase-out and Mr. Obama's new Social Security tax (of up to 12.4%) increases the total combined marginal tax rate on additional labor earnings (or small business income) from 44.6% to a whopping 62.8%. People respond to what they get to keep after tax, which the Obama plan reduces from 55.4 cents on the dollar to 37.2 cents -- a reduction of one-third in the after-tax wage! Despite the rhetoric, that's not just on rich individuals. It's also on a lot of small businesses and two-earner middle-aged middle-class couples in their peak earnings years in high cost-of-living areas. (His large increase in energy taxes, not documented here, would disproportionately harm low-income Americans. And, while he says he will not raise taxes on the middle class, he'll need many more tax hikes to pay for his big increase in spending.) On dividends the story is about as bad, with rates rising from 50.4% to 65.6%, and after-tax returns falling over 30%. Even a small response of work and investment to these lower returns means such tax rates, sooner or later, would seriously damage the economy. On economic policy, the president proposes and Congress disposes, so presidents
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
come on Luther! There are 6.x BILLION humans around. How many of the 300 million Americans are actually holding down a job that serves to make the nation better or even keeps the economy chugging along? I am thinking there are a few million folks on the mainland that could be let go and we would not even feel a hiccough in the national fabric. Could have a huge rebound effect on the amount of funds needed to support them that is now available for roads, schools, infrastructure upgrades or defense. Could pay teachers and nurses a decent wage for the work they do to strengthen our kids and health care. Just think, SMART and HEALTHY citizens! What of the drain all the underproductive people worldwide are having? Can these african nations truly support millions of starving people? Can the Amazon support all the folks going in to clear, burn, and leave sterile after a few years? Can the world support that kind of abuse and not have a very bad reaction down the road? All this whining about global climate change is not going to quiet down until there are fewer humans suckling at the drying out teat. When business and such goes bad in your town, most folks just pick up and move on to where there are resources to support them. Where is that place now? Not China. Not India, Not Africa. Not even Latin America. You plan on heading north to Canada when the heat gets unbearable? I am sure a couple hundred million other citizens are looking at that too. Sadly the land there will not support such an influx of refugees. This planet does not even support the current population and we continue to spew more people out. The rich will continue to prosper and the poor will breed themselves into horrors we have not seen on a global scale. Soon enough there will not be enough smart, well fed, well resourced people left to keep the global economy in motion. Then there will be a massive collapse and what you feel is moral will be about as important as the dust in a holed bucket. I really like the way my life is going and do not wish any of the horrors I have seen afflict my fellow man. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that what I want is really insignificant in the grand scope of the universe. At any given time there is just so much to go around. When it is gone, it is gone and you have to pass GO to get anymore. clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 15:54, Luther wrote: You, my friend, might be one of those that needs to be shipped off to your own Soylent Green Factory since your brain has ceased to use logic. Sometimes your logic works and is ok, but when you are way off base and far out in your radicalism, you are beyond help. Luther ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes - Fair Tax
This is a waste of my and everyone else's time. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am more concerned about the definition of the word fair when applied to the concept of taxation by those who want to take more in taxes from people who make more money. Since fair changes with a change in income, I would like to see those who use that word define it, ideally in a table of income v. tax by % and total amount, kinda like what the 1040 instruction book has in it. It's a real simple question, but no proponent of fair share taxation has been able to tell me what they mean by that word. In some ways, I'm a simple-minded kind of guy, so simple answers help me understand things better. Like, I make X, how much is 'fair' for me to pay in taxes? And then, So, how did you come up with that number? [Answer probably takes a bit more explanation] So, to Andrew -- if I made $150k per year how much would my fair tax be? $50k, 75k, 100k, 200k, 250k just to round it out a bit. --R Obamanomics Is a Recipe for Recession By *MICHAEL J. BOSKIN* July 29, 2008; Page A17 [nowides] What if I told you that a prominent global political figure in recent months has proposed: abrogating key features of his government's contracts with energy companies; unilaterally renegotiating his country's international economic treaties; dramatically raising marginal tax rates on the rich to levels not seen in his country in three decades (which would make them among the highest in the world); and changing his country's social insurance system into explicit welfare by severing the link between taxes and benefits? The first name that came to mind would probably not be Barack Obama, possibly our nation's next president. Yet despite his obvious general intelligence, and uplifting and motivational eloquence, Sen. Obama reveals this startling economic illiteracy in his policy proposals and economic pronouncements. From the property rights and rule of (contract) law foundations of a successful market economy to the specifics of tax, spending, energy, regulatory and trade policy, if the proposals espoused by candidate Obama ever became law, the American economy would suffer a serious setback. To be sure, Mr. Obama has been clouding these positions as he heads into the general election and, once elected, presidents sometimes see the world differently than when they are running. Some cite Bill Clinton's move to the economic policy center following his Hillary health-care and 1994 Congressional election debacles as a possible Obama model. But candidate Obama starts much further left on spending, taxes, trade and regulation than candidate Clinton. A move as large as Mr. Clinton's toward the center would still leave Mr. Obama on the economic left. Also, by 1995 the country had a Republican Congress to limit President Clinton's big government agenda, whereas most political pundits predict strengthened Democratic majorities in both Houses in 2009. Because newly elected presidents usually try to implement the policies they campaigned on, Mr. Obama's proposals are worth exploring in some depth. I'll discuss taxes and trade, although the story on his other proposals is similar. First, taxes. The table nearby demonstrates what could happen to marginal tax rates in an Obama administration. Mr. Obama would raise the top marginal rates on earnings, dividends and capital gains passed in 2001 and 2003, and phase out itemized deductions for high income taxpayers. He would uncap Social Security taxes, which currently are levied on the first $102,000 of earnings. The result is a remarkable reduction in work incentives for our most economically productive citizens. /(Continued below.)/ [Boskin] The top 35% marginal income tax rate rises to 39.6%; adding the state income tax, the Medicare tax, the effect of the deduction phase-out and Mr. Obama's new Social Security tax (of up to 12.4%) increases the total combined marginal tax rate on additional labor earnings (or small business income) from 44.6% to a whopping 62.8%. People respond to what they get to keep after tax, which the Obama plan reduces from 55.4 cents on the dollar to 37.2 cents -- a reduction of one-third in the after-tax wage! Despite the rhetoric, that's not just on rich individuals. It's also on a lot of small businesses and two-earner middle-aged middle-class couples in their peak earnings years in high cost-of-living areas. (His large increase in energy taxes, not documented here, would disproportionately harm low-income Americans. And, while he says he will not raise taxes on the middle class, he'll need many more tax hikes to pay for his big increase in spending.) On dividends the story is about as bad, with rates rising from 50.4% to 65.6%, and after-tax returns falling over 30%. Even a small response of work and investment to these lower returns means such tax rates,
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Fairtax a perfectly wonderful oxymoron. It's fair only to high wage earners... On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Redghost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: come on Luther! There are 6.x BILLION humans around. How many of the 300 million Americans are actually holding down a job that serves to make the nation better or even keeps the economy chugging along? I am thinking there are a few million folks on the mainland that could be let go and we would not even feel a hiccough in the national fabric. Could have a huge rebound effect on the amount of funds needed to support them that is now available for roads, schools, infrastructure upgrades or defense. Could pay teachers and nurses a decent wage for the work they do to strengthen our kids and health care. Just think, SMART and HEALTHY citizens! What of the drain all the underproductive people worldwide are having? Can these african nations truly support millions of starving people? Can the Amazon support all the folks going in to clear, burn, and leave sterile after a few years? Can the world support that kind of abuse and not have a very bad reaction down the road? All this whining about global climate change is not going to quiet down until there are fewer humans suckling at the drying out teat. When business and such goes bad in your town, most folks just pick up and move on to where there are resources to support them. Where is that place now? Not China. Not India, Not Africa. Not even Latin America. You plan on heading north to Canada when the heat gets unbearable? I am sure a couple hundred million other citizens are looking at that too. Sadly the land there will not support such an influx of refugees. This planet does not even support the current population and we continue to spew more people out. The rich will continue to prosper and the poor will breed themselves into horrors we have not seen on a global scale. Soon enough there will not be enough smart, well fed, well resourced people left to keep the global economy in motion. Then there will be a massive collapse and what you feel is moral will be about as important as the dust in a holed bucket. I really like the way my life is going and do not wish any of the horrors I have seen afflict my fellow man. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that what I want is really insignificant in the grand scope of the universe. At any given time there is just so much to go around. When it is gone, it is gone and you have to pass GO to get anymore. clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 15:54, Luther wrote: You, my friend, might be one of those that needs to be shipped off to your own Soylent Green Factory since your brain has ceased to use logic. Sometimes your logic works and is ok, but when you are way off base and far out in your radicalism, you are beyond help. Luther ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes - Fair Tax
Great piece... from the Rupert Murdoch Street Journal. Oh wait, shall we mention that Mr. Boskin, correction Dr. Boskin (the PhD after his name means he's smart right?) is on the board of directors of ExxonMobil, served on FOoliani's economic advisory team in his run for 2008, member of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution senior advisory board (an industry funded organization that advocates lower taxes and less regulation for big business, taking large donations from conservative organizations) and lets see, what else... oh yea, served on the Council of Economic Advisors for George H.W. Bush. Gee, wonder why he doesn't like Obama... Please do a little research before posting this crap... then again, I guess you are as you said, a simple-minded kind of guy. Save it for your nouveau riche email buddies that work harder for their money than anyone else, or better yet, those good, patriotic American folks that think Obama is a terrorist. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of andrew strasfogel Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:28 PM To: Mercedes Discussion List Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes - Fair Tax This is a waste of my and everyone else's time. On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Rich Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am more concerned about the definition of the word fair when applied to the concept of taxation by those who want to take more in taxes from people who make more money. Since fair changes with a change in income, I would like to see those who use that word define it, ideally in a table of income v. tax by % and total amount, kinda like what the 1040 instruction book has in it. It's a real simple question, but no proponent of fair share taxation has been able to tell me what they mean by that word. In some ways, I'm a simple-minded kind of guy, so simple answers help me understand things better. Like, I make X, how much is 'fair' for me to pay in taxes? And then, So, how did you come up with that number? [Answer probably takes a bit more explanation] So, to Andrew -- if I made $150k per year how much would my fair tax be? $50k, 75k, 100k, 200k, 250k just to round it out a bit. --R Obamanomics Is a Recipe for Recession By *MICHAEL J. BOSKIN* July 29, 2008; Page A17 [nowides] What if I told you that a prominent global political figure in recent months has proposed: abrogating key features of his government's contracts with energy companies; unilaterally renegotiating his country's international economic treaties; dramatically raising marginal tax rates on the rich to levels not seen in his country in three decades (which would make them among the highest in the world); and changing his country's social insurance system into explicit welfare by severing the link between taxes and benefits? The first name that came to mind would probably not be Barack Obama, possibly our nation's next president. Yet despite his obvious general intelligence, and uplifting and motivational eloquence, Sen. Obama reveals this startling economic illiteracy in his policy proposals and economic pronouncements. From the property rights and rule of (contract) law foundations of a successful market economy to the specifics of tax, spending, energy, regulatory and trade policy, if the proposals espoused by candidate Obama ever became law, the American economy would suffer a serious setback. To be sure, Mr. Obama has been clouding these positions as he heads into the general election and, once elected, presidents sometimes see the world differently than when they are running. Some cite Bill Clinton's move to the economic policy center following his Hillary health-care and 1994 Congressional election debacles as a possible Obama model. But candidate Obama starts much further left on spending, taxes, trade and regulation than candidate Clinton. A move as large as Mr. Clinton's toward the center would still leave Mr. Obama on the economic left. Also, by 1995 the country had a Republican Congress to limit President Clinton's big government agenda, whereas most political pundits predict strengthened Democratic majorities in both Houses in 2009. Because newly elected presidents usually try to implement the policies they campaigned on, Mr. Obama's proposals are worth exploring in some depth. I'll discuss taxes and trade, although the story on his other proposals is similar. First, taxes. The table nearby demonstrates what could happen to marginal tax rates in an Obama administration. Mr. Obama would raise the top marginal rates on earnings, dividends and capital gains passed in 2001 and 2003, and phase out itemized deductions for high income taxpayers. He would uncap Social Security taxes, which currently are levied on the first $102,000 of earnings. The result is a remarkable reduction in work incentives for our most economically productive citizens. /(Continued below.)/ [Boskin
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
This should help to clarify the complexity of each candidates take on the tax issue. Hopefully this will shed light on which candidate will best serve your individual needs http://tinyurl.com/5c3kak clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 20:35, andrew strasfogel wrote: Fairtax a perfectly wonderful oxymoron. It's fair only to high wage earners... On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Redghost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: come on Luther! There are 6.x BILLION humans around. How many of the 300 million Americans are actually holding down a job that serves to make the nation better or even keeps the economy chugging along? I am thinking there are a few million folks on the mainland that could be let go and we would not even feel a hiccough in the national fabric. Could have a huge rebound effect on the amount of funds needed to support them that is now available for roads, schools, infrastructure upgrades or defense. Could pay teachers and nurses a decent wage for the work they do to strengthen our kids and health care. Just think, SMART and HEALTHY citizens! What of the drain all the underproductive people worldwide are having? Can these african nations truly support millions of starving people? Can the Amazon support all the folks going in to clear, burn, and leave sterile after a few years? Can the world support that kind of abuse and not have a very bad reaction down the road? All this whining about global climate change is not going to quiet down until there are fewer humans suckling at the drying out teat. When business and such goes bad in your town, most folks just pick up and move on to where there are resources to support them. Where is that place now? Not China. Not India, Not Africa. Not even Latin America. You plan on heading north to Canada when the heat gets unbearable? I am sure a couple hundred million other citizens are looking at that too. Sadly the land there will not support such an influx of refugees. This planet does not even support the current population and we continue to spew more people out. The rich will continue to prosper and the poor will breed themselves into horrors we have not seen on a global scale. Soon enough there will not be enough smart, well fed, well resourced people left to keep the global economy in motion. Then there will be a massive collapse and what you feel is moral will be about as important as the dust in a holed bucket. I really like the way my life is going and do not wish any of the horrors I have seen afflict my fellow man. I am realistic enough to acknowledge that what I want is really insignificant in the grand scope of the universe. At any given time there is just so much to go around. When it is gone, it is gone and you have to pass GO to get anymore. clay On 19 Aug 2008, at 15:54, Luther wrote: You, my friend, might be one of those that needs to be shipped off to your own Soylent Green Factory since your brain has ceased to use logic. Sometimes your logic works and is ok, but when you are way off base and far out in your radicalism, you are beyond help. Luther ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
[MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
There are some people who believe it is right and just for the government to take money in taxes from people who have more money, and give it to those who have less money through various programs, grants, tax breaks, whatever. That is their belief system. There are some who believe it is right and just for those who have more money not to have the government penalize them for their financial success to support those who are not as successful. (I think most of those people also believe that some amount of tax-based redistribution is reasonable to help people who have problems, but most of those also believe that most everyone can go work and make more money if they invest in education, work, etc. and not being dumbasses about a bunch of things that impede them from financial success.) That is an equally valid belief system. There are a whole bunch who are somewhere in the middle, grumble and complain on April 15, but don't do much or think too much about it. So, these are 2 kinds of people who generally become polarized around their valid belief systems, and neither kind is gonna change the minds of the other though it does lead to lots of effort to try to do so. I have thought a lot about why a person falls into one camp or the other (or actively somewhere in between) and have some clues, but nothing definitive. (I note that some liberal friends of mine who have moved up into the Alternative Minimum Tax realm are rapidly developing more conservative thoughts when that little surprise bites them, or their wives like to spend that excess money on various things, or both.) -R andrew strasfogel wrote: I don't feel that paying taxes to the government for services is an unreasonable infringement of my freedom. I also don't mind that my tax dollars are somewhat higher than they might otherwise be because they help others less fortunate than I who aren't reached by private charities. There are other democracies (all of western Europe, Australia and NZ, etc.) who may tax their citizens at a higher rate but are nonetheless no worse off than we are and in fact may be delightful places to live permanently. BTW, if you want to maintain a reasonably civilized discourse hold off on the personal innuendo. On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Mitch Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: andrew strasfogel wrote: Not really, although if you provide some examples I could answer more definitively. You want me to tell you what countries you were talking about when you said the USSA was undertaxed compared to civilized nations? If a country has even more taxes than ours does, then the either socialist mommy state is more prevalent there, or the taxpayers aren't getting their money's worth, or both. I just don't see how higher taxes could be an admirable trait, unless it's a Socialist or Communist who's doing the admiring. Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Rich wrote: So, these are 2 kinds of people who generally become polarized around their valid belief systems, and neither kind is gonna change the minds of the other though it does lead to lots of effort to try to do so. I have thought a lot about why a person falls into one camp or the other (or actively somewhere in between) and have some clues, but nothing definitive. (I note that some liberal friends of mine who have moved up into the Alternative Minimum Tax realm are rapidly developing more conservative thoughts when that little surprise bites them, or their wives like to spend that excess money on various things, or both.) There is a third category that I am included in. I don't want to pay any taxes at all. NONE. BUT, I also want every service the government offers. I know I can't have it that way, but I really hate paying more than a third of my money to the government. (P.S. I am not really serious about not wanting to pay any taxes. I do think we need schools, and roads, and bridges, and social services, But I sure do wish I could pay less. I also think there are not that many barely rich liberals out there. The barely upper middle and the barely rich are the folks who are hit hardest with taxes. The ultra rich can invest in ways that keep them from paying taxes. Have you ever noticed some of the most liberal people around are also the richest? George Soros, the Kennedy's, Heinz, Edwards, etc. They want higher taxes, but take a look at Edwards investments. He is HEAVILY invested in tax free bonds. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Donald Snook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rich wrote: So, these are 2 kinds of people who generally become polarized around their valid belief systems, and neither kind is gonna change the minds of the other though it does lead to lots of effort to try to do so. I have thought a lot about why a person falls into one camp or the other (or actively somewhere in between) and have some clues, but nothing definitive. (I note that some liberal friends of mine who have moved up into the Alternative Minimum Tax realm are rapidly developing more conservative thoughts when that little surprise bites them, or their wives like to spend that excess money on various things, or both.) There is a third category that I am included in. I don't want to pay any taxes at all. NONE. BUT, I also want every service the government offers. I know I can't have it that way, but I really hate paying more than a third of my money to the government. (P.S. I am not really serious about not wanting to pay any taxes. I do think we need schools, and roads, and bridges, and social services, But I sure do wish I could pay less. I also think there are not that many barely rich liberals out there. The barely upper middle and the barely rich are the folks who are hit hardest with taxes. The ultra rich can invest in ways that keep them from paying taxes. Have you ever noticed some of the most liberal people around are also the richest? George Soros, the Kennedy's, Heinz, Edwards, etc. They want higher taxes, but take a look at Edwards investments. He is HEAVILY invested in tax free bonds. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Donald Snook [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: (P.S. I am not really serious about not wanting to pay any taxes. I do think we need schools, and roads, and bridges, and social services, But I sure do wish I could pay less. Many of these things you mention could be provided by the private sector (or at least by local gov't), much more economically than the federal gov't can. Allan -- 1983 300D ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Bill Gates and his father are not poor or republican. They want to do away with any sort of tax relief for those who they feel should be returning the wealth to show gratitude for all they have been blessed with. What this does end up doing is killing the family business that now has to liquidate upon the death of the founder, and the children and grandchildren are no longer able to continue the farm, the store, or the transportation company. Sell off the business before you die and Bill and Bill Sr. can rake in cash buying or doing the legal leg work on the deal. There are a bunch of M$ millionaires who give lavishly to causes. Taxes are another story for them though. Grubbing and scraping to not pay their share of infrastructure fees for the mcmansions and trouble they cause here. clay On 18 Aug 2008, at 11:32, andrew strasfogel wrote: Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Donald Snook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rich wrote: So, these are 2 kinds of people who generally become polarized around their valid belief systems, and neither kind is gonna change the minds of the other though it does lead to lots of effort to try to do so. I have thought a lot about why a person falls into one camp or the other (or actively somewhere in between) and have some clues, but nothing definitive. (I note that some liberal friends of mine who have moved up into the Alternative Minimum Tax realm are rapidly developing more conservative thoughts when that little surprise bites them, or their wives like to spend that excess money on various things, or both.) There is a third category that I am included in. I don't want to pay any taxes at all. NONE. BUT, I also want every service the government offers. I know I can't have it that way, but I really hate paying more than a third of my money to the government. (P.S. I am not really serious about not wanting to pay any taxes. I do think we need schools, and roads, and bridges, and social services, But I sure do wish I could pay less. I also think there are not that many barely rich liberals out there. The barely upper middle and the barely rich are the folks who are hit hardest with taxes. The ultra rich can invest in ways that keep them from paying taxes. Have you ever noticed some of the most liberal people around are also the richest? George Soros, the Kennedy's, Heinz, Edwards, etc. They want higher taxes, but take a look at Edwards investments. He is HEAVILY invested in tax free bonds. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Donald Snook wrote: There is a third category that I am included in. I don't want to pay any taxes at all. NONE. BUT, I also want every service the government offers. I know I can't have it that way... You aren't trying hard enough, because some people get all that you mention above. Their financial standard of living is lower than yours, but they don't have to actually do anything to maintain that reduced standard once they get it set up. It's a lot harder than it was 30-40 years ago, you can't just sit on your ass and say send me a check, but if you can get yourself certified as disabled by the government, or if you breed like rabbits, you can still do it. If you want a high standard of living for doing nothing, have one kid with somebody whose income puts them in the $5k a month or higher child support bracket. You and one child can live quite nicely on $60k a year (or better yet, $6 million a year if you divorce Donald Trump) of tax free child support. In the low standard of living category, here's a woman who has never worked in all her 40 years. Everybody she knows is habitually unemployed too, yet she was raised by a man who worked his keester off in a car factory for 45 years and tried to set a good example for her: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92592545 Some commentary on her situation: http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/finance/844982 Mitch ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
I'm in Canada where we are a fair bit more socialistic than the US of A. We pay taxes beyond what most in the US do and much more than we used to. I don't recall the exact numbers but I believe the tax burden now is much greater than it was in my father's time. What really gets to me is what the government does with all that money. For an example, I used to live out at what we now consider the cottage. It is in a very small town on Lake of the Woods south of Kenora. I left there in 1975 to go to University. When I lived there we had a Police station and at least 3 fulltime local policemen year round and additional policemen in the summer time when the tourist population increased. There was a police boat stationed there that cruised the lake on a regular basis. We also had a Natural Resources base with several game wardens that cruised the lake. All of that is gone. There is no real presence of either force there now. I think the closest would be about 50 miles away in Kenora. There are guard rails along the highway in spots where the ditch is deep. They are posts buried in the ground with cables attached to them. When I was younger, these were all painted white and maintained regularly. I don't recall seeing them in need of paint. Today, they don't bother to paint them and significant numbers of them are broken off - likely by the snow ploughs in winter. They don't bother to replace let alone paint. There is talk of taking out all the navigation buoys on the lake because they don't want to pay to maintain them. If they do that, we will all have to have GPS with the local maps to avoid the reefs. I hope the underwater rocks are marked well on the GPS maps. Taxes are higher but basic services are gone. What the heck are they doing with all the money? If I had to guess, I would say that they have promoted to the point where there are lots of upper management types and no people left on the street to do the work. Lots of desk cops and highway engineers earning in excess of 6 figures moaning about the fact that they have no money to spend on the services their department is supposed to provide. Randy ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Andrew wrote: Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... I think you are incorrect about that. However, in the interest of being accurate, I think it might be more accurate to say that the ultra-rich (who come from old money families are liberals, whereas the rich republicans are those that have earned their money. Even this has exceptions (that support my earlier contention), like Bill Gates and the Hollywood elite. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
In the interest of being accurate... HAH! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Donald Snook Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:27 PM To: mercedes@okiebenz.com Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes Andrew wrote: Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... I think you are incorrect about that. However, in the interest of being accurate, I think it might be more accurate to say that the ultra-rich (who come from old money families are liberals, whereas the rich republicans are those that have earned their money. Even this has exceptions (that support my earlier contention), like Bill Gates and the Hollywood elite. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Mitch wrote: You aren't trying hard enough, because some people get all that you mention above. Their financial standard of living is lower than yours, but they don't have to actually do anything to maintain that reduced standard once they get it set up. It's a lot harder than it was 30-40 years ago, you can't just sit on your ass and say send me a check, but if you can get yourself certified as disabled by the government, or if you breed like rabbits, you can still do it. You are right, I could go this way. But, I couldn't live with myself. I have a brother in law who lives like this. He and his wife live in a rent free apartment (attached to my in law's computer business. He works a maximum of 10 hours a week. They have two kids and one on the way. They get food stamps, WIC, free health care, welfare and every other free service they can. They mooch off of his parents (my in laws) and are a complete drain on everyone. It doesn't bother them. My father in law is the hardest working man I know. He is a country preacher. He has served as a pastor of a church of 40 for more than 20 years. He gets a place to live and $400 a month. He pays the $400 back to the church as his offering. He also works two other jobs. He used to work at a steel refinery until he hurt his back. Instead of trying to get disability, he went to work at a grain company (which is only slightly less hard on him). He also mows owns a VERY small computer repair business. He is a decent man and really salt of the earth. I don't know what happened to his kids. I think people like my BIL who can work and just won't, should be removed from all assistance. If they don't want to work, fine. But, the rest of us shouldn't have to pay for it. Sorry for the rant. This just makes me very upset thinking about it. I am godfather to their oldest child and it drives me crazy to see the kid learning that it is okay to be a slug and a leach. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Andrew, And your source for WAY outnumber and quieter is? Chuck On Aug 18, 2008, at 11:32 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
The rising cost of food means their money gets them about a third fewer bags of groceries — $100 used to buy about 12 bags of groceries, but now it's more like seven or eight. So they cut back on expensive items like meat, and they don't buy extras like ice cream anymore. Instead, they eat a lot of starches like potatoes and noodles. Both those women in the picture must weigh at least 300lb, so much for groceries being an issue. I used to live in Dorchester, a part of Boston with a significant immigrant (recent, as well as the Irish and everyone else who came over and started at the bottom of the heap) population. There was a fruit/veg store there, kind of a warehouse thing, that always had good stuff cheap. I would go there and see these Caribs buying rice, beans, unidentifiable root things, and other stuff, very little meat. They were all skinny and in good health. There were some Haitians living across the street from me, 3 brothers bought a triple-decker (triple decka) and lived in it with their families, all worked 2 or 3 jobs and loved America for what they could do. Whenever I talked to them on the street, they would invariably go off on the lazy welfare types up the street (black, but these guys were blacker) who were fat, lazy, no-good criminals, etc etc. Definitely not PC, and the language they used would have gotten me shot! My next door neighbor was Cape Verdean, he had a little garden plot in back, grew weird stuff, and he had the same attitude. They were harsher than the Irish rednecks up the street, go figure. Don't work, no money, get fat. Work hard, make money, stay skinny. What a country! --R Anyway, no reason Mitch Haley wrote: In the low standard of living category, here's a woman who has never worked in all her 40 years. Everybody she knows is habitually unemployed too, yet she was raised by a man who worked his keester off in a car factory for 45 years and tried to set a good example for her: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92592545 ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Rich Thomas wrote: Don't work, no money, get fat. Work hard, make money, stay skinny. What a country! We get a certain economic vigor from immigrants. They are more motivated than the average bear, or they'd still be sitting in the same place they were born. Unfortunately, at least with Mexicans, the 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants often pick up the worst of the lower class American habits. I have no idea how many generations Ms Nunez's family was here, but if she's forty and her dad retired after 45 years at GM, she's a natural citizen of the USSA. The original title to the NPR article was For Some Ohioans, Even Meat Is Out Of Reach, which left me thinking of course she can't reach it, her arm's too heavy to lift and it sure looks like plenty of some calorie source is in her reach. When you get into the details of the story, she has more free spending cash than a lot of taxpaying workers. She gets housing, $102 in food stamps and $637 in cash. Obviously, a 400lb manatee consumes more than $100 a month in food, but even if she pays $300 a month for food she's got about $440 a month after food, medical, and housing to pay for utilities, clothes, etc. I know somebody who would gladly trade places with this cow. She works at WalMart, takes home about $800 a month after taxes, pays $500 a month in rent, and gets taken to the cleaners by medical care providers who would accept far less if insurance or medicaid was paying for it. Her idea of a good week is when she has $20 left over to put in her gas tank to drive to work on. Mitch. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
Intuition and a life of observing! If you care to disprove my thesis have at it! On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:02 PM, Chuck Landenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrew, And your source for WAY outnumber and quieter is? Chuck On Aug 18, 2008, at 11:32 AM, andrew strasfogel wrote: Donald, surely you jest! The Republicans WAY outnumber liberal Dems in the filthy rich class, but they are generally a lot quieter about their beliefs... ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Difference on Taxes
mhmm, living the 21st century American Dream! This attitude is of my generation and was instilled in us by you old folk. We do the minimal amount of work to sustain life. Way to be! -- Luther KB5QHUAlma, Ark '87 300SDL (279,xxx mi) '85 Ford F250 6.9 diesel (x59,xxx mi) BioBeast '82 300CD (181 kmi) '82 300D (74 kmi) getting donor engine-sold '85 300D (280,176) parts car sans engine The Accordion Quoting Donald Snook [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Mitch wrote: You aren't trying hard enough, because some people get all that you mention above. Their financial standard of living is lower than yours, but they don't have to actually do anything to maintain that reduced standard once they get it set up. It's a lot harder than it was 30-40 years ago, you can't just sit on your ass and say send me a check, but if you can get yourself certified as disabled by the government, or if you breed like rabbits, you can still do it. You are right, I could go this way. But, I couldn't live with myself. I have a brother in law who lives like this. He and his wife live in a rent free apartment (attached to my in law's computer business. He works a maximum of 10 hours a week. They have two kids and one on the way. They get food stamps, WIC, free health care, welfare and every other free service they can. They mooch off of his parents (my in laws) and are a complete drain on everyone. It doesn't bother them. My father in law is the hardest working man I know. He is a country preacher. He has served as a pastor of a church of 40 for more than 20 years. He gets a place to live and $400 a month. He pays the $400 back to the church as his offering. He also works two other jobs. He used to work at a steel refinery until he hurt his back. Instead of trying to get disability, he went to work at a grain company (which is only slightly less hard on him). He also mows owns a VERY small computer repair business. He is a decent man and really salt of the earth. I don't know what happened to his kids. I think people like my BIL who can work and just won't, should be removed from all assistance. If they don't want to work, fine. But, the rest of us shouldn't have to pay for it. Sorry for the rant. This just makes me very upset thinking about it. I am godfather to their oldest child and it drives me crazy to see the kid learning that it is okay to be a slug and a leach. Donald H. Snook ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new parts see official list sponsor: http://www.buymbparts.com/ For used parts email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
