subject:"\[FairfieldLife\] Brain\-tenna\? Unlock your car, by touching your head"

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-24 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 11/23/2014 10:04 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
>

California is in pretty good shape fiscally. This is a specious 
argument, about only taxing the rich here. Real estate costs a small 
fortune in California, and *everybody* pays a mint in property taxes. 
It adds up.

Contrary to what you say, taxing the rich is not complicated, because 
their wealth doesn't fluctuate during economic ebbs and flows. In 
fact, the wealth of the rich always goes up, unlike yours and mine. 
They can definitely afford to throw more into the coffers.

>
According to what I've read, the top 1% of earners fill the coffers of 
states like California and New York during a boom—and leave them starved 
for revenue in a bust. Go figure.

/"Nearly half of California's income taxes before the recession came 
from the top 1% of earners: households that took in more than $490,000 a 
year. High earners, it turns out, have especially volatile incomes—their 
earnings fell by more than twice as much as the rest of the population's 
during the recession. When they crashed, they took California's finances 
down with them."/

'The Price of Taxing the Rich'
http://online.wsj.com/articles/ 

>

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

On 11/23/2014 5:58 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

>

Corporations DO NOT pay their fair share - It is supposed to be
35 to 40%, but several pay NO taxes at all. They can go
incorporate in Liberia, for all I care - Greedy, unpatriotic
bastards. I like the idea of a flat tax, but will settle for the
letter of the law.

PS There is exactly ONE political party in the USA - Quit getting
played for a chump.

>
It looks like we are in some agreement. Both political parties are
not working in our interest. Bhairitu's idea of a third party
makes a lot of sense. In the next presidential election I may vote
independent. It's easy to paint taxation with a large brush and to
combine notions of individual earned income tax with corporate
taxation and the idea of taxing the rich. It's complicated.

The problem with taxing the rich is that when the economy is good
politicians love it, but when the economy is poor, they hate it -
the instability is not a good thing. In California what is needed
is a flat tax rate to help stabilize state revenues, according to
U.S. Rep Tom McClintock (R., CA).

/"The working class may be taking a beating from spending cuts
used to close a cavernous deficit, Mr. Williams said, but the root
of California's woes is its reliance on taxing the wealthy." /

http://online.wsj.com/articles/

/

/Libertarian Party on Tax Reform:/
//
//"Government should not incur debt, which burdens future
generations without their consent. We support the passage of a
“Balanced Budget Amendment” to the US Constitution, provided that
the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, not
raising taxes."//
//
/http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Libertarian_Party_Tax_Reform.htm

/"The kid-glove treatment of corporate tax offenders by both
parties is exhibit A in America's shift from a functioning
democracy to a nascent oligarchy."/

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-biggest-tax-scam-ever 

>

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
, 
 wrote :

On 11/23/2014 1:01 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

>

The current situation is shameful.

>
/Agreed, but the answer is not//in continuing the current tax
structure. I am opposed to unfair income taxation. A better
idea might be a tax on luxury goods. One of the reason
businesses are leaving California and the U.S. is because of
unfair corporate taxation./
>

It is lying with statistics,

>
/The chart was compiled in 2011 by President Obama's
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) - it's a non-partisan
analysis. It proves that the rich pay almost all of the
income tax in the U.S. Do the math.//
//
//https://www.cbo.gov//

/http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

based on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy
give something back, besides the minimum. The only reason
that chart is trotted out, is to quiet those who know they
are being screwed, and to appease the very rich.

>
/So, it's an Obama government conspiracy to "quiet those" who
don't pay any income tax? You're not even making any sense

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]

California is in pretty good shape fiscally. This is a specious argument, about 
only taxing the rich here. Real estate costs a small fortune in California, and 
*everybody* pays a mint in property taxes. It adds up.  

 Contrary to what you say, taxing the rich is not complicated, because their 
wealth doesn't fluctuate during economic ebbs and flows. In fact, the wealth of 
the rich always goes up, unlike yours and mine. They can definitely afford to 
throw more into the coffers. 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 On 11/23/2014 5:58 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
 >

 Corporations DO NOT pay their fair share - It is supposed to be 35 to 40%, but 
several pay NO taxes at all. They can go incorporate in Liberia, for all I care 
- Greedy, unpatriotic bastards. I like the idea of a flat tax, but will settle 
for the letter of the law.

 PS There is exactly ONE political party in the USA - Quit getting played for a 
chump.

 >
 It looks like we are in some agreement. Both political parties are not working 
in our interest. Bhairitu's idea of a third party makes a lot of sense. In the 
next presidential election I may vote independent. It's easy to paint taxation 
with a large brush and to combine notions of individual earned income tax with 
corporate taxation and the idea of taxing the rich. It's complicated.

 The problem with taxing the rich is that when the economy is good politicians 
love it, but when the economy is poor, they hate it - the instability is not a 
good thing. In California what is needed is a flat tax rate to help stabilize 
state revenues, according to U.S. Rep Tom McClintock (R., CA).

 "The working class may be taking a beating from spending cuts used to close a 
cavernous deficit, Mr. Williams said, but the root of California's woes is its 
reliance on taxing the wealthy." 

 http://online.wsj.com/articles/ 
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704604704576220491592684626

 Libertarian Party on Tax Reform:

 "Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without 
their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the 
US Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting 
expenditures, not raising taxes."

 http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Libertarian_Party_Tax_Reform.htm 
http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Libertarian_Party_Tax_Reform.htm 

 "The kid-glove treatment of corporate tax offenders by both parties is exhibit 
A in America's shift from a functioning democracy to a nascent oligarchy."

 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-biggest-tax-scam-ever 
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-biggest-tax-scam-ever-20140827?page=4

 >

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:punditster@... wrote :

 On 11/23/2014 1:01 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
 >

   The current situation is shameful.

 >
 Agreed, but the answer is not in continuing the current tax structure. I am 
opposed to unfair income taxation. A better idea might be a tax on luxury 
goods. One of the reason businesses are leaving California and the U.S. is 
because of unfair corporate taxation.
 > 
 It is lying with statistics,

 >
 The chart was compiled in 2011 by President Obama's Congressional Budget 
Office (CBO) - it's a non-partisan analysis. It proves that the rich pay almost 
all of the income tax in the U.S. Do the math.

 https://www.cbo.gov/ https://www.cbo.gov/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/
 >
 based on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give something 
back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart is trotted out, is to 
quiet those who know they are being screwed, and to appease the very rich. 

 >
 So, it's an Obama government conspiracy to "quiet those" who don't pay any 
income tax? You're not even making any sense today, Jim. 

 The federal government’s most intrusive and potentially punitive institution, 
the IRS, unquestionably worked for Barack Obama’s reelection by suppressing 
activities by conservative groups.

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will/ 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-in-wisconsin-done-in-by-john-doe/2014/10/24/b30ee2ec-5ad8-11e4-b812-38518ae74c67_story.html
 >
 How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred million or so?

 >
 A few million here and a few million there and pretty soon you're talking real 
money. But, seriously it's not about the money - it's all about the jobs.
 >
 The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the common, and they should pay 
their fair share, without any tax breaks.

 >
 Not sure how you figure rich people paying 90% of all the U.S. income tax is 
paying "their fair share. It sounds more like the rich

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 11/23/2014 5:58 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
>

Corporations DO NOT pay their fair share - It is supposed to be 35 to 
40%, but several pay NO taxes at all. They can go incorporate in 
Liberia, for all I care - Greedy, unpatriotic bastards. I like the 
idea of a flat tax, but will settle for the letter of the law.

PS There is exactly ONE political party in the USA - Quit getting 
played for a chump.

>
It looks like we are in some agreement. Both political parties are not 
working in our interest. Bhairitu's idea of a third party makes a lot of 
sense. In the next presidential election I may vote independent. It's 
easy to paint taxation with a large brush and to combine notions of 
individual earned income tax with corporate taxation and the idea of 
taxing the rich. It's complicated.

The problem with taxing the rich is that when the economy is good 
politicians love it, but when the economy is poor, they hate it - the 
instability is not a good thing. In California what is needed is a flat 
tax rate to help stabilize state revenues, according to U.S. Rep Tom 
McClintock (R., CA).

/"The working class may be taking a beating from spending cuts used to 
close a cavernous deficit, Mr. Williams said, but the root of 
California's woes is its reliance on taxing the wealthy." /

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ 
/

/Libertarian Party on Tax Reform:/
//
//"Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations 
without their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget 
Amendment” to the US Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced 
exclusively by cutting expenditures, not raising taxes."//

//
/http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Libertarian_Party_Tax_Reform.htm

/"The kid-glove treatment of corporate tax offenders by both parties is 
exhibit A in America's shift from a functioning democracy to a nascent 
oligarchy."/

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-biggest-tax-scam-ever 

>

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

On 11/23/2014 1:01 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

>

The current situation is shameful.

>
/Agreed, but the answer is not//in continuing the current tax
structure. I am opposed to unfair income taxation. A better idea
might be a tax on luxury goods. One of the reason businesses are
leaving California and the U.S. is because of unfair corporate
taxation./
>

It is lying with statistics,

>
/The chart was compiled in 2011 by President Obama's Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) - it's a non-partisan analysis. It proves that
the rich pay almost all of the income tax in the U.S. Do the math.//
//
//https://www.cbo.gov//

/http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

based on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give
something back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart
is trotted out, is to quiet those who know they are being
screwed, and to appease the very rich.

>
/So, it's an Obama government conspiracy to "quiet those" who
don't pay any income tax? You're not even making any sense today,
Jim.//

The federal government’s most intrusive and potentially punitive
institution, the IRS, unquestionably worked for Barack Obama’s
reelection by suppressing activities by conservative groups.//
//
//http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will//

>

How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred
million or so?

>
/A few million here and a few million there and pretty soon you're
talking real money. But, seriously it's not about the money - it's
all about the jobs./
>

The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the common, and
they should pay their fair share, without any tax breaks.

>
/Not sure how you figure rich people paying 90% of all the U.S.
income tax is paying "their fair share. It sounds more like the
rich are the ones being screwed. The only fair income tax would be
a flat tax.

We are all supposed to be equal under the law, not prejudiced
against those that have more. Without the opportunity to be rich
people, everyone would be poor. Go figure./
">

If they did that, and corporations chipped in their fair share,
that would be good enough for me.

>
/It's not good enough for me until they reform the tax code and
eliminate the IRS and implement a flat tax. A true flat rate tax
is a system of taxation where one tax rate is applied to all
income with no deductions.
//
//Flat

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]

Here is a pretty good article in Chico's "alternative paper" (The Chico News
and Review), about how Jeff runs the heart of Amazon, its warehouses:

http://www.newsreview.com/chico/dark-side-of-a-commercial/content?oid=15407823
http://www.newsreview.com/chico/dark-side-of-a-commercial/content?oid=15407823

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

I was reading an article about Amazon in Seattle this morning and how Jeff
Bezos is a libertarian and we know how cruel that thinking is. it's sink or
swim, "I've got mine and to hell with everyone else." Not only that you
probably noticed that the previously apolitical software programmers decided
that libertarianism was the "cat's meow" back in the 1990s. Society is doomed
with that kind of thinking. It's very Dickensonian.

Are rich really that stupid? Must be or wealth has fogged their minds and
they are one pointed about one thing: making more money even though they have
plenty already. They are destroying society. Not that this is anything new it
has happened before and regardless of what we try to do history just repeats
itself.

The article on Amazon:

http://www.geekwire.com/2014/commentary-amageddon-seattles-increasingly-obvious-future/

I was last in Seattle in 2007 and it has lost it's charm. Downtown looked
like something out of "Bladerunner".

On 11/23/2014 11:01 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@...
mailto:fleetwood_macncheese@... [FairfieldLife] wrote:

The current situation is shameful. It is lying with statistics, based on an
outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give something back, besides the
minimum. The only reason that chart is trotted out, is to quiet those who know
they are being screwed, and to appease the very rich.

How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred million or so?
The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the common, and they should pay
their fair share, without any tax breaks. If they did that, and corporations
chipped in their fair share, that would be good enough for me.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
mailto:punditster@... wrote :

On 11/22/2014 2:28 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
>

Yes, I agree that a larger safety net is necessary, and the bucks for that
should come from the ultra wealthy who shirk their national responsibility, by
evading taxes.

>
A new CBO study shows that ‘the rich’ don’t just pay their ‘fair share,’ they
pay almost everybody’s share.

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/
>

Otherwise, we will continue to see the middle class disappear, and be headed
for a second revolution, eventually.

Part of the issue, is that corporate titans are seen as great visionaries and
geniuses, instead of simply being true to their charter, which is to turn as
big a profit, as possible, resources and populations be damned. We need real
leaders, not Warren Buffet and a bunch of unethical salesmen, running this
country.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
mailto:noozguru@... wrote :

One of the ways of doing it would be guaranteed annual income. That's a
safety net and keeps people from becoming desperate. In fact the crime
reduction it might produce might pay for it. You can look up the different
countries implementing it and see how they are going to pay for it. Otherwise
limit how much money anyone can have because we're seeing that billionaires are
mentally ill and don't deserve the power they wield.

Americans are so brainwashed with a Tarzan like "capitalism good, socialism
bad" meme that its difficult to get any decent change and it'll just send us
back to the middle ages where there are two classes the extremely wealthy and
the extremely poor. Don't stand for it!

Nothing brings this out more than than the holiday season or "Crassmust".

On 11/22/2014 10:20 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@...
mailto:fleetwood_macncheese@... [FairfieldLife] wrote:

Yes, but I don't know how that would be possible. This area I now live in,
was a paradise for the natives, for 3,000 years - no inter-tribal warfare, and
absolute respect for territorial boundaries. But, they had nothing, and lived
entirely off the land. I like my tech, and modern life, and not sure how that
would happen, without monetary rewards.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
mailto:noozguru@... wrote :

People sure are desperate for making money so they come up with their weirdest
ideas. If there is a future it's going to be VERY, VERY weird. Just think
what a nicer world this would be if people didn't have to worry abou

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]

Corporations DO NOT pay their fair share - It is supposed to be 35 to 40%, but 
several pay NO taxes at all. They can go incorporate in Liberia, for all I care 
- Greedy, unpatriotic bastards. I like the idea of a flat tax, but will settle 
for the letter of the law. 

 PS There is exactly ONE political party in the USA - Quit getting played for a 
chump.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

 On 11/23/2014 1:01 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
 >

   The current situation is shameful.

 >
 Agreed, but the answer is not in continuing the current tax structure. I am 
opposed to unfair income taxation. A better idea might be a tax on luxury 
goods. One of the reason businesses are leaving California and the U.S. is 
because of unfair corporate taxation.
 > 
 It is lying with statistics,

 >
 The chart was compiled in 2011 by President Obama's Congressional Budget 
Office (CBO) - it's a non-partisan analysis. It proves that the rich pay almost 
all of the income tax in the U.S. Do the math.

 https://www.cbo.gov/ https://www.cbo.gov/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/
 >
 based on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give something 
back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart is trotted out, is to 
quiet those who know they are being screwed, and to appease the very rich. 

 >
 So, it's an Obama government conspiracy to "quiet those" who don't pay any 
income tax? You're not even making any sense today, Jim. 

 The federal government’s most intrusive and potentially punitive institution, 
the IRS, unquestionably worked for Barack Obama’s reelection by suppressing 
activities by conservative groups.

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will/ 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-in-wisconsin-done-in-by-john-doe/2014/10/24/b30ee2ec-5ad8-11e4-b812-38518ae74c67_story.html
 >
 How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred million or so?

 >
 A few million here and a few million there and pretty soon you're talking real 
money. But, seriously it's not about the money - it's all about the jobs.
 >
 The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the common, and they should pay 
their fair share, without any tax breaks.

 >
 Not sure how you figure rich people paying 90% of all the U.S. income tax is 
paying "their fair share. It sounds more like the rich are the ones being 
screwed. The only fair income tax would be a flat tax. 

 We are all supposed to be equal under the law, not prejudiced against those 
that have more. Without the opportunity to be rich people, everyone would be 
poor. Go figure.
 ">
 If they did that, and corporations chipped in their fair share, that would be 
good enough for me. 

 >
 It's not good enough for me until they reform the tax code and eliminate the 
IRS and implement a flat tax. A true flat rate tax is a system of taxation 
where one tax rate is applied to all income with no deductions.

 Flat taxes offer simplicity in the tax code, which has been reported to 
increase compliance and decrease administration costs. A true flat rate tax is 
a system of taxation where one tax rate is applied to all income with no 
exceptions. The flat rate would be applied to all taxable income and profits 
without exception or exemption. 

 It could be argued that under such an arrangement, no one is subject to a 
preferential or "unfair" tax treatment. No industry receives special treatment, 
large households are not advantaged at the expense of small ones, etc. 

 Moreover, the cost of tax filing for citizens and the cost of tax 
administration for the government would be further reduced, as under a true 
flat tax only businesses and the self-employed would need to interact with the 
tax authorities.
 >

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 
 mailto:punditster@... wrote :

 On 11/22/2014 2:28 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
 >

   Yes, I agree that a larger safety net is necessary, and the bucks for that 
should come from the ultra wealthy who shirk their national responsibility, by 
evading taxes.

 >
 A new CBO study shows that ‘the rich’ don’t just pay their ‘fair share,’ they 
pay almost everybody’s share.

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share/
 >

 Otherwise, we will continue to see the middle class disappear, and be headed 
for a second revolution, eventually. 

 Part of the issue, is that corporate titans are seen as great visionaries and 
geniuses, instead of simply being true to their charter, which is to turn as 
big a profit, as possible, resources and populations be damned.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 11/23/2014 2:50 PM, Bhairitu wrote:
>

>
/Nobody on this forum today seems to be making any sense to me today.

Why should I depend on you or the government, an authority or anyone
else, to tell me what I should be doing or thinking with my free will? I
am the owner of myself and nobody else - I should be able to pursue free
market economics if I want to./

>
Not only that you probably noticed that the previously apolitical
software programmers decided that libertarianism was the "cat's meow"
back in the 1990s. Society is doomed with that kind of thinking.
It's very Dickensonian.

>
/"Libertarianism is //the rejection of dogma, its deliberate avoidance
of rigidly systematic theory, and, above all, its stress on extreme
freedom of choice and on the primacy of the individual judgment."

>
/

Are rich really that stupid?

>
/You in fact, just posted libertarian ideas today. Go figure.
/
//Woodcock, George (2004). */Anarchism: A History Of Libertarian Ideas
And Movements/**. Peterborough*, Ont.: Broadview Press. p. 16.

/>
/
Must be or wealth has fogged their minds and they are one pointed
about one thing: making more money even though they have plenty
already. They are destroying society. Not that this is anything new
it has happened before and regardless of what we try to do history
just repeats itself.

The article on Amazon:

http://www.geekwire.com/2014/commentary-amageddon-seattles-increasingly-obvious-future/

I was last in Seattle in 2007 and it has lost it's charm. Downtown
looked like something out of "Bladerunner".

On 11/23/2014 11:01 AM, fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
wrote:

The current situation is shameful. It is lying with statistics, based
on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give something
back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart is trotted out,
is to quiet those who know they are being screwed, and to appease the
very rich.

How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred
million or so? The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the
common, and they should pay their fair share, without any tax breaks.
If they did that, and corporations chipped in their fair share, that
would be good enough for me.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

On 11/22/2014 2:28 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

Yes, I agree that a larger safety net is necessary, and the
bucks for that should come from the ultra wealthy who shirk
their national responsibility, by evading taxes.

>
/A new CBO study shows that ‘the rich’ don’t just pay their ‘fair
share,’ they pay almost everybody’s share.

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

Otherwise, we will continue to see the middle class disappear,
and be headed for a second revolution, eventually.

Part of the issue, is that corporate titans are seen as great
visionaries and geniuses, instead of simply being true to their
charter, which is to turn as big a profit, as possible,
resources and populations be damned. We need real leaders, not
Warren Buffet and a bunch of unethical salesmen, running this
country.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
,
wrote :

how they are going to pay for it. Otherwise limit how much
money anyone can have because we're seeing that billionaires are
mentally ill and don't deserve the power they wield.

Americans are so brainwashed with a Tarzan like "capitalism
good, socialism bad" meme that its difficult to get any decent
change and it'll just send us back to the middle ages where
there are two classes the extremely wealthy and the extremely
poor. Don't stand for it!

Nothing brings this out more than than the holiday season or
"Crassmust".

On 11/22/2014 10:20 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@...
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

Yes, but I don't know how that would be possible. This area
I now live in, was a paradise for the natives, for 3,000
years - no inter-tribal warfare, and absolute respect for
territorial boundaries. But, they had nothing, and lived
entirely off the land. I like my tech, and modern life, and
not sure how that would happen, without monetary rewards.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 11/22/2014 2:11 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

One of the ways of doing it would be guaranteed annual income.

>
/What would be the incentive to work if there was a guaranteed annual 
income?/

>
That's a safety net and keeps people from becoming desperate.  In fact 
the crime reduction it might produce might pay for it.  You can look 
up the different countries implementing it and see how they are going 
to pay for it.

>
/You are not even making any sense.

How would everyone being poor reduce the crime rate? In an ideal world, 
everyone would be rich, not poor - there would be no crime because 
everyone would have all they want, so there would be no reason to steal. /

/But, we don't live in an ideal world yet, so we have to be practical 
and earn money ourselves and not depend on the government./

>
Otherwise limit how much money anyone can have because we're seeing 
that billionaires are mentally ill and don't deserve the power they wield.

>
/Non sequitur.

There is no evidence that being a billionaire would indicate a person 
was mentally ill. The richest man on the planet, Bill Gates, gives away 
millions of dollars every day to help people. Most rich Americans are 
the biggest donors to charity and good causes./

>
Americans are so brainwashed with a Tarzan like "capitalism good, 
socialism bad" meme that its difficult to get any decent change and 
it'll just send us back to the middle ages where there are two classes 
the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor. Don't stand for it!

>
/If my plan is implemented there will be plenty of work for everyone, 
making good money so they can buy what they need and pay their own way./

>

Nothing brings this out more than than the holiday season or "Crassmust".

>
/You're not even making any sense: without a job to earn money there 
would be no gifts to give. You are just being negative and showing your 
prejudice - t//he whole idea of Christmas is to give./

>

On 11/22/2014 10:20 AM, fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] 
wrote:
Yes, but I don't know how that would be possible. This area I now 
live in, was a paradise for the natives, for 3,000 years - no 
inter-tribal warfare, and absolute respect for territorial 
boundaries. But, they had nothing, and lived entirely off the land. I 
like my tech, and modern life, and not sure how that would happen, 
without monetary rewards.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

People sure are desperate for making money so they come up with their 
weirdest ideas.  If there is a future it's going to be VERY, VERY 
weird.  Just think what a nicer world this would be if people didn't 
have to worry about making money.

On 11/22/2014 08:11 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@... 
 [FairfieldLife] wrote:

Can't find your car? Hold your key fob up to your head.
(Really.) 

image 

Can't find your car? Hold your key fob up to your he...

It sounds crazy, but it extends its range just a little bit.

View on www.vox.com

Preview by Yahoo

Turn your brain into an antenna, by holding your key fob close
to your head...

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net [FairfieldLife]

I was reading an article about Amazon in Seattle this morning and how
Jeff Bezos is a libertarian and we know how cruel that thinking is. it's
sink or swim, "I've got mine and to hell with everyone else." Not only
that you probably noticed that the previously apolitical software
programmers decided that libertarianism was the "cat's meow" back in the
1990s. Society is doomed with that kind of thinking. It's very
Dickensonian.

Are rich really that stupid? Must be or wealth has fogged their minds
and they are one pointed about one thing: making more money even though
they have plenty already. They are destroying society. Not that this
is anything new it has happened before and regardless of what we try to
do history just repeats itself.

The article on Amazon:

http://www.geekwire.com/2014/commentary-amageddon-seattles-increasingly-obvious-future/

I was last in Seattle in 2007 and it has lost it's charm. Downtown
looked like something out of "Bladerunner".

On 11/23/2014 11:01 AM, fleetwood_macnche...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]
wrote:

The current situation is shameful. It is lying with statistics, based
on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give something
back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart is trotted out,
is to quiet those who know they are being screwed, and to appease the
very rich.

How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred
million or so? The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the
common, and they should pay their fair share, without any tax breaks.
If they did that, and corporations chipped in their fair share, that
would be good enough for me.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote :

On 11/22/2014 2:28 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

Yes, I agree that a larger safety net is necessary, and the bucks
for that should come from the ultra wealthy who shirk their
national responsibility, by evading taxes.

>
/A new CBO study shows that ‘the rich’ don’t just pay their ‘fair
share,’ they pay almost everybody’s share.

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

Otherwise, we will continue to see the middle class disappear,
and be headed for a second revolution, eventually.

Part of the issue, is that corporate titans are seen as great
visionaries and geniuses, instead of simply being true to their
charter, which is to turn as big a profit, as possible, resources
and populations be damned. We need real leaders, not Warren
Buffet and a bunch of unethical salesmen, running this country.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
,
wrote :

One of the ways of doing it would be guaranteed annual income.
That's a safety net and keeps people from becoming desperate. In

fact the crime reduction it might produce might pay for it. You
can look up the different countries implementing it and see how
they are going to pay for it. Otherwise limit how much money
anyone can have because we're seeing that billionaires are
mentally ill and don't deserve the power they wield.

Americans are so brainwashed with a Tarzan like "capitalism good,
socialism bad" meme that its difficult to get any decent change
and it'll just send us back to the middle ages where there are
two classes the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor. Don't
stand for it!

Nothing brings this out more than than the holiday season or
"Crassmust".

On 11/22/2014 10:20 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@...
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

Yes, but I don't know how that would be possible. This area
I now live in, was a paradise for the natives, for 3,000
years - no inter-tribal warfare, and absolute respect for
territorial boundaries. But, they had nothing, and lived
entirely off the land. I like my tech, and modern life, and
not sure how that would happen, without monetary rewards.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
,
wrote :

People sure are desperate for making money so they come up
with their weirdest ideas. If there is a future it's going
to be VERY, VERY weird. Just think what a nicer world this
would be if people didn't have to worry about making money.

On 11/22/2014 08:11 AM, fleetwood_macncheese@...
[FairfieldLife] wrote:

Can't find your car? Hold your key fob up to your head.
(Really.)

Can't find your car? Ho

Re: [FairfieldLife] Brain-tenna? Unlock your car, by touching your head

2014-11-23 Thread 'Richard J. Williams' pundits...@gmail.com [FairfieldLife]

On 11/23/2014 1:01 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:
>

The current situation is shameful.

>
/Agreed, but the answer is not//in continuing the current tax structure. 
I am opposed to unfair income taxation. A better idea might be a tax on 
luxury goods. One of the reason businesses are leaving California and 
the U.S. is because of unfair corporate taxation./

>

It is lying with statistics,

>
/The chart was compiled in 2011 by President Obama's Congressional 
Budget Office (CBO) - it's a non-partisan analysis. It proves that the 
rich pay almost all of the income tax in the U.S. Do the math.//

//
//https://www.cbo.gov//

/http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

based on an outmoded tax structure - Let the ultra-wealthy give 
something back, besides the minimum. The only reason that chart is 
trotted out, is to quiet those who know they are being screwed, and to 
appease the very rich.

>
/So, it's an Obama government conspiracy to "quiet those" who don't pay 
any income tax? You're not even making any sense today, Jim.//

The federal government’s most intrusive and potentially punitive 
institution, the IRS, unquestionably worked for Barack Obama’s 
reelection by suppressing activities by conservative groups.//

//
//http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will// 

>
How is someone worth a billion dollars, going to miss a hundred 
million or so?

>
/A few million here and a few million there and pretty soon you're 
talking real money. But, seriously it's not about the money - it's all 
about the jobs./

>
The ultra rich use a disproportionate share of the common, and they 
should pay their fair share, without any tax breaks.

>
/Not sure how you figure rich people paying 90% of all the U.S. income 
tax is paying "their fair share. It sounds more like the rich are the 
ones being screwed. The only fair income tax would be a flat tax.

We are all supposed to be equal under the law, not prejudiced against 
those that have more. Without the opportunity to be rich people, 
everyone would be poor. Go figure./

">
If they did that, and corporations chipped in their fair share, that 
would be good enough for me.

>
/It's not good enough for me until they reform the tax code and 
eliminate the IRS and implement a flat tax. A true flat rate tax is a 
system of taxation where one tax rate is applied to all income with no 
deductions.

//Flat taxes offer simplicity in the tax code, which has been reported 
to increase compliance and decrease administration costs. A true flat 
rate tax is a system of taxation where one tax rate is applied to all 
income with no exceptions. The flat rate would be applied to all taxable 
income and profits without exception or exemption. //

//
//It could be argued that under such an arrangement, no one is subject 
to a preferential or "unfair" tax treatment. No industry receives 
special treatment, large households are not advantaged at the expense of 
small ones, etc. //

//
//Moreover, the cost of tax filing for citizens and the cost of tax 
administration for the government would be further reduced, as under a 
true flat tax only businesses and the self-employed would need to 
interact with the tax authorities./

>

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,  wrote :

On 11/22/2014 2:28 PM, fleetwood_macncheese wrote:

>

Yes, I agree that a larger safety net is necessary, and the bucks
for that should come from the ultra wealthy who shirk their
national responsibility, by evading taxes.

>
/A new CBO study shows that ‘the rich’ don’t just pay their ‘fair
share,’ they pay almost everybody’s share.

http://www.aei.org/publication/new-cbo-study-shows-rich-dont-just-pay-fair-share-pay-almost-everybodys-share//
>

Otherwise, we will continue to see the middle class disappear,
and be headed for a second revolution, eventually.

Part of the issue, is that corporate titans are seen as great
visionaries and geniuses, instead of simply being true to their
charter, which is to turn as big a profit, as possible, resources
and populations be damned. We need real leaders, not Warren
Buffet and a bunch of unethical salesmen, running this country.

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
, 
 wrote :

One of the ways of doing it would be guaranteed annual income. 
That's a safety net and keeps people from becoming desperate.  In

fact the crime reduction it might produce might pay for it.  You
can look up the different countries implementing it and see how
they are going to pay for it. Otherwise limit how much money
anyone can have because we're seeing that billionaires are
mentally ill and don't deserve