I’m back in Seattle, and I think my house has fleas. Just thought I’d let you know. Talk amongst yourselves.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
I think it’s hilarious that Stefan posted his address on (un)Sound Politics.
So, everybody, what should we do about the selfish pricks who drive gas guzzlers and push up the price of gas for working people who can’t afford it? What say we tax the living shit out of gas guzzlers?
You didn’t hire Steffie to house-sit, did you Goldy?
Now I’ll bet some troll will come along and complain that I’m picking on poor little Steffie …
WELL I AM!!!
If you don’t like it, write your complaint here ->[ ] and e-mail it to Goldy.
Well that’s all from the garrulous rabbit tonite. It’s my beddy-bye time. )yawn(
Have you checked out the space they have given to Stefan in this weeks Stranger?
http://www.thestranger.com/sea.....?oid=22574
Stefan talks up Reagan Dunn like he is the second coming. I found it telling that Stefan is thrilled with Dunn for being able to draw upon his mother’s sources for out-of-district contributions. At the same time, however, Stefan glosses over the fact that in Dunn’s first electoral challenge, seeking the nomination at his party’s convention, the incumbent, Hammond, defeated him.
Also, I found it interesting that Stefan describes Dunn’s challenges as both winning in the upcoming primary and making peace with conservatives in south King County. After all, there is still the issue of whether winning the primary will even get Dunn on the ballot for the general election.
Hammond may not be raising money like Dunn but if the only time he has to talk to columnists is while doorbelling, that speaks to his commitment to the work of electioneering. Can the same be true of Dunn if he is seeking a seat representing a largely rural district by meeting columnists and sipping coffee in a Bellevue coffeehouse?
Stefan’s main point, however, seems to be that Reagan Dunn is a new light in the Washington GOP who is already larger than his current seat. It is as though Stefan suspects Dunn has already lost this contest and needs to be positioned for the state and national offices Stefan believes are in Dunn’s future. Who knows, if Dunn can raise $207,000 for a county council election maybe he can spread some of his future contributions in the direction of a discredited third tier conservative bloger?
For a more insightful look at Dunn, see Goldy’s post about him from June. 14, 2005.
At least your back where you belong: on the LEFT COAST, you LEFTIST PINHEAD! Surely now you “and” the rest of your crew of LIBERAL ELITEST HEAD OF THE GAY UNIVERSE PINHEADS will all be in the same spot! You never should have LEFT! Did I mention: LEFT? LEFT! PINHEAD! LIBERAL!
Well, here I am, up bright and early :D , waiting for the trolls to show up so I can go to work. Where are you, trolls?
Compare the crime rates between the “liberal” cities and the “conservative” cities in the previous post. Goldy refused to run my “update”, so you must do your own. [I like Detroit because it is soooo much like Harare, Zimbabwe, but you don’t need a passport!]
8AM and still no trolls. I wonder where the trolls are? Looking at Mr. Cynical’s last post, I don’t think we’ll hear from him before noon. ‘Pears he was carousing last nite.
Wonder what the trolls will rant about today (if they ever show up)? How “hard” they work?
While waiting for the trolls to poke their ugly snouts out of their burrows, I’ll start things off with a poll showing Americans blame high gas prices on oil companies, politicians, and oil producing countries — in that order.
http://www.king5.com/topstorie.....ae1ad.html
Typical. Never occurs to ’em their consuming habits might have something to do with it. Betcha there’s gonna be a glut of late-model SUVs on the used-car market soon. Not pickups, though. The rubes will never let go of their pickups, even if they have to sell the babies and rent out mama’s twat to pay for their gas.
Well, there’s no action here, so I think I’ll go eat some grass. Later.
Moonbats – Which contributes more to the cost of a gallon of gas? The cost of the oil that goes into it, or government’s greedy hand collecting taxes?
Mr. Bunny (or is it Ms??):
What about all the Lefties with eco bumper stickers on their rusted-out, bald-tired foreign cars that belch blue smoke? Can’t imagine they’re getting particularly good mileage there.
Do you admit that there MIGHT be a need for SOME people to own an SUV?
RR: “…I think I’ll go eat some grass.”
I thought you Lefties all smoked it. ;)
And a little something to get all the Lefties’ panties in a bunch:
JERUSALEM (Reuters) – President Bush said on Israeli television he could consider using force as a last resort to press Iran to give up its nuclear programme.
“All options are on the table,” Bush, speaking at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, said in the interview broadcast on Saturday.
Asked if that included the use of force, Bush replied: “As I say, all options are on the table. The use of force is the last option for any president and you know, we’ve used force in the recent past to secure our country.”
Mark@12 – Don’t worry…. the moonbats will be OK with taking out Iran’s nuke plant because france said they were concerned. So if it’s OK with the french, I’m sure it’s OK with the moonbats. We have french “permission”…
Thats OK. I’ll have you know that all these new gas-guzzling SUVS, actually burn cleaner and polute way less that most of the old, beater, piece of shit, tree-hugger VW’s and Volvos that most of you LEFTIST PINHEADS drive. But, then again, you have to have some way to go to the market and buy your fuckin tofu and “vegi”-burgers. Careful you don’t slip and fall on that giant oil slick in the parking lot!
Think I’ll talk about inflation, to keep things lively here on HorsesAss. We’re 2.5 years into King George’s military adventure in Iraq and counting. We now have shared shared sacrifice — everybody’s going broke. Fuel prices are through the roof, and of course, will trickle down through the whole economy. This is the only trickle-down that actually works. Food prices will soon follow. Housing costs are exploding. Inflation is what happens when a fiscally irresponsible president borrows a shitload of money to fight a war, instead of raising taxes to pay-as-you-go. Inflation, of course, is a tax. It’s also an efficient method for transferring money from the peasants to the rich, because it doesn’t hit people evenly (or at the same time). Businessmen — you know, the lard asses who play golf all day — raise prices early in the game. Workers — the people who actually produce something — eventually demand wage increases but they’re the last to get anything and by then the next round of price increases has already arrived. This is called “cost-push highway robbery” by professional economists. What’s inflation now, 10%? Are we in double digits yet? Thank you, King George, for destroying the standard of living of 380 million Americans. The other 5 million don’t carem because they’ve got theirs, and fuck everybody else — right Mark?
Only 1 troll so far. Where are the rest of the trolls this morning? Did a just and vengeful God sweep through Washington overnight and, um, recycle ’em all (except Mark)?
It’s been my view for several years now that the Bush administration would eventually take acton against Iran. The motivation, as I see it, is control of the Caspian Sea oil bed, and how best to transport the oil out of the region. The Iranian nuclear program would provide a convenient rationale for taking action.
And by the way, don’t expect to see democracy emerging in the other states surrounding the Caspian Sea; we’re happy with them the way they are, so long as they’re willing to cut preferential deals with US oil companies.
Hey, we’ve got 2 trolls here now! So where is King George going to get troops for his Iran military adventure? Is he gonna call up Junior ROTC? har har har har har har har har har har har har This is starting to look like Stalingrad, pretty soon he’ll be handing out rifles and ammo clips to washerwomen.
Goldy—
I did not make that Post @ 6.
I thought one of the rules here was to NOT use other people’s monikor’s….is that correct?
This has happened to me before Goldy.
If you have changed the rules, let everyone know.
Otherwise contact whoever did it and tell them to stop.
Thanks.
Ph and by the way, I see where your pal Jesse Jackson and his PUSH/Rainbow Coalition has a new employee….MEL REYNOLDS. He’s that Democratic Congressman Clinton pardoned before he he served virually any of his 6 year term for wire fraud and many other charges he was convicted of. Reynolds also spent 5 years sleeping with UNDERAGE employees and little girls.
You know what Jackson hired him to do??
Reynolds is now a fucking YOUTH COUNSELOR!!!!!
Ain’t America great…a pediphile.
Careful RR, you’ll be called a communist/Marxist/socialist/leftie pinko. If i only knew what those terms meant ;)
3 trolls here now, all named Mark. Hmmmm? Why are there so damn many troll marks? “Mark of Cain” maybe?
So, Mark (pick one), what SUV do you drive? A 1977 Bronco? What color is it — rust red? Does it look like the Tacoma smelter going down the road? How many gallons to the mile (gpm) does it get? Is that EPA or actual? Does it need to be attached to the refinery with a long hose?
Wabbit @ 15 – Nice rant, except you’re FOS as usual. You apparently didn’t hear on NPR that fed tax receipts were at all time high in June. Inflation is low. Unemployment is low. Home ownership at all time high. GWB has totally fixed the recession he inherited from WJC. Tax cuts work every time they’re tried don’t they wabbit?
Surprise, surprise! I didn’t expect to see Cynical here until about 2:30PM. So, what G A S G U Z Z L E R do you drive, Mr. C? A 1988 rust-red Suburban with a long hose attached to … never mind. Don’t answer that.
Reply to 10
The price of oil.
Comment on 18
If #6 is an imposter you’d better get a note from Goldy (after he tracks the IP) before Mrs. Cynical hits you with that frying pan again.
Gas and inflation…
http://inflationdata.com/Infla.....lation.asp
20.
“Inflation is low.”
Oh, okay. If you say so. (pause) So … does this mean you can buy a house in Seattle for 175K, hamburger costs $1.49/lb., gas is $1.89? Have I been sleeping, having a nightmare, and did I just wake up? Am I back in the real world now?
Shit. I’m back in the real world.
Reply to 24
Yes, Mark, I know about that. Thank you for providing the link, even though I didn’t ask you for it. This math works great for people whose wages have been adjusted to 1980 purchasing power levels. (pause) You wouldn’t know where I can find such an understanding boss, would you? (pause) No, didn’t think so. (pause) So anyway, according to your own article, oil has to hit $90/bbl. before we have the most expensive oil ever. (pause) Don’t worry — it will. Soon.
Goldy–
Who posted @ 2:37 AM using my ID???
I have a sidebet that one of your more voracious posters is the culprit.
Roger @ 25
Actually, the annual CPI change is in line with the Clinton and Bush I eras — averaging somewhere in the mid-2% range. Now, the Carter era is a whole ‘nother matter! Reagan, of course, had to right the ship from Carter’s 12.5% down to 3.1% in Reagan’s last year.
See: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special....../cpiai.txt
Let’s have some fun with economic statistics. (We Libs know how to do that, too.)
“between 1983 and 1989, the top 20 percent of wealth holders received fully 99 percent of the total gain in national wealth; the wealthiest one percent enjoyed 62 percent of that increase”
http://www.bostonreview.net/BR21.1/wolff.html
“It is a disquieting reality that even though there has been increased economic growth for many years now in the Western world, a serious proportion of the population is worse off, few are actually benefiting while a tiny number are seriously better off.”
ttp://www.aislingmagazine.com/aislingmagazine/articles/TAM27/Growth.html
“Power and wealth is out of reach for most Americans and is now concentrated in the hands of the privileged few. And those few are using their power and wealth to enrich themselves even more, ignoring the needs of the vast majority of working people. …
The fundamental disease of the U.S. society is the polarization of income. A tiny handful of millionaires and billionaires dominate this society. … While millions of Americans today are working their way deeper and deeper into poverty, all the wealth is flowing to and accumulates among the top 10 – 20 percent of the population. … This growing income gap now moves the United States further and further in the direction of a winner-take-all society. … only about 20 percent of Americans now control some 80 percent of the nation’s wealth … the top one percent of wealth-holders in America have now more property and financial assets than the bottom 92 percent of the U.S. population combined. … Over the past 20 years, as big business in America and its political servants have pursued policies of cutting taxes on the rich and destroying most of the social benefits for the rest of population at same time, the U.S. ruling overclass has doubled its share of the national wealth.
“The recent studies illustrate the extremes of this trend in U.S. society — the growing concentration of wealth alongside the most vindictive attacks on the poor and the oppressed. During the 1980s alone, with poverty and homelessness in America growing rapidly, the combined incomes of those making one million dollars a year or more increased 21 times. Between 1979 and 1995, the income of the wealthiest five percent of the U.S. population increased by a whopping 43 percent. … In 1976, the richest one percent of Americans owned 19 percent of the material wealth in the United States. By … 1992, the richest one percent of American households … held fully 42% of the wealth in this country.”
http://www.geocities.com/Capit.....rica5.html
We already know from historical experience that plutocratic societies — whether they got that way from a feudal system of inheritance or through unregulated capitalism — destroy themselves. They concentrated more and more wealth in fewer and fewer hands — until the many take things into their own hands and redistribute the wealth again, usually violently. I’m certainly not saying that’s what I want. I’m a capitalist — sort of. That is, I favor a form of capitalism that is workable because government intervention prevents its most destructive tendencies, and enlightened social policies soften its harshest edges. Ultra-conservatives who want to lead us to unregulated free-booting capitalism are the ultimate anti-capitalists, because if they get their way, capitalism will ultimately be overthrown and replaced with something far less workable.
Reply to 28
OK, Mark — you go right on preaching that inflation is only 2%, if it makes ya happy.
Those of us who don’t have chauffeurs to make our gasoline purchases and butlers to make our grocery purchases know better.
I knew the Bush Inflation would come, of course. It was inevitable. You can’t fight a big war, cut taxes, and run deficits all at the same time without inflation. You see, some of us who are a little older have lived through this before. Same bullshit, same lies. What you call the “Carter inflation” was actually the LBJ-Nixon Inflation. That one was bipartisan; the Bush Inflation is a GOP solo act. And, of course, the neocons responsible for it will blame … ta-da … Clinton.
Wabbbit @ 29 – WTF is the matter with you? Look, marxism and related kooky ideas fail every time they’re tried. Free markets work every time they’re tried. Destroying the incentive of the producers via confiscatory tax policy is a sure way to destroy an economy and society.
I’m one of those despised “rich” guys because I have highly marketable skills and I work my aks off. It’s no more complicated than that.
Reply to 31
Exactly! Destroying the incentive of the producers (i.e. workers) via confiscatory tax policy (i.e., exempting income from capital from taxation and shifting all taxes to wages, as conservatives want to do) will — as you say — “destroy [the] economy.”
Why should anyone work, if only owning capital is rewarded?
Hey wabbit – Read the article in today’s times about “gigayachts”. Let me know what you think.
Roger @ 30
Gotta love ya… Even when faced with REAL numbers (the official CPI), you still go off in your fantasy land.
Maybe you’re just a bad shopper! I learned a number of good shopping habits as a poor college student that I continue to use nowadays — especially avoiding impluse buying. If you go into debt trying to keep up with the Joneses because of your low self-esteem, it isn’t my fault. I recall your vociferous proclamation the other day about your time being valuable. Do you need a hug? ;)
By the way, who (other than a rabid Lefty) would believe anything written on a site (see your 29) that publishes Chomsky?
Roger @ 32
“Owning capital” is paper profit until you sell — and then you’re taxed.
Moonbats and especially Kwazy Wabbit – Let me get this straight… you hate me because I spend less than I make, save the difference and invest it wisely? You hate me because I have a plan where my money works for me and pays all my bills? Why? And why is it any of your gd business?
Mark@36–
You are correct…they hate you because you are successful and responsible.
Karl Marx would not approve of your success.
Roger Rabbit was a 30-year guv’mint hack attorney for the highly and chronically unsuccessful DSHS. Roger repeatedly lead the charge to break up families just because he can. Rogger Rabbit is a pitiful bottom-feeder who only knows government welfare as his so-called job was such a waste of taxpayer $$$. He continues to get 60% of the average of his highest 2 years wages. Roger Rabbit sucks.
RR,
Here’s a plan for ya… Since you Lefties love that “unilateral stuff” (e.g. unilateral disarmament, Kyoto, etc.), how about “Unilateral Voluntary Self-Taxation?”
Since you think wealth re-distribution is such a good idea, why don’t you Lefites — especially the “family money” kind — just voluntarily give extra money to the government? If you really make up half the country, you could single-handedly drop the tax rates for the poor by half, right? Or are you afraid that any extra revenue would just get spent? You could set an example for the rest of us and give up your
hard-earnedunion-negotiated earnings and put your money where your mouth is?Mark @ 37
Your comments display little more than ignorance.
Mark the Redneck @ 36
I don’t hate you because you spend less than you make. I hate you because you are such a fucking idiot! :-)
Reply to 34
Who (other than a rabid righty) would believe anything on a site that publishes anything by, well, any righty?
Since HorsesAss publishes righty rantings, that must mean nothing on HA has any credibility at all.
Dork.
Reply to 35
“‘Owning capital’ is paper profit until you sell – and then you’re taxed.”
I was talking about income from capital, jackass!
Anyway, you’re wrong — a lot of capital gain is never taxed. For example, if you inherit $1,501,000 of stock that your father paid $1,000 for in 1949, neither he nor you will ever pay 1 damn cent of tax on the $1,500,000 capital gain — even if you sell the stock Monday morning.
And how do you justify taxing capital gains at lower tax rates than wages paid to low-bracket workers? That’s just plain immoral.
As for “paper” capital gains, those “paper” capital gains finance one hell of a lot of mansions, yachts, personal jets, and kept women.
re: Inflation & Roger Rabbit’s overpriced market basket
I’ve come to the realization that the American public is stupid and lazy and that marketing strategists are geniuses!
Roger, of course your food will cost more if you insist on going to the Quik-E-Mart closest to your home. That is the price of convenience. Of course, things will cost more if you don’t pay attention to the going market price of things. Of course, you will have less spending money if you insist on more “must have” frivolous items and you want them NOW!
Why are marketing strategists geniuses? First, because they get you to believe that Wal-Mart is always the lowest-priced. It isn’t, but you’re too lazy to keep an eye on prices. Also, because they make you believe you have to have something you don’t really need. [Roger, hate to burst your bubble, but the blue crystals in Tide detergent don’t do anything.]
Marketers prey on your sense of inadequacy — and I think that works more on Lefties than the Right. Why? Because you guys all think your lot in life isn’t good enough and that the world owes you something. The more you feel that way, the more you go Dem. The more Dem you are, the more you get wound up to feel inadequate. Think about it… find someone that is full of feelings of inadequacy, self-loathing, victimization and low self-esteem… ten-to-one they’re a Democrat. And it is the Dem “machine” not The Man that keeps you down.
Reply to 36
No, I hate you because you’re hogging all the gas.
Roger @ 40: “nothing on HA has any credibility at all.”
Though your cause is wrong, your conclusion is fairly accurate. Sorry.
Reply to 37
“why don’t you Lefites – especially the ‘family money’ kind – just voluntarily give extra money to the government?”
What do you think we’ve been doing for 75 years? Who do you think pays the taxes we vote for? We do. You fucking freeloading Republicans sure don’t.
42
I’m gonna skip this post. I don’t need a home ec lesson from THAT guy.
How ’bout the POTUS’ weekly radio address this morning?
“This war on terror arrived on our shores on September the 11th, 2001. Since that day, the terrorists have continued to kill — in Madrid, Istanbul, Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Bali, Baghdad, London, and elsewhere. The enemy remains determined to do more harm. The terrorists kill indiscriminately, but with a clear purpose — they’re trying to shake our will. They want to force free nations to retreat so they can topple governments across the Middle East, establish Taliban-like regimes in their place, and turn the Middle East into a launching pad for attacks against free people.”
You knew that would come up… My informal count has the president using “terror” 7 times, and “terrorist(s)” 10 times. The administration is beginning to sound like a broken record. Deflect the public’s attention, sow a little fear, etc. The message becomes increasingly illogical from the penultimate sentence above. I’m sure the “liberal” media will point out the logical inconsistencies for us pretty soon.
Roger @ 41
You’re trying to mislead by mixing capital gains with inheritance/death tax. The true example:
One of those rich Righties in the top tax bracket bought stock in 1949 for $1 and sold if for $1.5 million last Friday. They will pay $225,000 in taxes. If they made that profit in less than a year, they’ll pay $525,000 in taxes — 35% of their profit. If you hold an investment for less than a year, you pay your full tax rate on any profit. If you hold it for more than a year, you still pay 15% (5% if you’re a low-tax-bracket investor).
Roger @ 46
Based on your complaining @ 25 & 30, sounds like you need shopping help.
OK – let’s get back on topic here. What to do about high gas price — and the gas hogs who drive SUVs and pickups. Free markets ration products in limited supply through pricing mechanisms. But that’s not the only way to ration scarce goods. During World War 2, nearly everything was rationed, especially fuel. Rather than distribute the limited supply of fuel to people with the most money, the government distributed it more or less equally across the population, using legal restrictions on how much fuel you could buy to replace higher prices as a means of limiting demand.
We’re now in a war. The war is draining off part of our fuel supply; in addition, the deficit financing of the war is also pushing up commodity prices. Low wage worker need to get to their jobs too, and have as much right to eat and have a roof over their heads as anyone else, so to be fair to these folks we should ration fuel by some means other than price rationing.
Otherwise, selfish pricks driving gas hogs will get all the gas, while other people can’t afford fuel, food, or rent because of their selfishness.
Since we’re in a wartime economy, facing wartime inflation, I think it’s in the best interest of the entire country to control gasoline prices and limit demand by issuing ration cards to motorists. Nobody’s gonna tell you what you can or can’t do with your fair share of the gas, Redneck! You get your quota of X gallons per month, and what you do with it is your business. You can use it to burn out blackberry bushes, or to drive your gas-hog SUV. That’s your business. You simply get X gallons a month, and when it’s gone, you walk. Whether you use it wisely is up to you.
That way, everyone gets their fair share at a reasonable price, and the gas hogs aren’t rewarded for being selfish pricks. Sounds good to me. Let’s bring back ration cards!
Reply to 46
Don’t call me, I’ll call you.
Guess Mark wants us to believe that housing, food, and fuel prices are going DOWN … ???? Or maybe, must maybe, he’s another Republican liar-apologist for the Worst.President.Ever trying to paper over the havoc GOP policies are inflicting on the economy. Well, you go right ahead being a True Believer, Mark … meanwhile, Bush’s approval ratings are sinking into the toilet.
2006 should be a lot of fun for Democratic candidates.
Hey, fellow bloggers, I have a question for you:
ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE FIVE YEARS AGO?
Let’s hear it!
42
“[Roger, hate to burst your bubble, but the blue crystals in Tide detergent don’t do anything.]”
I knew that before you were born, jackass! I buy the brand with the baking soda in it.
Wabbit@51 – Uh no, Nobel Prize winner Jimmy Carter holds that distinction.
52, Yes. I’m way better off. More money. Nicer and more stuff. Great job. Another degree. Live in fancy house in great ‘hood. New gas guzzling SUV. Daughter saved from her evil mother and with me now. Life never been better.
Roger @ 50: “Reply to 46 Don’t call me, I’ll call you. “
Your multiple personalities are catching up to you! YOU posted @ 46. Sad when even you don’t want to talk to yourself.
I agree, though, that marketing strategists are geniuses. Let’s take as a case study Mark the Redneck’s SUV purchase:
1. Dealer cost of vehicle: $32,000
2. Real MSRP: $36,000
3. Sticker price: $43,000
4. Rebate: $5,000
5. Real selling price: $38,000
See how that works? The average American car buyer will gladly pay $7,000 extra to get a $5,000 discount. Everybody wants something for nothing, right? Detroit figured this out 100 years ago, and it doesn’t take a marketing genius. All you need is sucker customers, and there’s plenty of those. One born every minute, according to Barnum.
Rebates, no-interest loans, employee pricing … all of these are profit centers. The more financing gimmicks, the more profit centers; the more profit centers, the more profit.
54
You must be new here, Mark. Many of the posts get hung up in Goldy’s spam filter and don’t appear on the board right away. Consequently, the post numbers change. Your post was #46 when I posted; it isn’t anymore. The numbers don’t mean anything. They’re usually off by the time you get a few posts farther down the board.
Roger @ 51: “Guess Mark wants us to believe that housing, food, and fuel prices are going DOWN … ???”
Uhhh… no. I NEVER said any such thing. I simply said that the rate of increase in the cost of the “market basket” (CPI – consumer price index) is the essentially the same as it has been for 15 years. Read the numbers yourself. I posted a link to the official CPI table.
As for the economy going into the tank, my company and others I know are experiencing a surge in b2b business. While the economy WAS down for a while, business confidence appears to be up. The Consumer Confidence Index dipped a bit this past month, but is up significantly over November of last year.
But then again, it is in your personal best interests to sow doubt and fear so that the Dems can try to regain seats in 2006.
Roger @ 52: “ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE FIVE YEARS AGO?”
Yes, I’m better off… because I worked my tail off instead of expecting things to be handed to me.
Roger @ 55
I’ve been on here longer than you… at least as the same “person.”
One, that’s why you quote in addition to the @ reference.
Two, have a sense of humor. No bunny loves any bunny without a sense of humor. ;)
Roger @ 53: “I buy the brand with the baking soda in it.”
Since tone doesn’t always come across without the stupid Smileys, I’m guessing that was supposed to be a joke?
48 (for now)
“One of those rich Righties in the top tax bracket bought stock in 1949 for $1 and sold if for $1.5 million last Friday. They will pay $225,000 in taxes.”
He’s got a pretty fucking stupid tax advisor if he does. Anyone who bought a stock in 1949 is now very old, and if he has any brains, he won’t sell it. What for? He’s going to kick soon, and if he’s hung onto the stock this long he obviously doesn’t need to spend the money — so if he has half a brain, nay 1/10th of a brain, he’ll leave it in his portfolio and when he kicks neither his estate nor his heirs will ever pay 1 damn cent of tax on his $1,499,999 of capital gains. Am I right? You know fucking well I’m right.
But let’s take your example a little further. Let’s say your numbers are accurate (i.e., 225K tax on 1.499M gain) and the dumbshit sells his stock. His tax rate is 15%. Now let’s take the waitress who served his ham and eggs this morning. She makes $7.35 an hour. (I’m assuming our investor friend is not only stupid, but cheap like most millionaire Republicans, and didn’t leave a tip.) She pays 7.65% off the top for FICA taxes plus a little to L & I and let’s say she’s in a 15% marginal tax rate (that was the minimum rate last time I looked). So she’s paying 22.65% off the top while the millionaire pays at most 15% but only if he’s incredibly stupid and more likely pays a Big Fat Goose Egg.
That’s how our tax system works — soak the poor so the rich can skate.
And if Bush gets his way, it’ll get much, much worse for the working class. You see, Dubya wants to eliminate ALL taxes on ALL capital gains and ALL investment income. Consequently, only wages will be taxed.
This will give us a system under which people who sit on their fat lazy asses and clip interest coupons will be rewarded, while people who work will be punished for producing things. You can see where that will go. Nobody will work. Why should we, if the economic and tax system punishes those who work and rewards those who live off the labor of others? I repeat, nobody will work. Everyone will be a self-employed independent contractor doing nothing and paying no taxes. Nothing will be produced, and the economy will collapse. Then we won’t have to hate the rich anymore, because there won’t be any rich to hate. Everyone will be equally poor. Is America great, or what?
Roger,
And, BTW, wages rose 0.2 percent in both May and June — outpacing inflation.
58
Point! H E S C O R E S ! ! ! :D
60
My pension rose 0.0 in both May and June, not outpacing inflation.
Question for Dr. E @ 47
I didn’t catch the speech … is he planning to invade Madrid, Istanbul, Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Bali, Baghdad, and London? Sounds like it.
56
Gee Mark, the rest of us worked our tails off too, but we’re not better off.
See my #8, then go look at #56 again. I TOLD YOU the trolls would rant about how “hard” they work, didn’t I?
These guys are very predictable.
Roger @ 62: “My pension rose 0.0 in both May and June, not outpacing inflation.”
Well, since inflation RATES haven’t really increased in 20 years, it sounds like you needed to do some better financial planning for your retirement years. Take some responsibility for your actions. My retirement depends on the planning I do today.
Side note… If you pension is over $48K per year, you will get ZERO sympathy from me (and I’d bet many others).
So what happened to Cynical and his imposter complaint? I don’t see anything more about that. Well, I didn’t do it. Did Goldy get back to you, Cynical? Let us know how it turns out. You’ve got my curiosity going now — I wanna know who the culprit is! Betcha one of the trolls did it.
“If you pension is over $48K per year”
I WISH!!! (sigh) If only it were … (sigh)
Try half that.
Roger @ 64: “the rest of us worked our tails off too, but we’re not better off.”
I thought you were retired. Did you do any income-producing work in the last five years?
Oh, and by the way, I don’t get 1 damn cent of government money with my pension. Every penny of it is money deducted from my paychecks. And it’s all taxable — no $1,500,000 free ride for us wage earners or pensioners.
Just thought I’d throw in here that the number of family farms sold because of inheritance taxes is zero.
P.S., I don’t want your sympathy, Mark. I want Mark R. to stop hogging my share of the gas.
Ramblings of a Republican…..
I drive an SUV for several reasons. 1st I have three kids, second, I feel very safe in it and third because we like to do a lot of camping. I put about 25% the miles as the people who I work with that drive economical cars. What is worse on our roadways? One SUV that I drive about 10,000 miles a year, or 4 Volkswagon Jetta’s that drive 40,000 miles per year each? We all probably use the same amount of gas. Why not pay our transportation taxes on mileage?
We bought a new mini-van last year, to try and save money on gas. The irony, it got only 3 miles more per gallon than the SUV we just traded it in for and we couldn’t use it for camping. With the three kids, there was barely room for a cooler in the mini-van.
As for the question, am I better off now than when Clinton was president? Absolutely. Our combined income was around $30,000 per year and we still had to pay taxes out of pocket, when we barely had enough money to pay for food, and we certainly had no money for new clothes. Now with Bush as President our income is up around $100,000 and due to the child tax credits, we actually get a refund around tax time.
When Clinton was president, and our family was so broke, I often went to the grocery store with old sweats covered with paint and holes to try and gather up enough groceries for my family, we used cloth diapers and I nursed my children. We were very frugal. I can’t tell you the number of times that a person was in front of me, dressed to the hilt, that purchased all of their food with food stamps and then drove away in their brand new car. We never used food stamps or public assistance. I can’t tell you how many times I left a store with tears in my eyes because I couldn’t get my kids something as simple as a small toy, or a new outfit. So no, we were not better off when Clinton was President.
Regarding inflation. I think any nominal increase in the cost of a gallon of milk (which we usually by on sale) and gas or bread, has been more than offset by the 100% plus increase in the value of our house over the past 5 years.
But heh, what do I know.
Roger @ 69 & 70 re: pension
Sorry to hear that. Is that $24K in total retirement benefits from all sources?
Didn’t mean to take it out on you, but I get nothing but annoyed when retirement complainers bitch about ONLY getting $50K a year.
Roger @ 74: “I want Mark R. to stop hogging my share of the gas.”
Why? You could get along just fine powered by your own hot air! ;)
I tried to answer the “better off” question, but the filter blocked it. If it gets released, you can see answer. Short answer “yes”.
But I have another question. The spiritual father of HA has an initiative on the ballot this fall for performance audits. I’m just wondering if moonbats are against PAs. If you are, can you explain why in rational terms?
I also tried to answer the “better off” and I am not sure why but it also got blocked by the filter. My answer was also yes.
wabbit @ 74 – “My share” is what I can afford. If you can’t afford it, it’s because your value to society is worth less than mine. If you contributed more value, you’d make more money.
New question: What do you Lefties — especially you Hard Lefties — think of the Democratic Leadership Council?
And FYI, McDermott (aka Uncle
JoeJim) ISN’T a member.You “enlightened” moonbats who drive pathetic little POS hybrids… do you know where electricity comes from? Did you know it doesn’t come from the wires?
Splain to me the overall economics of hybrids or all electric vehicles. If you include the transmission losses and the need to build a few thousand more power plants (including nukes)to support an all hybrid or all electrici Murkan car fleet, is the economics still there? Has anyone done a real scientific study? Do not post anything from Chomsky or his ilk… I mean REAL science done by adults…
rogerrabbit @30….you mean like ron sims has????? don’t you guys worship at his chubby little feet?
79
“If you can’t afford it, it’s because your value to society is worth less than mine.”
Oh, okay … so if John Gotti Jr. makes more $$$ from organized crime than I do from serving the public, he’s more deserving and should get the gas. I get it now.
Cops, fire fighters, teachers, day care workers, x-ray technicians, guys that sell peanuts at Seahawks games … none of them are deserving, because they don’t have a shitpot of $$$. I get it now.
But John Gotti Jr. is deserving because he makes a shitpot of $$$. Crack dealer — deserving, because he makes a shitpot of $$$. Immigrant smuggler — deserving, because he makes a shitpot of $$$. All these guys contribute to society, so they’re very deserving.
In an effort to be fairer to those of us who are less deserving, here is Roger Rabbit’s gas rationing plan:
BUSH SHOULD RAISE THE FEDERAL GAS TAX $2
Allow me to explain. To bring down gas prices, we need to reduce demand, but to reduce demand, we need to raise gas prices. Comprende? OK, good.
Since gas prices will go up anyway, until people are forced to use less gas, if you make them go up by levying an Emergency War Gas Tax, the money will go to the U.S. government and can be used to pay for the president’s hobby wars, instead of going to Saudi Arabia and being used to pay terrorists. This will also reduce the federal deficit and make the price of everything come down, because there will be less deficit-induced inflation.
Best of all, selfish pricks like Mark the Redneck will have to pay through the nose if they want to hog all the gas.
You like? I like! :D
I don’t suppose anybody here thinks the amount of $$$ people make has anything to do with how much power they have, and not much to do with what they “contribute?”
For example, a CEO who runs a company that’s losing money for its shareholders packs the board with sycophants who agree (in return for cushy director salaries) to pay the CEO $10 million a year for losing money for their shareholders.
Yep, now there’s somebody who “creates value” and “contributes to society.” Well, at least to part of society — namely, himself.
Some people think we should elected CEOs who pay themselves $10 million a year to the U.S. Senate to represent all of us. After all, he understands our problems, doesn’t he?
Geez Wabbit – Did I push a button? So you think pay is random or due to luck? You think there’s no correlation between society’s valuation of contribution and pay? Wow…
I like the idea of reducing gas price by raising taxes. Whyizit that libs see raising taxes as the solution to everything.
Without giving anything away… what kind of “public service” do you do? Do I pay your salary?
I really like HA because it gives me a chance to delve into the lib mind and look around. It’s truly amazing.
Rabid Rabbit: It is difficult to wade through your socialist drivel, but it sounds like you resent the fact that the people who work thier butts off all of thier lives get to keep a portion of the wealth they produce. If that is indeed your problem may I suggest that you move to Canada where a much larger share goes to taxes. We can find lots of volunteers to help you pack, and we’ll even buy you a one way bus ticket if you promise to never come back.
You pay me to help people honor their societal obligations.
roger@73…..the number of family farms sold because of inheritance taxes is ZERO???
you must be kidding. or a clueless seattle-ite that thinks his food pops out of a machine somewhere. the ranch next to ours had to be sold because when grandma died no one could afford to pay the 100’s of thousands of doallrs in taxes on it. you don’t ranch because you like money…it’s a lifestyle that you barely get by on.
typical clueless seattle liberal…you hate oil companies yet you drive cars, you are vegans that drive mercedes with leather seats, you think farming/ranching is just so much fun and easy too! and that these guys are rolling in dough.
so many farms have been lost because of taxes…you obviously have no idea what you are talking about on this one.
well…i really meant to say ‘dollars’…typo-city. :)
Wabbit @ 90 – You not just kwazy wabbit, you funny wabbit too. Is that what the earlier reference to Gotti was about? Isn’t that what he did? Didja get a chance to read the thing in the times about “gigayachts”. I’d love to know what you think of the boats and their owners.
Le Redneck @ 81
“Splain to me the overall economics of hybrids or all electric vehicles.”
They use less gas.
“If you include the transmission losses and the need to build a few thousand more power plants (including nukes)to support an all hybrid or all electrici Murkan car fleet, is the economics still there?”
Would someone please show Mark a hybrid car, so he can see there’s no cord and you don’t plug it into a grid?
“Has anyone done a real scientific study?”
Gee, I dunno. I’m not aware of any published studies, although I assume there’s some. It’s been empirically tested. Diesel locomotives have been using this technology since, oh, about 1938 or thereabouts.
Wabbit@93 – Oh, OK. I didn’t know that today’s hybrids have batteries that last forever. That makes all the difference.
And if I’m to understand the locomotive analogy, you think that the engine in a hybrid runs a generator which supplies power to electric motors on the wheels? Is that right?
Okay Mark, here goes. (deep breath) The gas engine drives a generator. The generator drives an electric motor. The electric motor turns the wheels.
This is how diesel locomotives work. Yes, Mark, trains are pulled by electric motors. They get electricity from an on-board generator run off an internal combustion engine. Tinkering with early locomotives never worked out a satisfactory transmission to directly link the ICE to the wheels, so they eliminated the transmission by resortng to the electric motor trick. This works great.
This is also how hybrid cars work, except they use a little gas engine instead of a big diesel engine to drive an oversized alternator, and hybrid cars have a bank of batteries to store a limited amount of electricity so the ICE doesn’t have to run all the time, which saves gas. A similar configuration is used on submarines, which can’t run their diesel engines underwater.
It’s ancient technology. Diesel-electric trains have been around since 1924. Diesel-electric submarines were used in World War 1. The hybrid car has been around longer than the car. Its basic design was understood before Henry F. built the first Model T.
95
“Oh, OK. I didn’t know that today’s hybrids have batteries that last forever. That makes all the difference.”
Cripes, Mark. They don’t run off the batteries! They run off the alternator that runs off the gas engine! Sheesh.
Le Rednecked One, have you actually seen a hybrid car? If you have, you didn’t see it dragging a cord down the street, did you? Didn’t you wonder where it got the electricity from? Must’ve been from something either under the hood or in the trunk, don’cha think? Nah … you don’t think.
And that’s the whole goddam problem.
Mark, why don’t you just say you’re in a high tax bracket and vote Republican because you want to pay less taxes. The Libs on HA will understand. You don’t have to go through all these mental gyrations trying to explain yourself. The rest of the Republican program is bullshit. But we understand that high earners don’t like high tax brackets. We do. Really.
I’m just trying to help you out, Mark. You’re not doing so well with hybrid cars or economic theory. I’m glad you like the idea of raising the federal gas tax by $2, though.
And the batteries DON’T last forever. They’re expensive to replace. A hybrid has slow acceleration and not much towing capacity. They cost more to buy — so much more, that even at $3 a gallon for gas, you don’t save money by buying one. But you consume less oil and pollute the air less. They’re good granola cars for the granola folks. They’re not gonna solve the oil peak problem, just delay it a teensy bit.
So in the liberal utopia of no oil, how does a hybrid help? The mileage difference between a hybrid and any other tiny shitbox with a mechanical transmission is small.
And yes, I want to pay less taxes. I’m tired of doing all the gd heavy lifting. I don’t care what “good” could be done by higher taxes or what “harm” could come by lower taxes. Don’t GAF. I want the parasites off my back. I want others, especially those in the lower income brackets to start carrying their share of the burden.
RR @ 63
No, it was more of the usual: things in Iraq are going well, democracy, freedom, etc.; then war on terror, terrorists will strike, terror, more terror, etc.; then veiled reference to Cindy Sheehan; then terror, war, freedom, etc. Pretty much nothing of substance.
RR @19
3 trolls here now, all named Mark. Hmmmm? Why are there so damn many troll marks? “Mark of Cain” maybe?
So, Mark (pick one), what SUV do you drive?
Quite smartly, I gave up my Mustang (16-18MPG) for a mini-SUV (22-25MPG) when gas hit $2. So you can see, I am now saving “your” gas for you (um, that would not be your “natural gas” that makes you so volatile)…
As for so many troll marks, I am the only “marks” :) However, you must understand that generally, people named Mark are cool guys…though I am mystified why we are all to the right of the political spectrum…
Back on the thing about Seattle moving down the liberal city list… I look at Seattle as a petri dish that the rest of us can use as a bad example. Moonbat wabbit @ 86 proposes higher taxes to make gas cheaper in an exercise of liberal “intellecutal” gymnastics that is stunning. Seattle can try to tax itself into prosperity, and the rest of us can stand back and laugh at the lunacy.
Here’s the link, you can read it yourself. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news.....50813.html
I gotta be honest… I gave up my full size Cheby PU for a mid size rice burner SUV. I love it. Part of the motivation was better mileage. So like the other Mark, I’m doing my part to save gas and Mommy Erf too.
Hey Marks – I love trolling here. I love it when they say “Tax Cuts For The Rich”, and then get all indignant.
Mark The Redneck @106
I prefer a more sedate approach to engaging our friends here, but to each their own, as the saying goes.
Personally, I would love to see higher taxes on inherited riches in excess of some arbitrary number, so long as the arbitrary number encompasses Ted Kennedy and others.
Wabbit @ 90 – None of my bidness, and I’ll understand if you tell me to FO.. but are you still actively employed in helping people meet their societal obligations or are you retired?
Marks – Should there be a tax on money you marry? Say like John Kerry?
I hope to pass on a huge inheritance to my daughter. I want her to be able to be the matriarch of a family dynasty. She’d be really pissed if gummint got in the middle of her money and helped themselves to re-distribute to the bad choice crowd.
Reply to 100
Well actually Mark, I think the lower brackets ARE carrying the burden by (a) doing the shitty work you don’t want to do, (b) fighting the country’s wars, and (c) laboring in the fields and sweat shops so other people can get rich and buy cheap food.
I’m not sure where you’re going with this “liberal utopia of no oil” thing. The world will run out of oil whether we’re liberal or conservative — the oil doesn’t give a fuck! At the rate we’re going through oil now, there’s only about a 29-year supply left, so somebody better think of something fast!
Of course, if the human population keeps exploding, and the other 95% of the world wants to consume more oil, and our own consumption keeps going up (because of gas guzzlers, wars, and other reasons), there’s much less than 29 years left.
The numbers are easy. Take the estimated recoverable reserves (900 billion bbl) and divide by 84 million bpd or 30.66 billion bbl per year, and you get 29 1/3 years. But analysts expect oil consumption to jump from 84M bpd now to 120M bpd by 2025, so you figure it out.
I’m not a geologist, petroleum engineer, or analyst. But I don’t think consumption will ever reach 120M bpd, because there isn’t another 36M bpd of production capacity out there. We’d have to find several undiscovered supergiant fields — to replace the ones that are depleting now, and to add the new capacity — but the experts don’t believe there are any. The last supergiant was found in 1970. The Hubbert Curve predicts that world oil production will peak in this decade and then decline. That might be wrong, the peak might come a little later … but it’s coming.
The problem for the oil industry is this. When oil production begins to decline, civilization will need a new energy source, or population and economies must shrink along with the energy supply. Whatever energy source or technology replaces oil (if there is one) will be needed long before the oil runs out. It will be needed on the downslope of the Hubbert curve. The problem for Big Oil is that if a source or technology is developed that makes oil obsolete before the oil is completely gone, Big Oil will get stuck with the unsold oil. Nobody will want it, because it has been replaced. If the replacement occurs early in the trip down the far side of the Hubbert Curve, Big Oil will get stuck with an awful lot of unmarketable oil. That’s what they’re worried about, and that’s why they’re reluctant to invest trillions of dollars in developing the last half of the world’s oil supply.
Mark The Redneck @109
I hope to pass on a huge inheritance to my daughter. I want her to be able to be the matriarch of a family dynasty.
And that would be great! Where I disagree with that is this:
Your daughter (perhaps) has not proven herself capable of handling the legacy. I understand she may be the apple of your eye and incapable of wrongdoing, but my point is not everybody can maintain an empire. The astute can take a fraction of the inheritance and build their own legacy, but the Kerry’s of the world require people like your daughter to make a name for themselves.
RR @110
The world will run out of oil whether we’re liberal or conservative – the oil doesn’t give a fuck! At the rate we’re going through oil now, there’s only about a 29-year supply left, so somebody better think of something fast!
Reminds me of the Social Security issue. The Democrats in Congress continue to say the problem is WAAY into the future, so why do sompin’ now?
It would be an untenable situation if we fail to do something about finding alternatives for either issue. What do you suggest?
Roger Rabbit–
Did you hear about the recall on the Prius Hybrid Car??
Those batteries you claim are so great have some serious issues like the health of the driver who is exposed repeatedly.
I see your plan RR.
Try to guilt all of us who are always RIGHT into buying and driving thsoe little pieces of crap and expose us to the side effects.
You are a ruthless little fucker!
Among the Hybrid Car Battery side effects are:
1) Your dork shrivels up and falls off (as RR knows from firsthand experience).
2) It causes delusional thinking (as evidenced by the empty headed thinking of every LEFTIST PINHEAD who owns one).
3) It causes paranoia (as evidenced by the LEFTIST PINHEAD paranoia that every problem in their pathetic useless lives is caused by Bush).
4) It causes you to never have a constructive thought (as evidence by the LEFTIST PINHEAD’s always being against everything).
LEFTIST PINHEADS are CAVE people…..
Citizens
Against
Virtually
Everything
CAVE people.
5) It causes you to believe that higher taxes and unaccountable government ruled by Marxists is always the best thing.
The list goes on & on!!!
Wabbit @ 100 – First off…thank you for coherent reply. You might be Kwazy Wabbit, but you not Stoopid Wabbit. Sometimes, you Scary Wabbit and sometimes, you Funny Wabbit. (“Paleo-con” still kwack me up !)
My point is that poor do not carry their share of taxes. Lower 50% only pays 4% of total taxes. That is immoral on its face.
Do you know why economics is called “The Dismal Science”? Because the first economists predicted the end of the world due to overpopulation and overconsumption. I think Malthus was the first to predict 400 years ago that the world would be wiped out. But the beauty of Adam Smith’s free market theory is that free markets always make the “right” decisions because all data are factored into prices. And because prices and returns drive investments, the “right” investments are made, and the end of the world is always avoided. New technologies, subsitution and the law of supply and demand are universal timeless concepts that always work. The last 100 years has shown conclusively that planned economies always fail, not because the econmic planners are stupid or mean, but because there’s no way for them to have all the information they need to make correct decisions.
So I’m all for letting free markets decide price of gallon of gas. When the “right” point is reached, the entrepreneurial spirit of people will be activated and another solution will be found. And ther will be new Rockefellers and Getty’s to be hated the Left.
Mark The Redneck @115
When the “right” point is reached, the entrepreneurial spirit of people will be activated and another solution will be found.
And that is indeed the point. If we fail to reach the requisite boundary, we fail to advance to our potential. In history, we humans have always achieved our potential, but the question is truly: “at what price?” I doubt the price will be so high to bankrupt us, but some believe differently…and it is indeed a failure based on political thought…IMO, of course…
112
No, marks, the Democrats in Congress say that (a) Bush has come up with a Social Security “crisis” by extrapolating all the way to eternity, and (b) under any set of economic assumptions that would allow Bush’s private accounts scheme to work, Social Security will run a surplus for the foreseeable future.
(Note, they’re not saying Social Security will run surpluses; they’re saying Bush’s economic assumptions are bullshit.)
113 & 114
Where did I say anybody should buy a Prius? I didn’t, so stop putting words in my mouth, Cynical-Liar. What I’m talking about is the difference between 12 mpg and 16 mpg in the vehicle you drive for daily commuting. That’s a drop of 25% in gasoline consumption. Geez talking to you is like trying to have a conversation with a rock.
There isn’t a damn thing wrong with driving a Suburban if you have to take 6 kids somewhere, or tow a horse trailer. We’re talking daily commuting — you know, 1 person per vehicle — Planet Earth to Cynical? Anybody home? Hellooooooo …
roger@110…….okay, now i know that you really do write for “the star”. that last paragraph about “big oil”[and once again…tell me where little oil and medium oil are? hm?] not investing because they are afraid of being “stuck” with oil.not only is that not true…it’s so ridiculous as to make me wonder what your angle is.
you said “I’m not a geologist, petroleum engineer, or analyst.”…no kidding…or a realist either obviously.
so which is it? are oil companies controlled by big nasty greedy republicans that want to make all the money or not? because if you knew anything at all about the research that is going on you would realize that all of these companies want to be the first to come up with a substitute they can CONTROL by manufacturing it right here. do you think they want to be at opec’s whims? hell no.
the big problem is this….right now and in the near future there is no substitute for oil anymore than you could suddenly start breathing something other than air.
RR @117
You of all people should know how bullshitty that is. I remember how the National Geographic back in the ’50s referred to the end of oil in the 70’s. Those guys are now saying we have 30 years? Fuck them and their assumptions, we have less time to assume shit, regardless of their authority on the issue. Same for SS, my friend.”
105
“I gotta be honest… I gave up my full size Cheby PU for a mid size rice burner SUV. I love it. Part of the motivation was better mileage. So like the other Mark, I’m doing my part to save gas and Mommy Erf too. Comment by Mark The Redneck”
NOOOOO!!!! YOU DIDN’T!!!! I own four vehicles, two of which are museum-piece 4WDs. They have big-block engines and 4-barrel carburetors (nobody ever heard of fuel injectors when these mammoth masses of sheet metal were assembled), and might get gas mileage in double digits in certain circumstances (for example, in free fall after being dropped from a B-52). I wouldn’t give up my babies for anything! The only question is whether they’re going to rust out before I do. I plan to be buried in my K-5.
Know how much gas they’ve burned this year? Under 10 gallons.
Our other two cars are late model no-frills, no-sex-appeal, utilitarian economy vehicles that get in the high teens. We’re both retired, so neither of us commute, and our gas budget is about $25 a month.
I start up the dinosaurs and run the engines a few times a year in hopes the crankcase oil won’t coagulate until my arteries do. You know — keeps ’em young. Every once in a while they tow a trailer, haul a load of yard waste to the recycling station, or pull a rhody stump.
I’ll tell you a secret about towing: You don’t get any better mileage with a mid-size V-6 than you do with a big V-8. It takes X amount of energy to pull a trailer up a hill, which requires burning Y amount of fuel, regardless of whether the fuel is being fed into a big engine or little engine. The little engine has to work much harder, so it runs at higher RPM, and burns the same amount of fuel. With a lot more wear and tear on the engine. That’s why I keep a couple of gas guzzling beasts in my stable. But commute in those beasts? Never.
115
“My point is that poor do not carry their share of taxes. Lower 50% only pays 4% of total taxes. That is immoral on its face.”
How so? Are you saying government should take money from the poorest citizens — money they need for basic subsistence — so people with far more than they have can have even more? Now THAT’s immoral!
Wabbit@117 – Here’s another opportunity to “educate” me. Stock market gives superior returns over SS and other fixed rate instruments over the long term. And since retirement money is long term money, why not maximize returns? Why not allow people to manage their own futures? “Life Cycle Funds” are a great way to balance portfolios as people age. Why do libs assume people are too stoopid to invest thier money? I really don’t get it. As one of the few coherent people on the wrong side of the political spectrum, please ‘splain the other viewpoint.
Moonbats… Wabbit has “graduated” above your level… don’t chime in until Wabbit is done. Please.
115
Why thank you, Mark! We HA libs occasionally have a “civil moment.” We try not to do that too often, but we can’t stop ourselves from doing it once in a while. We’re not like Republicans — always steadfast, always strong. We’re weak.
Wabbit @ 122 – Geez, don’t F it up now… you were on a coherent roll. Why shouldn’t poor pay the same percentage as everybody else? What’s “unfair” about that?
“Educate” me. Justify on moral grounds why producers and successful people should be penalized. Why should people who have f’d up their lives through their own choices be allowed to transfer the cost of their bad choices to the rest of us? By insulating people from the consequences of their bad choices, doesn’t that just encourage more counter-productive bad choices? How is that sustainable?
123
We do allow people to invest their own retirement money in tax-sheltered accounts. We give them half a dozen ways to do it: IRAs, Keoghs, Roths, 401(k)s, etc.
Social Security is not a retirement account. It’s old age and disability “insurance.” SS really has 3 parts. (1) Disability insurance, (2) survivor insurance, (3) retirement benefits. The latter function as an insurance policy against the inflation that destroys ordinary pensions. There is almost always inflation; and even when inflation seems low, if you’re still alive 30 years after retiring (as my father is), Social Security becomes essential to your survival. His pension is puny now. The SS check pays 80% of his expenses.
For most of us, Social Security is what will stand between us and the wolf in our most vulnerable years — when we’re old, sick, and can’t work anymore. The great value of Social Security is that it’s GUARANTEED. The U.S. government has paid every penny of Social Security benefits ever owed. It’s insane to risk that money in the stock market. What if you lose everything, or a big part of it? And yes, Mark, there are people who can’t manage money. Do you want to pay taxes to take care of them in their old age? Do we just let them die of exposure in the streets, or of hunger? What kind of person would allow such a thing?
Social Security will either (a) run surpluses, or (b) run deficits, depending on the economy’s future performance and economic growth rates. Social Security has no short-term problems; it’s running surpluses. Whether Social Security has a long-term problem depends on which set of guesses you opt for. But nobody can project 75 years out. The best we can do is base current policies on the most reasonable assumptions and make necessary adjustments as time goes on and the situation reveals itself.
The current math shows this: Under the worst-case scenario, “promised” benefits would have to be cut by about 25% by 2064 (or something like that) BUT RECIPIENTS IN THAT YEAR WOULD STILL RECEIVE MORE PURCHASING POWER FROM SOCIAL SECURITY THAN TODAY’S RECIPIENTS. The reason for this is that SS benefits are indexed to prosperity, not inflation. As the standard of living goes up for the rest of the country, it also goes up for SS retirees. There is a spread between the inflation rate and the Social Security index rate. You could reduce the index rate and still stay above the inflation rate, and doing so WOULD ERASE THE POTENTIAL SOCIAL SECURITY DEFICIT FOR AS FAR AS THE EYE CAN SEE.
In other words, the Social Security “problem” is a little problem, not a big problem. Depending on the economy’s performance, we MIGHT have to reduce future benefits growth to a slightly lower trajectory than they’re on now, but under any credible scenario, future retirees will still be better off than today’s retirees without having to borrow for the benefits.
The fundamental problem with Bush’s private accounts idea is this. Social Security is a pay-as-you-go program. That is, today’s SS taxes pay for today’s benefits. If you divert $1 trillion out of the revenue stream for private accounts, then you have to either cut SS benefits by $1 trillion, raise SS taxes by $1 trillion, or borrow $1 trillion. Either you replace the $1 trillion you took from SS for private accounts, or you pay $1 trillion less benefits.
This proposal is extremely threatening to middle aged and older retirees and soon-to-be-retirees. That’s why 75% of the American public is against it. Democrats don’t believe this proposal is intended to “fix” Social Security, we believe it’s designed to destroy Social Security, and we’re not going along with it.
Democrats see Social Security as the most successful social program in the history of the world. It went far to eliminate elderly poverty in the U.S. The program is credited with extending life spans of Americans by an average of 3 years. And given government monetary policies that consistently produce inflation and the vagaries and risks of investment methods of saving for retirement, Social Security is the only sure-fire thing that we can absolutely count on. As Democrats see it, Bush is tinkering with Social Security not because it doesn’t work, is in dire financial straits, or is an unsuccessful program, but because he is ideologically opposed to its concept; and it is precisely Social Security’s spectacular success that makes him so determined, because Social Security’s success is a threat to the validity of his ideology.
Does that help?
125
Okay … a civilized society doesn’t let people starve. If the income required for minimum subsistence is $12,000 (I’m picking this number out of a hat), then you exempt the first $12,000 of income from taxation, and tax the rest. A rational tax system would raise the money the government needs, and no more. Whether you do this with a flat-rate tax or a progressive-rate tax is a philosophical question, not a mathematical one.
Our actual tax code is neither a flat-rate nor progressive system. Some of the wealthiest people have a lower tax rate than some of our poorest. The tax code is a veritable Christmas tree of exemptions, deductions, and credits. It is rife with distortions that skew its equality and fairness. These come from ideology, favoritism, partisan politics, and a host of other motivations and sources. It is difficult to understand, punishes taxpayers who are not adept at exploiting its idiosyncrasies, and requires way the hell too much paperwork, accounting fees, and nervous stress. Most Americans agree it stinks.
Let’s try to deal with something more manageable. The state, unlike the federal government, is constitutionally required to balance its budget. It can’t spend money it doesn’t collect in taxes. This simplifies things, because now that we’ve decided that outgo and income must be equal, the only question is where the income comes from.
A small part of it comes from proprietary activities such as state liquor store profits, selling timber from state-owned lands, and lottery profits. A somewhat larger slice comes from user fees — licenses, permits, park entrance fees, fishing and hunting licenses, and so on. A big chunk (slightly under 30% of the budget) comes from the federal government. Roughly 48% of state spending comes from general state taxes. The main ones are the retail sales tax, which accounts for about half of state tax revenues, the B & O tax (about 18%), and the state portion of the property tax (about 12%). If you want a more precise breakdown go to http://www1.leg.wa.gov/Senate/.....ations.htm and scroll down the page to “Citizen’s Guide to the Budget.”
A couple years ago, the Legislature appointed a commission made up of academics, economists, and government officials to study the state’s tax structure. It was chaired by Bill Gates Sr., therefore is known as the “Gates Commission,” although that’s not its official name. If you want to download their report go here http://dor.wa.gov/content/stat.....Report.htm .
The Gates commission came up with three startling statistics.
1. Business pays 41% of state taxes in Washington, compared to an average of 30% in other western states, which indicates a disproportionate share of the state tax burden falls on small and medium sized businesses. (Big businesses like Boeing and Microsoft get out of paying state taxes because of their political clout.)
2. The poorest 20% of the state’s citizens pay an average of 16% of their income to state and local taxes.
3. The richest 20% of the state’s citizens pay an average of 4% of their income to state and local taxes.
The Gates commission offered a number of options for achieving better balance in the distribution of the state tax burden. These options were all revenue neutral; i.e., they would not increase total taxes collected, but simply redistribute the tax burden. The one that received the most press attention was the proposal for a state income tax, but this was by no means the only oiption the commission offered, although it seems to be the one they preferred by a slight margin.
From an examination of the numbers above, it’s obvious that Washington has an unfair and regressive tax structure that places a relatively greater burden on those least able to pay. The obvious thing to do is shift taxes away from small business and lower income households to affluent households, but this is politically difficult.
The Gates commission income tax proposal involves repealing the B & O tax and reducing or eliminating the state portion of the sales tax, and offsetting these revenue losses with a flat-rate income tax. The first $X of income would be exempt from being taxed. Most Democratic politicians who like the idea of a state income tax support a flat-rate tax coupled with tax relief for small business and a reduction in the sales tax. Progressives — the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party — tend to prefer a graduated state income tax. However, most states use a flat-rate tax.
Washington is one of only 5 or so states that does not have a state income tax. As a percentage of income, Washington state and local taxes are in the middle, pretty close to the median. There are quite a few state with higher taxes than we have. Some people, especially conservative Republicans, think our taxes are too high and want to scale back state government. This would be difficult to do, as about half of state spending goes to K-12 schools. Most states fund public schools from local property tax. Washington is unique in funneling the bulk of public school funding through a state agency and the state budget, which distorts the budget — it makes our budget look much larger than it is, when compared to other states, because close to half of Washington’s state budget is actually local school funding.
So that’s an explanation of state taxes, Mark.
125
“Why should people who have f’d up their lives through their own choices be allowed to transfer the cost of their bad choices to the rest of us?”
The world is not as simple as you wish it was, Mark.
When parents make bad choices, we don’t let their children go hungry, because it’s unfair to make the children suffer for their parents’ mistakes. It’s also cheaper, and consumes less tax dollars in the long run, to take care of them. Hungry children can’t learn in school, aren’t healthy, and will incur more societal costs than healthy kids who are school-ready.
We ask taxpayers to pay for drug and alcohol treatment programs because it’s cheaper for society than leaving this illnesses untreated. We also do it out of compassion, but in this instance, compassion pays. Untreated addicts can’t work, don’t pay taxes, their families become a burden on society, they have greater health costs, and drain public resources if they get involved in crime. Drunk drivers also kill innocent people, so we do this in part for self-preservation.
We invest taxpayer dollars in social programs in part to reduce crime losses to the community and reduce costs for policing, courts, and jails.
I could offer more examples but the common theme in much of government social spending is that it prevents or saves greater spending that would result from not dealing with social problems.
It’s hard for people who work in the business world to understand how much of society is dysfunctional even here in the U.S., which we like to think of as one of the world’s most civilized and advanced societies. If you work in government, one of the things you learn is that none of society’s rules enforce themselves. If we didn’t have traffic cops, there would be chaos on our streets. Your ability to collect money owed to you under a business contract ultimately depends on the courts — and on the power of the sheriff to send armed deputies to seize property. You may never have to go to court to collect your business income. But there’s a lot more honor in the business world as a result of knowing the courts and sheriffs are there, and can be resorted to, if need be. You need government, Mark. Without government, you could not own any property except that which you could carry on your person and defend by force. You could not prosper. You could not even be safe. Your right not to be hit over the head by a mugger and robbed is secured by the existence of police, courts, and jails. That security is less than perfect, but it’s far greater than what you would have without those things.
Wabbit @ 126 – Again, thank you for thoughtful reply. You almost Cuddly Wabbit sometimes. But you’re still Wrong Wabbit.
I’ll give first hand example. Hopefully Goldy’s filter won’t block this one as it has previous ones.
My x was member of bad choice crowd. She worked family court system, me, and welfare system for all it was worth. She ran up $200k in credit card debt. All to spend on herself. Very little went to my daughter. Most went to her $300/day drug habit. She nearly destroyed my daughter’s life. Her ability to work the system killed her.
GD IT – !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Goldy let my GD Posts through ! ! ! I’m tryin to explain a real life example to illustrate a point.
Shit..
Wabbit @ 126 – I wrote part of thoughtful post to challenge your position. I was going to post in pieces to get through filter, but the GD filter won’t even let first part through. Dunno why. No profanity. No attacks. Just opposite point of view. I guess clear thinkin’ opposing posts are banned.
GD It.. !!!!!!!!
shit piss cock cunt mother fucker screw.
Did that get through?
Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker, and Tits, wow. Tits doesn’t even belong on the list, you know. It’s such a friendly sounding word. It sounds like a nickname. ‘Hey, Tits, come here. Tits, meet Toots, Toots, Tits, Tits, Toots.’ It sounds like a snack doesn’t it? Yes, I know, it is, right. But I don’t mean the sexist snack, I mean, New Nabisco Tits. The new Cheese Tits, and Corn Tits and Pizza Tits, Sesame Tits Onion Tits, Tater Tits, Yeah. Betcha can’t eat just one. That’s true I usually switch off . But I mean that word does not belong on the list.
Carlin…
Christmasghost: If you are aware of farms lost to taxes please contact the American Farm Bureau Foundation, they have been trying for years (unsuccessfully) to find one to try to justify eliminating the “death tax”. Thanks
And as long as we’re testing..
Anal, ass, asshole, bitch, breast, buttocks, buttplug, chink, clit, clitoris, cock, cocksucker, cum, cumshot, dickhead, dildo, fag, faggot, reich, fellatio, fuck, fucker, fuckhead, fucking, gonad, gook, jap, Hitler, jackass, jackoff, jewboy, masturbate, motherfucker, Nazi, necrophilia, negro, nigga(s), nigger(s), nipple, Osama, penis, pimp, pussy, queer, retard, screw, scrotum, semen, shit, slut, sperm, Stalin, tit, vagina, vaginal, whore, wop
OK. I guess we’ve established now what passes for thoughtful comment on HA.
You’re welcome. Fuck you assholes.
Wow: I take the Sabbath off and Wabbit is the most prolific pixel user here. I wonder why? Righty “Troll” reporting to deliver the standard lefty whipping. Oops… wuppin, of Moonbat, lefty Moby Troll donks! Hmmm…? I suppose now that the NY Slimes has stated the economy is going great and Greenspan has to raise interest rates, his economic arguments against GWB are taking a beating.
Wabbit you didn’t address Ms Ghost’s situation of the rancher example, where they will have to sell. Did you drink the koolaid from Nancy Pelosi. It was she who said the capital gains taxes would not affect the little people. Well MS. DUFUS is wrong again. I wonder how PacMan lives knowing that sorry piece of a congresswoman represents around where he lives! As always when something doesn’t fit you analogies (notice the first FOUR letters of that LAST word Roger), you scamper to another topic weally weally fast!
BTW I am way better off than I wuz in 2000. Way way better off. And you know what we did with that first $600 check we received on the 2001 tax cut? We cleaned our cedar shake roof with a more expensive cleaner, and it lasts longer than other people’s roof cleanings so far. So we put the money to great use!
Now that it looks like the Inhaler’s administration missed getting Atta, Loocy and don*****don are kind of quiet regarding it’s GWB’s fault regarding 9/11. Sure leaves one to wonder!!!
Hey Marks, don’t worry about it!
http://www.progressivestates.org/
On Tuesday there s a national conference in Seattle on developing a progressive think tank and action group for state legislature measures. Among the guests are Willie Brown, John Edwards, and MT GOv. Sweitzer. Go to site for more details.
Danny
Ah yes, the beat goes on on Atta-gate, you know the one where the Clintonistas ignored evidence of Mohammad Atta?
http://www.nysun.com/article/18492 – Bottom line, I agree with safeguards on US Citizens. But Atta was not a US Citizen you stoopid ACLU people.
http://www.nypost.com/postopin...../51737.htm – was there a coverup? – “That warning came right from the front line in the War on Terror — from Manhattan U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White, who headed up key terror probes like the prosecutions for the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993.
White — herself a Clinton appointee — wrote directly to Reno that the wall was a big mistake.
“It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorney’s Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required,” White wrote on June 13, 1995.” Hmmm… 1995 a full five years?
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....151634.asp – “[T]he Commission should study carefully the National Security Council plan to disrupt the al Qaeda network in the U.S. that our government failed to implement fully seventeen months before September 11.” – What did Tricky Dick Clarke really know?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200508\POL20050811b.html – “In another development, a group of Sept. 11 widows that demanded a probe of the events leading up to 9/11 issued a statement saying it is disappointed to learn that the commission’s final report is “incomplete and illusory.” – You know these Jersey Widows, the ones that the d u m m o c r a p s put in front of the MSM, saying Bush was the cause!!! How that for you don*****don and headlice loocy?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08.....intel.html – I wonder why the intel was rejected?
curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=32193 – Some HA lefty said Weldon was a right-wing wacko. Well Many people now beg to differ HA lefties! You all are still donks!
And there are these news tidbits that don’t seem to make it to the HA front page:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200508\CUL20050812b.html – Goldy, why not add this to the list of front page articles. Men can wear dresses to work in Pennsylvania.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200508\CUL20050811c.html – Looks like gay marriage will wait it’s turn in the California court system.
When Goldy verifies my post it will be #137.
It’s time yet again for Puddy’s freeper facts.
Puddy uses the Gray Lady to support his warped world view. The Times is a good paper but hardly perfect. The truth is is that never has an economic recovery hurt so good as this one.
Plenty of profits for corps but a dearth of jobs for ordinary folks many of whom lost work in the last recession and never came back. So many of these households have one wage earner and in many cases have taken on debt to stay afloat.
The money stat: 2.9 million jobs per year were created during Clinton’s presidency and only 400 thousand during Dubya’s.
But Puddy is way better off. Good for Puddy.
And Puddy ignores that 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch who during his campaign asserted that America’s greatest security priority was a missile defense system in contrast to the outgoing Clinton team who told the Bushies that the greatest threat was dealing with terrorism. Smart team those Bushies.
Hey Redneck – get your mind out of the gutter.
MTR @ 125
“Why should people who have f’d up their lives through their own choices be allowed to transfer the cost of their bad choices to the rest of us? By insulating people from the consequences of their bad choices, doesn’t that just encourage more counter-productive bad choices? How is that sustainable?
This is precisely where your reasoning proves fallacious: that individuals with lower incomes are in their financial situations because of “bad choices”. People make bad choices, and still end up incredibly wealthy (viz. George W. Bush, whose life until the age of 40 consisted of numerous bad choices and exceptionally poor business decisions).
It takes few math skills to see that flat-rate taxation on income is regressive, and would impact low-income families the hardest.
Bush Lied!! Bush Lied!! Er……….Never mind………..
Saturday, Aug. 13, 2005 10:45 p.m. EDT
Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq
U.S. troops raided a suspected insurgent chemical weapons factory in northern Iraq, finding about 1,500 gallons of dangerous substances, the U.S. military said Saturday.
Lt. Col. Steve Boylan, a military spokesman, said 11 chemicals were found in the hideout in Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad, “which are dangerous by themselves, and mixed together they would become even more dangerous.”
Story Continues Below
“Our feeling at this point is that had this stuff been mixed and used, it could have been very easily used against Iraqi and coalition forces,” Boylan said.
The military cautioned in a statement, however, that ongoing testing at the facility was “insufficient to determine what the insurgents had been producing” and that further tests were required.
U.S. troops, acting on a tip from detainees under interrogation, raided the building Tuesday, the statement said. The military did not say if anyone was detained in the raid and said it was investigating which insurgent group was operating the facility.
The military has found many suspected chemical sites in the past, none of which ended up containing chemical or biological weapons. Testing of such sites can take several days.
Boylan said the materials did not appear to be linked to Saddam Hussein’s ousted regime.
The U.S. invaded Iraq in March 2003 to destroy Saddam’s purported unconventional weapons of mass destruction. None were ever found.
U.S. arms investigators have said there was evidence that Iraqi resistance groups had tried to manufacture chemical weapons. The information was disclosed in the final report of Charles A. Duelfer’s Iraq Survey Group, the account of its fruitless 18-month hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
In an annex to the Duelfer report, the joint CIA-Pentagon teams told of having broken up an insurgent group in June 2004 that for six months tried to make weapons agents.
The group had recruited a Baghdad chemist and obtained chemicals from farmers who looted state companies and from shops in Baghdad’s chemicals market, the report said. They first tried to make tabun, a nerve agent, but could not get the ingredients. Then the chemist, who had no weapons-making experience, was unable to manufacture the blistering agent mustard, although he had the right chemicals, the report said.
The insurgents hired another chemist, who succeeded in making ricin base, a poisonous plant extract, from castor beans, but at that point a U.S. raid on the laboratory, at Baghdad’s al-Abud trading complex, disrupted the network.
The Duelfer account also said various sources reported insurgents were trying to produce chemical weapons elsewhere in Iraq.
In November, U.S. and Iraqi forces that overran Fallujah reported finding an insurgent lab which included the poisonous industrial compound hydrogen cyanide and a book of instructions for making potential chemical weapons.
Weeks earlier, Jordanian authorities said they had foiled planned chemical attacks by suicide bombers on Jordanian government targets. They said the plot was conceived by Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of the al-Qaida wing in Iraq.
Dr. – Pull yer head out of yer ass. GWB is a Navy fighter pilot and MBA fercrissakes. And he’s a good politician too as he kicked donk ass twice despite everything you could throw at him. Now he’s head of the free world.
By bad choices I mean low education attainment, indiscriminate breeding, crime, drugs/booze laziness and general lack of character. I have zero sympathy for those people.
Here’s the deal: If you want what I got, do what I do. And if you’re too fucking stupid to do that, then tough shit.
indiscriminate breeding
Guffaw! Like the kind that produced you.
GWB was never NAVY. He was TANG – Texas Air National Guard. He was an ok pilot for 4 years maybe and then he went AWOL and didn’t bother to maintain his physical readiness. He broke faith with his six year commitment to the TANG and to the soldiers who had to go to the ‘nam in his place because of his placement in that “champagne” unit.
He was and is a disgrace to this country.
On the other hand John Kerry was NAVY and he experienced something GWB never did – he got his ass shot at in the Mekong Delta. The kind of experience that makes you think at least twice before sending young men and women to do the same.
MTR @ 140
You start with an irrelevant personal attack, which I will ignore.
“GWB is a Navy fighter pilot
Texas Air National Guard; suspended and then grounded for not completing his routine physical; arguably AWOL for 1 year or more. Evidence of such has been amply documented.
“and MBA fercrissakes”
Admitted to Harvard under his father’s legacy status. C average student, poor intellectual and academic performance amply documented: see Yoshi Tsurumi’s comments, among others.
“And he’s a good politician too as he kicked donk ass twice despite everything you could throw at him.
Point B (“kicked donk ass”) does not prove point A (“good politician”); no conditions are given on what constitutes a “good politician”, so no basis for further comment on point B. Point A is provably false: the 2000 election was a statistical tie (as was the 2004 gub. election in WA that Repubs. are still crying foul about) that was decided by the Supreme Court in a partisan decision.
“By bad choices I mean low education attainment, indiscriminate breeding, crime, drugs/booze laziness and general lack of character. I have zero sympathy for those people.”
a) Low education attainment is not necessarily a matter of choice.
b) I’m not sure what you mean by “indiscriminate breeding,” so will leave that for now.
c) “Crime, drugs/booze”, which I assume to mean being involved in crime, using drugs and/or alcohol: you make no effort to explain how this is relevant.
d) “General lack of character”, aside from being a general personal attack, you don’t define character.
“I have zero sympathy for those people.”
That’s clear from your argument above, which doesn’t seem to have been thought through at all.
“If you want what I got, do what I do.”
I don’t know what you have, nor do I know that I (or others) would want what you have. Nor do we know what you do, so we cannot emulate you.
“And if you’re too fucking stupid to do that, then tough shit.
This assumes it takes come modicum of intelligence to do what you do; since this is known only to you as of know, it’s irrelevant.
Apart from that, your remarks seem to display some sort of dog-eat-dog, social-Darwinist construct of society. Although you’re entitled to your view, it does nothing to solve the complex causes of the various societal problems prevalent today.
In my opinion, the most urgent problem in US society right now is a profoundly willful ignorance of at least 1/3 of the population as to the malevolence of the current administration, which clearly displays fascist tendencies — especially when compared with the documented actions of fascist governments of the past.
Moonbat – Fuck you asshole. I sure didn’t hear any of this when Bubba was your boy.
142
“He was and is a disgrace to this country.”
Not only do I agree, but I feel the greater disgrace is the failure of a substantial part of the US population to understand this administrations policy agenda, and to hold it accountable to both US and international law.
MTR @ 143
Untrue. Took me 10 seconds to find an example writted during Clinton’s second term
http://www.thirdworldtraveler......eLies.html
E – I see you get your information from Dan Rather. And we know how good that is.
Every recount in Fla showed dems failed to manufacture enough votes. Even NYT couldn’t find them.
Education is a matter of choice. Get up and go to school. It’s free through HS and 80% subsidized by taxpayers at state schools. If you’re uneducated it’s because you chose to be so. Live with the consequences.
There’s no “willful ignorance” you arrogant asshole. I understand perfectly the free choices people make to fuck up their lives.
MTR @ 146
“I see you get your information from Dan Rather.”
He’s retired. Irrelevant.
“Every recount in Fla showed dems failed to manufacture enough votes.”
Loaded statement (“manufactured”). Counterarguments to your claim are amply documented.
“If you’re uneducated it’s because you chose to be so. Live with the consequences.”
This would be true if there were universal standards in public education, which there arent, and if all teachers were equally competent, and all students had access to the same resources — also not the case. By the way, you also have to live with the consequences of the chronically under-educated.
“There’s no “willful ignorance” you arrogant asshole.”
Willful ignorance does exist all over the planet, and there’s no shortage of it in this country. For instance, anyone who still thinks that Iraq and 9-11 were linked is willfully ignorant, and there are plenty of people who hold this view.
By the way, I’m neither arrogant nor an asshole.
Ramblings of a Republican…..
I drive an SUV for several reasons. 1st I have three kids, second, I feel very safe in it and third because we like to do a lot of camping. I put about 25% the miles as the people who I work with that drive economical cars. What is worse on our roadways? One SUV that I drive about 10,000 miles a year, or 4 Volkswagon Jetta’s that drive 40,000 miles per year each? We all probably use the same amount of gas. Why not pay our transportation taxes on mileage?
We bought a new mini-van last year, to try and save money on gas. The irony, it got only 3 miles more per gallon than the SUV we just traded it in for and we couldn’t use it for camping. With the three kids, there was barely room for a cooler in the mini-van.
As for the question, am I better off now than when Clinton was president? Absolutely. Our combined income was around $30,000 per year and we still had to pay taxes out of pocket, when we barely had enough money to pay for food, and we certainly had no money for new clothes. Now with Bush as President our income is up around $100,000 and due to the child tax credits, we actually get a refund around tax time.
When Clinton was president, and our family was so broke, I often went to the grocery store with old sweats covered with paint and holes to try and gather up enough groceries for my family, we used cloth diapers and I nursed my children. We were very frugal. I can’t tell you the number of times that a person was in front of me, dressed to the hilt, that purchased all of their food with food stamps and then drove away in their brand new car. We never used food stamps or public assistance. I can’t tell you how many times I left a store with tears in my eyes because I couldn’t get my kids something as simple as a small toy, or a new outfit. So no, we were not better off when Clinton was President.
Regarding inflation. I think any nominal increase in the cost of a gallon of milk (which we usually by on sale) and gas or bread, has been more than offset by the 100% plus increase in the value of our house over the past 5 years.
But heh, what do I know.
Ramblings of a Republican…..
I drive an SUV for several reasons. 1st I have three kids, second, I feel very safe in it and third because we like to do a lot of camping. I put about 25% the miles as the people who I work with that drive economical cars. What is worse on our roadways? One SUV that I drive about 10,000 miles a year, or 4 Volkswagon Jetta’s that drive 40,000 miles per year each? We all probably use the same amount of gas. Why not pay our transportation taxes on mileage?
We bought a new mini-van last year, to try and save money on gas. The irony, it got only 3 miles more per gallon than the SUV we just traded it in for and we couldn’t use it for camping. With the three kids, there was barely room for a cooler in the mini-van.
As for the question, am I better off now than when Clinton was president? Absolutely. Our combined income was around $30,000 per year and we still had to pay taxes out of pocket, when we barely had enough money to pay for food, and we certainly had no money for new clothes. Now with Bush as President our income is up around $100,000 and due to the child tax credits, we actually get a refund around tax time.
When Clinton was president, and our family was so broke, I often went to the grocery store with old sweats covered with paint and holes to try and gather up enough groceries for my family, we used cloth diapers and I nursed my children. We were very frugal. I can’t tell you the number of times that a person was in front of me, dressed to the hilt, that purchased all of their food with food stamps and then drove away in their brand new car. We never used food stamps or public assistance. I can’t tell you how many times I left a store with tears in my eyes because I couldn’t get my kids something as simple as a small toy, or a new outfit. So no, we were not better off when Clinton was President.
Clueless you are still clueless. I didn’t talk about economics per se, I spoke how I was doing. DOn’t you get it. Economics is a personal thing. I spoke of the Clueless one, your cousin Nancy Pelosi. I am better off.
Clueless, Now you call the NY Slimes a freeper magazine. Yep, Still Clueless After All These Years!
For the rest of the comments started on 166, please see post 82. For some unknown reason it was caught by the filter, I tried to cut and paste, but that didn’t work.
The rest of the ramblings answer questions regarding…am I better off and inflation.
Never mind, 165 has the whole thing… :}
Darnit, I tried to cut and paste my comments in smaller pieces hoping that they would be able to get through. Now that they have all come through it’s a little confusing and I apologize. Sorry about that.
Bf see my post @ 146 for list of words that does get through filter. You just need to know how to express yourself like a HA.
Mark the Redneck,
Yes I looked over the list last night while waiting for my comments to get through the filter, quite humerous!
168 – Puddy when confronted with your BS you just shovel more. It’s well known you freepers will use the Daily Worker if it serves your agenda.
“High on E” @ 164: “This would be true if there were universal standards in public education, which there arent, and if all teachers were equally competent, and all students had access to the same resources – also not the case.”
So, are you in favor of merit pay for teachers? Are you in favor of paying the good ones more and firing the lousy ones? How about wiping out seniority, tenure and the rest of the union gimmes that keep the education system stagnant?
How about insisting teachers put their energy into readin’, ‘ritin’ and ‘rithmetic instead of asking how Johnny feeeels about “2+2=5?”
How about teachers and schools accepting responsibility for child supervision instead of blaming the kids and parents? Johnny is a little boy and full of energy. He doesn’t have ADD and doesn’t need to be drugged up for the teacher’s convenience. Get over it. Janie chased Johnny on the playfield and kissed him. She is not a predator. Give her a talking-to, send a note home and let it go.
Okay Clueless, I won’t use the NY Slimes. I use Free Republic just for you.
175
“High on E”
Is that intended as a joke or an insult?
So, are you in favor of merit pay for teachers?
Yes, if they can prove through their teaching skills that they deserve it.
Are you in favor of paying the good ones more and firing the lousy ones?
Yes.
How about wiping out seniority, tenure and the rest of the union gimmes that keep the education system stagnant?
I oppose bad teaching and poor academic content. I would not advocate eliminating tenure in the hopes of preventing bad teaching, since I don’t think there’s a universal cause-and-effect that can be demonstrated. I would strongly support periodic review of tenured instructors at the primary/secondary level to discourage complacency and discipline poor classroom performance.
I’m not sure what the “union gimmes” are, so I can’t comment on that.
“How about insisting teachers put their energy into readin’, ‘ritin’ and ‘rithmetic instead of asking how Johnny feeeels about “2+2=5?”
Any teacher given the responsibility of teaching basic disciplines and fails to do so should be removed from the classroom. I would further add that I view many of these “self-esteem”-based, quasi-educational philosophies as suspect at best, and educational quackery at worst.
“How about teachers and schools accepting responsibility for child supervision instead of blaming the kids and parents?
That’s fine, insofar as the teachers can actual be effectual. Many school districts, however, suffer from children coming from problem households: mom’s an alcoholic, dad’s in jail, etc. Unfortunately, a lot of these kids are broken by the time they reach 4th or 5th grade, at which point the teacher can probably only hope to provide some damage control. Don’t expect educators to solve all of society’s problems.
Look, as a professional educator at the college level, I take these matters very seriously. I deal with these problems, and with some of these students, once they’ve been pushed out the sausage extruder that our public education system has in many ways become. I think by far the biggest problem is the hideously low rate of pay most public school teachers receive (and many public university instructors as well). Judging by its actions alone, the US government has demonstrated that it cares very little about the quality and content of the education afforded our students. I personally find this situation to be competely unacceptable, especially given the fact that the US is still the weathiest nation on Earth. But, until our national priorities change, don’t expect Johnny to be lurning to spel any better.
Doc @ 177
“…don’t expect Johnny to be lurning to spel any better.”
I’m not sure I get your joke here. That sentence is considered proper in at least a few CA school districts — Oakland, San Bernardino, etc.
Overall, I am very much in agreement with your statements. As a parent and someone involved in the school district, I see and hear a lot of things that go on. Part of the problems with school are also cultural. At least the most recent generations have been raised to believe that college is the only way to go.
What do you think of the system of Gymnasium, Realschule, Hauptschule and Gesamtschule? Johnny can make a good living as a car mechanic — especially if he likes to do it and that causes him to apply himself more. If they want to get all touchy-feely, this is actually the way to go. Let him know he isn’t any less for going to trade school instead of college.
Doc @ 117
While it is true that some teachers are underpaid, the numbers that get thrown around aren’t always accurate. For example, KING5 did a piece a couple of years ago that showed all of the extra money teachers get above their base salary for experience, extra training, coaching, etc. Also, there is SOME merit to the “divide by nine because you have summers off” argument. Yes, there are continuing ed courses and prep to do, but I also know teachers who have LOTS of free time during those months.
Oh Howard Dean, you’ve done it again.
Appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation” yesterday, the fiery former Vermont governor said, “It looks like today, and this could change, as of today it looks like women will be worse off in Iraq than they were when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq.”
Please keep Dean hard at work at Dem Party Headquaters.
Freeper Puddy
Sorry
Deaniac Cluedless: Thanks for the complement.
Just for you Clueless: Here is another one. Sorry for it beling late, but I didn’t have time to cruise the Internet for information while traveling.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/.....=110007107 – Looks like Europe sees Al Qaeda for what it is. More are now reacting, except our ACLU.
Then Turbin Dicky Durbin is at it again: http://www.nationalreview.com/.....160824.asp
Deaniac Clueless: Lt Col Shaffer was on the CNN American Morning show this morning and on the Michael Savage show last night and he stated that the 9/11 Commission purposely left out information and lied about him saying other things. He mentioned a Philip Zelikow person whom he met with in 2003, blew him off in January 2004 and didn’t want to meet with him again. Through FOI requests he learned with Congressman Weldon, that the two cylinders of information (he said 1/20 of the total information gleaned from open sources like Lexis-Nexis, etc.) was delivered in Feb 2004 and was totally ignored. So GBS and others who claim that this 9/11 Report is the definitive report, seems to me that they purposely left out information and didn’t want certain information arriving in the report. Curiouser and curiouser.
Remember, Atta did all of his setup work during Clinton’s watch, some of it with an expired visa.
GBS: Take out the editorializing by Rush and read the facts. Tell me what YOU think after reading the links too.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/ho.....guest.html
OK, I’ve made my best attempt to read Rush’s stuff. Truth be told, couldn’t manage to read through all his crap. He’s just too over the top. He seems more bent on the continued personal destruction of Clinton than anything else. Rush is also been know to outright lie about a lot of subjects so I don’t put a lot of credence in his conclusions.
The long and the short of it, is that I would like very much to know the whole story. The Bush administration played a key role in suppressing information and testimony from the original 9/11 report before the elections. The truth is sometimes hard to digest, but it is impossible to determine what actually happened unless all of the dirty laundry is aired.
That said, I have a few suspicions about the timing of this story and how much it’s lagged behind current events. I also have suspicions when someone in the intel community has their security clearances suspended over $67 of personal charges on a military cell phone. I know the military is harder on officers than just enlisted pukes like me, but not when it comes to extremely sensitive information. The reasons for the colonel getting his clearances revoked are not “just” misuse of a military cell phone. There is more to that story than meets the eye. The government spends a bunch more money on people with these types of security clearances than the average Joe, and even more so with an officer. If it were just a matter of calling his wife for the bread and eggs shopping list or getting a tee time, he’d be reprimanded, but not lose his clearance. He’d have to have done something a little more egregious than that, and it would have to bring in to consideration his trustworthiness to have access to TS info.
When I had my various security clearances, it was made very clear to me that even “negligent disclosure”, as I recall the term being used, would land you in very hot water. So this colonel getting his clearance yanked of $67 and Rove being allowed to keep his after disclosing a CIA operative creates serious doubts in my mind regarding who is pulling the strings on this story. Just leaving TS information unsecured for one second was enough to have your clearance yanked, especially the human intel variety.
In the end, I want to KNOW everything that’s happened, where all failures occurred, and correct those defects. But I’m more interested in finding out why we are not storming into Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Either Pakistan is unwilling or unable to get him and it’s our obligation to do the heavy lifting any ways.
It’s been almost 4 years since 9/11 and where is Bin Laden? Hiding in the same region he’s been hiding in since we missed him at Tora Bora because we left the mission to Afghanistan War Lords. I’d like to have as much scrutiny on the mishandling of the attack on Tora Bora as “the wall memo.”
Getting Bin Laden now should be our main focus, not how we missed Atta. Don’t you agree?
Freeper Puddy:
9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. He was reading My Pet Goat remember?
Bush couldn’t be bothered with Bin Laden. He was too busy enriching military contractors with Star Wars boondoggles.
GBS, I agree we need to find OBL. But that being said, your side and my side do need to get this out in the open. If there is 50% of the truth put forth by Lt. Col. Shaffer we definitely have a problem here. If they put Gorelick on the stand and made her explain her actions, it would soothe many problems. What do you think? I think the relevations are coming because Rep. Weldon possibly published a book?
@ 189
Puddybud,
The news today from a Pentagon briefing are not favorably illuminating Congressman Weldon’s, or Lt. Co. Schaffer’s assertions that we identified Atta by name or location in 2000.
These are becoming to appear, as I suspected in my earlier post, quite suspicious in their veracity. Gorelick memo not withstanding.
Gorelick’s memo, I have found out, only clarifies an Executive Order issued by Ronald Regan. So putting Gorelick on the stand for prosecutory reasons won’t soothe or solve much of anything. Getting to the rock bottom truth, regardless of party politics, is the key to understanding what we can glean form this and how it might shape future policy decisions. However, the bigger questions, for me, are not what mistakes we made in the past as much as what are we doing today? Knowing that there were, or might have been, some missteps in the past can have some positive results in shaping the policies now. But, Bush is on the stump today promoting his “stay the course” policy. Which, no matter how you feel about Bush, has to come under some serious scrutiny as to how his Iraq / War on Terror policies are effecting our short-, and long-term military readiness.
The Reserves and National Guard status is beginning to show signs of serious deterioration, and we can’t keep rotating soldiers for 12-18 month deployments and maintain our recruiting and reenlistment goals.
The lack of a clear, well thought out and well publicized policy on winning the War on Terror is becoming quite evident to the American public and it will have serious ramifications on all elections between now and 2008.
I have a “SUV”. Nothing special there. I don’t guzzle gas. I transport 4 people to work and average 21mpg. That gives us all an average of over 80mpg. In 1970 the average car got 13.5mpg. If a person driving a compact car can bitch about a suv’s mpg rating, why can’t a motorcycle rider bitch about a compact car’s mpg rating, and further a bicyclist bitch about a gas guzzling motorcycle? Everything isn’t quite as black and white as the so called “liberals” or those who think they know it all would have you believe. Things are better than ever before and I’m personally sick and tired of all those who want to paint this “end-times” religious based catastrophic view of the world. Research history and find out how hard people really had it in the past. And, to you crazy religious fanatics who can’t seem to wait for a “judgement day” just shoot yourself in the head, the end result is pretty much the same. Of course, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong!
On second thought, everyone who pukes doom and gloom, kill yourself! It only makes sense. I’m tired of your garbage and it comes from your need for endless attention and your love of wringing your hands and nashing your teeth. It doesn’t make me feel bad and I won’t mourn your passing, just enjoy the peace and quiet.