Waiting for Fitzgerald - Page 31

Captain · 09-20-2005, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
I had no idea your last name was "Obvious"

Thank you for the inspiration.

I only stated the obvious because it seemed to have been overlooked.

ltl/fb · 09-20-2005, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
Thank you for the inspiration.

I only stated the obvious because it seemed to have been overlooked.

You should use Captain 401(k) at some point:

www.psca.org/kdaymain.html

Captain · 09-20-2005, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
The key is to put the money into the poor persons hand and get them to invest it. That is the best utilization of the money for everyone involved. If my trust fund cousin spends it on Crystal, not so much help.

I think this is the key to much of the economic history of the country and our phenomenal growth. We have relatively well off working people, and often have had a lot of decentralized capital. Thanks to the frontier, the distribution of land in the US in the 19th century was amazingly democratic compared to the rest of the world. To be able to do something like that today!

Hank Chinaski · 09-20-2005, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
I think this is the key to much of the economic history of the country and our phenomenal growth. We have relatively well off working people, and often have had a lot of decentralized capital. Thanks to the frontier, the distribution of land in the US in the 19th century was amazingly democratic compared to the rest of the world. To be able to do something like that today!

If you could create a country how would you set up its tax structure?

Captain · 09-20-2005, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
You should use Captain 401(k) at some point:

www.psca.org/kdaymain.html

I was thinking of Captain Jack Sparrow when I chose the name, but couldn't remember the sparrow part and didn't think Captain Jack had the right connotation. I didn't realize there would be so many Captains.

ltl/fb · 09-20-2005, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
I was thinking of Captain Jack Sparrow when I chose the name, but couldn't remember the sparrow part and didn't think Captain Jack had the right connotation. I didn't realize there would be so many Captains.

Captain Morgan.

Tyrone Slothrop · 09-20-2005, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If really rich people, like Clinton (and Bill Gates and his dad, and Buffett, and Soros and Corzine et al) feel so opposed to the concept of tax cuts to the really really rich, can't they just give the money to the government as a non-deductible patriotic donation? Why is this so problematic. Pay what you think is equitable and SFTU! Commies!

This makes about as much sense as saying that if a corporation thinks that the government's tax laws amount to double taxation, it should just pay what it thinks is equitable instead.

Spanky · 09-20-2005, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
I think this is the key to much of the economic history of the country and our phenomenal growth. We have relatively well off working people, and often have had a lot of decentralized capital. Thanks to the frontier, the distribution of land in the US in the 19th century was amazingly democratic compared to the rest of the world. To be able to do something like that today!

I agree with but I also think it is that so many immigrants make it big here (like Carnegie) that our economy attracts the best entrepenerus from around the planet. Other countries drive them out and we suck them in.

What I don't get is the obsession in my party of some of the people to protect wealthy tax payers. It is bizarre. And it is not the wealthy country club Republicans that are obsessed with tax cuts for the rich, it is more of the middle class Republicans. It is like it is some moral crusade or something. The point behind low taxes is to stimulate the economy so the rising tide lifts all boats. It is not to stop the government from "unfairly taxing" the rich.

It is like free trade an capitalism. We don't have them to help a few get rich, it is because free trade and capitalism, when instituted properly, benefits every strata of society.

Tax policy should be engineered so that growth can be optimized. If you can get more tax money out of the rich while you are doing that, that is the best of all worlds. Taxes are a necessary evil. It sucks that we have to tax rich people. But it sucks even more that we have to tax poor people.

The point is to increase growth while taxing the poor people as little as possible.

ltl/fb · 09-20-2005, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I agree with but I also think it is that so many immigrants make it big here (like Carnegie) that our economy attracts the best entrepenerus from around the planet. Other countries drive them out and we suck them in.

What I don't get is the obsession in my party of some of the people to protect wealthy tax payers. It is bizarre. And it is not the wealthy country club Republicans that are obsessed with tax cuts for the rich, it is more of the middle class Republicans. It is like it is some moral crusade or something. The point behind low taxes is to stimulate the economy so the rising tide lifts all boats. It is not to stop the government from "unfairly taxing" the rich.

It is like free trade an capitalism. We don't have them to help a few get rich, it is because free trade and capitalism, when instituted properly, benefits every strata of society.

Tax policy should be engineered so that growth can be optimized. If you can get more tax money out of the rich while you are doing that, that is the best of all worlds. Taxes are a necessary evil. It sucks that we have to tax rich people. But it sucks even more that we have to tax poor people.

The point is to increase growth while taxing the poor people as little as possible.

Your repetitiveness makes me think you maybe have aspirations of being a Bush speechwriter?

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
The House yesterday passed an anodyne resolution commemorating the fourth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. It extended sympathy to the victims and survivors; honored the military, first responders, and others who helped; thanked foreign leaders for their support; declared that America is not waging war "on any people or any faith"; reaffirmed a commitment to the global war on terrorism; and vowed "never [to] forget the sacrifices made" on 9/11 or to "bow to terrorist demands." No one could disagree with that, right? Not quite. The House vote for the resolution was 402-6; here are the six far-left Democrats who voted "no":

John Conyers (Mich.) Barbara Lee (Calif.) Jim McDermott (Wash.) Cynthia McKinney (Ga.) Pete Stark (Calif.) Lynn Woolsey (Calif.)

McDermott is the lowest level of scumbag treasonous piece of cat-shite. In a just world a Radical Islamic would fly a plane into him, although I imagine when the dems hand over the keys to the Ayotallahs when they get a chance that a guy like McDermott would be one of the first that they behead. After Hillary.

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
One nice thing is a lot of foreign countries are helping us out. Like today, France sent a donation. They sent a truckload of white flags for people to wave when they're waiting to be rescued.

LOl.

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If you could create a country how would you set up its tax structure?

Voluntary.

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This makes about as much sense as saying that if a corporation thinks that the government's tax laws amount to double taxation, it should just pay what it thinks is equitable instead.

2.

Penske_Account · 09-20-2005, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Your repetitiveness makes me think you maybe have aspirations of being a Bush speechwriter?

Your stupidity makes me think you are Biden's alter ego.

Hank Chinaski · 09-20-2005, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I agree with but I also think it is that so many immigrants make it big here (like Carnegie) that our economy attracts the best entrepenerus from around the planet. Other countries drive them out and we suck them in.

What I don't get is the obsession in my party of some of the people to protect wealthy tax payers. It is bizarre. And it is not the wealthy country club Republicans that are obsessed with tax cuts for the rich, it is more of the middle class Republicans. It is like it is some moral crusade or something. The point behind low taxes is to stimulate the economy so the rising tide lifts all boats. It is not to stop the government from "unfairly taxing" the rich.

It is like free trade an capitalism. We don't have them to help a few get rich, it is because free trade and capitalism, when instituted properly, benefits every strata of society.

Tax policy should be engineered so that growth can be optimized. If you can get more tax money out of the rich while you are doing that, that is the best of all worlds. Taxes are a necessary evil. It sucks that we have to tax rich people. But it sucks even more that we have to tax poor people.

The point is to increase growth while taxing the poor people as little as possible.

this would point to you trying to get your friend to open his vineyard to the public, or at least letting some of us in.