Still Hating America.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Adder
That is a irony of Gore. He was an android when it mattered, but likable when it didn't.

oh.. and he was afraid people would think he was going to get head in the oval office.

when he was running his handlers made him diet, which changed his personality greatly. now he can eat all the Amazon-raised beef that Mickey D's can throw out the drive through, so he is more relaxed. Anyone know if he buys green vouchers for all the rainforest acres his fat ass has caused to be turned into grazing land?

[Diane_Keaton]

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (AP) - Democrat John Edwards is forging ahead with his second bid for the presidency despite the sobering news that his wife, Elizabeth, is battling an incurable reappearance of cancer.

I'm sure you all discussed this already but God Damn, how embarrassing to hold a press conference discussing your wife's untreatable cancer and how it will affect your campaign and you are not even a Pres or VP (and don't even have the Dem nomination). Mainstream articles said some family friends didn't even know. He could have issued a release to his campaign workers or even the dem party, but a public news conference with all the press snapping away photos? No question - the information that he would be continuing his campaign would have gotten out if he wanted it to, without the press conference. It's clear he held the junket as an opportunity to use his wife's cancer to his political advantage. Cause he wasn't doing it to get "information out" (there are lots of other ways to do that).

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
I'm sure you all discussed this already but God Damn, how embarrassing to hold a press conference discussing your wife's untreatable cancer and how it will affect your campaign and you are not even a Pres or VP (and don't even have the Dem nomination). Mainstream articles said some family friends didn't even know. He could have issued a release to his campaign workers or even the dem party, but a public news conference with all the press snapping away photos? No question - the information that he would be continuing his campaign would have gotten out if he wanted it to, without the press conference. It's clear he held the junket as an opportunity to use his wife's cancer to his political advantage. Cause he wasn't doing it to get "information out" (there are lots of other ways to do that).

does anyone know the root cause of her cancer? Can he sue someone?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
The dividend and cap gains cut ended up putting nearly a Trillion dollars of immediate liquidity back in the Capital Markets.

But sure, let's penalize that again, tie up investment, and raise the minimum wage. Good stuff.

No it didn't. It wound up leading corporations that had been slowly buying back stock on market dips to pay out their cash hoards in dividends instead, the portion of which that wasn't spent on new planes and Mercedes was reinvested in the same corporations. So, absent some luxury good purchases, a couple of thousand second homes, and maybe, just maybe, a college tuition or two, the money was recycled back into the hands of the corporations who bought in their stock after it went ex-dividend.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
He argued against the Dems raising taxes against same - yet again.

Penalizing capital gains by raising the tax rate is saying "American Way - Fuck you. And don't be too succesful"

Do you want to be wealthy - or do you want to be poor? Seriously.

If I make $100 in capital gains and I'm taxed at the same rate as salary, I still keep $65. I have an incentive to earn more.

If I earn $100 in salary and I pay $35 in tax while some rich asshole pays $15, I have an incentive to kick back, buy some lottery tickets, and watch Deal or No Deal.

Do you want to be some asshole wage slave supporting people who don't need your help or do you want equality of opportunity? You know about equality of opportunity, don't you? It's the epitome of the American Dream.

Why do you hate America?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How would you propose taxing him, then?

BTW - his income tax is at the highest possible rate, and his companies, stock, dividends, etc. are taxed as well.

You're repeated point can be summed up thusly:

You succeeded too well and made too much money. The rest of us unsuccessful slobs resent it (while we nap), and thus you must pay us, dammit.

BTW, you're talking out your ass. His salary, a minor portion of his annual income, is taxed at the highest margnial rate. His dividends and capital gains are taxed at 15%. I think they should be taxed at the same rate as any other form of income. Income is income. It should be taxed as such.

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
My favorite is of course the govt workers' pensions and Maybach health plans. You do know some of them get full pensions and those comprehensive plans on your and my dime after a mere 25-30 years of work. Nice. I know some folks enjoying a damn solid early retirement. They tell me they deserve those sweet bennies because working among Fed Govt employees for so long qualifies them for that and then some... I don't know if they're right, but it looks like a pretty good gig on the balance whether you're working with the challenged or Einsteins.

Translation: I should have been a cop instead of a lawyer.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ironweed
Translation: I should have been a cop instead of a lawyer.

the cab routing guys at the big NYC hotels- is there retirement for that, cuz I'm about right there. can they order up any drink they want like at coltrane's firm?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I didn't question whether the Senate has authority to issue a subpoena for an investigation. That's what that case is about. It happens to have been directed to a former attorney general. So it doesn't really address your current point, which is at root a separation of powers issue.

If you want my better response: The House objected strenuously to the FBI's searching Livingston's office, and they had extended negotiations over how to handle such situations in the future. Given that virtually everyone else in the House could not object to a search of a person whose refrigerator held lobbyist cash, they didn't push the issue. Can't imagine the WH would be simliarly constrained.

Now you've shifted away from suggesting that the Sargeant at Arms properly plays that role to pointing out that if the White House resisted, you'd have a dispute between two branches of government, and resolution might well depend on the political strength and will of the respective branches. In the Jefferson thing (Livingston?), you had a supine Congress and an ascendant Executive. Reverse the situation, and it's easy to imagine the scenario. If Congress decided to stop paying Secret Service and White House salaries until they cooperated, I bet they'd cooperate.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Inhofe killed him.

That trick of trying of telling Gore he had to answer loaded questions about climate science with only a "yes" or "no"? Gore never saw that coming, I tell you what.

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
the cab routing guys at the big NYC hotels- is there retirement for that, cuz I'm about right there. can they order up any drink they want like at coltrane's firm?

Most of them just use the job as a stepping stone. A lot of them arrive as penniless immigrants, but the sharper ones learn the language, get the dispatching job, get a college degree and then become CEO of a major corporation or President of the United States. Or at least they would if the liberals weren't holding them back with all their social engineering.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
No. You don't get it.

At the outset, I asked Ty to show me an example of the govt taking one dollar from a poor person - an actual dollar that poor person had - and giving it to a rich person. He couldn't.

Adder already mentioned Social Security -- you can throw Medicare in there, too. If I wanted to get my ass kicked, I'd ask Ivan the dishwasher at the Dew Drop Inn how he feels about that FICA guy taking some of his money each week to subsidize my widowed-trophy-wife-to-a-Packard-executive aunt's retirement in Palm Springs (based upon how green her grass is, I suspect that the Social Security check goes to pay to the water bill) and her Lipitor/Ambien/Captopril cocktail, now that Medicare pays for prescriptions. Seems that that's about as clear an example of one actual dollar going from one class to another as anything you think John Edwards is proposing.

Or sugar subsidies. There's a double whammy on that one -- we taxpayers give money to US Sugar, and also get to pay higher prices for food as a result. Win win for the poor, no? And remember when it came out that the Department of Agriculture paid subsidies to McDonalds for advertising overseas? Does that qualify in Sebbyland?

And if you want to look at state and local governments, there are many examples of this. An increase in the sales tax to build a new sports arena to be managed by the owners of the team, not the county who paid for it. Ivan loses an extra penny per dollar he spends, and the team gets a great new facility that they get to manage.

Or "general aviation" airports that have been built by local governments, sometimes with federal funding. Lots of Ivans use those places to park their Gulfstreams, right? Yet his taxes pay for it. Sure, some middle class people park their Cessnas there, but that's a stretch.

I conclude with two points -- (1) some of these transfers may be objectively good ideas, and (2) you will dance away from this, claiming that if the jackbooted thugs (thanks, Gatti) don't give my Aunt Maureen the same $5 bill that they took from Ivan, it doesn't count.

I should know better by now than to think that facts can get in the way of a good Sebby rant, but sometimes I can't help myself.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Adder already mentioned Social Security -- you can throw Medicare in there, too. If I wanted to get my ass kicked, I'd ask Ivan the dishwasher at the Dew Drop Inn how he feels about that FICA guy taking some of his money each week to subsidize my widowed-trophy-wife-to-a-Packard-executive aunt's retirement in Palm Springs (based upon how green her grass is, I suspect that the Social Security check goes to pay to the water bill) and her Lipitor/Ambien/Captopril cocktail, now that Medicare pays for prescriptions. Seems that that's about as clear an example of one actual dollar going from one class to another as anything you think John Edwards is proposing.

Or sugar subsidies. There's a double whammy on that one -- we taxpayers give money to US Sugar, and also get to pay higher prices for food as a result. Win win for the poor, no? And remember when it came out that the Department of Agriculture paid subsidies to McDonalds for advertising overseas? Does that qualify in Sebbyland?

And if you want to look at state and local governments, there are many examples of this. An increase in the sales tax to build a new sports arena to be managed by the owners of the team, not the county who paid for it. Ivan loses an extra penny per dollar he spends, and the team gets a great new facility that they get to manage.

Or "general aviation" airports that have been built by local governments, sometimes with federal funding. Lots of Ivans use those places to park their Gulfstreams, right? Yet his taxes pay for it. Sure, some middle class people park their Cessnas there, but that's a stretch.

I conclude with two points -- (1) some of these transfers may be objectively good ideas, and (2) you will dance away from this, claiming that if the jackbooted thugs (thanks, Gatti) don't give my Aunt Maureen the same $5 bill that they took from Ivan, it doesn't count.

I should know better by now than to think that facts can get in the way of a good Sebby rant, but sometimes I can't help myself.

Social security- I've maxed out every year for a very long time. Are you saying I'll ever get that back- or even half of it back- because i don't think i will. Are you saying I'll get 100K in SS? how is SS me taking money from poor people? They pay less than I do and get back about what I'll get back, won't they?

[Adder]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Adder already mentioned Social Security -- you can throw Medicare in there, too. If I wanted to get my ass kicked, I'd ask Ivan the dishwasher at the Dew Drop Inn how he feels about that FICA guy taking some of his money each week to subsidize my widowed-trophy-wife-to-a-Packard-executive aunt's retirement in Palm Springs (based upon how green her grass is, I suspect that the Social Security check goes to pay to the water bill) and her Lipitor/Ambien/Captopril cocktail, now that Medicare pays for prescriptions. Seems that that's about as clear an example of one actual dollar going from one class to another as anything you think John Edwards is proposing.

Or sugar subsidies. There's a double whammy on that one -- we taxpayers give money to US Sugar, and also get to pay higher prices for food as a result. Win win for the poor, no? And remember when it came out that the Department of Agriculture paid subsidies to McDonalds for advertising overseas? Does that qualify in Sebbyland?

And if you want to look at state and local governments, there are many examples of this. An increase in the sales tax to build a new sports arena to be managed by the owners of the team, not the county who paid for it. Ivan loses an extra penny per dollar he spends, and the team gets a great new facility that they get to manage.

Or "general aviation" airports that have been built by local governments, sometimes with federal funding. Lots of Ivans use those places to park their Gulfstreams, right? Yet his taxes pay for it. Sure, some middle class people park their Cessnas there, but that's a stretch.

I conclude with two points -- (1) some of these transfers may be objectively good ideas, and (2) you will dance away from this, claiming that if the jackbooted thugs (thanks, Gatti) don't give my Aunt Maureen the same $5 bill that they took from Ivan, it doesn't count.

I should know better by now than to think that facts can get in the way of a good Sebby rant, but sometimes I can't help myself.

Congrats. Hank thinks you are sufficiently dense to require weeding out.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Social security- I've maxed out every year for a very long time. Are you saying I'll ever get that back- or even half of it back- because i don't think i will. Are you saying I'll get 100K in SS? how is SS me taking money from poor people? They pay less than I do and get back about what I'll get back, won't they?

Why are they getting back in the future and you aren't?

But more importantly, this was not the question. Regardless of what either of you may get back in the long run, the fact remains that today, social security takes money from poor and middle class working people and gives it to (among others) rich retirees. The ponzi scheme is set up that way.