On Fri, 16 May 2008 01:16:24 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
wrote:
[. . .]
>
>Of course, billions should be given to JPMorgan Chase to "bail out" Bear
>Stearns. I'm all for people being responsible for their actions; but
>this was a gigantic ripoff of the public as well as the financial
>industry. Let the people who perpetrated the hoax take it up the ***
>this time.
Oversimplification made to satisfy a personal political view.
On Thu, 15 May 2008 11:22:34 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:53:40 +0000, Jim Higgins
><invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:51:20 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>So you think McBush would be an improvement?
>>>Take a look...
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbBEQN9Hb8Y
>>
>>
>>So you think someone backed by MoveOn.org would be an improvement?
>
>Absolutely.
I guess you missed the announcement by Robert Heilbronner, "dean" of
American socialists at the time, when he announced in the 80s that the
battle between socialism and capitalism had been waged and socialism
had lost. That was all but proven by the second Jamestown colony, but
some still don't get it.
>>And BTW, the folks caught in the housing "crisis" did it to
>>themselves. Second jobs or foreclosuere. The American Taxpayer is
>>not the final insurer against stupidity.
>
>I don't disagree with you. But we also shouldn't be bailing out Wall
>Street or giving the friggin' oil companies tax incentives.
No argument with eliminating all bailouts as well as eliminating
certain tax incentives, but neither of those are the exclusive
provenance of Republicans. Democrats have controlled both houses for
some time and did so for a long time in the past and haven't moved to
do any of the things so many think we now need a change of parties in
the White House to accomplish. All a party change in the White House
will get you for sure is higher taxes and a deeper faster recession.
The Laffer Curve is far more provable reality than Global Warming and
we are on the side of the curve where higher taxes mean recession and
less revenue. More taxes aren't about financing new programs; they're
about more control over the taxpayers.
On Fri, 16 May 2008 01:16:24 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
wrote:
>Jim Higgins wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:51:20 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> So you think someone backed by MoveOn.org would be an improvement?
>
>Absolutely, after 8 long years of the Bushies, I think someone from
>Criminals R Us would be an improvement.
>
>> And BTW, the folks caught in the housing "crisis" did it to
>> themselves. Second jobs or foreclosuere. The American Taxpayer is
>> not the final insurer against stupidity.
>
>Of course, billions should be given to JPMorgan Chase to "bail out" Bear
>Stearns. I'm all for people being responsible for their actions; but
>this was a gigantic ripoff of the public as well as the financial
>industry. Let the people who perpetrated the hoax take it up the ***
>this time.
Of course. This time and every time hereafter. That's common sense
that transcends party lines. Do that once or twice and more will pay
a lot more attention to what they invest in. We offer a lower capital
gains tax to spur investment because investment is risky. To then
bail out losing investments makes the US taxpayer the insurer of last
resort. We should no more do that than we should be bailing out New
Orleans. If it weren't for waiting for prospective bailouts to
materialize, New Orleans would be much ****her along towards
rebuilding. The US taxpayer should not have to subsidize questionable
personal choices. I call choosing to live below sea level in an area
prone to flooding a poor personal choice.
Personal responsibility is the cure for a lot of what ails us, but no
MoveOn.Org candidate requires anything of the individual except for
the rich to pay taxes and the poor to take handouts. It's not a
sustainable platform.
I work too ****ed hard already to solve my own problems and to avoid others,
especially medical conditions. But let's face facts.
Our medical care system has been highjacked by (variously) big pharma, so-called
non-profit hospitals, for-profit hospitals, independent medical labs, medical
equipment manufacturers, and insurance companies, with a lot of help by a
hands-off government that either lets them all do as they please or legislates
something beyond stupid like NOT allowing negotiation of prices of
pharmaceuticals bought by the government. And our fine members of Congress and
the executive branch, all bought and paid for, make sure they get the very best
of health care for themselves and their families funded by our tax dollars. All
of them conspire to screw you and me out of affordable and competent health
care.
Doesn't this picture **** you off at least a little bit? Even with my
hyperbole, one must admit that it is pretty accurate.
And THAT is a problem which I alone cannot solve, except by doing my best to
remain in good health and strongly encouraging my family members to do the same.
The Massachusetts DMV has become pretty efficient. I have never spent more than
15 minutes there waiting for a license renewal or car registration. And the
process itself takes maybe 5 minutes for routine matters. I can easily tolerate
that... Ben Myers
On Thu, 08 May 2008 20:51:50 -0500, Bill Gross <bgross@_REMOVE_airmail.net>
wrote:
>I've stood in line at DMV. The picture of government run medical care
>is not a warm fuzzy one. Shesh, let Uncle Sam pay for it. That will
>solve all my problems. How about taking care of your own problems in
>stead of asking the government to do it for you.
>
>On Thu, 08 May 2008 08:01:35 -0400, Ben Myers
><ben_myers_spam_me_not@charter.net> wrote:
>
>>Please! Let's not confuse what the ruling, bought-and-paid-for politicians want
>>and what most of the people want. Our supposedly free market medical system has
>>the highest cost per citizen in the world with less than optimal results and
>>millions uncovered by medical insurance. But the medical industry (doctors,
>>"non-profit" hospitals with millionaire administrators, big pharma, medical
>>equipment and supply manufacturers, insurers) do their best to obscure the real
>>facts, raking in big profits, and the public at large passively accepts the
>>status quo. Some free market! ... Ben Myers
>>
>>On Thu, 8 May 2008 03:49:09 -0400, "Tom Lake" <tlake@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Colin Wilson" <REMOVEEVERYTHINGBUTnewsgroup@phoenixbbsZEROSPAM.c o.uk> wrote
>>>in message news:MPG.228c07943eda5980989751@news.motzarella.or g...
>>>>
>>>> Think of all the health care those billions could have provided for
>>>> the sick and needy.
>>>
>>>Even if we hadn't gotten into this war, the money wouldn't have
>>>gone to the sick and needy anyway. Most Americans are against
>>>socialized medicine at the moment. As the country ages (as it is
>>>doing) it may be a different story.
>>>
>>>Tom Lake
Bill Gross wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 01:16:24 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
> wrote:
>
> [. . .]
>> Of course, billions should be given to JPMorgan Chase to "bail out" Bear
>> Stearns. I'm all for people being responsible for their actions; but
>> this was a gigantic ripoff of the public as well as the financial
>> industry. Let the people who perpetrated the hoax take it up the ***
>> this time.
>
> Oversimplification made to satisfy a personal political view.
Jim Higgins wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 01:16:24 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Jim Higgins wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:51:20 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So you think someone backed by MoveOn.org would be an improvement?
>> Absolutely, after 8 long years of the Bushies, I think someone from
>> Criminals R Us would be an improvement.
>>
>>> And BTW, the folks caught in the housing "crisis" did it to
>>> themselves. Second jobs or foreclosuere. The American Taxpayer is
>>> not the final insurer against stupidity.
>> Of course, billions should be given to JPMorgan Chase to "bail out" Bear
>> Stearns. I'm all for people being responsible for their actions; but
>> this was a gigantic ripoff of the public as well as the financial
>> industry. Let the people who perpetrated the hoax take it up the ***
>> this time.
>
> Of course. This time and every time hereafter. That's common sense
> that transcends party lines. Do that once or twice and more will pay
> a lot more attention to what they invest in. We offer a lower capital
> gains tax to spur investment because investment is risky. To then
> bail out losing investments makes the US taxpayer the insurer of last
> resort. We should no more do that than we should be bailing out New
> Orleans. If it weren't for waiting for prospective bailouts to
> materialize, New Orleans would be much ****her along towards
> rebuilding. The US taxpayer should not have to subsidize questionable
> personal choices. I call choosing to live below sea level in an area
> prone to flooding a poor personal choice.
>
> Personal responsibility is the cure for a lot of what ails us, but no
> MoveOn.Org candidate requires anything of the individual except for
> the rich to pay taxes and the poor to take handouts. It's not a
> sustainable platform.
More rightwing claptrap, much like their belief that people with good
health care coverage abuse the system by running to the doc for every
**** or hangnail. Also like their cant about how government is always
inefficient, the private sector is always better and free markets have
some innate magic that makes them work. All givens to the
rightwingers/neocons/whatever-you-want-to-call-them, yet not borne out
in real life at all.
Of course the rich should pay more in taxes, the US system was
progressive from its inception.
Jim Higgins wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 11:22:34 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:53:40 +0000, Jim Higgins
>> <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:51:20 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> So you think McBush would be an improvement?
>>>> Take a look...
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbBEQN9Hb8Y
>>>
>>> So you think someone backed by MoveOn.org would be an improvement?
>> Absolutely.
>
>
> I guess you missed the announcement by Robert Heilbronner, "dean" of
> American socialists at the time,
On Mon, 19 May 2008 04:15:53 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
wrote:
>Jim Higgins wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 01:16:24 -0400, Tony Harding <ToHard@nowhere.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Higgins wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 10:51:20 -0500, Mark E. Bye <fxdyna@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So you think someone backed by MoveOn.org would be an improvement?
>>> Absolutely, after 8 long years of the Bushies, I think someone from
>>> Criminals R Us would be an improvement.
>>>
>>>> And BTW, the folks caught in the housing "crisis" did it to
>>>> themselves. Second jobs or foreclosuere. The American Taxpayer is
>>>> not the final insurer against stupidity.
>>> Of course, billions should be given to JPMorgan Chase to "bail out" Bear
>>> Stearns. I'm all for people being responsible for their actions; but
>>> this was a gigantic ripoff of the public as well as the financial
>>> industry. Let the people who perpetrated the hoax take it up the ***
>>> this time.
>>
>> Of course. This time and every time hereafter. That's common sense
>> that transcends party lines. Do that once or twice and more will pay
>> a lot more attention to what they invest in. We offer a lower capital
>> gains tax to spur investment because investment is risky. To then
>> bail out losing investments makes the US taxpayer the insurer of last
>> resort. We should no more do that than we should be bailing out New
>> Orleans. If it weren't for waiting for prospective bailouts to
>> materialize, New Orleans would be much ****her along towards
>> rebuilding. The US taxpayer should not have to subsidize questionable
>> personal choices. I call choosing to live below sea level in an area
>> prone to flooding a poor personal choice.
>>
>> Personal responsibility is the cure for a lot of what ails us, but no
>> MoveOn.Org candidate requires anything of the individual except for
>> the rich to pay taxes and the poor to take handouts. It's not a
>> sustainable platform.
>
>More rightwing claptrap, much like their belief that people with good
>health care coverage abuse the system by running to the doc for every
>**** or hangnail.
If the health care coverage is absolutely free that's exactly what
happens. That's why private insurance plans have a co-pay.
> Also like their cant about how government is always
>inefficient, the private sector is always better and free markets have
>some innate magic that makes them work. All givens to the
>rightwingers/neocons/whatever-you-want-to-call-them, yet not borne out
>in real life at all.
Depends on your definition of "work." If you mean "to each according
to his need" then the private sector approach definitely doesn't work.
>Of course the rich should pay more in taxes, the US system was
>progressive from its inception.
The "rich" **DO** pay more in taxes. Far more. Something like 50%
of all taxes collected come from those in the top 2% income range.
Expand that to the top 5% and you've got over 85% of taxes covered.
Past a certain level of taxation "progressive" becomes stifling. You
can tax the living hell out of the rich if you want to, but just
remember that it isn't the poor that are providing jobs and if you
suck up all the investment capital (otherwise known as profits) then
you kill job creation.
Re: OT: XP sp3 
Linear Mode
