O/T: Got to love them Southerners

Page 2 of 2  
Larry Jaques wrote:

-yes-
5'11"/180.34cm 145lb/65.77kg -> 20.2
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Yep, 6', 182 pounds (a few up from last year, when I was a youngster of 58) = 24.7 Kerry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 04:36:01 -0800, Larry Jaques

I'm 5'11", 163 lbs, BMI".7 In high school, I was a rather thin 145 pounds and ate like a horse. I see a lot of folks struggle to lose weight--no wonder McDonalds is in the DOW.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You could probably blame television and game consoles as much as McDonalds.
Did you all know that the marginal tax rate on the top income earners for the 50 years between 1935 and 1985 was over 70% (up to 90% in war years albeit with a higher margin setpoint)[*]?
Today it is only 35%. It's no wonder the country is in deep doo-doo.
That high marginal tax rate paid for wars, the interstate highway system, the moon program and the entitlement programs.
It was criminal of RR, GHWB[!] & congress to lower the rates without any curtailing of spending.
It was double criminal for GWB & congress to lower the rates during wartime (for the first time in history).
scott
[*] http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php [!] Read my lips...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott Lurndal wrote:

You seem to have forgotten the Kennedy/Johnson tax cuts during the Viet Nam War.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

True, from 91% to (70 - 77%) during that era. Still significantly above the rates starting in 1982.
scott
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Scott Lurndal wrote:

You also miss the fact that after the Reagan tax cuts and the initial shock to the system, tax revenues to the treasury actually increased because common people were no longer penalized for achieving. Those were the people hit by those tax rates; the actual rich -- the Rockefellers, the Kennedy's, the Gores, etc all had teams of lawyers and tax loopholes to permit themselves to be shielded from those 70% and 90% rates. What was criminal was that those increased revenues were then viewed as a mechanism by those controlling congress (where all spending bills originate) to increase social spending.
--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita wrote:

Maximizing, or even increasing, revenue to the Treasury is not the goal and is ignored by those advocating tax increases. The goal is equalization of income.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

No, that's the sales pitch. It's really to keep the poor poor and the rich rich. Ever wonder why after nearly a century of progressive income tax the income gap is greater than ever?
Note how the taxes are structured. It's not people who are already rich who get socked with the high taxes, it's the people who are in between, so they never make it from working stiff to independent wealth.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's the fact that the wealthy have the means to buy the politicians...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"Big wow". They moved about 500 jobs to Chicago. Their Wa. payroll is, last I knew, a bit under _85,000_ full-time positions. They were cutting jobs agressively for a number of years, to get the payroll under 100,000.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's not all due to government. The unions have pushed the pay rate for Boeing's employees to the point of being ridiculous.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That unionization has worked so well for the automotive industries and railroads etc... How to keep your job by killing your boss.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I lived in Ohio, Los Angeles and now east Tennessee where the taxes are low, mild winters, and mountains of all kinds of hardwoods--a woodworker's dream. The culture takes awhile to appreciate.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Phisherman wrote:

You'd appreciate it more if you had a good-looking cousin of the opposite sex.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The South isn't the only place where family trees have no branches. ...and no need for the opposite sex.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Phisherman" wrote:

And having local sources of "corn" isn't a negative either.
Lew
PS: BTW, it was 77F here in L/A on Monday. Cold Snap today, only 66F.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.