But he said he would stop responding to his posts!!! This definitely
adds a lot of weight to the seriousness of this argument!
We need to take these emphasized statements seriously. If somebody
states something incorrectly, here, woodworkers need to unite and don
their white capes with face hoods for fear of just being viewed as a
bunch of whittling hacks with no real life skills! These lifestyle
threatening off-the-cuff comments cannot be tolerated and shouldn't be
Anybody have plans for a wooden cross?
"Swingman" wrote in message
I'm going to quit responding to your posts. Time and time again I and
others have corrected your errors of fact and you never change. I have
to assume that you deliberately ignore the facts to generate
The trouble is already projected by many of the participants here. I
just enjoy reflecting the same garbage.
You need a new nickname as that one has a bad reputation, big time, on
Usenet. Your babysitting fits the description of the same kook.
"Bill" wrote in message
You sure spend a lot of time and effort at trying to be a
"trouble-maker". Either that or I don't have as good of a sense of
humor (which is plausable).
Then why are you performing this function?
We got Mikey putting in "Bullshit" every post and we got Bill trying to
scold us into good behaviour.
Sounds like both sharing a keyboard with akula.
"Bill" wrote in message
I would say that the REAL inequity is that some of those 49% who pay
no taxes are richer than you or me. As for the poor paying no taxes,
certainly there is some abuse in the system at all income levels, but
personally I have no problem, for instance, with a widowed single
mother making minimum wage at Burger King not paying any income taxes.
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:21:36 +0000 (UTC), firstname.lastname@example.orgNoOnSePsAtMar.org
(Larry W) wrote:
Define "richer". If you mean money in the bank, well, we don't tax wealth
(shh, don't tell BHO). We also don't tax income on certain municipal bonds,
because holding them is deemed to be a good thing. If you want to tax them,
fine, but understand that many more municipalities will go under as a result.
These things have consequences.
I do. To be a full member of society, *everyone* should have skin in the
Perhaps another program to supplement her income would be in order.
But giving people a pass on paying (even a slight amount) in taxes is
counter-productive. She could probably afford a dollar per week. That dollar
would give her a stake in federal expenditures and, hopefully, she would
help pester the congress-critters to reduce spending.
There is a common notion, with some justification, that if a magic jellybean
could somehow redistribute all the wealth in the nation equally, within a
short time, the original distribution would again obtain.
Herman Cain said just this week, "If you're not rich, blame yourself!"
Having had help gettting were I am, I am sure that such a statement is a
bad joke for many who didn't have the same type of help. Cain is a flash
in the pan, a true American politician. Next he'll write a book how he
almost won the presidency. He has nice slogans and appeals to the simple
minds that think as simplistic as he does. Just wait until more real
economists talk more about his 9-9-9 plan that'll suck the life out of
Sets see here Han do you want to share your wealth with me? Probably
not. Corporations which are made up of people and create jobs for
people should not be taxed at all. We don't want to bite the hand that
I am paying my fair share of taxes, as far as I can tell. I support in
various ways those around me. I have also offered (maybe in words that
were too obscure) my Akeda dovetail jig for any reasonable price, since
I didn't like it.
Corporations are structured in different ways. Some loose money, some
make a profit. Seems difficult to me to structure them so as to always
equitably remunerate ALL who contribute to the profit (if any). Look at
the car manufacturers. Because of the excessively adversary positions
between workers, management and investors everyone has lost lately. But
how do you make things really equitable??
You make things equitable by looking at the world through the
corporate MBA's greedy glasses. Like that shit that GM is pulling
these last couple of years. They compete by offering lower prices on
new cars, like Malibu, then completely rape you when it is time for a
brake job... and after market parts voids all warranties of course. My
close friend manages fleets of cars for a large leasing company
(77,000 cars at last count) and tracks all maintenance costs. GM
products through the roof. Not in terms of break-downs, but parts
costs. And get this: A Canadian built GM car, when bought in the
States, then brought back to Canada, will have its warranty voided.
Pass me the Vaseline PLEASE.
Unless Canada is different GM gains very little by you having your brake
jobs done at the dealership. IIRC the "cost" of parts for a brake job
was around $40 back in the 90's. None of the remaining profit on those
parts or labor went back to the GM.
Not sure how fleets are handled as they get pretty good purchasing perks
but the standard owners manuals DO NOT require GM parts for maintenance
items as long as they meet minimum requirements.
I cannot believe that buying a GM car in the US and taking it back to
Canada voids the warranty. I could believe that if you want the
warranty honored you have to take it back to the US. Think of all the
tourists that would loose their warranties for visiting Canada.
AND if you think this is exclusive to GM you might want to look at all
the manufacturers and your auto insurance policy concerning traveling to
foreign countries. My insurance policy does not cover my traveling into
Mexico 250 miles away.
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.