Scotty's mistake
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...


I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Only if you want to become less competitive in the world marketplace.

Huh? This makes no sense.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment and increasing the wealth
of the already obscenely wealthy.

There's plenty left of the environment. China is the world's largest
polluter.

Again, this makes no sense. Just because another country has a bad record
does not mean we can just igore the situation.

Many valuable and effective programs have been cut, all in the name of the
war in Iraq.

A good number of the government programs are unconstitutional, perhaps
even the war in Iraq.

Who says? You?

Of course, that idiot and his buddies in the White House don't have a
clue.

I think they have a clue and are quite smart. They are doing a great job
of looking out for their best interests.

Not with poll number of 34%. Even their right wingnut buddies in Congress
are running for cover.

Scotty's mistake
 

In article .com, Joe
wrote:

On China........... today Jones introduces bill to raise tariff on
Chinese-made cars

(Sun Journal (New Bern, NC)(KRT) Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) Mar.
3--The Chinese government slapped a 28 percent tariff on American-made
cars, but the U.S tariff on Chinese-made cars is only 2.5 percent.

Yep, in that case, they're asking for it.

Mind you I seem to recall something similar WRT American cars sold into
Japan. The sales were abysmally low because the quality, compared to
the domestic product, was so inferior. But that's a different issue.

PDW

Scotty's mistake
 

In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment

How? why?

and increasing the wealth of
the already obscenely wealthy.

Riiiight. I hear this all the time from the local left wing whackos
too. They'd rather have high theoretical tax rates on the 1% of rich
people, all of whom employ accountants to get out of paying it, than
give up their politics of envy and stop attempting futile confiscatory
tax rates. All that ends up happening is the salaried middle class gets
hit with the high tax rates, not the rich - unless you define 'rich' as
anyone earning more than you do.

Many valuable and effective programs have
been cut, all in the name of the war in Iraq. It would be far smarter to
figure out a better way to deal with that problem.

Yep. However California is a wonderful example of how not to go about
it, from where I sit. Energy in particular, you guys have some of the
most spectacular screwups around. You want your cake - abundant energy
- but you want someone else to pick up the environmental cost. There's
a word for that, starts with h........

Of course, that idiot and
his buddies in the White House don't have a clue. Bush should be impeached
for his fiscal irresponsibility alone.

Always easy to blame someone else. Even when true, as in this case, it
doesn't actually address the problems, Jon. Might make you feel better,
but it doesn't address the problems. Repeat as needed.

Now, do you want to feel better because you have someone to blame, or
do you want to attempt to deal with the issues?

PDW

Scotty's mistake
 

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment

How? why?

For example, fewer dollars for environmental cleanup, prevention, etc.

and increasing the wealth of
the already obscenely wealthy.

Riiiight. I hear this all the time from the local left wing whackos
too. They'd rather have high theoretical tax rates on the 1% of rich
people, all of whom employ accountants to get out of paying it, than
give up their politics of envy and stop attempting futile confiscatory
tax rates. All that ends up happening is the salaried middle class gets
hit with the high tax rates, not the rich - unless you define 'rich' as
anyone earning more than you do.

Huh? Are you saying that the middle and lower classes should be taxed at a
higher rate then the richies?

You need to stop ranting against liberals and start thinking.

Many valuable and effective programs have
been cut, all in the name of the war in Iraq. It would be far smarter to
figure out a better way to deal with that problem.

Yep. However California is a wonderful example of how not to go about
it, from where I sit. Energy in particular, you guys have some of the
most spectacular screwups around. You want your cake - abundant energy
- but you want someone else to pick up the environmental cost. There's
a word for that, starts with h........

Never claimed Cal was. What's your point? I have a very nice solar panel
system that insulates us from huge electic costs now and in the future.

Of course, that idiot and
his buddies in the White House don't have a clue. Bush should be
impeached
for his fiscal irresponsibility alone.

Always easy to blame someone else. Even when true, as in this case, it
doesn't actually address the problems, Jon. Might make you feel better,
but it doesn't address the problems. Repeat as needed.

Bushco is totally to blame for the current fiscal nightmare. Getting rid of
him and his bunk buddies would be a good first step. In fact, it's one of
the first essential steps.

Now, do you want to feel better because you have someone to blame, or
do you want to attempt to deal with the issues?

See previous. Impeach Bush, get us back on fiscally responsible behavior.

Scotty's mistake
 

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Porter Gable, Craftsman, Mac, are all good tools.

If you ever break or find a broken Craftsman hand tool take it to any
Sears store for a free new re-placement!

Remove the word "new" between the words "free" and "replacement" and you've
got it right. Most of the tools given as replacements are reconditioned,
seldom new.

Max

Scotty's mistake
 

In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment

How? why?

For example, fewer dollars for environmental cleanup, prevention, etc.

and increasing the wealth of
the already obscenely wealthy.

Riiiight. I hear this all the time from the local left wing whackos
too. They'd rather have high theoretical tax rates on the 1% of rich
people, all of whom employ accountants to get out of paying it, than
give up their politics of envy and stop attempting futile confiscatory
tax rates. All that ends up happening is the salaried middle class gets
hit with the high tax rates, not the rich - unless you define 'rich' as
anyone earning more than you do.

Huh? Are you saying that the middle and lower classes should be taxed at a
higher rate then the richies?

You need to stop ranting against liberals and start thinking.

I'm saying that the middle & lower classes *are* taxed at a higher rate
than the richies. The tax scales might not show it, but the rich employ
accountants to reduce their taxable income in ways that the salaried
middle class simply can't manage.

That's reality. You need to look at the real world, not theory.

PDW

Scotty's mistake
 

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...


I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Only if you want to become less competitive in the world marketplace.

Huh? This makes no sense.

If taxes and regulation are reduced, the US becomes more competitive in the
world marketplace for labor and products.



Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment and increasing the wealth
of the already obscenely wealthy.

There's plenty left of the environment. China is the world's largest
polluter.

Again, this makes no sense. Just because another country has a bad record
does not mean we can just igore the situation.


Ever read the Kyoto Treaty? China is exempt, yet pollutes the most. The
Kyoto Treaty increases regulation on US business, giving China a greater
economic advantage and incentive to pollute more.


Many valuable and effective programs have been cut, all in the name of
the war in Iraq.

A good number of the government programs are unconstitutional, perhaps
even the war in Iraq.

Who says? You?

I say so because I can read and understand the Constitution.

Do you think outlawing abortion at the Federal level is Constitutional?

Congress only has the power to declare war. We are at war in Iraq. When was
it declared?


Of course, that idiot and his buddies in the White House don't have a
clue.

I think they have a clue and are quite smart. They are doing a great job
of looking out for their best interests.

Not with poll number of 34%. Even their right wingnut buddies in Congress
are running for cover.

What has poll numbers to do with getting rich off of favors and funneled
government contracts? Have you checked Halliburton stock lately? Defense
contractor stocks? The poll numbers can be 0%, he's a lame duck anyway.

Scotty's mistake
 

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment

How? why?

For example, fewer dollars for environmental cleanup, prevention, etc.

and increasing the wealth of
the already obscenely wealthy.

Riiiight. I hear this all the time from the local left wing whackos
too. They'd rather have high theoretical tax rates on the 1% of rich
people, all of whom employ accountants to get out of paying it, than
give up their politics of envy and stop attempting futile confiscatory
tax rates. All that ends up happening is the salaried middle class gets
hit with the high tax rates, not the rich - unless you define 'rich' as
anyone earning more than you do.

Huh? Are you saying that the middle and lower classes should be taxed at
a
higher rate then the richies?

You need to stop ranting against liberals and start thinking.

I'm saying that the middle & lower classes *are* taxed at a higher rate
than the richies. The tax scales might not show it, but the rich employ
accountants to reduce their taxable income in ways that the salaried
middle class simply can't manage.

That's reality. You need to look at the real world, not theory.


It's in the theory too. Read the tax code and apply your brain.


PDW

Scotty's mistake
 

"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Bob Crantz" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...


I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Only if you want to become less competitive in the world marketplace.

Huh? This makes no sense.

If taxes and regulation are reduced, the US becomes more competitive in
the world marketplace for labor and products.

We're already competitive. The only people who will be helped by lowering
taxes will be rich people and large corporations.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment and increasing the wealth
of the already obscenely wealthy.

There's plenty left of the environment. China is the world's largest
polluter.

Again, this makes no sense. Just because another country has a bad record
does not mean we can just igore the situation.


Ever read the Kyoto Treaty? China is exempt, yet pollutes the most. The
Kyoto Treaty increases regulation on US business, giving China a greater
economic advantage and incentive to pollute more.

What's your point? The Kyoto agreement was flawed.

Many valuable and effective programs have been cut, all in the name of
the war in Iraq.

A good number of the government programs are unconstitutional, perhaps
even the war in Iraq.

Who says? You?

I say so because I can read and understand the Constitution.

Fortunately, for the rest of us, yours is not the final word.

Do you think outlawing abortion at the Federal level is Constitutional?

Depends on the wording of the law I would imagine.

Congress only has the power to declare war. We are at war in Iraq. When
was it declared?

What does this have to do with lowering taxes?

Of course, that idiot and his buddies in the White House don't have a
clue.

I think they have a clue and are quite smart. They are doing a great job
of looking out for their best interests.

Not with poll number of 34%. Even their right wingnut buddies in Congress
are running for cover.

What has poll numbers to do with getting rich off of favors and funneled
government contracts? Have you checked Halliburton stock lately? Defense
contractor stocks? The poll numbers can be 0%, he's a lame duck anyway.

Again, you're not making much sense.

Scotty's mistake
 

The real world is that the rich are disportionally not taxed as much as the
rest. Their taxes need to be raised and the loopholes closed.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Capt. JG
wrote:

I think that's completely stupid at this point.

Lowering taxes and decreasing regs at this point will serve no purpose
except ruining what's left of the environment

How? why?

For example, fewer dollars for environmental cleanup, prevention, etc.

and increasing the wealth of
the already obscenely wealthy.

Riiiight. I hear this all the time from the local left wing whackos
too. They'd rather have high theoretical tax rates on the 1% of rich
people, all of whom employ accountants to get out of paying it, than
give up their politics of envy and stop attempting futile confiscatory
tax rates. All that ends up happening is the salaried middle class gets
hit with the high tax rates, not the rich - unless you define 'rich' as
anyone earning more than you do.

Huh? Are you saying that the middle and lower classes should be taxed at
a
higher rate then the richies?

You need to stop ranting against liberals and start thinking.

I'm saying that the middle & lower classes *are* taxed at a higher rate
than the richies. The tax scales might not show it, but the rich employ
accountants to reduce their taxable income in ways that the salaried
middle class simply can't manage.

That's reality. You need to look at the real world, not theory.

PDW