Randycat, Pscates and I have all these nice semi-informational semi-joking posts where a question was asked and then answered.(lots of smilies) It was light hearted.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Go back and reread your first post...no smilies. Mine? No smilies either. It was at least partially off topic, which is the type of post that I usually see getting attacked around these parts.
The line about the Kool-Aid? That was funny.
I just like to be frank when I write. Sometimes we all get long winded, but I try to avoid it. Wine? I don't avoid that, unless it's white.
SPJ...it's pointless to argue. You're not 40 yet. You have so much life to live. Whether you're Democrat or Republican it's hard to say how you will feel in 10-15yrs. You sound like alot of us did at your age. So sure and confident. Pscates doesn't speak out of ignorance but out of his very own experiences. He will be wrong to some but spot on for others.
Statistics are nice but remember the actual voting numbers are skewered...not all of America votes.
I don't personally get into Democrat vs Repulican. There are crappy people in both parties and good people in both parties. I do believe in living a more conservative lifestyle. 400,000 houses IMO are obtained by conservative means(financial responsibility). It's obvious your family has a good balance. Which is great.
Go back and reread your first post...no smilies. Mine? No smilies either. It was at least partially off topic, which is the type of post that I usually see getting attacked around these parts.
The line about the Kool-Aid? That was funny.
I just like to be frank when I write. Sometimes we all get long winded, but I try to avoid it. Wine? I don't avoid that, unless it's white.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but I put four smilies in the second post. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I read the Gates article and in the extremes that they speak about the estate tax does make sense. My primary concern (especially out here in California) is that they seldom adjust those rates and down the line they can be quite restrictive. As recently as 1998, the limit was only $650,000 per person. It was just recently raised to 1,000,000 as part of the Bush tax cuts and from what I read that doesn't even fully happen until 2006. If they left it at 2 million per couple and indexed it to inflation, I could probably live with that.
My own house has gone up almost $100,000 in 4 years. (Good times here in So Cal.) If you have a lot of investments that rise with inflation and the exception doesn't, well that could make it very uncool for many of us real quickly.
I would remind you that people like Gates Sr. don't actually have money, they control it. The difference tax-wise is astonishing.
Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well.
If only we could say that today... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, perhaps adjusted for inflation, we're now in that same bracket?
<strong>Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well.</strong><hr></blockquote>I'd be all for that. Would you? Even today, the top 1% pays for over 1/3 of all federal income taxes. If we raised the rate on them instead of lowering it as Bush has done then I think we could do it!
[quote]Originally posted by trumptman:
<strong>Yeah, but he forgot one... an important one. Selective quoting is oh so unbecoming...</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wasn't trying to - that one just stood out to me as interesting. Unbecoming? After all these months of hitting on you now you call me unbecoming?
it shouldn't be taxed twice, that's criminal</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not taxed twice, that's the point. It's taxed when it goes to one individual. It's taxed as it goes to a second individual. If you gain income it is you who is taxed. Different people, different dollars, different taxes.
<strong>SPJ...it's pointless to argue. You're not 40 yet. You have so much life to live. Whether you're Democrat or Republican it's hard to say how you will feel in 10-15yrs. You sound like alot of us did at your age. So sure and confident. Pscates doesn't speak out of ignorance but out of his very own experiences. He will be wrong to some but spot on for others.
Statistics are nice but remember the actual voting numbers are skewered...not all of America votes.
I don't personally get into Democrat vs Repulican. There are crappy people in both parties and good people in both parties. I do believe in living a more conservative lifestyle. 400,000 houses IMO are obtained by conservative means(financial responsibility). It's obvious your family has a good balance. Which is great.</strong><hr></blockquote>
To which I would respond with my first post:
[quote] No it's not. That was one of the few things I've ever read here that actually made me glow red with anger. If anything, it proves that Pscates has no handle on what it means to be a Democrat, and chaulks what he thinks it means up to inexperience, as if the the people who "know" should really be Republicans.
That's just ridiculous.
Ridiculous.
And if Pscates wants to write another long-winded reply venting his anger, he certainly has an audience, but that doesn't mean a word he says is right. Ignorant I would say. But it's the truth. Trumpt, Pscates, Murbot, Randycat all slander what it means to be a Democrat. <hr></blockquote>
and to add to it that fiscal responsibility is a Democratic idea lately. Using his argument, I would also add to it that senior citizens must have "a hard time" taking seriously the views of 30-40-somethings since they don't have enough life experience. After all, they vote Democratic.
<strong>I'm looking around my $400,000 house, two Volvo's, Apple Titanium PowerBook computer, expensive to maintain Asian girlfriend, and a ****ing Killington Ski trip on Saturday and I think my left-leaning Democratic family gets along just fine. All 140+ years of experience they have.
The new AppleOutsider. Quality posts here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That puts you in the upper-half of middle class in this country. That demographic is probably precisely half Republican and half Democrat. Of course you lean Democrat because you're just jealous of the real wealthy...with estates worth at least 20x yours, with THREE Mercedes-Benzs, a collection of Macs, and a few maids to take care of the high maintenance Asian girlfriend...
Which federal income tax bracket do you occupy...or your parents?
<strong>No it's not. That was one of the few things I've ever read here that actually made me glow red with anger.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Methinks the young gentleman doth protest too much.
Excellent post, pscates!
By the way, I still own Birks, a hackeysack, and a B0nG, though none of them are used on a daily basis any more.
NB: I am more likely to vote Libertarian or Independent than Republican (I generally hate all mainstream Republicrat and Demopublican politicians), but I am not the "bleeding-heart liberal" that I was 20 years ago in my first year of college.
That puts you in the upper-half of middle class in this country. That demographic is probably precisely half Republican and half Democrat. Of course you lean Democrat because you're just jealous of the real wealthy...with estates worth at least 20x yours, with THREE Mercedes-Benzs, a collection of Macs, and a few maids to take care of the high maintenance Asian girlfriend...
Which federal income tax bracket do you occupy...or your parents?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sure. We all want to be wealthy. Although I bet my house would be worth much more in California than it is in... Northeast PA <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> . Everyone is pretty much moving out of here. I'm not going to tell you my parents' income. Not too much as a public school teacher and college professor. They could have made much more in the private sector. Nonetheless, we're happy as a Democratic-voting family.
I'm looking around my $400,000 house, two Volvo's, Apple Titanium PowerBook computer, expensive to maintain Asian girlfriend, and a ****ing Killington Ski trip on Saturday <hr></blockquote>
YOUR ??
Somehow I doubt that.
Do you have even a part-time job, BTW??
SPJ, I'm sure you are a real nice kid (although your complete confidence that people twice your age are "ignorant" and your know everything is not very flattering).
But when it comes to knowing anything about living life on your own, you really need to get over the Angry Young Man routine and just accept that your experience is lacking compared to me, pscates, and other 30-somethings on this list.
Tell ya what, youngster, come back and talk to us when you are making the house payments, car payments, and credit card payments out of YOUR own paycheck!
This would be the last part of that quote you cut-off in mid-sentence:
[quote]and I think my left-leaning Democratic family gets along just fine. All 140+ years of experience they have. <hr></blockquote>
The point was that my family obviously pays all those bills you still talk about, and guess what? We're liberal. I can't say that experience has magically transformed them from young, idealistic, inexperienced liberals to wise, experienced, "in the know" conservatives. The times may have changed since this is not the 60's and we're still hungover from the 80's- two polar extremes of ideology, but they're still as active as ever as Democrats. Perhaps even more liberal. Who knows. They obviously weren't out getting stoned when they were in college to get where my family is now.
Why is Fireside Chat in here? As for the 20 year pay out, I had always understood that if the winner died, the payout terminates. I have also been informed that not too many people know this info but this is how the involved state(s) retain a lot of the winnings. I knew that Powerball operated in this manner...maybe it changed now, but, I doubt it.
... Using his argument, I would also add to it that senior citizens must have "a hard time" taking seriously the views of 30-40-somethings since they don't have enough life experience. After all, they vote Democratic.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because it's a favorite Democrat tactic to scare them into thinking that Republicans want to take away their Social Security. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>And it's a favorite Republican tactic to convince young, idealistic liberals that they will become die-hard Republicans later in life.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's not an election tactic. How many votes does that get you? And if I had to resort scaring old people in order to win public office, well, I suppose I'd make a dandy Democrat.
Comments
<strong>
Randycat, Pscates and I have all these nice semi-informational semi-joking posts where a question was asked and then answered.(lots of smilies) It was light hearted.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Go back and reread your first post...no smilies. Mine? No smilies either. It was at least partially off topic, which is the type of post that I usually see getting attacked around these parts.
The line about the Kool-Aid? That was funny.
I just like to be frank when I write. Sometimes we all get long winded, but I try to avoid it. Wine? I don't avoid that, unless it's white.
Statistics are nice but remember the actual voting numbers are skewered...not all of America votes.
I don't personally get into Democrat vs Repulican. There are crappy people in both parties and good people in both parties. I do believe in living a more conservative lifestyle. 400,000 houses IMO are obtained by conservative means(financial responsibility). It's obvious your family has a good balance. Which is great.
<strong>
Go back and reread your first post...no smilies. Mine? No smilies either. It was at least partially off topic, which is the type of post that I usually see getting attacked around these parts.
The line about the Kool-Aid? That was funny.
I just like to be frank when I write. Sometimes we all get long winded, but I try to avoid it. Wine? I don't avoid that, unless it's white.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but I put four smilies in the second post. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I read the Gates article and in the extremes that they speak about the estate tax does make sense. My primary concern (especially out here in California) is that they seldom adjust those rates and down the line they can be quite restrictive. As recently as 1998, the limit was only $650,000 per person. It was just recently raised to 1,000,000 as part of the Bush tax cuts and from what I read that doesn't even fully happen until 2006. If they left it at 2 million per couple and indexed it to inflation, I could probably live with that.
My own house has gone up almost $100,000 in 4 years. (Good times here in So Cal.) If you have a lot of investments that rise with inflation and the exception doesn't, well that could make it very uncool for many of us real quickly.
I would remind you that people like Gates Sr. don't actually have money, they control it. The difference tax-wise is astonishing.
Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well.
If only we could say that today... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Nick
<strong>
Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, perhaps adjusted for inflation, we're now in that same bracket?
<strong>No. You are "earning" money which means that money you didn't have before, you have now.</strong><hr></blockquote>
it shouldn't be taxed twice, that's criminal
<strong>Also if you look up the history of the income tax you might be amazed that it at one time only applied to the top 1% of income earners. It was a tax on the super-wealthy as well.</strong><hr></blockquote>I'd be all for that. Would you? Even today, the top 1% pays for over 1/3 of all federal income taxes. If we raised the rate on them instead of lowering it as Bush has done then I think we could do it!
[quote]Originally posted by trumptman:
<strong>Yeah, but he forgot one... an important one. Selective quoting is oh so unbecoming...</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wasn't trying to - that one just stood out to me as interesting. Unbecoming? After all these months of hitting on you now you call me unbecoming?
<strong>
it shouldn't be taxed twice, that's criminal</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not taxed twice, that's the point. It's taxed when it goes to one individual. It's taxed as it goes to a second individual. If you gain income it is you who is taxed. Different people, different dollars, different taxes.
At least that's my understanding of the law.
<strong>SPJ...it's pointless to argue. You're not 40 yet. You have so much life to live. Whether you're Democrat or Republican it's hard to say how you will feel in 10-15yrs. You sound like alot of us did at your age. So sure and confident. Pscates doesn't speak out of ignorance but out of his very own experiences. He will be wrong to some but spot on for others.
Statistics are nice but remember the actual voting numbers are skewered...not all of America votes.
I don't personally get into Democrat vs Repulican. There are crappy people in both parties and good people in both parties. I do believe in living a more conservative lifestyle. 400,000 houses IMO are obtained by conservative means(financial responsibility). It's obvious your family has a good balance. Which is great.</strong><hr></blockquote>
To which I would respond with my first post:
[quote] No it's not. That was one of the few things I've ever read here that actually made me glow red with anger. If anything, it proves that Pscates has no handle on what it means to be a Democrat, and chaulks what he thinks it means up to inexperience, as if the the people who "know" should really be Republicans.
That's just ridiculous.
Ridiculous.
And if Pscates wants to write another long-winded reply venting his anger, he certainly has an audience, but that doesn't mean a word he says is right. Ignorant I would say. But it's the truth. Trumpt, Pscates, Murbot, Randycat all slander what it means to be a Democrat. <hr></blockquote>
and to add to it that fiscal responsibility is a Democratic idea lately.
[ 12-26-2002: Message edited by: ShawnPatrickJoyce ]</p>
<strong>I'm looking around my $400,000 house, two Volvo's, Apple Titanium PowerBook computer, expensive to maintain Asian girlfriend, and a ****ing Killington Ski trip on Saturday and I think my left-leaning Democratic family gets along just fine. All 140+ years of experience they have.
The new AppleOutsider. Quality posts here.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That puts you in the upper-half of middle class in this country. That demographic is probably precisely half Republican and half Democrat. Of course you lean Democrat because you're just jealous of the real wealthy...with estates worth at least 20x yours, with THREE Mercedes-Benzs, a collection of Macs, and a few maids to take care of the high maintenance Asian girlfriend...
Which federal income tax bracket do you occupy...or your parents?
<strong>No it's not. That was one of the few things I've ever read here that actually made me glow red with anger.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Methinks the young gentleman doth protest too much.
Excellent post, pscates!
By the way, I still own Birks, a hackeysack, and a B0nG, though none of them are used on a daily basis any more.
NB: I am more likely to vote Libertarian or Independent than Republican (I generally hate all mainstream Republicrat and Demopublican politicians), but I am not the "bleeding-heart liberal" that I was 20 years ago in my first year of college.
<strong>
That puts you in the upper-half of middle class in this country. That demographic is probably precisely half Republican and half Democrat. Of course you lean Democrat because you're just jealous of the real wealthy...with estates worth at least 20x yours, with THREE Mercedes-Benzs, a collection of Macs, and a few maids to take care of the high maintenance Asian girlfriend...
Which federal income tax bracket do you occupy...or your parents?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sure. We all want to be wealthy. Although I bet my house would be worth much more in California than it is in... Northeast PA <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> . Everyone is pretty much moving out of here. I'm not going to tell you my parents' income. Not too much as a public school teacher and college professor. They could have made much more in the private sector. Nonetheless, we're happy as a Democratic-voting family.
I'm looking around my $400,000 house, two Volvo's, Apple Titanium PowerBook computer, expensive to maintain Asian girlfriend, and a ****ing Killington Ski trip on Saturday <hr></blockquote>
YOUR ??
Somehow I doubt that.
Do you have even a part-time job, BTW??
SPJ, I'm sure you are a real nice kid (although your complete confidence that people twice your age are "ignorant" and your know everything is not very flattering).
But when it comes to knowing anything about living life on your own, you really need to get over the Angry Young Man routine and just accept that your experience is lacking compared to me, pscates, and other 30-somethings on this list.
Tell ya what, youngster, come back and talk to us when you are making the house payments, car payments, and credit card payments out of YOUR own paycheck!
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
[ 12-26-2002: Message edited by: FormerLurker ]</p>
[quote]and I think my left-leaning Democratic family gets along just fine. All 140+ years of experience they have. <hr></blockquote>
The point was that my family obviously pays all those bills you still talk about, and guess what? We're liberal. I can't say that experience has magically transformed them from young, idealistic, inexperienced liberals to wise, experienced, "in the know" conservatives. The times may have changed since this is not the 60's and we're still hungover from the 80's- two polar extremes of ideology, but they're still as active as ever as Democrats. Perhaps even more liberal. Who knows. They obviously weren't out getting stoned when they were in college to get where my family is now.
Why is Fireside Chat in here? As for the 20 year pay out, I had always understood that if the winner died, the payout terminates. I have also been informed that not too many people know this info but this is how the involved state(s) retain a lot of the winnings. I knew that Powerball operated in this manner...maybe it changed now, but, I doubt it.
[ 12-26-2002: Message edited by: kwondo ]</p>
<strong>
... Using his argument, I would also add to it that senior citizens must have "a hard time" taking seriously the views of 30-40-somethings since they don't have enough life experience. After all, they vote Democratic.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Because it's a favorite Democrat tactic to scare them into thinking that Republicans want to take away their Social Security. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
I'll hold my opinion with the most "experienced" bunch- seniors.
<strong>And it's a favorite Republican tactic to convince young, idealistic liberals that they will become die-hard Republicans later in life.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's not an election tactic. How many votes does that get you? And if I had to resort scaring old people in order to win public office, well, I suppose I'd make a dandy Democrat.
<strong>Yeah well I trust the government to set better prices on prescriptions drugs than drug companies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I suppose you do.