Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: assimilate on 19 Dec 2009 22:01 On 18-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > >> These are the ultra-elite I'm talking about here. We're talking > >> wealth that no one in this group can imagine *seeing*, much > >> less making in one year. In case you haven't been paying > >> attention, they run the country, and have been running it > >> for awhile now. > > > > You're talking about the politics of envy. > > No envy. I'm just saying that a permanent oligarchy is > bad for the country. I sure as hell don't want to *be* > part of the ruling elite. These words strike me as ironic coming from someone who's whole political world is financed by Soros -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 19 Dec 2009 22:04 On 19-Dec-2009, kenpitts <ken.ptts(a)gmail.com> wrote: > How do you figure? Whatever comes out of your check is mached by your > employer. Clearly you have never worked on 1099 as I have. which comes out of his budget to hire you; you pay the matching half too -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 19 Dec 2009 22:12 On 19-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > It seems to me that most of our problems are from people spending more > > than they have and taking big chances (houses, businesses, etc). > > This wouldn't happen if you didn't have people who > actually *have* that money dangling it in front of > the have-nots with sweet nothings of "easy credit" > whispered in their ears. and they wouldn't have done that if it was their money at risk, but since they knew they could sell the mortgage off and have it gauranteed by the Imperial Fed gov't via Fannie & Freddie, why not, what could they lose? -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 19 Dec 2009 22:13 On 19-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > The BAR defense: "Greed is a myth." > > That's some world-class denial right there. Greed is always someone else's fault -- bill-o
From: Chris Bellomy on 19 Dec 2009 23:08
assimilate(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/19/09 8:43 PM: > On 18-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > >> So, you don't see a problem with forcing working people to >> subsidize the Paris Hiltons of the world? >> >> Next time I'll just name a random Kennedy, because working >> people subsidize them, too, when there is no estate tax. > > subsidize? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think > it means. ... You pay taxes that otherwise they would pay. Yeah, I think "subsidize" is more than close enough for jazz. |