In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what the
home inspector is going to be seeing.

kpg* wrote:
As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same
rate per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what the
home inspector is going to be seeing.

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we have
a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of ammunition.
Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to tax the
ammunition out of existence.

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

kpg* wrote:
As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same
rate per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what
the home inspector is going to be seeing.

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.


sigh

What happened to the America I grew up in? Something needs
to change. I hope you people are paying attention out there.

We take freedom for granted, but it's not a right, it must be earned
and defended. I'm not talking about Iraq, who knows if that's the
right or wrong way to go, I'm talking about those dimwits in congress
and sitting on the bench.

Don't get me started.

Oh, too late.

"kpg*" wrote in
20:

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

kpg* wrote:
As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same
rate per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what
the home inspector is going to be seeing.

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

That idiot was always trying to enact that crap,and nobody ever paid him
any attention.(Daniel Moynihan,btw.)


sigh

What happened to the America I grew up in? Something needs
to change. I hope you people are paying attention out there.

We take freedom for granted, but it's not a right, it must be earned
and defended. I'm not talking about Iraq, who knows if that's the
right or wrong way to go, I'm talking about those dimwits in congress
and sitting on the bench.

Well,there's a LOT of dimwits that ELECT those Congressional dimwits.
Socialists.

Don't get me started.

Oh, too late.


Don't tell me you actually BELIEVE that troll?
A $100 tax on a DOLLAR item? "By 2010,all homes will be inspected...."

WHERE is your common sense?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:52:42 -0500, wrote:

In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

The US has to pay for Bush's War one way or another.

Don't tell me you actually BELIEVE that troll?
A $100 tax on a DOLLAR item? "By 2010,all homes will be inspected...."

lol, of course not. Because that's not how it happens. The reality
is our freedoms are eroded much slower than that; at a pace we hardly
notice.

I was taking the opportunity of this obviously exaggerated claim
to point out that if if did happen all at once it would be outrageous
and no one would stand for it. A tax on non-CF bulbs out of the
question? I don't think so. Tax policy is used to mold society
as our 'leaders' see fit. That is not their job, and that is not
freedom.

You are right about not feeding the trolls, however.

Nevermind.

YEp yep if you think that Daniel Moynihan is bad
how about this Major that NYC have he would like
charge all who visit city below 86th. street $ 8.00 fee
and truckers $ 26.00. what truckers should do make surcharge
for any delivery $300.00 under 1 ton and $500.00 over 1-5,
5 ton and up $1000.00 no exceptions then let him dance jig


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
"kpg*" wrote in
20:

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

kpg* wrote:
As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same
rate per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what
the home inspector is going to be seeing.

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

That idiot was always trying to enact that crap,and nobody ever paid him
any attention.(Daniel Moynihan,btw.)


sigh

What happened to the America I grew up in? Something needs
to change. I hope you people are paying attention out there.

We take freedom for granted, but it's not a right, it must be earned
and defended. I'm not talking about Iraq, who knows if that's the
right or wrong way to go, I'm talking about those dimwits in congress
and sitting on the bench.

Well,there's a LOT of dimwits that ELECT those Congressional dimwits.
Socialists.

Don't get me started.

Oh, too late.


Don't tell me you actually BELIEVE that troll?
A $100 tax on a DOLLAR item? "By 2010,all homes will be inspected...."

WHERE is your common sense?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

wrote:
In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

I also understand that in order to make this new tax more
palatable, the government will now legalize the dope you
are smoking.

[8~{} Uncle Monster

Tony wrote:
YEp yep if you think that Daniel Moynihan is bad
how about this Major that NYC have he would like
charge all who visit city below 86th. street $ 8.00 fee
and truckers $ 26.00.

London, England has had this type of thing for some time now. They want
about $14/day. Since introducing the fee, private traffic has dropped
nearly 40 percent, cyclists have nearly doubled and bus passengers have
increased 50 percent.

Interestingly enough, the American ambassador who took his post in July
205 refused to pay the fees. Including fines, the embassy owes around a
quarter-million dollars.

Chris

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:45:52 GMT, "kpg*" wrote Re
Light Bulbs are getting Expensive / New Tax:

lol, of course not. Because that's not how it happens. The reality
is our freedoms are eroded much slower than that; at a pace we hardly
notice.

Right!

If you are over 55, think back to when you were a kid and compare the
freedoms our society had then vs. what we have now. It's not even
close.

Chris Friesen wrote in
:

Tony wrote:
YEp yep if you think that Daniel Moynihan is bad
how about this Major that NYC have he would like
charge all who visit city below 86th. street $ 8.00 fee
and truckers $ 26.00.

London, England has had this type of thing for some time now. They want
about $14/day. Since introducing the fee, private traffic has dropped
nearly 40 percent, cyclists have nearly doubled and bus passengers have
increased 50 percent.

Interestingly enough, the American ambassador who took his post in July
205 refused to pay the fees. Including fines, the embassy owes around a
quarter-million dollars.

Chris



How do they charge mopeds or small motorbikes? Or doesn't Britain have
those?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Phisherman wrote in
:

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 12:52:42 -0500, wrote:

In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

The US has to pay for Bush's War one way or another.


More Bush Derangement Syndrome. get help.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Caesar Romano" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:45:52 GMT, "kpg*" wrote Re
Light Bulbs are getting Expensive / New Tax:

lol, of course not. Because that's not how it happens. The reality
is our freedoms are eroded much slower than that; at a pace we hardly
notice.

Right!

If you are over 55, think back to when you were a kid and compare the
freedoms our society had then vs. what we have now. It's not even
close.

As our children and grandchildren grow up under these restrictions, they
think it is normal and they may add even more.

Look at the number or government employees per private worker and how that
has changed. Look at the number of people paying taxes versus the number
collecting some sort of government check or aid. Look at the number of
boneheads on the House of Representatives and how that has grown.

We should consolidate some of the states and lower the number of people in
Washington. From 50 states, we could whittle it down to about 25 or so.
Like join Nebraska and the Dakotas together and dump four senators. One
Carolina and two more senators are out of work. You get the idea.

"Uncle Monster" wrote in message
...
wrote:
In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

I also understand that in order to make this new tax more
palatable, the government will now legalize the dope you
are smoking.

[8~{} Uncle Monster

How did the OP's statement about a supposed tax on light bulbs turn into
rants about everything but? Besides, you've been trolled. There has been
no national legislation passed with such a tax -- or even proposed in
Congress.

TKM

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:37:23 GMT, "kpg*" wrote:

As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what the
home inspector is going to be seeing.

Do these bullets contain lead? Lead is a hazardous material, which
must be disposed of properly.

"TKM" wrote in message

How did the OP's statement about a supposed tax on light bulbs turn into
rants about everything but? Besides, you've been trolled. There has been
no national legislation passed with such a tax -- or even proposed in
Congress.

TKM

The original post was not so much a troll as it was some humor. Others just
added on to it after that. Do you really think you are the only one that
did not believe a $100 tax on light bulbs?

Harry wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:37:23 GMT, "kpg*" wrote:

As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.
Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what the
home inspector is going to be seeing.

Do these bullets contain lead? Lead is a hazardous material, which
must be disposed of properly.


Can you think of a better way to dispose of them?

Best regards,
Bob

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"TKM" wrote in message
How did the OP's statement about a supposed tax on light bulbs turn into
rants about everything but? Besides, you've been trolled. There has been
no national legislation passed with such a tax -- or even proposed in
Congress.

TKM

The original post was not so much a troll as it was some humor. Others just
added on to it after that. Do you really think you are the only one that
did not believe a $100 tax on light bulbs?




Maxwell Smart voice
Would you believe a $2 tax?
/MSV

Bob

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"TKM" wrote in message
How did the OP's statement about a supposed tax on light bulbs turn into
rants about everything but? Besides, you've been trolled. There has been
no national legislation passed with such a tax -- or even proposed in
Congress.

TKM

The original post was not so much a troll as it was some humor. Others just
added on to it after that. Do you really think you are the only one that
did not believe a $100 tax on light bulbs?


Too many people take themselves and things they see and read
on the interweb too seriously. I must now get back to bottling
my new and improved troll repellent.

[8~{} Uncle Monster

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

"TKM" wrote in message
...

"Uncle Monster" wrote in message
...
wrote:
In order to meet the demand to save energy the US government will be
adding a tax to the price of all lightbulbs, effective January 1,
2008. All bulbs will be charged one dollar per watt tax. Thus the
price of a 100 watt bulb will be about $101.00 (the one dollar is the
cost of the bulb itself). This tax will also be added to all
electrical appliances, tools, motors and other equipment. For
example, a toaster which generally draws 1250 watts will have a tax of
$1250 added to the price of the toaster. An electric range could cost
as much as $55,000. You will be required to pay this tax upon
purchase. As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Walter K.

I also understand that in order to make this new tax more
palatable, the government will now legalize the dope you
are smoking.

[8~{} Uncle Monster

How did the OP's statement about a supposed tax on light bulbs turn into
rants about everything but? Besides, you've been trolled. There has been
no national legislation passed with such a tax -- or even proposed in
Congress.

TKM


Because some of us getting fed up with this *******s that
get in power and then giving rust shaft to the people
generating new taxes so they can steel more from the pot
Tony

Few years ago I have contacted my police department
at time I want dispose of some old ammo and guess
they did not wanted I guess I will need to dispose of it into garbage
Tony

"Harry" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:37:23 GMT, "kpg*" wrote:

As of 2010, all homes will be inspected and all remaining
and existing appliances and lights will also be taxed at the same rate
per watt.

Just so long as they don't start taxing bullets, cause that's what the
home inspector is going to be seeing.

Do these bullets contain lead? Lead is a hazardous material, which
must be disposed of properly.

"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

NO no you got that wrong croocvks own the guns
crooks are permitted to carry guns
but free people must hide

In article k2yDi.4522$J96.3330@trnddc02,
"Tony" wrote:

"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

NO no you got that wrong croocvks own the guns
crooks are permitted to carry guns
but free people must hide

Which of course shows up why gun control laws don't work.

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:36:33 -0400, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article k2yDi.4522$J96.3330@trnddc02,
"Tony" wrote:

"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

NO no you got that wrong croocvks own the guns
crooks are permitted to carry guns
but free people must hide

Which of course shows up why gun control laws don't work.


The USA has 90 firearms per 100 people, the highest ratio in the
world. Laws that are not enforced don't work, but that doesn't stop
Congress from making more laws.

In article ,
Phisherman wrote:


The USA has 90 firearms per 100 people, the highest ratio in the
world. Laws that are not enforced don't work, but that doesn't stop
Congress from making more laws.

Heck works well with Immigration (G&D&R). Studies show that those
areas with the most Draconian personal gun laws also have the highest
rates of gun-related violence. Of course, no one has yet answered my
questions about the other relationship, which is that they tend to be
big cities. More target-rich environments that many areas in Utah,
Colorado, etc.

Phisherman wrote:
....
The USA has ...the highest ratio in the world. ...

I heard somewhere just the other day (I don't recall precisely where,
but do remember thinking at the time it seemed a little unusual so I'm
wondering if it wasn't NPR's All Things Considered or something similar)
that despite the above common assertion that other places have more --
seems like Israel was one of the other places specifically mentioned...

--

On Sep 5, 9:11 am, dpb wrote:
Phisherman wrote:

...

The USA has ...the highest ratio in the world. ...

I heard somewhere just the other day (I don't recall precisely where,
but do remember thinking at the time it seemed a little unusual so I'm
wondering if it wasn't NPR's All Things Considered or something similar)
that despite the above common assertion that other places have more --
seems like Israel was one of the other places specifically mentioned...

--

Does Switzerland still require every able bodied man to be trained in
gun use? I heard gun ownership is high there too, which would
certainly explain why it is a very low-crime country. I dont know,
just asking, maybe somebody from there is reading.

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Phisherman wrote:


The USA has 90 firearms per 100 people, the highest ratio in the
world. Laws that are not enforced don't work, but that doesn't stop
Congress from making more laws.

Heck works well with Immigration (G&D&R). Studies show that those
areas with the most Draconian personal gun laws also have the highest
rates of gun-related violence. Of course, no one has yet answered my
questions about the other relationship, which is that they tend to be
big cities. More target-rich environments that many areas in Utah,
Colorado, etc.


I don't know all the laws in this country but it seems to me that Cities
that have laws making it illegal even to own the weapon of any kind
has most killing and largest crime and as I said I don't know all
the laws and rules but it sure don't make any sense to me

RickH wrote:
I heard gun ownership is high there too, which would
certainly explain why it is a very low-crime country.

Correlation doesn't imply causation.

Maybe the fact that every male is militarily trained leads to both
reduced crime and increased gun ownership. Maybe reduced crime is due
to higher employment, population demographics, cultural bias, or
something else entirely.

Chris

Jim Yanik wrote:
Chris Friesen wrote in
:

Tony wrote:
YEp yep if you think that Daniel Moynihan is bad
how about this Major that NYC have he would like
charge all who visit city below 86th. street $ 8.00 fee
and truckers $ 26.00.
London, England has had this type of thing for some time now. They want
about $14/day. Since introducing the fee, private traffic has dropped
nearly 40 percent, cyclists have nearly doubled and bus passengers have
increased 50 percent.

Interestingly enough, the American ambassador who took his post in July
205 refused to pay the fees. Including fines, the embassy owes around a
quarter-million dollars.

Chris



How do they charge mopeds or small motorbikes? Or doesn't Britain have
those?

That's what happens when there ought to be law types get in charge. The
damned socialists have taken over England and are starting here with
their traffic cameras, in the name of safety. It's all bull sh--. It's
about the money.

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in
. net:


"Caesar Romano" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 20:45:52 GMT, "kpg*" wrote Re
Light Bulbs are getting Expensive / New Tax:

lol, of course not. Because that's not how it happens. The reality
is our freedoms are eroded much slower than that; at a pace we hardly
notice.

Right!

If you are over 55, think back to when you were a kid and compare the
freedoms our society had then vs. what we have now. It's not even
close.

As our children and grandchildren grow up under these restrictions,
they think it is normal and they may add even more.

Look at the number or government employees per private worker and how
that has changed. Look at the number of people paying taxes versus
the number collecting some sort of government check or aid. Look at
the number of boneheads on the House of Representatives and how that
has grown.

The House grows according to population;seems proper.
you want to cut government size,get rid of gov't programs that gov't is
*not supposed to be doing*,like Social Security,Welfare,various other
social programs.THAT is where the gov't sticks its nose into people's
business.


We should consolidate some of the states and lower the number of
people in Washington. From 50 states, we could whittle it down to
about 25 or so. Like join Nebraska and the Dakotas together and dump
four senators. One Carolina and two more senators are out of work.
You get the idea.

what about states like Texas and California that are big and populous
enough for TWO states? Split 'em up?





What we need is TERM LIMITs,so that Congresscritters don't spend their
entire working lives there.
That's when they start thinking they are "elites",different and better than
the rest of us. They don't have to follow the laws like the rest of us
do. They lose touch with reality,too.

The job was never meant to be a lifelong career.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Kurt Ullman wrote in news:kurtullman-
:

In article ,
Phisherman wrote:


The USA has 90 firearms per 100 people, the highest ratio in the
world. Laws that are not enforced don't work, but that doesn't stop
Congress from making more laws.

Heck works well with Immigration (G&D&R). Studies show that those
areas with the most Draconian personal gun laws also have the highest
rates of gun-related violence. Of course, no one has yet answered my
questions about the other relationship, which is that they tend to be
big cities. More target-rich environments that many areas in Utah,
Colorado, etc.


Compare Washington,DC's crime with the nearby Virginia cities,where guns
ARE allowed.If easy access to guns were the problem,then Virginia's crime
would be far higher than DC's,but it's the opposite.

Criminals prefer unarmed victims.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

The House grows according to population;seems proper.
you want to cut government size,get rid of gov't programs that gov't
is *not supposed to be doing*,like Social Security,Welfare,various
other social programs.THAT is where the gov't sticks its nose into
people's business.


You know, I don't even mind the 'safety net' of welfare. I do
mind when the safety net becomes a hammock though.

I see 40% of the population that will blindly vote for anyone that
will promise them free stuff, and that number is growing fast.


Left as it is I don.t see any hope for change. It's going to take a
series of 9/11's or WWIII to get the USA out of this socialist spiral,
which, of course, is not how I would like to see the change come about.

my .02

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:20:16 GMT, "Tony"
wrote:


"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

NO no you got that wrong croocvks own the guns
crooks are permitted to carry guns
but free people must hide


Does that mean that all the crooks that sell on ebay carry guns?
There sure are a lot of them on ebay.

wrote in
:

Does that mean that all the crooks that sell on ebay carry guns?
There sure are a lot of them on ebay.

Buyer beware.

on 9/5/2007 1:16 PM said the following:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 13:20:16 GMT, "Tony"
wrote:


"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .

You may say that in jest, but a U.S. Senator from New York admitted we
have a 200-year supply of guns, but only a ten-year supply of
ammunition. Obviously, then, the way to attack the "gun problem" is to
tax the ammunition out of existence.

And only a month's supply of Senators

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

NO no you got that wrong croocvks own the guns
crooks are permitted to carry guns
but free people must hide



Does that mean that all the crooks that sell on ebay carry guns?
There sure are a lot of them on ebay.



I met a crook one time that didn't carry a gun, so I gave him one.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Jim Yanik wrote:
....
The House grows according to population;seems proper.

The only constitutional rule relating to the size of the House says "The
Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand."

Congress regularly increased the size of the House after the census to
account for growth but fixed the size of the House at 435 seats in 1911.

While theoretically could revoke/revise that law, since then all that
has been done is to reapportion seats based on relative populations
after the official census.

--

"kpg*" wrote in message
20...
The House grows according to population;seems proper.
you want to cut government size,get rid of gov't programs that gov't
is *not supposed to be doing*,like Social Security,Welfare,various
other social programs.THAT is where the gov't sticks its nose into
people's business.


You know, I don't even mind the 'safety net' of welfare. I do
mind when the safety net becomes a hammock though.

I see 40% of the population that will blindly vote for anyone that
will promise them free stuff, and that number is growing fast.


Left as it is I don.t see any hope for change. It's going to take a
series of 9/11's or WWIII to get the USA out of this socialist spiral,

Well we are far away from socialistic system however we are on
the road to it.
When such as NJ treasury department penalizes victims because
of some Corporation commit fraud what more can we aspect
www.cas-environ.com



which, of course, is not how I would like to see the change come about.

my .02