On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:36:50 -0800, Hawke
wrote:

On 2/17/2011 5:41 AM, Scout wrote:
Hawke wrote:
On 2/16/2011 12:43 AM, Deep Dudu wrote:

So what are you asking for? An unfair discriminatory tax designed to
penalize people for success?

No, penalizing people for ripping everyone else off.



Anything else, and you're going to have loopholes.

no ****, Sherlock. Maybe you are catching on....

And yet you seem to feel such a proposal was delusional fantasy.

Well, all I can say is I don't see YOU coming up with any reasonable
solutions.

I agree with a flat tax with no loopholes. It just won't ever
happen, that's all. The wealthy control our government and they
don't want to pay taxes.


That's true. That's why they want a flat tax too. Flat taxes are
regressive meaning the more you make the lower the rate you pay. The
only fair tax system in an unequal economic system is a progressive
one, very progressive. Like how much tax should someone who makes a
billion dollars a year pay? What's fair? Take 90% from him and he
still walks away with 100 million bucks. That kind of progressive
rate is necessary when the pay scale is so grossly unequal.

So tell me why you think it's far to tax some people at such a higher rate
than others?


They system has always been based upon the ability to bear the tax
burden. Consequently, those who can carry a larger share of the burden
are asked to do so. It's like going on a camping trip with your family.
You don't put all the goods to be carried into equal weight packages for
each member of the family. You make each member's pack appropriate for
their ability to carry it. You wouldn't make the father's pack the same
weight as an 8 year old girl's, would you? That is what the tax system
was designed to be like. Whoever can carry the heaviest burden is asked
to do so. Most people see that as about as fair a system as there is.
All the other systems wind up making those with less ability to pay
responsible for a larger share of the burden than others who can handle
it more easily. They figured out this a long time ago. Progressive taxes
are the most fair tax system anyone has yet devised.

Hawke

So what you are saying is that because you are lollygaggin around on
your minimum wage doodle and I'm busting my ass working two jobs that
I should pay more tax then you do? I'm not too sure that I can vote
for your party.

Your socialistic "stick the rich schemes" are also hokum. In 1950
Warren Buffet had saved $9,800 and now is the 3rd richest man in the
world. Should he pay a higher percentage of his income then you. After
all you both got to where you are now on your own merits.

George Soros immigrated to England in 1947 with no money at all. He
lived with an Uncle who paid his way to collage and he worked as a
waiter and a railway porter. Now he is (as they used to say at home)
comfortable. Yet another bloke who got there by his own efforts.

Bill Gates was a nobody, computer programmer, when he formed Microsoft
and look at him now.

If you are going to stick it to the rich folk for being smarter and
harder working then you are then you should just fess up to the fact
that you are jealous.

On 2/18/2011 6:06 AM, john B. wrote:


So what you are saying is that because you are lollygaggin around on
your minimum wage doodle and I'm busting my ass working two jobs that
I should pay more tax then you do? I'm not too sure that I can vote
for your party.

Your comparison doesn't apply because the amount of pay someone gets
from a minimum wage job compared to you "busting your ass working two
jobs" are not going to be that much different in pay. A minimum wage
worker may make about 15K a year. Say you make 150K a year from two
jobs. As far as money goes both are considered small potatoes. You are
not wealthy in modern America making 150K a year. If you made 25 million
a year then we're talking.



Your socialistic "stick the rich schemes" are also hokum. In 1950
Warren Buffet had saved $9,800 and now is the 3rd richest man in the
world. Should he pay a higher percentage of his income then you. After
all you both got to where you are now on your own merits.

Wrong. Everyone doesn't get where they get on their own merits. Some
people get lucky. In fact, you could say everyone who gets really rich
got lucky. A lot of them will tell you that.



George Soros immigrated to England in 1947 with no money at all. He
lived with an Uncle who paid his way to collage and he worked as a
waiter and a railway porter. Now he is (as they used to say at home)
comfortable. Yet another bloke who got there by his own efforts.

Bill Gates was a nobody, computer programmer, when he formed Microsoft
and look at him now.

Your examples of some of the luckiest men to ever live are not worth a
thing. I could go to Vegas and show you the people who won big jackpots
there too and say look how well they did. What does that mean? Nothing.
There are always a handful of people who hit the jackpot. Soros, Gates,
and Buffet all qualify.



If you are going to stick it to the rich folk for being smarter and
harder working then you are then you should just fess up to the fact
that you are jealous.


The Kardassians made 65 million bucks last year. Glenn Beck made more
than 30 million. I don't think it's because they are smarter or harder
working than others. I think they were very fortunate. But the point is
there will always be some folks who hit the jackpot. That is how our
economic system works. Five percent of the people who work make most of
the money made. I say they should pay. What do you think? We should ask
the people who are in poverty or make barely enough to make ends meet to
pay for our obligations. Take from the poor and give to the rich? Ah,
then you must belong to the republican party.

Hawke

On Feb 19, 11:19*pm, Hawke wrote:

Wrong. Everyone doesn't get where they get on their own merits. Some
people get lucky. In fact, you could say everyone who gets really rich
got lucky. A lot of them will tell you that.

Your examples of some of the luckiest men to ever live are not worth a
thing. I could go to Vegas and show you the people who won big jackpots
there too and say look how well they did. What does that mean? Nothing.
There are always a handful of people who hit the jackpot. Soros, Gates,
and Buffet all qualify.

Hawke

More drivel. Gates , Soros and Buffet consistently did things that
made them money. Go to Vegas , find the people that won big jackpots
and see how well they do during the next 10 years. That is the
difference between luck and skill.

You are just justifying how well you have done by claiming it is just
luck that makes the difference.

Dan

On 2/20/2011 6:04 AM, wrote:
On Feb 19, 11:19 pm, wrote:

Wrong. Everyone doesn't get where they get on their own merits. Some
people get lucky. In fact, you could say everyone who gets really rich
got lucky. A lot of them will tell you that.

Your examples of some of the luckiest men to ever live are not worth a
thing. I could go to Vegas and show you the people who won big jackpots
there too and say look how well they did. What does that mean? Nothing.
There are always a handful of people who hit the jackpot. Soros, Gates,
and Buffet all qualify.

Hawke

More drivel. Gates , Soros and Buffet consistently did things that
made them money. Go to Vegas , find the people that won big jackpots
and see how well they do during the next 10 years. That is the
difference between luck and skill.

You are just justifying how well you have done by claiming it is just
luck that makes the difference.

Dan



Show me a successful person that wasn't lucky.

Hawke

On Feb 22, 4:07*pm, Hawke wrote:


Show me a successful person that wasn't lucky.

Hawke

How about Donald Trump, Bill Gates , and Warren Buffet?

Or my father who grew up on a farm in Kansas, was in the Army during
WWI, worked his way through college at Colorado School of Mines by
waiting tables, worked in Mexico in the yucatan peninsula when he
graduated from college. He was successful, but he earned it by
working.

Dan

wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:07*pm, Hawke wrote:

Show me a successful person that wasn't lucky.

How about Donald Trump, Bill Gates , and Warren Buffet?

Or my father who grew up on a farm in Kansas, was in the Army during
WWI, worked his way through college at Colorado School of Mines by
waiting tables, worked in Mexico in the yucatan peninsula when he
graduated from college. He was successful, but he earned it by
working.

Well, Bill Gates was unquestionably lucky - IBM made the PC, and
somehow Gates weaseled himself there and wrote DOS, which was mostly
copied from CP/M; IBM was so unenthusiastic about PCs in general that
they essentially _granted_ Gates the exclusive rights to it.

Bad move for IBM, but Gates made a king's ransom.

But he was so incredibly naive - when Windows and networking and
interoperability appeared, he had this dream of this big worldwide
network where everybody shares all their files with everybody else,
anybody can run programs on anybody else's computers, and all that
pie-in-the-sky schtuff.

Obviously he had no clue that there were bad people out there who
would exploit that vision.

Albeit, he did cause a huge market for third party antivirus software
vendors.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

On 2/22/2011 1:30 PM, wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:07 pm, wrote:


Show me a successful person that wasn't lucky.

Hawke

How about Donald Trump, Bill Gates , and Warren Buffet?

Or my father who grew up on a farm in Kansas, was in the Army during
WWI, worked his way through college at Colorado School of Mines by
waiting tables, worked in Mexico in the yucatan peninsula when he
graduated from college. He was successful, but he earned it by
working.

Dan


He was lucky nothing bad happened to him and that he was healthy. He
probably also was born with attributes that others lacked. If you look
at the successful carefully you always find they had luck too. Luck is
an important feature of success. Know any unlucky people who are
successful?

Hawke