'Red Scares'
in [Cars]
|
From: Michael Coburn on 25 Jul 2010 23:02 On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:27:05 -0400, Dave Head wrote: > On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:13:26 -0500, "bugo" <watuzi(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>"Dave Head" <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote in message >>news:bhnp46teki6ftfe9lco9p88sg7a567u28m(a)4ax.com... >>> The Fair Tax is applied as a sales tax on new items and services sold >>> at retail. Things sold at wholesale, or for use in commerce, are not >>> taxed. So, Farmer Brown's seed stock for the year is not taxed, nor >>> is his tractor. The corn you buy from him is taxed since it is sold >>> to you at retail. Every new item and every service, save one, is >>> taxed. The only service not taxed is tuition. >> >>So corporations get off scot-free. > > They always have. No corporation has ever paid a penny of tax. They've > just passed that expense along to the rest of us who buy their products, > and we pay it. THe corporation simply ends up being a tax collector, to > the detriment of Ameican industrial competitiveness. Ah yes... The moronic Republican nutter who knows NOTHING about cost distributions, or tax incidence, or tax burden. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_incidence --------------------- Read it carefully and make sure you read the parts I properly sourced and added about Macroeconomic perspectives. >>No wonder why you corporate-loving Repubs like it so much. > > Why would you not be "corporate-loving." Where else do you think you're > going to get the good jobs to raise people out of poverty? From properly regulated corporations. It isn't corporation or not. It is properly regulated business. Like using import tariffs to incentivize domestic production. Import tariffs are far superior to corporate income tax increases. >>In your distorted world, corporations can do no wrong. > > Didn't say that, but that's no reason to hate them all because some of > them do really nasty stuff. That is true. They can do very good stuff as well as the rip offs they currently seem employ. -- "Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60
From: Beam Me Up Scotty on 25 Jul 2010 23:14 On 7/25/2010 8:25 PM, bugo wrote: > "Dave Head" <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote in message > news:rpjp46t45t4ao7ifp16aea327i3g5e7ku3(a)4ax.com... >>> You didn't answer why it's OK for insurance companies to have death >>> panels >>> while it's not OK for the government to. >> >> I don't believe they do. They have to honor what's in their >> contracts. > > Then you're wrong. It's a well-known fact that insurance companies have > defacto death panels. > > That would be government death panels where you are forced into their health care. The insurance companies can't decide on treatment or not to treat, unless you sign a contract that lets them decide. You need to buy a policy that says they will do what ever is needed and if after the crisis is over and it turns out it's NOT covered then they have your house deed as collateral. That is a contract that might work.
From: US 71 on 25 Jul 2010 23:31 "Dave Head" <rally2xs(a)att.net> wrote >> > No, everybody who's a US citizen. And you believe that lie?
From: Beam Me Up Scotty on 25 Jul 2010 23:30 On 7/25/2010 7:29 PM, bugo wrote: > "Larry G" <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:2c7f1080-56fe-4850-87be- >> I don't know about other states but Va's Constitution mandates public >> education. > > I bet the "state's rights" crowd will be silent on this comment. Did the U.S. constitution prohibit the States from offering a public education? To mandate an education would ignore the U.S. constitution....
From: Larry G on 26 Jul 2010 18:18
On Jul 25, 9:02 pm, Dave Head <rally...(a)att.net> wrote: > On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:47:06 -0700 (PDT), Larry G > > > > > > <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >On Jul 25, 8:21 pm, "bugo" <wat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Dave Head" <rally...(a)att.net> wrote in message > > >>news:aijp46ttdd878cl257dl51hj4rt0t6sq0c(a)4ax.com... > > >> > On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 18:26:12 -0500, "bugo" <wat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> >>"Dave Head" <rally...(a)att.net> wrote in message > >> >>news:qtgp46d5r4tkanqg29s7vchdueeeeefm17(a)4ax.com... > >> >>> On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 15:52:23 -0500, "bugo" <wat...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> >>>>"Dave Head" <rally...(a)att.net> wrote in message > >> >>>>news:0noo46d4ci8f79qqnpbbipgijecti1ufgv(a)4ax.com... > >> >>>>> Kill the income tax, make everyone prosperous, then they won't need > >> >>>>> it. > > >> >>>>I wish I had such a simple, dumbed down, black and white worldview.. It > >> >>>>would be a lot easier than seeing the world as a complex thing. > > >> >>> Killing the income tax is pretty simple - its a cancer in the economy. > > >> >>Simplifying the income tax is a great idea. Eliminating it for a sales > >> >>tax > >> >>that unfairly overtaxes the poor is criminal. > > >> > The poor don't pay a penny of Fair Tax. > > >> Explain. The way I understand, the "fair" tax is a sales tax. Everyone has > >> to pay a sales tax, and at the same rate. > > >what exactly is being taxed with the FAIR TAX? > > The Fair Tax is applied as a sales tax on new items and services sold > at retail. Things sold at wholesale, or for use in commerce, are not > taxed. So, Farmer Brown's seed stock for the year is not taxed, nor > is his tractor. The corn you buy from him is taxed since it is sold > to you at retail. Every new item and every service, save one, is > taxed. The only service not taxed is tuition. sounds a lot like the GST in Canada and Europe. |