 | | Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania... —Simon Robinson
|
| | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: OK - as your posting was mostly just an 'I agree' response to what Larry wrote, I wouldn't have thought of replying to it - until I saw this. (...) The following applies to you Scott, Mike (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania... —Mike Stanley
|
| | | | | (...) or: (c) Don't always have enough time to spend on a well-reasoned reply that will ultimately fall on the deaf ears of someone whose opinions are simply wrong-headed. (...) Most people who actually engage in debates have no intention of being (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania... —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | Simon, (...) Heaven forbid I might use a word. (...) As I do yours, but I digress. (...) I can tell you things about political name calling, but I don't feel like bringing that up again. (...) First of all, Simon, I was not really replying to you, I (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Blue Hopper Car Mania... —John Neal
|
| | | | Scott Edward Sanburn wrote: <snippage of some pointless flames [come on, guys]> (...) This is just a random post to something Scott said, but it made me think of why I was a Liberal and why I'm not completely Libertarian. It has to do with stuff. I (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | John, (...) Pointless, yes, as always, but still there. I'm used to getting crispy every now and then, part of debate, I guess. (...) I don't think it is wrong. If that's the way they want to be, that is their right, unless the government intervenes (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | (...) Fairness was moist emphatically not enforced in the USSR. Marxism has never happened. (...) I wonder where you get your figures. My figures say the costs of administration of the US welfare system are about 2% of the total sum paid out. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) and mine say they can go as high as 70%. 2% admin for a US government program? Laughable. (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | Last I head, from the Congressional Budget office figures, about 7 out of 8 dollars go to the administering of the programs, not the recipients, so whenever they talk about putting more money there, it is for the people running it, not the people on (...) (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Christopher Lannan
|
| | | | | | (...) whenever (...) Not only the huge costs of dispensing the money in these programs, but I have heard that 50% of the money that the IRS collects is spent collecting it. That seems like a terrible waste to me. Flat sales taxes anyone? Chris (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | (...) Sales tax, at least for the state (Michigan) is flat. How about a flat income tax, or a consumption tax even? Anything is better than the awful monstrosity of the Federal tax system. Scott S. "I have worked harder than I ever have in my entire (...) (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Christopher Lannan
|
| | | | | | (...) have (...) That (...) of (...) you a (...) I guess that's what I mean- there would be no taxes except for about a 20% sale tax on most things (I know there's going to be folks saying what about this and that, milk, diapers, should folks on the (...) (25 years ago, 11-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —John DiRienzo
|
| | | | Christopher Lannan wrote in message ... (...) it. (...) income (...) monstrosity (...) no (...) the (...) the (...) it (...) Instead of spending our time figuring new dumb ways to tax people, I have an idea (1)... how about not taxing people? I like (...) (25 years ago, 12-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | (...) A nice idea, true, but one that is impractical, as of right now. I would love not to be taxed, but I don't think it is practical. Our current society needs to pay for certain things (I.E., military, roads, etc.), but not in the way, the (...) (25 years ago, 12-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —Christopher Lannan
|
| | | | (...) to (...) There has got to be a better way. A drastic measure is not such a bad idea. Its too bad, I think, that our current system of govt/economy is so established at this point, and protects itself so jealously, that really we probably won't (...) (25 years ago, 12-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Discussion (Was: Blue Hopper Car Mania...) —John DiRienzo
|
| | | | Christopher Lannan wrote in message ... (...) have (...) lot. (...) the (...) or (...) there (...) waste. (...) love (...) needs (...) the (...) anything (...) miserably- (...) we (...) bad (...) Unfortunely, (...) herself. (...) anyway, (...) (...) (25 years ago, 13-Nov-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
