Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#4311
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can bemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <he01rvkv69ec5fet8fd4vrfgmbvqvjevfe@4ax.com>, Marc wrote:
> "Steve Stone" <spfleck@zzcitlinkzz.net> wrote:
>>What is a liberal these daze ?
>>
> A "liberal" is anyone that thinks that corporations should be held liable
> for their illegal actions. A "liberal" is someone that thinks that what a
> person does in their own home alone or with consenting adults is only the
> business of those present.
The left (aka 'Liberals') want to get into the people's homes in an even
more sinister thought police style rather than the simple view screen
model of the 'right'. But either way it's sliced, it's 1984.
> "Steve Stone" <spfleck@zzcitlinkzz.net> wrote:
>>What is a liberal these daze ?
>>
> A "liberal" is anyone that thinks that corporations should be held liable
> for their illegal actions. A "liberal" is someone that thinks that what a
> person does in their own home alone or with consenting adults is only the
> business of those present.
The left (aka 'Liberals') want to get into the people's homes in an even
more sinister thought police style rather than the simple view screen
model of the 'right'. But either way it's sliced, it's 1984.
#4312
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can bemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <he01rvkv69ec5fet8fd4vrfgmbvqvjevfe@4ax.com>, Marc wrote:
> "Steve Stone" <spfleck@zzcitlinkzz.net> wrote:
>>What is a liberal these daze ?
>>
> A "liberal" is anyone that thinks that corporations should be held liable
> for their illegal actions. A "liberal" is someone that thinks that what a
> person does in their own home alone or with consenting adults is only the
> business of those present.
The left (aka 'Liberals') want to get into the people's homes in an even
more sinister thought police style rather than the simple view screen
model of the 'right'. But either way it's sliced, it's 1984.
> "Steve Stone" <spfleck@zzcitlinkzz.net> wrote:
>>What is a liberal these daze ?
>>
> A "liberal" is anyone that thinks that corporations should be held liable
> for their illegal actions. A "liberal" is someone that thinks that what a
> person does in their own home alone or with consenting adults is only the
> business of those present.
The left (aka 'Liberals') want to get into the people's homes in an even
more sinister thought police style rather than the simple view screen
model of the 'right'. But either way it's sliced, it's 1984.
#4313
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can bemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <vp01rv8d9htdocpdmvhacs2ikfl2g6plso@4ax.com>, Marc wrote:
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
#4314
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can bemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <vp01rv8d9htdocpdmvhacs2ikfl2g6plso@4ax.com>, Marc wrote:
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
#4315
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can bemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
In article <vp01rv8d9htdocpdmvhacs2ikfl2g6plso@4ax.com>, Marc wrote:
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
> I pay less than 20% of my paycheck to the government. Even including my
> employer's contribution to SS (which I wouldn't receive if they didn't
> pay),
You do X amount of work. It costs the empolyer Y. That cost is what the
empolyer sees and considers the market rate for an employee that can do
X. The work X is worth Y. If the hidden SS tax goes away, the work is
still worth Y. To keep and attract the best employees that segment would
become wages. Now for the unskilled, inexperienced worker on the bottom
rung, he probably wouldn't get it, however, since he could now work for
a lower cost the likelyhood of finding a job to build skill and experience
is greater and he will get himself out of that posistion.
#4316
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >That tax increases hurt economies is an observed fact.<<
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
#4317
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >That tax increases hurt economies is an observed fact.<<
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
#4318
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >That tax increases hurt economies is an observed fact.<<
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
> Then why is it so hotly debated? <
It is only "hotly debated" beccause the Leftists must have massive &
continual revenue stream increases to fund their plans for ever increasing
government & its attendant patronage. They must therefore attempt to fool
the public into thinking "the rich" need to be taxed more & more. Any review
of tax codes shows "the rich" turn out to be anyone making more than $50k a
year, with the threshold creeping lower year on year.
Democrats plan for and try to perpetuate public ignorance on this subject.
Yesterday it was reported that Bills put forward by the Democrats just this
this year, if enacted, would total nearly $450 billion vs. roughly 36 b by
the Republicans. Further, cost for Democratic proposals when totalled over
the next ten years would increased the defict nearly tenfold over their own
deficit figures from the "evil Bush tax cuts". They hope we can't read or
add & subtract. They also hope we forget that they voted for them. Once
again, Democrats represent the epitome of irresponsibility, lies and
hypocrisy.
#4319
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> And the majority of voting shares are controlled by the financial elite. <
I suppose that's a problem, huh? The people who understand business and take
the biggest risks shouldn't have a voice? BTW, I'm not of the "financial
elite" but I get to vote on every holding I have. Every shareholder has that
right. The alternative is governmaent control of business, which has and
will always be a total failure .. or, did you miss what happened in Russia?
I suppose that's a problem, huh? The people who understand business and take
the biggest risks shouldn't have a voice? BTW, I'm not of the "financial
elite" but I get to vote on every holding I have. Every shareholder has that
right. The alternative is governmaent control of business, which has and
will always be a total failure .. or, did you miss what happened in Russia?
#4320
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> And the majority of voting shares are controlled by the financial elite. <
I suppose that's a problem, huh? The people who understand business and take
the biggest risks shouldn't have a voice? BTW, I'm not of the "financial
elite" but I get to vote on every holding I have. Every shareholder has that
right. The alternative is governmaent control of business, which has and
will always be a total failure .. or, did you miss what happened in Russia?
I suppose that's a problem, huh? The people who understand business and take
the biggest risks shouldn't have a voice? BTW, I'm not of the "financial
elite" but I get to vote on every holding I have. Every shareholder has that
right. The alternative is governmaent control of business, which has and
will always be a total failure .. or, did you miss what happened in Russia?