david3 0 #376 December 30, 2010 Quote Quote You're simply ignoring the facts in an irrational manner. You might want to retain a tax law attorney for any unforeseen future needs. Although paying the tax will be significantly cheaper. This has been repeatedly proven. Ignoring that won't make it different. Define income. As a matter of fact and law, why don't you look up and provide for us the definition of income as stated in the tax code. Thanks. "Treetop" aka LORD OF THE SKY No Shit, Don Jardine. The man, the myth... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #377 December 30, 2010 Tarpons are cool when you are night diving - they like the lights and shoot right at you and then turn suddenly away. It would be nice to let this thread die, but it won't, so piling on. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #378 December 30, 2010 >Define income. OOhhh, semantics games again! If you redefine words you can do anything! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #379 December 30, 2010 Quote>Define income. OOhhh, semantics games again! If you redefine words you can do anything! if someone else wants to be the test case for this, I'm all for it. I don't have the time or money to go playing redefinition games in court. It would bring re-implementation of taxes into the realm of possibility though. meh... I have work to do... can't go dreaming.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #380 December 30, 2010 Quote >Define income. OOhhh, semantics games again! If you redefine words you can do anything! Absolutley. Just ask Bill Clinton.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #381 December 30, 2010 Quote Of course, the reverse is the liberal view of 'less tax=theft from the government' which is equally fallacious. WRONG AGAIN. Taxes are not theft, and (less tax) is not (theft from government). Theft simply doesn't enter in to it one way or the other.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #382 December 30, 2010 Quote$90 mil is "super rich"? Who wrote anything about $90M?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #383 December 30, 2010 Quote>The bailout is an attempt to hide their criminality. That is fact. If it was fact they would all be in jail. . If you define criminality by being convicted, OK. But then there are many criminals who are never caught.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #384 December 30, 2010 >But then there are many criminals who are never caught. Right. But if there are criminals in plain view (which all bankers currently are) with hard facts on their criminal activities readily available (which the poster claims) then either the justice system doesn't work at all or there is an error in the poster's claim. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #385 December 30, 2010 Quote>But then there are many criminals who are never caught. Right. But if there are criminals in plain view (which all bankers currently are) with hard facts on their criminal activities readily available (which the poster claims) then either the justice system doesn't work at all or there is an error in the poster's claim. Al Capone (and many other gangsters right up the the present day) were/are in plain view. Big Al only ever got convicted of tax evasion. In Chicago we have well known street gang bangers who can't be convicted for various reasons. Then there are those given immunity so the prosecutors can go after bigger fish.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #386 December 30, 2010 >Al Capone (and many other gangsters right up the the present day) >were/are in plain view. Yep. Were the facts concerning their criminal activities readily available? >In Chicago we have well known street gang bangers who can't be convicted >for various reasons. Also agreed. Were the facts concerning their criminal activities readily available? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #387 December 30, 2010 Quote>Al Capone (and many other gangsters right up the the present day) >were/are in plain view. Yep. Were the facts concerning their criminal activities readily available? >In Chicago we have well known street gang bangers who can't be convicted >for various reasons. Also agreed. Were the facts concerning their criminal activities readily available? Well, being known and being admissible as evidence are not equivalent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #388 December 30, 2010 >Well, being known and being admissible as evidence are not equivalent. Agreed. Now, were the facts concerning the criminal activities of the groups you mentioned above readily available? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #389 December 30, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Hey when the ducks all quack the same.... Thanks for proving the point. Sorry that you guys keep voting for those who spout morality and try to legislate morality and turn out time after time after time.. to have a far higher level of immorality in their own lives. IT must REALLLY suck to be fooled damn near ALL of the time. Sucks to be yall Ah, and there's the 'idiots' insinuation. Must suck to be so barren of fact that these are the only type of rebuttals you can make.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,121 #390 December 30, 2010 Quote>Well, being known and being admissible as evidence are not equivalent. Agreed. Now, were the facts concerning the criminal activities of the groups you mentioned above readily available? I'm not sure what you mean. The Chicago street gangs and their members are well known.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #391 December 30, 2010 >The Chicago street gangs and their members are well known. Yes. Were the facts concerning their illegal activities readily available? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #392 December 30, 2010 Quoteif someone else wants to be the test case for this, I'm all for it. I don't have the time or money to go playing redefinition games in court. Been done already. many times. . . QuoteIn Great-West Life Assurance Co. v. United States, 230 Ct. Cl. 477, 678 F.2d 180, 183 (1982) “The determination of where income is derived or ‘sourced’ is generally of no moment to either United States citizens or United States corporations, for such persons are subject to tax under section 1 and section 11, respectively, on their worldwide income.” . . .and several more just from searching that case._____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #393 December 30, 2010 QuoteThe Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to describe the 1920s, principally in North America but also in London, Paris and Berlin. The phrase was meant to emphasize the period's social, artistic, and cultural dynamism. 'Normalcy' returned to politics in the wake of World War I, jazz music blossomed, the flapper redefined modern womanhood, Art Deco peaked, and finally the Wall Street Crash of 1929 served to punctuate the end of the era, as The Great Depression set in. The era was further distinguished by several inventions and discoveries of far-reaching importance, unprecedented industrial growth, accelerated consumer demand and aspirations, and significant changes in lifestyle. The social and cultural features known as the Roaring Twenties began in leading metropolitan centers, especially New York, Paris and Berlin, then spread widely in the aftermath of World War I. The United States gained dominance in world finance. Thus when Germany could no longer afford war reparations to Britain, France and other Allies, the Americans came up with the Dawes Plan and Wall Street invested heavily in Germany, which repaid its reparations to nations that in turn used the dollars to pay off their war debts to Washington. By the middle of the decade, prosperity was widespread. The second half of the decade becoming known as the "Golden Twenties". In France and francophone Canada, they were also called the "années folles" ("Crazy Years").[1] The spirit of the Roaring Twenties was marked by a general feeling of discontinuity associated with modernity, a break with traditions. Everything seemed to be feasible through modern technology. New technologies, especially automobiles, moving pictures and radio proliferated 'modernity' to a large part of the population. Formal decorative frills were shed in favor of practicality in both daily life and architecture. At the same time, jazz and dancing rose in popularity, in opposition to the mood of the specter of World War I. As such, the period is also often referred to as the Jazz Age. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Twentiesstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #394 December 30, 2010 is this the cycle you're talking about... QuoteIn 1920-1921 there was an acute recession, followed by the sustained recovery throughout the 1920s. The Federal Reserve expanded credit, by setting below market interest rates and low reserve requirements that favored big banks, and the money supply actually increased by about 60% during the time following the recession. By the latter part of the decade "buying on margin" entered the American vocabulary as more and more Americans over-extended themselves to speculate on the soaring stock market and expanding credit. Very few expected the crash that began in 1929, and none suspected it would be so drastic or so prolonged. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Twentiesstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #395 December 30, 2010 >is this the cycle you're talking about... It's one of them, yes. Economic cycles - and bubbles, and crashes - are part of every economic system we've ever created. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #396 December 30, 2010 Quote>is this the cycle you're talking about... It's one of them, yes. Economic cycles - and bubbles, and crashes - are part of every economic system we've ever created. so we can expect a big world war to rebalance things?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #397 December 30, 2010 QuoteQuote>is this the cycle you're talking about... It's one of them, yes. Economic cycles - and bubbles, and crashes - are part of every economic system we've ever created. so we can expect a big world war to rebalance things? the most notable difference between now and the 20s is the Bomb. So, no, we don't expect such an event. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #398 December 30, 2010 >so we can expect a big world war to rebalance things? Unlikely. And even if we did, wars are just one economic impact among many. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #399 December 30, 2010 Quote>so we can expect a big world war to rebalance things? Unlikely. or more realistically about fifty/fifty...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #400 December 30, 2010 QuoteQuote It is not me wanting to take other peoples stuff/money but you keep saying you want us to pay more taxes than the super rich - so you obviously want our stuff/money to do that... (goodness - can you whine on behalf of the super rich - they're not paying you are they) Hmmm - as a matter of fact, yes they are - they create jobs for people that in return have money to spend on a new barn, or house, or other building I want to have them pay me to build. So yes, indirectly they are paying me . . . and you, if you work.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
