rehmwa

you're purposely ignoring who has the ability to use investment income and who doesn't - you know that, don't be obtuse to the actual point of the statement If we gave a special deduction for investments over $2,000,000 you could make the same argument admit it - you are a social liberal that wants to socially engineer a special spending and investment behavior rather than just let the market run freely - ... 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

IMHO - He's a hell of a decent guy with a great vision/method. I hope you get it worked out. ... 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

yes - get rid of all deductions, all incentives, every single little 'special gift' that the politicians 'gave' to the people to buy their votes - (that goes for multi-millionaires CEOs, welfare moms, and the middle class) - then tax at one rate for all sources of income (richer people pay more dollars - so it's still progressive in amount - but equal in proportion (proportion is also considered a share)) A uniform $$ amount (everyone pays the same amount rather than the same percentage) is also fair - but I don't think it's doable or practical of course, "fair" is subjective to the max - that's just my definition what's 'fair' about someone with low income paying nothing? what's 'fair' about the uber rich getting special deductions that only they can leverage and paying nothing? what's 'fair' about a home owner paying less than a non-home owner? etc etc etc ... 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

it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of Claiming that "the rich" get a special rate is social engineering as well. no, it's just marketing your statement doesn't even make any sense, Mike - the rich get to take advantage of the special rates much more than those with no investment income - it's pretty clear it's a boon to a certain income class I don't like it any better than welfare for other income classes - government shouldn't be trying to pick winners and losers ... 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

it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of +1 then of course you agree that having a progressive rate structure is also unnecessary social engineering as is mortgage deductions and subsidies for solar panels and subsidies to banks and industries to keep them alive and cars for cash efforts etc etc etc I don't like all of these - I think it's unnecessary I don't like the lefty philosophy, because they want to play favorites all the time and meddle with who gets which bennies I don't like the 'typical' righties, because they claim to want my philosophy, but then they cry if they think they'll lose their precious special rates and deductions (it would be easier if we wiped the slate clean and just establish a single set of rules) ... 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

it's still stupid - income is income, taxing different buckets at different rates is just social engineering - which the gov should stay out of ... 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

absolutely. However, if it was monotonic, I'd blame global warming for it ... 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

I'm assuming it's a lot like when John Kerry would berth his yacht in another state to avoid huge tax bills ... 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

probably true just like democrats feel they purge more rep voters than dem voters by blocking legal military absentee votes one has to decide on their own which party has the moral high side in comparison - if one exists ... 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

It might be worthwhile contacting Kurt at Skyleague.com. Helping regions setting up leagues is something he's really done so well. You'll need a local leader to step up and volunteer to make it happen, though. (www.skyleague.com) was originally set up as a national (US) skyleague, but now it's more of an international sky league and fantastic that it is. We get to compare scores on same weekly draws with all sorts of teams around the world. West-Aussie would be a GREAT addition. ... 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

I see..... you think only women are ignorant and worship make-believe fairies. Men just want to get dates. Your insight really is helping me understand more about gender problems. I never ever thought that women were that scattered brained. It's still hard to accept that but, with your example, I'll try harder. As for men - I always knew we'd do whatever necessary to find the right gal. So no surprise there. ... 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

Any "reward" for one guy, just means the others have to pick up the slack (i.e., you are forcing your neighbors to subsidize your car purchase). So it's still a punishment for those that choose to not go after the reward. What business does the government have for offering a reward for doing something, anyway? It's not their business. However = I agree this is DRAMATICALLY upping the interference factor, it's a much more BLATANT implementation of the concepts. I'm very worried that both parties will be able to springboard off of this to force the public to act and think and live by their arbitrary social standards. ... 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

I suspect that there may be regional trends. As well as extreme reactions to people that are very in your face regardless of where they are. I'm in the upper midwest, and except for the fanatics (political usually...., not religious - except for the elderly) - most of time we mind our own business and just take our neighbors one at a time based on how they behave. At least in my circle. I don't really bother with people that make an assessment with only superficial data. ... 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

Fine, Shotgun is still my candidate for president (since Nightengale left the forums). But you've moved into my candidate for VP. ... 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

I know a lot of people who say that they are spiritual but not religious, and I'm pretty sure that most of them are not atheists. I think most of them believe in some sort of god or "higher power," but they don't relate to or adhere to a religion. But that's just my experience . . . OK, you beat me to it I also know guys that pretend to be this to get into the pants of girls that claim that position. Seems to be the best rationale so far..... ... 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

In my experience, people who claim to be spiritual but not religious are actually religious types who are unwilling to come right out and admit it on account that atheism is socially PC lately in the USA So what? we're probably both right in some cases. Individuals tends to have individual reasons for their own beliefs and that's how it should be. ... 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

yes - get rid of ALL penalties and all subsidies (in whatever form, tax, fee, etc etc etc). Treat everyone as individuals with a flat tax rate, and let products services be managed in the free market gov interference is nuts - whether for good intentions or not - we can take care of ourselves this one really opened the flood gates to where the gov can intrude on all aspects of life and confiscate anything and everything they like on a whim ... 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

this has got to be some kind of Dem talking point since the Democratic candidate also claimed it's not a tax so what, SC says it is ... 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

Isn't it great? we need a name for the full list of ways the government takes money/equity from the people: tax, fine, fee, custom, print more money, subsidies (help one group, then anyone not in that group has to take up the slack), penalties, etc etc ad nauseum seriously, ad nauseum because in the end, whatever you call it, the citizen is left with less in his pocket and the government has more to waste - waste being the only thing it does efficiently ... 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

it's in the semantics (sadly) - I take exception to the word 'evidence'. If it was 'belief', or 'faith' or 'anecdotes', then I respect it completely. (i'm probably wrong, but I see 'evidence' and think of it as something open to review and verification - but on a subjective topic, it's not really, it's just stuff you relate to your beliefs - but my vocabulary isn't that extensive) But I know lots of people that tend to treat beliefs and opinion (on lots of subjects, not just religion) as fact. They tend like phrases like " 'nuff said', and 'fact of the matter is', etc etc etc) - so go figure ... 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

at first, eventually, just running in circles get boring ... 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

I find it to be a great part time job, but not so great as a full time vocation.. and in this thread, you're not one at all - good discussion ... 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

we're not disagreeing, the original error is from that person claiming proof on a subject that's clearly founded, BASED on, a belief that doesn't require proof. (Frankly, if there ever is shown absolute proof in either direction, all organized faith based groups would come crashing down) I'm just saying that, instead of driving down the pointless "gimme proof of the unprovable" route - which is a total waste of time and, IMO, just antagonistic for the sake of being antagonistic - the better gambit is to address their convictions on their personal faith and ask them why they feel the need to claim proof when it should be absolutely unnecessary if their faith is truly as strong as it should be. But that's just me, I couldn't care less about the large organizations, but I'm always interested in more insight of individuals and friends. Those can be interesting discussions with those who are sincere, and an added bonus is it pretty much lets you sort out those others that are shallow in their beliefs and just spewing quotes and crap (those I just ignore as wasting my time and reason). And, frankly, this also works with atheists to figure out who's reasonable and thoughtful vs just the fanatics. ... 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

Actually - they don't need to 'provide evidence' (that's a silly way to respond to them, it's non-productive and confrontative), what is needed is a discussion why any "absolute claim" is a non-starter and doesn't even fit the bounds of any discussion on faith or spirituality. Essentially, they are exagerating the verbage in an attempt to show the strength of their personal (and unprovable) belief. That part can be called out - but asking for 'evidence' is just kinda jerky since, by definition, it can't exist. in that, I agree - Winsor stated it pretty nicely and pretty much exactly my position on it. ... 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

"spirituality" is a coping mechanism - I don't find it even slightly different than "faith" as it addresses the same concerns. Just like faith, if people want to claim to be spiritual, then that's fine, but those same people then can't mock faithful types either - pot/kettle. the end result I care about is just whether it makes them nicer people (measure that) or terms them into jerks or weirdos - and that follows no rules, it's individual ... 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