Normal lifespan of cats

"jmc" wrote in message
...
Suddenly, without warning, dgk exclaimed (10/13/2010 9:09 AM):
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:05:22 -0700, "Bill
wrote:


Capitalism doesn't work when corporations get "too big to fail". If we
had let the financial system crumble, it would have ruined a lot more
people than just the ones responsible. We need to stop corporations
from getting that big but no one can because corporations can now fund
elections all they want. Thanks to the Republican Supreme Court.

Remember, Democrats are leased by big corporations but Republicans are
owned outright.

You are discounting the millions of out-of-work people who are suffering
from this recession today.....You think that they don't count because we
can't see them all? In my state alone, fully 12% of the work force
doesn't.
I see these people every day, trying to earn a few dollars to pay for
their
food by mowing my lawn or doing some chore that I need. Your estimation
of
what the government is doing to help the situation is very unrealistic.
And,
even in my own case, I retired in 1996 with .93 million dollars in my
IRA,
and today it has shrunk to .7 million. I certainly haven't spent the
difference in the past 14 years. I will be lucky if I survive until my
death
without having to rent a trailer court home outside Tulsa
Oklahoma.....My
father would be rolling over in his grave about now......He's the one
who
told me to save 10% of everything I earned for my retirement.....Little
did
he know that the socialists would steal most of it, and I should have
saved
20%.....I wonder where he would go to escape were he still alive today?
For
the life of me, I can't find anyplace.....

The socialists stole it? I'm a socialist and I don't have any of it.
No, your money has gone to increase the wealth of the already
fabulously wealthy. I haven't seen any of it.

See, I'm a socialist like those guys who used to get together and
raise a barn for their neighbor. We all get together and try to make
our little village better. I'm the president of our civic association.
I'm the guy trying to spay and neuter the local feral population, and
build them little winter homes. No sir, capitalist pigs stole your
retirement money, not us good socialists.


I'm not a socialist and I think barn-raising is great. Why would you
think libertarians won't help their neighbors? I donate my time and money
to charities all the time. So do many of those so called "capitalist
pigs" you so love to denigrate. I noticed you completely failed to notice
that I provided a link where thousands of "filthy rich" give millions
(billions, in the case of Bill Gates) to charity. Here's another example:
Remember Tony Curtis, who recently died? Him and his wife spent a good
bit of time and money rescuing horses, rehabilitating them, and helping
them find new homes. He didn't have to do that, but he chose to.

Sure, there are people who have a lot of money that don't donate a dime to
charity. That's their choice, it's their time and money. There are
plenty of people in all walks of life, rich AND poor, who wouldn't lift a
finger to save a dying puppy on the side of the road. It's not the amount
of money a person has that makes them that way, it's their own
personality.

If charity is forced, it is not charity. It is theft. Plain and simple.
If you take my hard earned money away from me, to give to those who
haven't worked for it, then you've robbed me. I'm willing to pay taxes to
support roads and other public works, but not to pay able-bodied people to
sit around on their fat asses, watch TV and call me evil, while coveting
the money I've earned by my own hard work.

One thing I've noticed about socialists though - it's always someone
else's money. Never their own. It's always That Evil Capitalist that
needs to have their money taken away, not Me The Good Socialist, even if
the Good Socialist makes the same amount of money. Margaret Thatcher (you
remember her, used to be Prime Minister of England, a socialist country?)
once said, "the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other
people's money".

This is getting kind of old though. None of us are going to change each
other's minds. Since you love Socialism, please move to England. I've
lived over a half decade there, so I know what it's like to live under a
socialist government. You can have it.

America is not, and should not become, another socialist country. That
perverts the very tenents our country is based on.

jmc



Robin Hood was, sadly, nothing but a thief. A thief neither knows nor cares
where the person he steals from got his money. He just assumes that he stole
it from the poor and will use it for himself.

"dgk" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:56:46 -0400, Patok
wrote:

Bill Graham wrote:

It isn't us capitalists who are printing money at the mint in Washington
DC, and borrowing trillions from China either. In a pure capitalist
world, we would be in competition with one another for the consumers
money.....What it comes down to is this: (in my experience) when a
businessman bribes a government official or senator to get him to vote
in laws that restrict trade, then who is more at fault? If you think
that its the businessman, then you are a liberal socialist. If you think
its the government official, then you are likely to be, (like me) a
libertarian.

I think that both are equally at fault. What am I?

--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.


The problem is that it costs millions of dollars to run for office. If
someone takes money in order to run for office, of course they are
going to vote the way the donor wants. If people really want to fix
the way things are, then get the money out of politics. Right now, the
Supreme Court has unleashed corporations to spend massive amounts of
money to buy their chosen republicans the House and Senate. It's
working. I can't turn on a radio or tv without hearing an attack ad by
some unknown sourced group attacking the democrats.

Let's work for a system where it is illegal to bribe (ie, donate money
to) a politician. Oh, but the Supreme Court says that donating money
is free speech! Well, we'd best find a way around that quickly unless
we want a fascist country. (facism, the marriage of corporate and
state power). Geting there quickly and I expect the Tea Party members
will be receiving their brown shirts soon.

I agree with this, which brings up my ideal government. I would eliminate
voting, and have a computer pick several hundred people out of the voting
population to be our congressmen and run the country.....Perhaps 200 every
other year for 6 years, and then retire the oldest two hundred and replace
them with the 200 freshmen they just picked.....So no one would serve more
than 6 years.......IOW, chose our leaders out of the general population.
That way, there wouldn't be any more lawyers or rich people than there were
farmers, store clerks, seamstresses, nurses, or any other profession or
workers.......Truly a government "of the people".....

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:52:19 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


"dgk" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:56:46 -0400, Patok
wrote:

Bill Graham wrote:

It isn't us capitalists who are printing money at the mint in Washington
DC, and borrowing trillions from China either. In a pure capitalist
world, we would be in competition with one another for the consumers
money.....What it comes down to is this: (in my experience) when a
businessman bribes a government official or senator to get him to vote
in laws that restrict trade, then who is more at fault? If you think
that its the businessman, then you are a liberal socialist. If you think
its the government official, then you are likely to be, (like me) a
libertarian.

I think that both are equally at fault. What am I?

--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.


The problem is that it costs millions of dollars to run for office. If
someone takes money in order to run for office, of course they are
going to vote the way the donor wants. If people really want to fix
the way things are, then get the money out of politics. Right now, the
Supreme Court has unleashed corporations to spend massive amounts of
money to buy their chosen republicans the House and Senate. It's
working. I can't turn on a radio or tv without hearing an attack ad by
some unknown sourced group attacking the democrats.

Let's work for a system where it is illegal to bribe (ie, donate money
to) a politician. Oh, but the Supreme Court says that donating money
is free speech! Well, we'd best find a way around that quickly unless
we want a fascist country. (facism, the marriage of corporate and
state power). Geting there quickly and I expect the Tea Party members
will be receiving their brown shirts soon.

I agree with this, which brings up my ideal government. I would eliminate
voting, and have a computer pick several hundred people out of the voting
population to be our congressmen and run the country.....Perhaps 200 every
other year for 6 years, and then retire the oldest two hundred and replace
them with the 200 freshmen they just picked.....So no one would serve more
than 6 years.......IOW, chose our leaders out of the general population.
That way, there wouldn't be any more lawyers or rich people than there were
farmers, store clerks, seamstresses, nurses, or any other profession or
workers.......Truly a government "of the people".....

Yea, the problem is that there are real issues and it takes a while to
get up to speed, while the vested interests know all the ins and outs
and deals and such. Corporations have huge staffs that push through
bills and loopholes that they want and they do not turn over every six
years.

On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:43:53 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


America is not, and should not become, another socialist country. That
perverts the very tenents our country is based on.

jmc



Robin Hood was, sadly, nothing but a thief. A thief neither knows nor cares
where the person he steals from got his money. He just assumes that he stole
it from the poor and will use it for himself.

What we have in this country is a very bad way of distributing wealth.
Too many people work hard all their lives and have nothing to show for
it. I have neighbors, good hard-working people, who barely scrape by.
And we have people with so much wealth that they couldn't spend it in
a thousand lifetimes.

Yes, each person theoretically has a chance to become wealthy, like
Bill Gates did, but most of the money goes from generation to
generation. Such great wealth has really stacked the deck against
working people and towards the enormously wealthy so that it isn't
really fair anymore. The more money you have the easier it is to get
more.

Did you know that the top bracket was once 90%? Now getting them up to
30% is too much to ask. The original income tax was only on the
wealthy, under the assumption that America had been good to them so
they should have a big stake in making it stronger. Now we're supposed
to let them keep all their wealth and they'll invest it and get us
jobs. Yes, jobs in Thailand.

"dgk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:52:19 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


"dgk" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:56:46 -0400, Patok
wrote:

Bill Graham wrote:

It isn't us capitalists who are printing money at the mint in
Washington
DC, and borrowing trillions from China either. In a pure capitalist
world, we would be in competition with one another for the consumers
money.....What it comes down to is this: (in my experience) when a
businessman bribes a government official or senator to get him to vote
in laws that restrict trade, then who is more at fault? If you think
that its the businessman, then you are a liberal socialist. If you
think
its the government official, then you are likely to be, (like me) a
libertarian.

I think that both are equally at fault. What am I?

--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.


The problem is that it costs millions of dollars to run for office. If
someone takes money in order to run for office, of course they are
going to vote the way the donor wants. If people really want to fix
the way things are, then get the money out of politics. Right now, the
Supreme Court has unleashed corporations to spend massive amounts of
money to buy their chosen republicans the House and Senate. It's
working. I can't turn on a radio or tv without hearing an attack ad by
some unknown sourced group attacking the democrats.

Let's work for a system where it is illegal to bribe (ie, donate money
to) a politician. Oh, but the Supreme Court says that donating money
is free speech! Well, we'd best find a way around that quickly unless
we want a fascist country. (facism, the marriage of corporate and
state power). Geting there quickly and I expect the Tea Party members
will be receiving their brown shirts soon.

I agree with this, which brings up my ideal government. I would eliminate
voting, and have a computer pick several hundred people out of the voting
population to be our congressmen and run the country.....Perhaps 200 every
other year for 6 years, and then retire the oldest two hundred and replace
them with the 200 freshmen they just picked.....So no one would serve more
than 6 years.......IOW, chose our leaders out of the general population.
That way, there wouldn't be any more lawyers or rich people than there
were
farmers, store clerks, seamstresses, nurses, or any other profession or
workers.......Truly a government "of the people".....

Yea, the problem is that there are real issues and it takes a while to
get up to speed, while the vested interests know all the ins and outs
and deals and such. Corporations have huge staffs that push through
bills and loopholes that they want and they do not turn over every six
years.

So I would have to make a few other rules.....Like, nobody should be able to
talk to a senator in private....All such discussions should be monitored by
the press....(for example) and/or all such discussions would have to be
monitored by a bi-partisan committee. (all parties represented)

"dgk" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 18:43:53 -0700, "Bill Graham"
wrote:


America is not, and should not become, another socialist country. That
perverts the very tenents our country is based on.

jmc



Robin Hood was, sadly, nothing but a thief. A thief neither knows nor
cares
where the person he steals from got his money. He just assumes that he
stole
it from the poor and will use it for himself.

What we have in this country is a very bad way of distributing wealth.
Too many people work hard all their lives and have nothing to show for
it. I have neighbors, good hard-working people, who barely scrape by.
And we have people with so much wealth that they couldn't spend it in
a thousand lifetimes.

Yes, each person theoretically has a chance to become wealthy, like
Bill Gates did, but most of the money goes from generation to
generation. Such great wealth has really stacked the deck against
working people and towards the enormously wealthy so that it isn't
really fair anymore. The more money you have the easier it is to get
more.

Did you know that the top bracket was once 90%? Now getting them up to
30% is too much to ask. The original income tax was only on the
wealthy, under the assumption that America had been good to them so
they should have a big stake in making it stronger. Now we're supposed
to let them keep all their wealth and they'll invest it and get us
jobs. Yes, jobs in Thailand.

Hey! Nobody is madder than I am at Bill Gates.....I use his name in vain
whenever I try to do anything on my computer....:^) It is true that wealth
breeds more wealth. Fortunately, most wealthy people start and run
businesses that hire others and generally contribute to the wealth of the
entire nation....We only hear about people like Brittney Spears and Michael
Jackson, and never hear about the others. You are right about that, but I
don't believe across the board taxation at like 90% is the answer. Or, if
you do have a larger sliding scale tax rate, then you should allow
exemptions for those who start businesses that hire others.....IOW, there
are ways to be sensible other than just ripping off everyone who has made
money. I am against the capitol gains taxes because they represent double
taxation. As a stockholder, I am a business owner, and my businesses pay a
corporate income tax....Then, when the corporation tries to give me my
(after tax) profit, I get to pay taxes on it again! (income tax) For the
same basic reason, I am against sales taxes.....First I get paid. Then I pay
federal income tax on that pay. Then I pay state income tax on that
pay.....Then, when I try to go to the store and spend what little I have
left over after those taxes, I should have to pay sales taxes too? This it
triple taxation, even not counting my property taxes and automobile
registration fees. (which are really property taxes in most states) This
country is tax crazy......They collect money from us every chance they get,
and right now they are sitting around in some smoke filled room trying to
figure out how to get more of it from us. They are talking about putting men
on Mars now.....I wonder how much that's going to cost. Do you really think
we need men on mars? I think a nice robot crew could do the job a hell of a
lot cheaper, and I am a technical person with an engineering education that
worked in the sciences all of my life. I love the satellite program, and the
GPS stuff for navigation, and the space exploration program in general, but
men on Mars? Give me a break! I think the government is drunk on spending
other people's money....(Yours and mine)