PDA

View Full Version : Ending The Recession


Tim Bruening
March 16th 09, 11:36 PM
I just sent the following letter to President Obama at
. Please send him similar letters.

Dear President Obama:

I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited the
country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top labor
leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and Republican
leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David. We will not
come down from the mountain until we have forged a common, transparent
strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".

This announcement would send a signal to the world that America is
coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation! This would
immediately boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
the U.S.!

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 01:45 AM
Tim Bruening wrote:

> I just sent the following letter to President Obama
> at .

And his minions flushed it where it belongs.

> Please send him similar letters.

It isnt a letter, its an email, stupid.

> Dear President Obama:

> I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited
> the country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top
> labor leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and
> Republican leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David.
> We will not come down from the mountain until we have forged a
> common, transparent strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".

And he would urge you to go and **** yourself if he ever did see your email, which he wont.

> This announcement would send a signal to the world that America
> is coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation!

Nope, it would actually send the signal that some fool is at the controls.

> This would immediately boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you dont have a ****ing clue
about what drives investment in the US, or about anything else at all either!!!

March 17th 09, 01:50 AM
obama wants a financial crisis. like queen hilary bragged;" we can't let
this crisis go by wihout taking adavantage- we can get all kinds of
environmental laws passed that the americans would not allow during any
other time"
sounds like a foreign agent talking .


"THE BLACK HAND" is the name of the international
terrorist group that is causing all the problems.

Econotron
March 17th 09, 02:28 AM
"Tim Bruening" > wrote in message
...
>I just sent the following letter to President Obama at
> . [snip]
>
I feel better already.
>
> Dear President Obama:
>
> I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited the
> country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top labor
> leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and Republican
> leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David. We will not
> come down from the mountain until we have forged a common, transparent
> strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".
>
> This announcement would send a signal to the world that America is
> coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation! This would
> immediately boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> the U.S.!
>
Who is Banking Crisis?
e.

Tim Bruening
March 17th 09, 03:40 AM
Rod Speed wrote:

> Tim Bruening wrote:
>
> > I just sent the following letter to President Obama
> > at .
>
> And his minions flushed it where it belongs.
>
> > Please send him similar letters.
>
> It isnt a letter, its an email, stupid.
>
> > Dear President Obama:
>
> > I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited
> > the country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top
> > labor leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and
> > Republican leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David.
> > We will not come down from the mountain until we have forged a
> > common, transparent strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".
>
> And he would urge you to go and **** yourself if he ever did see your email, which he wont.

I believe that such an announcement would be in character for him.

> > This announcement would send a signal to the world that America
> > is coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation!
>
> Nope, it would actually send the signal that some fool is at the controls.

What's so foolish about inviting the nations top business leaders, labor leaders, economists, and
political leaders to help forge a strategy for solving the banking crisis?

Tim Bruening
March 17th 09, 03:41 AM
Econotron wrote:

> "Tim Bruening" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I just sent the following letter to President Obama at
> > . [snip]
> >
> I feel better already.
> >
> > Dear President Obama:
> >
> > I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited the
> > country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top labor
> > leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and Republican
> > leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David. We will not
> > come down from the mountain until we have forged a common, transparent
> > strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".
> >
> > This announcement would send a signal to the world that America is
> > coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation! This would
> > immediately boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> > the U.S.!
> >
> Who is Banking Crisis?
> e.

Its a what, not a who.

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 04:14 AM
Tim Bruening wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Tim Bruening wrote

>>> I just sent the following letter to President Obama
>>> at .

>> And his minions flushed it where it belongs.

>>> Please send him similar letters.

>> It isnt a letter, its an email, stupid.

>>> Dear President Obama:

>>> I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited
>>> the country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top
>>> labor leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and
>>> Republican leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David.
>>> We will not come down from the mountain until we have forged a
>>> common, transparent strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".

>> And he would urge you to go and **** yourself if he ever did see your email, which he wont.

> I believe that such an announcement would be in character for him.

>>> This announcement would send a signal to the world that America
>>> is coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation!

>> Nope, it would actually send the signal that some fool is at the controls.

> What's so foolish about inviting the nations top business leaders, labor leaders,
> economists, and political leaders to help forge a strategy for solving the banking crisis?

The problem is with the rest of it, 'will not come down from the mountain' ****.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 05:15 PM
On Mar 16, 7:36*pm, Tim Bruening > wrote:
> I just sent the following letter to President Obama at
> . *Please send him similar letters.
>
> Dear President Obama:
>
> I urge you to make the following announcement on TV: "I have invited the
> country's 20 leading bankers, 20 leading industrialists, 20 top labor
> leaders, 20 top market economists, and the Democratic and Republican
> leaders in Congress to join me and my team at Camp David. *We will not
> come down from the mountain until we have forged a common, transparent
> strategy for getting us out of this banking crisis!".
>
> This announcement would send a signal to the world that America is
> coming together to battle the banking crisis as one nation! *This would
> immediately boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> the U.S.!

It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
how to get out of the recession.

March 17th 09, 06:46 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>> the U.S.!
>
> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
> how to get out of the recession.


Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 07:18 PM
On Mar 17, 2:46*pm, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> >> the U.S.!
>
> > It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> > capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> > the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> > how to get out of the recession.
>
> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
and 2000s. It is proven to work.

March 17th 09, 07:52 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>
>>>> the U.S.!
>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>> how to get out of the recession.
>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> and 2000s. It is proven to work.


With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
already below sustaining existing programs.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 08:13 PM
On Mar 17, 3:52*pm, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> >>>> the U.S.!
> >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> >>> the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> >>> how to get out of the recession.
> >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> > and 2000s. *It is proven to work.
>
> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> already below sustaining existing programs.

Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
make congress do their job of setting a budget!

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 08:48 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:

>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>> how to get out of the recession.

>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.

And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

> It is proven to work.

Not in a recession like this it isnt.

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 08:50 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>
>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>
>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>
>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> Then cut a few programs.

You'd need to cut more than 'a few programs' to get rid of the deficit.

> As a start I would close most of the education and energy departments.

Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.

> Plus end "baseline" budgeting and make congress do their job of setting a budget!

Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.

Tim Bruening
March 17th 09, 08:56 PM
AZDuffman wrote:

> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> > >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >
> > >> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> >
> > >>>> the U.S.!
> > >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> > >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> > >>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
> > >>> how to get out of the recession.
> > >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >
> > > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> > > and 2000s. It is proven to work.
> >
> > With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> > than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> > is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> > already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> make congress do their job of setting a budget!

I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we can cut
our military spending.

Tim Bruening
March 17th 09, 08:57 PM
Rod Speed wrote:

> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!
>
> >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> >>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
> >>> how to get out of the recession.
>
> >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.
>
> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

Now is our chance to see if lowering the highest marginal rates would work on this
recession!

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 09:50 PM
Tim Bruening wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
>
>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>
>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>
>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>
>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>
>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>
>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan
> so that we can cut our military spending.

More fool you with afghanistan.

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 09:51 PM
Tim Bruening wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the
>>>>>> U.S.!
>>
>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
>>
>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>
>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>> and 2000s.
>>
>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
>
> Now is our chance to see if lowering the highest marginal rates would
> work on this recession!

That would be stupid with them already quite low.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 11:18 PM
On Mar 17, 4:48*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!
> >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> >>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
> >>> how to get out of the recession.
> >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.
>
> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

Was tried and worked in 1982, a much worse recession than this one.

> > It is proven to work.
>
> Not in a recession like this it isnt.

It worked in 1982, which was far worse than this one.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 11:19 PM
On Mar 17, 4:50*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> >>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
> >>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
> >>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> >>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> >>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>
> >> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
> >> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
> >> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
> >> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> > Then cut a few programs.
>
> You'd need to cut more than 'a few programs' to get rid of the deficit.
>
> > As a start I would close most of the education and energy departments.
>
> Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.
>

it wouldn't hurt.

> > Plus end "baseline" budgeting and make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.- Hide quoted text -

It owuld be a good first step. Instead of "compound interest
spending" like we now have congress would actually have to justify
everything every year. Then we could reduce rates of increase without
liberals callin it a "cut" in spending to spend less than you planned
to.

AZDuffman
March 17th 09, 11:20 PM
On Mar 17, 4:56*pm, Tim Bruening > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> > > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> > > >> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> > > >> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> > > >>>> the U.S.!
> > > >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> > > >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> > > >>> the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> > > >>> how to get out of the recession.
> > > >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> > > > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> > > > and 2000s. *It is proven to work.
>
> > > With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> > > than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> > > is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> > > already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> > Then cut a few programs. *As a start I would close most of the
> > education and energy departments. *Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> > make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we can cut
> our military spending.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

So, your idea is surrender? How many "Kusenich for President"
stickers on your 1985 Plymouth Reliant?

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 11:31 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 4:50 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>
>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>
>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>
>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>
>>> Then cut a few programs.

>> You'd need to cut more than 'a few programs' to get rid of the deficit.

>>> As a start I would close most of the education and energy departments.

>> Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.

> it wouldn't hurt.

Corse it would.

>>> Plus end "baseline" budgeting and make congress do their job of setting a budget!

>> Wouldnt get rid of the deficit.

> It owuld be a good first step.

Nope.

> Instead of "compound interest spending" like we now have

Lie.

> congress would actually have to justify everything every year.

Completely unviable.

> Then we could reduce rates of increase without liberals callin
> it a "cut" in spending to spend less than you planned to.

Corse they still would.

And with the trillions being ****ed against the wall to attempt to fix the
problem you fools created, it would be a fart in the bath in all of that.

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 11:34 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 4:56 pm, Tim Bruening > wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>
>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>
>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>
>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>
>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
>>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>>
>> I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that
>> we can cut our military spending.

> So, your idea is surrender?

Pulling out aint 'surrender'

> How many "Kusenich for President" stickers on your 1985 Plymouth Reliant?

How many Dr Strangelove stickers on yours ?

Rod Speed
March 17th 09, 11:37 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 4:48 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the
>>>>>> U.S.!
>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>> and 2000s.
>>
>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

> Was tried and worked in 1982,

When there were much higher rates than there are now.

> a much worse recession than this one.

Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>> It is proven to work.

>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.

> It worked in 1982,

When there were much higher rates than there are now.

> which was far worse than this one.

Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.

March 18th 09, 01:36 AM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>>>> how to get out of the recession.
>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
>> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
>> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
>> already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> make congress do their job of setting a budget!



Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.

March 18th 09, 01:42 AM
Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
> found these unused words:
>
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>
>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>>>> how to get out of the recession.
>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>
>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
>> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
>> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
>> already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit spending
> by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>
> Zimbabwe, here we come!
>
> BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung slang?
>


He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my opinion is
unsolvable without another Breton woods world financial reset button
being pushed.

Tim Bruening
March 18th 09, 08:01 AM
AZDuffman wrote:

> On Mar 17, 4:56 pm, Tim Bruening > wrote:
> > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> > > > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> > > > >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >
> > > > >> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> >
> > > > >>>> the U.S.!
> > > > >>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> > > > >>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> > > > >>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
> > > > >>> how to get out of the recession.
> > > > >> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >
> > > > > Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> > > > > and 2000s. It is proven to work.
> >
> > > > With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> > > > than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> > > > is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> > > > already below sustaining existing programs.
> >
> > > Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
> > > education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> > > make congress do their job of setting a budget!
> >
> > I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we can cut
> > our military spending.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> So, your idea is surrender? How many "Kusenich for President"
> stickers on your 1985 Plymouth Reliant?

I voted for Obama, and drive a 1992 Previa.

BobR
March 18th 09, 02:47 PM
On Mar 17, 8:42*pm, wrote:
> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > found these unused words:
>
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> >>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> >>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> >>>>> how to get out of the recession.
> >>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> >>> and 2000s. *It is proven to work.
>
> >> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> >> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> >> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> >> already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> > Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit spending
> > by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>
> > Zimbabwe, here we come!
>
> > BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung slang?
>
> He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my opinion is
> unsolvable without another Breton woods world financial reset button
> being pushed.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah, and the hidden message on that reset button will be OVERCHARGE!

March 18th 09, 02:58 PM
BobR wrote:
> On Mar 17, 8:42 pm, wrote:
>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> found these unused words:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>>>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>>>>>> how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
>>>> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
>>>> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
>>>> already below sustaining existing programs.
>>> Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit spending
>>> by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>>> Zimbabwe, here we come!
>>> BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung slang?
>> He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my opinion is
>> unsolvable without another Breton woods world financial reset button
>> being pushed.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah, and the hidden message on that reset button will be OVERCHARGE!




I can't see how they will do it without some sort of major debt write
off, there isn't enough assets in the world to pay for it all...........

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 03:41 PM
On Mar 17, 7:34*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 4:56 pm, Tim Bruening > wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>
> >>>>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
> >>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
> >>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> >>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
> >>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>
> >>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
> >>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
> >>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
> >>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> >>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
> >>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> >>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> >> I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that
> >> we can cut our military spending.
> > So, your idea is surrender?
>
> Pulling out aint 'surrender'
>
> > How many "Kusenich for President" stickers on your 1985 Plymouth Reliant?
>
> How many Dr Strangelove stickers on yours ?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Great flick, but I don't put bumper sticklers on my car.

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 03:45 PM
On Mar 17, 7:37*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 4:48 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the
> >>>>>> U.S.!
> >>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
> >>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
> >>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> >>> and 2000s.
>
> >> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> > Was tried and worked in 1982,
>
> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>
> > a much worse recession than this one.
>
> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.
>
> >>> It is proven to work.
> >> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> > It worked in 1982,
>
> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>
> > which was far worse than this one.
>
> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Heard you the first time. And you are back to just saying :lie" it
seems. Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican Debt Crisis
which would have collapses the banks. And 20%+ prime rate is not a
sign of a strong financial system. Finally, so it was different
causes and symptoms then. CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS. And it works
best when you make sure to cut the top marginal rate which is where
the most investment income can come from.

ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
left. So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income there
is the most available for new investments.

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 03:47 PM
On Mar 17, 9:36*pm, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> >>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> >>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> >>>>> how to get out of the recession.
> >>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> >>> and 2000s. *It is proven to work.
> >> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
> >> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
> >> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
> >> already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> > Then cut a few programs. *As a start I would close most of the
> > education and energy departments. *Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> > make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

So then why keep spending more for worse and worse results. Let the
states go back to running education as the Constitution states they
should. More money for education has not worked any better than more
money for Chrysler will.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 06:30 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> AZDuffman wrote
>>> Tim Bruening > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:

>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.

>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.

>>>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting
>>>>> and make congress do their job of setting a budget!

>>>> I propose ending our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan so that
>>>> we can cut our military spending.

>>> So, your idea is surrender?

>> Pulling out aint 'surrender'

>>> How many "Kusenich for President" stickers on your 1985 Plymouth Reliant?

>> How many Dr Strangelove stickers on yours ?

> Great flick, but I don't put bumper sticklers on my car.

Your problem, as always.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 06:35 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 17, 9:36 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>
>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
>>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>>
>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest
>> High school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.-

> So then why keep spending more for worse and worse results.

Because most arent actually stupid enough to get rid of public education.

> Let the states go back to running education as the Constitution states they should.

That was written by silly old farts that are WAY past their useby date. The world's moved
on and no one world wide is actually stupid enough to do education that way today.

No one is actually stupid enough to do defense the way those fools wanted it done either.

> More money for education has not worked any better than more money for Chrysler will.

No money would work even worse, stupid.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 06:36 PM
wrote:
> BobR wrote:
>> On Mar 17, 8:42 pm, wrote:
>>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> found these unused words:
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>>> Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit
>>>> spending by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>>>> Zimbabwe, here we come!
>>>> BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung
>>>> slang?
>>> He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my opinion
>>> is unsolvable without another Breton woods world financial reset
>>> button being pushed.

>> Yeah, and the hidden message on that reset button will be OVERCHARGE!
> I can't see how they will do it without some sort of major debt write
> off, there isn't enough assets in the world to pay for it all...........

That last is just plain wrong. It isnt anything like as much as WW2 cost.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 06:43 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> AZDuffman wrote
>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote

>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
>>>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
>>>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>> 80s, and 2000s.

>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,

>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>> a much worse recession than this one.

>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>>>> It is proven to work.

>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.

>>> It worked in 1982,

>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>> which was far worse than this one.

>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

> Heard you the first time.

Your **** in spades.

> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.

You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.

You get to like that or lump it.

> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.

Pig ignorant lie.

> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.

Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.

> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.

And nothing even remotely resembling anything like the complete implosion of the world financial system.

> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.

JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.

> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.

Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.

> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.

It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.

They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.

> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> there is the most available for new investments.

Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough to give you any say on anything at all, ever.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 06:59 PM
wrote:
> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>> found these unused words:
>>
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting
>>>> and make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>>>
>>>
>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest
>>> High school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing
>>> ground.
>>
>> Well as long as :
>> the teechurz onion refuses grants because -=they=- can't control the
>> dispersal of the funds ...
>> Ejukaters aren't promoted or paid on performance ...
>> Waste any 'left over' funds, to be -=sure=- they'll get MORE next
>> year ... Insist that unruly students be in the same classes as those
>> interested in learning, draggin the whole class down ...
>> Teach for quiz, not understanding and knowledge ...
>>
>> it's never going to be capable of meeting the needs!
>>
>> You might look at the side benefits 'arranged' for these 'pubic
>> servants', not the least are half price insurance, no cost loans ...

> American primary school teachers get paid less than their counterparts in other western nations,

Lie.

> the schools are falling apart,

They are all over the world.

> some with not enough books to teach with,

Its stupid to have the school provide those.

> what do you expect?

That someone puts a bomb under the fools that 'run' them.

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 07:08 PM
On Mar 18, 2:43*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rod Speed > wrote
> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>> wrote
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!
> >>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
> >>>>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
> >>>>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
> >>>>> 80s, and 2000s.
> >>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> >>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>> a much worse recession than this one.
> >> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>> It is proven to work.
> >>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> >>> It worked in 1982,
> >> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>> which was far worse than this one.
> >> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> > Heard you the first time.
>
> Your **** in spades.
>
> > And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
>
> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
>
> You get to like that or lump it.
>
> > Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> > Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
>
> Pig ignorant lie.
>
> > And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
>
> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.
>
> > Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
>
> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like the complete implosion of the world financial system.
>
> > CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
>
> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
>
> > And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> > rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
>
> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
>
> > ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.
>
> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
>
> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.
>
> > So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> > there is the most available for new investments.
>
> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough to give you any say on anything at all, ever.- Hide quoted text -

Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence. If you
could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you ever give
to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give you more time
to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 07:13 PM
On Mar 18, 2:35*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 17, 9:36 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> >>>>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> >>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
> >>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
> >>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
> >>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
> >>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
> >>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
> >>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
> >>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>
> >>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
> >>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
> >>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
> >> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest
> >> High school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.-
> > So then why keep spending more for worse and worse results.
>
> Because most arent actually stupid enough to get rid of public education.
>
> > Let the states go back to running education as the Constitution states they should.
>
> That was written by silly old farts that are WAY past their useby date. The world's moved
> on and no one world wide is actually stupid enough to do education that way today.

So, more truth about your America-hating comes out. So the Founding
Fathers, perhaps the greatest group of leaders any nation ever had at
one time, are a bunch of "old farts?"


> No one is actually stupid enough to do defense the way those fools wanted it done either.
>
> > More money for education has not worked any better than more money for Chrysler will.
>
> No money would work even worse, stupid.- Hide quoted text -

Who said "no money?" I simply say education is an area where crappy
service is given yet there is constant demand for more money. Where I
come from, if someone is doing a bad service you fire them, not give
them a raise.

I'd get rid of the department of education and make all funding
"student direct" so private schools could crop up and if you wanted to
go to a school with a good music department you could. If you
preferred a better vo-tech program then pick that one. Good teachers
would love it as it would raise demand for good teachers. Teachers
unions would hate it because they could not shake down a govbernment-
run school with no alternatives.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 07:43 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 18, 2:43 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s.
>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
>>>>> It worked in 1982,
>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>>> Heard you the first time.
>>
>> Your **** in spades.
>>
>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
>>
>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
>>
>> You get to like that or lump it.
>>
>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
>>
>> Pig ignorant lie.
>>
>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
>>
>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as
>> they are now.
>>
>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
>>
>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like the complete
>> implosion of the world financial system.
>>
>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
>>
>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
>>
>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
>>
>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
>>
>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
>>> left.
>>
>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
>>
>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be
>> tanking further.
>>
>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
>>> there is the most available for new investments.
>>
>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you have never ever
>> had a ****ing clue about anything
>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough to give you
>> any say on anything at all, ever.- Hide quoted text -

> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.

More name calling.

> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you ever
> give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give you more
> time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.

More name calling.

March 18th 09, 08:06 PM
Rod Speed wrote:
> wrote:
>> BobR wrote:
>>> On Mar 17, 8:42 pm, wrote:
>>>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> found these unused words:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>>>> Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit
>>>>> spending by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>>>>> Zimbabwe, here we come!
>>>>> BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung
>>>>> slang?
>>>> He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my opinion
>>>> is unsolvable without another Breton woods world financial reset
>>>> button being pushed.
>
>>> Yeah, and the hidden message on that reset button will be OVERCHARGE!
>> I can't see how they will do it without some sort of major debt write
>> off, there isn't enough assets in the world to pay for it all...........
>
> That last is just plain wrong. It isnt anything like as much as WW2 cost.
>
>



Derivatives debt now totals over $345 trillion, which dwarfs what ww2 cost.

March 18th 09, 08:15 PM
Rod Speed wrote:
> wrote:
>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>> found these unused words:
>>>
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate
>>>>>>>>> back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure
>>>>>>>>> out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.
>>>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting
>>>>> and make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>>>>
>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest
>>>> High school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing
>>>> ground.
>>> Well as long as :
>>> the teechurz onion refuses grants because -=they=- can't control the
>>> dispersal of the funds ...
>>> Ejukaters aren't promoted or paid on performance ...
>>> Waste any 'left over' funds, to be -=sure=- they'll get MORE next
>>> year ... Insist that unruly students be in the same classes as those
>>> interested in learning, draggin the whole class down ...
>>> Teach for quiz, not understanding and knowledge ...
>>>
>>> it's never going to be capable of meeting the needs!
>>>
>>> You might look at the side benefits 'arranged' for these 'pubic
>>> servants', not the least are half price insurance, no cost loans ...
>
>> American primary school teachers get paid less than their counterparts in other western nations,
>
> Lie.

Nope truth, even in Canada teachers depending on the jurisdiction, an
entry level salary can range from $36,305 to $58,980 annually,

Of the USA average beginning teacher salaries, Alaska had the highest
average beginning salary at $37,401. States joining Alaska in the top
tier were New Jersey, at $35,673; District of Columbia, at $35,260; New
York, at $35,259; and California, at $34,805.


>
>> the schools are falling apart,
>
> They are all over the world.


Maybe in third world countries


>
>> some with not enough books to teach with,
>
> Its stupid to have the school provide those.

A school without books, what a concept, no wonder you guys are having
problems with education.


>
>> what do you expect?
>
> That someone puts a bomb under the fools that 'run' them.


You run them

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 08:43 PM
wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> wrote
>>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote
>>>> wrote
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote

>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in

>>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.

>>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were
>>>>>>> considerably higher than today, in the early 1960's the top
>>>>>>> rate was 91%. The point the USA is at now it cannot out grow
>>>>>>> it's debt with further tax breaks, they are already below
>>>>>>> sustaining existing programs.

>>>>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>>>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting
>>>>>> and make congress do their job of setting a budget!

>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>>> loosing ground.

>>>> Well as long as :
>>>> the teechurz onion refuses grants because -=they=- can't control
>>>> the dispersal of the funds ...
>>>> Ejukaters aren't promoted or paid on performance ...
>>>> Waste any 'left over' funds, to be -=sure=- they'll get MORE next
>>>> year ... Insist that unruly students be in the same classes as
>>>> those interested in learning, draggin the whole class down ...

>>>> Teach for quiz, not understanding and knowledge ...

>>>> it's never going to be capable of meeting the needs!

>>>> You might look at the side benefits 'arranged' for these 'pubic
>>>> servants', not the least are half price insurance, no cost loans...

>>> American primary school teachers get paid less than their counterparts in other western nations,

>> Lie.

> Nope truth,

Have fun substantiating that claim.

> even in Canada teachers depending on the jurisdiction, an
> entry level salary can range from $36,305 to $58,980 annually,

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that
there is more than just Canada in 'other western nations'

> Of the USA average beginning teacher salaries,

It isnt beginning salarys that matter either.

> Alaska had the highest average beginning salary at $37,401. States joining Alaska in the top tier were New Jersey, at
> $35,673; District of Columbia, at $35,260; New York, at $35,259; and California, at $34,805.

Even those useless numbers dont substantiate your original claim.

>>> the schools are falling apart,

>> They are all over the world.

> Maybe in third world countries

Right thruout much of the first world.

>>> some with not enough books to teach with,

>> Its stupid to have the school provide those.

> A school without books, what a concept,

No one said anything about no books, ****wit.

> no wonder you guys are having problems with education.

>>> what do you expect?

>> That someone puts a bomb under the fools that 'run' them.

> You run them

No thanks, they're infested with pig ignorant fools like you.

I'll use schools that are properly organised instead thanks.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 08:52 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> AZDuffman wrote
>>> wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote

>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in

>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.

>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably
>>>>>> higher than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The
>>>>>> point the USA is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further
>>>>>> tax breaks, they are already below sustaining existing programs.

>>>>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>>>>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting
>>>>> and make congress do their job of setting a budget!

>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest
>>>> High school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.

>>> So then why keep spending more for worse and worse results.

>> Because most arent actually stupid enough to get rid of public education.

>>> Let the states go back to running education as the Constitution states they should.

>> That was written by silly old farts that are WAY past their
>> useby date. The world's moved on and no one world wide
>> is actually stupid enough to do education that way today.

> So, more truth about your America-hating comes out.

More of your name calling.

> So the Founding Fathers, perhaps the greatest group of leaders
> any nation ever had at one time, are a bunch of "old farts?"

They did a pretty decent job in some areas and got it just plain
wrong in others, most obviously with the military and slavery.

>> No one is actually stupid enough to do defense the way those fools wanted it done either.

>>> More money for education has not worked any better than more money for Chrysler will.

>> No money would work even worse, stupid.

> Who said "no money?"

You did.

> I simply say education is an area where crappy service
> is given yet there is constant demand for more money.

You said a hell of a lot more than that, as everyone can see from the quoting.

> Where I come from, if someone is doing a bad
> service you fire them, not give them a raise.

And the real world with something like education is a tad more complicated than that.

> I'd get rid of the department of education and make all funding
> "student direct" so private schools could crop up and if you wanted
> to go to a school with a good music department you could.

How odd that not one modern first world country is actually stupid enough to do it like that.

> If you preferred a better vo-tech program then pick that one.

Pity about when there aint any to pick.

> Good teachers would love it

Like hell they would. The absolutely vast bulk of them are completey unemployable.

> as it would raise demand for good teachers.

Pity the absolute vast bulk of them are nothing like that.

> Teachers unions would hate it because they could not shake
> down a govbernment- run school with no alternatives.

There's always alternatives, fool.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 08:55 PM
wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> wrote
>>> BobR wrote
>>>> wrote
>>>>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote
>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:

>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in

>>>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
>>>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s. It is proven to work.

>>>>>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were
>>>>>>> considerably higher than today, in the early 1960's the top
>>>>>>> rate was 91%. The point the USA is at now it cannot out grow
>>>>>>> it's debt with further tax breaks, they are already below
>>>>>>> sustaining existing programs.

>>>>>> Yep, that why BamBam just created the largest single year deficit
>>>>>> spending by a factor of 4 from ANY previous administration.
>>>>>> Zimbabwe, here we come!

>>>>>> BTW, how can you "out grow it is debt" - is that American slung slang?

>>>>> He's hardly responsible for the current crisis, which in my
>>>>> opinion is unsolvable without another Breton woods world
>>>>> financial reset button being pushed.

>>>> Yeah, and the hidden message on that reset button will be OVERCHARGE!

>>> I can't see how they will do it without some sort of major debt
>>> write off, there isn't enough assets in the world to pay for it all...........

>> That last is just plain wrong. It isnt anything like as much as WW2 cost.

> Derivatives debt now totals over $345 trillion,

That number is straight from your arse. We can tell from the smell.

And derivatives debt aint owed by the govt, stupid.

> which dwarfs what ww2 cost.

Wrong, as always.

AZDuffman
March 18th 09, 09:22 PM
On Mar 18, 4:52*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>
> > So the Founding Fathers, perhaps the greatest group of leaders
> > any nation ever had at one time, are a bunch of "old farts?"
>
> They did a pretty decent job in some areas and got it just plain
> wrong in others, most obviously with the military and slavery.

They started a country that ended up witht he best military in
history. Slavery was an issue they couldn't settle at the founding it
went so deep. No group is perfect.

> > Where I come from, if someone is doing a bad
> > service you fire them, not give them a raise.
>
> And the real world with something like education is a tad more complicated than that.

Doesn't have to be. If a school in Washington, DC for example can't
get high school students to read at a 7th grade level, fire the
administration and fire most of the teachers. Privitize it if you have
to. Where is it written teachers can't be fired or schools can't be
closed? It is no different than many companies that replaced DHL with
FedEx because they wanted their packages on time, every time.


> > I'd get rid of the department of education and make all funding
> > "student direct" so private schools could crop up and if you wanted
> > to go to a school with a good music department you could.
>
> How odd that not one modern first world country is actually stupid enough to do it like that.

No one had voting for a leader until it was tried the first time,
either. But that worked out great here in the USA, with the exception
of electing Obama, maybe.


> > If you preferred a better vo-tech program then pick that one.
>
> Pity about when there aint any to pick.

If the system was in place they would open. By your logic why was the
car invented, there were no highways to drive on.


> > Good teachers would love it
>
> Like hell they would. The absolutely vast bulk of them are completey unemployable.

I'm sure you know about being unemployable.

Rod Speed
March 18th 09, 09:49 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote

>>> So the Founding Fathers, perhaps the greatest group of leaders
>>> any nation ever had at one time, are a bunch of "old farts?"

>> They did a pretty decent job in some areas and got it just plain
>> wrong in others, most obviously with the military and slavery.

> They started a country that ended up witht he best military in history.

It wouldnt have if that country had been stupid enough
to do the military the way they wanted it done.

And europe would still be under the kraut jackboot too.

And asia under the Jap jackboot too.

> Slavery was an issue they couldn't settle at the founding it went so deep.

They didnt even proclaim that slavery was immoral.

> No group is perfect.

Neither is anything even remotely resembling anything like perfect.

AND they certainly were not in favor of your hare brained approach to education either.

>>> Where I come from, if someone is doing a bad
>>> service you fire them, not give them a raise.

>> And the real world with something like education is a tad more complicated than that.

> Doesn't have to be.

Yes it does.

> If a school in Washington, DC for example can't get high school
> students to read at a 7th grade level, fire the administration and
> fire most of the teachers. Privitize it if you have to.

That will not ensure that the kids will be able to read in the 7th grade level.

> Where is it written teachers can't be fired or schools can't be closed?

Nowhere. Some have noticed that that that approach wont
ensure that the kids will be able to read in the 7th grade.

> It is no different than many companies that replaced DHL with
> FedEx because they wanted their packages on time, every time.

Completely different, actually. There's the tiny matter that it aint
practical to ship the kids to the other side of the country twice a day etc.

>>> I'd get rid of the department of education and make all funding
>>> "student direct" so private schools could crop up and if you wanted
>>> to go to a school with a good music department you could.

>> How odd that not one modern first world country
>> is actually stupid enough to do it like that.

> No one had voting for a leader until it was tried the first time, either.

How odd that your illustrious 'founding fathers' didnt propose that approach either.

> But that worked out great here in the USA, with the exception of electing Obama, maybe.

There's been plenty of other complete duds like Tricky Dick Nixon.

>>> If you preferred a better vo-tech program then pick that one.

>> Pity about when there aint any to pick.

> If the system was in place they would open.

Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.

Particularly when most teachers are essentially unemployable.

> By your logic why was the car invented, there were no highways to drive on.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that the first cars just used what was used for horses.

>>> Good teachers would love it

>> Like hell they would. The absolutely vast bulk of them are completey unemployable.

> I'm sure you know about being unemployable.

More of your name calling, hypocrite.

March 18th 09, 09:57 PM
cutting worthless depts like the dept of education and the dept. of
education would not get rid of the deficit, but it is a hell of a good
way to START getting rid of it...


"THE BLACK HAND" is the name of the international
terrorist group that is causing all the problems.

March 18th 09, 10:06 PM
as the socialist "user invalid" fails to point out, the so caled dept of
education does not "teach" anyone...it just sucks tax money away that
could be used to better educat students....
or we could just burn the money we spend on the so called dept of
education in the schools furnace heaters. that way , the money would at
least be helping keep students warm....hahahahha that money is totaly
being wasted. and , may ipoint out that america had the best "scores" in
math and cience and a low drop out rate UNTIL the creation of the dept
of education,proving, once again, that socialism does not work !
hahahhahah


"THE BLACK HAND" is the name of the international
terrorist group that is causing all the problems.

Econotron
March 18th 09, 10:51 PM
> wrote in message ...
> AZDuffman wrote:
>> On Mar 17, 3:52 pm, wrote:
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
>>>>>>> the U.S.!
>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
>>>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
>>>>>> the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on its own
>>>>>> how to get out of the recession.
>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
>>>> and 2000s. It is proven to work.
>>> With all due respect the, top rates in the 60's were considerably higher
>>> than today, in the early 1960's the top rate was 91%. The point the USA
>>> is at now it cannot out grow it's debt with further tax breaks, they are
>>> already below sustaining existing programs.
>>
>> Then cut a few programs. As a start I would close most of the
>> education and energy departments. Plus end "baseline" budgeting and
>> make congress do their job of setting a budget!
>
>
>
> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>
More money is not going to fix it.
e.

Les Cargill
March 18th 09, 10:52 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 18, 4:52 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>>> So the Founding Fathers, perhaps the greatest group of leaders
>>> any nation ever had at one time, are a bunch of "old farts?"
>> They did a pretty decent job in some areas and got it just plain
>> wrong in others, most obviously with the military and slavery.
>
> They started a country that ended up witht he best military in
> history. Slavery was an issue they couldn't settle at the founding it
> went so deep. No group is perfect.
>
>>> Where I come from, if someone is doing a bad
>>> service you fire them, not give them a raise.
>> And the real world with something like education is a tad more complicated than that.
>
> Doesn't have to be. If a school in Washington, DC for example can't
> get high school students to read at a 7th grade level, fire the
> administration and fire most of the teachers. Privitize it if you have
> to. Where is it written teachers can't be fired or schools can't be
> closed? It is no different than many companies that replaced DHL with
> FedEx because they wanted their packages on time, every time.
>
>

But you might have to be prepared to simply fire every administrator
who applies for the job. If the concept of the value of reading at the
seventh grade level is simply lost on people... what good does
this firing do?

I am sure that speaking Latin has value, but the value of it
to me is not proportional to the cost of gaining the skill.
Lacking a better yardstick, this is how I imagine a high school
student looks at reading at a seventh grade level in a
low-performing school.

Designing and implementing performance metrics is bloody
difficult. Right now, the "best practices" for corporate
such is derived from Jack Welch's "My Way" and his other
writings. Well.... the legacy of that is that GE's bonds
have gone from AAA . Never mind that these practices
are innumerate and boldly ignorant....

<snip>

--
Les Cargill

March 18th 09, 11:41 PM
Econotron wrote:
> > wrote in message ...

>>
>>
>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>
> More money is not going to fix it.
> e.
>
>



Neither is less money going to fix it

March 19th 09, 03:37 AM
money has nothing to do with the education systems failures. it is the
teachers union teaching communism to the kids that is causing the
dropout rae,poor grades,etc. they all know they are being lied to and
resent it.


"THE BLACK HAND" is the name of the international
terrorist group that is causing all the problems.

AZDuffman
March 19th 09, 03:28 PM
On Mar 18, 7:41*pm, wrote:
> Econotron wrote:
> > > wrote in ....
>
> >> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>
> > More money is not going to fix it.
> > e.
>
> Neither is less money going to fix it

Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
to cut weapons programs. I live for the day when the military is
fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
explain the treatment of students in detention.

(For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
"bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)

March 19th 09, 04:21 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>> Econotron wrote:
>>> > wrote in ...
>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>> e.
>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>
> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> to cut weapons programs.


LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.



I live for the day when the military is
> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>
> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)


Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......

AZDuffman
March 19th 09, 04:41 PM
On Mar 19, 12:21*pm, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
> >> Econotron wrote:
> >>> > wrote in ...
> >>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
> >>> More money is not going to fix it.
> >>> e.
> >> Neither is less money going to fix it
>
> > Education supporters always say they need more money. *They keep
> > putting out a crappy product. *Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> > to cut weapons programs. *
>
> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.

A few issues here. One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
providing a military to protect the country. The Constitution
specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and involved
in education. Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?

Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon you will have money
not spent as well as it should be. However you can bet that lots of
the "mis-spent" money, like your example, is used to do something else
of value but not allowed for whatever reason. People high-up in the
military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend $1MM on sending a
few washers somewhere without a very good reason.

Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.


> I live for the day when the military is
>
> > fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
> > explain the treatment of students in detention.
>
> > (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
> > "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>
> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......

Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 05:14 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>> Econotron wrote:
>>> > wrote in
>>> ...
>>
>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>> loosing ground.
>>
>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>> e.
>>
>> Neither is less money going to fix it

> Education supporters always say they need more money.

So does everyone else.

> They keep putting out a crappy product.

You ****wit yanks keep ****ing up the world economy, over and over again.

> Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced to cut weapons programs.

There aint no one to go to war with anymore, stupid.

> I live for the day when the military is fully funded and schools administrators
> have to go before congress to explain the treatment of students in detention.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, Dr Strangelove.

> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on
> that famous "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)

The real world has moved on, stupid.

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 05:21 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 19, 12:21 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>> > wrote in
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>>>> loosing ground.
>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>> e.
>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>
>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>> to cut weapons programs.
>>
>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of
>> 38 cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.

> A few issues here.

Nope, just more of your mindless raving.

> One is that the Constitution provides for the
> feds providing a military to protect the country.

How odd that those fools didnt want a standing army.

> The Constitution specifically says the feds are not
> supposed to be funding and involved in education.

It also said that there shouldnt be a standing army too.

> Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?

Which you conveniently ignore when it suits you.

> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon
> you will have money not spent as well as it should be.

Hang on, some silly fart claims that any operation that is ****ing up should be wound up.

> However you can bet that lots of the "mis-spent"
> money, like your example, is used to do something
> else of value but not allowed for whatever reason.

Mindlessly silly.

> People high-up in the military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend
> $1MM on sending a few washers somewhere without a very good reason.

Presumably you actually are that stupid. It cant be an act.

> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.

And the net in spades.

Corse there have been a few benefits from education too.

> I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
> today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

What you might or might not take in spades.

>>> I live for the day when the military is fully funded and
>>> schools administrators have to go before congress
>>> to explain the treatment of students in detention.

>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on
>> that famous "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)

>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......

> Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
> having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.

AZDuffman
March 19th 09, 05:29 PM
On Mar 19, 1:14*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>
> > They keep putting out a crappy product.
>
> You ****wit yanks keep ****ing up the world economy, over and over again.

Nice foul language, shows clairity of thought. I guess buildingthe
world's bggest economy and driving growth thru much of the world is
effing up the economy?


> > Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced to cut weapons programs.
>
> There aint no one to go to war with anymore, stupid.

Really? Someone forgot to tell Iran, Rusia, and all those splinter
Islam-crazies.

> > I live for the day when the military is fully funded and schools administrators
> > have to go before congress to explain the treatment of students in detention.
>
> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, Dr Strangelove..

How is the weather in Rio Linda today?


> > (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on
> > that famous "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>
> The real world has moved on, stupid.

AZDuffman
March 19th 09, 05:35 PM
On Mar 19, 1:21*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:


>
> > The Constitution specifically says the feds are not
> > supposed to be funding and involved in education.
>
> It also said that there shouldnt be a standing army too.

Please quote where you are getting this from.


> > Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?
>
> Which you conveniently ignore when it suits you.

And where would I be doing that?


> > Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon
> > you will have money not spent as well as it should be.
>
> Hang on, some silly fart claims that any operation that is ****ing up should be wound up.

That barely makes sense after reading it three times. I'll just
chalk it up to your usual rage, name calling, and foul language in
your posts without really making an intelligent point.


> Corse there have been a few benefits from education too.

Does not change the fact that education is a job the Constitution
gives to the states, not the feds.


Balance snipped as it just repeats the name calling, foul language,
and rage Rod uses over and over.

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 06:37 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> AZDuffman wrote

>>> The Constitution specifically says the feds are not
>>> supposed to be funding and involved in education.

>> It also said that there shouldnt be a standing army too.

> Please quote where you are getting this from.

You know where it says that.

>>> Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?

>> Which you conveniently ignore when it suits you.

> And where would I be doing that?

That standing army stuff.

>>> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon
>>> you will have money not spent as well as it should be.

>> Hang on, some silly fart claims that any operation
>> that is ****ing up should be wound up.

> That barely makes sense after reading it three times.

Never ever could bull**** and lie its way out of a wet paper bag.

>>> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
>>> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.

>> And the net in spades.

>> Corse there have been a few benefits from education too.

> Does not change the fact that education is a job
> the Constitution gives to the states, not the feds.

That bit wasnt discussing the constitution, fool.

<reams of this hypocrite's name calling flushed where it belongs>

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 06:40 PM
AZDuffman wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote

>>> They keep putting out a crappy product.

>> You ****wit yanks keep ****ing up the world economy, over and over again.

> I guess building the world's biggest economy and driving
> growth thru much of the world is effing up the economy?

Nope, the lack of decent regulation of the banks did that, fool.

>>> Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced to cut weapons programs.

>> There aint no one to go to war with anymore, stupid.

> Really?

Yep.

> Someone forgot to tell Iran, Rusia,

They aint going to war with anyone, fool.

> and all those splinter Islam-crazies.

Dont need weapons programs for them, fool.

>>> I live for the day when the military is fully funded and schools administrators
>>> have to go before congress to explain the treatment of students in detention.

>> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys, Dr Strangelove.

> How is the weather in Rio Linda today?

No idea, fool.

>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on
>>> that famous "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)

>> The real world has moved on, stupid.

March 19th 09, 06:50 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 19, 12:21 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>> > wrote in ...
>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>> e.
>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>> to cut weapons programs.
>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>
> A few issues here. One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
> providing a military to protect the country. The Constitution
> specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and involved
> in education. Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?

It is not a static document, and can be amended


>
> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon you will have money
> not spent as well as it should be. However you can bet that lots of
> the "mis-spent" money, like your example, is used to do something else
> of value but not allowed for whatever reason. People high-up in the
> military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend $1MM on sending a
> few washers somewhere without a very good reason


The Pentagon is well known for blowing Millions and not knowing where it
went. In this case it was their billing system, with no oversight.
Contractors found out any item labeled "priority" on route to military
installations were paid automatically. It had nothing to do with the
immediate need of the items overbilled for.


>
> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.

Which in no way indicate the Pentagon is any better at handling money
than the education system.


> I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
> today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.


If you went to school when I did there were very few students who did
not speak English, came from single parent families, or didn't have
parents who backed the teacher up. You go try teaching a class today and
see how effective you are.


>
>
>> I live for the day when the military is
>>
>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
>>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
>>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>
> Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
> having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.
>


Being a "Ditto head" means exactly the opposite. Rush routinely makes a
comment that he will interpret the news so you( ditto heads) won't have to.

BobR
March 19th 09, 06:58 PM
On Mar 19, 11:41*am, AZDuffman > wrote:
> On Mar 19, 12:21*pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
> > >> Econotron wrote:
> > >>> > wrote in ...
> > >>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> > >>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
> > >>> More money is not going to fix it.
> > >>> e.
> > >> Neither is less money going to fix it
>
> > > Education supporters always say they need more money. *They keep
> > > putting out a crappy product. *Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> > > to cut weapons programs. *
>
> > LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
> > prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
> > same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
> > cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>
> A few issues here. *One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
> providing a military to protect the country. *The Constitution
> specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and involved
> in education. *Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?
>

It is but then leave it to the politicians to find very easy ways
around the constitution. In the case of education, the government
used the approach of "If you can't control it by constitution, you can
control it with money." This is the same approach the Federal
Government uses on virtually everything else as well. They offer the
States tons of money for Education, Highways, Medicaid, UnEmployment
Compensation, and etc. with so many strings attached that they in
effect control the States. The Governor of Texas has turned down $555
Billion in UnEmployment Stimulus money because part of the stipulation
for the receiving the money was to make permanent, costly, and
irreversable changes to the Unemployment Compensation rules in Texas.
I won't get into the argument as to rather they were valid or not but
the fact that to receive the funds hinged on permanent changes
dictated by the Federal Government shows that the Government doesn't
care if it is a states rights issue, they will find a way to force
Federal Rules.

> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon you will have money
> not spent as well as it should be. However you can bet that lots of
> the "mis-spent" money, like your example, is used to do something else
> of value but not allowed for whatever reason. *People high-up in the
> military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend $1MM on sending a
> few washers somewhere without a very good reason.
>
> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. *GPS, frozen
> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
> I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
> today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.
>

I would venture that when YOU and I were in school the teacher could
handle a class of 30 because the teacher was the total authority of
the classroom. Not so now.

> > I live for the day when the military is
>
> > > fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
> > > explain the treatment of students in detention.
>
> > > (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
> > > "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>
> > Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>
> Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
> having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.
>

Hell, you don't have to be a listener of Rush Limbaugh to recognize
that.

AZDuffman
March 19th 09, 07:13 PM
On Mar 19, 2:58*pm, BobR > wrote:
> On Mar 19, 11:41*am, AZDuffman > wrote:
>

> It is but then leave it to the politicians to find very easy ways
> around the constitution. *In the case of education, the government
> used the approach of "If you can't control it by constitution, you can
> control it with money." *This is the same approach the Federal
> Government uses on virtually everything else as well. *They offer the
> States tons of money for Education, Highways, Medicaid, UnEmployment
> Compensation, and etc. with so many strings attached that they in
> effect control the States. *The Governor of Texas has turned down $555
> Billion in UnEmployment Stimulus money because part of the stipulation
> for the receiving the money was to make permanent, costly, and
> irreversable changes to the Unemployment Compensation rules in Texas.
> I won't get into the argument as to rather they were valid or not but
> the fact that to receive the funds hinged on permanent changes
> dictated by the Federal Government shows that the Government doesn't
> care if it is a states rights issue, they will find a way to force
> Federal Rules.

So true on controlling with money. I like the case of Grove City
College. Feds wanted them to do stuff, they said "no." Feds said,
"no money then!" GC said, "Keep your cash!" Now, the feds are not
used to this so they said, "Hey, your students get Pell Grants, etc,
you are doing what we say!" GC said, ""Keep the aid to students
then!"

Now, if more places acted like that we would have a far better
country!

> > Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. *GPS, frozen
> > orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
> > I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
> > today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.
>
> I would venture that when YOU and I were in school the teacher could
> handle a class of 30 because the teacher was the total authority of
> the classroom. *Not so now.

Money won't solve that, getting back to the basics will. Tort refoem
will. Administrators with a spine to stand up to parents will.

> > Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
> > having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.
>
> Hell, you don't have to be a listener of Rush Limbaugh to recognize
> that.- Hide quoted text -

OK, I guess that is a valid point. I'm still hoping for Newt in 12.
Let the GOP pick their own candidate this time, unlike McCain picked
by indies and dems in open-primaries.

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 07:18 PM
BobR wrote:
> On Mar 19, 11:41 am, AZDuffman > wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 12:21 pm, wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>>> > wrote in
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>>>>> loosing ground.
>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>> e.
>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>
>>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being
>>>> forced to cut weapons programs.
>>
>>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of
>>> financial prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion
>>> dollars? The same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers
>>> with a value of 38 cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the
>>> other one.
>>
>> A few issues here. One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
>> providing a military to protect the country. The Constitution
>> specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and
>> involved in education. Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?
>>
>
> It is but then leave it to the politicians to find very easy ways
> around the constitution. In the case of education, the government
> used the approach of "If you can't control it by constitution, you can
> control it with money." This is the same approach the Federal
> Government uses on virtually everything else as well. They offer the
> States tons of money for Education, Highways, Medicaid, UnEmployment
> Compensation, and etc. with so many strings attached that they in
> effect control the States. The Governor of Texas has turned down $555
> Billion in UnEmployment Stimulus money because part of the stipulation
> for the receiving the money was to make permanent, costly, and
> irreversable changes to the Unemployment Compensation rules in Texas.
> I won't get into the argument as to rather they were valid or not but
> the fact that to receive the funds hinged on permanent changes
> dictated by the Federal Government shows that the Government doesn't
> care if it is a states rights issue, they will find a way to force
> Federal Rules.
>
>> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon you will have
>> money not spent as well as it should be. However you can bet that
>> lots of the "mis-spent" money, like your example, is used to do
>> something else of value but not allowed for whatever reason. People
>> high-up in the military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend
>> $1MM on sending a few washers somewhere without a very good reason.
>>
>> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
>> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
>> I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
>> today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.
>>
>
> I would venture that when YOU and I were in school the teacher could
> handle a class of 30 because the teacher was the total authority of
> the classroom. Not so now.

Wrong, any teacher that can teach can still do it.

>>> I live for the day when the military is
>>
>>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress
>>>> to explain the treatment of students in detention.
>>
>>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that
>>>> famous "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>>
>>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>>
>> Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
>> having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.

> Hell, you don't have to be a listener of Rush Limbaugh to recognize that.

Just have ear to ear dog ****. You qualify.

BobR
March 19th 09, 11:09 PM
On Mar 19, 2:13*pm, AZDuffman > wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2:58*pm, BobR > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 19, 11:41*am, AZDuffman > wrote:
>
> > It is but then leave it to the politicians to find very easy ways
> > around the constitution. *In the case of education, the government
> > used the approach of "If you can't control it by constitution, you can
> > control it with money." *This is the same approach the Federal
> > Government uses on virtually everything else as well. *They offer the
> > States tons of money for Education, Highways, Medicaid, UnEmployment
> > Compensation, and etc. with so many strings attached that they in
> > effect control the States. *The Governor of Texas has turned down $555
> > Billion in UnEmployment Stimulus money because part of the stipulation
> > for the receiving the money was to make permanent, costly, and
> > irreversable changes to the Unemployment Compensation rules in Texas.
> > I won't get into the argument as to rather they were valid or not but
> > the fact that to receive the funds hinged on permanent changes
> > dictated by the Federal Government shows that the Government doesn't
> > care if it is a states rights issue, they will find a way to force
> > Federal Rules.
>
> So true on controlling with money. *I like the case of Grove City
> College. *Feds wanted them to do stuff, they said "no." *Feds said,
> "no money then!" *GC said, "Keep your cash!" *Now, the feds are not
> used to this so they said, "Hey, your students get Pell Grants, etc,
> you are doing what we say!" *GC said, ""Keep the aid to students
> then!"
>
> Now, if more places acted like that we would have a far better
> country!
>

They are way too dependent on the government to fund their operations
and they know they don't have the power to raise their taxes to offset
the losses.

> > > Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. *GPS, frozen
> > > orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
> > > I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
> > > today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.
>
> > I would venture that when YOU and I were in school the teacher could
> > handle a class of 30 because the teacher was the total authority of
> > the classroom. *Not so now.
>
> Money won't solve that, getting back to the basics will. *Tort refoem
> will. *Administrators with a spine to stand up to parents will.
>

Yet the only response is always to throw more money at the problem and
that money is often wasted on everything except teaching.

> > > Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self, and
> > > having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.
>
> > Hell, you don't have to be a listener of Rush Limbaugh to recognize
> > that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> OK, I guess that is a valid point. *I'm still hoping for Newt in 12.
> Let the GOP pick their own candidate this time, unlike McCain picked
> by indies and dems in open-primaries.

Right now, there isn't anybody from either party I would contribute a
dime to and don't want any of them. They are all just like Rod Speed
and stink of the outhouse.

Rod Speed
March 19th 09, 11:26 PM
BobR wrote:
> On Mar 19, 2:13 pm, AZDuffman > wrote:
>> On Mar 19, 2:58 pm, BobR > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 19, 11:41 am, AZDuffman > wrote:
>>
>>> It is but then leave it to the politicians to find very easy ways
>>> around the constitution. In the case of education, the government
>>> used the approach of "If you can't control it by constitution, you
>>> can control it with money." This is the same approach the Federal
>>> Government uses on virtually everything else as well. They offer the
>>> States tons of money for Education, Highways, Medicaid, UnEmployment
>>> Compensation, and etc. with so many strings attached that they in
>>> effect control the States. The Governor of Texas has turned down
>>> $555 Billion in UnEmployment Stimulus money because part of the
>>> stipulation for the receiving the money was to make permanent,
>>> costly, and irreversable changes to the Unemployment Compensation
>>> rules in Texas. I won't get into the argument as to rather they
>>> were valid or not but the fact that to receive the funds hinged on
>>> permanent changes dictated by the Federal Government shows that the
>>> Government doesn't care if it is a states rights issue, they will
>>> find a way to force Federal Rules.
>>
>> So true on controlling with money. I like the case of Grove City
>> College. Feds wanted them to do stuff, they said "no." Feds said,
>> "no money then!" GC said, "Keep your cash!" Now, the feds are not
>> used to this so they said, "Hey, your students get Pell Grants, etc,
>> you are doing what we say!" GC said, ""Keep the aid to students
>> then!"
>>
>> Now, if more places acted like that we would have a far better
>> country!
>>
>
> They are way too dependent on the government to fund their operations
> and they know they don't have the power to raise their taxes to offset
> the losses.
>
>>>> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
>>>> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military
>>>> programs. I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school
>>>> just because today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when
>>>> I was in school.
>>
>>> I would venture that when YOU and I were in school the teacher could
>>> handle a class of 30 because the teacher was the total authority of
>>> the classroom. Not so now.
>>
>> Money won't solve that, getting back to the basics will. Tort refoem
>> will. Administrators with a spine to stand up to parents will.
>>
>
> Yet the only response is always to throw more money at the problem and
> that money is often wasted on everything except teaching.
>
>>>> Yes, it explains clear thought, ability to think for one's self,
>>>> and having been able to recognize Obama as far-left from the start.
>>
>>> Hell, you don't have to be a listener of Rush Limbaugh to recognize
>>> that.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> OK, I guess that is a valid point. I'm still hoping for Newt in 12.
>> Let the GOP pick their own candidate this time, unlike McCain picked
>> by indies and dems in open-primaries.
>
> Right now, there isn't anybody from either party I would
> contribute a dime to and don't want any of them.

You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant.

What you might or might not contribute a dime to in spades.

Econotron
March 19th 09, 11:32 PM
> wrote in message ...
> Econotron wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>
>> More money is not going to fix it.
>> e.
>
> Neither is less money going to fix it
>
No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of education largely
depends on genes, family, and culture. Also, while the current system
continues to be a jobs program for the teachers, there is little hope for
improvement.
e.

March 20th 09, 12:41 AM
Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
> found these unused words:
>
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>> > wrote in ...
>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>> e.
>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>> to cut weapons programs.
>>
>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>>
>>
>>
>> I live for the day when the military is
>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
>>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>>>
>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
>>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>>
>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>
> Yep, dumbocritters love to lump the opposition into one pile. They can just
> barely handle that with their drugged brains.
>


"For those of you in Rio Linda" is a Rush Limbaugh tag line he often
uses, nobody but a ditto head would use it.

Whose drugged brain? Limbaugh was the one in rehab for oxycontin, it's
what made him go deaf.

March 20th 09, 12:42 AM
Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
> found these unused words:
>
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 19, 12:21 pm, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>>>> > wrote in ...
>>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>>> e.
>>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>>>> to cut weapons programs.
>>>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>>>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>>>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
>>>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>>> A few issues here. One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
>>> providing a military to protect the country. The Constitution
>>> specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and involved
>>> in education. Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?
>> It is not a static document, and can be amended
>
> But -=should=- be before action is taken.
>
> ALL not specifically enumerated IN the US Constitution [States have them
> too!] are RESERVED to the states. Believe that and 80% of the federal
> gummint socialistic pogroms go away ... bye bye BamBam's birdie!
>
>
>>> Second, in an institution the size of the Pentagon you will have money
>>> not spent as well as it should be. However you can bet that lots of
>>> the "mis-spent" money, like your example, is used to do something else
>>> of value but not allowed for whatever reason. People high-up in the
>>> military tend to be very intelligent and don't spend $1MM on sending a
>>> few washers somewhere without a very good reason
>>
>> The Pentagon is well known for blowing Millions and not knowing where it
>> went. In this case it was their billing system, with no oversight.
>> Contractors found out any item labeled "priority" on route to military
>> installations were paid automatically. It had nothing to do with the
>> immediate need of the items overbilled for.
>>
>>
>>> Third, military spending gives good spinoff-benefit. GPS, frozen
>>> orange juice, the first modern computer--all were military programs.
>> Which in no way indicate the Pentagon is any better at handling money
>> than the education system.
>>
>>
>>> I'll take this over throwing more teachers into a school just because
>>> today's teacher can't handle a class of 30 like when I was in school.
>>
>> If you went to school when I did there were very few students who did
>> not speak English, came from single parent families, or didn't have
>> parents who backed the teacher up. You go try teaching a class today and
>> see how effective you are.
>>
> He/She/It could be 'effective' without the gummint and NEA decreeing "Lowest
> Capability Fits ALL!"
>
> Put the language impaired in a class group, put the druggies in JAIL and let
> those that want to learn be in class!
>
> Oh, sorry. that wouldn't fit the lefty agenda ...!
>

AZDuffman
March 20th 09, 12:42 PM
On Mar 19, 8:41*pm, wrote:
> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > found these unused words:
>
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
> >>>> Econotron wrote:
> >>>>> > wrote in ...
> >>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
> >>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
> >>>>> e.
> >>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
> >>> Education supporters always say they need more money. *They keep
> >>> putting out a crappy product. *Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> >>> to cut weapons programs. *
>
> >> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
> >> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
> >> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
> >> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>
> >> I live for the day when the military is
> >>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
> >>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>
> >>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
> >>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>
> >> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>
> > Yep, dumbocritters love to lump the opposition into one pile. They can just
> > barely handle that with their drugged brains.
>
> "For those of you in Rio Linda" is a Rush Limbaugh tag line he often
> uses, nobody but a ditto head would use it.
>
> Whose drugged brain? Limbaugh was the one in rehab for oxycontin, it's
> what made him go deaf.- Hide quoted text -

Yes, he had severe, inoperable back pain and got hooked on an
addictive painkiller. One trip to rehab and he got off, showing good
personal responsibility.

March 20th 09, 01:55 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 19, 8:41 pm, wrote:
>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> found these unused words:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>>>> > wrote in ...
>>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>>> e.
>>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>>>> to cut weapons programs.
>>>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>>>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>>>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
>>>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>>>> I live for the day when the military is
>>>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
>>>>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>>>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
>>>>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>>>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>>> Yep, dumbocritters love to lump the opposition into one pile. They can just
>>> barely handle that with their drugged brains.
>> "For those of you in Rio Linda" is a Rush Limbaugh tag line he often
>> uses, nobody but a ditto head would use it.
>>
>> Whose drugged brain? Limbaugh was the one in rehab for oxycontin, it's
>> what made him go deaf.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Yes, he had severe, inoperable back pain and got hooked on an
> addictive painkiller. One trip to rehab and he got off, showing good
> personal responsibility.
>
>
>


Sure he did, that's why he was playing golf during that whole period.
claiming he had no physical limitations. If you've had back pain so bad
you need oxy there's no way you could play golf in a tournament.

AZDuffman
March 20th 09, 02:03 PM
On Mar 20, 9:55*am, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 19, 8:41 pm, wrote:
> >> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>
> >>> found these unused words:
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
> >>>>>> Econotron wrote:
> >>>>>>> > wrote in ...
> >>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >>>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground..
> >>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
> >>>>>>> e.
> >>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
> >>>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. *They keep
> >>>>> putting out a crappy product. *Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> >>>>> to cut weapons programs. *
> >>>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
> >>>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
> >>>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
> >>>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
> >>>> I live for the day when the military is
> >>>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
> >>>>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
> >>>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
> >>>>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
> >>>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
> >>> Yep, dumbocritters love to lump the opposition into one pile. They can just
> >>> barely handle that with their drugged brains.
> >> "For those of you in Rio Linda" is a Rush Limbaugh tag line he often
> >> uses, nobody but a ditto head would use it.
>
> >> Whose drugged brain? Limbaugh was the one in rehab for oxycontin, it's
> >> what made him go deaf.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Yes, he had severe, inoperable back pain and got hooked on an
> > addictive painkiller. *One trip to rehab and he got off, showing good
> > personal responsibility.
>
> Sure he did, that's why he was playing golf during that whole period.
> claiming he had no physical limitations. If you've had back pain so bad
> you need oxy there's no way you could play golf in a tournament.- Hide quoted text -

He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
party it up.

March 20th 09, 03:36 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 20, 9:55 am, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 19, 8:41 pm, wrote:
>>>> Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
>>>>> found these unused words:
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
>>>>>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > wrote in ...
>>>>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
>>>>>>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
>>>>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>>>>> e.
>>>>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>>>>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
>>>>>>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
>>>>>>> to cut weapons programs.
>>>>>> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
>>>>>> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
>>>>>> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
>>>>>> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
>>>>>> I live for the day when the military is
>>>>>>> fully funded and schools administrators have to go before congress to
>>>>>>> explain the treatment of students in detention.
>>>>>>> (For those of you in Rio Linda, that is sarcasm based on that famous
>>>>>>> "bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper sticker.)
>>>>>> Ah a listener of Rush Limbaugh, well that explains everything.......
>>>>> Yep, dumbocritters love to lump the opposition into one pile. They can just
>>>>> barely handle that with their drugged brains.
>>>> "For those of you in Rio Linda" is a Rush Limbaugh tag line he often
>>>> uses, nobody but a ditto head would use it.
>>>> Whose drugged brain? Limbaugh was the one in rehab for oxycontin, it's
>>>> what made him go deaf.- Hide quoted text -
>>> Yes, he had severe, inoperable back pain and got hooked on an
>>> addictive painkiller. One trip to rehab and he got off, showing good
>>> personal responsibility.
>> Sure he did, that's why he was playing golf during that whole period.
>> claiming he had no physical limitations. If you've had back pain so bad
>> you need oxy there's no way you could play golf in a tournament.- Hide quoted text -
>
> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
> party it up.
>
>



He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......

AZDuffman
March 20th 09, 05:10 PM
On Mar 20, 11:36*am, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:


> > He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. *I
> > give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
> > a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
> > party it up.
>
> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
their private medical records public. I love the left--"Let's have
programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."

And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."

March 20th 09, 06:25 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>
>
>>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
>>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
>>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
>>> party it up.
>> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
>> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
>> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
>> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
>> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
> their private medical records public.



If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.


I love the left--"Let's have
> programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
> overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."

He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.


>
> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>

"There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys
individuals.

It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
say,

is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing

drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know

what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed

by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought

to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".



"What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
use.

Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
getting

away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not
to start

letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who
are breaking

the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away
with it,

convict them and send them up the river, too."


"When you strip it all away, Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs.
And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are
out of whack, folks."

Poetic Justice[_2_]
March 20th 09, 06:42 PM
wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
>> On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
>>>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
>>>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
>>>> party it up.
>>> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
>>> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
>>> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
>>> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
>>> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......-
>>> Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>
>> And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
>> their private medical records public.
>
>
>
> If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.
>
>
> I love the left--"Let's have
>> programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
>> overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."
>
> He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.
>
>
>>
>> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>>
>
> "There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals.

It saves millions from all sorts of diseases.

> It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
> say,

Drug use saves people and families, addictions of sex destroy families.

>
> is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing
>

We had laws against evil sex too.

> drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know
>

Those laws put people in prisons for what a rich guy can pay a doctor
for and then be 100% legal. Drugs are a social Taboo and should not be
a Legal matter, but a social aversion.

> what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed
>

It's sad but not worth filling prisons with.


> by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought
>

I had a girl friend that became an alcoholic... That was legal.


> to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".

It's worked so well to this point.


>
> "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
> use.

you just said it's destructive, so no user is getting away with it.

>
> Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
> getting

So are the doctors and the drug producers like Pfizer.

AZDuffman
March 20th 09, 06:50 PM
On Mar 20, 2:25*pm, wrote:
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. *I
> >>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
> >>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
> >>> party it up.
> >> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
> >> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
> >> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
> >> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
> >> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
> > their private medical records public.
>
> If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.
>
> I love the left--"Let's have
>
> > programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
> > overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."
>
> He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.
>
>
>
> > And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>
> * "There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys
> individuals.
>
> It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
> say,
>
> is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing
>
> drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know
>
> what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed
>
> by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought
>
> to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".
>
> "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
> use.
>
> Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
> getting
>
> away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not
> to start
>
> letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who
> are breaking
>
> the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away
> with it,
>
> convict them and send them up the river, too."
>
> "When you strip it all away, Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs.
> And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are
> out of whack, folks."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


And Limbaugh was not using illegal drugs like you are quoting. He was
hooked on perscription painkillers due to inoperable back pain. There
is a differece between that and people shoving coke up their noses for
"fun."

Your comparison does not mesh.

AZDuffman
March 20th 09, 07:00 PM
On Mar 20, 2:42*pm, Poetic Justice >
wrote:
> wrote:
> > AZDuffman wrote:
> >> On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
> >>> AZDuffman wrote:
>
> >>>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. *I
> >>>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
> >>>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
> >>>> party it up.
> >>> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
> >>> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
> >>> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
> >>> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
> >>> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......-
> >>> Hide quoted text -
>
> >>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >> And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
> >> their private medical records public.
>
> > If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.
>
> > I love the left--"Let's have
> >> programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
> >> overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."
>
> > He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.
>
> >> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>
> > *"There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals.
>
> It saves millions from all sorts of diseases.
>
> > It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
> > say,
>
> Drug use saves people and families, addictions of sex destroy families.
>
>
>
> > is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing
>
> We had laws against evil sex too.
>
> > drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know
>
> Those laws put people in prisons for what a rich guy can pay a doctor
> for and then be 100% legal. *Drugs are a social Taboo and should not be
> a Legal matter, but a social aversion.
>
> > what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed
>
> It's sad but not worth filling prisons with.
>
> > by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought
>
> I had a girl friend that became an alcoholic... That was legal.
>
> > to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".
>
> It's worked so well to this point.
>
>
>
> > "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
> > use.
>
> you just said it's destructive, so no user is getting away with it.
>
>
>
> > Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
> > getting
>
> So are the doctors and the drug producers like Pfizer.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Another person missing the point, and this one even more so. Illegal
drugs like cocaine, heroin, and weed are what is being commented on.
And those drugs do not "save" people, they destroy them. No one gets
coke or heroin by a perscription in this day and age. They are for
"recreation" as is weed, but I can't see anything fun about them.

And I find it more lovely how the left says there was a "witch hunt"
for Bill Clinton by a GOP Congress who found perjury a crime yet says
Limbaugh got off somehow.

Doobie Keebler[_2_]
March 20th 09, 08:12 PM
On Mar 20, 12:10*pm, AZDuffman > wrote:

> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."

You're evidently not a good and loyal Ditto Head, you missed this:

"If people are violating the law by doing drugs," he told his
listeners in 1995, "they ought to be accused and they ought to be
convicted and they ought to be sent up."

Limbaugh faced conviction for doctor-shopping, which is a third-degree
felony under Florida Statutes 893.13(7)(a)(8) and 893.13(7)(c). The
practice is punishable by up to five years in prison and up to a
$5,000 fine.

The DA had a compelling case, but instead he received 18 month
deferred prosecution on condition he go to rehab. This is fairly
standard celebrity treatment, so no one should be surprised by this.

As for regular folks? Well, Ricky Earl Herc, 62, and his wife, Terry
Ann, 47, remained in the Orient Road Jail this morning. No Bail.
http://northeast2.tbo.com/content/2009/mar/20/couple-son-charged-doctor-shopping-prescriptions/

See, if it had been you or me, we'd still be sitting in the pokey.

The irony is that Rush talks tough on drug crime prosecution, but he's
at least as guilty as Ricky Herc.


..

Poetic Justice[_2_]
March 20th 09, 10:07 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2:42 pm, Poetic Justice >
> wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>> On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
>>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
>>>>>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
>>>>>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
>>>>>> party it up.
>>>>> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
>>>>> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
>>>>> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
>>>>> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
>>>>> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......-
>>>>> Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
>>>> their private medical records public.
>>> If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.
>>> I love the left--"Let's have
>>>> programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
>>>> overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."
>>> He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.
>>>> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>>> "There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals.
>> It saves millions from all sorts of diseases.
>>
>>> It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
>>> say,
>> Drug use saves people and families, addictions of sex destroy families.
>>
>>
>>
>>> is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing
>> We had laws against evil sex too.
>>
>>> drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know
>> Those laws put people in prisons for what a rich guy can pay a doctor
>> for and then be 100% legal. Drugs are a social Taboo and should not be
>> a Legal matter, but a social aversion.
>>
>>> what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed
>> It's sad but not worth filling prisons with.
>>
>>> by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought
>> I had a girl friend that became an alcoholic... That was legal.
>>
>>> to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".
>> It's worked so well to this point.
>>
>>
>>
>>> "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
>>> use.
>> you just said it's destructive, so no user is getting away with it.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
>>> getting
>> So are the doctors and the drug producers like Pfizer.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Another person missing the point, and this one even more so. Illegal
> drugs like cocaine, heroin, and weed are what is being commented on.
> And those drugs do not "save" people, they destroy them. No one gets
> coke or heroin by a perscription in this day and age. They are for
> "recreation" as is weed, but I can't see anything fun about them.

Those drugs that you call illegal, were once(Opiates & Marijuana still
are) drugs used to treat people, the fact that Congress says they have
no value, doesn't mean that they have no value for medical care. If so
they would have never been used for medical reasons in the past. I do
have a right to perform medical treatment on myself....

As for whether those drugs save or destroy, it depends on the user and
the case. You forgot alcohol that is a poison is also used for
recreation, but in a pinch works for medical reasons too, and sometimes
for Psychological reasons. How about Butane and Scotch Guard?

Your hard core approach isn't the only way.


The war on drugs isn't going so well.... from what I see it looks like
it has created more problems than it has solved, all you need to do is
look back at *prohibition* which spiked crime and filled prisons. In
the end we discovered that adjudicating social Taboos didn't make things
better.

From where I sit it was you who didn't understand the point.







--

http://OutSourcedNews.com
*A LIBERTARIAN BAIL-OUT PLAN*

Reducing regulations is primary since regulation is what stifles
commerce, the more regulations, the more it costs our economy. Most
regulations are used by existing businesses to reduce competition, and
competition would help us get out of this depression.

End the "war on drugs" make them legal(increase competition) and sold at
any drug store and make prostitution legal too, that will take the BIG
money out of trafficking in drugs, and that will reduce the
gangs/dealers income and that should reduce the value of sex slaves and
hurt the slavery business income also. Why have illegal prostitutes
when there are so many legal tax paying prostitutes out there?

Enact the http://fairtax.org (Federal sales tax) with the same amendment
that removes income tax. This will reduce the number of tax crimes that
people are in jails for. Then cut every single expenditure of the
government by 10%, and begin to draw down troops as needed from around
the world. This will financially assault the drug dealers and hookers
and other underground economy's by forcing them to have to pay tax when
they spend their money, which will further reduce the benefit of dealing
in other illegal stuff. We are "right now" taking money from peoples
pay checks before they get them and at the same time we don't tax drug
dealers or hookers and illegals or others at all. Sales tax will also
encourage saving money rather than encouraging the leveraging of every
dime you can get like income tax does.

This will drive people in the underground economy to become part of the
real economy. It will stop most of the turf killings and end our
Immigration problems with illegals stealing identities since they will
be paying tax(as sales tax). Offer illegals low welfare and charge them
tax and they won't be so eager to come here and we won't need to chase
them......

End social security, grandfather it out of existence.

We need to quit filling the jails with people over *social taboos* , we
need to take away congress' ability to "regulate" businesses/people
using tax code. Government needs to spend 10% less every year until they
meet the income of the government. And we need to give up our roll as
the police man of the world, let them fight their own fights. We need
fewer people committing crimes, we need fewer police and prisons.... my
drug and tax plans.... will reduce police and prison needs by at least
that 10% that I suggest cutting.

NO welfare to corporations, and cut welfare to people by 10% each year
until it is 10% of what it is today.

Any way you look at it, we're in DEEP **** for a short time.

March 20th 09, 11:02 PM
AZDuffman wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2:25 pm, wrote:
>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>> On Mar 20, 11:36 am, wrote:
>>>> AZDuffman wrote:
>>>>> He eventually had it corrected but was still addicted to the oxy. I
>>>>> give him credit for overcoming his addiction and absolutely put it in
>>>>> a different league than some cokehead/meth addict just doing dope to
>>>>> party it up.
>>>> He over came his addiction because he was "Outed", turned in by his
>>>> housekeeper, who he was forcing to provide him with drugs. Lot's of
>>>> people become addicted to prescription drugs,and then end up as junkies,
>>>> they just don't have Limbaugh's resources to cover it up, or bad mouth
>>>> other junkies while having their housekeepers deal for them......- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> And most people prosecuted don't have the local DA trying to make
>>> their private medical records public.
>> If Limbaugh were an average joe without money he would have been in jail.
>>
>> I love the left--"Let's have
>>
>>> programs for users, but if Rush Limbaugh uses his own resources to
>>> overcome an addiction then there is something wrong with that."
>> He went because he had to go, or would have likely faced jail time.
>>
>>
>>
>>> And I really don't recall him "bad-mouthing any junkies."
>> "There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys
>> individuals.
>>
>> It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might
>> say,
>>
>> is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing
>>
>> drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know
>>
>> what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed
>>
>> by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought
>>
>> to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up".
>>
>> "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug
>> use.
>>
>> Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are
>> getting
>>
>> away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not
>> to start
>>
>> letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who
>> are breaking
>>
>> the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away
>> with it,
>>
>> convict them and send them up the river, too."
>>
>> "When you strip it all away, Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs.
>> And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are
>> out of whack, folks."- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -


>
>
> And Limbaugh was not using illegal drugs like you are quoting.


LOL,yes he was. He was using drug prescriptions belonging to other
people and obtaining drugs from a dealer, which makes the drugs he took
illegal. The same as any other junkie.

He was
> hooked on perscription painkillers due to inoperable back pain. There
> is a differece between that and people shoving coke up their noses for
> "fun."
>
> Your comparison does not mesh.


Pull the other one, nobody uses 11,900 legally prescribed tablets over
six months. The drugs Rush Limbaugh was using are legal only with a
doctor's prescription.

nemo
March 23rd 09, 12:36 AM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 18, 2:43 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
> >>>>>>>>>> the U.S.!
> >>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
> >>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
> >>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
> >>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
> >>>>>>> 80s, and 2000s.
> >>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> >>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
> >>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>>>> It is proven to work.
> >>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> >>>>> It worked in 1982,
> >>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>> which was far worse than this one.
> >>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>> Heard you the first time.
> >>
> >> Your **** in spades.
> >>
> >>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
> >>
> >> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
> >>
> >> You get to like that or lump it.
> >>
> >>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> >>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
> >>
> >> Pig ignorant lie.
> >>
> >>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
> >>
> >> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as
> >> they are now.
> >>
> >>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
> >>
> >> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like the complete
> >> implosion of the world financial system.
> >>
> >>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
> >>
> >> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
> >>
> >>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> >>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
> >>
> >> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
> >>
> >>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
> >>> left.
> >>
> >> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
> >>
> >> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be
> >> tanking further.
> >>
> >>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> >>> there is the most available for new investments.
> >>
> >> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you have never ever
> >> had a ****ing clue about anything
> >> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough to give you
> >> any say on anything at all, ever.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
>
> More name calling.
>
> > If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you ever
> > give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give you more
> > time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
>
> More name calling.
>

The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense. It was those who came later who
buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.

However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it, you're
bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for blues under
the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.

So read it herself, and a bit of history, before yer frow the Manifesto at
someone else!

And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!

Innit!

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 01:14 AM
nemo wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> AZDuffman wrote
>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote

>>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
>>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
>>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
>>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.

>>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.

>>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

>>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,

>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.

>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.

>>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.

>>>>>>> It worked in 1982,

>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.

>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>>>> Heard you the first time.

>>>> Your **** in spades.

>>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.

>>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.

>>>> You get to like that or lump it.

>>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
>>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.

>>>> Pig ignorant lie.

>>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.

>>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.

>>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.

>>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
>>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.

>>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.

>>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.

>>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
>>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.

>>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.

>>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.

>>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.

>>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.

>>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
>>>>> there is the most available for new investments.

>>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
>>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
>>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
>>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.

>>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.

>> More name calling.

>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.

>> More name calling.

> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.

No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out of
the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into it,
most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.

THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.

> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.

Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.

Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

> So read it herself, and a bit of history,

Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!

> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!

You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 01:33 AM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:14:00 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
>>> More name calling.
>
>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
>
>>> More name calling.
>
>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out of
> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into it,
> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.

Wrong. In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip. For
an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No
one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than I expected, the
trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was
as good as anywhere else and the less good chocolate was no worse than the
worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the
streets, and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the
Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and I enjoyed NOT having
to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night
television you got a news hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious
content instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials. As a
guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful
color, sharp picture, in focus, and no defects.

> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.

Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy
and a quite well performing national health service (according to a number
of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half
the cost.

>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>
> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.

>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
>> you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

Plenty other attempts did.

>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

Betcha can't prove that idle boast, along with all your other idle boasts.

>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>
>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.

Better than ending up like you without a brain, Mr. Alzheimer.

BobR
March 23rd 09, 02:07 AM
On Mar 22, 8:14*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> nemo wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rod Speed > wrote
> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!
> >>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
> >>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
> >>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
> >>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.
> >>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> >>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
> >>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> >>>>>>> It worked in 1982,
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>> Heard you the first time.
> >>>> Your **** in spades.
> >>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
> >>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
> >>>> You get to like that or lump it.
> >>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> >>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
> >>>> Pig ignorant lie.
> >>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
> >>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.
> >>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
> >>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
> >>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.
> >>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
> >>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
> >>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> >>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
> >>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
> >>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.
> >>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
> >>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.
> >>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> >>>>> there is the most available for new investments.
> >>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
> >>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
> >>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
> >>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.
> >>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
> >> More name calling.
> >>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. *That would give
> >>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
> >> More name calling.
> > The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out of
> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into it,
> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>
> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.
>

The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
it.

> > It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>
> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>

Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
time anyway.)

Other than a few examples of that nature, I would agree.

> > However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> > surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> > you're bound to become just a little paranoid and *start looking for
> > blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.
>
> > So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>

Now that! I can believe!

> > before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
> > And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> > unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide quoted text -
>

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 03:12 AM
Stray Dog wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote

>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.

>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.

>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>> doing that makes no difference.

> Wrong.

Nope.

> In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.

And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars, fool.

> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines
> (ques) than
> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else
> and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.

In spades with china at that time.

Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.

> and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and I
> enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night television you got a news hour
> that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

> instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and no
> defects.

Pity about the content, ****wit.

>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed to deliver anything like the real living
>> standards that a mixed economy does.

> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy and a quite well performing national health
> service (according to a number of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half the cost.

And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.

There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life expectancy too.

>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.

>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.

Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.

>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
>>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it, you're bound to become just a little paranoid
>>> and start looking for
>>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.

>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

> Plenty other attempts did.

Like hell they did.

>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,

>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!

>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!

>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 03:24 AM
BobR wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> nemo wrote
>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!

>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top
>>>>>>>>>>>>> income tax rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> country would figure out on its own how to get out of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> recession.

>>>>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.

>>>>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the
>>>>>>>>>>> 60s, 80s, and 2000s.

>>>>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.

>>>>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,

>>>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>>>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.

>>>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>>>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.

>>>>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.

>>>>>>>>> It worked in 1982,

>>>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.

>>>>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.

>>>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.

>>>>>>> Heard you the first time.

>>>>>> Your **** in spades.

>>>>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.

>>>>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
>>>>>> You get to like that or lump it.

>>>>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
>>>>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.

>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie.

>>>>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.

>>>>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.

>>>>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.

>>>>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
>>>>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.

>>>>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.

>>>>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.

>>>>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
>>>>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.

>>>>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.

>>>>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.

>>>>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.

>>>>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.

>>>>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
>>>>>>> there is the most available for new investments.

>>>>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
>>>>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
>>>>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
>>>>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.

>>>>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.

>>>> More name calling.

>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.

>>>> More name calling.

>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.

>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>> doing that makes no difference.

>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.

> The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain it.

Thats what all the kibbutz and the absolute vast bulk of communes tried and they ALL failed anyway.

>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.

>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

> Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
> a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time.
> Think AMISH.

They aint communes or kibbutz. They are a lot closer to capitalism where
you end up with the fruits of the effort you are prepared to put in personally.

And the rest of them that were anything like communes or kibbutz,
like the lot that used to make the furniture, have entirely vanished now

> They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
> an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living.

Like hell they do.

> Not that I would want their standard of living.
> (At least not most of the time anyway.)

I wouldnt want it ever. ****ed if I'm gunna have the ****ing
phone in an outhouse on the corner of the ****ing property.

> Other than a few examples of that nature, I would agree.

>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
>>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
>>> you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
>>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.

>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,

>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

> Now that! I can believe!

>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!

>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 02:57 PM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:12:34 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog wrote
>> Rod Speed > wrote
>
>>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
>
>>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
>>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>>> doing that makes no difference.
>
>> Wrong.
>
> Nope.

Yep.

>> In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.
>
> And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
> difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars, fool.

As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just
like in the west. You would be "well off" in Russia, or "in poverty" in
Russia. Or, somewhere in between.

>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines
>> (ques) than
>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else
>> and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
>> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.

> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.

It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with the poor
in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with Russia.

> In spades with china at that time.

Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big rise in
billionairs in China, India, and even Russia in recent years.

> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
> west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
> decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.

Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today, and totally affordable by
the rich/wealthy in Russia/China.

>> and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and I
>> enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night television you got a news hour
>> that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

The real clue is your failure to understand the deeper significance of
people not exposed to "buy-this-buy-that" western capitalist consumption
propaganda designed to entice people into excess debt.

>> instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
>> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and no
>> defects.
>
> Pity about the content, ****wit.

I was quite impressed with "no commercials" and space for more
program content.

>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed to deliver anything like the real living
>>> standards that a mixed economy does.
>
>> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy and a quite well performing national health
>> service (according to a number of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half the cost.
>
> And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
> they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.

As if the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't happen in the west or non-USSR
countries. eg. India, today.

> There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life expectancy
too.

The USA isn't on top on that, either.

>>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>
>>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.

Besides the advantages/disadvantages, one would have to actually live in a
place with favorite advantages and see of one liked them compared to the
disadvantages.

>>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
>>>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it, you're bound to become just a little paranoid
>>>> and start looking for
>>>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
>>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.
>
>> Plenty other attempts did.
>
> Like hell they did.

Like hell they didn't.

>>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
>>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>
>>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>
>>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
>>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Here is some really good **** for you.....





The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
g00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -

After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]


Who or What is Rod Speed?

Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.

Rod is believed to be from Australia.


Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?

It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.


But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?

Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.


But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?

Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.


What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?

Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.


But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?

It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"


What is a "RodBot"?

Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.


Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?

You got it!


What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?

KillFile!

..

bob wald
March 23rd 09, 05:06 PM
obama laughs as the nation loses hundreds of bils in stock
market..........$$$$$$...POOF!

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 05:46 PM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Sir F. A. Rien wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:34:22 -0700
> From: Sir F. A. Rien >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> BobR > found these unused words:
>
>> On Mar 22, 8:14*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>>> nemo wrote

>>>
>>
>> Now that! I can believe!
>>
>>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> Most titles are enclosed in quotes ... guess you skipped English that year,
> eh?

It all depends on what style is standard for whatever medium you use.

Artistic licence covers all other situations.

>>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>
>

BobR
March 23rd 09, 05:58 PM
On Mar 23, 11:34*am, Sir F. A. Rien > wrote:
> BobR > found these unused words:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mar 22, 8:14*pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> >> nemo wrote
>
> >> > Rod Speed > wrote
> >> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >> >>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >> >>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >> >>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote
> >> >>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the U.S.!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >> >>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s, and 2000s.
> >> >>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> >> >>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >> >>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
> >> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >> >>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
> >> >>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> >> >>>>>>> It worked in 1982,
> >> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >> >>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
> >> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >> >>>>> Heard you the first time.
> >> >>>> Your **** in spades.
> >> >>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
> >> >>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out..
> >> >>>> You get to like that or lump it.
> >> >>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> >> >>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
> >> >>>> Pig ignorant lie.
> >> >>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
> >> >>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they are now.
> >> >>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
> >> >>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
> >> >>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.
> >> >>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
> >> >>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
> >> >>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> >> >>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
> >> >>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
> >> >>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is left.
> >> >>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
> >> >>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be tanking further.
> >> >>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> >> >>>>> there is the most available for new investments.
> >> >>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
> >> >>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
> >> >>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
> >> >>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.
> >> >>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
> >> >> More name calling.
> >> >>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >> >>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. *That would give
> >> >>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
> >> >> More name calling.
> >> > The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> >> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out of
> >> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into it,
> >> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference..
>
> >> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> >> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.
>
> >The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> >accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
> >it.
>
> But the liberals decry having to [shudder] work .. you 'deserve' the best
> whether you make any effort or not. If you don't, why we'll take it from
> someone else and GIVE it to you!
>

Yep, they all want the same high standard of living, are envious of
those who have a higher standard of living than they but are totally
unwilling to put forth the effort and risk required to achieve. It is
much easier to either steal it or better yet let the government steal
it for you.

> >> > It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>
> >> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> >> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
> >Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. *I can think of
> >a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. *Think
> >AMISH. *They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
> >an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. *Not
> >that I would want their standard of living. *(At least not most of the
> >time anyway.)
>
> Depends upon what you call 'standard'. Drugs, guns, crime, buggery - it
> those are your 'standards', then welcome to them!
>

Thats why I qualified my not wanting their standard of living with the
(At least not most of the time.) condition. The longer I live in this
gawd forsaken city, the more I would accept a reduction in the
standard of stress.

>
> >Other than a few examples of that nature, I would agree.
>
> >> > However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> >> > surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> >> > you're bound to become just a little paranoid and *start looking for
> >> > blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> >> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.
>
> >> > So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> >> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
> >Now that! *I can believe!
>
> >> > before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
> >> > And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> >> > unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> Most titles are enclosed in quotes ... guess you skipped English that year,
> eh?
>
>
>
> >> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 06:04 PM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Sir F. A. Rien wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:37:15 -0700
> From: Sir F. A. Rien >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog > found these unused words:
>
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:12:34 +1100
>>> From: Rod Speed >
>>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
>>> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
>>> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>>>
>>> Stray Dog wrote
>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>
>>>>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
>>>
>>>>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>>>
>>>>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>>>>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>>>>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>>>>> doing that makes no difference.
>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>
>> Yep.
>
> Clinton

Karl Marx

>>>> In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.
>>>
>>> And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
>>> difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars, fool.
>>
>> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just
>> like in the west. You would be "well off" in Russia, or "in poverty" in
>> Russia. Or, somewhere in between.
>>
>>>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines
>>>> (ques) than
>>>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else
>>>> and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
>>>> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,
>>>
>>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>>
>> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.
>
> Sure you weren't the criminal?

Yes, I'm sure. Had my passport and visa. All legal.

>>> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
>>> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.


>> I was quite impressed with "no commercials" and space for more
>> program content.
>
> Forgot about the required license - or did you pirate the signal[s]?

Paid for by state subsidy.

Once upon a time, in the USA, there was the PBS system, also free and no
commercials. Now, lots of commercials on PBS TV here, in the USA.

>>>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed to deliver anything like the real living
>>>>> standards that a mixed economy does.
>>>

>>> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.
>>
>> Besides the advantages/disadvantages, one would have to actually live in a
>> place with favorite advantages and see of one liked them compared to the
>> disadvantages.
>
> Presuming that as a citizen of that location, you HAD such a choice!

I paid the same price for a loaf of bread that a citizen paid. Five
kopecks, and the bread was pretty good, too.

Bus travel anywhere, all day long was also five kopecks. Metro (subway)
had unlimited transfers. YOu could get a bus pass for a month for a couple
of rubles and get on and off the bus unlimited times, transfer unlimited
times, for a whole month.

Grocery stores were not posh, but you were not going to starve and
everything was cheap. If you were a big party muck-muck you got to shop in
special "malls" where you could get anything available anywhere else in
the world. I saw them, too. Rank hath it's priviledges, just like money in
the west talks.

I bought a made-in-the-USSR transistor radio, too. It still works, too.
Look inside, all the electronic parts have cyrillic lettering on them.
Wild. Also included an electrical schematic diagram identifying parts,
values, and printed circuit boars, also with cyrillic lettering all over.
Wild. Price includes batteries and -- believe it or not-- a one year
warranty.

It was a lot of fun going around and looking under or behind things to see
the identification labels that said where something was made, the same
price you pay no matter where you buy it, all kinds of neat stuff.

>>>>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>>>
>>>>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>>>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>>>
>>>>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>>>
>>> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>>
>> Here is some really good **** for you.....

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 06:39 PM
Stray Dog wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Stray Dog wrote
>>> Rod Speed > wrote

>>>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response
>>>>>>> you ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That
>>>>>>> would give you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto"
>>>>>>> for the 10th time.

>>>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.

>>>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>>>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>>>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>>>> doing that makes no difference.

>>> Wrong.

>> Nope.

> Yep.

Nope.

>>> In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.

>> And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
>> difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars, fool.

> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just
> like in the west. You would be "well off" in Russia, or "in poverty"
> in Russia. Or, somewhere in between.

What matters is that the living standards that say an employed
engineer, scientist, cleaner, surgeon, truck driver etc etc etc
were ALL radically worse in the USSR than in the west using
any sensible measure like the quality of housing or cars or
freedom of movement around the world on holiday etc etc etc.

>>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all
>>> that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than
>>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and
>>> all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else and the less good
>>> chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west, there
>>> were more cars on the road than I expected, and no piles of
>>> abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,

>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.

But are so stupid that you cant work out those basics that I have just listed above.

>> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
>> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.

> It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with the poor in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with
> Russia.

Wrong, as always. What matters is what the bulk of
people end up with, not what the extremes end up with.

>> In spades with china at that time.

> Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big rise in billionairs in China, India, and even Russia
> in recent years.

Didnt happen while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

>> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
>> west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
>> decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
>> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.

> Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today,

But couldnt while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

> and totally affordable by the rich/wealthy in Russia/China.

But not while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

Even Gorby and Mao couldnt.

>>> and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and
>>> I enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night television you got a news
>>> hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content

>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

> The real clue is your failure to understand the deeper significance of people not exposed to "buy-this-buy-that"
> western capitalist
> consumption propaganda designed to entice people into excess debt.

How odd that the east germans clearly preferred that approach.

They preferred it so much that they had to have a ****ing great wall to
stop them moving to where they decided things were done much better.

And eventually even the goons couldnt stop them tearing it down.

Same thing happened with China too with hordes moving to HongKong
where they decided things were much better than where the Communist
Manifesto was in theory the way things were done.

>>> instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
>>> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and
>>> no defects.

>> Pity about the content, ****wit.

> I was quite impressed with "no commercials" and space for more program content.

Pity about the program content, fool.

>>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed to deliver anything like the real living
>>>> standards that a mixed economy does.

>>> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy and a quite well performing national
>>> health service (according to a number of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half the
>>> cost.

>> And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
>> they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.

> As if the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't happen in the west or non-USSR countries. eg. India, today.

Not via a completely ****ed official medical system, fool.

>> There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life expectancy too.

> The USA isn't on top on that, either.

Still leaves the USSR and china for dead, fool.

>>>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.

>>>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>>>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

>>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.

>> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.

> Besides the advantages/disadvantages, one would have to actually live in a place with favorite advantages and see of
> one liked them compared to the disadvantages.

Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.

>>>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN surrounding countries declare war on you as
>>>>> soon as you implement
>>>>> it, you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for blues under the loos and the inevitable
>>>>> paranoia that that leads to.

>>>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

>>> Plenty other attempts did.

>> Like hell they did.

> Like hell they didn't.

Have fun listing the SEVEN surrounding countrys that declared war on china, fool.

>>>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,

>>>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.

>> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

>>>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!

>>>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of
>>>>> ignorance than of cleverness!

>>>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.

<reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 07:09 PM
\On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 05:39:30 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote
>>> Stray Dog wrote
>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>
>
>>>> Wrong.
>
>>> Nope.
>
>> Yep.
>
> Nope.

Yep.

>> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just
>> like in the west. You would be "well off" in Russia, or "in poverty"
>> in Russia. Or, somewhere in between.
>
> What matters is that the living standards that say an employed
> engineer, scientist, cleaner, surgeon, truck driver etc etc etc
> were ALL radically worse in the USSR than in the west using
> any sensible measure like the quality of housing or cars or
> freedom of movement around the world on holiday etc etc etc.

As a matter of fact, the living standards were NOT radically worse in the
USSR but WERE radically worse in places like India and China.

Freedom of movement? I asked them about that. The law says they had to get
permission, but the law is not enforced. 99% of them just bought their
tickets, or drove their cars, wherever they wanted.

>>>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all
>>>> that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than
>>>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and
>>>> all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else and the less good
>>>> chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west, there
>>>> were more cars on the road than I expected, and no piles of
>>>> abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,
>
>>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
>> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.
>
> But are so stupid that you cant work out those basics that I have just
listed above.

You were not there, not as an eyewitness, not physically there, at all.

You're also ignorant and totally co-opted by your own prejudices.

>>> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
>>> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.
>
>> It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with the poor in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with
>> Russia.
>
> Wrong, as always. What matters is what the bulk of
> people end up with, not what the extremes end up with.

I'll bet you even have a lot of poverty in Oz, too.

And, I spent a week there, back in mid 1990s. Read the papers, talked with
people, and saw a lot.

>>> In spades with china at that time.
>
>> Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big rise in billionairs in China, India, and even Russia
>> in recent years.
>
> Didnt happen while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the
Communist Manifesto.

My sentence is correct, and relevant to the important recent past.

>>> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
>>> west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
>>> decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
>>> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.
>
>> Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today,
>
> But couldnt while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

What is relevant is today, not decades ago.

>> and totally affordable by the rich/wealthy in Russia/China.
>
> But not while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

MKight want to think about "socialized" Europe for a pretty high standard
of living.

> Even Gorby and Mao couldnt.

The world may someday thank Gorby. Mao is long ago.

Might want to think about Fidel and Hugo, today.

>>>> and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and
>>>> I enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night television you got a news
>>>> hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content
>
>>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
>> The real clue is your failure to understand the deeper significance
>> of people not exposed to "buy-this-buy-that"
>> western capitalist
>> consumption propaganda designed to entice people into excess debt.
>
> How odd that the east germans clearly preferred that approach.

The east Germans all thought, mistakenly, that when the wall came down,
capitalism would rush in and save them. It didn't.

> They preferred it so much that they had to have a ****ing great wall to
> stop them moving to where they decided things were done much better.

Its actually interesting that an in-depth WSJ article conveyed the
impression that while material standards of living in east Germany were
not very good, people did enjoy a low stress life (you just did not want
to get mixed up in activities that would get the secret police on your
ass).

> And eventually even the goons couldnt stop them tearing it down.

Ahhh...yes... just kinda like the Boston Tea party in the US on our way to
the Declaration of Independence.

> Same thing happened with China too with hordes moving to HongKong
> where they decided things were much better than where the Communist
> Manifesto was in theory the way things were done.

Of course, you already forgot why Mao got to take over China to begin
with.

>>>> instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
>>>> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and
>>>> no defects.
>
>>> Pity about the content, ****wit.
>
>> I was quite impressed with "no commercials" and space for more program content.
>
> Pity about the program content, fool.

Program content was sports, art films, with deep content and meaning. News
was comparable, complete with satellite images of weather patterns, cloud
cover, temperaturs in centigrade super-imposed on graphics.

>
>>> And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
>>> they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.
>
>> As if the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't happen in the west or non-USSR countries. eg. India, today.
>
> Not via a completely ****ed official medical system, fool.

You mean like, in other words, almost everywhere else as today? And, even
worse in China/India/Africa?

>>> There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life expectancy too.
>
>> The USA isn't on top on that, either.
>
> Still leaves the USSR and china for dead, fool.

Hardly. They still have a lot of people over there, not dead.

>
>>>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>>>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
>>> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.
>
>> Besides the advantages/disadvantages, one would have to
>> actually live in a place with favorite advantages and see of
>> one liked them compared to the disadvantages.
>
> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.

Totally relevant.

>
>>>>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.
>
>>>> Plenty other attempts did.
>
>>> Like hell they did.
>
>> Like hell they didn't.
>
> Have fun listing the SEVEN surrounding countrys that declared war
on china, fool.

I could list more that made wars against Russia.

>>>>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
>>> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>
>>>>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>
>>>>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of
>>>>>> ignorance than of cleverness!
>
>>>>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>


To explain your unusually impolite and extensive ignorance and prejudice,
to other people, here is the Rod Speed FAQ again....(I didn't write it)...





The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
g00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -

After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]


Who or What is Rod Speed?

Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.

Rod is believed to be from Australia.


Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?

It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.


But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?

Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.


But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?

Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.


What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?

Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.


But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?

It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"


What is a "RodBot"?

Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.


Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?

You got it!


What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?

KillFile!

..

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 08:43 PM
Stray Dog wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote
>> Stray Dog wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Stray Dog wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote

>>>>> Wrong.

>>>> Nope.

>>> Yep.

>> Nope.

> Yep.

Nope.

>>> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just like in the west. You would be "well off" in
>>> Russia, or "in poverty"
>>> in Russia. Or, somewhere in between.

>> What matters is that the living standards that say an employed
>> engineer, scientist, cleaner, surgeon, truck driver etc etc etc
>> were ALL radically worse in the USSR than in the west using
>> any sensible measure like the quality of housing or cars or
>> freedom of movement around the world on holiday etc etc etc.

> As a matter of fact, the living standards were NOT radically worse in the USSR

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

On housing, cars and freedom of movement, they were MUCH worse, fool.

> but WERE radically worse in places like India and China.

Wrong with an employed engineer in India at that time, fool.

> Freedom of movement? I asked them about that. The law says they had to get permission, but the law is not enforced.
> 99% of them just
> bought their tickets, or drove their cars, wherever they wanted.

Like hell they ever did outside the eastern bloc countrys.

And **** all had cars that they could use to drive to say britain in anyway.

>>>>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all
>>>>> that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than
>>>>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and
>>>>> all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst
>>>>> chocolate in the west, there
>>>>> were more cars on the road than I expected, and no piles of
>>>>> abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,

>>>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>>>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

>>> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.

>> But are so stupid that you cant work out those basics that I have just listed above.

> You were not there, not as an eyewitness, not physically there, at all.

You have absolutely no idea where I have been, ****wit.

>>>> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
>>>> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.

>>> It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with
>>> the poor in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with Russia.

>> Wrong, as always. What matters is what the bulk of
>> people end up with, not what the extremes end up with.

> I'll bet you even have a lot of poverty in Oz, too.

Irrelevant to what matters, what the bulk of people end up with living standards wise.

> And, I spent a week there, back in mid 1990s. Read the papers, talked with people, and saw a lot.

But are so stupid that you couldnt manage to grasp that the living standards
of the bulk of the people were radically better than in the USSR at that time.

>>>> In spades with china at that time.

>>> Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big
>>> rise in billionairs in China, India, and even Russia in recent years.

>> Didnt happen while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

> My sentence is correct, and relevant to the important recent past.

But not relevant to what was being discussed, the Communist Manifesto, fool.

>>>> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and west germany. In west germany, choice from a big
>>>> range of very decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
>>>> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.

>>> Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today,

>> But couldnt while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.

> What is relevant is today, not decades ago.

Pity we happened to be discussing the Communist Manifesto, ****wit.

And since this mindless **** is the best you can manage, here goes the chain on the rest of your mindless ****.

Werner
March 23rd 09, 08:56 PM
On Mar 22, 9:33*pm, Stray Dog > wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:14:00 +1100
....
>
> > No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out of
> > the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into it,
> > most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>
> Wrong. In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip. For
> an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No
> one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than I expected, the
> trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was
> as good as anywhere else and the less good chocolate was no worse than the
> worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the
> streets, and it did *not escape my notice that most of the people on the
> Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and I enjoyed NOT having
> to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night
> television you got a news hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious
> content instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials. As a
> guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful
> color, sharp picture, in focus, and no defects.
>


Rod, you inveted me to leave the country in a different thread. Why
didn't you stay in the USSR? Or why didn't you move there after
graduation?

I visited Yougoslavia and Hungary once before the Curtain fell. I
noticed a really big difference. They may not have been starving, but
learned what a police state is. You must have noticed it also.


> > THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> > to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.
>
> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy
> and a quite well performing national health service (according to a number
> of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half
> the cost.
>


Health care in Europe is a big problem. The system is capped and
rationed.



> >> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>
> > Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> > that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>


And you didn't like it enough to live in the USSR. I can't fault you
for making that decision.


....

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 09:56 PM
Werner wrote
> Stray Dog > wrote
>> Rod Speed wrote

>>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>>> doing that makes no difference.

>> Wrong. In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange
>> trip. For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't
>> all that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques)
>> than I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate
>> and all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else and the less
>> good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the west,
>> there were more cars on the road than I expected, and no piles of
>> abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets, and it did
>> not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros and buses
>> were reading books or newspapers and I enjoyed NOT having to look at
>> commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night television
>> you got a news hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious
>> content instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
>> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and
>> beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and no defects.

> Rod, you inveted me to leave the country in a different thread.

No I didnt. I JUST said that you are welcome to do that if you
dont like the way things are being done and can find some
place where you believe its done better that will have you.

> Why didn't you stay in the USSR? Or why didn't you move there after graduation?

You do realise that that bit was written by the dog, not by me ?

I wrote the para now right at the top.

Because I realise that things are done there much worse.

Both at that time and now too.

> I visited Yougoslavia and Hungary once before the Curtain fell. I
> noticed a really big difference. They may not have been starving,
> but learned what a police state is. You must have noticed it also.

I did indeed.

>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
>>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.

>> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of
>> a mixed economy and a quite well performing national health
>> service (according to a number of studies) that delivers
>> measurable comparison with the US system at half the cost.

> Health care in Europe is a big problem. The system is capped and rationed.

Thats a lie. Japan in spades. They dont even have any waiting time at all,
even for specialists, and an overnight stay in hospital costs only $10 per
night if you are happy with a 4 bed ward, $90 if you want a private ward.

>>>> It was those who came later who buggered
>>>> Communism up and turned it into fascism.

>>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.

> And you didn't like it enough to live in the USSR.
> I can't fault you for making that decision.

bob wald
March 23rd 09, 10:09 PM
the main thing that lifted the market is rising oil prices.........ng
maybe later.....
obamas give away..lol..lifted the market...lol

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 10:10 PM
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:43:26 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog wrote
>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>> Stray Dog wrote
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> Stray Dog wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>
>>>>>> Wrong.
>
>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>> Yep.
>
>>> Nope.
>
>> Yep.
>
> Nope.

Yep.

>>>> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just like in the west. You would be "well off" in
>>>> Russia, or "in poverty"
>>>> in Russia. Or, somewhere in between.
>
>>> What matters is that the living standards that say an employed
>>> engineer, scientist, cleaner, surgeon, truck driver etc etc etc
>>> were ALL radically worse in the USSR than in the west using
>>> any sensible measure like the quality of housing or cars or
>>> freedom of movement around the world on holiday etc etc etc.
>
>> As a matter of fact, the living standards were NOT radically
> worse in the USSR
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

And, their quality of education was as good or better, too.

> On housing,

No worse than our worst.

> cars

I'd rather have Toyota than Detroit.

> and freedom of movement, they were MUCH worse, fool.

They just went wherever they wanted, as long as they could afford the
ticket price.

>> but WERE radically worse in places like India and China.
>
> Wrong with an employed engineer in India at that time, fool.

USSR had the first ever space satellite. Sputnik.

>> Freedom of movement? I asked them about that. The law says they had to get permission, but the law is not enforced.
>> 99% of them just
>> bought their tickets, or drove their cars, wherever they wanted.
>
> Like hell they ever did outside the eastern bloc countrys.

You cross borders in the west and needed a visa in many cases, too.

> And **** all had cars that they could use to drive to say britain in anyway.

You were not there, I was.

>>>>>> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all
>>>>>> that bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than
>>>>>> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and
>>>>>> all of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst
>>>>>> chocolate in the west, there
>>>>>> were more cars on the road than I expected, and no piles of
>>>>>> abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the streets,
>
>>>>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
>>>>> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
>>>> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.
>
>>> But are so stupid that you cant work out those basics that I have just listed above.
>
>> You were not there, not as an eyewitness, not physically there, at all.
>
> You have absolutely no idea where I have been, ****wit.

I can tell by what you say.

You are the Emperor with no clothes.

>>>>> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
>>>>> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.
>
>>>> It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with
>>>> the poor in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with Russia.
>
>>> Wrong, as always. What matters is what the bulk of
>>> people end up with, not what the extremes end up with.
>
>> I'll bet you even have a lot of poverty in Oz, too.
>
> Irrelevant to what matters, what the bulk of people end up with
living standards wise.

Your prime minister, Kevin Rudd, from today's WSJ, says Oz won't be able
to avoid the depression.

>> And, I spent a week there, back in mid 1990s. Read the papers, talked with people, and saw a lot.
>
> But are so stupid that you couldnt manage to grasp that the living standards
> of the bulk of the people were radically better than in the USSR at that time.

I saw much. Better than India and China at the time. Better than Africa
and Latin America.

>>>>> In spades with china at that time.
>
>>>> Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big
>>>> rise in billionairs in China, India, and even Russia in recent years.
>
>>> Didnt happen while ever they were still doing
> anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.
>
>> My sentence is correct, and relevant to the important recent past.
>
> But not relevant to what was being discussed, the Communist Manifesto, fool.

More people read that than read you.

>>>>> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and west germany. In west germany, choice from a big
>>>>> range of very decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
>>>>> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.
>
>>>> Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today,
>
>>> But couldnt while ever they were still doing anything like whats in the Communist Manifesto.
>
>> What is relevant is today, not decades ago.
>
> Pity we happened to be discussing the Communist Manifesto, ****wit.

No, YOU brought up Mercs, BMWs, Audis, etc., and I responded exactly to
that.

> And since this mindless **** is the best you can manage, here
goes the chain on the rest of your mindless ****.

It certainly looks like what is mindless around here is inside your head.

And, just for the record, here is more of your own mindless ****....

You must be real proud of yourself.....

-------------------
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:20:55 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, alt.politics.economics
> Subject: Re: Hey, Rob R, read this....
>
> Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
> delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
> Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
> of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>
> No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard
> arse.
>
> No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
>
>
>

Tim Bruening
March 23rd 09, 10:27 PM
AZDuffman wrote:

> On Mar 17, 7:37 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> > AZDuffman wrote:
> > > On Mar 17, 4:48 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> > >> AZDuffman wrote:
> > >>> On Mar 17, 2:46 pm, wrote:
> > >>>> AZDuffman wrote:
> > >>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in the
> > >>>>>> U.S.!
> > >>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> > >>>>> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back
> > >>>>> to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would figure out on
> > >>>>> its own how to get out of the recession.
> > >>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> > >>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s, 80s,
> > >>> and 2000s.
> >
> > >> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> > > Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >
> > When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >
> > > a much worse recession than this one.
> >
> > Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >
> > >>> It is proven to work.
> > >> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> > > It worked in 1982,
> >
> > When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >
> > > which was far worse than this one.
> >
> > Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete implosion of the world financial system that time.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Heard you the first time. And you are back to just saying :lie" it
> seems. Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican Debt Crisis
> which would have collapses the banks. And 20%+ prime rate is not a
> sign of a strong financial system. Finally, so it was different
> causes and symptoms then. CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS. And it works
> best when you make sure to cut the top marginal rate which is where
> the most investment income can come from.
>
> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
> left. So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income there
> is the most available for new investments.

So to stimulate consumer spending (which is something like 2/3rd to 70% of the economy, and has been hammered by the
recession), we should increase the incomes of the poor. I therefore suggest increasing welfare checks, food stamps,
SSI, and SSD. I also suggest declaring a one year payroll tax holiday, thus giving an instant pay hike to all workers,
and instantly lowering payroll expenses of businesses so that they can hire more. It's my understanding that lower
income workers often pay more in payroll taxes than in income taxes!

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 10:28 PM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Werner wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Werner >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> On Mar 22, 9:33*pm, Stray Dog > wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:14:00 +1100
> ...


>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
>>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.
>>
>> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy
>> and a quite well performing national health service (according to a number
>> of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half
>> the cost.
>>
>
>
> Health care in Europe is a big problem. The system is capped and
> rationed.

Its a big problem in the USA, too.

Costs still going up at rates higher than inflation. The bureaucratization
of the insurance-based health plans means a fraction of all claims are
denied, benefits are capped, pre-existing conditions don't qualify for
benefits, certain diagnosis codes don't qualify for benefits, and
subscribers can run into lifetime benefit caps after only a few years, and
the precertification-preauthorization processes are becoming excessively
complicated.

>>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into fascism.
>>
>>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>>
>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
> And you didn't like it enough to live in the USSR. I can't fault you
> for making that decision.

I was on a visit, never interested in changing citizenship.

People in any 3rd world economy who were in the bottom 95% of their
socio-economic scale would probably be happy to move to anywhere in the
first or second world.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 10:42 PM
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:56:21 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Werner wrote
>> Stray Dog > wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>
>

Rod, you inveted me to leave the country in a different thread.

>> No I didnt. I JUST said that you are welcome to do that if you
>> dont like the way things are being done and can find some
>> place where you believe its done better that will have you.

> Why didn't you stay in the USSR? Or why didn't you move there after
graduation?

You do realise that that bit was written by the Werner, not by me ?

I wrote the para now right at the top.

Because I realise that things are not done there much worse.

Sometimes at that time and sometimes now too.

>> I visited Yougoslavia and Hungary once before the Curtain fell. I
>> noticed a really big difference. They may not have been starving,
>> but learned what a police state is. You must have noticed it also.

I did indeed. It was just like how the USA interred the Japanese citizens
living in California in the second world war, and rounded up Arabs right
after 9/11, and still runs Gitmo in Cuba.


>>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
>>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy does.
>
>> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of
>> a mixed economy and a quite well performing national health
>> service (according to a number of studies) that delivers
>> measurable comparison with the US system at half the cost.
>
> Health care in Europe is a big problem. The system is capped and rationed.
>

Thats a lie. Japan in spades. They dont even have any waiting time at all,
even for specialists, and an overnight stay in hospital costs only $10 per
night if you are happy with a 4 bed ward, $90 if you want a private ward.

Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

>> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
>> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
>> And you didn't like it enough to live in the India.
>
> I can't fault you for making that decision.

Yes, you can.

Tim Bruening
March 23rd 09, 10:46 PM
wrote:

> AZDuffman wrote:
> > On Mar 19, 12:21 pm, wrote:
> >> AZDuffman wrote:
> >>> On Mar 18, 7:41 pm, wrote:
> >>>> Econotron wrote:
> >>>>> > wrote in ...
> >>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >>>>>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
> >>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
> >>>>> e.
> >>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
> >>> Education supporters always say they need more money. They keep
> >>> putting out a crappy product. Meanwhile the Pentagon is being forced
> >>> to cut weapons programs.
> >> LOL, are you serious? Holding up the Pentagon as a model of financial
> >> prudence? The same Pentagon that misplaced eight billion dollars? The
> >> same pentagon that paid $998,798 to send two washers with a value of 38
> >> cents to an Army installation in Texas? Pull the other one.
> >
> > A few issues here. One is that the Constitution provides for the feds
> > providing a military to protect the country. The Constitution
> > specifically says the feds are not supposed to be funding and involved
> > in education. Pesky thing that Constitution, eh?
>
> It is not a static document, and can be amended

I don't recall it being specifically amended to provide for Federal involvement in
education.

Tim Bruening
March 23rd 09, 10:48 PM
Econotron wrote:

> > wrote in message ...
> > Econotron wrote:
> >> > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the highest High
> >>> school drop out rates in the Western World and is loosing ground.
> >>>
> >> More money is not going to fix it.
> >> e.
> >
> > Neither is less money going to fix it
> >
> No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of education largely
> depends on genes, family, and culture. Also, while the current system
> continues to be a jobs program for the teachers, there is little hope for
> improvement.

Which nations are the best at education, and how do they do it?

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 11:11 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 23rd 09, 11:36 PM
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:11:16 +1100
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
> delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
> Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
> of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>
> No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.
>
> No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Popped your cork again, eh?

Predictable as always.

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 11:40 PM
Tim Bruening wrote:
> Econotron wrote:
>
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>>> loosing ground.
>>>>>
>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>> e.
>>>
>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>
>> No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of education
>> largely depends on genes, family, and culture. Also, while the
>> current system continues to be a jobs program for the teachers,
>> there is little hope for improvement.
>
> Which nations are the best at education,

Depends on how you define best at education.

> and how do they do it?

Rod Speed
March 23rd 09, 11:44 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Tim Bruening
March 24th 09, 06:55 AM
Rod Speed wrote:

> Tim Bruening wrote:
> > Econotron wrote:
> >
> >> > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>> Econotron wrote:
> >>>> > wrote in message
> >>>> ...
> >>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
> >>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
> >>>>> loosing ground.
> >>>>>
> >>>> More money is not going to fix it.
> >>>> e.
> >>>
> >>> Neither is less money going to fix it
> >>>
> >> No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of education
> >> largely depends on genes, family, and culture. Also, while the
> >> current system continues to be a jobs program for the teachers,
> >> there is little hope for improvement.
> >
> > Which nations are the best at education,
>
> Depends on how you define best at education.

How would you define "best at education"?

Rod Speed
March 24th 09, 09:16 AM
Tim Bruening wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> Tim Bruening wrote:
>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cut Education? Are you nuts? The USA already has one of the
>>>>>>> highest High school drop out rates in the Western World and is
>>>>>>> loosing ground.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>> e.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>>>
>>>> No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of
>>>> education largely depends on genes, family, and culture. Also,
>>>> while the current system continues to be a jobs program for the
>>>> teachers, there is little hope for improvement.
>>>
>>> Which nations are the best at education,
>>
>> Depends on how you define best at education.
>
> How would you define "best at education"?

I wasnt the one asking that question.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 24th 09, 11:33 AM
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Tim Bruening wrote:

> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:55:56 -0800
> From: Tim Bruening >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
>
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> Tim Bruening wrote:
>>> Econotron wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>>>> More money is not going to fix it.
>>>>>> e.
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither is less money going to fix it
>>>>>
>>>> No, but some other programs may benefit :-) The success of education
>>>> largely depends on genes, family, and culture. Also, while the
>>>> current system continues to be a jobs program for the teachers,
>>>> there is little hope for improvement.
>>>
>>> Which nations are the best at education,
>>
>> Depends on how you define best at education.
>
> How would you define "best at education"?
>


Rod Speed has a lot of trouble with a lot of things.

I didn't write the "Rod Speed FAQ" but it helps understand him...






The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
g00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -

After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]


Who or What is Rod Speed?

Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.

Rod is believed to be from Australia.


Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?

It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.


But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?

Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.


But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?

Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.


What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?

Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.


But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?

It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"


What is a "RodBot"?

Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.


Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?

You got it!


What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?

KillFile!

..

Rod Speed
March 24th 09, 05:21 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 24th 09, 06:36 PM
Rod Speed, the gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a human being, desperately cowering behind
his over-inflated ego and desperately attempting to bull**** and lie his
way out of his predicament and fooled only himself, as always.

No surprise that gives himself the bums rush, right out the door, onto
his own lard arse, by almost everyone on the newsgroups.

No surprise that he is so pathetically bitter and twisted about it that he
posts these "copy and paste," knee-jerk, brain-fart, repetitious-neurotic,
"come-backs" as if he thinks he is accomplishing anything purposeful
outside of Rambo-style pulling the trigger on a machine gun.

Too bad he can't tell the difference between his mouth and a machine gun;
hot air comes out of one, bullets or blanks the other.

Rod Speed
March 24th 09, 06:48 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 25th 09, 12:52 AM
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Sir F. A. Rien wrote:

> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:57:08 -0700
> From: Sir F. A. Rien >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, alt.politics.economics,
> misc.invest.stocks
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog > found these unused words:
>
>>
>> Rod Speed, the gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
>> delusions about being a human being, desperately cowering behind
>> his over-inflated ego and desperately attempting to bull**** and lie his
>> way out of his predicament and fooled only himself, as always.
>>
>> No surprise that gives himself the bums rush, right out the door, onto
>> his own lard arse, by almost everyone on the newsgroups.
>>
>> No surprise that he is so pathetically bitter and twisted about it that he
>> posts these "copy and paste," knee-jerk, brain-fart, repetitious-neurotic,
>> "come-backs" as if he thinks he is accomplishing anything purposeful
>> outside of Rambo-style pulling the trigger on a machine gun.
>>
>> Too bad he can't tell the difference between his mouth and a machine gun;
>> hot air comes out of one, bullets or blanks the other.
>
> Hot air comes out of both, you clueless idiot!

It comes out of you, too.

nemo
March 26th 09, 09:28 PM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> nemo wrote
> > Rod Speed > wrote
> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
the U.S.!
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
> >>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
> >>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
> >>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
80s, and 2000s.
>
> >>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
>
> >>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
>
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>
> >>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
>
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>
> >>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
>
> >>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
>
> >>>>>>> It worked in 1982,
>
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>
> >>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
>
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>
> >>>>> Heard you the first time.
>
> >>>> Your **** in spades.
>
> >>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
>
> >>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
>
> >>>> You get to like that or lump it.
>
> >>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> >>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
>
> >>>> Pig ignorant lie.
>
> >>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
>
> >>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they
are now.
>
> >>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
>
> >>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
> >>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.
>
> >>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
>
> >>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
>
> >>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> >>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
>
> >>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
>
> >>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
left.
>
> >>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
>
> >>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be
tanking further.
>
> >>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> >>>>> there is the most available for new investments.
>
> >>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
> >>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
> >>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
> >>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.
>
> >>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
>
> >> More name calling.
>
> >>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
> >>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
>
> >> More name calling.
>
> > The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out
of
> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into
it,
> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>
> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy
does.
>
> > It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into
fascism.
>
> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
> > However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> > surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> > you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
> > blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like
that.
>
> > So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
> > before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>
> > And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> > unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>
Nice, but ineffective.

nemo
March 26th 09, 09:29 PM
"Stray Dog" > wrote in message
r.org...
>
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:14:00 +1100
> > From: Rod Speed >
> > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> >
> >
> >>> More name calling.
> >
> >>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
> >>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
> >
> >>> More name calling.
> >
> >> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
> >
> > No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get
out of
> > the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put
into it,
> > most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>
> Wrong. In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip. For
> an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that bad. No
> one was starving, there were fewer lines (ques) than I expected, the
> trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of the ice cream was
> as good as anywhere else and the less good chocolate was no worse than the
> worst chocolate in the west, there were more cars on the road than I
> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the
> streets, and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the
> Metros and buses were reading books or newspapers and I enjoyed NOT having
> to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on the late night
> television you got a news hour that contained a full 60 minutes of serious
> content instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials. As a
> guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and beautiful
> color, sharp picture, in focus, and no defects.
>
> > THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> > to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy
does.
>
> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed economy
> and a quite well performing national health service (according to a number
> of studies) that delivers measurable comparison with the US system at half
> the cost.
>
> >> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it
into fascism.
> >
> > Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> > that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
> >> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> >> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> >> you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
> >> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
> >
> > Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like
that.
>
> Plenty other attempts did.
>
> >> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
> >
> > Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
> Betcha can't prove that idle boast, along with all your other idle boasts.
>
> >> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
> >
> >> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> >> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of
cleverness!
> >
> > You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>
> Better than ending up like you without a brain, Mr. Alzheimer.
>

Nice one!

And so is the vacuum between his ears!

nemo
March 26th 09, 09:30 PM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> Stray Dog wrote
> > Rod Speed > wrote
>
> >>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
> >>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th
time.
>
> >>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> >> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
> >> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
> >> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
> >> doing that makes no difference.
>
> > Wrong.
>
> Nope.
>
> > In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.
>
> And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
> difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars,
fool.
>
> > For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that
bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines
> > (ques) than
> > I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all of
the ice cream was as good as anywhere else
> > and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in the
west, there were more cars on the road than I
> > expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the
streets,
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
> Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
> let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.
>
> In spades with china at that time.
>
> Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
> west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
> decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
> steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.
>
> > and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros
and buses were reading books or newspapers and I
> > enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and on
the late night television you got a news hour
> > that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
> > instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
> > As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and
beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and no
> > defects.
>
> Pity about the content, ****wit.
>
> >> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
to deliver anything like the real living
> >> standards that a mixed economy does.
>
> > Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed
economy and a quite well performing national health
> > service (according to a number of studies) that delivers measurable
comparison with the US system at half the cost.
>
> And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
> they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.
>
> There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life expectancy
too.
>
> >>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it
into fascism.
>
> >> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> >> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>
> > Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
> > disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
>
> Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.
>
> >>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> >>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
you're bound to become just a little paranoid
> >>> and start looking for
> >>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> >> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like
that.
>
> > Plenty other attempts did.
>
> Like hell they did.
>
> >>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> >> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed
where it belongs>
>
> >>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>
> >>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> >>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of
cleverness!
>
> >> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
>
> <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed
where it belongs>
>
Ooooh! Izzntea getting cross!

Cross cross cross cross cross, ducky!!

nemo
March 26th 09, 09:32 PM
"Stray Dog" > wrote in message
r.org...
>
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
>
> > Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:12:34 +1100
> > From: Rod Speed >
> > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> >
> > Stray Dog wrote
> >> Rod Speed > wrote
> >
> >>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
> >>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th
time.
> >
> >>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
> >
> >>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
> >>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
> >>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
> >>> doing that makes no difference.
> >
> >> Wrong.
> >
> > Nope.
>
> Yep.
>
> >> In 1989 I spent almost a month in the USSR on an exchange trip.
> >
> > And even someone as stupid as you should have noticed the massive
> > difference it real living standards with housing alone, let alone cars,
fool.
>
> As a matter of fact, there was a whole range of living standards, just
> like in the west. You would be "well off" in Russia, or "in poverty" in
> Russia. Or, somewhere in between.
>
> >> For an economy that was not geared to consumerism, it wasn't all that
bad. No one was starving, there were fewer lines
> >> (ques) than
> >> I expected, the trains ran on schedule, some of the chocolate and all
of the ice cream was as good as anywhere else
> >> and the less good chocolate was no worse than the worst chocolate in
the west, there were more cars on the road than I
> >> expected, and no piles of abandoned/brokendown cars on the sides of the
streets,
> >
> > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> > never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
> I was an eyewitness, physically there, for almost a month.
>
> > Compare the result in east and west germany for starters,
> > let alone the dregs of the world like romania etc etc etc.
>
> It would be more instructive to compare the rich in Germany with the poor
> in Germany, BEFORE making comparisons with Russia.
>
> > In spades with china at that time.
>
> Anyone can look at the Forbes data on billionaires and see a big rise in
> billionairs in China, India, and even Russia in recent years.
>
> > Have a look at the cars that say an engineer drove in east and
> > west germany. In west germany, choice from a big range of very
> > decent cars like Mercs, BMWs, Audis, VWs etc and in east germany
> > steaming turds with wheels like the Trabbant and Wartburg.
>
> Which you can buy in Russia, or anywhere, today, and totally affordable by
> the rich/wealthy in Russia/China.
>
> >> and it did not escape my notice that most of the people on the Metros
and buses were reading books or newspapers and I
> >> enjoyed NOT having to look at commercial advertisements anywhere, and
on the late night television you got a news hour
> >> that contained a full 60 minutes of serious content
> >
> > Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of that you have
> > never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.
>
> The real clue is your failure to understand the deeper significance of
> people not exposed to "buy-this-buy-that" western capitalist consumption
> propaganda designed to entice people into excess debt.
>
> >> instead of 45 minutes of news and 15 minutes of commercials.
> >> As a guest at one house, I saw a Russian TV set with wide screen and
beautiful color, sharp picture, in focus, and no
> >> defects.
> >
> > Pity about the content, ****wit.
>
> I was quite impressed with "no commercials" and space for more
> program content.
>
> >>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
to deliver anything like the real living
> >>> standards that a mixed economy does.
> >
> >> Quite a bit of western Europe has core living standards of a mixed
economy and a quite well performing national health
> >> service (according to a number of studies) that delivers measurable
comparison with the US system at half the cost.
> >
> > And they ALL left the USSR for dead where they were so stupid that
> > they couldnt even afford new needles and spread HIV/AIDS that way.
>
> As if the spread of HIV/AIDS doesn't happen in the west or non-USSR
> countries. eg. India, today.
>
> > There's also the tiny matter of the obscene differences in life
expectancy
> too.
>
> The USA isn't on top on that, either.
>
> >>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it
into fascism.
> >
> >>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> >>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
> >
> >> Technically you would have to write down a list of advantages and
> >> disadvantages for each system and decide what you liked or not.
> >
> > Irrelevant to his stupid comment about fascism.
>
> Besides the advantages/disadvantages, one would have to actually live in a
> place with favorite advantages and see of one liked them compared to the
> disadvantages.
>
> >>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> >>>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
you're bound to become just a little paranoid
> >>>> and start looking for
> >>>> blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
> >
> >>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing
like that.
> >
> >> Plenty other attempts did.
> >
> > Like hell they did.
>
> Like hell they didn't.
>
> >>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
> >
> >>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
> >
> > <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed
where it belongs>
> >
> >>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
> >
> >>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> >>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of
cleverness!
> >
> >>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.
> >
> > <reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed
where it belongs>
>
> Here is some really good **** for you.....
>
>
>
>
>
> The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
> - - - - - - - - -
>
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
> g00462.html
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
> of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
> this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]
>
>
> Who or What is Rod Speed?
>
> Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
> Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
> he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
> big, hard man" on the InterNet.
>
> Rod is believed to be from Australia.
>
>
> Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?
>
> It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
> what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
> personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
> unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
> away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
> more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
> also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
> place.
>
>
> But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?
>
> Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
> knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
> including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
> self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
> him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
> more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
> subject matter.
>
>
> But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?
>
> Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
> taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
> credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
> shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
> example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
> view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
> opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
> simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
> himself fought against his whole life.
>
>
> What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?
>
> Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
> other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
> responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
> instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
> much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
> harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
> The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
> says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.
>
>
> But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?
>
> It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
> who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
> Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
> emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
> class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
> the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
> off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
> proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
> an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
> pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
> naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
> the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
> class. The correct response was "please report to the
> headmaster's office right NOW!"
>
>
> What is a "RodBot"?
>
> Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
> indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
> opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
> pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
> equally pithy Rod Speedism.
>
>
> Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?
>
> You got it!
>
>
> What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?
>
> KillFile!
>

Yerrrrss! Stick a sharp file in im!

nemo
March 28th 09, 09:37 PM
"BobR" > wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 8:14 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> nemo wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rod Speed > wrote
> >> AZDuffman wrote
> >>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
> >>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment in
the U.S.!
> >>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting
> >>>>>>>>>>> the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax
> >>>>>>>>>>> rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the country would
> >>>>>>>>>>> figure out on its own how to get out of the recession.
> >>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top rate.
> >>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the 60s,
80s, and 2000s.
> >>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
> >>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
> >>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
> >>>>>>> It worked in 1982,
> >>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
> >>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
> >>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
> >>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
> >>>>> Heard you the first time.
> >>>> Your **** in spades.
> >>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
> >>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie out.
> >>>> You get to like that or lump it.
> >>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
> >>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
> >>>> Pig ignorant lie.
> >>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
> >>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as they
are now.
> >>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
> >>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
> >>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.
> >>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
> >>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
> >>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
> >>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
> >>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
> >>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what is
left.
> >>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked spectacularly.
> >>>> They stay with cash until they decide that the economy wont be
tanking further.
> >>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
> >>>>> there is the most available for new investments.
> >>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
> >>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
> >>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
> >>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.
> >>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
> >> More name calling.
> >>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
> >>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
> >>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th time.
> >> More name calling.
> > The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>
> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out
of
> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into
it,
> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>
> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy
does.
>

The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
it.

> > It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into
fascism.
>
> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>

Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
time anyway.)

Other than a few examples of that nature, I would agree.

> > However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
> > surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement it,
> > you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking for
> > blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that leads to.
>
> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like
that.

By that time, everybody could hold up Russian Communism and a fascist
disaster so of course other attempts at bring it in were sabotaged.

And remember: Communism encourages fair shares for all and no greedy fat
rich *******s at the top. With the greedy fat rich *******s owning the
press, the media and having the police and military on their side, it's not
Communism's fault that it's not often been successful - it's the fault of
the greedy fat rich *******s who look upon ordinary people not as human
beings, but as a resource to be exploited so that they, the greedy fat rich
*******s, can become richer still!!!!
>
> > So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>
> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>
Odd that, because it's not a very long document and it's quite easy to
understand. Ahh well, Some people understand what they're reading more than
others.


Now that! I can believe!

> > before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
> > And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
> > unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of cleverness!
>
> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide quoted
text -
>
Child? Negative engrams only work on people who don't recognise them.

Try again sunshine!

Rod Speed
March 28th 09, 10:05 PM
You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.

nemo wrote:
> On Mar 22, 8:14 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>> nemo wrote
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed > wrote
>>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> AZDuffman wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> boost confidence, leading to a restoration of investment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> the U.S.!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting the capital gain tax to zero and taking the top
>>>>>>>>>>>>> income tax rate back to the 1980s level of 28%. Then the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> country would figure out on its own how to get out of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> recession.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Pile of crap. After deductions nobody is paying the top
>>>>>>>>>>>> rate.
>>>>>>>>>>> Lowering the highest marginal rates boosted growth in the
>>>>>>>>>>> 60s,
> 80s, and 2000s.
>>>>>>>>>> And hasnt been tried in a recession like this.
>>>>>>>>> Was tried and worked in 1982,
>>>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>>>>>>>>> a much worse recession than this one.
>>>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>>>>>>>>>>> It is proven to work.
>>>>>>>>>> Not in a recession like this it isnt.
>>>>>>>>> It worked in 1982,
>>>>>>>> When there were much higher rates than there are now.
>>>>>>>>> which was far worse than this one.
>>>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie. We didnt see the complete
>>>>>>>> implosion of the world financial system that time.
>>>>>>> Heard you the first time.
>>>>>> Your **** in spades.
>>>>>>> And you are back to just saying :lie" it seems.
>>>>>> You lie, you can be reasonably confident I will point the lie
>>>>>> out. You get to like that or lump it.
>>>>>>> Well, in the early 80s we did have the Mexican
>>>>>>> Debt Crisis which would have collapses the banks.
>>>>>> Pig ignorant lie.
>>>>>>> And 20%+ prime rate is not a sign of a strong financial system.
>>>>>> Separate matter entirely to whether the tax rates were as low as
>>>>>> they
> are now.
>>>>>>> Finally, so it was different causes and symptoms then.
>>>>>> And nothing even remotely resembling anything like
>>>>>> the complete implosion of the world financial system.
>>>>>>> CUTTING TAXES STILL WORKS.
>>>>>> JUST SHOUTING THAT LOUDER CUTS NO MUSTARD.
>>>>>>> And it works best when you make sure to cut the top marginal
>>>>>>> rate which is where the most investment income can come from.
>>>>>> Wrong again. They dont bother to pay tax.
>>>>>>> ECON101: People will fulfill their needs first and invest what
>>>>>>> is
> left.
>>>>>> It doesnt work like that when the economy has tanked
>>>>>> spectacularly. They stay with cash until they decide that the
>>>>>> economy wont be
> tanking further.
>>>>>>> So if you cut the tax on the highest portions of income
>>>>>>> there is the most available for new investments.
>>>>>> Thanks for that completely superflous proof that you
>>>>>> have never ever had a ****ing clue about anything
>>>>>> at all, ever, and why no one is actually stupid enough
>>>>>> to give you any say on anything at all, ever.
>>>>> Thanks for the foul language and rage all in one sentence.
>>>> More name calling.
>>>>> If you could say "lie" in there it would sum up every response you
>>>>> ever give to anyone and save a whole lot of time. That would give
>>>>> you more time to re-read "The Communist Manifesto" for the 10th
>>>>> time.
>>>> More name calling.
>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>>
>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
>> get out of the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the
>> effort you put into it, most wont work very hard at all because
>> doing that makes no difference.
>>
>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER
>> managed
>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed
>> economy does.
>>
>
> The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain it.

That doesnt work either. Thats essentially what kibbutz and
communes attempt and not one of those has lasted for long.

>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it
>>> into fascism.
>>
>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.

>> Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
>> a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
>> AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
>> an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
>> that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
>> time anyway.)

> Other than a few examples of that nature, I would agree.

There arent any that have lasted for long. Even the Amish havent been around all that long either.

>>> However good a new political system you might come up with, if SEVEN
>>> surrounding countries declare war on you as soon as you implement
>>> it, you're bound to become just a little paranoid and start looking
>>> for blues under the loos and the inevitable paranoia that that
>>> leads to.
>>
>> Pity about all the other attempts to implement it that had nothing like that.

> By that time, everybody could hold up Russian Communism and a fascist
> disaster so of course other attempts at bring it in were sabotaged.

Try that one again in english.

> And remember: Communism encourages fair shares
> for all and no greedy fat rich *******s at the top.

Like hell it does.

> With the greedy fat rich *******s owning the press, the
> media and having the police and military on their side,

Corse nothing like that happens with communism, eh ?

> it's not Communism's fault that it's not often been successful
> - it's the fault of the greedy fat rich *******s who look upon
> ordinary people not as human beings, but as a resource to be
> exploited so that they, the greedy fat rich *******s, can become
> richer still!!!!

Corse nothing like that happens with communism, eh ?

>>> So read it herself, and a bit of history,
>>
>> Been doing that since before you were even born thanks.
>>
> Odd that, because it's not a very long document and it's quite easy to
> understand. Ahh well, Some people understand what they're reading
> more than others.
>
>
> Now that! I can believe!
>
>>> before yer frow the Manifesto at someone else!
>>> And it's not "The Communist Manifesto". It's a real document so the
>>> unnecessary quotes are much more a sign of ignorance than of
>>> cleverness!
>>
>> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide
>> quoted text -
>>
> Child? Negative engrams

No such animal, child.

> only work on people who don't recognise them.
>
> Try again sunshine!

Go and **** yourself, moonshine!!

Stray Dog[_2_]
March 28th 09, 10:05 PM
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, nemo wrote:

> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:37:30 GMT
> From: nemo >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
> "BobR" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Mar 22, 8:14 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
>> nemo wrote

>>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
>>
>> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out
> of
>> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into
> it,
>> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
>>
>> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
>> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy
> does.
>>
>
> The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
> it.
>
>>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into
> fascism.
>>
>> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
>> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
>>
>
> Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
> a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
> AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
> an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
> that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
> time anyway.)

Good example, but the Inca Empire was socialist and stable for at least
250 years (see below)...

Subject: Socialism in the Inca Empire (historical note)

------------------
disclaimer: the following is not meant to
either endorse or condemn socialist economics
but to identify a historical item of interest.


Source:
from pages 79-80 of the book "1491 - New
Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus"
by Charles C. Mann, c 2005, ISBN 1-4000-4006-
X, 509 pp including about 140 pages of
references and notes.

-------
p.79:

"Not only did Pachakuti reconfigure the
capital, he laid out the institutions that
characterised Tawantinsuyu itself. For
centuries, villagers had spent of their time
working in teams on community projects.
Alternately bullying and cajoling, Pachakuti
expanded the service obligation
unrecognizably. In Tawantisuyu, he decreed,
all land and property belonged to the state
(indeed to the Inka himself ["Inka" is the
author's spelling for Inca]). Peasants thus
had to work periodically for the empire as
farmers, herders, weavers, masons, artisans,
miners, or soldiers. Often crews spent months
away from home. While they were
on the road, the state fed, clothed, and
housed them--all from goods supplied by other
work crews. Conscripts built dams, terraces,
and irrigation canals; they grew crops on
state land and raised herds on state patures
and made pots in state factories and stocked
hundreds of state warehouses; they paved the
highways and supplied the runners and llamas
carrying messages and goods along them.
Dictatorially extending Andean vertically, the
imperium shuttled people and material in and
out of every Andean crevace."

p. 80:

"Not the least surprising feature of this
economic system was that it functioned without
money. True, the lack of currency did not
surprise the Spanish invaders [the
Conquistadors] -- much of Europe did without
money until the eighteenth century. But the
Inka did not even have _markets_. Economists
would predict that this nonmarket economy--
vertical socialism, it has been called--should
produce gross inefficiencies. These surely
occurred, but the errors were of surplus, not
want. The Spanish invaders were stunned to
find warehouses overflowing with untouched
cloth and supplies. But to the Inka the
brimming coffers signified prestige and
plenty; it was all part of the plan. Most
important Tawantinsuyu "managed to eradicate
hunger," the Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas
Llosa noted. Though no fan of the Inka, he
conceded that "only a very small number of
empires throughout the whole world have succeeded
in achieving this feat."
-------------------------------------

Tim Bruening
March 29th 09, 02:47 AM
Stray Dog wrote:

> On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, nemo wrote:
>
> > Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:37:30 GMT
> > From: nemo >
> > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> >
> >
> > "BobR" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > On Mar 22, 8:14 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> >> nemo wrote
>
> >>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
> >>
> >> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you get out
> > of
> >> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put into
> > it,
> >> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no difference.
> >>
> >> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER managed
> >> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed economy
> > does.
> >>
> >
> > The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> > accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
> > it.
> >
> >>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it into
> > fascism.
> >>
> >> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> >> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
> >>
> >
> > Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
> > a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
> > AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
> > an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
> > that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
> > time anyway.)
>
> Good example, but the Inca Empire was socialist and stable for at least
> 250 years (see below)...
>
> Subject: Socialism in the Inca Empire (historical note)
>
> ------------------
> disclaimer: the following is not meant to
> either endorse or condemn socialist economics
> but to identify a historical item of interest.
>
> Source:
> from pages 79-80 of the book "1491 - New
> Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus"
> by Charles C. Mann, c 2005, ISBN 1-4000-4006-
> X, 509 pp including about 140 pages of
> references and notes.
>
> -------
> p.79:
>
> "Not only did Pachakuti reconfigure the
> capital, he laid out the institutions that
> characterised Tawantinsuyu itself. For
> centuries, villagers had spent of their time
> working in teams on community projects.
> Alternately bullying and cajoling, Pachakuti
> expanded the service obligation
> unrecognizably. In Tawantisuyu, he decreed,
> all land and property belonged to the state
> (indeed to the Inka himself ["Inka" is the
> author's spelling for Inca]). Peasants thus
> had to work periodically for the empire as
> farmers, herders, weavers, masons, artisans,
> miners, or soldiers. Often crews spent months
> away from home. While they were
> on the road, the state fed, clothed, and
> housed them--all from goods supplied by other
> work crews. Conscripts built dams, terraces,
> and irrigation canals; they grew crops on
> state land and raised herds on state patures
> and made pots in state factories and stocked
> hundreds of state warehouses; they paved the
> highways and supplied the runners and llamas
> carrying messages and goods along them.
> Dictatorially extending Andean vertically, the
> imperium shuttled people and material in and
> out of every Andean crevace."
>
> p. 80:
>
> "Not the least surprising feature of this
> economic system was that it functioned without
> money. True, the lack of currency did not
> surprise the Spanish invaders [the
> Conquistadors] -- much of Europe did without
> money until the eighteenth century. But the
> Inka did not even have _markets_. Economists
> would predict that this nonmarket economy--
> vertical socialism, it has been called--should
> produce gross inefficiencies. These surely
> occurred, but the errors were of surplus, not
> want. The Spanish invaders were stunned to
> find warehouses overflowing with untouched
> cloth and supplies. But to the Inka the
> brimming coffers signified prestige and
> plenty; it was all part of the plan. Most
> important Tawantinsuyu "managed to eradicate
> hunger," the Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas
> Llosa noted. Though no fan of the Inka, he
> conceded that "only a very small number of
> empires throughout the whole world have succeeded
> in achieving this feat."
> -------------------------------------

Wow!!!!!!!!

nemo
April 4th 09, 12:05 PM
"Tim Bruening" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Stray Dog wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, nemo wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:37:30 GMT
> > > From: nemo >
> > > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> > >
> > >
> > > "BobR" > wrote in message
> > >
...
> > > On Mar 22, 8:14 pm, "Rod Speed" > wrote:
> > >> nemo wrote
> >
> > >>> The Communist Manifesto makes perfect sense.
> > >>
> > >> No it doesnt. The main problem with it is that while ever what you
get out
> > > of
> > >> the system living standards wise doesnt depend on the effort you put
into
> > > it,
> > >> most wont work very hard at all because doing that makes no
difference.
> > >>
> > >> THATS the reason that NOT ONE of the attempts at that has EVER
managed
> > >> to deliver anything like the real living standards that a mixed
economy
> > > does.
> > >>
> > >
> > > The only way it could ever work would be if everyone were willing to
> > > accept the same standards and put forward the same effort to obtain
> > > it.
> > >
> > >>> It was those who came later who buggered Communism up and turned it
into
> > > fascism.
> > >>
> > >> Even low level communism like kibbutz and voluntary communes
> > >> that never did see any fascism at all never did work for very long.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Welllllllll, I might just argue that point just a bit. I can think of
> > > a couple of examples where it has worked for a very long time. Think
> > > AMISH. They are clear examples of my statement above, they all share
> > > an equilivent amount of work and an equal standard of living. Not
> > > that I would want their standard of living. (At least not most of the
> > > time anyway.)
> >
> > Good example, but the Inca Empire was socialist and stable for at least
> > 250 years (see below)...
> >
> > Subject: Socialism in the Inca Empire (historical note)
> >
> > ------------------
> > disclaimer: the following is not meant to
> > either endorse or condemn socialist economics
> > but to identify a historical item of interest.
> >
> > Source:
> > from pages 79-80 of the book "1491 - New
> > Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus"
> > by Charles C. Mann, c 2005, ISBN 1-4000-4006-
> > X, 509 pp including about 140 pages of
> > references and notes.
> >
> > -------
> > p.79:
> >
> > "Not only did Pachakuti reconfigure the
> > capital, he laid out the institutions that
> > characterised Tawantinsuyu itself. For
> > centuries, villagers had spent of their time
> > working in teams on community projects.
> > Alternately bullying and cajoling, Pachakuti
> > expanded the service obligation
> > unrecognizably. In Tawantisuyu, he decreed,
> > all land and property belonged to the state
> > (indeed to the Inka himself ["Inka" is the
> > author's spelling for Inca]). Peasants thus
> > had to work periodically for the empire as
> > farmers, herders, weavers, masons, artisans,
> > miners, or soldiers. Often crews spent months
> > away from home. While they were
> > on the road, the state fed, clothed, and
> > housed them--all from goods supplied by other
> > work crews. Conscripts built dams, terraces,
> > and irrigation canals; they grew crops on
> > state land and raised herds on state patures
> > and made pots in state factories and stocked
> > hundreds of state warehouses; they paved the
> > highways and supplied the runners and llamas
> > carrying messages and goods along them.
> > Dictatorially extending Andean vertically, the
> > imperium shuttled people and material in and
> > out of every Andean crevace."
> >
> > p. 80:
> >
> > "Not the least surprising feature of this
> > economic system was that it functioned without
> > money. True, the lack of currency did not
> > surprise the Spanish invaders [the
> > Conquistadors] -- much of Europe did without
> > money until the eighteenth century. But the
> > Inka did not even have _markets_. Economists
> > would predict that this nonmarket economy--
> > vertical socialism, it has been called--should
> > produce gross inefficiencies. These surely
> > occurred, but the errors were of surplus, not
> > want. The Spanish invaders were stunned to
> > find warehouses overflowing with untouched
> > cloth and supplies. But to the Inka the
> > brimming coffers signified prestige and
> > plenty; it was all part of the plan. Most
> > important Tawantinsuyu "managed to eradicate
> > hunger," the Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas
> > Llosa noted. Though no fan of the Inka, he
> > conceded that "only a very small number of
> > empires throughout the whole world have succeeded
> > in achieving this feat."
> > -------------------------------------
>
> Wow!!!!!!!!

Yerss. Look at all the typing I made him do!! Heheheheheeee!

nemo
April 4th 09, 12:05 PM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
>
OK.

<snip!>

Dick-head Arse-face wrote . .

> >> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out, child.- Hide
> >> quoted text -
> >>
> > Child? Negative engrams
>
> No such animal, child.

It ain't an animal - it's a psychological trick. Managers, cops and other
evil weirdoes use em all the time.

> > only work on people who don't recognise them.
> >
> > Try again sunshine!
>
> Go and **** yourself, moonshine!!
>

Ooooooh! Isn't she crossssss?!

You say, "*Go* and **** yourself . . " Is there then a special location
somewhere which is reserved for those among us who might wish to ****
themselves?

And why didn't you reply with a long tirade, then I could have replied,
"Oooh. Look at all the typing I've made him do!" Drives Suppressive Persons
mad that one does!

No. It's OK. The next poor sod has, so I used it on him in Tim's reply.

And with regards to your kind advice, it's long - very long - butt it ain't
that long!! - and I'm not allowed any moonshine or any other kind of booze
since September last year. Doctor Cohen's orders. One of the best
hæmatologists in the country, who we in the UK get to see for free via our
magnificent National Health Service. Good, innit!

http://www.nhs.uk/Pages/homepage.aspx

nemo
April 4th 09, 12:05 PM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
>
OK.

<snip>

Is that better?

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 4th 09, 07:14 PM
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:

> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:05:17 GMT
> From: nemo >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
> ...
>> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
>>
> OK.
>
> <snip>
>
> Is that better?
>
>
>

I'd just like to mangle all of Rod Speed and put what is left into the
dumpster.

Rod Speed
April 4th 09, 07:35 PM
Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
nemo desperately attempted to bull**** its way out of its
predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 5th 09, 04:45 PM
On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Sir F. A. Rien wrote:

> Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2009 08:12:24 -0700
> From: Sir F. A. Rien >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Stray Dog > found these unused words:
>
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:05:17 GMT
>>> From: nemo >
>>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
>>> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
>>> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>>>
>>>
>>> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
>>>>
>>> OK.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Is that better?
>>>

>>
>> I'd just like to mangle all of Rod Speed and put what is left into the
>> dumpster.
>>

>>
> Next project - repeat with Timmee Browning.

For quite a while I thought a fairly big fraction of people on these
newsgroups were a little "loopy".

However, after reading a lot of how Rod Speed responds to most people,
most of the time, I've changed my mind and decided that really everyone
but Rod Speed is really actually quite sane and rational but just have
different strong feelings.

Everyone else fasten your seatbelts, Rod Speed will be getting up in a few
more hours and then we will have to deal with a blast of "****wit" posts,
more blasts of "liars" and "wrongs" and "pig ignorant fantasies" and
multiple lines of more of the same crap from him, all without further
explanations. Looks like he can be rational, what, 5-10% of the time?
Irrational the other 90-95% of the time?

Rod Speed
April 5th 09, 07:08 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Tim Bruening
April 9th 09, 10:54 PM
Defense Secretary Gates wants to cut several big weapons systems to save
money. I propose that the savings be used for economic stimulus.

nemo
April 12th 09, 01:50 PM
"Stray Dog" > wrote in message
. org...
>
> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:
>
> > Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:05:17 GMT
> > From: nemo >
> > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> >
> >
> > "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
> >>
> > OK.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Is that better?
> >
> >
> >
>
> I'd just like to mangle all of Rod Speed and put what is left into the
> dumpster.
>
And if you told the dumpster driver where to go with it afterwards, you'd be
a Mangling Director!

nemo
April 12th 09, 01:50 PM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
> nemo desperately attempted to bull**** its way out of its
> predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>
>
Just like you!

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 12th 09, 07:28 PM
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:

> Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:50:30 GMT
> From: nemo >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
> "Stray Dog" > wrote in message
> . org...
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:05:17 GMT
>>> From: nemo >
>>> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
>>> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
>>> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>>>
>>>
>>> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> You've somehow managed to utterly mangle most of the attribution.
>>>>
>>> OK.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Is that better?
>>>
>>
>> I'd just like to mangle all of Rod Speed and put what is left into the
>> dumpster.
>>
> And if you told the dumpster driver where to go with it afterwards, you'd be
> a Mangling Director!

It's perfectly OK with me to "mangle" the word "management" into the word
"manglement".



Stray Dog

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 12th 09, 07:31 PM
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:

> Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:50:30 GMT
> From: nemo >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
>> nemo desperately attempted to bull**** its way out of its
>> predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>>
>>
> Just like you!


Rod Speed has used that exact same paragraph about 500 times since he
appeared on these newsgroups back last August ('08) or so.

I did not write the "Rod Speed FAQ" (see below) but I love to see him
"pop his cork" whenever he sees it....





The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
g00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -

After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]


Who or What is Rod Speed?

Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.

Rod is believed to be from Australia.


Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?

It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.


But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?

Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.


But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?

Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.


What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?

Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.


But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?

It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"


What is a "RodBot"?

Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.


Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?

You got it!


What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?

KillFile!

..

Rod Speed
April 12th 09, 07:47 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 12th 09, 07:50 PM
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:47:12 +1000
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Some gutless ****wit psychopath

How to handle Rod Speed:


<reams of your desperate attempt to bull**** your way out of your
predicament
that fools absolutely no one at all, as always, flushed where it belongs>

Rod Speed[_2_]
April 13th 09, 01:20 AM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

nemo
April 13th 09, 01:21 AM
"Rod Speed" > wrote in message
...
> Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
> delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
> Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
> of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>
> No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard
arse.
>
> No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
>

If you've got the size of proboscis that I would guess you've got, you're
the one who deserves The Noser Prize!

nemo
April 13th 09, 01:21 AM
"Stray Dog" > wrote in message
.org...
>
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009, nemo wrote:
>
> > Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:50:30 GMT
> > From: nemo >
> > Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> > Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
> >
> >
> > "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Some gutless ****wit desperately cowering behind
> >> nemo desperately attempted to bull**** its way out of its
> >> predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
> >>
> >>
> > Just like you!
>
>
> Rod Speed has used that exact same paragraph about 500 times since he
> appeared on these newsgroups back last August ('08) or so.
>
> I did not write the "Rod Speed FAQ" (see below) but I love to see him
> "pop his cork" whenever he sees it....
>
OK. For "Just like you!" read "Just like whoever!"

These things happen.

>
>
>
> The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
> - - - - - - - - -
>
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
> g00462.html
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
> of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
> this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]
>
>
> Who or What is Rod Speed?
>
> Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
> Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
> he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
> big, hard man" on the InterNet.
>
> Rod is believed to be from Australia.
>
>
> Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?
>
> It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
> what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
> personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
> unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
> away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
> more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
> also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
> place.
>
>
> But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?
>
> Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
> knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
> including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
> self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
> him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
> more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
> subject matter.
>
>
> But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?
>
> Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
> taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
> credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
> shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
> example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
> view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
> opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
> simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
> himself fought against his whole life.
>
>
> What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?
>
> Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
> other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
> responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
> instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
> much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
> harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, ******, etc etc".
> The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
> says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.
>
>
> But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?
>
> It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
> who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
> Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
> emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
> class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
> the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
> off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
> proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
> an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
> pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
> naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
> the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
> class. The correct response was "please report to the
> headmaster's office right NOW!"
>
>
> What is a "RodBot"?
>
> Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
> indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
> opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
> pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
> equally pithy Rod Speedism.
>
>
> Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?
>
> You got it!
>
>
> What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?
>
> KillFile!
>
> .
>

nemo
April 13th 09, 01:21 AM
"Tim Bruening" > wrote in message
...
> Defense Secretary Gates wants to cut several big weapons systems to save
> money. I propose that the savings be used for economic stimulus.

Narr. Give all the money to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!

April 13th 09, 03:57 AM
On Mar 17, 10:15*am, AZDuffman > wrote:

> It would be simpler and more effective to say he is cutting the
> capital gain tax to zero and taking the top income tax rate back to
> the 1980s level of 28%. *Then the country would figure out on its own
> how to get out of the recession.

Yeah, by exterminating about half of the present population.

Mike

Tim Bruening
April 13th 09, 06:05 PM
nemo wrote:

> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
> > delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
> > Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
> > of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
> >
> > No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard
> arse.
> >
> > No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
> >
>
> If you've got the size of proboscis that I would guess you've got, you're
> the one who deserves The Noser Prize!

Is Rod an elephant?

Tim Bruening
April 13th 09, 06:06 PM
nemo wrote:

> "Tim Bruening" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Defense Secretary Gates wants to cut several big weapons systems to save
> > money. I propose that the savings be used for economic stimulus.
>
> Narr. Give all the money to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!

But you're not a United Statesian!

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 13th 09, 09:59 PM
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Tim Bruening wrote:

> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:05:42 -0700
> From: Tim Bruening >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: Ending The Recession
>
>
>
> nemo wrote:
>
>> "Rod Speed" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
>>> delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
>>> Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
>>> of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>>>
>>> No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard
>> arse.
>>>
>>> No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
>>>
>>
>> If you've got the size of proboscis that I would guess you've got, you're
>> the one who deserves The Noser Prize!
>
> Is Rod an elephant?
>

Noser? Nose? Hmmmm....an analogue of Pinnochio?

He had problems with lies, too.

Rod Speed
April 13th 09, 11:05 PM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.

Stray Dog[_2_]
April 14th 09, 12:11 AM
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Rod Speed wrote:

> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 08:05:57 +1000
> From: Rod Speed >
> Newsgroups: alt.computer.consultants, sci.econ, misc.invest.stocks,
> alt.humor.puns, alt.humor
> Subject: Re: ### Re: Ending The Recession
>
> Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
> delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
> Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
> of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
>
> No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.
>
> No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.


Popped your cork again? As usual. Totally predictable.

You should not pay the bills from your psychiatrist, he's not helping you.

Rod Speed
April 14th 09, 02:51 AM
Some gutless ****wit psychopath with pathetic psychotic
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bull**** and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.

No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.