OT - Family Values

On Sep 20, 5:02*pm, (Michael Baldwin) wrote:
Tom asks:

Oh really? List successful US entrepreneurs that have NOT made
use of government provided infrastructure and services.

Note the words below Tom, GOVERNMENT AID.

Note the pedant above, Mike Baldwin.

Using taxpayer-funded resources to "help" yourself is sort of like
"aid", if one would go to the dictionary and look up "aid" and "help".

Any more word games you'd like to play, Mike?

E.P.

Ed Pirrero writes:

Using taxpayer-funded resources to "help" yourself is sort of like
"aid", if one would go to the dictionary and look
up "aid" and "help".

If you and Tom want to believe that everybody driving on I-75 today is
on government "aid", and equate that to a trust funder receiving a
research grant to "study" the migration of "something" from on tropical
island to the next, go for it.

Any more word games you'd like to play, Mike?

Gee Ed, I didn't realize _we_ were playing word games. I thought it
was just you and Tom.

This thread subject is: Family Values. And in this thread I've tried
to convey what I think are some the issues under mining Family Values in
America.
I think the U.S. Tax Code is the root cause of many of America's
problems. I've cited several connections. Many of those replying can
only counter my points with rhetoric.

This leads me to another issue in America.
Our general acceptance to let lies and deception go unchallenged.
Example, America has become the most obese nation on earth.
I think that speaks volumes in itself. If an individual cannot be
honest with themselves, even regarding their own health, why should I
be surprised when that individual can't be honest about anything else?

I am my worst enemy. My guard is always down. My openness makes me
an easy mark for those who attempt to build themselves up, by tearing
others down.


just regards - Mike Baldwin

Michael Baldwin wrote:
Tom asks:

Oh really? List successful US entrepreneurs that have NOT made
use of government provided infrastructure and services.


Note the words below Tom, GOVERNMENT AID.


I'll paraphrase my own point _again_. Successful entrepreneurs shatter
the
elite premise that in order to succeed in America a
person needs government aid of some sort.

Infrastructure and services are not government _aid_ Tom and you know
it.

Do not government provided infrastructure and services aid private
enterprise in making a profit?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Twisting may help if yawl can chew gum and walk.” - gene daniels

On Sep 21, 5:47*am, (Michael Baldwin) wrote:
Ed Pirrero writes:
Using taxpayer-funded resources to "help" yourself is sort of like
"aid", if one would go to the dictionary and look
up "aid" and "help".

*If you and Tom want to believe that everybody driving on I-75 today is
on government "aid", *and equate that to a trust funder receiving a
research grant to "study" the migration of "something" from on tropical
island to the next, go for it. *

Logical fallacy - straw man.

Your rhetoric comment below becomes hilariously ironic.

*Any more word games you'd like to play, Mike?

* Gee Ed, I didn't realize _we_ were playing word games. *I thought it
was just you and Tom.

No, Mike - you're the only one playing word games. Now your honesty
comment becomes ironic.

* I think the U.S. Tax Code is the root cause of many of America's
problems. I've cited several connections. *Many of those replying can
only counter my points with rhetoric. *

That's because you points were merely rhetoric to begin with.

*This leads me to another issue in America. *
*Our general acceptance to let lies and deception go unchallenged.

Indeed. The GOP has become especially adept at just making **** up
and pretending that it's God's own truth.

It appears as though you have fallen for the propaganda that is
paraded around as truth. Might as well start with your consumption
tax - it's a non-starter for so many reasons that it's not worth
talking about. So instead, let's have a discussion on a progressive
income tax that has no deductions and has low enough rates to start
(and at the end) that everyone who gets taxed pays something, and
nobody can avoid it. That seem pretty fair to me. You make money in
the stock market? Pay tax. You get an inheritance? Pay tax. You
win a lawsuit? Pay tax. You work minimum wage? You pay tax.
Everyone pays. Nobody gets something for nothing. No special favors,
no social engineering. The burden gets spread out over all citizens,
and nobody gets special treatment. The rich still end up rich, and
the poor end up being poor. But nobody gets to point a finger about
someone not paying tax. Some pay less percent than others, but at
least there will be no free ride, AND the folks that benefit most from
a stable, free(ish) society pay the most for that priviledge.
Everybody still gets to keep the majority of what income comes their
way. Under my system, they keep a large majority, and nobody gets
unduly screwed.

It'll never happen either. But it's smarter than any half-baked
consumption tax which will NEVER get a hearing from anyone, anywhere.

E.P.

From the tilt-a-whirl Tom goes directly to the loop-d-loop and writes:

Do not government provided infrastructure and services aid private
enterprise
in making a profit?
--
Tom Sherman -

Stop Tom stop! You're really sliding down a steep slope and I'm afraid
you're hurting yourself grasping out for anything to abate your fall.

I used the word "aid" as a noun. You're using the word "aid" as a verb.

While self-employed I turned down government aid when offered.
Example - Local government was offering low interest loans for store
front improvements. I never submitted a request even after being
encouraged by members of city council. Why? Two reasons.

A. I walk like I talk. If I'm opposed to revenue sharing schemes, I'd
be a hypocrite in accepting confiscated property converted into low
interests loans for improving private property.

B. Those who accepted the low interest loans found themselves being
dictated to by a group of "wanna-be-elites"- planning department types,
regarding the entire scope of their projects. I knew that would happen
_before_ it happened.

Best Regards Brother - Mike Baldwin

Regarding The Fair Tax Ed writes:

It'll never happen either. But it's smarter than any half-baked
consumption tax which will NEVER get a hearing from anyone,
anywhere.
E.P.

Better check the congressional record Ed. TFT has been in Congressional
committees for the past 4 years.

Also, FT proposals are in committees in the state legislatures of
Michigan and Missouri.

My Congressman Tim Walberg is a co-sponsor of TFT proposal in the
House. He's up for re-election this November.
His challenger is running TV ads stating Walberg supports a 23%
national sales tax. Of course the ad leaves out how this "23% national
sales tax" will abolish the IRS, repeal the un-Constitutional 16th
amendment and put just about every lobbyist in D.C. out on the street.

I can calmly say, the U.S. Tax Code is the source of so many issues in
America.
I've yet to encounter a anti-fairtaxer who's capable of separating
their emotions from the issue.
I've attended Fair Tax rallies where the antis were pretty lathered
up.

Likewise, I've yet to meet an anti-fair-taxer whom earned less than
$100,000 annually, but the majority are Democrats though

just regards - Mike Baldwin

Michael Baldwin wrote:

Ed Pirrero writes:

Using taxpayer-funded resources to "help" yourself is sort of like
"aid", if one would go to the dictionary and look
up "aid" and "help".

*If you and Tom want to believe that everybody driving on I-75 today is
on government "aid", *and equate that to a trust funder receiving a
research grant to "study" the migration of "something" from on tropical
island to the next, go for it. *

I think it's very, very funny that you seem to believe the latter
scenario happens often enough to figure significantly into
_anything_. I'd like to see the entire national grant budget for
basic science and the arts compared to the budget for just one
Interstate Highway.

The Interstate Highway System serves as a huge subsidy for those
"hardworking entrepreneurs" and other businesses who use it out of
proportion to how much they pay for it. Almost nobody is complaining
about that-- notwithstanding the number of businesses and individuals
who pay the same amount for a major highway and don't use it at all.
It's because folks generally acknowledge that highways are a valuable
part of the commons, and that we all benefit to one degree or another
by having them.

Basic science is another valuable segment of the commons. If we left
basic science to private industry, all new discoveries would be
claimed as proprietary. Worse, we'd get new boner drugs instead of a
cure for AIDS, low-earth-orbit luxury hotels instead of new
astronomical tools, and nuclear-powered yachts instead of new sources
of clean energy. It's not obvious to me that we haven't reached this
point already. I heard the other day that Bell Labs has given up on
doing basic scientific research, focusing instead on things with
obvious profit potential.

You said something earlier to the effect that because I lead an artful
life, therefore I must be taking grants of public money. That's a
pretty big and pretty delusional thing to arrive at, considering the
few facts you began with. To my knowledge, I've never been the
beneficiary of a government grant for anything other than my college
scholarship, which was a merit award. I've done all my machining on
the premises of various industrial jobs I had. I've done every bit of
my art, mechanical or otherwise, on my own dime (or, when I was a kid,
on my parents' dime). That's one of the things I'm talking about when
I say there's more to life than spending most of your waking hours
hustling to snatch a buck from somebody.

Trying to make money doing the things that give you fulfillment has a
way of chasing most of the fulfillment out of them. I've tried it
with greater and lesser degrees of success, but it was always at a net
loss (and I don't mean money). But if taking money is what gives your
life meaning, then knock yourself out.

I bet you're a real gem of a guy to work for.

Chalo

Chalo Colina wrote:
Michael Baldwin wrote:
Ed Pirrero writes:
Using taxpayer-funded resources to "help" yourself is sort of like
"aid", if one would go to the dictionary and look
up "aid" and "help".
If you and Tom want to believe that everybody driving on I-75 today is
on government "aid", and equate that to a trust funder receiving a
research grant to "study" the migration of "something" from on tropical
island to the next, go for it.

I think it's very, very funny that you seem to believe the latter
scenario happens often enough to figure significantly into
_anything_. I'd like to see the entire national grant budget for
basic science and the arts compared to the budget for just one
Interstate Highway.

Not to mention subsidies for air travel, which is heavily used by
business, barge travel and port facilities, bath of which are used
almost primarily for transport of commercial goods.

The Interstate Highway System serves as a huge subsidy for those
"hardworking entrepreneurs" and other businesses who use it out of
proportion to how much they pay for it. Almost nobody is complaining
about that-- notwithstanding the number of businesses and individuals
who pay the same amount for a major highway and don't use it at all.
It's because folks generally acknowledge that highways are a valuable
part of the commons, and that we all benefit to one degree or another
by having them.

Basic science is another valuable segment of the commons. If we left
basic science to private industry, all new discoveries would be
claimed as proprietary. Worse, we'd get new boner drugs instead of a
cure for AIDS, low-earth-orbit luxury hotels instead of new
astronomical tools, and nuclear-powered yachts instead of new sources
of clean energy. It's not obvious to me that we haven't reached this
point already. I heard the other day that Bell Labs has given up on
doing basic scientific research, focusing instead on things with
obvious profit potential.

There have also been no major scientific breakthroughs in the last 35
years. Of course, the general attitude of the US has turned decidedly
anti-science during that time.

You said something earlier to the effect that because I lead an artful
life, therefore I must be taking grants of public money. That's a
pretty big and pretty delusional thing to arrive at, considering the
few facts you began with. To my knowledge, I've never been the
beneficiary of a government grant for anything other than my college
scholarship, which was a merit award. I've done all my machining on
the premises of various industrial jobs I had. I've done every bit of
my art, mechanical or otherwise, on my own dime (or, when I was a kid,
on my parents' dime). That's one of the things I'm talking about when
I say there's more to life than spending most of your waking hours
hustling to snatch a buck from somebody.

Mr. Baldwin likes to throw alleged personal stuff out there to distract
from the discussion.

Trying to make money doing the things that give you fulfillment has a
way of chasing most of the fulfillment out of them. I've tried it
with greater and lesser degrees of success, but it was always at a net
loss (and I don't mean money). But if taking money is what gives your
life meaning, then knock yourself out.

I bet you're a real gem of a guy to work for.

Working for people hysterical about money is always fun.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Twisting may help if yawl can chew gum and walk.” - gene daniels

On Sep 21, 9:46*am, (Michael Baldwin) wrote:
Regarding The Fair Tax Ed writes:

It'll never happen either. But it's smarter than any half-baked
consumption tax which will NEVER get a hearing from anyone,
anywhere.
E.P.

Better check the congressional record Ed. *TFT has been in Congressional
committees for the past 4 years.

Yes, lots of stuff is in committee. Being pedantic again, I see.

Of course the ad leaves out how this "23% national
sales tax" will abolish the IRS, repeal the un-Constitutional 16th
amendment and put just about every lobbyist in D.C. out on the street.

[roll eyes]

Yeah, an amendment to the Constitution is unconstitutional. Sure
thing.

* I can calmly say, the U.S. Tax Code is the source of so many issues in
America. * *
* I've yet to encounter a anti-fairtaxer who's capable of separating
their emotions from the issue.

You have now.
*
* Likewise, I've yet to meet an anti-fair-taxer whom earned less than
$100,000 annually, but the majority are Democrats though *

You have now, since I have neither "prequalification".

E.P.

Let me remind you Chalo....

Group: rec.bicycles.tech Date: Wed, Sep 17, 2008, 11:58am (EDT-3) From:
(Chalo)
And if you have to work twelve hours times seven
days a week to keep your business afloat, you should
consider a different line of work. There is more to
life than that.
Chalo

....you're the 1st master of assumptions. Your "wanna-be-elitist"
attitude (thanks Tom!) shines brightly.
You look down on those who work hard toward a goal. You level with the
assumption, wow what a loser, working "just" to survive. It's your own
way to justify your life how life should be for all, according to Chalo.

That's one of the things I'm talking about when I
say there's more to life than spending most of your
waking hours hustling to snatch a buck from somebody.

Another assumption Chalo. Basically according to you, entrepreneurs are
criminals that have not been convicted yet.
This line is even more insulting then your first. I've never "hustled"
or "snatched" a buck from anyone.

What confounds me Chalo, you seem to be a champion for every underdog,
except those that don't let the system hold them back or use it as an
excuse for not obtaining their goals.
I'll stand by my comments. The "wanna-be-elite" despise successful
entrepreneurs because they shatter the premise that individual
achievement is impossible without socialist programs.

just regards - Mike Baldwin