Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Follies who wrote (14108)	5/11/2001 11:11:24 AM
From: lifeisgood	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

maybe you guys could take this to another thread and stop all this bickering on this tread. please. best... LIG

To: Follies who wrote (14108)	5/11/2001 11:58:48 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 42834

>>Therein lies the fallacy of liberalism and class envy. It doesn't work, it sounds good like a ponzi scheme, but when you examine the full consequences, it just doesn't work.<< dale, get out of the oversimplified, "us against them" world. i'm not envious of anything. in fact, i do very well, thank you. and i pay a ton in taxes. really, i don't need more and i don't covet things others have that i don't. it seems that your approach is the envious type. you aren't satisfied with what you have (read envious of what others have and you don't). don't put your issues on me. my point is that shifting the tax burden to poor folks who in many cases can't put food on the table is something i'd rather not do. our value systems are different. i'm all for smaller, more efficient govt. but, just like you are screaming for every thing you can get, the govt officials are screaming for everything they can get. therefore, smaller, more efficient govt isn't going to happen. get what ya can and screw the collateral damage. >>I forgot fat cat farmers with 5 million dollars farms who have a couple of drought years and no income, of course they should have to cough up part of that farm each year.<< again, this your oversimplified view of the world. there are many ways to approach issues like this that society deems for the good of society. nobody said exactly how people with with 60% of the stuff ought to pay the 60% portion of the taxes. but, your concept sounds awful liberal. subsidize farmers who don't have the capital to sustain normal operations over time? god forbid! i'm calling rush limbaugh! ;-) i'm surprised you don't want to throw them out on their butts and let real corporations with tons of capital take over. you rotten left winger you! ;-) it does show you have at least some compassion, though. that is a good thing.