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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (530253)	1/27/2004 12:00:22 AM
From: Nicholas Thompson	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Glad to see someone who has figured out that Bush's policies if allowed to continue will ultimately lead to severe imbalances in the economy and severe economic times.

To: American Spirit who wrote (530253)	1/27/2004 8:24:28 AM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Too funny. I will take that to my accountant today and let him know that I expect no taxes...where do people come up with this stuff...? The rich have many tax write-offs and can easily lower their tax payments so long as they invest in job creating enterprises. But Bush lets them off scott free.

To: American Spirit who wrote (530253)	1/27/2004 8:28:12 AM
From: Bald Eagle	Respond to of 769667

RE:Notice no race riots under Clinton but plenty under Bush Sr. Huh? what ARE you talking about? There was a riot after the Rodney King affair, but that had nothing to do with Bush Sr! Get real.

To: American Spirit who wrote (530253)	1/27/2004 12:35:13 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

But Bush lets them off scott free. If you live on stock dividends now and are very rich you pay very little. You can pass it on for nothing and your family remains rich and idle forever. Bad idea. [Q] From Pete Barnes: “Exactly whence came the term scot free? Does it, as it sounds, refer to citizens of Scotland? Or am I reading something into that?” "[A] As with the word hopscotch, scot free has no connection with Scotsmen, frugal or otherwise. It’s a Scandinavian word meaning “payment”. The expression derives from a medieval municipal tax levied in proportional shares on inhabitants, often for poor relief. This was called a scot, as an abbreviation of the full term scot and lot, where scot was the sum to be paid and lot was one’s allotted share. (This tax lasted a long time, in some places such as Westminster down to the electoral reforms of 1832, with only those paying scot and lot being allowed to vote.) So somebody who avoided paying his share of the town’s expenses for some reason got off scot free. It was also used for a payment or reckoning, especially one’s share of the cost of an entertainment; when one settled up, one “paid for one’s scot”. Again, someone who evaded paying their share of the tab got off scot free. It’s been suggested that this usage may have come from the old habit of noting purchases of drinks and the like by making marks on a slate, or scotching it, but the evidence suggests this is just a popular etymology, and that the usage comes from the same idea of a sum due to be paid." By your reasoning those who pay the larger tax burden should be allotted more votes. Also by your logic a man that lives off his land, eating the livestock and produce, growing the cotton, weaving the cloth, and making the clothes is getting off scot-free. Still at the bottom you have to play by the rules. If there is no (or little) tax on some forms of income then that is the law. Change the law if you don't like it but that will only mean some will find a way around it LEGALLY....or perhaps you don't have a basic understanding of human nature. Try and avoid the idea that government largesse is Charity.