 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:47:11 +0100, "St." <dot### [at] dot com> wrote:
>
>> "Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
>> news:48038975$1@news.povray.org...
>>
>>
>>> It's not that you know lots of doctors. It's that you ignore all the poor
>>> people who you pass every day.
>> That was a low call.
>>
>
> Fighting talk, where I come from. Worse than putting your empty beer
> glass, upside down on the table.
For the last couple or three decades, it's been getting easier and
easier to identify the far-right-wing elements here, without ever
bringing up politics: They're incredibly rude, and they think that's OK.
--Sherry Shaw
--
#macro T(E,N)sphere{x,.4rotate z*E*60translate y*N pigment{wrinkles scale
.3}finish{ambient 1}}#end#local I=0;#while(I<5)T(I,1)T(1-I,-1)#local I=I+
1;#end camera{location-5*z}plane{z,37 pigment{granite color_map{[.7rgb 0]
[1rgb 1]}}finish{ambient 2}}// TenMoons
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sherry Shaw wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6
>
>>> It's on a web page produced by a political action organization.
>>
>> It's on a web page produced by "political action organization"??
>>
>> It's on a web page produced by THE F'ING CONGRESS OF THE USA!
>>
>
> From the NTU site to which you linked:
So you're going to ignore the numbers that say the same thing that come
from the congress and the IRS?
See, read what I wrote:
Blah blah blah, Congress and IRS says in 2004 it was like this, blah
blah, other people *claim* it's even worse later. (That's what the word
"apparently" means, you see. It *appears* that way.)
So if you don't like arguing about the NTU while having no actual facts
of your own, why not argue with the Congress and the IRS while having no
facts of your own?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sherry Shaw wrote:
> I don't currently know any doctors. I can't afford to know any doctors.
> I did spend a number of years doing people's taxes.
So, based on the numbers you saw while doing peoples taxes, you figure
most of the country makes a lot of money? Did you consider the
selection bias that people who are *not* making a lot of money don't
come to you to have their taxes done?
Indeed, you'd see only rich people if *only* the top 1% of earners had
to pay any income tax at all?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sherry Shaw wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>>
>> I.e., not that you're "ignoring them" as unworthy, but that you're
>> "ignoring them" when counting the percentage of people who make lots
>> of money. You obviously interact more with people who make lots of
>> money - that's how they make it.
>>
>
> Rich people don't associate with the likes of me. I don't mind a bit.
Well, it's good to know that makes you more of an expert than the IRS on
how many rich people are paying taxes. Thanks for playing.
(Geez, is it me, or has everyone in the last couple weeks been playing
the Creationism Logic Game here? "It's hard for me to believe that rich
people pay a lot of tax in spite of the evidence presented, therefore
I'll argue it must not be true without providing any evidence of my
own." "It's hard for me to believe some people use non-relational data
storage in spite of being provided with a list of both reasons and
users, so I'll claim it's true without any evidence to counter it.")
>> Me, I think I know very few people who make >$250K who don't have
>> millions and millions of dollars. (I know a fair number of people who
>> have millions and millions of dollars, tho.)
>
> Whoa, how could anyone ever have guessed that?
Unfortunately, I'm not one of them. And unfortunately they're not giving
me any of their money any more.
But I apologize if I've actually insulted you. It wasn't my intention
to do so.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:00:23 -0500, Sherry Shaw <ten### [at] aolcom>
wrote:
>For the last couple or three decades, it's been getting easier and
>easier to identify the far-right-wing elements here, without ever
>bringing up politics: They're incredibly rude, and they think that's OK.
>
Oh! So that's where our upper classes went. You got them :)
Seriously they are always like that. When our Mrs T was in power it
was the same over here. When there is a far right government in power
more crawl out of the woodwork than you would imagine was possible.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:480b6cff$1@news.povray.org...
> "It's hard for me to believe some people use non-relational data
> storage in spite of being provided with a list of both reasons and
> users, so I'll claim it's true without any evidence to counter it.")
Where's that one? I seem to have somehow missed it...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
> Where's that one? I seem to have somehow missed it...
In the p.o-t.fan.haskell.bork.bork.bork group.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:480c28be$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> > Where's that one? I seem to have somehow missed it...
>
> In the p.o-t.fan.haskell.bork.bork.bork group.
Ok....
Didn't even realise more off topic newsgroups existed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:480c28be$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> > Where's that one? I seem to have somehow missed it...
>
> In the p.o-t.fan.haskell.bork.bork.bork group.
Ouch.... Nice case of willful cluelessness.
I'd offer you a hand, but you seem to be having fun...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
You still don't get it, do you? I never said rich people don't pay
taxes. I never said rich people don't pay enough taxes. I never said
rich people don't pay *absolutely* more taxes than poor people. I said
it was appropriate for rich people to pay *relatively* more taxes than
poor people because they get *relatively* more benefit.
>
> But I apologize if I've actually insulted you. It wasn't my intention
> to do so.
>
Oh, give me a break.
--Sherry Shaw
--
#macro T(E,N)sphere{x,.4rotate z*E*60translate y*N pigment{wrinkles scale
.3}finish{ambient 1}}#end#local I=0;#while(I<5)T(I,1)T(1-I,-1)#local I=I+
1;#end camera{location-5*z}plane{z,37 pigment{granite color_map{[.7rgb 0]
[1rgb 1]}}finish{ambient 2}}// TenMoons
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
