On 12/22/2016 8:03 PM, Bruce wrote:

>
> I think people should be able to get filthy rich by honest means, as
> long as they pay taxes proportionally.
>

Exactly
It has been proposed but gets nowhere. Puts people out of work.

It can be very simple based on total earnings, no matter the source.

No deductions of any kind. My numbers are just a guess, but you get the
idea.

Under 20k no tax.
20k to 40k 8%
40k to 80k 12%
200k to 600k 25%
over 1 million even more

In article >, Ed Pawlowski says...
>
> On 12/22/2016 8:03 PM, Bruce wrote:
>
> >
> > I think people should be able to get filthy rich by honest means, as
> > long as they pay taxes proportionally.
> >
>
> Exactly
> It has been proposed but gets nowhere. Puts people out of work.
>
> It can be very simple based on total earnings, no matter the source.
>
> No deductions of any kind. My numbers are just a guess, but you get the
> idea.
>
> Under 20k no tax.
> 20k to 40k 8%
> 40k to 80k 12%
> 200k to 600k 25%
> over 1 million even more

Yes, progressive taxes. But don't all western countries have that
already?

On 12/22/2016 8:58 PM, Bruce wrote:
> In article >, Ed Pawlowski says...
>>
>> On 12/22/2016 8:03 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think people should be able to get filthy rich by honest means, as
>>> long as they pay taxes proportionally.
>>>
>>
>> Exactly
>> It has been proposed but gets nowhere. Puts people out of work.
>>
>> It can be very simple based on total earnings, no matter the source.
>>
>> No deductions of any kind. My numbers are just a guess, but you get the
>> idea.
>>
>> Under 20k no tax.
>> 20k to 40k 8%
>> 40k to 80k 12%
>> 200k to 600k 25%
>> over 1 million even more
>
> Yes, progressive taxes. But don't all western countries have that
> already?
>

On the surface, yes. Our tax code has many loopholes and there are a
lot of high income people paying very little. Lower the rate and
eliminate deduction. Won't happen as the tax preparers, lawyers,
accountants, will be out of business.

On 2016-12-22 7:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 12/22/2016 3:43 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> department.
>>
>> I am sure a lot of people would. The idea of taxes is to fund the things
>> our society needs....schools, roads, police and fire services, armed
>> forces. I don't think it is appropriate that someone should be able to
>> divert that money to a charity of his or her choice. If we all did that
>> we might not have the tax revenues to fund important government programs
>> while Jimmy Bakker makes enough money to have air conditioned dog houses.
>>
>
> You forgot to mention jails to put people like the Bakkers in.

What a piece of work he is. Iwas channel surfing one day and was
surprised to see on on the screen as I passed by some religious station.
I stopped there long enough to see him introduce some young (ex) con and
tell a story about how he had met the guy in prison. Big long sob story
about the guy's life of misery, crime and redemption... and that made
him realize why God had put him through through that ordeal.... so he
could reach out and help that young man.




>
> IMO, you need both. Only a well funded organization like the government
> can build things like the interstate highway system, but they tend to
> have a lot of waste built in too. That is an area where Trump should be
> able to do some good. It will be interesting.
>

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:19:30 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 12/22/2016 8:58 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> In article >, Ed Pawlowski says...
>>>
>>> On 12/22/2016 8:03 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think people should be able to get filthy rich by honest means, as
>>>> long as they pay taxes proportionally.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly
>>> It has been proposed but gets nowhere. Puts people out of work.
>>>
>>> It can be very simple based on total earnings, no matter the source.
>>>
>>> No deductions of any kind. My numbers are just a guess, but you get the
>>> idea.
>>>
>>> Under 20k no tax.
>>> 20k to 40k 8%
>>> 40k to 80k 12%
>>> 200k to 600k 25%
>>> over 1 million even more


That's not logical... if everyone is taxed at the same rate regardless
of earnings then it's logical and those who earn more will obviously
pay more. What are we going to do, have a sliding scale for sales
tax, what about motor vehicle fees (license/inspection), and roadway
tolls, and how about public tranportation, will every one pay a
different rate to ride a bus, train, taxi... what about tax on fuel
and booze? And then there's property tax, people who earn little seem
to have the most kids in school yet don't pay a proportionate share of
school tax... I have no kids in school yet I pay a very high school
tax... I'm tired of paying for the parasite's flock. Perhaps it would
be more logical to base the tax rate on how many kids, more kids you
pay a higher rate. I never did get the logic of dependant
deductions... more dependants one has the higher their tax rate should
be, after all those non productive parasite baby factories are
depending on me! Okay, give them food stamps but give me the
deduction for supporting them. The grubbermint ain't supporting them,
the grubbermint uses my money to support those loser's spawn and I get
not a whit out of it... where's the ****ing logic... I didn't even get
to **** those baby mommas. But it's fine and dandy for them losers to
**** my wallet. Let the elected officials feed those spawn out of
their pay, see how fast things become fairer. The answer is to
legalize prostitution because that's what all those losers are doing
now anyway only they are producing spawn that the productive moral
folks are forced to support. And I'm not drinking, I've always felt
that way... ****ing is the most basic animal function, there is no way
to stop it, but legalised prostitution is a simple way to stop
producing many millions of useless spawn.
I also blame the church for not promoting birth control yet those old
men are making rules for something that they claim not to engage in
yet they are humping young boy's butts. And why do you think they
came up with the concept of nuns, it was to satisfy the priests, and I
know this for a fact because when I was 19 and was in the Vatican on
Easter Sunday and met a young nun, we had sex among the crowd right at
the holy fountain and we talked some, she was very confused about what
she was doing because the old limp dicked priests were ravaging her
and other young nuns. If I wasn't in dress whites and was going to
sea the next morning I probably would have brought her back to
Brooklyn, I don't even know her name.


>> Yes, progressive taxes. But don't all western countries have that
>> already?
>>
>
>On the surface, yes. Our tax code has many loopholes and there are a
>lot of high income people paying very little. Lower the rate and
>eliminate deduction. Won't happen as the tax preparers, lawyers,
>accountants, will be out of business.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 23:20:37 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-12-22 7:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> You forgot to mention jails to put people like the Bakkers in.
>
>What a piece of work he is. Iwas channel surfing one day and was
>surprised to see on on the screen as I passed by some religious station.
>I stopped there long enough to see him introduce some young (ex) con and
>tell a story about how he had met the guy in prison. Big long sob story
>about the guy's life of misery, crime and redemption... and that made
>him realize why God had put him through through that ordeal.... so he
>could reach out and help that young man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPOfurmrjxo

On 12/22/2016 11:55 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
\
>>>>
>>>> Under 20k no tax.
>>>> 20k to 40k 8%
>>>> 40k to 80k 12%
>>>> 200k to 600k 25%
>>>> over 1 million even more
>
>
> That's not logical... if everyone is taxed at the same rate regardless
> of earnings then it's logical and those who earn more will obviously
> pay more. What are we going to do, have a sliding scale for sales
> tax, what about motor vehicle fees (license/inspection), and roadway
> tolls, and how about public tranportation, will every one pay a
> different rate to ride a bus, train, taxi... what about tax on fuel
> and booze?

We have that already. Lowest is 10% and rises to 39.6% Used to be the
tax rate ran up to 90% on the biggest earners.

As for sales tax, there is an odd form of progression there too. Lower
income people pay tax on the 6 year old used car they bought while
higher income pay tax on the brand new BMW.

"Jeßus" wrote:
>
> Bruce wrote:
> >The more money people make, the more taxes they should pay. Is that
> >class envy? But I agree that if Trump dodged taxes in a legal way, I'd
> >have done that too.
>
> I wouldn't have if I were in a position to do so, unless my motivation
> was to divert those funds into helping the poor. How much money do you
> really need?

You're so full of dingo doo.
Being "rich" is only a relative term.
You had the money to go on an extended vacation recently.
I couldn't have afforded to do that.
So I could consider you maybe not rich but certainly
richer than I am.
I could say that you should have stayed home and given
that money to the poor or pay more taxes.

But I don't think that way. You are doing better than me
but I don't envy your extra money. Good for you!

I deal with my life, use my funds wisely, but I never
whine and cry about others with more money. I'm happy.
People that make twice what I do cry about being poor.
I make half that and I don't cry. I deal with it.
I work with what I have. Give me a break.

"Jeßus" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 07:55:59 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
> >Bruce wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know how he's going to pay for it though, because I bet he also
> >> wants to lower taxes. Hopefully not to the level that he pays them.
> >
> >Remember Bruce - he did nothing illegal. He took advantage of legal
> >tax loopholes. Only an idiot wouldn't do that.
> >
> >And why are those loopholes there? Because most of congress consists
> >of rich guys that vote in their own best interest.
> >Blame Congress, not Trump.
> >I go for any deduction that I can. Why not rich people too?
> >
> >It's all about class envy.
> >"He has more money than me. It's not fair." (whine and cry)
>
> Do you REALLY think that way?!?!

Yes. It's true except I don't envy people with more money than me.
A rich life is not about money, it's quality of life.
You make due with what you have.

"Jeßus" wrote:
>
> Bruce wrote:
> >I'd rather give my excess money to causes I'd pick than to the tax
> >department.
>
> Agreed.

LOL. So *WHY* did you choose to spend YOUR excess money on
a vacation recently?

Think of all the poor people you could have helped that just
hope they can pay their monthly bills.

You are such a hypocrite. Even worse, you have no clue.

"Jeßus" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 15:43:18 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
> >On 2016-12-22 3:33 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >> In article >, Jeßus says...
> >>>
> >
> >>> I wouldn't have if I were in a position to do so, unless my motivation
> >>> was to divert those funds into helping the poor. How much money do you
> >>> really need?
> >>
> >> I'd rather give my excess money to causes I'd pick than to the tax
> >> department.
> >
> >I am sure a lot of people would. The idea of taxes is to fund the things
> >our society needs....schools, roads, police and fire services, armed
> >forces.
>
> Sure, although I'm surprised you'd cite the armed forces. They need
> funding, of course, but not the wasted trillions of dollars spent that
> goes into the military industrial complex's pockets, and keeps the U.S
> in permanent war-mode.

"...carry a big stick" to scare the bad guys away.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
> > People who make a lot of
> > money do so as a result of what the government and its taxpayers have
> > provided. It is also not a good thing for society to allow people to
> > amass too much money because it also gives them too much power and
> > influence.
> >
>
> Sounds like you want Communism. Comrade Trudeau will tell you how much
> you may earn. Get in line for you loaf of bread this week. Your meat
> ration this week is one chicken leg. You made too much money to
> deserve a steak.

I was going to comment on that too, Ed.
Dave said, "It is also not a good thing for society to allow people to
amass too much money because..."

WTH? Again...it's just class envy. If someone makes more money
than they do, they call them the evil rich people.

On 2016-12-23 8:27 AM, Gary wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> I was going to comment on that too, Ed.
> Dave said, "It is also not a good thing for society to allow people to
> amass too much money because..."
>
> WTH? Again...it's just class envy. If someone makes more money
> than they do, they call them the evil rich people.
>

You have to admit that money is power for some people. I am sure we have
all heard of little people running up against the rich and powerful and
being unable to fight back because they don't have the resources. How
many times of we heard of people and corporations stealing other
people's ideas and tying them up in prolonged and expensive law suits.
My hat goes off to a guy in our town who pitched a plant to Disney and
they turned him down, but four years later Disney went ahead with the
project. It took years and years in the courts, but he got a $240
million award.

On 12/23/2016 9:51 AM, Dave Smith wrote:

>
> You have to admit that money is power for some people. I am sure we have
> all heard of little people running up against the rich and powerful and
> being unable to fight back because they don't have the resources. How
> many times of we heard of people and corporations stealing other
> people's ideas and tying them up in prolonged and expensive law suits.
> My hat goes off to a guy in our town who pitched a plant to Disney and
> they turned him down, but four years later Disney went ahead with the
> project. It took years and years in the courts, but he got a $240
> million award.

Sleazy people exist and there are probably more rich than poor ones.
OTOH, those rich people employ many others and provide them with a good
income.

Do you really think the guy deserved $240 million? He probably got far
less especially after the lawyers too their share.

On 2016-12-23 10:27 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 12/23/2016 9:51 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>>
>> You have to admit that money is power for some people. I am sure we have
>> all heard of little people running up against the rich and powerful and
>> being unable to fight back because they don't have the resources. How
>> many times of we heard of people and corporations stealing other
>> people's ideas and tying them up in prolonged and expensive law suits.
>> My hat goes off to a guy in our town who pitched a plant to Disney and
>> they turned him down, but four years later Disney went ahead with the
>> project. It took years and years in the courts, but he got a $240
>> million award.
>
> Sleazy people exist and there are probably more rich than poor ones.
> OTOH, those rich people employ many others and provide them with a good
> income.


Sure. Guys like Trump, who trample over little guys. I have heard too
many stories of him screwing little guys.

> Do you really think the guy deserved $240 million? He probably got far
> less especially after the lawyers too their share.

They were going for a lot more. He had a good idea and they stole it
from him, and then they jerked him around. In cases like this there are
punitive damages to serve as a deterrent to others. I suppose they
could have made a deal with him when he pitched it, or they could have
settled with him when they were caught stealing his ideas. Sometimes
the rich and powerful have to be made to pay a heavy price to make them
think twice about screwing people.

In article >,
says...
>
> On 2016-12-22 4:52 PM, graham wrote:
> > On 12/22/2016 1:40 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> >> It is a strange sort of system where someone can lose money in such a
> >> way that he does not have to pay income tax for years when he obviously
> >> has been making a lot more money. His gains apparently far exceeded his
> >> loss, but he still gets away tax free. That sucks.
> >>
> > I strongly doubt that he is as wealthy as he makes himself out to be!!!!!!
> >
>
> I don't know why you would doubt the word of a man who trusted enough to
> vote in for president. He claims to be worth about $10 Billion, but
> Forbes says he is worth about $3.7 Billion.... so imagine having amassed
> an amount of money in that range but not having to pay income tax
> because you lost some money one year.

Take a look at the discrepancy in accounts of his two Scottish golf
courses; between what he tells the UK govt tax dept, and what he tells
the US tax dept

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rump-scotland-
golf-course-resort-losses

Janet UK

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 16:14:50 -0000, Janet > wrote:

>In article >,
>says...
>>
>> On 2016-12-22 4:52 PM, graham wrote:
>> > On 12/22/2016 1:40 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> >> It is a strange sort of system where someone can lose money in such a
>> >> way that he does not have to pay income tax for years when he obviously
>> >> has been making a lot more money. His gains apparently far exceeded his
>> >> loss, but he still gets away tax free. That sucks.
>> >>
>> > I strongly doubt that he is as wealthy as he makes himself out to be!!!!!!
>> >
>>
>> I don't know why you would doubt the word of a man who trusted enough to
>> vote in for president. He claims to be worth about $10 Billion, but
>> Forbes says he is worth about $3.7 Billion.... so imagine having amassed
>> an amount of money in that range but not having to pay income tax
>> because you lost some money one year.
>
> Take a look at the discrepancy in accounts of his two Scottish golf
>courses; between what he tells the UK govt tax dept, and what he tells
>the US tax dept
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rump-scotland-
>golf-course-resort-losses
>
> Janet UK
>
Through freedom of information he was unable to stop letters he wrote
to Alex Salmond (then Scottish First Minister) that were virulent
because Salmond was allowing a wind farm out at sea and Trump felt it
spoilt the view from his golf course. He wasn't making a bid for
president then, so he let it flow. The man has delusions of grandeur,
thinks he is a king.

wrote:
>
> The man has delusions of grandeur,
> thinks he is a king.

He is now! ;-D

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:25:47 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>"Jeßus" wrote:
>>
>> Bruce wrote:
>> >I'd rather give my excess money to causes I'd pick than to the tax
>> >department.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
>LOL. So *WHY* did you choose to spend YOUR excess money on
>a vacation recently?

Aww... Did I 'dis' Merca? Keep up with the tantrums, I love it <G>

>Think of all the poor people you could have helped that just
>hope they can pay their monthly bills.

Cambodians don't need money? It's a very poor country. Tourism is a
very important part of the economy there. Tourists need accommodation,
food and transport. Guess who does that and earns an income from it?
None of my money went to big business or the government, save for the
cost of a visa, airlines and I guess tax on petrol. It went directly
into ordinary people's hands.

It's really none of your business, but I'm helping a couple over there
pay for their daughter to get an education at a school that teaches
English. This will make a huge difference in her adult life. I became
good friends with the couple and I am actually looking into buying
property over there so I can eventually live there part time. Due to
Cambodian law that is difficult for a non-citizen to do (unless you
are rich and can afford a USD$250000 'donation' to the government).
Long story short, if this comes to pass, this family will also get
free accommodation for several years out of it.

>You are such a hypocrite. Even worse, you have no clue.

Feel like a real dick now? That comment is irony defined, your
ignorance of the outside world is breathtaking.

On 12/23/2016 11:00 AM, Dave Smith wrote:

>
>> Do you really think the guy deserved $240 million? He probably got far
>> less especially after the lawyers too their share.
>
> They were going for a lot more. He had a good idea and they stole it
> from him, and then they jerked him around. In cases like this there are
> punitive damages to serve as a deterrent to others. I suppose they
> could have made a deal with him when he pitched it, or they could have
> settled with him when they were caught stealing his ideas. Sometimes
> the rich and powerful have to be made to pay a heavy price to make them
> think twice about screwing people.
>

Cases like that are difficult to prove. It is not unusual for two or
more people to have the same idea at about the same time. He may or may
not have influenced Disney. Some companies won't even look at your idea
for that reason. They may already have a similar plan in the works.

I don't know the case or the idea so I have no opinion. Jury may or may
not have been right.

Just as various places around the world have markers for the sun to
shine through at the solstice. Back a few thousand years the people on
distant islands, South America and Europe had no idea other people
existed, yet they had the same idea.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:27:20 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>"Jeßus" wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 15:43:18 -0500, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On 2016-12-22 3:33 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> >> In article >, Jeßus says...
>> >>>
>> >
>> >>> I wouldn't have if I were in a position to do so, unless my motivation
>> >>> was to divert those funds into helping the poor. How much money do you
>> >>> really need?
>> >>
>> >> I'd rather give my excess money to causes I'd pick than to the tax
>> >> department.
>> >
>> >I am sure a lot of people would. The idea of taxes is to fund the things
>> >our society needs....schools, roads, police and fire services, armed
>> >forces.
>>
>> Sure, although I'm surprised you'd cite the armed forces. They need
>> funding, of course, but not the wasted trillions of dollars spent that
>> goes into the military industrial complex's pockets, and keeps the U.S
>> in permanent war-mode.
>
>"...carry a big stick" to scare the bad guys away.

Carry a big stick to scare the 'bad guys' away? You apparently can't
make the distinction between budgeting for legitimate defence versus
the mountains of taxpayers money being ****ed away on logistics and
equipment going directly into the coffers of corporate america on
illegitimate invasions and wars for the past 50 years. How about the
more than 2 Trillion dollars that just 'disappeared 12 or so years
ago? "Whoops, sorry guys, dunno where it went" LOL. Wake up.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:24:40 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>"Jeßus" wrote:
>>
>> Bruce wrote:
>> >The more money people make, the more taxes they should pay. Is that
>> >class envy? But I agree that if Trump dodged taxes in a legal way, I'd
>> >have done that too.
>>
>> I wouldn't have if I were in a position to do so, unless my motivation
>> was to divert those funds into helping the poor. How much money do you
>> really need?
>
>You're so full of dingo doo.
>Being "rich" is only a relative term.
>You had the money to go on an extended vacation recently.
>I couldn't have afforded to do that.

So?

>So I could consider you maybe not rich but certainly
>richer than I am.

Yes, it's all relative, so what?

>I could say that you should have stayed home and given
>that money to the poor or pay more taxes.

See my detailed reply elsewhere in the thread to you on your inane
reasoning. Ohhh, you meant helping poor WHITE people rather than those
useless gooks. I get it now.

>But I don't think that way. You are doing better than me
>but I don't envy your extra money. Good for you!

By western standards I am certainly not rich.

>I deal with my life, use my funds wisely, but I never
>whine and cry about others with more money.

That's because you're not exactly blessed in the brains department,
Gary, and cannot make the distinction between those comfortable or
well off, versus genuinely rich people who could lose millions of
dollars and not even notice it. And use their wealth to be above the
law and abuse the spirit of taxation laws. Just as an example.

> I'm happy.
>People that make twice what I do cry about being poor.
>I make half that and I don't cry. I deal with it.
>I work with what I have. Give me a break.

LOL.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:51:00 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>You have to admit that money is power for some people. I am sure we have
>all heard of little people running up against the rich and powerful and
>being unable to fight back because they don't have the resources.

Trump being the definitive example of that.

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:25:20 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>"Jeßus" wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 07:55:59 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >Bruce wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I don't know how he's going to pay for it though, because I bet he also
>> >> wants to lower taxes. Hopefully not to the level that he pays them.
>> >
>> >Remember Bruce - he did nothing illegal. He took advantage of legal
>> >tax loopholes. Only an idiot wouldn't do that.
>> >
>> >And why are those loopholes there? Because most of congress consists
>> >of rich guys that vote in their own best interest.
>> >Blame Congress, not Trump.
>> >I go for any deduction that I can. Why not rich people too?
>> >
>> >It's all about class envy.
>> >"He has more money than me. It's not fair." (whine and cry)
>>
>> Do you REALLY think that way?!?!
>
>Yes. It's true except I don't envy people with more money than me.
>A rich life is not about money, it's quality of life.
>You make due with what you have.

My point was that you seem to think people critical of the extremely
rich merely have 'envy' for them. You have such a simplistic outlook
on everything.

In article >, Jeßus says...
>
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:25:20 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
> >"Jeßus" wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 07:55:59 -0500, Gary > wrote:
> >>
> >> >It's all about class envy.
> >> >"He has more money than me. It's not fair." (whine and cry)
> >>
> >> Do you REALLY think that way?!?!
> >
> >Yes. It's true except I don't envy people with more money than me.
> >A rich life is not about money, it's quality of life.
> >You make due with what you have.
>
> My point was that you seem to think people critical of the extremely
> rich merely have 'envy' for them. You have such a simplistic outlook
> on everything.

Gary defends rich people because he's a millionaire himself. He's just
going through a temporary financial bad patch.

On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 05:16:02 +1100, Bruce >
wrote:

>In article >, Jeßus says...
>>
>> On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 08:25:20 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >"Jeßus" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 07:55:59 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >It's all about class envy.
>> >> >"He has more money than me. It's not fair." (whine and cry)
>> >>
>> >> Do you REALLY think that way?!?!
>> >
>> >Yes. It's true except I don't envy people with more money than me.
>> >A rich life is not about money, it's quality of life.
>> >You make due with what you have.
>>
>> My point was that you seem to think people critical of the extremely
>> rich merely have 'envy' for them. You have such a simplistic outlook
>> on everything.
>
>Gary defends rich people because he's a millionaire himself. He's just
>going through a temporary financial bad patch.

Based on what he's posted over the years here it seems to be mostly
self-inflicted.

He regards me as rich, LOL. No, I just use my money wisely and plan
ahead. That's why I was out at bed at 3:45AM on this xmas eve, moving
irrigation and tending to livestock so I can eat and also make some
money... I do this because I'm rich, apparently

In article >, Jeßus says...
>
> Based on what he's posted over the years here it seems to be mostly
> self-inflicted.
>
> He regards me as rich, LOL. No, I just use my money wisely and plan
> ahead. That's why I was out at bed at 3:45AM on this xmas eve

Is it Xmas Eve? I always forget about these things.

> , moving
> irrigation and tending to livestock so I can eat and also make some
> money... I do this because I'm rich, apparently

As you said, I think: it's all relative.

On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 11:54:44 AM UTC-7, Bruce wrote:
> In article >, Jeßus says...
> >
> > Based on what he's posted over the years here it seems to be mostly
> > self-inflicted.
> >
> > He regards me as rich, LOL. No, I just use my money wisely and plan
> > ahead. That's why I was out at bed at 3:45AM on this xmas eve
>
> Is it Xmas Eve? I always forget about these things.
>
> > , moving
> > irrigation and tending to livestock so I can eat and also make some
> > money... I do this because I'm rich, apparently
>
> As you said, I think: it's all relative.

Yes, it is all relative...and when a certain "relative" dies I will be rich
as I am in her will. Sad, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

In article >, Roy
says...
>
> On Friday, December 23, 2016 at 11:54:44 AM UTC-7, Bruce wrote:
> > In article >, Jeßus says...
> > >
> > > Based on what he's posted over the years here it seems to be mostly
> > > self-inflicted.
> > >
> > > He regards me as rich, LOL. No, I just use my money wisely and plan
> > > ahead. That's why I was out at bed at 3:45AM on this xmas eve
> >
> > Is it Xmas Eve? I always forget about these things.
> >
> > > , moving
> > > irrigation and tending to livestock so I can eat and also make some
> > > money... I do this because I'm rich, apparently
> >
> > As you said, I think: it's all relative.
>
> Yes, it is all relative...and when a certain "relative" dies I will be rich
> as I am in her will. Sad, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Yes, even Trump is rich because of a relative. That's how relative it
is.

On 12/18/2016 9:23 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Dec 2016 12:47:07 -0700, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/18/2016 12:16 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> Heck, I wish I could cook my own eggs at restaurants - I'm picky about eggs.
>>
>> An overcooked egg, especially scrambled, is a terrible thing.
>>
>> Going to sous vide some soft boiled ones for breakfast soon, that
>> machine is the bomb!
>>
>> And TNX to you and Ophelia for recommending it.
>
> Now that you're sold on it, this should be of some interest to you.
> http://www.bakingsteel.com/blog/sous...t-pizza-recipe
>
>
Missed this, but I will make - TNX!

Be well, please.

On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 17:08:57 -0700, Sqwertz >
wrote:

> Missed this, but I will make - TNX!
>
> Be well, please.

Thank you.



--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 12/27/2016 9:38 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2016 17:08:57 -0700, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>> Missed this, but I will make - TNX!
>>
>> Be well, please.
>
> Thank you.

YW

....and oh those eggs!

The 1st batch never made it past breakfast, lol...