Damn those evil rich people!!!!Follow

He's that stupid... what?

This particular quote is an exceptional example though. It's rare someone gets it that wrong.

Sorry, chum. When I see our rich clients trying to write off tampons and bubble gum simply because they spent a week in LA to have a one hour meeting at the record company, it's a little difficult to see all of the things written off as completely legit. Does that make our clients evil? No. It makes them want to hold on to as much of their money as they can, which I can understand.

But thanks for trying to put words in my mouth.

They're partly the same myth, of course. Well, I mean, they're not because they're not myths, but Microsoft does dodge taxes on its royalty income by basing itself in Nevada. Many of these techniques are of highly questionable legality, some are genuine loopholes. The distinction seems to be largely academic, though, as they're not pursued aggressively in most cases.

Is Microsoft evil? Well, it goes out of its way to subvert democracy and use its influence to push through legislation that shifts its costs onto others and reduces its tax contributions at the expense of small business. You could call that evil, I suppose. On the other side, it barely ever murders anyone, so it's sitting pretty for an international company.

Well, I think it'd be nice if you stopped being such a stupid, smug little cunt, but we can't always get what we want.

This is especially true of those of us that want an entire diverse and above all large group of people to do something.

Edited, Apr 8th 2010 8:08pm by Kavekk

Hrm? I've said a bunch of times that most people make a net "profit" in the things the government provides for (on all levels: roads, schools, public services, etc etc) versus what they pay in taxes. That goes for the stuff most people on both sides of the political aisle "get in life".

I hope it made you feel better to hear it said again.

Ok. But "most people" assumes that it's not "all people". Thus, someone is footing the bill, right? Some people are paying more than what they get back. And those "some people" are the very "evil rich" people that get constantly bashed by the left for the horrific crime of thinking that they're getting a bit of the shaft on this deal...



I'll point out that you went out of you way to *not* say that the people who receive more than they pay owe some thanks to the people who receive less than they pay. So while I'm sure you do say what you just posted, it's not what I was talking about. I'm quite certain you have never once on this forum expressed the opinion that we should be a bit easier on the rich because they already pay so much more of the tax burden relative to what they receive.

Sure. When have I ever stated otherwise?


You'd have a hard time finding a cite of me bashing the rich. I'm sure someone has but I've got enough to do without answering for everyone else in the world.


So it didn't make you feel better?


Of course. I thought it was obvious, but whatever.

Hey, did you know that red states get their government services completely due to blue states paying out more in taxes than they get back? It's true!

So you responded to my post with something completely irrelevant and unrelated?

You know, when someone posts something like "Gee. It would be really nice if...", and someone responds to that with "But I do this...", one expects that the second poster is actually claiming to have done the thing referred to in the post he responded to. Apparently, you think that pointing out something unrelated is somehow sufficient, and I'm not sure why.

I'm just curious if you do the same thing when discussing other things as well (ie: not conservative leaning politics). So, a friend of your's states that it's sad that so many people go hungry in the world, and it would be nice if more people donated to food banks, and you respond by saying that you got your car tuned up last week? Is that how your conversations go? Or is it only on this board that you present such obtuse responses?

My post was about the fact that not enough people show appreciation for this fact. Your response side-stepped the whole thing, while attempting a "not me!" claim. Acknowledging that "most people" get more than they pay for, isn't the same as acknowledging *why* they get that.

On my way to work tomorrow, I'll kiss the road in front of my house. I might buy it roses. Dinner is out of the question.

I would, but there's not one around here. And when you drive onto the government property around here, they tend to shoot to kill.

Just can't have any fun...