Feel Secure?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
As I have run, and continue to run, businesses that rank their milestones in billions of dollars, I doubt there is anything your sophomoric mindset could add to my edumacation.
Nonetheless, perhaps you have something to offer?
By the way, none of these businesses utilize pensions; too easy to appropriate. Strictly 401(k), and company-sponsored, at that.

You keep Jim and Tammy's books?
Go pull the wings off some flys, maybe you'll figure out a way to clawback the old person's ill-gotten gains, the damn socialist bag-lady.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I see; so you oppose all taxation? Otherwise to grant one group a tax benefit is not laissez faire. See how that works?

BTW, exactly how much income would you be earning if the government didn't provide the legal enforcement of contracts? Or legal tender for that matter?

I oppose oppressive taxation, especially that which rewards lethargy and punishes achievement.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I oppose oppressive taxation, especially that which rewards lethargy and punishes achievement.

OK fine. Sell me a rope and I will hang you. Then, the poor people will party.
Praise be.

Originally posted by KneverKnight
OK fine. Sell me a rope and I will hang you. Then, the poor people will party.
Praise be.

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

If your'e beautiful why do you hide behind your own wealth whilst hating old age pensioners. This old lady clearly exploited a loophole in the market just like many single mothers on benefits do..... so? Do multi-billion dollar industries thrive by behaving ethically?!?

Originally posted by TomP
If your'e beautiful why do you hide behind your own wealth whilst hating old age pensioners. This old lady clearly exploited a loophole in the market just like many single mothers on benefits do..... so? Do multi-billion dollar industries thrive by behaving ethically?!?

Hating?
You'll need to do better than that, I'm afraid. Unlike you, I am a tad more long-range in vision.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
"Ida May Fuller's first monthly retirement check, paid on this day in 1940 from the Social Security program, was for $22.54. Ms. Fuller had worked for three years under the program, which had been established in 1935. The accumulated taxes on her salary over those three years were $24.75. She lived to be 100 years old, collecting $22,888 in Social Security ...[text shortened]... run consecutively from 0001 to 9999 within each group designation."
Ain't socialism grand?

Would you prefer to see her starve to death?

Probably, judging by your later posts - you are clearly a Capitalist Fascist.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Hating?
You'll need to do better than that, I'm afraid. Unlike you, I am a tad more long-range in vision.

What in particular makes you think I lack long term vision? How is it you are so well endowed exactly? Why does the obvious statement that large buisiness interests tend to ignore the question of ethics not agree with you? If your'e so wealthy why not be unapologetic and just say the most ruthless person won, what am I going to do?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I oppose oppressive taxation, especially that which rewards lethargy and punishes achievement.

Firstly, This women wasn't oppressed by taxation she was liberated by it.

Secondly, In the most capitalist societies the poor pay a larger percentage of their income in tax.

Finally, one of the major indicators of a successful a society is, can be judged from how well it looks after its poorest members.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I oppose oppressive taxation, especially that which rewards lethargy and punishes achievement.

greed apparently needs no logic, common sense or concept of consequence.

a pension for a poor lady is the same social welfare that you disproportionately receive as a tax cut. and when you no doubt reduce your total tax liability with every known trick in the book what do you call that?

I would call it welshing on your duty as citizen to shoulder the load so that your country can protect you and your future, while the people who cant afford your avoidance skill are the actual financial base that props up your self involved ignorance

Originally posted by howardgee
Would you prefer to see her starve to death?

Probably, judging by your later posts - you are clearly a Capitalist Fascist.

Novel concept: everyone pulls their own weight. I know, it likely sounds crazy and utopian. Hell, you may say I'm a dreamer; but I'm not the only one. I hope someday you will join us, and the world will live as one.

Originally posted by invigorate

Firstly, This women wasn't oppressed by taxation she was liberated by it.
She was liberated by taxation? Liberated from... ?

Secondly, In the most capitalist societies the poor pay a larger percentage of their income in tax.
I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that, proportionately, the poor don't make as much. Your math wizardary is astounding. Perhaps you could take up work as an economic advisor to heads of state. Somewhere.

Finally, one of the major indicators of a successful a society is, can be judged from how well it looks after its poorest members.
And the minor indicators? How about this one: a major indicator of a successful society is one that doesn't encourage its citizenry to become or remain poor. Still working on the minor indicators for this model.

Originally posted by kmax87
greed apparently needs no logic, common sense or concept of consequence.

a pension for a poor lady is the same social welfare that you disproportionately receive as a tax cut. and when you no doubt reduce your total tax liability with every known trick in the book what do you call that?

I would call it welshing on your duty as citizen to shoulder the load so that your country can protect you and your future, while the people who cant afford your avoidance skill are the actual financial base that props up your self involved ignorance
God forbid anyone keep their rewards from their achievement safe from those intent on making it their own. Hell, why not let the government have all of it, and just give me back what they decide I need?
My country's government is a voracious, insatiable greedy monster, that will do anything it can to get its grubby tentacles on the rewards of my acheivement, even if it means labeling their actions with such innoculous phrases and terms, such as: Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, and etc.

Originally posted by TomP

Why does the obvious statement that large buisiness interests tend to ignore the question of ethics not agree with you? If your'e so wealthy why not be unapologetic and just say the most ruthless person won, what am I going to do?
Precisely because my company is not ruthless; treats its employees with the highest wages and benefits for the industry; obeys not just the letter of the law but the spirit of the law in every community in which business is conducted; and continually rewards its shareholders.
Perhaps you are only privvy to the terrible warnings of capitalism without integrity.