Oil reaches Chandeleur Islands.
http://www.sunherald.com

http://www.devilfinder.com
Mississippi Islands

DAMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN BP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
cuhulin

On May 4, 9:14*pm, retrogrouch wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2010 18:15:21 -0700 (PDT), bpnjensen





wrote:
On May 4, 3:09*pm, retrogrouch wrote:
On Tue, 04 May 2010 13:43:56 -0500, "D. Peter Maus"

wrote:

* Ok. Look at it this way. And we're being optimistic here. A
dollar comes into the government. It costs, for the sake of
discussion, .10 to collect it, .02 for interest on any debt, and .02
for interest on any short term financing for deficit spending, again
in the short term. That leaves .86 for the workings of government,
salaries, spending, physical plant for government activities, and
contract work. Which goes into people's pockets.

When you start making **** up you can make up any point you want.
You're living in a fantasy.

Dear Lord, I am getting so tired of politics. *If you please, I ask
that you equip each human being with wisdom, compassion and courage,
and reset to start. *Thanks for listening. *Amen.

I'm tired of people making up **** to support theories that are
totally ridiculous to begin with. You're spinning nonsense to support
a fallacy.

Eg. The total IRS budget increased for next year is 12.6 billion
that's to collect 2.5 trillion in revenue. That's .005%.

SO you're 10 cents a dollar for collection is horse crap, as is the
rest.

All to support your utterly ridiculous concept that government
spending doesn't contribute to the economy. *Gawd, how can people
believe so many demonstrably false things at the same time?

And then want to hold forth on them too. Sheesh.

Wait a second - I didn't say that, that's not me you're talking to!
Paging Peter...

BTR Bruce

In article 02c2a642-5411-483b-86a3-
, says...
On May 4, 9:14*pm, retrogrouch wrote:
On Tue, 4 May 2010 18:15:21 -0700 (PDT), bpnjensen





wrote:
On May 4, 3:09*pm, retrogrouch wrote:
On Tue, 04 May 2010 13:43:56 -0500, "D. Peter Maus"

wrote:

* Ok. Look at it this way. And we're being optimistic here. A
dollar comes into the government. It costs, for the sake of
discussion, .10 to collect it, .02 for interest on any debt, and .02
for interest on any short term financing for deficit spending, again
in the short term. That leaves .86 for the workings of government,
salaries, spending, physical plant for government activities, and
contract work. Which goes into people's pockets.

When you start making **** up you can make up any point you want.
You're living in a fantasy.

Dear Lord, I am getting so tired of politics. *If you please, I ask
that you equip each human being with wisdom, compassion and courage,
and reset to start. *Thanks for listening. *Amen.

I'm tired of people making up **** to support theories that are
totally ridiculous to begin with. You're spinning nonsense to support
a fallacy.

Eg. The total IRS budget increased for next year is 12.6 billion
that's to collect 2.5 trillion in revenue. That's .005%.

SO you're 10 cents a dollar for collection is horse crap, as is the
rest.

All to support your utterly ridiculous concept that government
spending doesn't contribute to the economy. *Gawd, how can people
believe so many demonstrably false things at the same time?

And then want to hold forth on them too. Sheesh.

Wait a second - I didn't say that, that's not me you're talking to!
Paging Peter...

BTR Bruce


It happens to all of us.
--
BDK, non-jew leader of the non-existant jew paid shills!

On May 4, 6:05*am, "D. Peter Maus" wrote:
On 5/3/10 23:17 , bpnjensen wrote:

On May 3, 8:48 pm, "D. Peter *wrote:
On 5/3/10 18:57 , m II wrote:

D. Peter Maus wrote:

* * Yeah, when I pay more tax than John Kerry, it makes my blood boil, too.

Would paying more tax than George Bush be different somehow?

* * George Bush didn't run on a platform of raising my taxes.

...nor did he run on a platform of doubling our national debt.

* *You mean the way Obama trebled it in less than 5 months? Or
increased it 10 times over the period of his first term? I mean, if
you want to have a third grade argument, we can. But you've
demonstrated too many times that you're smarter than that.

* *The discussion, however, is that Kerry, like Obama, and
especially Biden, ran on a platform of raising taxes for us, while
doing everything he can to avoid paying his own. If he's so
determined that more taxes need to be paid, then let him lead the
way...pay more of his own money into the Treasury before he
confiscates ours. If Biden is so convinced that paying taxes is a
patriotic thing to do, then let him lead the way. Let him show us
his own patriotism and forego his exemptions. Let him and pay more,
before telling us that we must pay til it hurts as a matter of duty.

* *If it's a matter of taking care of the less fortunate, then
donate more of his own money before redistributing ours. By his own
released records Kerry donates nothing to charity. While you and I
do, out of our own pockets. Bush and Cheney donated more out of
their own pockets...more of their own money...than all the Democrats
in Congress combined. While those same Democrats argued that we must
be more generous, and take care of the less fortunate, by raising
our taxes and redistributing that wealth, at the same time
protecting their own.

* *Kerry, especially, makes 5-10 times what you and I do, and yet he
avoids paying his share of taxes, while arguing that you and I must
pay more. If George Bush had done the same, I'd be just as ****ed at
the double standard. But he didn't.

* *It's laughable at how the argument, no matter the topic, always
gets pushed back to what Bush did or did not do. The truth is that
I'm no happier about Bush's Presidency than I am Obiteme's. His
administration is responsible for not one, but two lame-ass stimulus
packages that did nothing but make busywork for civil employees. It
cost the government about $2400 in man-hours to write those silly
$600 stimulus checks that did nothing to stimulate the economy.
While a simple tax cut would have boosted economic output, and in
the process increased the flow into the Treasury immediately. Bush's
administration further wrote checks on my future to bailout General
Motors, Chrysler and how many banks and Wall Street brokerages?
While letting them go to bankruptcy when bankruptcy first
threatened, would have ended the harping, and started the rebuilding
within two weeks. Instead of dragging the process out, further
depressing the economy until there was no way the banks, the auto
companies or Wall Street brokerages could recover themselves.

* *The reality is, that Bush did precisely what he ran
against...government interference in the private sector. Had GM, for
instance, simply been allowed to fail when the issue first came up,
there would have been a bankruptcy, and another manufacturer, or
manufacturers would have swooped in and bought up the assets for
pennies, restructured the businesses, and moved on. For two weeks
there would have been a lot of nail biting, stocks would have been
depressed, and then recovery would have been well under way by the
time the housing bubble burst and the real crash occurred nearly a
year later. The economy would have strong enough to absorb the hit
without spending nearly two trillion more out of public coffers,
which created the public panic that virtually halted the economy for
more than a year.

* *The economy is resilient. It has the ability to right itself
after a bubble burst. Had it been allowed to simply do so, as with
the crash of the 20's, the economic calamity that followed, like the
Great Depression, would have been very short lived before recovery
began. History has shown time and again, that economic downturns are
short lived except when government interferers. And that the debt
soars when the ruling party can't keep its hands to itself.

* *So, yes, I'm furious at Bush, as well. He took a well
intentioned, and successful Presidency and ran it off the rails.

* *But that's not what this discussion is about.

* *You know, it's rare that Kevin and I find ourselves on the same
side of a political issue, but he's right...both parties are
abominations to the Founding Fathers' intentions, these days.

* *There are 535 people who can be blamed for the state of the
nation. 535 people who have run for office decrying the enormous
government waste. The same 535 people who could at anytime put an
end to that waste overnight. And yet, they have not. 535 people who
have run for office decrying runaway government spending. The same
535 people who could at anytime end that runaway government spending
overnight. And yet, they have not. 535 people, every term who have
promised campaign after campaign, that there will be improvement in
government responsibility, government transparency, and government
effiency. The same 535 people, who, every term fail to fulfill those
promises, blaming the economy, the deficit, international terrorism,
tooth decay and toenail fungus.

* *The deficit hasn't been addressed because those 535 people don't
WANT it addressed. Because it's a touchstone for their campaigns.
End the debt and they lose the issue that gave them their impetus
for election. Government waste hasn't been addressed because that
money is their pipeline to support in the civil sector. Runaway
government spending hasn't been addressed because that money is the
source of their power for that 535 people.

* *535 people. That's all it takes to end these ills. 535 people.
Each one with the power to change things.

* *And yet, they don't. Because they don't want to.

* *It could be done overnight. In the dead of night. The same way
they hide their efforts from those of us who elect them. But it
doesn't happen because those 535 people con't want it to.

* *But all of this is not the issue at topic in this discussion.

* *The argument that we, The People, must surrender our hard-earned
productivity to the Federal Treasury being made by persons who,
themselves, exploit every opportunity to avoid their share of
taxation is an abomination unto itself.

* *And that was the point of this discussion.

Excellent analysis DPM, this is one righteous summation.