Jan Heine of Rene Herse Cycles discusses tariffs in detail:
https://www.renehersecycles.com/bikes-in-the-age-of-tariffs/
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of >"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as >consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins. >>
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies >>> like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also
elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even
though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:26:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
wouldn't it be grand if they shifted their bicyle production back to Wisconsin?
Not likly.....
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant--
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of >>"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies >>like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins. >>
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as >>consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay >>more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA
, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 12:52:59 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them >>>on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of >>>"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a >>>new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>>purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies >>>like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins. >>>
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as >>>consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay >>>more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA
(by "illegal immigrants")
, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
;)
[]'s
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 12:52:59 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies >>> like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA
(by "illegal immigrants")
, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
;)
[]'s
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:26:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
So what is your income tax rate? Here it's from 0 to 27.5% (0%
for people who don't make enough to eat and pay only purchase tax (60%
on food) to people that make more than US$ 500, 00 a month and are
considered "rich" employees.
Businessmen, market "players", multinationals and banks are
all tax exempt. We are a right wing country, more or less expected. Inheritance tax is around 1%, but most millionaires get a judge to
exempt them.
Give me an example. If Musk manages to buy the judges in Texas
and gives himself over 50 billion dollars for a year's "hard" work
breaking Tesla, how much of that will he pay as income tax?
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
USA facts is founded and run by a billionaire(Steve Ballmer)
one of the most notorious tax-evaders in the world. LOL, he probably
deducts any expenses with his "ORG".
Hardly a "reference" for unbiased tax "facts".
IMHO
[]'s
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for >thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression
at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high
and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so
much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced. >Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard
and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and
shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is
the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed >(percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call
them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't
afford it any more...
[]'s
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression
at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high
and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so
much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced. Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard
and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and
shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is
the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed (percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call
them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't
afford it any more...
[]'s
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor.
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 20:34:00 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for
thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression
at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high
and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so
much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced.
Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard
and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and
shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is
the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed
(percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call
them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't
afford it any more...
[]'s
Oh my goodness.... We're all gonna die....
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many
small 3rd world countries - but I think we should not be
striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income-and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of less
worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as their
complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented,
work toward keeping the masses content enough that they
don't literally rebel. Rebellions are messy, unpredictable,
and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle
Americans, in part because of clever deductions. Remember
Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free
of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega-
mansion is much more important than better food for the
family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-rich
help to keep Social Security afloat?
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Jan Heine of Rene Herse Cycles discusses tariffs in detail:
https://www.renehersecycles.com/bikes-in-the-age-of-tariffs/
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them >>>>> on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of >>>>> "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a >>>>> new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>>>> purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies >>>>> like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as >>>>> consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay >>>>> more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be >>>> affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of >>>> the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also
elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even
though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force.
It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do
that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes. Are they of a
significant or critical number? Probably not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on tax cheating
for their survival. I for one will not cry when their operations are
closed, illegals deported, and the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I expect the brunt
of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
On 4/4/2025 6:50 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 20:34:00 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for
thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression
at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high
and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so
much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced.
Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard
and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and
shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is
the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed
(percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call
them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't
afford it any more...
[]'s
Oh my goodness.... We're all gonna die....
--
C'est bon
Soloman
We most assuredly shall!
As Mr Franklin famously wrote, that, and taxes, are certainties.
On 4/4/2025 9:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Good riddance.
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you
don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during
Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that
the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income-
and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive. >>>
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it
over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward
keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per
year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part
because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more
important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of those
receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief,
much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia,
Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but
almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures
favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes >corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money. >Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you somehow >forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal >shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't think
it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young
white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing
black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I was >comparing those groups in 1776.
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder >>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them >>>>>>> on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of >>>>>>> "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a >>>>>>> new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>>>>>> purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as >>>>>>> consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay >>>>>>> more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be >>>>>> affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of >>>>>> the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also
elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even
though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an
import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in
the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >imported. So why don't they?
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder >>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder >>>>><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>>>>>>>> purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be >>>>>>>> affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of >>>>>>>> the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also >>>>>>>elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even >>>>>>>though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>>>It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>>that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an >>>>import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in
the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >>>imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program
to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
On Fri Apr 4 14:52:25 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:59 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:26:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
So what is your income tax rate? Here it's from 0 to 27.5% (0%
for people who don't make enough to eat and pay only purchase tax (60%
on food) to people that make more than US$ 500, 00 a month and are
considered "rich" employees.
Businessmen, market "players", multinationals and banks are
all tax exempt. We are a right wing country, more or less expected.
Inheritance tax is around 1%, but most millionaires get a judge to
exempt them.
Give me an example. If Musk manages to buy the judges in Texas
and gives himself over 50 billion dollars for a year's "hard" work
breaking Tesla, how much of that will he pay as income tax?
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
USA facts is founded and run by a billionaire(Steve Ballmer)
one of the most notorious tax-evaders in the world. LOL, he probably
deducts any expenses with his "ORG".
Hardly a "reference" for unbiased tax "facts".
IMHO
[]'s
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I carry no water for Mr Ballmer. I (and others) have linked
many tax reporting sites over the years with the same
numbers as that one.
I also have no animus toward Brasil. Run your own country
any way you like, not my problem. Our tax rates are in
theory zero to 37.5%.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
In practice, relief here, with our "negative income tax"
policies, is the equivalent of up to $62,000 per year* or
well over what many working people make before taxes.
Again, this is not a policy statement either way, just
reporting.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
*for 2022. Higher now of course.
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes. and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:30:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many
small 3rd world countries - but I think we should not be
striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income-and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of less
worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as their
complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented,
work toward keeping the masses content enough that they
don't literally rebel. Rebellions are messy, unpredictable,
and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle
Americans, in part because of clever deductions. Remember
Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free
of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega-
mansion is much more important than better food for the
family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-rich
help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited
wealth but almost all the top earners are self made
including an astonishingly large number of legal immigrants
especially Indian, other Asian and notably Nigerians:
https://africanmind.org/statistical-portrait-of-nigerian-americans-accomplishments-paradoxes-and-misconceptions/
who seem to have learned to stay out of Poland Ohio and so
do quite well here.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
https://www.britannica.com/money/Herman-Cain
https://www.the-sun.com/news/4916213/willie-wilson-how-became-millionaire/ >>
Mr Wilson literally plowed fields behind a mule before
taking his talents elsewhere.
Some black one-percenters (not the motorcycle type one
percenters):
https://247wallst.com/income/2024/08/08/meet-the-wealthiest-black-americans/ >>
Back to our mere millionaires:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2022/10/25/millionaire-status-is-on-the-rise-with-52-million-people-joining-the-club/
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the
top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
Disregarding any racism I would ask "how does a modern millionaire
compare with a millionaire of, say 20 years ago?
2005 gold was in the $709.00 range and to day's price is ????
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 22:03:16 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you
don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during Trump
version 1?
USA has
among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that the top 1% >>> of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world countries
- but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-justice/income-and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it
over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward
keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per
year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part
because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega-mansion is much more
important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
Most of that is nonsense straight out of far left media, but I do
believe that last paragraph is an issue that needs to be addressed. I
see no reason to exempt rich people from being part of the ponzi
scheme.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:38:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Good riddance.
+1
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half
of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling
middle Americans, in part because of clever deductions.
Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third
mega- mansion is much more important than better food for
the family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-
rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria,
Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc.
etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico,
Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws
and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too
dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back
then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely
even you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to
succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my
original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:19:45 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 00:08:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you >>>>> don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during
Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that >>>>>> the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income- >>>>> and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive. >>>>>
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it >>>>> over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, >>>>> as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at >>>>> prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward >>>>> keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per >>>>> year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part
because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for >>>>> little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social >>>>> Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more >>>>> important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why >>>>> should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of those >>>> receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief,
much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia,
Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but >>>> almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures
favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you somehow
forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal >>> shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't think
it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young
white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing
black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I was
comparing those groups in 1776.
The Leftists racism nonsense is not working any more as more and more
non-white people walk away from the Democrat Party. Perhaps they
should stop using it.
'Re Frank's post above... in early America George Washington, a 3rd generation slave owner, assumed ownership of his first 10 slaves when
he was 11 years old. At his death there were 317 slaves at Mount
Vernon.
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required >>>>>>>>> purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be >>>>>>>> affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of >>>>>>>> the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also
elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even
though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>>> It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>> that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an
import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in
the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are
imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work. But how long
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program
to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:58:36 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items.
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also >>>>>>>>> elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even >>>>>>>>> though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>>>>> It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>>>> that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an >>>>>> import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in >>>>> the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >>>>> imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
Presumably, it only needs to be cheaper than the cost of the foreign
stuff after tariffs are applied...
The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and then the
other side applies a tariff.and at the same time the side with the
most to lose is looking for other sources.
In the U.S. China soybean battle the end result was that China found
another source and the U.S lost 1/4 of their sales to some country in S.America.
.
But how long
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program
to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
I suspect the goal is to get the tariffs applied by the other
countries removed or decreased.
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
What unfair tactics?
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
On 4/5/2025 7:26 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:58:36 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also >>>>>>>>>> elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even >>>>>>>>>> though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>>>>>> It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>>>>> that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an >>>>>>> import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in >>>>>> the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >>>>>> imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
Presumably, it only needs to be cheaper than the cost of the foreign
stuff after tariffs are applied...
The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and then the
other side applies a tariff.and at the same time the side with the
most to lose is looking for other sources.
In the U.S. China soybean battle the end result was that China found
another source and the U.S lost 1/4 of their sales to some country in
S.America.
.
But how long
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program >>>> to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
I suspect the goal is to get the tariffs applied by the other
countries removed or decreased.
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
What unfair tactics?
" The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and
then the other side applies a tariff.and at the same time
the side with the most to lose is looking for other sources."
Yes, that's right about usual patterns.
In this instance, Israel reduced duty on US goods to zero
within hours. Vietnam followed with deep rate cuts as have
others. And it's only been a few days so far.
I get the principles and history and reasoning overall, but
some of this looks just batshit crazy* to me. But I'm an
outside observer with limited information. I'll reserve
final judgement as the pieces on this board are all in
motion yet.
*Targeted protection for favored players (auto assembly)
will turn out just like Mao's backyard scrap steel kilns in
1958. Really ugly.
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas
tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property
taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and
ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed
that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the
first $13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt
from Capital Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax
percentage, and thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay
a pittance in property tax, including on inherited property
prior to December 16, 2020 (when Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of
property they inherit (or they pay the current assessed
value, whichever is greater). Since Tom's property is worth
less than $1 million, the property tax rate of any heirs
would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the
country, which is why so many wealthy people establish
residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in
nearby San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For
any large purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my
city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his
accountant was either incompetent or was stealing from him.
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:35:17 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 4:43 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:19:45 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 00:08:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you >>>>>>> don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during >>>>>>> Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that >>>>>>>> the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of >>>>>>> developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those. >>>>>>>
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income- >>>>>>> and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was >>>>>>> founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it >>>>>>> over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, >>>>>>> as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at >>>>>>> prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward >>>>>>> keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel. >>>>>>> Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per >>>>>>> year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part >>>>>>> because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for >>>>>>> little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social >>>>>>> Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more >>>>>>> important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why >>>>>>> should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings, >>>>>> ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of those >>>>>> receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief, >>>>>> much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia, >>>>> Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad >>>>> as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth. >>>>>
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but >>>>>> almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures >>>>> favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money. >>>>> Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you somehow >>>>> forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal >>>>> shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't think >>>>> it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young >>>>> white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19 >>>>>> countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing >>>>> black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I was >>>>> comparing those groups in 1776.
The Leftists racism nonsense is not working any more as more and more
non-white people walk away from the Democrat Party. Perhaps they
should stop using it.
'Re Frank's post above... in early America George Washington, a 3rd
generation slave owner, assumed ownership of his first 10 slaves when
he was 11 years old. At his death there were 317 slaves at Mount
Vernon.
True although most were acquired at his marriage.
Odd though that people do harp on him, and on Thomas
Jefferson as well, while exempting John Adams and Benjamin
Franklin from that line of conversation.
And the same people have no time or attention for today's
open slave markets across the Gulf region, into Sudan and
now, with the sudden absence of French special forces,
across the Sahel as the jihadis take over.
Not to mention massive scale vivisection of political
prisoners by the CCP for their international organ selling
programs. Oh no, not at all important when bashing Mr
Washington is so entertaining.
It is difficult to understand how telling the truth is "bashing". Or
has the truth become a sin in modern America?
As Winston Churchill (and others ) said, “Those that fail to learn
from history are doomed to repeat it.”
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus
salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the first $13.61
million in value of an inheritance is exempt from Capital Gains taxes,
thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax percentage, and
thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay a pittance in property
tax, including on inherited property prior to December 16, 2020 (when
Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of property
they inherit (or they pay the current assessed value, whichever is
greater). Since Tom's property is worth less than $1 million, the
property tax rate of any heirs would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the country,
which is why so many wealthy people establish residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in nearby San
Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For any large purchases he
should go to San Francisco. In my city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his accountant was
either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of sales tax and
property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem to prefer it
that way.
On 4/5/2025 7:26 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:58:36 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms >>>>>>>>>>>> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also >>>>>>>>>> elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even >>>>>>>>>> though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force. >>>>>>>>> It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>>>>> that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an >>>>>>> import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in >>>>>> the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >>>>>> imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the
tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
Presumably, it only needs to be cheaper than the cost of the foreign
stuff after tariffs are applied...
The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and then the
other side applies a tariff.and at the same time the side with the
most to lose is looking for other sources.
In the U.S. China soybean battle the end result was that China found
another source and the U.S lost 1/4 of their sales to some country in
S.America.
.
But how long
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace the
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program >>>> to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S."
I suspect the goal is to get the tariffs applied by the other
countries removed or decreased.
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
What unfair tactics?
" The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and
then the other side applies a tariff.and at the same time
the side with the most to lose is looking for other sources."
Yes, that's right about usual patterns.
In this instance, Israel reduced duty on US goods to zero
within hours. Vietnam followed with deep rate cuts as have
others. And it's only been a few days so far.
I get the principles and history and reasoning overall, but
some of this looks just batshit crazy* to me. But I'm an
outside observer with limited information. I'll reserve
final judgement as the pieces on this board are all in
motion yet.
*Targeted protection for favored players (auto assembly)
will turn out just like Mao's backyard scrap steel kilns in
1958. Really ugly.
On 4/5/2025 9:00 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Good point.
Or in my employee's easily remembered rhyme:
Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
Taxation is theft.
Inflation is, too.
Can your employee point to a method for running a
civilization without taxation? Does he have an example? Or
an example of a prospering society with no inflation?
I can't think of any offhand.
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 7:26 AM, John B. wrote:Thats rather cherry picking! China has hit back hard, and number of other >countries or blocks such as the EU are highly likely to respond in kind.
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 16:58:36 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 05:43:25 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 15:45:48 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:03:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:52:01 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 13:18:19 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:00:21 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Trust, but verify.On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 09:16:05 -0700, sms >>>>>>>>>>>>> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while decreasing them
on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so Reaganesque with the fraud of
"Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be disastrous since a
new bike, a new phone, or even a new car, is not generally a required
purchase, and consumers will be unwilling to pay much more. So companies
like Trek will likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more business as
consumers spend more to keep their existing vehicle working. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just have to pay
more for the same items or switch to lower-cost items. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Much of the food we USAians eat is produced in the USA, so it won't be
affected by tariffs. The current high grocery prices are a product of
the inflation that happened over the last four years.
--
"when will they ever learn?"
--Pete Seeger
The tariffs imposed during Mr Trump's first term, which also >>>>>>>>>>> elicited dramatic tales of future horrors, were not
rescinded by the Obama-Biden team over four long years, even >>>>>>>>>>> though that is well within Presidential powers. Not one.
We USAians are a huge block of consumers and that's a powerful force.
It's a shame not to use that power for our benefit, and tariffs do >>>>>>>>>> that.
Vegetable Imported From Total Market Value (USD)
Bell Peppers Mexico $1.4 billion
Cucumbers Mexico $607 million
Cauliflower,
Broccoli Mexico $301 million
Asparagus Mexico $386 million
Now add 30 or so % import duty :-(
It seems to me that we can grow that stuff here in the USA, and an >>>>>>>> import tariff might be the way to do it.
Sure you can grow stuff in the U.S. just as you can build bicycles in >>>>>>> the U.S., or, autos, or computers or any of the other things that are >>>>>>> imported. So why don't they?
Well, obviously, because the foreign stuff is cheaper. Perhaps the >>>>>> tariffs will change that.
Well, if the U.S. can manufacture cheaply it will work.
Presumably, it only needs to be cheaper than the cost of the foreign
stuff after tariffs are applied...
The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and then the
other side applies a tariff.and at the same time the side with the
most to lose is looking for other sources.
In the U.S. China soybean battle the end result was that China found
another source and the U.S lost 1/4 of their sales to some country in
S.America.
.
But how long
will you have to go without before U.S. production can replace theI suspect the goal is to get the tariffs applied by the other
foreign suppliers. In that respect some years ago there was a program >>>>> to repair or rebuild some of the bays bridges in California. I read
the article and they were excusing the use of steel from China as
"steel of this specification and size is not manufactured in the U.S." >>>>
countries removed or decreased.
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
What unfair tactics?
" The usual practice is first one side applies a tariff and
then the other side applies a tariff.and at the same time
the side with the most to lose is looking for other sources."
Yes, that's right about usual patterns.
In this instance, Israel reduced duty on US goods to zero
within hours. Vietnam followed with deep rate cuts as have
others. And it's only been a few days so far.
And would seem generally moves away from the US economy ie choose non >American suppliers and so on, or investment.
Predictions are as ever difficult but this isnt going to end well for the
US economy or its people. Brexit wasnt great for UK economy but its small >beer compared to this!
I get the principles and history and reasoning overall, but
some of this looks just batshit crazy* to me. But I'm an
outside observer with limited information. I'll reserve
final judgement as the pieces on this board are all in
motion yet.
*Targeted protection for favored players (auto assembly)
will turn out just like Mao's backyard scrap steel kilns in
1958. Really ugly.
Roger Merriman
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if
you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear
during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such
that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/
income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it >>>>> over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone
(well, as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal >>>>> shot at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented,
work toward keeping the masses content enough that they don't
literally rebel. Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for
bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions
per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in
part because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes
are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of
Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is
much more important than better food for the family making $50,000
per year. Why should the ultra- rich help to keep Social Security
afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of
those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on
relief, much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia,
Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth
but almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures
favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you
somehow forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not
get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't
think it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a
young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing
black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I
was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered disadvantages
compared to white Americans? That is absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage in, garbage
out. By utterly ignoring our lavish transfer/benefits systems, the
appearance of poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to ask what is
counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a shortersimpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting." So we should >ignore the countless American and world-wide economic institutions which
all accept recognized standards for inequality measurements, and rank >America's GINI index as being worse than all similar modern nations.
Instead we should pay attention to the outlier, the hyper-libertarian
Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians, being as dark or
darker than US citizens grouped as black, do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various
sub-cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by various >measurements than average white Americans. IIRC, white Jewish Americans
do better, on average, than other whites. That does not mean that racism >against American blacks is gone, and that blacks don't suffer from its >current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers and later my
black students getting mocked behind their backs or to their faces. I >remember our two neighbors proudly going off to hear Lester Maddox
speak, telling us "He's going to put those niggers back in their place."
I can't believe those attitudes didn't lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought his first
house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I did the same many years >later. Buying a home and having its value appreciate, as they generally
do, was an important contributor toward increasing family wealth. But
after WW2, black servicemen had much more trouble taking advantage of
the GI Bill. That put a great damper on black family's equity growth,
and the historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often notes, "Hard
work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good education, >access to capital, etc. and if you're not rejected for a job by being
the wrong color.
On 4/5/2025 10:11 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas
tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property
taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001
and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed
that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the
first $13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt
from Capital Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis
rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax
percentage, and thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners
pay a pittance in property tax, including on inherited
property prior to December 16, 2020 (when Prop 19 took
effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value
of property they inherit (or they pay the current
assessed value, whichever is greater). Since Tom's
property is worth less than $1 million, the property tax
rate of any heirs would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the
country, which is why so many wealthy people establish
residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but
in nearby San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower.
For any large purchases he should go to San Francisco. In
my city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his
accountant was either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and
simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of
sales tax and property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem
to prefer it that way.
Illinois is a high tax state and everyone is trying to get
out who happen to be conservatives. The nuts running this
state all are against anything that might be helpful that
Trump is doing. Out property taxes are the 2nd highest in
the nation.
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your
own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones!
Wasn't that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly
half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-
income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM
our nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake
in millions per year and pay lower rates than
struggling middle Americans, in part because of clever
deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's
third mega- mansion is much more important than better
food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why should
the ultra- rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax'
payments and in fact dos very well on relief, much
better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S.
is higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France,
Austria, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania,
Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South
Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current
laws and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially
the very wealthy. That includes corporations, for which
it's not that unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes.
Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't
too dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery
existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with
anecdotes about modern black guys who have gotten rich.
But surely even you don't think it's as likely for a
young black guy to succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I
was comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in
my original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered
disadvantages compared to white Americans? That is
absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of
'garbage in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty
greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well
to ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here'sa shorter
simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting."
So we should ignore the countless American and world-wide
economic institutions which all accept recognized standards
for inequality measurements, and rank America's GINI index
as being worse than all similar modern nations. Instead we
should pay attention to the outlier, the hyper-libertarian
Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various
sub-cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by
various measurements than average white Americans. IIRC,
white Jewish Americans do better, on average, than other
whites. That does not mean that racism against American
blacks is gone, and that blacks don't suffer from its
current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers and
later my black students getting mocked behind their backs or
to their faces. I remember our two neighbors proudly going
off to hear Lester Maddox speak, telling us "He's going to
put those niggers back in their place." I can't believe
those attitudes didn't lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought
his first house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I
did the same many years later. Buying a home and having its
value appreciate, as they generally do, was an important
contributor toward increasing family wealth. But after WW2,
black servicemen had much more trouble taking advantage of
the GI Bill. That put a great damper on black family's
equity growth, and the historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots
often notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not
rejected for a job by being the wrong color.
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your
own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones!
Wasn't that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly
half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-
income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM
our nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake
in millions per year and pay lower rates than
struggling middle Americans, in part because of clever
deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's
third mega- mansion is much more important than better
food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why should
the ultra- rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax'
payments and in fact dos very well on relief, much
better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S.
is higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France,
Austria, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania,
Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South
Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current
laws and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially
the very wealthy. That includes corporations, for which
it's not that unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes.
Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't
too dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery
existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with
anecdotes about modern black guys who have gotten rich.
But surely even you don't think it's as likely for a
young black guy to succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I
was comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in
my original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered
disadvantages compared to white Americans? That is
absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of
'garbage in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty
greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well
to ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here'sa shorter
simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting."
So we should ignore the countless American and world-wide
economic institutions which all accept recognized standards
for inequality measurements, and rank America's GINI index
as being worse than all similar modern nations. Instead we
should pay attention to the outlier, the hyper-libertarian
Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various
sub-cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by
various measurements than average white Americans. IIRC,
white Jewish Americans do better, on average, than other
whites. That does not mean that racism against American
blacks is gone, and that blacks don't suffer from its
current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers and
later my black students getting mocked behind their backs or
to their faces. I remember our two neighbors proudly going
off to hear Lester Maddox speak, telling us "He's going to
put those niggers back in their place." I can't believe
those attitudes didn't lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought
his first house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I
did the same many years later. Buying a home and having its
value appreciate, as they generally do, was an important
contributor toward increasing family wealth. But after WW2,
black servicemen had much more trouble taking advantage of
the GI Bill. That put a great damper on black family's
equity growth, and the historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots
often notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not
rejected for a job by being the wrong color.
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half
of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling
middle Americans, in part because of clever deductions.
Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third
mega- mansion is much more important than better food for
the family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-
rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria,
Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc.
etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico,
Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws
and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too
dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back
then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely
even you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to
succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my
original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage
in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty greatly
exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to
ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a
shorter simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,--
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here? And Nigerians are not unique (I was made
aware of their success by a Nigerian immigrant engineer of
my acquaintance) with above average incomes for legal
immigrant Ghanians, Jamaicans and others, most voluminously
Indians.
They all live in the same world as you, finding employment,
housing and so on with all the myriad daily interactions as
you while 'swimming in the same pool' as it were. If
there's 'structural racism' the outcomes don't show it.
Then again I mentioned recently that I was in North Lawndale
(Chicago) regularly some years ago. The guys on the corner
drinking cheap liquor from a bagged pint while shooing dice
and generally killing time claimed 'the man' kept them down.
They actually believed that.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:20:15 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half
of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling
middle Americans, in part because of clever deductions.
Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third
mega- mansion is much more important than better food for
the family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-
rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria,
Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc.
etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico,
Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws
and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too
dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back
then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely
even you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to
succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my
original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage
in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty greatly
exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to
ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a
shorter simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
Cato? Seriously?
That's a far right pro tax exemption (only for billionaires) think
tank....
LOL
PS It's non profit because the bribes it receives are distributed
equally between its "reporters". They call it "expenses".
[]'s
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here? And Nigerians are not unique (I was made
aware of their success by a Nigerian immigrant engineer of
my acquaintance) with above average incomes for legal
immigrant Ghanians, Jamaicans and others, most voluminously
Indians.
They all live in the same world as you, finding employment,
housing and so on with all the myriad daily interactions as
you while 'swimming in the same pool' as it were. If
there's 'structural racism' the outcomes don't show it.
Then again I mentioned recently that I was in North Lawndale
(Chicago) regularly some years ago. The guys on the corner
drinking cheap liquor from a bagged pint while shooing dice
and generally killing time claimed 'the man' kept them down.
They actually believed that.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
On 4/5/2025 2:16 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:20:15 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half
of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling
middle Americans, in part because of clever deductions.
Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third
mega- mansion is much more important than better food for
the family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-
rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria,
Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc.
etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico,
Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws
and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too
dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back
then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely
even you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to
succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my
original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage
in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty greatly
exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to
ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a
shorter simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
Cato? Seriously?
That's a far right pro tax exemption (only for billionaires) think
tank....
LOL
PS It's non profit because the bribes it receives are distributed
equally between its "reporters". They call it "expenses".
[]'s
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here? And Nigerians are not unique (I was made
aware of their success by a Nigerian immigrant engineer of
my acquaintance) with above average incomes for legal
immigrant Ghanians, Jamaicans and others, most voluminously
Indians.
They all live in the same world as you, finding employment,
housing and so on with all the myriad daily interactions as
you while 'swimming in the same pool' as it were. If
there's 'structural racism' the outcomes don't show it.
Then again I mentioned recently that I was in North Lawndale
(Chicago) regularly some years ago. The guys on the corner
drinking cheap liquor from a bagged pint while shooing dice
and generally killing time claimed 'the man' kept them down.
They actually believed that.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
I have proudly supported and contributed to Cato Institute
for over 30 years. Aside from their newish web presence they
are a major publisher as well, which is how I first metthem:
https://www.cato.org/search/category/books
On 4/5/2025 3:12 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:38:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Good riddance.
+1
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Most USAians have absolutely no idea how difficult, frustrating,
lengthy, uncertain and expensive a process legal immigration has become.
That said, it does seem to filter for great citizens. As evidenced.
On Fri Apr 4 11:26:12 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, floriduh dumbass
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
On 4/5/2025 10:11 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus
salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was >>>> no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the first
$13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt from Capital
Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax percentage, and
thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay a pittance in property
tax, including on inherited property prior to December 16, 2020 (when
Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of property
they inherit (or they pay the current assessed value, whichever is
greater). Since Tom's property is worth less than $1 million, the
property tax rate of any heirs would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the country,
which is why so many wealthy people establish residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in nearby
San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For any large
purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his accountant was
either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of sales tax and
property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem to prefer
it that way.
Illinois is a high tax state and everyone is trying to get out who
happen to be conservatives. The nuts running this state all are against anything that might be helpful that Trump is doing. Out property taxes
are the 2nd highest in the nation.
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if
you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear
during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such >>>>>>> that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most- income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity
of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those. >>>>>>
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/
income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation
was founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class
lording it over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of
everyone (well, as long as their complexion wasn't too dark)
getting an equal shot at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, >>>>>> if implemented, work toward keeping the masses content enough that >>>>>> they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are messy, unpredictable,
and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions
per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in
part because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes >>>>>> are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of
Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is
much more important than better food for the family making $50,000 >>>>>> per year. Why should the ultra- rich help to keep Social Security
afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of
those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on
relief, much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher
(worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia,
Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as
bad as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a
myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth
but almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax
structures favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That
includes corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next
to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons
of money. Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone
should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you
somehow forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not
get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about
modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't
think it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a
young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my original
statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered disadvantages
compared to white Americans? That is absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage in,
garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish transfer/benefits
systems, the appearance of poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to ask what
is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a shortersimpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting." So we
should ignore the countless American and world-wide economic
institutions which all accept recognized standards for inequality
measurements, and rank America's GINI index as being worse than all
similar modern nations. Instead we should pay attention to the
outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians, being as dark
or darker than US citizens grouped as black, do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various sub-
cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by various
measurements than average white Americans. IIRC, white Jewish
Americans do better, on average, than other whites. That does not mean
that racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks don't
suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers and later my
black students getting mocked behind their backs or to their faces. I
remember our two neighbors proudly going off to hear Lester Maddox
speak, telling us "He's going to put those niggers back in their
place." I can't believe those attitudes didn't lead to disadvantages
for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought his first
house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I did the same many
years later. Buying a home and having its value appreciate, as they
generally do, was an important contributor toward increasing family
wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much more trouble taking
advantage of the GI Bill. That put a great damper on black family's
equity growth, and the historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often notes,
"Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not rejected for a
job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at separate water
fountains. We're roughly of the same age so I know what you meant.
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you
don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during
Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such that
the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of
developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world
countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income-
and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was
founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it
over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward
keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per
year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part
because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more
important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings,
ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief,
much better than many working people.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self made including an astonishingly
large number of legal immigrants especially Indian, other Asian and
notably Nigerians:
https://africanmind.org/statistical-portrait-of-nigerian-americans- accomplishments-paradoxes-and-misconceptions/
who seem to have learned to stay out of Poland Ohio and so do quite well here.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
https://www.britannica.com/money/Herman-Cain
https://www.the-sun.com/news/4916213/willie-wilson-how-became-millionaire/
Mr Wilson literally plowed fields behind a mule before taking his
talents elsewhere.
Some black one-percenters (not the motorcycle type one percenters):
https://247wallst.com/income/2024/08/08/meet-the-wealthiest-black-
americans/
Back to our mere millionaires:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihale/2022/10/25/millionaire-status-is- on-the-rise-with-52-million-people-joining-the-club/
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19
countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
On 4/5/2025 9:37 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:35:17 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 4:43 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:19:45 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 00:08:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" >>>>>>>> if you
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts. >>>>>>>>
don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during >>>>>>>> Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth,
such that
the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of >>>>>>>> developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world >>>>>>>> countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those. >>>>>>>>
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/ >>>>>>>> income-
and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was >>>>>>>> founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class
lording it
over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone >>>>>>>> (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal
shot at
prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work >>>>>>>> toward
keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel. >>>>>>>> Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per
year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part >>>>>>>> because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes
are for
little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of >>>>>>>> Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much >>>>>>>> more
important than better food for the family making $50,000 per
year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings, >>>>>>> ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of >>>>>>> those
receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief, >>>>>>> much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher >>>>>> (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia, >>>>>> Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as >>>>>> bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth. >>>>>>
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited
wealth but
almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures >>>>>> favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero
federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of
money.
Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone >>>>>> should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you
somehow
forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an >>>>>> equal
shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about >>>>>> modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't
think
it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young >>>>>> white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19 >>>>>>> countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing
black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement,
I was
comparing those groups in 1776.
The Leftists racism nonsense is not working any more as more and more >>>>> non-white people walk away from the Democrat Party. Perhaps they
should stop using it.
'Re Frank's post above... in early America George Washington, a 3rd
generation slave owner, assumed ownership of his first 10 slaves when >>>> he was 11 years old. At his death there were 317 slaves at Mount
Vernon.
True although most were acquired at his marriage.
Odd though that people do harp on him, and on Thomas
Jefferson as well, while exempting John Adams and Benjamin
Franklin from that line of conversation.
And the same people have no time or attention for today's
open slave markets across the Gulf region, into Sudan and
now, with the sudden absence of French special forces,
across the Sahel as the jihadis take over.
Not to mention massive scale vivisection of political
prisoners by the CCP for their international organ selling
programs. Oh no, not at all important when bashing Mr
Washington is so entertaining.
It is difficult to understand how telling the truth is "bashing". Or
has the truth become a sin in modern America?
As Winston Churchill (and others ) said, “Those that fail to learn
from history are doomed to repeat it.”
It's true. We all have read multiple contemporary accounts. No
reasonable person doubts that truth.
When incessant harping on that, with no mention of his other actions
over a long life (and not all exemplary, for example that French and
Indian War incident) it may well be called bashing. YVVM.
Similarly my criticism of the modern education racket is that young
people can recount all of our country's sins, which were real, but none
of the good we have done.
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:16:40 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:37 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:35:17 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 4:43 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 04:19:45 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 00:08:53 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" if you >>>>>>>>> don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during >>>>>>>>> Trump version 1?
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts. >>>>>>>>>
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, such thatThe USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity of >>>>>>>>> developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd world >>>>>>>>> countries - but I think we should not be striving to emulate those. >>>>>>>>>
the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/ >>>>>>>>>
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/income- >>>>>>>>> and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation was >>>>>>>>> founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class lording it >>>>>>>>> over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well,
as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot at >>>>>>>>> prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward >>>>>>>>> keeping the masses content enough that they don't literally rebel. >>>>>>>>> Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops. >>>>>>>>>
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in millions per >>>>>>>>> year and pay lower rates than struggling middle Americans, in part >>>>>>>>> because of clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for >>>>>>>>> little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of Social
Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more >>>>>>>>> important than better food for the family making $50,000 per year. Why
should the ultra-rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable earnings, >>>>>>>> ignoring that fully half the country pays no income tax. Many of those
receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief, >>>>>>>> much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher >>>>>>> (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, Australia, >>>>>>> Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad >>>>>>> as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth. >>>>>>>
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited wealth but
almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited >>>>>>> wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax structures >>>>>>> favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That includes >>>>>>> corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next to zero >>>>>>> federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with tons of money. >>>>>>> Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone >>>>>>> should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you somehow >>>>>>> forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal
shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about >>>>>>> modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't think >>>>>>> it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young >>>>>>> white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top 19 >>>>>>>> countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was comparing >>>>>>> black Americans to white Americans. And in my original statement, I was >>>>>>> comparing those groups in 1776.
The Leftists racism nonsense is not working any more as more and more >>>>>> non-white people walk away from the Democrat Party. Perhaps they
should stop using it.
'Re Frank's post above... in early America George Washington, a 3rd >>>>> generation slave owner, assumed ownership of his first 10 slaves when >>>>> he was 11 years old. At his death there were 317 slaves at Mount
Vernon.
True although most were acquired at his marriage.
Odd though that people do harp on him, and on Thomas
Jefferson as well, while exempting John Adams and Benjamin
Franklin from that line of conversation.
And the same people have no time or attention for today's
open slave markets across the Gulf region, into Sudan and
now, with the sudden absence of French special forces,
across the Sahel as the jihadis take over.
Not to mention massive scale vivisection of political
prisoners by the CCP for their international organ selling
programs. Oh no, not at all important when bashing Mr
Washington is so entertaining.
It is difficult to understand how telling the truth is "bashing". Or
has the truth become a sin in modern America?
As Winston Churchill (and others ) said, “Those that fail to learn
from history are doomed to repeat it.”
It's true. We all have read multiple contemporary accounts.
No reasonable person doubts that truth.
When incessant harping on that, with no mention of his other
actions over a long life (and not all exemplary, for example
that French and Indian War incident) it may well be called
bashing. YVVM.
Similarly my criticism of the modern education racket is
that young people can recount all of our country's sins,
which were real, but none of the good we have done.
Not to start another helmet or gun fight but the bad things stick
right out in front of "God and Everyone" - long series of "wars" to
deprive the original owners of their land for example, what are the
"good things"?
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 15:54:01 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/5/2025 2:16 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 08:20:15 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative
facts" if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't
that made clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half
of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as
many small 3rd world countries - but I think we should
not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a
privileged class lording it over those purportedly of
less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as long as
their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an equal shot
at prosperity. If nothing else, those ideas, if
implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are
messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling
middle Americans, in part because of clever deductions.
Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is
free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third
mega- mansion is much more important than better food for
the family making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra-
rich help to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no
income tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments
and in fact dos very well on relief, much better than many
working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria,
Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc.
etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico,
Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are self
made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws
and tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too
dark. Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back
then? Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely
even you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to
succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than
the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my
original statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage
in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish
transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of poverty greatly
exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to
ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a
shorter simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
Cato? Seriously?
That's a far right pro tax exemption (only for billionaires) think
tank....
LOL
PS It's non profit because the bribes it receives are distributed
equally between its "reporters". They call it "expenses".
[]'s
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black,
do so well here? And Nigerians are not unique (I was made
aware of their success by a Nigerian immigrant engineer of
my acquaintance) with above average incomes for legal
immigrant Ghanians, Jamaicans and others, most voluminously
Indians.
They all live in the same world as you, finding employment,
housing and so on with all the myriad daily interactions as
you while 'swimming in the same pool' as it were. If
there's 'structural racism' the outcomes don't show it.
Then again I mentioned recently that I was in North Lawndale
(Chicago) regularly some years ago. The guys on the corner
drinking cheap liquor from a bagged pint while shooing dice
and generally killing time claimed 'the man' kept them down.
They actually believed that.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
I have proudly supported and contributed to Cato Institute
for over 30 years. Aside from their newish web presence they
are a major publisher as well, which is how I first metthem:
https://www.cato.org/search/category/books
Sorry, I mistook it for this:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute>
In 2024 they had a 71 million dollar budget . 124 employees.
Nice salaries.
<Cato Institute Awards 2025 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing
Liberty to Charles Koch>
There's a word for that. Not Nepotism. In Portuguese it would
be "puxasaquismo".
[]'s
[]'s
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, floriduh dumbass
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed
years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US
government stood
by and watched it happen.
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
On 4/5/2025 9:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 3:12 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:38:04 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably
not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I
expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Good riddance.
+1
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Most USAians have absolutely no idea how difficult,
frustrating, lengthy, uncertain and expensive a process
legal immigration has become.
That said, it does seem to filter for great citizens. As
evidenced.
Great, then lets constitutionally mandate that all people
over 18 living in the US goes through the process.
Question 1: Are Haitian immigrants were stealing and
eating pets in Springfield, Ohio?
If the answer is anything but an adamant and equivocal "NO",
you get deported. That should clear out an appreciable
portion of the left side of the bell curve.
On 4/5/2025 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your
own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have
"alternative facts" if you don't like the look of
normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during Trump
version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly
half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-
income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and
wealth disparity of developed nations. Granted, not
as bad as many small 3rd world countries - but I
think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-
justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM
our nation was founded on the idea of doing away with
a privileged class lording it over those purportedly
of less worth. Also the idea of everyone (well, as
long as their complexion wasn't too dark) getting an
equal shot at prosperity. If nothing else, those
ideas, if implemented, work toward keeping the masses
content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike
shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake
in millions per year and pay lower rates than
struggling middle Americans, in part because of
clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes
are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year
is free of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's
third mega- mansion is much more important than
better food for the family making $50,000 per year.
Why should the ultra- rich help to keep Social
Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only
taxable earnings, ignoring that fully half the country
pays no income tax. Many of those receive 'negative
tax' payments and in fact dos very well on relief,
much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the
U.S. is higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France,
Austria, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania,
Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad as South
Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but it's hardly a
myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are
self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current
laws and tax structures favor the wealthy and
especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay
next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are available
to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little people"
have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was
that everyone should get an equal shot if their skin
wasn't too dark. Did you somehow forget that black
slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an equal
shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with
anecdotes about modern black guys who have gotten rich.
But surely even you don't think it's as likely for a
young black guy to succeed as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA
than the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans.
I was comparing black Americans to white Americans. And
in my original statement, I was comparing those groups
in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered
disadvantages compared to white Americans? That is
absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of
'garbage in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our
lavish transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of
poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well
to ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link,here's a shorter
simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is
counting." So we should ignore the countless American and
world-wide economic institutions which all accept
recognized standards for inequality measurements, and
rank America's GINI index as being worse than all similar
modern nations. Instead we should pay attention to the
outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians,
being as dark or darker than US citizens grouped as
black, do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among
various sub- cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do
better here by various measurements than average white
Americans. IIRC, white Jewish Americans do better, on
average, than other whites. That does not mean that
racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks
don't suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers
and later my black students getting mocked behind their
backs or to their faces. I remember our two neighbors
proudly going off to hear Lester Maddox speak, telling us
"He's going to put those niggers back in their place." I
can't believe those attitudes didn't lead to
disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father
bought his first house with help from the GI Bill. My
wife and I did the same many years later. Buying a home
and having its value appreciate, as they generally do,
was an important contributor toward increasing family
wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much more
trouble taking advantage of the GI Bill. That put a great
damper on black family's equity growth, and the historic
effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots
often notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections,
good education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not
rejected for a job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at separate
water fountains. We're roughly of the same age so I know
what you meant.
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-supremacist-violence
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
On 4/6/2025 6:24 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 3:12 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 21:38:04 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 3:55 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Are there illegals in agricultural work? Probably yes.
Are they of a significant or critical number? Probably
not.
That said, there are probably ag operations dependent on
tax cheating for their survival. I for one will not cry
when their operations are closed, illegals deported, and
the principals pursued, tried and convicted.
"When"? How naively optimistic! :-)
Some such operations may face legal challenges. But I
expect
the brunt of the enforcement will fall on their employees.
Good riddance.
+1
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Most USAians have absolutely no idea how difficult,
frustrating, lengthy, uncertain and expensive a process
legal immigration has become.
That said, it does seem to filter for great citizens. As
evidenced.
Great, then lets constitutionally mandate that all people
over 18 living in the US goes through the process.
Question 1: Are Haitian immigrants were stealing and
eating pets in Springfield, Ohio?
If the answer is anything but an adamant and equivocal "NO",
you get deported. That should clear out an appreciable
portion of the left side of the bell curve.
On a more serious note, there are advocates for passing the
immigrant citizen tests before voter registration. On one
side, I think that would be great in concept but on the
other, I doubt many of my fellow voters could pass even with
some study effort.
I've made a habit over the years of giving people copies of
our Constitution:
https://store.cato.org/products/pocket-constitution-10-pack
I estimate about one in ten actually read it, even
partially. The amazing parts are the conversations
afterwards, "I had no idea!".
On 4/6/2025 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
As I recall, Jefferson envisioned an America comprised
On a more serious note, there are advocates for passing
the immigrant citizen tests before voter registration. On
one side, I think that would be great in concept but on
the other, I doubt many of my fellow voters could pass
even with some study effort.
largely of educated farmers; and given the period's
treatment of women and blacks, I highly doubt he would have
wanted _everyone_ to be allowed to vote. In that context,
ISTM he might have accepted the idea of first passing a test.
But tests for voting have a very bad history in the U.S.
On 4/6/2025 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
As I recall, Jefferson envisioned an America comprised largely of
On a more serious note, there are advocates for passing the immigrant
citizen tests before voter registration. On one side, I think that
would be great in concept but on the other, I doubt many of my fellow
voters could pass even with some study effort.
educated farmers; and given the period's treatment of women and blacks,
I highly doubt he would have wanted _everyone_ to be allowed to vote. In
that context, ISTM he might have accepted the idea of first passing a test.
But tests for voting have a very bad history in the U.S.
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly >inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that >attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
Tell us all what you're worth?
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity. And many many other very rich peoplegive huge amounts of money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were the benefactors of this largess until they grew so far left wing that they were attacking the very people funding them.
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
"Estate tax is paid by the estate on its net value, while inheritance
tax is paid by beneficiaries on what they receive, with estate taxes
going to the [federal] government and inheritance taxes to state
governments."
"Only six states currently impose inheritance taxes: Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania."
<https://www.actec.org/resources-for-wealth-planning-professionals/state-death-tax-chart/>
"Tax is tied to federal state death tax credit. CA REV & TAX ??
13302; 13411.
State Type of Tax: None.
2025 State Death Tax Threshold: None
and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor. >>Tom, you claimed to have millions in investments. Why are you still
living in California?
03/05/2025
<https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=121640&group=rec.bicycles.tech#121640>
"I GAVE $60,000 to my brothers... In order to protect my investments
from any possible recession I have moved from growth stocks into fuds
like Govertrnment bonds which pay low interest rates rather than
growth. And I still have increased my investments to over $1.1
Million."
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
On Sun Apr 6 07:29:37 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:38 AM, Mark J cleary wrote:
On 4/5/2025 10:11 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus >>>>>>> salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in >>>>>> 2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was >>>>>> no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the first
$13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt from Capital
Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax percentage, and >>>>> thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay a pittance in property
tax, including on inherited property prior to December 16, 2020 (when >>>>> Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of property >>>>> they inherit (or they pay the current assessed value, whichever is
greater). Since Tom's property is worth less than $1 million, the
property tax rate of any heirs would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the country,
which is why so many wealthy people establish residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in nearby
San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For any large
purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his accountant was
either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and simple ratio: >>>>
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of sales tax and
property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem to prefer
it that way.
Illinois is a high tax state and everyone is trying to get out who
happen to be conservatives. The nuts running this state all are against
anything that might be helpful that Trump is doing. Out property taxes
are the 2nd highest in the nation.
<trying to think of anything helpful trump is doing........>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Wi8Fv0AJA4
Only you could think that at least three trillion dollars in savings per year isn't helpful in a time when we couldn't even pay the interest of the Biden national debt.
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest in tax experts and
lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax percentage rates in the
90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite prosperous. Middle
class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no multibillionaires, but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple elderly widows I've met
who are both trying to scrape by only on Social Security. Don't worry,
Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts of money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were the benefactors of this largess until they grew so far left wing that they were attacking the very people funding them.
On Sun Apr 6 12:44:39 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:07 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was >>>> no estate tax.
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
:-) This is hilarious.
As usual for Kunich, the site he can't access works for me.
This "internet" thing absolutely baffles Tom! :-)
Then why does it say: "Welcome to the State Controller's Website - The Page you requested was not found" followed by a list of pages under the State Controller's website, NONE of which pertain to the matter in question? Is that what you call "working"?
On Sat Apr 5 08:41:35 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/4/2025 7:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 14:52:25 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:59 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:26:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
So what is your income tax rate? Here it's from 0 to 27.5% (0%
for people who don't make enough to eat and pay only purchase tax (60% >>>>> on food) to people that make more than US$ 500, 00 a month and are
considered "rich" employees.
Businessmen, market "players", multinationals and banks are
all tax exempt. We are a right wing country, more or less expected.
Inheritance tax is around 1%, but most millionaires get a judge to
exempt them.
Give me an example. If Musk manages to buy the judges in Texas
and gives himself over 50 billion dollars for a year's "hard" work
breaking Tesla, how much of that will he pay as income tax?
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
USA facts is founded and run by a billionaire(Steve Ballmer)
one of the most notorious tax-evaders in the world. LOL, he probably >>>>> deducts any expenses with his "ORG".
Hardly a "reference" for unbiased tax "facts".
IMHO
[]'s
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I carry no water for Mr Ballmer. I (and others) have linked
many tax reporting sites over the years with the same
numbers as that one.
I also have no animus toward Brasil. Run your own country
any way you like, not my problem. Our tax rates are in
theory zero to 37.5%.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
In practice, relief here, with our "negative income tax"
policies, is the equivalent of up to $62,000 per year* or
well over what many working people make before taxes.
Again, this is not a policy statement either way, just
reporting.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
*for 2022. Higher now of course.
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes. and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor.
As of 2022, California has the highest number of billionairs of any
state in the US, and is #4 per capita.
https://www.madisontrust.com/information-center/visualizations/which-us-states-have-the-most-billionaires/
Please post data to the contrary if you can.
Do you mean those Hollywood actors who have ashes instead of himes? Tom Sellect isn't bragging that he has a lot of money and he doesn't care.
Tell us all what you're worth?
On Sun Apr 6 07:36:52 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:42 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 11:26:12 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Like "there was no recession before obama took office"?
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
"That is not only not right; it is not even wrong"
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Little closet communists don't believe anyone should be rich enough to
qualify for "tax the rich". You keep getting these basic PoliSci
concepts wrong. Perhaps you should stop.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
And tell me you never took any unemployment benefits.
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had money. And then when there was no one else to grow the food and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more than a closet communist under the mantle of socialism attacked them andnearly succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at Stalingrad.
One of these days you will cease making an absolute fool out of yourself. Probably after you die.
On 4/6/2025 6:41 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, floriduh dumbass
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood
by and watched it happen.
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
Well, that is an extremely complex slow moving disaster.
But it was not from any lack of iron ore, coking coal, transport, engineering, markets or capital.
Over to you.
On Sat Apr 5 06:54:11 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Jan Heine of Rene Herse Cycles discusses tariffs in detail:
https://www.renehersecycles.com/bikes-in-the-age-of-tariffs/
The few MTB ones seemed even less positive, particularly if relatively
small and high end ie carbon which is labour intensive.
Not sure certainly in the Bike industry that it needs America? Is SRAM and >> some of the bike companies that started with MTB, but in terms of bikes
made and parts for them?
Case in point our club kit manufacturers just changed suppliers ie no
longer using a US company.
Can?t see this ending well a recession seems inevitable certainly for the
US at least, and unlike last times other countries where allies, so isn?t
much incentive to bargain etc.
Roger, if England didn't charge the US goods a tariff we would not match
it. Perhaos you should learn where to point the finger. I have a club
jersey that is Made in America that is 20 years old and in better
condition than my Made in China jerseys that are a couple of years old.
On 4/6/2025 7:03 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" >>>>>>>> if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts. >>>>>>>>
clear during Trump version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth,
such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all income >>>>>>>>> tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most- income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth disparity >>>>>>>> of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many small 3rd
world countries - but I think we should not be striving to
emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic- justice/ >>>>>>>> income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently
progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our nation >>>>>>>> was founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged class
lording it over those purportedly of less worth. Also the idea >>>>>>>> of everyone (well, as long as their complexion wasn't too dark) >>>>>>>> getting an equal shot at prosperity. If nothing else, those
ideas, if implemented, work toward keeping the masses content
enough that they don't literally rebel. Rebellions are messy,
unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle
Americans, in part because of clever deductions. Remember Leona >>>>>>>> Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free of >>>>>>>> Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- mansion >>>>>>>> is much more important than better food for the family making
$50,000 per year. Why should the ultra- rich help to keep Social >>>>>>>> Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no income
tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact >>>>>>> dos very well on relief, much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is higher >>>>>> (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada,
Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes,
it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but
it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited
wealth but almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to inherited
wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and tax
structures favor the wealthy and especially the very wealthy. That >>>>>> includes corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay next >>>>>> to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are available to those with
tons of money. Helmsley's "little people" have no access to that
trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that everyone >>>>>> should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. Did you
somehow forget that black slavery existed back then? Slaves did
not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes about >>>>>> modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even you don't
think it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed as it is for >>>>>> a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top
19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my original
statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered disadvantages
compared to white Americans? That is absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage in,
garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish transfer/benefits
systems, the appearance of poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to ask
what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a shortersimpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting." So we
should ignore the countless American and world-wide economic
institutions which all accept recognized standards for inequality
measurements, and rank America's GINI index as being worse than all
similar modern nations. Instead we should pay attention to the
outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians, being as
dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black, do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various sub-
cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by various
measurements than average white Americans. IIRC, white Jewish
Americans do better, on average, than other whites. That does not
mean that racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks
don't suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-workers and later
my black students getting mocked behind their backs or to their
faces. I remember our two neighbors proudly going off to hear Lester
Maddox speak, telling us "He's going to put those niggers back in
their place." I can't believe those attitudes didn't lead to
disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought his first
house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I did the same many
years later. Buying a home and having its value appreciate, as they
generally do, was an important contributor toward increasing family
wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much more trouble taking
advantage of the GI Bill. That put a great damper on black family's
equity growth, and the historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often notes,
"Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not rejected for a
job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at separate water
fountains. We're roughly of the same age so I know what you meant.
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-
white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-
s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Right. We're a very large country with every flavor of belief arranged uncomfortably into two gargantuan party structures. But a few pointy
head racists (above) or the antisemite scum in the other party are
equally offset by their opposites. In each party.
https://www.chicagoflipsred.com/
On 4/6/2025 10:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 6:41 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, floriduh dumbass
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US government stood >>>>> by and watched it happen.
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
Well, that is an extremely complex slow moving disaster.
But it was not from any lack of iron ore, coking coal, transport,
engineering, markets or capital.
Over to you.
Again - "it was mostly destroyed years ago by unfair tactics by
dishonest foriegn entities"
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
The steel industry declined because foreign steel was cheaper, no other >reason. Sure, there were a few minor cases of steel dumping into the US >market, but nothing that could have destroyed the industry. It wasn't
because of this margatard narrative of unfair trade practices.
Blame the industries that bought the steel if you wish, no one forced
them to turn away from the US steel industry.
On Sun Apr 6 19:03:58 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Most countries apply some tariffs on most goods, but since tariffs are paid >> by the countries population, it?s normally low as your voters are paying
the tariffs.
You are aware you?re going to paying for the tariffs yes? Particularly with >> your Aliexpress etc parts and what not! And if you really do have money in >> the market that has lost value and is continuing to do so.
As per my last post this isn?t going to end well!
A tariff is to place a finger on the scale. If you can get cheaper
components locally you do so. But the USA has for too long carried little
or no tarriffs. Now we simply match your tariffs. This does NOT mean that China will not still have cheaper parts because they can and will drop tariffs to zero.
You do not have sufficient financial training to understand the
complexity of international trade and I doubt you are any more in it than
to read doomsday headlines written by the Slime Stream Media and to take them seriously.
Tell me what you think that taeffs did to GB? Why would they do any difference here?For instance, it would be far cheaper to ship Rover components here and assemble the final product here and avoid tariffs altog4ether. The only thing it would cost is the inicial outlay which
could be avoided by conjtracting local builders like Chrysler or Chevrolet.
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
"Estate tax is paid by the estate on its net value, while inheritance
tax is paid by beneficiaries on what they receive, with estate taxes
going to the [federal] government and inheritance taxes to state
governments."
"Only six states currently impose inheritance taxes: Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania."
<https://www.actec.org/resources-for-wealth-planning-professionals/state-death-tax-chart/>
"Tax is tied to federal state death tax credit. CA REV & TAX ??
13302; 13411.
State Type of Tax: None.
2025 State Death Tax Threshold: None
and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor. >>Tom, you claimed to have millions in investments. Why are you still
living in California?
03/05/2025
<https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=121640&group=rec.bicycles.tech#121640>
"I GAVE $60,000 to my brothers... In order to protect my investments
from any possible recession I have moved from growth stocks into fuds
like Govertrnment bonds which pay low interest rates rather than
growth. And I still have increased my investments to over $1.1
Million."
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
On Sat Apr 5 10:11:43 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas
tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property
taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and
ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed
that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the
first $13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt
from Capital Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax
percentage, and thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay
a pittance in property tax, including on inherited property
prior to December 16, 2020 (when Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of
property they inherit (or they pay the current assessed
value, whichever is greater). Since Tom's property is worth
less than $1 million, the property tax rate of any heirs
would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the
country, which is why so many wealthy people establish
residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in
nearby San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For
any large purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my
city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his
accountant was either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and
simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of sales
tax and property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem
to prefer it that way.
I would say that the voter do not prefer it that way. We get ZERO services for out taxes and feel powerless to change that because the Democrats though election fraud control everything.PG&E has the highewst energy rates in the nation and yet makesonly about half of the stock profits as other states. This is because the company is taxed almost to bankruptsy by an unelected PPublic Utilities Commision which is nothing more than another source of corrupt taxation.
I'm sure that Liebermann can tell us that they are absolutely wonderful. As he chops wood to try and remain warm in the winter because he cannot afford heating.
On Fri Apr 4 20:08:37 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 6:34 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for
thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression
at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high
and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so
much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced.
Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard
and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and
shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is
the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed
(percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call
them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't
afford it any more...
[]'s
Tax revenue as percent of GDP shows no direct relationship
to statutory marginal rates or political policy:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS?locations=US
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217533/revenues-from-income-tax-and-forecast-in-the-us-as-a-percentage-of-the-gdp/
Oh, and about that "94%" rate (which virtually no one ever
paid), it ran only in FDR's last full year alive and into
1945, dropped after the war to 91% and continued until
Lyndon Johnson, with Democrats running both chambers,
dropped it to 77%:
https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-highest-marginal-income-tax-rates
Concise overview and 1913~2025 chart here:
https://bradfordtaxinstitute.com/Free_Resources/Federal-Income-Tax-Rates.aspx
But let it be said that the Democrats spent the Social Security Trust Fund against the cries of the Republicans. This gave the Democrats the power to claim that people like Trump are going to kill social security when they have been using it as asourse of corruption that would put normal people in prison for life.
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in
this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over
charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once read that human societies (from tribes up to
nations) tend to welcome single foreigners as interesting
temporary visitors, but tend to get much more skeptical
when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when larger
numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on
(mostly inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving
much of the land unclaimed; then on importing (mostly)
Europeans in wave after wave to make productive use of the
land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No
Irish Need Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German,
Italian, Polish, etc. - were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were
white enough to "pass." They're still considered part of an
"invasion." And yes, that attitude has been in our
institutions for a long, long time.
On Sun Apr 6 12:59:52 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no >>>> way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
Frank I would mostly agree with you but blacks are a special case. The Irish were the first slaves of the English which comprised the initial settlers. Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves and it took a civil war to free themwhereupon the Democrats reassumed power and installed everything except outright slavery again. California was more or less exempt from discrimination except from the English elite in power here but the common man in California never went for it.
Indians were hunter/gatherers and required huge tracks of land to maintain small tribes. They considered farmers to be encroaching on their land which led to wars with the different tribes who fibnally were forced to surrender. They were then GIVENtheir rights rather than keeping them from before European settlers. A few east coast tribes considered the very small numbers of initial settlers to be interesting and odd and learned that the ways of farmingf and ranching required a lot less work to
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives rather than the extremists.
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no >>>> way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:04:49 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Tell us all what you're worth?
About $90 at auction with some variation depending on age, health,
talents, etc.
"Modern-day slavery: a flourishing business at $90 for a human life" <https://socialinnovation.blog.jbs.cam.ac.uk/2015/03/17/modern-day-slavery-a-flourishing-business-at-90-for-a-human-life/>
"The oversupply makes slaves cheap. Very cheap. While in the 1850s, a
slave cost the equivalent of $35,000-$40,000, a human life today
averages $90."
On 4/6/2025 1:28 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 07:29:37 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:38 AM, Mark J cleary wrote:
On 4/5/2025 10:11 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus
gas tax, plus
salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in
2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have
noticed that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax,
the first
$13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt
from Capital
Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax
percentage, and
thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay a pittance
in property
tax, including on inherited property prior to December
16, 2020 (when
Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed
value of property
they inherit (or they pay the current assessed value,
whichever is
greater). Since Tom's property is worth less than $1
million, the
property tax rate of any heirs would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in
the country,
which is why so many wealthy people establish
residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%,
but in nearby
San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For any
large
purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my city
it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his
accountant was
either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget
and simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of
sales tax and
property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters
seem to prefer
it that way.
Illinois is a high tax state and everyone is trying to
get out who
happen to be conservatives. The nuts running this state
all are against
anything that might be helpful that Trump is doing. Out
property taxes
are the 2nd highest in the nation.
<trying to think of anything helpful trump is doing........>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Wi8Fv0AJA4
Only you could think that at least three trillion dollars
in savings per year isn't helpful in a time when we
couldn't even pay the interest of the Biden national debt.
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result
in even the tiniest fraction of $3T........
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal
tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest in
tax experts and
lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and
some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax percentage
rates in the
90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite
prosperous. Middle
class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no multibillionaires,
but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple elderly
widows I've met
who are both trying to scrape by only on Social Security.
Don't worry,
Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply
because they have money tell us some specific cases of
"questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100%
of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts of
money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were
the benefactors of this largess until they grew so far
left wing that they were attacking the very people funding
them.
On 4/6/2025 10:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 7:03 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
You can have whatever opinion you like but not
your own facts.
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have
"alternative facts" if you don't like the look of
normal ones! Wasn't that made clear during Trump
version 1?
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes
on earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay
roughly half of all income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-
income-tax/
The USA also has some of the highest income and
wealth disparity of developed nations. Granted, not
as bad as many small 3rd world countries - but I
think we should not be striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/
economic- justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still
insufficiently progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway?
ISTM our nation was founded on the idea of doing
away with a privileged class lording it over those
purportedly of less worth. Also the idea of
everyone (well, as long as their complexion wasn't
too dark) getting an equal shot at prosperity. If
nothing else, those ideas, if implemented, work
toward keeping the masses content enough that they
don't literally rebel. Rebellions are messy,
unpredictable, and bad for bike shops.
We now have a new privileged class, one that can
rake in millions per year and pay lower rates than
struggling middle Americans, in part because of
clever deductions. Remember Leona Helmsley? "Taxes
are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per
year is free of Social Security duties. Because
hey, one's third mega- mansion is much more
important than better food for the family making
$50,000 per year. Why should the ultra- rich help
to keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only
taxable earnings, ignoring that fully half the
country pays no income tax. Many of those receive
'negative tax' payments and in fact dos very well on
relief, much better than many working people.
"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the
U.S. is higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy,
France, Austria, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Sweden,
Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. Yes, it's not as bad
as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela, Columbia, but
it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some
inherited wealth but almost all the top earners are
self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments
to inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our
current laws and tax structures favor the wealthy and
especially the very wealthy. That includes
corporations, for which it's not that unusual to pay
next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's
"little people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was
that everyone should get an equal shot if their skin
wasn't too dark. Did you somehow forget that black
slavery existed back then? Slaves did not get an
equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with
anecdotes about modern black guys who have gotten
rich. But surely even you don't think it's as likely
for a young black guy to succeed as it is for a young
white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA
than the top 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black
Africans. I was comparing black Americans to white
Americans. And in my original statement, I was
comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered
disadvantages compared to white Americans? That is
absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of
'garbage in, garbage out. By utterly ignoring our
lavish transfer/benefits systems, the appearance of
poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do
well to ask what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link,here's a shorter
simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income-
inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is
counting." So we should ignore the countless American
and world-wide economic institutions which all accept
recognized standards for inequality measurements, and
rank America's GINI index as being worse than all
similar modern nations. Instead we should pay attention
to the outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant
Nigerians, being as dark or darker than US citizens
grouped as black, do so well here?
Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among
various sub- cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do
better here by various measurements than average white
Americans. IIRC, white Jewish Americans do better, on
average, than other whites. That does not mean that
racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks
don't suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co-
workers and later my black students getting mocked
behind their backs or to their faces. I remember our
two neighbors proudly going off to hear Lester Maddox
speak, telling us "He's going to put those niggers back
in their place." I can't believe those attitudes didn't
lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father
bought his first house with help from the GI Bill. My
wife and I did the same many years later. Buying a home
and having its value appreciate, as they generally do,
was an important contributor toward increasing family
wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much more
trouble taking advantage of the GI Bill. That put a
great damper on black family's equity growth, and the
historic effects persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots
often notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections,
good education, access to capital, etc. and if you're
not rejected for a job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at
separate water fountains. We're roughly of the same age
so I know what you meant.
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we-
love-trump- white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-
about- white- supremacist-violence
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-
sides- with- white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-
in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-
about- white- supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics-
government/2025-01-08/u- s-attorneys-office-yellowstone-
gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Right. We're a very large country with every flavor of
belief arranged uncomfortably into two gargantuan party
structures. But a few pointy head racists (above) or the
antisemite scum in the other party are equally offset by
their opposites. In each party.
https://www.chicagoflipsred.com/
Lets not pretend they aren't trying to exert political
influence.
On 4/6/2025 12:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:Following up on my own post, I remember seeing this bumper
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in
this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over
charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once read that human societies (from tribes up to
nations) tend to welcome single foreigners as interesting
temporary visitors, but tend to get much more skeptical
when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when larger
numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
sticker:
https://drfugawe.wordpress.com/wp-content/ uploads/2012/05/410a026dh3l-_sl500_aa300-1_.gif
On 4/6/2025 3:00 PM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 10:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 6:41 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On Sat, 05 Apr 2025 06:57:17 -0400, floriduh dumbass
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
As for the U S steel industry, it was mostly destroyed
years ago by
unfair tactics by dishonest foriegn entities. The US
government stood
by and watched it happen.
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
Well, that is an extremely complex slow moving disaster.
But it was not from any lack of iron ore, coking coal,
transport, engineering, markets or capital.
Over to you.
Again - "it was mostly destroyed years ago by unfair
tactics by dishonest foriegn entities"
Magatard pabulum swallowed....hook, line, and sinker.
The steel industry declined because foreign steel was
cheaper, no other reason. Sure, there were a few minor
cases of steel dumping into the US market, but nothing
that could have destroyed the industry. It wasn't because
of this margatard narrative of unfair trade practices.
Blame the industries that bought the steel if you wish, no
one forced them to turn away from the US steel industry.
Regarding the crash of American steel, among those posting
I'm sure I'm living in the most affected area. This entire
region was built on iron, then steel production. The local
steel mills were huge, and were massive employers, up till
the industry crashed suddenly in the 1970s.
Why the crash? There are various explanations tossed about.
One is "The unions did it!" I'm sure U.S. union wages were
higher than Japanese wages, but I very much doubt that was
really important. I've heard "Illegal trade practices" but I
haven't heard enough specifics to evaluate that claim. I've
heard "Environmental regulations killed our steel." But
environmental requirements were also rising in Japan,
Germany, etc.
From my knowledge of the mills and the technology, here's
what I believe: Japan and Germany had their manufacturing
plants decimated in World War 2. American plants were
unscathed. So in the 1950s, our plants were able to keep
running as usual, producing steel as it had always been done
- the old way.
Other countries had to rebuild industries, and I think that
gave them opportunity to modernize. In addition, I think
foreign governments were more likely to help their steel
industries with modernization efforts, including efficiency
efforts. (I don't know about the legality of that support.
Maybe it violated some trade rules?)
Ultimately, largely because of better technology, it simply
took far less manpower per ton and cost far less money per
ton to produce steel overseas. Try as they might, American
steelworkers using antique processing equipment weren't able
to compete.
I once visited a former student of mine where he worked. His
company was doing heavy roll forming and stamping of steel,
producing (for example) highway guard rails and guard rail
end caps. As he showed me around, proudly pointing out his
own design achievements, I saw many coils of steel, maybe 5'
diameter, 6' tall standing on end in the warehouse area. I
asked "Is that steel from WCI?" (Warren Consolidated
Industry steel plant, about 15 miles away.) He said "Let's
see: That one's from WCI. That one's from Germany, that
one's from Japan..." etc.
It was astonishing that those countries could manufacture
the steel, pay to ship it tens of thousands of miles, and
still beat the price of the local mill 15 miles away.
On 4/6/2025 1:22 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:04:49 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Tell us all what you're worth?
About $90 at auction with some variation depending on age, health,
talents, etc.
"Modern-day slavery: a flourishing business at $90 for a human life"
<https://socialinnovation.blog.jbs.cam.ac.uk/2015/03/17/modern-day-slavery-a-flourishing-business-at-90-for-a-human-life/>
"The oversupply makes slaves cheap. Very cheap. While in the 1850s, a
slave cost the equivalent of $35,000-$40,000, a human life today
averages $90."
Oh, $90 today, sure.
But not so much later: >https://www.thoughtco.com/worth-of-your-elements-3976054
On 4/6/2025 11:27 AM, cyclintom wrote:only about half of the stock profits as other states. This is because the company is taxed almost to bankruptsy by an unelected PPublic Utilities Commision which is nothing more than another source of corrupt taxation.
On Sat Apr 5 10:11:43 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:36 AM, sms wrote:
On 4/4/2025 5:59 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas
tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property
taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and
ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed
that there was
no estate tax.
<snip>
Besides there being no inheritance tax or estate tax, the
first $13.61 million in value of an inheritance is exempt
from Capital Gains taxes, thanks to the Step-Up in Basis rule.
California ranks 35th in the country for property tax
percentage, and thanks to Prop 13, long time homeowners pay
a pittance in property tax, including on inherited property
prior to December 16, 2020 (when Prop 19 took effect).
With Prop 19, heirs get $1 million off the assessed value of
property they inherit (or they pay the current assessed
value, whichever is greater). Since Tom's property is worth
less than $1 million, the property tax rate of any heirs
would not go up at all.
However California has the highest income tax rate in the
country, which is why so many wealthy people establish
residency in Nevada.
Where Tom lives, the sales tax is a whopping 10.75%, but in
nearby San Francisco it's 8.625%, more than 2% lower. For
any large purchases he should go to San Francisco. In my
city it's 9.13%.
If Tom paid anything in inheritance taxes then his
accountant was either incompetent or was stealing from him.
Many ways to view that or parse it.
For 2023, selected states by population, annual budget and
simple ratio:
Florida 24 million people, $116 billion budget = 4.8
New York 20 million people, $122 billion budget = 6.1
California 40 million people, $308 billion budget = 7.7
I don't doubt you that there are local differences of sales
tax and property tax within California.
California is however a high-tax State and the voters seem
to prefer it that way.
I would say that the voter do not prefer it that way. We get ZERO services for out taxes and feel powerless to change that because the Democrats though election fraud control everything.PG&E has the highewst energy rates in the nation and yet makes
I'm sure that Liebermann can tell us that they are absolutely wonderful. As he chops wood to try and remain warm in the winter because he cannot afford heating.
" I would say that the voter do not prefer it that way."
In your opinion.
Meanwhile, Mr Newsom handily defeated the recall effort.
Under California statute, the recall vote is separate from
candidate selection It's a simple up-or-down plebiscite on
the Governor's performance in office up to here.
Which is nothing new. In Mencken's words:
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/h_l_mencken_163179
On 4/6/2025 12:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:whereupon the Democrats reassumed power and installed everything except outright slavery again. California was more or less exempt from discrimination except from the English elite in power here but the common man in California never went for it.
On Sun Apr 6 12:59:52 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no >>>>> way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country. >>>>Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough >>> to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that >>> attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
Frank I would mostly agree with you but blacks are a special case. The Irish were the first slaves of the English which comprised the initial settlers. Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves and it took a civil war to free them
their rights rather than keeping them from before European settlers. A few east coast tribes considered the very small numbers of initial settlers to be interesting and odd and learned that the ways of farmingf and ranching required a lot less work to
Indians were hunter/gatherers and required huge tracks of land to maintain small tribes. They considered farmers to be encroaching on their land which led to wars with the different tribes who fibnally were forced to surrender. They were then GIVEN
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives rather than the extremists.
"Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves"
Not the last any any means. Slavery is popular again.
We currently have an epidemic of enslaved people in US and
worldwide. And growing. In USA they are primarily young
central/south American women and girls but boys as well.
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/24-02934-TIP_Factsheet-Western-Hemisphere-Region_508-Accessible-8.13.2024.pdf
https://hopeforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/USA-MSHT-Briefing-Document-Updated-May-2024-1.pdf
"On any given day, there are 1,091,000 people living in
conditions of modern-day slavery in the
USA"
https://womenonguard.com/statistics/human-trafficking/
Roughly 28 million people worldwide as we write.
On 4/6/2025 1:53 PM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest in tax experts
and
lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax percentage rates in the >>>> 90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite prosperous.
Middle
class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no multibillionaires, but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple elderly widows I've
met
who are both trying to scrape by only on Social Security. Don't worry, >>>> Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because
they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable
practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government
salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts of money to
charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were the benefactors of
this largess until they grew so far left wing that they were
attacking the very people funding them.
" Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is."
A lot.
Much of his Tesla earnings, while structured as salary, are more
properly 'performance bonus' as it was and would have remained zero had
he not met extremely unlikely (when written) goals. And it wasn't structured in all cash but rather mostly in stock options. The
consensus at the time was that it was nearly impossible.
https://www.investopedia.com/elon-musks-multi-billion-dollar-pay- package-8757243
"In 2018, Tesla's board and then the shareholders approved a
compensation plan for Musk worth up to around $56 billion at the time.
This performance-based package granted Musk stock options contingent
upon achieving specific milestones related to Tesla's market
capitalization and operational targets.
Each milestone unlocked additional stock options, aiming to align Musk's incentives with the company's growth. Notably, Musk would not receive a salary or any cash bonuses as CEO, emphasizing a commitment to Tesla's long-term success."
On Sun Apr 6 14:55:40 2025 zen cycle wrote:nearly succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at Stalingrad.
On 4/6/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had money. And then when there was no one else to grow the food and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more than a closet communist under the mantle of socialism attacked them and
One of these days you will cease making an absolute fool out of yourself. Probably after you die.
We keeping hoping one of these days you'll get some simple aspect of
history right. Today isn't one of those days.
The reason you're a nobody is because you can't read. https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2010/09/naimark-stalin-genocide-092310 would put you on the right track but you couldn't follow it because there are twists and turns.
On 4/6/2025 2:04 PM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 10:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 7:03 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" >>>>>>>>>> if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made >>>>>>>>>> clear during Trump version 1?
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts. >>>>>>>>>>
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, >>>>>>>>>>> such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of allThe USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
income tax.
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most- income-tax/ >>>>>>>>>>
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many >>>>>>>>>> small 3rd world countries - but I think we should not be
striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/ economic-
justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently >>>>>>>>>> progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our
nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged >>>>>>>>>> class lording it over those purportedly of less worth. Also >>>>>>>>>> the idea of everyone (well, as long as their complexion wasn't >>>>>>>>>> too dark) getting an equal shot at prosperity. If nothing
else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward keeping the >>>>>>>>>> masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops. >>>>>>>>>>
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in
millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle >>>>>>>>>> Americans, in part because of clever deductions. Remember
Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free >>>>>>>>>> of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega-
mansion is much more important than better food for the family >>>>>>>>>> making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra- rich help to >>>>>>>>>> keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no income >>>>>>>>> tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact >>>>>>>>> dos very well on relief, much better than many working people. >>>>>>>>
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, >>>>>>>> Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc.
Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela,
Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited >>>>>>>>> wealth but almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and >>>>>>>> tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that
unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. >>>>>>>> Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back then?
Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes
about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even
you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed >>>>>>>> as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top >>>>>>>>> 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was
comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my original >>>>>>>> statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered disadvantages >>>>>> compared to white Americans? That is absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage in,
garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish transfer/benefits
systems, the appearance of poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to ask
what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a shorter >>>>>>> simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income- inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting." So we
should ignore the countless American and world-wide economic
institutions which all accept recognized standards for inequality
measurements, and rank America's GINI index as being worse than
all similar modern nations. Instead we should pay attention to the >>>>>> outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians, being as >>>>>>> dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black, do so well here? >>>>>>Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various sub-
cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by various
measurements than average white Americans. IIRC, white Jewish
Americans do better, on average, than other whites. That does not
mean that racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks
don't suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co- workers and
later my black students getting mocked behind their backs or to
their faces. I remember our two neighbors proudly going off to
hear Lester Maddox speak, telling us "He's going to put those
niggers back in their place." I can't believe those attitudes
didn't lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought his
first house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I did the same >>>>>> many years later. Buying a home and having its value appreciate,
as they generally do, was an important contributor toward
increasing family wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much >>>>>> more trouble taking advantage of the GI Bill. That put a great
damper on black family's equity growth, and the historic effects
persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not rejected for
a job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at separate water
fountains. We're roughly of the same age so I know what you meant.
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-
trump- white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care- about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court- sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner- in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care- about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/
u- s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-
supremacist-views
Right. We're a very large country with every flavor of belief
arranged uncomfortably into two gargantuan party structures. But a
few pointy head racists (above) or the antisemite scum in the other
party are equally offset by their opposites. In each party.
https://www.chicagoflipsred.com/
Lets not pretend they aren't trying to exert political influence.
Well, who doesn't?
But it's not Cato's main mission. They are highly critical of
Republicans by the way and have been for at least 40 years.
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's still
seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr
2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. ThisAlthough perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country. >>>>
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough >>> to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that >>> attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
On Sun Apr 6 19:03:58 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Most countries apply some tariffs on most goods, but since tariffs are paid >> by the countries population, it?s normally low as your voters are paying
the tariffs.
You are aware you?re going to paying for the tariffs yes? Particularly with >> your Aliexpress etc parts and what not! And if you really do have money in >> the market that has lost value and is continuing to do so.
As per my last post this isn?t going to end well!
A tariff is to place a finger on the scale. If you can get cheaper components locally you do so. But the USA has for too long carried little or no tarriffs. Now we simply match your tariffs.
This does NOT mean that China will not still have cheaper parts because they can and will drop tariffs to zero.
You do not have sufficient financial training to understand the complexity of international trade and I doubt you are any more in it than to read doomsday headlines written by the Slime Stream Media and to take them seriously.
Tell me what you think that taeffs did to GB? Why would they do any difference here?For instance, it would be far cheaper to ship Rover components here and assemble the final product here and avoid tariffs altog4ether.avoided by conjtracting local builders like Chrysler or Chevrolet.
The only thing it would cost is the inicial outlay which could be
This is how I became an engineer. By imagining what others could not.
Look at what Flunky and Liebermann post! They are blithering idiots. Flunky is so important he doesn't do any work. Liebermann so brilliant that it took him 6 years to get a four year degree and could only work as a technician. I have my opinions aboutFrank but not because he is stupid but because he is to lazy and incapable of waiting to earn promotion by working for them. His comments about helmets and taking the lane were nothing more than cheap shots at me. I don't mind personal attacks . They can
On 4/6/2025 8:27 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 2:04 PM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 10:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 7:03 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/5/2025 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/5/2025 11:44 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/5/2025 9:20 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/4/2025 10:30 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 9:03 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:"The disparity is a myth"?? The GINI index for the U.S. is
On 4/4/2025 12:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Heck, I thought it was fashionable to have "alternative facts" >>>>>>>>>>> if you don't like the look of normal ones! Wasn't that made >>>>>>>>>>> clear during Trump version 1?
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own facts. >>>>>>>>>>>
USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on earth, >>>>>>>>>>>> such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of all >>>>>>>>>>>> income tax.The USA also has some of the highest income and wealth
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most- income-tax/ >>>>>>>>>>>
disparity of developed nations. Granted, not as bad as many >>>>>>>>>>> small 3rd world countries - but I think we should not be >>>>>>>>>>> striving to emulate those.
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/ economic-
justice/ income- and-wealth-inequality/
I'd say that means our tax structure is still insufficiently >>>>>>>>>>> progressive.
And what should we be trying to achieve anyway? ISTM our >>>>>>>>>>> nation was founded on the idea of doing away with a privileged >>>>>>>>>>> class lording it over those purportedly of less worth. Also >>>>>>>>>>> the idea of everyone (well, as long as their complexion wasn't >>>>>>>>>>> too dark) getting an equal shot at prosperity. If nothing >>>>>>>>>>> else, those ideas, if implemented, work toward keeping the >>>>>>>>>>> masses content enough that they don't literally rebel.
Rebellions are messy, unpredictable, and bad for bike shops. >>>>>>>>>>>
We now have a new privileged class, one that can rake in >>>>>>>>>>> millions per year and pay lower rates than struggling middle >>>>>>>>>>> Americans, in part because of clever deductions. Remember >>>>>>>>>>> Leona Helmsley? "Taxes are for little people."
And of course, any money made over $170,000 per year is free >>>>>>>>>>> of Social Security duties. Because hey, one's third mega- >>>>>>>>>>> mansion is much more important than better food for the family >>>>>>>>>>> making $50,000 per year. Why should the ultra- rich help to >>>>>>>>>>> keep Social Security afloat?
The 'disparity' is a myth in that it counts only taxable
earnings, ignoring that fully half the country pays no income >>>>>>>>>> tax. Many of those receive 'negative tax' payments and in fact >>>>>>>>>> dos very well on relief, much better than many working people. >>>>>>>>>
higher (worse) than for Britain, Italy, France, Austria, Canada, >>>>>>>>> Australia, Ireland, Sweden, Albania, Croatia, etc. etc. etc. >>>>>>>>> Yes, it's not as bad as South Africa, Mexico, Venezuela,
Columbia, but it's hardly a myth.
Regarding wealthy citizens, we do indeed have some inherited >>>>>>>>>> wealth but almost all the top earners are self made ...
That's irrelevant. I was not restricting my comments to
inherited wealth. I'm basically saying that our current laws and >>>>>>>>> tax structures favor the wealthy and especially the very
wealthy. That includes corporations, for which it's not that >>>>>>>>> unusual to pay next to zero federal taxes. Tax shelters are
available to those with tons of money. Helmsley's "little
people" have no access to that trickery.
Your snarky racism comment is ridiculous.
I said a big idea for the new nation of the U.S. was that
everyone should get an equal shot if their skin wasn't too dark. >>>>>>>>> Did you somehow forget that black slavery existed back then? >>>>>>>>> Slaves did not get an equal shot.
Yes, I know you (especially you!) can come up with anecdotes >>>>>>>>> about modern black guys who have gotten rich. But surely even >>>>>>>>> you don't think it's as likely for a young black guy to succeed >>>>>>>>> as it is for a young white guy.
There are 224 times more black millionaires in USA than the top >>>>>>>>>> 19 countries of Africa combined.
Go stick your racism somewhere else.
I was not comparing black Americans to black Africans. I was >>>>>>>>> comparing black Americans to white Americans. And in my original >>>>>>>>> statement, I was comparing those groups in 1776.
It simply is not true. Full stop. Not true.
It is not true that black Americans in 1776 suffered disadvantages >>>>>>> compared to white Americans? That is absolutely senseless.
'Income disparity' is a classic blatant example of 'garbage in, >>>>>>>> garbage out. By utterly ignoring our lavish transfer/benefits >>>>>>>> systems, the appearance of poverty greatly exceeds poverty.
As with so many topics discussed here, one would do well to ask >>>>>>>> what is counted and who is counting.
For readers who did not pursue my previous link, here's a shorter >>>>>>>> simpler version:
https://www.cato.org/study/myth-american-income- inequality
:-) Ah yes, "one would do well to ask ... who is counting." So we >>>>>>> should ignore the countless American and world-wide economic
institutions which all accept recognized standards for inequality >>>>>>> measurements, and rank America's GINI index as being worse than
all similar modern nations. Instead we should pay attention to the >>>>>>> outlier, the hyper-libertarian Cato institute.
And regarding racism, why do legal immigrant Nigerians, being as >>>>>>>> dark or darker than US citizens grouped as black, do so well here? >>>>>>>Yes, there are certainly cultural differences among various sub- >>>>>>> cultures. Japanese and Chinese tend to do better here by various >>>>>>> measurements than average white Americans. IIRC, white Jewish
Americans do better, on average, than other whites. That does not >>>>>>> mean that racism against American blacks is gone, and that blacks >>>>>>> don't suffer from its current and historical effects.
When I lived down south, I witnessed my black co- workers and
later my black students getting mocked behind their backs or to
their faces. I remember our two neighbors proudly going off to
hear Lester Maddox speak, telling us "He's going to put those
niggers back in their place." I can't believe those attitudes
didn't lead to disadvantages for them.
One thing that I learned fairly recently: My father bought his
first house with help from the GI Bill. My wife and I did the same >>>>>>> many years later. Buying a home and having its value appreciate, >>>>>>> as they generally do, was an important contributor toward
increasing family wealth. But after WW2, black servicemen had much >>>>>>> more trouble taking advantage of the GI Bill. That put a great
damper on black family's equity growth, and the historic effects >>>>>>> persist.
Or as my favorite black millionaire from humble roots often
notes, "Hard work wins."
It's more likely to "win" if you have good connections, good
education, access to capital, etc. and if you're not rejected for >>>>>>> a job by being the wrong color.
Nearly 60 years ago I was shocked and offended at separate water
fountains. We're roughly of the same age so I know what you meant. >>>>>>
That was long long ago. Fortunately.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-
trump- white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care- about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court- sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner- in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care- about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/
u- s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-
supremacist-views
Right. We're a very large country with every flavor of belief
arranged uncomfortably into two gargantuan party structures. But a
few pointy head racists (above) or the antisemite scum in the other
party are equally offset by their opposites. In each party.
https://www.chicagoflipsred.com/
Lets not pretend they aren't trying to exert political influence.
Well, who doesn't?
But it's not Cato's main mission. They are highly critical of
Republicans by the way and have been for at least 40 years.
By 'they' I meant white supremacists.
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 19:12:47 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:whereupon the Democrats reassumed power and installed everything except outright slavery again. California was more or less exempt from discrimination except from the English elite in power here but the common man in California never went for it.
On 4/6/2025 12:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 12:59:52 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no >>>>>> way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country. >>>>>Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists >>>>> in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need >>>> Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. - >>>> were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough >>>> to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that >>>> attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
Frank I would mostly agree with you but blacks are a special case. The Irish were the first slaves of the English which comprised the initial settlers. Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves and it took a civil war to free them
their rights rather than keeping them from before European settlers. A few east coast tribes considered the very small numbers of initial settlers to be interesting and odd and learned that the ways of farmingf and ranching required a lot less work to
Indians were hunter/gatherers and required huge tracks of land to maintain small tribes. They considered farmers to be encroaching on their land which led to wars with the different tribes who fibnally were forced to surrender. They were then GIVEN
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives rather than the extremists.
"Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves"
Not the last any any means. Slavery is popular again.
We currently have an epidemic of enslaved people in US and
worldwide. And growing. In USA they are primarily young
central/south American women and girls but boys as well.
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/24-02934-TIP_Factsheet-Western-Hemisphere-Region_508-Accessible-8.13.2024.pdf
https://hopeforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/USA-MSHT-Briefing-Document-Updated-May-2024-1.pdf
"On any given day, there are 1,091,000 people living in
conditions of modern-day slavery in the
USA"
https://womenonguard.com/statistics/human-trafficking/
Roughly 28 million people worldwide as we write.
Indeed.
I've been researching human trafficking in the USA for my latest book. https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_soloman/54435782663/
The cover picture above is one of several I've been working on. Yeah,
the picture is kind of weird, but it fits because I'm kind of a weird
guy. The blurb below is also a work in progress. It will probably be
modified before you read it.
Vincent Rivera was exonerated and freed from a wrongful conviction in
Texas. An experienced sailor, he used the compensation money to buy a refurbished 41 foot masthead sloop named the Cultured Pearl. Ignoring
the superstitions about renaming a boat, he re-registered the Morgan
Out Island as the Uncultured Pearl. It was a response to a comment
about his education, made by the man who framed him for murder and is
now in prison for that same murder.
Intending to return to his home country of Puerto Rico, he stopped for
minor repairs in a small harbor town in Florida. Unfortunately, the
mangrove lined cove where he'd dropped anchor was the home port of a
criminal operation.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 4/6/2025 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 1:53 PM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal
tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest
in tax experts and
lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and
some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax
percentage rates in the
90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite
prosperous. Middle
class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no
multibillionaires, but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to
help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple
elderly widows I've met
who are both trying to scrape by only on Social
Security. Don't worry,
Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people
simply because they have money tell us some specific
cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are
donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts
of money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS
were the benefactors of this largess until they grew so
far left wing that they were attacking the very people
funding them.
" Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is."
A lot.
Much of his Tesla earnings, while structured as salary,
are more properly 'performance bonus' as it was and would
have remained zero had he not met extremely unlikely (when
written) goals. And it wasn't structured in all cash but
rather mostly in stock options. The consensus at the time
was that it was nearly impossible.
https://www.investopedia.com/elon-musks-multi-billion-
dollar-pay- package-8757243
"In 2018, Tesla's board and then the shareholders approved
a compensation plan for Musk worth up to around $56
billion at the time. This performance-based package
granted Musk stock options contingent upon achieving
specific milestones related to Tesla's market
capitalization and operational targets.
Each milestone unlocked additional stock options, aiming
to align Musk's incentives with the company's growth.
Notably, Musk would not receive a salary or any cash
bonuses as CEO, emphasizing a commitment to Tesla's long-
term success."
I was referring specifically to "Trump and Musk are donating
100% of their government salaries to charity.", which in
musks case is exactly $0 - hence musk isn't contributing any
government salary to charity
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand.
It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job
gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank
Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism
in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally
over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations)
tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but
tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move
in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on
(mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much
of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave
after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet.
"No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian,
Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they
were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an
"invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long
time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by
so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
On 4/7/2025 3:24 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:them whereupon the Democrats reassumed power and installed everything except outright slavery again. California was more or less exempt from discrimination except from the English elite in power here but the common man in California never went for it.
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 19:12:47 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 12:59:52 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This in no >>>>>>> way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this country. >>>>>>Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists >>>>>> in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome >>>>> single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to >>>>> make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need >>>>> Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. - >>>>> were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white enough >>>>> to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, that >>>>> attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
Frank I would mostly agree with you but blacks are a special case. The Irish were the first slaves of the English which comprised the initial settlers. Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves and it took a civil war to free
their rights rather than keeping them from before European settlers. A few east coast tribes considered the very small numbers of initial settlers to be interesting and odd and learned that the ways of farmingf and ranching required a lot less work to
Indians were hunter/gatherers and required huge tracks of land to maintain small tribes. They considered farmers to be encroaching on their land which led to wars with the different tribes who fibnally were forced to surrender. They were then GIVEN
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives rather than the extremists.
"Blacks are only significant because they were the LAST slaves"
Not the last any any means. Slavery is popular again.
We currently have an epidemic of enslaved people in US and
worldwide. And growing. In USA they are primarily young
central/south American women and girls but boys as well.
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/24-02934-TIP_Factsheet-Western-Hemisphere-Region_508-Accessible-8.13.2024.pdf
https://hopeforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/USA-MSHT-Briefing-Document-Updated-May-2024-1.pdf
"On any given day, there are 1,091,000 people living in
conditions of modern-day slavery in the
USA"
https://womenonguard.com/statistics/human-trafficking/
Roughly 28 million people worldwide as we write.
Indeed.
I've been researching human trafficking in the USA for my latest book.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_soloman/54435782663/
The cover picture above is one of several I've been working on. Yeah,
the picture is kind of weird, but it fits because I'm kind of a weird
guy. The blurb below is also a work in progress. It will probably be
modified before you read it.
Vincent Rivera was exonerated and freed from a wrongful conviction in
Texas. An experienced sailor, he used the compensation money to buy a
refurbished 41 foot masthead sloop named the Cultured Pearl. Ignoring
the superstitions about renaming a boat, he re-registered the Morgan
Out Island as the Uncultured Pearl. It was a response to a comment
about his education, made by the man who framed him for murder and is
now in prison for that same murder.
Intending to return to his home country of Puerto Rico, he stopped for
minor repairs in a small harbor town in Florida. Unfortunately, the
mangrove lined cove where he'd dropped anchor was the home port of a
criminal operation.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
You created a cover? Authors I know have done a slow burn
over cover art as it's usually foisted by the publisher.
Small quibble: Puerto Rico is not a country. It's a US
Territory, part of our country and Puerto Ricans are full US
citizens.
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand.
It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job
gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank
Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism
in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally
over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations)
tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but
tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move
in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on
(mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much
of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave
after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet.
"No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian,
Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they
were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an
"invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long
time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by
so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with
Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy
Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
On 4/6/2025 5:00 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 19:03:58 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Most countries apply some tariffs on most goods, but
since tariffs are paid
by the countries population, it?s normally low as your
voters are paying
the tariffs.
You are aware you?re going to paying for the tariffs yes?
Particularly with
your Aliexpress etc parts and what not! And if you really
do have money in
the market that has lost value and is continuing to do so.
As per my last post this isn?t going to end well!
A tariff is to place a finger on the scale. If you can get
cheaper components locally you do so. But the USA has for
too long carried little or no tarriffs. Now we simply
match your tariffs.
Until a few days ago, the US and Australia had a free trade
agreement, so they had no tariffs on US imports at all.
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/agreements/fta/ australia/asset_upload_file148_5168.pdf
See chapter 2, section B
The only product with any restrictions was american beef,
which was agreed to in that treaty.
Now, the US has imposed a 10% tariff to account for the
trade imbalance. Funny thing though, is that Australia has a
trade deficit to the US.
https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/southeast-asia-pacific/
australia
"The U.S. goods trade surplus with Australia was $17.9
billion in 2024, a 1.6 percent increase ($279.7 million)
over 2023."
This does NOT mean that China will not still have cheaper
parts because they can and will drop tariffs to zero.
You do not have sufficient financial training to
understand the complexity of international trade and I
doubt you are any more in it than to read doomsday
headlines written by the Slime Stream Media and to take
them seriously.
lol...So "china can drop the tariffs to zero" means somehow
they can completely avoid the US tariffs? and the US has had
little or no tarrifs? And Roger is the one who doesn't
understand international trade?
I'd take Rogers understanding of international trade over
yours any day.
could be avoided by conjtracting local builders like
Tell me what you think that taeffs did to GB? Why would
they do any difference here?For instance, it would be far
cheaper to ship Rover components here and assemble the
final product here and avoid tariffs altog4ether.
The only thing it would cost is the inicial outlay which
Chrysler or Chevrolet.
Hey, dumbass, the tariffs are on parts as well.
This is how I became an engineer. By imagining what others
could not.
Sure, like cables are tested with PWM, aluminum oxide is
flammable, a dent can pop out of a top tube by riding the bike.
Look at what Flunky and Liebermann post! They are
blithering idiots. Flunky is so important he doesn't do
any work. Liebermann so brilliant that it took him 6 years
to get a four year degree and could only work as a
technician. I have my opinions about Frank but not because
he is stupid but because he is to lazy and incapable of
waiting to earn promotion by working for them. His
comments about helmets and taking the lane were nothing
more than cheap shots at me. I don't mind personal
attacks . They can even be fun when they make the
perpitrator look silly.
well, talk about being important. As far as I remember the
discussions about taking the lane were with the floriduh
dumbass and the recent discussion on helmets was between me
a frank - but now it was all about you? Hmmm....Maybe I've
been wrong all this time and the floriduh dumbass _isn't_
the biggest narcissist here.
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced
by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
On 4/7/2025 3:24 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
Intending to return to his home country of Puerto Rico,
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's still
seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On Sun, 6
Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This >>>>>>> in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this
country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists >>>>>> in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome >>>>> single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to >>>>> make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need >>>>> Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. - >>>>> were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white
enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes,
that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's still >>>>>> seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On Sun, 6
Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycleI agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to welcome >>>>>> single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. This >>>>>>>> in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this
country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists >>>>>>> in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged. >>>>>>
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after wave to >>>>>> make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish Need >>>>>> Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, etc. - >>>>>> were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white
enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And yes, >>>>>> that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we-love-trump-white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides-with-white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about-white-supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics-government/2025-01-08/u-s-attorneys-office-yellowstone-gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:16:40 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Similarly my criticism of the modern education racket is
that young people can recount all of our country's sins,
which were real, but none of the good we have done.
Not to start another helmet or gun fight but the bad things stick
right out in front of "God and Everyone" - long series of "wars" to
deprive the original owners of their land for example, what are the
"good things"?
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work
stand. It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but
the job gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized
racism in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally
over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations)
tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors,
but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to
move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based
on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving
much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in
wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion"
gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German,
Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they
were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an
"invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long
time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced
by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged.
On Sat Apr 5 08:41:35 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/4/2025 7:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 14:52:25 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 12:59 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 11:26:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/4/2025 11:16 AM, sms wrote:
The whole idea of increasing taxes on the masses, while
decreasing them on the wealthy, is so Republican, and so
Reaganesque with the fraud of "Trickle-Down Economics."
These new high taxes on discretionary items will be
disastrous since a new bike, a new phone, or even a new car,
is not generally a required purchase, and consumers will be
unwilling to pay much more. So companies like Trek will
likely absorb some of the tariffs by accepting lower margins.
OTOH, some businesses, like car repair shops will see more
business as consumers spend more to keep their existing
vehicle working.
For items that are not discretionary, like food, we'll just
have to pay more for the same items or switch to lower-cost
items.
You can have whatever opinion you like but not your own
facts. USA has among the most steeply sloped tax regimes on
earth, such that the top 1% of earners pay roughly half of
all income tax.
So what is your income tax rate? Here it's from 0 to 27.5% (0%
for people who don't make enough to eat and pay only purchase tax (60% >> >>> on food) to people that make more than US$ 500, 00 a month and are
considered "rich" employees.
Businessmen, market "players", multinationals and banks are
all tax exempt. We are a right wing country, more or less expected.
Inheritance tax is around 1%, but most millionaires get a judge to
exempt them.
Give me an example. If Musk manages to buy the judges in Texas
and gives himself over 50 billion dollars for a year's "hard" work
breaking Tesla, how much of that will he pay as income tax?
https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/
USA facts is founded and run by a billionaire(Steve Ballmer)
one of the most notorious tax-evaders in the world. LOL, he probably
deducts any expenses with his "ORG".
Hardly a "reference" for unbiased tax "facts".
IMHO
[]'s
Moreover, various Cassandras notwithstanding, no significant
changes to the current (2017 Act) schedules are in play.
Regarding Trek, otherwise known as The Great Chinese Bicycle
Selling Company, meh.
I carry no water for Mr Ballmer. I (and others) have linked
many tax reporting sites over the years with the same
numbers as that one.
I also have no animus toward Brasil. Run your own country
any way you like, not my problem. Our tax rates are in
theory zero to 37.5%.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
In practice, relief here, with our "negative income tax"
policies, is the equivalent of up to $62,000 per year* or
well over what many working people make before taxes.
Again, this is not a policy statement either way, just
reporting.
https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets
*for 2022. Higher now of course.
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes. and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor.
As of 2022, California has the highest number of billionairs of any
state in the US, and is #4 per capita.
https://www.madisontrust.com/information-center/visualizations/which-us-states-have-the-most-billionaires/
Please post data to the contrary if you can.
Do you mean those Hollywood actors who have ashes instead of himes? Tom Sellect isn't bragging that he has a lot of money and he doesn't care.
Tell us all what you're worth?--
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
"Estate tax is paid by the estate on its net value, while inheritance
tax is paid by beneficiaries on what they receive, with estate taxes
going to the [federal] government and inheritance taxes to state
governments."
"Only six states currently impose inheritance taxes: Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania."
<https://www.actec.org/resources-for-wealth-planning-professionals/state-death-tax-chart/>
"Tax is tied to federal state death tax credit. CA REV & TAX ??
13302; 13411.
State Type of Tax: None.
2025 State Death Tax Threshold: None
and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor. >>Tom, you claimed to have millions in investments. Why are you still
living in California?
03/05/2025
<https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=121640&group=rec.bicycles.tech#121640>
"I GAVE $60,000 to my brothers... In order to protect my investments
from any possible recession I have moved from growth stocks into fuds
like Govertrnment bonds which pay low interest rates rather than
growth. And I still have increased my investments to over $1.1
Million."
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had money. And then when there was no one else to grow the food
and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more than a closet communist
under the mantle of socialism attacked them and nearly succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at Stalingrad.
Roger, if England didn't charge the US goods a tariff we would not match it.
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and >should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 17:25:16 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
This business of wars in virtually every place in the world could have and >> should have been avoided had they listened to the conservatives
LOL. Like Iraq ?
Can I quote that?
[]'s
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
A tariff is to place a finger on the scale. If you can get cheaper components locally you do so. But the USA has for too long carried little or no tarriffs. Now we simply match your tariffs. This does NOT mean that China will not still have cheaperparts because they can and will drop tariffs to zero.
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work
stand. It's still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but
the job gets done. On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male
examples. This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized
racism in this country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically
"racism" exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand)
Americans are
generally considered rather stupid and are normally
over charged.
I agree that racism is extremely common throughout the
world. I once
read that human societies (from tribes up to nations)
tend to welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors,
but tend to get
much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to
move in. And when
larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based
on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving
much of the land
unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in
wave after wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion"
gauntlet. "No Irish Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German,
Italian, Polish, etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they
were white enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an
"invasion." And yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long
time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced
by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Check you're not using a bogus anti-virus. I recommend Kaspersky.
On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 17:33:26 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
Check you're not using a bogus anti-virus. I recommend Kaspersky.
Kaspersky antivirus was banned for use by the US government after Sept
24, 2024. I agree that the ban is justified.
"The Aftermath of the Kaspersky Ban" ><https://www.bitsight.com/blog/aftermath-kaspersky-ban>
"Kaspersky and the Russian government" ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaspersky_and_the_Russian_government>
"Russian antivirus firm faked malware to harm rivals - Ex-employees"
(Aug 14, 2015) ><https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/exclusive-russian-antivirus-firm-faked-malware-to-harm-rivals-ex-employees-idUSKCN0QJ1CQ/>
Tom once claimed that he uses BitDefender. I have my doubts that he
uses any brand of anti-virus:
<https://www.bitdefender.com>
My recommendation is to use Microsoft Defender, which comes baked into >Windoze on Win 10 and Win 11.
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:55:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had money. And then when there was no one else to grow the food
I don't think ANY of the rich guys grew any food. The peasants
grew the food.
and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more than a closet communist
Hitler was a far-right fascist. Something like Musk. First
thing he did was kill all the communists. Only then did he move on to
gypsies and eventually Jews....
under the mantle of socialism attacked them and nearly succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at Stalingrad.
The Russians used Russian arms. Stop watching Hollywood
propaganda. It's obsolete. The cold war is over...
[]'s
On 4/7/2025 11:32 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's
still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On
Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycleI agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. >>>>>>>>> This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this >>>>>>>>> country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" >>>>>>>> exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are >>>>>>>> generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged. >>>>>>>
welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly
inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after
wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish >>>>>>> Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish,
etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white >>>>>>> enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And
yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-
white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-
s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness. Her writings
were suppressed for two years before finally leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter- audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly- revealed-diary-entries/
On 4/7/2025 4:45 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:55:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had
money. And then when there was no one else to grow the food
I don't think ANY of the rich guys grew any food. The
peasants
grew the food.
and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more
than a closet communist
Hitler was a far-right fascist. Something like Musk.
First
thing he did was kill all the communists. Only then did he
move on to
gypsies and eventually Jews....
under the mantle of socialism attacked them and nearly
succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying
arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at
Stalingrad.
The Russians used Russian arms. Stop watching Hollywood
propaganda. It's obsolete. The cold war is over...
[]'s
Tommy has repeatedly spoken glowingly of Putin and the
current russian regime.
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
On 4/7/2025 8:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:32 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's
still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On >>>>>>>> Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycleI agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. >>>>>>>>>> This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this >>>>>>>>>> country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" >>>>>>>>> exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are >>>>>>>>> generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged. >>>>>>>>
welcome
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly >>>>>>>> inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after
wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish >>>>>>>> Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, >>>>>>>> etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white >>>>>>>> enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And >>>>>>>> yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-
white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-
s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness. Her writings
were suppressed for two years before finally leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-
audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-
revealed-diary-entries/
Specious use of 'suppressed' duly noted and dismissed as specious, and
it wasn't for two years.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-orders-fbi-hand-over-trans-school-shooter-audrey-hale-manifesto
Also duly noted is the conflation of the act of an obviously disturbed >individual versus a movement in the US:
https://www.adl.org/new-hate-and-old-changing-face-american-white-supremacy
and the (at best) complacency of the current US regime:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-hosted-white-supremacist-nick-fuentes-mar-a-lago-reports-2022-11?op=1
On 4/8/2025 6:19 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 4:45 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:55:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they had money. And
then when there was no one else to grow the food
I don't think ANY of the rich guys grew any food. The peasants
grew the food.
and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing more than a
closet communist
Hitler was a far-right fascist. Something like Musk. First
thing he did was kill all the communists. Only then did he move on to
gypsies and eventually Jews....
under the mantle of socialism attacked them and nearly succeeded.
And would have it not for the US supplying arms and ammunition to
the brave Russian people at Stalingrad.
The Russians used Russian arms. Stop watching Hollywood
propaganda. It's obsolete. The cold war is over...
[]'s
Tommy has repeatedly spoken glowingly of Putin and the current russian
regime.
Although US aid/support to the Soviets was significant and some may
argue dispositive overall, the contribution at Stalingrad was negligible
if not nil.
Stalingrad:
https://totalmilitaryinsight.com/weapons-used-by-both-sides/
Overall US support during The Great Patriotic War: https://archive-share.america.gov/america-sent-equipment-to-soviet- union-in-world-war-ii/
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 07:38:54 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 8:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:32 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's >>>>>>>>> still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On >>>>>>>>> Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycleI agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>>>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to >>>>>>>>> welcome
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. >>>>>>>>>>> This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this >>>>>>>>>>> country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" >>>>>>>>>> exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are >>>>>>>>>> generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged. >>>>>>>>>
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>>>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>>>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly >>>>>>>>> inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>>>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after >>>>>>>>> wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish >>>>>>>>> Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, >>>>>>>>> etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white >>>>>>>>> enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And >>>>>>>>> yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time.
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and >>>>> his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump-
white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u-
s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views >>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness. Her writings
were suppressed for two years before finally leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-
audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-
revealed-diary-entries/
Specious use of 'suppressed' duly noted and dismissed as specious, and
it wasn't for two years.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-orders-fbi-hand-over-trans-school-shooter-audrey-hale-manifesto
Also duly noted is the conflation of the act of an obviously disturbed
individual versus a movement in the US:
https://www.adl.org/new-hate-and-old-changing-face-american-white-supremacy >>
and the (at best) complacency of the current US regime:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-hosted-white-supremacist-nick-fuentes-mar-a-lago-reports-2022-11?op=1
Trump was taken "by surprise" when the Nazis showed up to
dinner.
Wonder who invited them. Musk, maybe?
PS Can people even "turn up to dinner" at the White House? Is
there no filtering ? Surprised hobos don't turn up for a free dinner.
Or even curious people. "Wonder what the POTUS eats"....
[]'s
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
On 4/8/2025 8:31 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/8/2025 6:19 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 4:45 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:55:14 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Stalin literally killed millions simply because they
had money. And then when there was no one else to grow
the food
I don't think ANY of the rich guys grew any food.
The peasants
grew the food.
and build the weapons Hitler who himself was nothing
more than a closet communist
Hitler was a far-right fascist. Something like
Musk. First
thing he did was kill all the communists. Only then did
he move on to
gypsies and eventually Jews....
under the mantle of socialism attacked them and nearly
succeeded. And would have it not for the US supplying
arms and ammunition to the brave Russian people at
Stalingrad.
The Russians used Russian arms. Stop watching Hollywood
propaganda. It's obsolete. The cold war is over...
[]'s
Tommy has repeatedly spoken glowingly of Putin and the
current russian regime.
Although US aid/support to the Soviets was significant and
some may argue dispositive overall, the contribution at
Stalingrad was negligible if not nil.
Stalingrad:
https://totalmilitaryinsight.com/weapons-used-by-both-sides/
In terms of weapons, maybe, but myriad sources show supplies
via the lend-lease act were critical to the effort.
https://www.history.com/articles/battle-stalingrad-turning-
point
https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/46345.htm
Granted, written from the point of view of the victors, but
not refuted by USSR or the Russian Federation.
Overall US support during The Great Patriotic War:
https://archive-share.america.gov/america-sent-equipment-
to-soviet- union-in-world-war-ii/
On 4/8/2025 9:02 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 07:38:54 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 4/7/2025 8:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:32 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:35 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
All shifting completes, now, at least on the work stand. It's >>>>>>>>>> still seems a bit noisy and hesatant, but the job gets done. On >>>>>>>>>> Sun, 6 Apr 2025 12:59:52 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 07:46:16 -0400, zen cycleI agree that racism is extremely common throughout the world. I once >>>>>>>>>> read that human societies (from tribes up to nations) tend to >>>>>>>>>> welcome
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
Exceptions abound within all non-white or non-male examples. >>>>>>>>>>>> This in no
way affects the facts around institutionalized racism in this >>>>>>>>>>>> country.
Although perhaps not as obvious but what is basically "racism" >>>>>>>>>>> exists
in many societies. As an example, here (Thailand) Americans are >>>>>>>>>>> generally considered rather stupid and are normally over charged. >>>>>>>>>>
single foreigners as interesting temporary visitors, but tend to get >>>>>>>>>> much more skeptical when, say, clusters show up to move in. And when >>>>>>>>>> larger numbers arrive, it's treated as an "invasion."
The U.S. is an oddball country. Its origin was based on (mostly >>>>>>>>>> inadvertently) killing off the aboriginals, leaving much of the land >>>>>>>>>> unclaimed; then on importing (mostly) Europeans in wave after >>>>>>>>>> wave to
make productive use of the land.
But each new wave went through the "invasion" gauntlet. "No Irish >>>>>>>>>> Need
Apply" and all that. But most - Irish, German, Italian, Polish, >>>>>>>>>> etc. -
were eventually able to blend in.
Those of African origin could not blend in unless they were white >>>>>>>>>> enough
to "pass." They're still considered part of an "invasion." And >>>>>>>>>> yes, that
attitude has been in our institutions for a long, long time. >>>>>>>>>
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago >>>>>> culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and >>>>>> his ilk.
And yet....
https://michiganadvance.com/2024/07/22/we-love-hitler-we- love-trump- >>>>> white-supremacists-march-through-howell/
https://www.ctpublic.org/2025-01-10/nh-supreme-court-sides- with-
white-supremacist-group-over-highway-banner-in-portsmouth
https://www.brennancenter.org/events/do-police-care-about- white-
supremacist-violence
https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/politics- government/2025-01-08/u- >>>>> s-attorneys-office-yellowstone- gunman-espoused-white-supremacist-views >>>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness. Her writings >>>> were suppressed for two years before finally leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-
audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-
revealed-diary-entries/
Specious use of 'suppressed' duly noted and dismissed as specious, and
it wasn't for two years.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-orders-fbi-hand-over-trans-school-shooter-audrey-hale-manifesto
Also duly noted is the conflation of the act of an obviously disturbed
individual versus a movement in the US:
https://www.adl.org/new-hate-and-old-changing-face-american-white-supremacy >>>
and the (at best) complacency of the current US regime:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-hosted-white-supremacist-nick-fuentes-mar-a-lago-reports-2022-11?op=1
Trump was taken "by surprise" when the Nazis showed up to
dinner.
More of an indication of his lack of awareness. Someone approved
Fuentes, he at least would have had to have been vetted by the secret >service. It may very well be that trumps minions were well aware and
didn't say anything to trump as it suited their agenda.
Wonder who invited them. Musk, maybe?
I think this was before Musks bought his way into the cult.
PS Can people even "turn up to dinner" at the White House? Is
there no filtering ? Surprised hobos don't turn up for a free dinner.
Or even curious people. "Wonder what the POTUS eats"....
This was Mar a lago, when Biden was president.
On 4/8/2025 8:50 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
Given anti transgendered sentiment in the US (which is as virulent as
the anti-immigrant sentiment), it's surprising she didn't get flagged.
[]'s
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan and
his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They come in all
flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country we have one
(or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely with your dedication to >finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I think it's
ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing more racism than
whites. It's an extraordinary claim that should require extraordinary >evidence.
Got data?
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly practiced by so called >>>>>>> "people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar with Chicago
culture and politics, I think you discount Screwy Louie Farrakhan
and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They come in all
flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country we have one
(or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I think it's
ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing more racism than
whites. It's an extraordinary claim that should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
On 4/8/2025 11:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As for me, I couldn't care less about your opinion.
:-) You care enough to jump on nearly all of my posts to snark about
them!
At least it brings _some_ meaning to your life. ;-)
On 4/8/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
No, I don't.
Which again revolves on what's being measured, by what
criterion and by whom.
Logically, the number would be less, assuming equal
incidence, in a group 12.3% of the population vs one 63.4%
Both exist.
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:25:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
No, I don't.
Which again revolves on what's being measured, by what
criterion and by whom.
Logically, the number would be less, assuming equal
incidence, in a group 12.3% of the population vs one 63.4%
Both exist.
In Brazil a judge decided that calling someone white is a
compliment, whereas calling them black is always an insult. His
decision has "jurisprudencia" whatever that is in English.
IOW, it's legally impossible for a black person to be racist.
Unless he picks on Orientals, I suppose.
[]'s
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:25:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
No, I don't.
Which again revolves on what's being measured, by what
criterion and by whom.
Logically, the number would be less, assuming equal
incidence, in a group 12.3% of the population vs one 63.4%
Both exist.
In Brazil a judge decided that calling someone white is a
compliment, whereas calling them black is always an insult. His
decision has "jurisprudencia" whatever that is in English.
IOW, it's legally impossible for a black person to be racist.
Unless he picks on Orientals, I suppose.
[]'s
On 4/8/2025 4:34 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:25:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
No, I don't.
Which again revolves on what's being measured, by what
criterion and by whom.
Logically, the number would be less, assuming equal
incidence, in a group 12.3% of the population vs one 63.4%
Both exist.
In Brazil a judge decided that calling someone white is a
compliment, whereas calling them black is always an insult. His
decision has "jurisprudencia" whatever that is in English.
IOW, it's legally impossible for a black person to be racist.
Unless he picks on Orientals, I suppose.
[]'s
This just in today regarding just deserts for racists:
https://nypost.com/2025/04/08/world-news/australian-surgeon-fined-for-sharing-picture-of-coma-patients-swastika-tattooed-penis/
Which is great for the anonymous cretin. He has the ink and
the pipe bomb injuries, both of his own volition!
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 09:59:55 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 4:34 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:25:04 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/8/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 11:26 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/7/2025 9:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/7/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
But racism in the USA today is most commonly
practiced by so called
"people of color" and their white sycophants.
horse shit
Perhaps only because I am near to Chicago and familiar
with Chicago culture and politics, I think you discount
Screwy Louie Farrakhan and his ilk.
Andrew, you're a specialist in finding outlying cases.
"Most commonly" has - or should have - meaning.
It was news to you that we have race baiters here? They
come in all flavors, inciting hatred whenever feeble minds
will listen.
Andrew, you're correct in saying that in our large country
we have one (or more) of everything. That fact jibes nicely
with your dedication to finding outlying cases.
But Zen and I were talking about what's "most common." I
think it's ludicrous to claim that non-whites are practicing
more racism than whites. It's an extraordinary claim that
should require extraordinary evidence.
Got data?
No, I don't.
Which again revolves on what's being measured, by what
criterion and by whom.
Logically, the number would be less, assuming equal
incidence, in a group 12.3% of the population vs one 63.4%
Both exist.
In Brazil a judge decided that calling someone white is a
compliment, whereas calling them black is always an insult. His
decision has "jurisprudencia" whatever that is in English.
IOW, it's legally impossible for a black person to be racist.
Unless he picks on Orientals, I suppose.
[]'s
This just in today regarding just deserts for racists:
https://nypost.com/2025/04/08/world-news/australian-surgeon-fined-for-sharing-picture-of-coma-patients-swastika-tattooed-penis/
Which is great for the anonymous cretin. He has the ink and
the pipe bomb injuries, both of his own volition!
The doctor should have lost his license, or at least had it
suspended for a year or so. U$ 10K is a joke. Probably a week's pay.
Doctor-patient confidentiality is vital to medicine. Should
not be abused.
[]'d
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting >>here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all >>cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:43:41 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting >>>here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all >>>cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
Fortunately, we have a doorbell camera with a microphone and a speaker
so we don't even have to get up and open the door to send away
strangers who come around looking to take notes about us.
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:16:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:43:41 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>>years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single >>>>household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental >>>>or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting >>>>here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>>and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all >>>>cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
Fortunately, we have a doorbell camera with a microphone and a speaker
so we don't even have to get up and open the door to send away
strangers who come around looking to take notes about us.
LOL. If you don't want to talk to them, ask them to take your
address off their list. Or you can phone in and request it. They are
not trying to sell anything like those "have you found jeesus" crowd.
Though you WILL be flagged as a sociopath unless you can come
up with a valid excuse for not wanting to communicate with other
people.
I just say "Hi ! Everything's fine here. Careful, the dog
bites... see you next month..
[]'s
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:16:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:43:41 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>> years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental >>>> or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>> and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
Fortunately, we have a doorbell camera with a microphone and a speaker
so we don't even have to get up and open the door to send away
strangers who come around looking to take notes about us.
LOL. If you don't want to talk to them, ask them to take your
address off their list. Or you can phone in and request it. They are
not trying to sell anything like those "have you found jeesus" crowd.
Though you WILL be flagged as a sociopath unless you can come
up with a valid excuse for not wanting to communicate with other
people.
I just say "Hi ! Everything's fine here. Careful, the dog
bites... see you next month..
[]'s
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:16:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:43:41 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>> years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental >>>> or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>> and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
Fortunately, we have a doorbell camera with a microphone and a speaker
so we don't even have to get up and open the door to send away
strangers who come around looking to take notes about us.
LOL. If you don't want to talk to them, ask them to take your
address off their list. Or you can phone in and request it. They are
not trying to sell anything like those "have you found jeesus" crowd.
Though you WILL be flagged as a sociopath unless you can come
up with a valid excuse for not wanting to communicate with other
people.
I just say "Hi ! Everything's fine here. Careful, the dog
bites... see you next month..
[]'s
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>> years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental >>>> or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>> and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to check up and take
notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments already know
more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with the federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of
their health care.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white-kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent
free public health service. She would have been identified and treated >>>>>> years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with mental >>>>>> or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting >>>>>> here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be American" >>>>>> and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to check up and take
notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments already know
more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of
their health care.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
On 4/11/2025 3:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance companies
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of
their health care.
are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining health care
costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks. It's by far the
most expensive in the world, and delivers far, far from the best results.
Granted, that doesn't prove that a converted U.S. system would be
better. It may be that U.S. politicians could find a way to screw it up.
They seem to be almost uniquely capable of screwing up good ideas.
Overall, I remain astonished by people who try to defend the U.S. health
care system. I can only assume those people are almost totally
innumerate; or perhaps on the take with the current system.
On 4/11/2025 3:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are
unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/
congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in
charge of
their health care.
companies are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining
health care costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks.
It's by far the most expensive in the world, and delivers
far, far from the best results.
Granted, that doesn't prove that a converted U.S. system
would be better. It may be that U.S. politicians could find
a way to screw it up. They seem to be almost uniquely
capable of screwing up good ideas.
Overall, I remain astonished by people who try to defend the
U.S. health care system. I can only assume those people are
almost totally innumerate; or perhaps on the take with the
current system.
On 4/11/2025 9:21 AM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-nashville-school-
shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-wanting-to-kill-all-the-white- >>>>>>>> kids-in-newly-revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent >>>>>>> free public health service. She would have been identified and
treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify people with
mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass shooting >>>>>>> here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be
American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all >>>>>>> cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was >>>>>>> black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents". >>>>>> Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to check up and take
notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments already know
more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with the >>>> federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/congressional/
approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of
their health care.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
On 4/11/2025 11:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 9:21 AM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow
<Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental
illness.
Her writings were suppressed for two years before
finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans-
nashville-school- shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about-
wanting-to-kill-all-the-white- kids-in-newly-
revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't
have a decent
free public health service. She would have been
identified and treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country,
every single
household is visited once a year to try to identify
people with mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had
a mass shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he
"wanted to be American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and
listening in to all
cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught
her if she was
black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its
"health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in
heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to
check up and take
notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments
already know
more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are
unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/
congressional/ approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats
in charge of
their health care.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/
uploads/2013/11/ Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-
Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
lol...sorry andrew, it was just last weekend, so yes, after
only 80 days in office
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/huge-crowds-gather-hands- off-rallies-nationwide-protest/story?id=120523176
On Sun Apr 6 14:53:03 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest in tax experts and >>>> lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax percentage rates in the >>>> 90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite prosperous. Middle >>>> class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no multibillionaires, but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple elderly widows I've met >>>> who are both trying to scrape by only on Social Security. Don't worry, >>>> Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts of money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were the benefactors of this largess until they grew so far left wing that they were attacking the very people funding them.
Tell us dumbass - since he is donating 100%, what does it matter. He isn't working for the profit you numbskull.
On Sun Apr 6 18:49:47 2025 AMuzi wrote:sourse of corruption that would put normal people in prison for life.
On 4/6/2025 11:43 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 20:08:37 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/4/2025 6:34 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 21:42:58 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I have to wonder why only the real losers in the world have to change real facts to fit their narative.
Do you suppose that they really think that it was Trump that invented tariffs?
LOL. No tariffs (also known as taxes paid only by consumers) exist for >>>>> thousands of years. They were the main cause of the great depression >>>>> at the beginning of the last century. The American economy "broke",
and took down the economies of its allies.
Trump as probably the first American President to use tariffs to
manipulate the market and make billions buying cheap and selling high >>>>> and betraying pension funds and small investors. Him and his
billionaire buddies, Maybe that's what you a referring to.
Do you suppose these olittle closet communists reall think that taxing the rich is a good idea?
Basically, it was what the "New Deal" was all about. America grew so >>>>> much that by the 60's - 70's it produced 60% of ALL industrial
products in the world. That is the maximum America has ever produced. >>>>> Millionaires were taxed > 80% on their earnings. They had to work hard >>>>> and employ a lot to expand their businesses and continue rich.
Then they complain that they can't get a job aned want the government to support them.
The "New Deal" collapsed when Reagan removed taxes from the rich and >>>>> shifted them on to the working class and pensioners. And now China is >>>>> the World's #1 economy.... there are more homeless and unemployed
(percentage-wise, obviously) in the US than in China.
PS If you're interested in pro-market right wing publications, read
this month's "The Economist". They are not perfect, in fact I'd call >>>>> them classic repuglicans, but are not usually wrong in their
predictions...
Oh, I forgot. "The Economist" is a British product. You probably can't >>>>> afford it any more...
[]'s
Tax revenue as percent of GDP shows no direct relationship
to statutory marginal rates or political policy:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS?locations=US
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217533/revenues-from-income-tax-and-forecast-in-the-us-as-a-percentage-of-the-gdp/
Oh, and about that "94%" rate (which virtually no one ever
paid), it ran only in FDR's last full year alive and into
1945, dropped after the war to 91% and continued until
Lyndon Johnson, with Democrats running both chambers,
dropped it to 77%:
https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-highest-marginal-income-tax-rates
Concise overview and 1913~2025 chart here:
https://bradfordtaxinstitute.com/Free_Resources/Federal-Income-Tax-Rates.aspx
But let it be said that the Democrats spent the Social Security Trust Fund against the cries of the Republicans. This gave the Democrats the power to claim that people like Trump are going to kill social security when they have been using it as a
Except for FDR and the 1930s Democrat majority Congresses at
the start, it's been both parties ever since. There never
was any "trust fund" or "lock box".
Calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme is an insult o
Charles Ponzi. He at least had some cleverness.
SToday that surplus is not that large not because of an aging population but because of an aging population that is living far longer mazking the percentage of working vs retired smaller.
There is a trust fund but perhaps not as you are thinking - Like at the very founding of SS. it is the working workforce vs. the retir4ed workforce. After WW II the number of people retired per worker was very small, and there was a large surplus.
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result in even the
tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140-billion-savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk-republicans-legislation-next-steps-trump
On 4/11/2025 10:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 11:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 9:21 AM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote: >>>>
On 4/11/2025 2:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
wrote:
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 09:50:57 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:07:51 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
Just saw this on the subject of racism and mental illness. >>>>>>>>>> Her writings were suppressed for two years before finally
leaking out.
https://nypost.com/2025/04/07/us-news/trans- nashville-school- >>>>>>>>>> shooter-audrey-hale-ranted-about- wanting-to-kill-all-the- >>>>>>>>>> white- kids-in-newly- revealed-diary-entries/
Pretty classic schizophrenia. Pity you don't have a decent >>>>>>>>> free public health service. She would have been identified and >>>>>>>>> treated
years ago. Although Brazil is a very poor country, every single >>>>>>>>> household is visited once a year to try to identify people with >>>>>>>>> mental
or infectious problems. I don't think we've ever had a mass
shooting
here(one guy in a cinema, a decade ago, but he "wanted to be >>>>>>>>> American"
and was eventually diagnosed as autistic.)
Also, the TLAs reading all your mail and listening in to all >>>>>>>>> cellphones wasn't at all useful. Might have caught her if she was >>>>>>>>> black or Islamic.....
[]'s
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents". >>>>>>>> Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to check up and take >>>>>> notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments already know >>>>>> more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with >>>>>> the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/ congressional/
approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of >>>>>> their health care.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/ uploads/2013/11/
Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My- Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
lol...sorry andrew, it was just last weekend, so yes, after only 80
days in office
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/huge-crowds-gather-hands- off-rallies-
nationwide-protest/story?id=120523176
A protest in DC? That's not news.
My point was the incongruity of someone on the dole complaining about socialism.
On 4/11/2025 11:25 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:46:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance companies
are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining health care
costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks. It's by far the >>> most expensive in the world, and delivers far, far from the best
results.
IMO, cost calculations and the health care data is manipulated by
pollsters.
Ah yes. Any data you don't happen to like _must_ be false. You are the possessor of the only truth. And your sole evidence is that you happen
to believe it.
I'd think with your head under all that sand, you'd have trouble breathing.
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result in even the
tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140-billion-savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk-republicans-legislation-next-steps-trump
On Sun Apr 6 18:35:17 2025 AMuzi wrote:
On 4/6/2025 11:07 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was >>>> no estate tax.
"Estate tax is paid by the estate on its net value, while inheritance
tax is paid by beneficiaries on what they receive, with estate taxes
going to the [federal] government and inheritance taxes to state
governments."
"Only six states currently impose inheritance taxes: Iowa, Kentucky,
Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania."
<https://www.actec.org/resources-for-wealth-planning-professionals/state-death-tax-chart/>
"Tax is tied to federal state death tax credit. CA REV & TAX ??
13302; 13411.
State Type of Tax: None.
2025 State Death Tax Threshold: None
and more because all of the rich have left so the have to bleed the poor. >>>>Tom, you claimed to have millions in investments. Why are you still
living in California?
03/05/2025
<https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=121640&group=rec.bicycles.tech#121640>
"I GAVE $60,000 to my brothers... In order to protect my investments
from any possible recession I have moved from growth stocks into fuds
like Govertrnment bonds which pay low interest rates rather than
growth. And I still have increased my investments to over $1.1
Million."
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
Displays for me.
Why do you suppose that those pages display for you and not for me with the strongest antivirus on the market? When they try to embed trackers into my system they cannot do so. So it stops the page from loading. Don't worry, as long as you don't haveany important information on your computer such as bank account numbers or credit card information you can always erase the extraneous information you're getting.
On 4/11/2025 12:10 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 11 10:51:36 2025 AMuzi wrote:
That's not a 'trust fund' except to you and The Red Queen,
who make words mean anything you wish.
Where is that money held? Originally it was a very large
trust fund. It may be smaller now but is nevertheless a
large amount of money.
I hear that at the moment, it's in a drawer in Musk's desk,
right underneath his gaming controller. He gazes at the cash
for comfort when he's lost yet another video game.
On Fri Apr 11 10:51:36 2025 AMuzi wrote:
That's not a 'trust fund' except to you and The Red Queen,
who make words mean anything you wish.
Where is that money held? Originally it was a very large trust fund. It may be smaller now but is nevertheless a large amount of money.
On Mon Apr 7 17:39:40 2025 Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:49:53 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity. >>All the corrupt politicians do that here in Brazil too.
The ones that do not steal need their salaries to live on....
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian. You were sniveling about their government. If instead you're Brazilian, you seem to have done very well for yourself.
On 4/11/2025 11:25 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:46:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance companiesIMO, cost calculations and the health care data is manipulated by
are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining health care
costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks. It's by far the >>> most expensive in the world, and delivers far, far from the best results. >>
pollsters.
Ah yes. Any data you don't happen to like _must_ be false. You are the >possessor of the only truth. And your sole evidence is that you happen
to believe it.
I'd think with your head under all that sand, you'd have trouble breathing.
On 4/11/2025 11:53 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will
result in even the
tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://
thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140-
billion-savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk-
republicans-legislation-next-steps-trump
Still proving you're willing to swallow any MAGA spunk
ejaculated in your general direction.
On 4/11/2025 11:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 11:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/
Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
lol...sorry andrew, it was just last weekend, so yes, after only 80 days
in office
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/huge-crowds-gather-hands-off-rallies-
nationwide-protest/story?id=120523176
I think the current "Hands Off My Social Security" may be referring to
Musk and his hacker boys instead of the official government; but I could
be wrong.
On Mon Apr 7 06:38:05 2025 zen cycle wrote:
I was referring specifically to "Trump and Musk are donating 100% of
their government salaries to charity.", which in musks case is exactly
$0 - hence musk isn't contributing any government salary to charity
Flunky - "whine, whine, snivel, snivel snivel.
On Fri Apr 11 11:40:15 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:
He isn't taking a salary at all, you fucking idiot.
So you're now complaining that Elon Musk isn't being paid?
On 4/11/2025 11:21 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 11:53 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result in even the >>>> tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://
thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140- billion-
savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk- republicans-
legislation-next-steps-trump
Still proving you're willing to swallow any MAGA spunk ejaculated in
your general direction.
I believe Mr Musk is sincere.
Then again so was Peter Grace.
Even though I like the goal we're not anywhere near it so far.
On 4/11/2025 11:28 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Mon Apr 7 17:39:40 2025 Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:49:53 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to
charity.
All the corrupt politicians do that here in Brazil too.
The ones that do not steal need their salaries to live on....
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian.
You were sniveling about their government. If instead you're
Brazilian, you seem to have done very well for yourself.
Dr Shadow in is Sao Paulo Brasil.
You conflated Brasil and Argentina months ago and resist everyone's
efforts to correct you on that point.
On Mon Apr 7 06:48:07 2025 zen cycle wrote:
lol....TRy to find any passage in your link which supports
- killed millions simply because they had money
- hitler was able to invade because there was _no_ one left to do
agricultural or industrial labor.
I'll give you a little credit for The US contributions via the
lend-lease act, but you're 1 for 3, (which is actually pretty good for you)
There you have it. Flunky is a fan of Joseph Stalin.
On 4/11/2025 11:18 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/11/2025 12:10 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 11 10:51:36 2025 AMuzi wrote:
That's not a 'trust fund' except to you and The Red Queen,
who make words mean anything you wish.
Where is that money held? Originally it was a very large trust fund.
It may be smaller now but is nevertheless a large amount of money.
I hear that at the moment, it's in a drawer in Musk's desk, right
underneath his gaming controller. He gazes at the cash for comfort
when he's lost yet another video game.
I get the humor (and it's funny).
Although I know nothing of computer games, Mr Musk apparently does:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2024/11/22/elon-musk-apparently- just-became-the-no-1-diablo-4-player-in-the-world/
On 4/11/2025 11:28 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Mon Apr 7 17:39:40 2025 Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:49:53 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity. >>>All the corrupt politicians do that here in Brazil too.
The ones that do not steal need their salaries to live on....
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian.
You were sniveling about their government. If instead you're Brazilian,
you seem to have done very well for yourself.
Dr Shadow in is Sao Paulo Brasil.
You conflated Brasil and Argentina months ago and resist
everyone's efforts to correct you on that point.
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:18:12 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/10/2025 3:43 PM, Shadow wrote:
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
A great example of the old adage, "For every room in heaven,
there's one just like it in hell for someone else."
The idea of a government agent coming to my door to check up and take
notes on me boggles the mind. The various governments already know
more about me than I'm comfortable with.
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are unhappy with the >federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in charge of
their health care.
Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:16:14 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 17:43:41 -0300, Shadow <Sh@dow.br> wrote: ..............
Just came across this:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65530272>
About the Brazilian health system... and its "health agents".
Worth a read.
[]'s
Fortunately, we have a doorbell camera with a microphone and a speaker
so we don't even have to get up and open the door to send away
strangers who come around looking to take notes about us.
LOL. If you don't want to talk to them, ask them to take your
address off their list. Or you can phone in and request it. They are
not trying to sell anything like those "have you found jeesus" crowd.
Though you WILL be flagged as a sociopath unless you can come
up with a valid excuse for not wanting to communicate with other
people.
I just say "Hi ! Everything's fine here. Careful, the dog
bites... see you next month..
[]'s
Ive had various checkups and think the occasional blood tests, though
since Im frankly a specialist subject (brain injury) I do wonder as to the >usefulness of this!
Ie lot of my medical history and future is likely linked to that.
Roger Merriman
On 4/11/2025 9:21 AM, John B. wrote:..........
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
On 4/11/2025 9:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/11/2025 3:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are
unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/
congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in
charge of
their health care.
companies are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining
health care costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks.
It's by far the most expensive in the world, and delivers
far, far from the best results.
Granted, that doesn't prove that a converted U.S. system
would be better. It may be that U.S. politicians could find
a way to screw it up. They seem to be almost uniquely
capable of screwing up good ideas.
Overall, I remain astonished by people who try to defend the
U.S. health care system. I can only assume those people are
almost totally innumerate; or perhaps on the take with the
current system.
It is indeed not fully government run but has strayed far
from a free market.
The regulations* are voluminous, draconian, excessive and in
many instances counterproductive with disincentives all
through. One great example is the establishment of PBMs and
price controls which incentivize kickbacks (the industry
says 'rebates') and padding various 'cost' bases. Throw in
the deluge of flagrant Medicaid and Medicare phony billing
codes for fictitious services and a few hundred other
rackets, scams and shortcuts.
UK NHS runs about US$4310 per human:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7zvp5xrqo
US runs roughly $13493
While there are differences in the systems (age cutoffs and
delays versus outright denials) it's not clear to me that we
have a 310% quality differential to match the price difference.
As economists say about that sort of systemic degradation,
'You can make fish soup from an aquarium but it's hard to go
back.'
*No industry suffers more regulation, by a wide margin. And--
not only Federal regulation. States pile on in pernicious
ways too, for example one has to either cajole or bribe
regulators for permits to open a hospital or buy new
equipment for existing facilities.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:02:41 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 9:21 AM, John B. wrote:..........
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:01:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
+1
As incongruent as demonstrators' signs, 'Government hands
off my Social Security'
WTF?
Already? After only 80 days in office?
No, that was in 2009, 2010, the Tea Party days.
https://i0.wp.com/www.zebrafactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Keep-Your-Government-Hands-Off-My-Medicare.png?w=640&ssl=1
LOL. Didn't know Psilocybe tea was a thing in the US. Great at
parties, but tends to completely mess up your thought processes...
As evidenced by imbeciles in the picture.
The damage can be permanent. I'll bet you many that survived
voted for Trump.
[]'s
On Sun Apr 6 14:53:03 2025 zen cycle wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 21:43:55 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
chambers, dropped it to 77%:I'm sure "virtually no one ever paid" the high marginal tax rates,
largely because people earning that much money invest in tax experts and >> >> lawyers to minimize their tax burdens by any legal, and some very
questionable tactics.
But I think it's significant that with top tax percentage rates in the
90s, then in the 70s, the country was generally quite prosperous. Middle >> >> class prosperity soared. So what was the downside?
True, we had fewer millionaires and no multibillionaires, but as I
recall, we got along pretty well without them.
Overall, I think the government should be doing less to help
megamillionaires and more to help, say, a couple elderly widows I've met >> >> who are both trying to scrape by only on Social Security. Don't worry,
Musk and Bezos and Zuckerberg won't go hungry. Honest!
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
And many many other very rich people give huge amounts of money to charities. For many, many years NPR and PBS were the benefactors of this largess until they grew so far left wing that they were attacking the very people funding them.
Tell us dumbass - since he is donating 100%, what does it matter. He isn't working for the profit you numbskull.
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy by the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome cut off their water.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:24:18 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 9:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/11/2025 3:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are
unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/
congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in
charge of
their health care.
companies are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining
health care costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks.
It's by far the most expensive in the world, and delivers
far, far from the best results.
Granted, that doesn't prove that a converted U.S. system
would be better. It may be that U.S. politicians could find
a way to screw it up. They seem to be almost uniquely
capable of screwing up good ideas.
Overall, I remain astonished by people who try to defend the
U.S. health care system. I can only assume those people are
almost totally innumerate; or perhaps on the take with the
current system.
It is indeed not fully government run but has strayed far
from a free market.
The regulations* are voluminous, draconian, excessive and in
many instances counterproductive with disincentives all
through. One great example is the establishment of PBMs and
price controls which incentivize kickbacks (the industry
says 'rebates') and padding various 'cost' bases. Throw in
the deluge of flagrant Medicaid and Medicare phony billing
codes for fictitious services and a few hundred other
rackets, scams and shortcuts.
It's impossible for ANY healthcare to work if ANYpart of it is outsourced to private firms.
UK NHS runs about US$4310 per human:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7zvp5xrqo
See. That was Thatcher. All the most profitable parts were
privatized. Doctors get "incentives" to ask for exams done by private companies. The NHS has strayed so far from what it was that Geoge
Orwell would be shocked if he was alive today.
I can almost see the slogans:
Sickness is Health.
Being Born is Death
US runs roughly $13493
While there are differences in the systems (age cutoffs and
delays versus outright denials) it's not clear to me that we
have a 310% quality differential to match the price difference.
As economists say about that sort of systemic degradation,
'You can make fish soup from an aquarium but it's hard to go
back.'
*No industry suffers more regulation, by a wide margin. And
not only Federal regulation. States pile on in pernicious
ways too, for example one has to either cajole or bribe
regulators for permits to open a hospital or buy new
equipment for existing facilities.
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result in even the
tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140-billion-savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk-republicans-legislation-next-steps-trump
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:53:53 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Sun Apr 6 14:45:47 2025 zen cycle wrote:
Trying to thing of anything trump is doing that will result in even the
tiniest fraction of $3T........
Showing yet again your skill with numbers. https://thenationaldesk.com/news/fact-check-team/doge-reports-140-billion-savings-amid-unaccounted-treasury-funds-elon-musk-republicans-legislation-next-steps-trump
A "fact check" that starts off praising Trump and Musk?
You used to have a neuron that said "Hey, that's blatant
#FAKE_NEWS".
What happened to it?
[]'s
On Sun Apr 6 18:35:17 2025 AMuzi wrote:..............
On 4/6/2025 11:07 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Apr 4 17:59:08 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:36:14 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
In California add to the top rate another 12%. plus gas tax, plus salews tax,plus 50% inheretance tax, property taxes.
The California estate tax was reduced starting in 2001 and ended in
2005:
<https://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html>
Since your mother died in 2019, you should have noticed that there was
no estate tax.
"Estate tax is paid by the estate on its net value, while inheritance
tax is paid by beneficiaries on what they receive, with estate taxes
going to the [federal] government and inheritance taxes to state
governments."
As is usual for Liebermann - "Welcome to the State Controller's Website
The page you requested is not found"
Displays for me.
Why do you suppose that those pages display for you and not for me
with the strongest antivirus on the market?
When they try to embed trackers into my system they cannot do so. So it stops the page from loading.
On Mon Apr 7 18:03:23 2025 Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 6 Apr 2025 14:53:03 -0400, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 4/6/2025 12:49 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, rather than implying criminal acts by people simply because they have money tell us some specific cases of "questionable practices". Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity.
Gee tommy, tell us exactly what musks salary is.
The exact amount he donates to poor people. I think that's
what Tom meant.
ZERO.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/01/elon-musk-foundation-charity-donations/82594217007/
Does that sound like zero?
On Mon Apr 7 17:39:40 2025 Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 16:49:53 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Trump and Musk are donating 100% of their government salaries to charity. >>All the corrupt politicians do that here in Brazil too.
The ones that do not steal need their salaries to live on....
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian.
You were sniveling about their government. If instead you're Brazilian,
you seem to have done very well for yourself.
On 4/11/2025 2:36 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:24:18 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/11/2025 9:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/11/2025 3:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
As opposed to the current scheme in which private insurance
Here's another related mind boggle:
The polling in the USA indicates that most people are
unhappy with the
federal government,
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/
congressional/approval-rating
yet many of them want to put government bureaucrats in
charge of
their health care.
companies are in charge of their health care?
Hmm. How can we see which works better? Maybe by examining
health care costs and results for countries using each scheme?
By that standard, the American health care system sucks.
It's by far the most expensive in the world, and delivers
far, far from the best results.
Granted, that doesn't prove that a converted U.S. system
would be better. It may be that U.S. politicians could find
a way to screw it up. They seem to be almost uniquely
capable of screwing up good ideas.
Overall, I remain astonished by people who try to defend the
U.S. health care system. I can only assume those people are
almost totally innumerate; or perhaps on the take with the
current system.
It is indeed not fully government run but has strayed far
from a free market.
The regulations* are voluminous, draconian, excessive and in
many instances counterproductive with disincentives all
through. One great example is the establishment of PBMs and
price controls which incentivize kickbacks (the industry
says 'rebates') and padding various 'cost' bases. Throw in
the deluge of flagrant Medicaid and Medicare phony billing
codes for fictitious services and a few hundred other
rackets, scams and shortcuts.
It's impossible for ANY healthcare to work if ANYpart of it is
outsourced to private firms.
UK NHS runs about US$4310 per human:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7zvp5xrqo
See. That was Thatcher. All the most profitable parts were
privatized. Doctors get "incentives" to ask for exams done by private
companies. The NHS has strayed so far from what it was that Geoge
Orwell would be shocked if he was alive today.
I can almost see the slogans:
Sickness is Health.
Being Born is Death
US runs roughly $13493
While there are differences in the systems (age cutoffs and
delays versus outright denials) it's not clear to me that we
have a 310% quality differential to match the price difference.
As economists say about that sort of systemic degradation,
'You can make fish soup from an aquarium but it's hard to go
back.'
*No industry suffers more regulation, by a wide margin. And
not only Federal regulation. States pile on in pernicious
ways too, for example one has to either cajole or bribe
regulators for permits to open a hospital or buy new
equipment for existing facilities.
You're welcome to your opinion but the BBC link is 2025,
twenty five years after Ms Thatcher resigned.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy by the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian.
Tell us dumbass - since he is donating 100%, what does it matter. He isn't working for the profit you numbskull.
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 16:28:20 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I am somewhat confused. I thought you said that you were Argentinian.
OMG. I asked you not to forget that YESTERDAY.
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy by
the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing
vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome
cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a truth in there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor, nuisance lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam, which was the beginning of the
end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the-people/telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed eventually, the larger
issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-to-get-water- flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking precedent (snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water management became focused away
from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA, CalEPA, etc)
decided that fresh water running into San Francisco Bay was absolutely critical to the survival of the delta smelt and blocking water projects
or removing dams was not sufficient for the small fish. Having made that
a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the Central Valley, which was highly productive land for dense vegetable farming, were abrogated.
Farms which had used sluice gates to irrigate for nearly a hundred years
were cut off. That's been a rolling crisis for years and is recently exacerbated by new limits on pumping groundwater. Farmers cannot pump
water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land values have
gone in different directions and, despite ample rainfall in 2023 and
again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into
bankruptcy by the Democrat administration quite a few
who had been growing vegetablkes for generations
committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I
don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a
truth in there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor,
nuisance lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam,
which was the beginning of the end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the-
people/telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed
eventually, the larger issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-to-
get-water- flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking
precedent (snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water
management became focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA,
CalEPA, etc) decided that fresh water running into San
Francisco Bay was absolutely critical to the survival of
the delta smelt and blocking water projects or removing
dams was not sufficient for the small fish. Having made
that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the Central
Valley, which was highly productive land for dense
vegetable farming, were abrogated. Farms which had used
sluice gates to irrigate for nearly a hundred years were
cut off. That's been a rolling crisis for years and is
recently exacerbated by new limits on pumping groundwater.
Farmers cannot pump water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land
values have gone in different directions and, despite
ample rainfall in 2023 and again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california-
water-crisis/
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil
and gas operators use millions of gallons of California’s
limited water during times of intense dryness to amass
tremendous profits, while local wells run dry. And as these
private interests guzzle down the water supply, more than 1
million people in California do not have access to safe
drinking water."
On Sat, 12 Apr 2025 09:02:45 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
On 4/12/2025 8:20 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into
bankruptcy by the Democrat administration quite a few
who had been growing vegetablkes for generations
committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I
don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a
truth in there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor,
nuisance lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam,
which was the beginning of the end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the-
people/telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed
eventually, the larger issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-to-
get-water- flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking
precedent (snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water
management became focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA,
CalEPA, etc) decided that fresh water running into San
Francisco Bay was absolutely critical to the survival of
the delta smelt and blocking water projects or removing
dams was not sufficient for the small fish. Having made
that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the Central
Valley, which was highly productive land for dense
vegetable farming, were abrogated. Farms which had used
sluice gates to irrigate for nearly a hundred years were
cut off. That's been a rolling crisis for years and is
recently exacerbated by new limits on pumping groundwater.
Farmers cannot pump water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land
values have gone in different directions and, despite
ample rainfall in 2023 and again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california-
water-crisis/
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil
and gas operators use millions of gallons of California’s
limited water during times of intense dryness to amass
tremendous profits, while local wells run dry. And as these
private interests guzzle down the water supply, more than 1
million people in California do not have access to safe
drinking water."
Both can be true and both sorta are true.
Wasting huge volumes of water straight into San Francisco
Bay is not a helpful policy, not for farmers nor anyone
else. Contract abrogation in denying deeded water rights to
ag landowners left groundwater pumping, which is we agree
another problem now.
There haven't been any major California water
control/storage/redirection projects in 50 years, despite
oodles of 'project studies' and compelling need. This is a
turnaround from the 100 prior years, when large scale water
management was crucial to development and not only to ag
production directly.
As a side note, this is not only a California problem
although the nature of that area, with periodic droughts,
make it 'newsy'. Our total national hydroelectric power
generation is lower than 60, 70 years ago. How does that
make any sense?
Wasn't a dam broken down somewhere? Something about letting the fishes
swim, or some such thing.
On 4/12/2025 11:17 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/12/2025 10:09 AM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2025 09:02:45 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
Our total national hydroelectric power
generation is lower than 60, 70 years ago. How does that
make any sense?
Wasn't a dam broken down somewhere? Something about
letting the fishes
swim, or some such thing.
Ongoing disaster. We're ripping them out, not building
more and better dams. See first chart here:
https://energycentral.com/c/ec/hydroelectric-generators-
are-among- united-states-oldest-power-plants
Dam removal doesn't necessarily have anything to do with
hydroelectric power. Locally, the Mahoning River was a
famously polluted industrial sewer. For about 100 years,
miles and miles of steel mills and other factories lining
the river used the water for process cooling, and discharged
untreated waste directly into the river. Many of those
factories had low head dams to ensure access to the water
they used.
The mills are nearly all gone, but until very recently all
the dams remained. They are being removed to allow the river
to recover by flushing and dispersing heavily polluted
sediment. Fish, birds and even kayakers and canoeists have
returned to the river - although it's common to hear advice
to not walk in the stream. In at least some places, if your
feet sink too deeply in the sediment, they say you'll be
standing in thick grease.
I have two surviving brothers - Nickolas Kunich Jr. and Robert Kunich. Apparently Liebermann thinks those are identical names.
On 4/12/2025 8:20 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy by
the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing
vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome
cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a truth in
there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor, nuisance
lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam, which was the
beginning of the end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the- people/
telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed eventually, the
larger issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-to- get-water-
flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking precedent
(snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water management became
focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA, CalEPA, etc)
decided that fresh water running into San Francisco Bay was
absolutely critical to the survival of the delta smelt and blocking
water projects or removing dams was not sufficient for the small
fish. Having made that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the
Central Valley, which was highly productive land for dense vegetable
farming, were abrogated. Farms which had used sluice gates to
irrigate for nearly a hundred years were cut off. That's been a
rolling crisis for years and is recently exacerbated by new limits on
pumping groundwater. Farmers cannot pump water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land values have
gone in different directions and, despite ample rainfall in 2023 and
again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california- water-crisis/
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil and gas
operators use millions of gallons of California’s limited water during
times of intense dryness to amass tremendous profits, while local
wells run dry. And as these private interests guzzle down the water
supply, more than 1 million people in California do not have access to
safe drinking water."
Both can be true and both sorta are true.
Wasting huge volumes of water straight into San Francisco Bay is not a helpful policy, not for farmers nor anyone else. Contract abrogation in denying deeded water rights to ag landowners left groundwater pumping,
which is we agree another problem now.
There haven't been any major California water control/storage/
redirection projects in 50 years, despite oodles of 'project studies'
and compelling need. This is a turnaround from the 100 prior years,
when large scale water management was crucial to development and not
only to ag production directly.
As a side note, this is not only a California problem although the
nature of that area, with periodic droughts, make it 'newsy'. Our total national hydroelectric power generation is lower than 60, 70 years ago.
How does that make any sense?
On 4/12/2025 10:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/12/2025 8:20 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy by >>>>>> the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing
vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome >>>>>> cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a truth in
there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor, nuisance
lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam, which was the
beginning of the end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the- people/
telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed eventually, the
larger issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-to- get-water-
flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking precedent
(snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water management became
focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA, CalEPA, etc)
decided that fresh water running into San Francisco Bay was
absolutely critical to the survival of the delta smelt and blocking
water projects or removing dams was not sufficient for the small
fish. Having made that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the
Central Valley, which was highly productive land for dense vegetable
farming, were abrogated. Farms which had used sluice gates to
irrigate for nearly a hundred years were cut off. That's been a
rolling crisis for years and is recently exacerbated by new limits on
pumping groundwater. Farmers cannot pump water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land values have
gone in different directions and, despite ample rainfall in 2023 and
again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california- water-crisis/
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil and gas
operators use millions of gallons of Californias limited water during
times of intense dryness to amass tremendous profits, while local
wells run dry. And as these private interests guzzle down the water
supply, more than 1 million people in California do not have access to
safe drinking water."
Both can be true and both sorta are true.
Wasting huge volumes of water straight into San Francisco Bay is not a
helpful policy, not for farmers nor anyone else. Contract abrogation in
denying deeded water rights to ag landowners left groundwater pumping,
which is we agree another problem now.
There haven't been any major California water control/storage/
redirection projects in 50 years, despite oodles of 'project studies'
and compelling need. This is a turnaround from the 100 prior years,
when large scale water management was crucial to development and not
only to ag production directly.
As a side note, this is not only a California problem although the
nature of that area, with periodic droughts, make it 'newsy'. Our total
national hydroelectric power generation is lower than 60, 70 years ago.
How does that make any sense?
It makes perfect sense to the fossil fuel companies.
On 4/12/2025 10:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/12/2025 8:20 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom
<cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into
bankruptcy by the Democrat administration quite a few
who had been growing vegetablkes for generations
committed suicide when Gavin Loathsome cut off their
water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I
don't look
like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a
truth in there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor,
nuisance lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico
Dam, which was the beginning of the end for sane water
management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the-
people/ telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed
eventually, the larger issues (humans vs baitfish)
festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how-
to- get-water- flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking
precedent (snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water
management became focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA,
CalEPA, etc) decided that fresh water running into San
Francisco Bay was absolutely critical to the survival of
the delta smelt and blocking water projects or removing
dams was not sufficient for the small fish. Having made
that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in the
Central Valley, which was highly productive land for
dense vegetable farming, were abrogated. Farms which had
used sluice gates to irrigate for nearly a hundred years
were cut off. That's been a rolling crisis for years and
is recently exacerbated by new limits on pumping
groundwater. Farmers cannot pump water on their own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land
values have gone in different directions and, despite
ample rainfall in 2023 and again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california-
water-crisis/
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil
and gas operators use millions of gallons of California’s
limited water during times of intense dryness to amass
tremendous profits, while local wells run dry. And as
these private interests guzzle down the water supply,
more than 1 million people in California do not have
access to safe drinking water."
Both can be true and both sorta are true.
Wasting huge volumes of water straight into San Francisco
Bay is not a helpful policy, not for farmers nor anyone
else. Contract abrogation in denying deeded water rights
to ag landowners left groundwater pumping, which is we
agree another problem now.
There haven't been any major California water control/
storage/ redirection projects in 50 years, despite oodles
of 'project studies' and compelling need. This is a
turnaround from the 100 prior years, when large scale
water management was crucial to development and not only
to ag production directly.
As a side note, this is not only a California problem
although the nature of that area, with periodic droughts,
make it 'newsy'. Our total national hydroelectric power
generation is lower than 60, 70 years ago. How does that
make any sense?
It makes perfect sense to the fossil fuel companies.
On 4/13/2025 5:55 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/12/2025 10:02 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/12/2025 8:20 AM, zen cycle wrote:
On 4/11/2025 6:56 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/11/2025 2:49 PM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:43:43 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Vegetable farmers in California have been driven into bankruptcy >>>>>>> by the Democrat administration quite a few who had been growing
vegetablkes for generations committed suicide when Gavin
Loathsome cut off their water.
LOL
Can I quote you on that? PS I'll need sources so I don't look >>>>>> like a fool.
Sources pls.
[]'s
As with many comments from Mr Kunich there is actually a truth in
there. Someplace.
Over 50 years ago, long before the present Governor, nuisance
lawsuits stopped construction of TVA Tellico Dam, which was the
beginning of the end for sane water management.
https://www.tva.com/about-tva/our-history/built-for-the- people/
telling- the-story-of-tellico-it-s-complicated
and although that project was in fact completed eventually, the
larger issues (humans vs baitfish) festered:
https://www.ocregister.com/2014/03/22/tom-campbell-how- to- get-
water- flowing-again-in-california/
with one smaller-than-bait-fish after another invoking precedent
(snail darter, delta smelt, whatever), water management became
focused away from human nourishment.
Starting 20? 25? odd years ago, the powers that be (EPA, CalEPA,
etc) decided that fresh water running into San Francisco Bay was
absolutely critical to the survival of the delta smelt and blocking
water projects or removing dams was not sufficient for the small
fish. Having made that a priority, water rights tied to deeds in
the Central Valley, which was highly productive land for dense
vegetable farming, were abrogated. Farms which had used sluice
gates to irrigate for nearly a hundred years were cut off. That's
been a rolling crisis for years and is recently exacerbated by new
limits on pumping groundwater. Farmers cannot pump water on their
own land!
Ag production has been devastated, unemployment and land values
have gone in different directions and, despite ample rainfall in
2023 and again in 2024:
https://engaging-data.com/california-precipitation-levels/
the water goes right past Mr Kunich's house into the Bay.
Well, that's one distorted opinion. Here's another:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2023/02/01/california- water-crisis/ >>>>
"Almond empires, alfalfa exporters, mega-dairies, and oil and gas
operators use millions of gallons of California’s limited water
during times of intense dryness to amass tremendous profits, while
local wells run dry. And as these private interests guzzle down the
water supply, more than 1 million people in California do not have
access to safe drinking water."
Both can be true and both sorta are true.
Wasting huge volumes of water straight into San Francisco Bay is not
a helpful policy, not for farmers nor anyone else. Contract
abrogation in denying deeded water rights to ag landowners left
groundwater pumping, which is we agree another problem now.
There haven't been any major California water control/ storage/
redirection projects in 50 years, despite oodles of 'project studies'
and compelling need. This is a turnaround from the 100 prior years,
when large scale water management was crucial to development and not
only to ag production directly.
As a side note, this is not only a California problem although the
nature of that area, with periodic droughts, make it 'newsy'. Our
total national hydroelectric power generation is lower than 60, 70
years ago. How does that make any sense?
It makes perfect sense to the fossil fuel companies.
Probably at the margin.
But it's unclear at best that the evil fuel producers have much sway in California state policy.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 53:19:49 |
| Calls: | 9,810 |
| Calls today: | 12 |
| Files: | 13,754 |
| Messages: | 6,190,511 |
