Linux-Advocacy Digest #689, Volume #28 Sun, 27 Aug 00 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Linux..a trip down memory lane.. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Mike
Marion)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Windows blows ("Joe Kiser")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chad Irby)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Jim Richardson)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 27 Aug 2000 22:18:01 GMT
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:29:07 GMT, Mike Marion wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> If you get into the details, which teachers see, but most people don't -- you
>> find that the students with the problems are by and large the ones with
>> problem homes. And it comes with them to school -- and what happenes to them
>
>I'm not arguing that point, but they shouldn't be allowed to graduate (so
>called "social promotion") if they can't do what's required. The fact that
I pretty much agree with you on this one. I believe that everyone should
be allowed to work at their own pace, but I don't believe that they can
both work at a different pace *and* graduate in the same time.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux..a trip down memory lane..
Reply-To: redmond.net
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:22:14 -0400
Use Linux?
Yea sure, and I would love to drive that 1975 Chrysler you have sitting in your
garage.
Linux is like a visit back in time... It takes operations that are simple under
Windows, and turns them into a mess of reading, programming and general wasting
of time.....It's all about applications and one quick look at freshmeat.net
shows a collection of fragmented and useless applications only a true idiot
could love.
Try Netscape some time (Windows version will do) and see what you think...Oh
yea, "several" browsers are in the works for Linux...Think they will ever see
the light of day?
Doubtful....
My advice?
If you are interested, try Linux and see for yourself...
http://www.cheapbytes.com
You will soon become another dis-satisifed customer...
Linux is even worse than a piece of shit, it is more like a septic tank filled
with fresh sewerage....
Shit, what do you expect for $1.99?
Billy
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:25:52 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> Would you care to back up your bold claim with some statistics ?
Just go to a site like cnn, do a search on social promotion and read some of
the articles related to schools (you'll get hits on political stuff too).
Nice quotes like:
"I want to go to my right grade. I don't want to stay in
sixth," said 12-year-old Natasha Ware, taking a
break from a decimal multiplication exercise. "I don't
want to be no failure all my life and stuff like that."
from http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/06/28/social.promotion/index.html show a
lacking in her education.. yet she thinks she should still move to the next
grade even if she hasn't earned it. I have two friends that are brothers who
were both held back (one twice) mainly because they moved from Mexico to the
US when they were 4 and 5 years old (legally BTW). The both worked hard,
didn't see themselves as failures, and one is now in medical school while the
other is working to be a Respiratory Tech.
But read some of those articles at CNN and even the kids' parents make these
arguments that if their children are held back, they'll be scarred for life.
Too bad they didn't get involved in their kids education before they fell so
far behind. Maybe a little care ahead of time would've avoided the
problem(s).
> To show that an education system is inferior, you need to control for the
> ability of incoming students.
Read what I wrote... I wasn't arguing that either system was better or worse
at churning out students... I was simply noting that even though Japan's
system seems to churn out better students, they do so at a high cost to those
students lives through far too much pressure. A good education doesn't do any
good if the child is pushed to the breaking point. But that's yet another
conversation and this thread is already too big to keep up on. :)
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://miguelito.org
Well, what else is important to them? As far as stimulants go, both of our
generations know the feeling of jonesing for product from Columbia; it's just
that their product is coffee. -- Dennis Miller on GenX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 27 Aug 2000 22:27:09 GMT
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:01:37 GMT, ZnU wrote:
>by measuring things like how long it takes you to make block patterns
>and how well you can repeat strings of numbers. Do you consider those
>reasonable criteria for measuring the ability of job applicants?
Up to a certain point. The tests are just used for pre-screening,
but the interviews are the real "test".
>Sometimes high intelligence isn't even the most important criterion;
>good communication skills or initiative can be more valuable in certain
>positions. You'd almost certainly be doing yourself a disservice by
>pre-screening applicants based on IQ.
For positions where intelligence is unimportant, they are less prone
to using such tests.
>that you can make a reasonably strong case that IQ tests are biased.
There are two possible conclusions ( not neccessarily mutually exclusive )
one could reach from the fact that different groups perform differently on the
test. Either it says something about the test or it says something about the
groups. To assume either way without proof is dogmatic.
To show that the "general knowledege" has an impact on tests, you'd need
to investigate whether or not removing / changing the "general knowledge"
content has any impact on the alleged "bias" in the tests.
"The Bell Curve" tests this and concludes that changing/removing such
biases has no effect ( or even an effect in the reverse direction ).
However, I'd want to see corroboration from other sources before drawing
my own conclusions.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Joe Kiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows blows
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 18:29:23 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Windows sucks dick.. every single Microsoft operating system is complete
> garbage..
Looks like junior got Linux installed and thinks he's l33t now.
Anybody stupid enough to bet their business on Microshaft
> products deserves what they get.
Yeah, like $30,000 profits from stock investing?
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:43:19 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even at a mere 100 feet, all sub disasters are "over in a couple of
> seconds".
Nope. There's even a current book out about the rescue of an American
sub crew from 250 feet in 1939 (this is about 50 feet shallower than the
Kursk), and there have been practice rescues from other subs as deep as
500 feet (including some free-escape tests from that depth).
Doesn't matter too much though, since the current story from Russia is
that it was involved in a collision with a ship, which puts the depth at
zero feet.
> Once the boat is flooded, it doesn't matter how long it takes to sink
> to the bottom.
But there's no guarantee the boat was completely flooded right away, and
since they managed to shut down the reactors, it suggests that there was
enough time to do quite a few things, like close some doors. Current
reports suggest that the reactors were actually shut down *after* the
sub was on the sea bed, since the cooling water intakes are on the
bottom of the nose of the ship, and would have been clogged.
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:15:37 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 01:58:34 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>wrote:
>>>
>>> And with that understanding, I entirely agree. Normally a large market
>>> share *can* be considered monopolization, as there is no other way to
>>> get large market share in a competitive market.
>>
>>That's most certainly not true.
>>
>>A large enough market share (>90% typically) can be considered a
>>monopoly.
>>
>>But to say that there's no way to get that large a share in a
>>competitive market is just plain wrong.
>
>Adam Smith says you're wrong.
Where?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:18:08 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:33:43 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said Courageous in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>
>>> At best, this system will waste $60 billion of US tax payer money.
>>
>>Many incidental technologies generally flow from such efforts.
>
>"Star Wars" is not landing a man on the moon, I'm afraid.
>
>>> At worst, it will waste much more and start a another cold war.
>>
>>I believe this is doubtful.
>
>Well, if you had a background in foreign policy, and the temerity to
>post with your real name, perhaps we might care about your belief, one
>way or the other.
>
Speak for yourself, I value his belief/opinion as much as I value yours...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:23:05 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:28:25 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said Eric Bennett in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> [...]
>>> >You're making so many absurd assumptions that it's hard to know where to
>>> >start:
>>>
>>> Am I?
>>>
>>> >1. You assume that a temporary monopoly can't be harmful. It can.
>>>
>>> Adam Smith say's you're wrong.
>>
>>Adam Smith also says antitrust laws are not viable. Do you believe him?
>
>Do you have a quote?
>
>>> >4. You assume that a temporary monopoly can be overcome by a free
>>> >market. It may not.
>>>
>>> Adam Smith say's you're wrong.
>>
>>Adam Smith also says antitrust laws are not viable. Do you believe him?
>
>I don't believe you when you say that he says that, if that's what
>you're asking. Adam Smith might be thought, in some ingenuous theory,
>to say that anti-trust laws are not necessary. In that, alas, he was
>idealistic, if it is indeed the case.
So when *you* say Adam Smith said something (without, I might add, any quote
to back you up.) We are to believe whole heartedly that he did in fact say it,
and that he was right. But if someone else claims Mr Smith said something,
you first demand a quote (reasonable. If only you would follow your own
requirements) and then wave Smiths words off as idealistic?
So, just to recap, when you quote someone it's gospel, but when someone
else does, it's either made up or idealistic?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:35:28 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 06:56:37 GMT,
Courageous, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>> Carter has devoted his post-presidential life to public service, for
>> which he's been widely given honors and respect, as he deserves.
>
>Quite true. Carter was an awful President, but seems to be
>an outstanding humanitarian. Credit where credit is due.
>
>
>
>
>C//
I was (and am) a vocal critic of Carter as a president, (or as a foreign
policy ambassador for that matter) but I would be proud to stand next to
him and help with the habitat for overbreeding hominids :)
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:51:10 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:26:28 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> [...]
>>You should talk. Your hero Reagan was the king of anecdotal evidence.
>>Your only argument in support of your sick economic policies is that
>>very rarely some people from the bottom manage to pull themselves to the
>>top.
>
>Not that Aaron was ever on the bottom. I think we can safely presume
>that, despite the limited economic means of his parents, he's a healthy
>white male.
>
>--
For questions on economic mobility in the US, perhaps
http://www.urban.org/oppor/opp_031b.html
would shed some light.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:27:02 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:51:52 -0400,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>> [...]
>>> >Even if I get what I've been promised, my lifetime return on investment
>>> >will probably be negative or in the very low single digits. If I had
>>> >been able to invest my Social Security "contribution" in any reasonable
>>> >investment, I'd retire extremely wealthy -by almost any standards.
>>> >
>>> >That IS theft
>>>
>>> Nobody ever made you any promises, Joe, other than you won't starve to
>>> death.
>>
>>Sound's like a good deal to me.
>>"Give us 6.2% of your gross pay all of your life and we'll allow you to live
>>below the poverty level on cans of dog food slow cooked over the pilot light
>>of your stove, in the dark."
>>
>>But I like this plan better.
>>Put away 6% in an IRA for your whole life and retire early as a
>>multi-millionair.
>
>So do that, too, after you've provided for social security, because not
>everyone comes out on top in the end, like you hope to. Obviously,
>there are more people who might eat dog food on social security than
>would retire multi-millionaires.
>
I know people who retire millionaires from investments, I know no-one eating
dog-food to survive. Nor have I seen any valid examples of old folks chowing
down on purina. Kernunos!, dog-food is more expensive than hamburger.
I would happily jump at the chance to invest rather than pay SS, I'd willingly
give up the last 20 years of SS ripped out of my (oft times slim) paycheck
if only I didn't have to keep getting ripped off by it.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 13:57:21 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 23:30:10 GMT,
Chad Irby, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Chad Irby wrote:
>> >
>> > Courageous
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > We were having to pay off the Vietnam War buildup, we had an Energy
>> > > > Crisis that was out of anyone's control (in this hemisphere,
>> > > > anyway),
>> > > > Iran kept the hostages because Reagan gave them...
>> > >
>> > > You are woefully confused about certain things, like the
>> > > order in which certain Presidents were elected, for example.
>> >
>> > The Vietnam War was expanded in the '60s, ran through '73, and the
>> > payments on it were stalled until after Ford lost in 1976, dropping the
>> > financial issues for it into Carter's lap.
>>
>> The Vietnam War was DEMOCRAT Johnson's baby.
>
>Actually, American involvement started during Eisenhower's watch,
>started growing during Kennedy's short term, and expended to a
>full-scale shitstorm during Johnson's term... so it wasn't Carter's
>fault that the economic issues from that war landed with a sickening
>thud during Carter's Presidency, was it?
>
>> In case you don't recall...
>> REPUBLICAN Nixon got us ***OUT*** of that boondoggle.
>
>....in the face of near-revolution at home, after sticking with it for
>five years.
>
>> > The Energy Crisis was during Carter's Presidency.
>>
>> The OPEC embargo lasted less than 6 months.
>
>Yep, and that's the six months it happened.
>
>> > The hostages were taken during Carter's Presidency and released after
>> > Reagan won, partly through the Iran-Conrta situation.
>>
>> They hostages were in captivity for 444 days.
>>
>> They were released shortly after the election....only about
>> 180 days after Reagan secured enough primary delegates.
>>
>> What about the preceeding 260 days ***BEFORE** Reagan became
>> the nominee-apparent?
>>
>> Why couldn't Carter accomplish in 9 MONTHS AS PRESIDENT what
>> Reagan supposedly accomplished in 6 months as a mere nominee???
>>
>> Hmmmmmmmmmmm?
>
>He couldn't get Iran to release some hostages because Reagan was busily
>bribing the Iranian government to *not* release them, in order to win
>the presidential election. It was all uncovered during the Iran-Contra
>hearings, if you'll remember.
>
>One thing about the Iranians... they give good value when you bribe them
>right.
>
>--
??
Reagan was bribing them how exactly? Iran-Contra was about what happend
whilst Ronnie was in office, not while Carter was.
"Mr Khomeinei? yes, you don't know me, but I am running for Prez of USA,
so I want you to keep them folks awhile 'k?"
*chortle*
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:35:30 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:30:14 GMT,
ZnU, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Marion
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Perry Pip wrote:
>>
>> > And you want my taxes to pay for vouchers for that shit? No way.
>>
>> As someone who started out in public schools, then switched to
>> private school, I can say without a doubt that the education I got at
>> the private school was _much_ better then I could've gotten in the
>> public system. My parents sacrificed a lot for my sister and I (and
>> we both let them know that we appreciate what they did) to go to
>> private school. I have plenty of friends that went to public school
>> that wish they could've also gone to private school and talk about
>> how bad they were/are.
>
>It depends where you live. In rich suburbs, the public schools are of
>very high quality. They're properly funded. In inner cities, they're
>woefully underfunded, and they're horrible.
It has zip to do with funding, Utah, which pays very little for schools
compared to say, Wash DC consistantly has better scores. Rank the states
by $$ spent per student, and results, and you see no correlation.
>
>> BTW, I think the proper system would be to give a tax credit for
>> someone that sends their kids to private schools.. which wouldn't
>> cost you anything in taxes.
>
>The solution is to properly fund inner city schools, not drain even more
>money away from them.
Inner city schools often receive more per student $$ than rural or suburban
schools. It has nothing to do with funding level.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:56:30 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:43:36 GMT,
ZnU, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
>Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [1] AFDC comprised only 8% of the federal budget, IIRC.
>> >
>>
>> Let's see. 8% of $1.7 trillion is $136 BILLION. Or $500 for every man,
>> woman, and child in the U.S.
>>
>> Not to mention the billions being spent by the states, as well.
>>
>> And the other welfare programs.
>>
>> "Only" 8%, indeed.
>
>What do you pay in taxes? Take 8% of that. Ask yourself if it's worth
>that amount to prevent millions of children from starving to death.
Why do you assume they would starve? when less than 25% actually goes to
them (the rest getting eaten up in admin costs, mostly beauracrat salaries)
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 19:15:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
>> I don't think anybody more familiar with tax laws will understand this
>> any more than I do. What does "when I was in the 21% bracket, my tax
>> was 25% of the bracket level" mean?
>
>It was in the section that you just trimmed, you idiot.
No it wasn't. What you said about it was, but that was obviously not in
any way enlightening in what it was supposed to mean. Check deja (I
would also recommend having someone with some reading comprehension
skills double-check your interpretation) and you might understand what
took place.
>I intentionally left it in the above post, but you cut it out either
>because you were too stupid to understand that it was important or
>because you're intentionally confusing the issue.
No, the issue is that it didn't make sense to me, and I asked for an
explanation. I'd already read what you'd written before, and considered
it entirely incomprehensible. My goal is not to ridicule you, but to
comprehend what it is you're trying to say. So there's really no
purpose in reposting what it is that already didn't make any sense.
>As I said, when I was in the 21% tax bracket, I only paid about 5% of my
>income in federal income tax. That's what "when I was in the 21%
>bracket, my tax was 25% of the bracket level" means.
Thank you. And which was the larger sum, 4% of your current income, or
%16 percent of your previous income?
>So we can add intentional post mangling to your techniques, huh?
No, but we might actually be getting close to you understanding what it
is I've been saying all along. If your an asshole troll, you'll insist
I haven't been saying that. If you've any brains, you'll realize that
4% of your current income is greater than 16% of your former income, and
that is why all of my statements have been true and honest, apart from
your attempts to mangle them or any miscellaneous mistakes on my part in
presenting them.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
