"Explain how increased taxes improve the economy."
It improves the economy by starting a recession (ex. the Clinton
Recession)... see the logic I followed there??

"Bill Funk" <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message
news:rtriqvkhms3sfdqhscdi2qnno4u28o5iud@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Nov 03 11:42:46 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
> >>We all remember that lying bastard Clinton ran in '92 on a
> >>middle class tax cut.
> >
> >And when Bush left the budget in much worse shape, to his credit, he took
> >steps to get it under control.
>
> Would that be by instituting the largest tax increase in our history?
> Explain how increased taxes improve the economy.
>
> --
> Bill Funk
> replace "g" with "a"

 

"Explain how increased taxes improve the economy."
It improves the economy by starting a recession (ex. the Clinton
Recession)... see the logic I followed there??

"Bill Funk" <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message
news:rtriqvkhms3sfdqhscdi2qnno4u28o5iud@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Nov 03 11:42:46 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
> >>We all remember that lying bastard Clinton ran in '92 on a
> >>middle class tax cut.
> >
> >And when Bush left the budget in much worse shape, to his credit, he took
> >steps to get it under control.
>
> Would that be by instituting the largest tax increase in our history?
> Explain how increased taxes improve the economy.
>
> --
> Bill Funk
> replace "g" with "a"

 

Those damn corrupt republicans!!! The damn corrupt republicans also kept
that news out of the mainstream press that is obviously conservative...

"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqjdrv6m9dlk0a@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Joe" <jo_ratner@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vCiqb.11714$9M3.10456@newsread2.news.atl.eart hlink.net...
> > "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> > Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
results
> of
> > Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.
>
> And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
> recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was
counted,
> no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
> official count had given him.
>
>
> >
> > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> > news:bob0k1$s2a$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > > In article <bo8tgh012ij@enews1.newsguy.com>,
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

 

Those damn corrupt republicans!!! The damn corrupt republicans also kept
that news out of the mainstream press that is obviously conservative...

"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqjdrv6m9dlk0a@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Joe" <jo_ratner@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vCiqb.11714$9M3.10456@newsread2.news.atl.eart hlink.net...
> > "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> > Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
results
> of
> > Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.
>
> And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
> recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was
counted,
> no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
> official count had given him.
>
>
> >
> > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> > news:bob0k1$s2a$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > > In article <bo8tgh012ij@enews1.newsguy.com>,
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

 

Those damn corrupt republicans!!! The damn corrupt republicans also kept
that news out of the mainstream press that is obviously conservative...

"Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:vqjdrv6m9dlk0a@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Joe" <jo_ratner@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vCiqb.11714$9M3.10456@newsread2.news.atl.eart hlink.net...
> > "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> > Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
results
> of
> > Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.
>
> And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
> recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was
counted,
> no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
> official count had given him.
>
>
> >
> > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> > news:bob0k1$s2a$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > > In article <bo8tgh012ij@enews1.newsguy.com>,
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorgenospam@frontier.net> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

 

Hello??? LLLLLOYD are you published in your field of expertise?? I am, are
you?????

"Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote in message
news:bo979g$1c2b1s$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de...
> LLoyd,
> are you published anywhere?
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:bo8tr4$dku$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <duSpb.77564$275.206280@attbi_s53>,
> > tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >In article <bo8jlm$3lv$2@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > >> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >
> > >>>http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994321
> > >
> > >>>I am sure parker will just call it a 'right-wing' publication
> > >>>or something to dismiss it all.
> > >
> > >> Why not read something a real scientific group says? IPCC, or EPA,
or
> > >> National Academy of Sciences? Afraid?
> > >
> > >You didn't comment on the journal article URL I posted earlier.
> >
> > Because it's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. You know, the kind
> real
> > scientists publish in.
>
>

 

Hello??? LLLLLOYD are you published in your field of expertise?? I am, are
you?????

"Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote in message
news:bo979g$1c2b1s$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de...
> LLoyd,
> are you published anywhere?
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:bo8tr4$dku$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <duSpb.77564$275.206280@attbi_s53>,
> > tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >In article <bo8jlm$3lv$2@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > >> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >
> > >>>http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994321
> > >
> > >>>I am sure parker will just call it a 'right-wing' publication
> > >>>or something to dismiss it all.
> > >
> > >> Why not read something a real scientific group says? IPCC, or EPA,
or
> > >> National Academy of Sciences? Afraid?
> > >
> > >You didn't comment on the journal article URL I posted earlier.
> >
> > Because it's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. You know, the kind
> real
> > scientists publish in.
>
>

 

Hello??? LLLLLOYD are you published in your field of expertise?? I am, are
you?????

"Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote in message
news:bo979g$1c2b1s$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de...
> LLoyd,
> are you published anywhere?
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> news:bo8tr4$dku$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> > In article <duSpb.77564$275.206280@attbi_s53>,
> > tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >In article <bo8jlm$3lv$2@puck.cc.emory.edu>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > >> tetraethyllead@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > >
> > >>>http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994321
> > >
> > >>>I am sure parker will just call it a 'right-wing' publication
> > >>>or something to dismiss it all.
> > >
> > >> Why not read something a real scientific group says? IPCC, or EPA,
or
> > >> National Academy of Sciences? Afraid?
> > >
> > >You didn't comment on the journal article URL I posted earlier.
> >
> > Because it's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. You know, the kind
> real
> > scientists publish in.
>
>

 

"But I bet you understood what I menat in the first place....didn't you?"
Nope, thought you were being stoopid... sorry!

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3FA900DF.A19031A2@mindspring.com...
>
>
> Joe wrote:
>
> > "Nature doesn't extinguish fires started by lightening "
> > if this were true, there would be no vegitation on the planet. It would
> > have burned off long before humans showed up.
>
> OK, you got me. I should have said something like "nature lets fires burn
until
> rain storms put them out and doesn't fight them just becasue they are in
> national forests or near populated areas or becasue they dump lots of
pollution
> into the environment." But I bet you understood what I menat in the first
> place....didn't you?
>
> Ed
>

 

"But I bet you understood what I menat in the first place....didn't you?"
Nope, thought you were being stoopid... sorry!

"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3FA900DF.A19031A2@mindspring.com...
>
>
> Joe wrote:
>
> > "Nature doesn't extinguish fires started by lightening "
> > if this were true, there would be no vegitation on the planet. It would
> > have burned off long before humans showed up.
>
> OK, you got me. I should have said something like "nature lets fires burn
until
> rain storms put them out and doesn't fight them just becasue they are in
> national forests or near populated areas or becasue they dump lots of
pollution
> into the environment." But I bet you understood what I menat in the first
> place....didn't you?
>
> Ed
>