More entitlements

[MERCMAN]

Thanks to all you hard working people!!


https://www.safelinkwireless.com/Safelink/

[Blackened300a]

So glad I'm throwing $100 away a month when I could just quit my job and have a phone for free. :shake:

[guspech750]

GOOD!! What else would have I done with my money. Spend it on my family or house. Now that's stupid.

Good for them.


I'm all for entitlements. I feel entitled to smash their F-ing faces into a woodchipper!!

---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

[tbone]

I'm all for entitlements. I feel entitled to smash their F-ing faces into a woodchipper!!

Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

lololololol

I feel entitled to despise Obama Bin Lyon.:banana:

[Mike]

GOOD!! What else would have I done with my money. Spend it on my family or house. Now that's stupid.

Good for them.


I'm all for entitlements. I feel entitled to smash their F-ing faces into a woodchipper!!

---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

Tell us how you really feel :D

[Paul T. Casey]

Seems like us poor working class schlubs are the only ones doing any budget cuts. BTW, feet first into the woodchipper works better. Gives them a little extra time to think.

[Phrog_gunner]

I'm pretty sure the right to have a cell phone is stated in the 28th Amendment?? :puke:

[CBT]

I'm pretty sure the right to have a cell phone is stated in the 28th Amendment?? :puke:

Give them the old timey cell phones that you hold one part in your hand and put the other piece up to your ear like they used back when they wrote the Constitution. That will teach them! Cause no one wants to use an out dated cell phone, sheeyaaaaah.
My tax dollars paing for phones I don't use. Note to self: Invent time machine, travel back and punch Thomas Jefferson in the face.

[Phrog_gunner]

Give them the old timey cell phones that you hold one part in your hand and put the other piece up to your ear like they used back when they wrote the Constitution. That will teach them! Cause no one wants to use an out dated cell phone, sheeyaaaaah.
My tax dollars paing for phones I don't use. Note to self: Invent time machine, travel back and punch Thomas Jefferson in the face.

Case and Greg's Excellent Adventure???

[CBT]

Case and Greg's Excellent Adventure???

Do like laughing at people getting punched in the face?

[Phrog_gunner]

Do like laughing at people getting punched in the face?

As long as I'm not the punch-ee....

[CBT]

Sweet! Then let's make like George Bush and announce our ass kicking, face punching adventure by yelling "Let's roll!" and come back in 10 years with nothing to show for it!! Hmmmm...doesn't sound as fun now. :(

[guspech750]

Am I detecting anger in this thread? But why? Because we are getting nothing for something. Seams like a fair deal to me. Come next elections. I vote we woodchip all of Washington and make our way down to the local level dkheads!!


---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

[Bigdogjim]

Thanks to all you hard working people!!


https://www.safelinkwireless.com/Safelink/


Dan your slow on the draw:) This has been around a while now:)

[Vortex]

I thought you were referring to to this:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Tax-VOX/2011/0925/Buffett-rule-All-about-capital-gains

[Bigdogjim]

GOOD!! What else would have I done with my money. Spend it on my family or house. Now that's stupid.

Good for them.


I'm all for entitlements. I feel entitled to smash their F-ing faces into a woodchipper!!

---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

My friend all you have to do is vote the crooks out of office this November:)

Not saying you don't vote but sure as hell not enough of US vote.

[sailsmen]

I thought you were referring to to this:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Tax-VOX/2011/0925/Buffett-rule-All-about-capital-gains

From the article linked - "And scaling back popular tax subsidies for, say, mortgage interest and employer-sponsored health insurance won’t help alot either. Those tax breaks really benefit the upper middle class and the merely rich, not the Buffetts of the world (after all, you can only get so much gold plating on your health insurance and the mortgage deduction is already capped at $1 million). The big guys do benefit from big charitable deductions, however."

"tax subsidy"? Pure Communist statement! Allowing a person to keep what they earned is not a "tax subsidy"!
People who benefit from "mortgage interest and employer sponsored health insurance" as deductions/pre-tax dollars are not "the upper middle class and the merely rich".

3-27-08 CNBC
"Sen. OBAMA: "Well, you know, I haven't given a firm number. Here's my belief, that we can't go back to some of the, you know, confiscatory rates that existed in the past that distorted sound economics. And I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton, which was the 28 percent. I would--and my guess would be it would be significantly lower than that. I think that we can have a capital gains rate that is higher than 15 percent. If it--and if it, you know--when I talk to people like Warren Buffet or others and I ask them, you know, what's--how much of a difference is it going to be if it's 20 or 25 percent, they say, look, if it's within that range then it's not going to distort, I think, economic decision making"
"Sen. OBAMA: Right. The two points I would make. Number one, as I said, I'm going to have to take a look at what revenues are coming in when I take office because, you know, I'm not ideological and I think it is very important for us to stick to a principle of pay as you go. If I'm going to cut taxes for the middle class, as I've proposed, that means that I've got to either end some tax breaks elsewhere or cut spending. And if I want to increase spending, then I've got to find offsetting revenues or cut programs that aren't working. That's a principle that I believe in strongly and I will run on and implement when I'm president.

What's interesting, though, is The Wall Street Journal, I think--actually a columnist looked, in The Wall Street Journal, at does Obama's policies in fact add up? Do the numbers add up? And the conclusion was, yes. Because not only have I called for an end to the war in Iraq, which would not provide all the money that's being spent there--some of that's going to have to go to resetting our military, dealing with veterans and so forth--but there will be some money that we can use for other things.

Now, as I said before, it could be that revenues are so short in a year's time that we've got to make some assessments. And I am not going to initiate programs that can't be paid for. "


Pure class warfare against the middle class.
Charitable Deductions are limited to either 50% or 30% of income depending on the class the charity falls into.
Raising the long term capital gains tax to match the income tax brackets will devalue every business in the USA. Going from the long term cap gains rate of 15% to 36% income tax rate would devalue the business by 21%. This includes both private and publicaly held businesses.

There is no data that proves raising the cap gains rate results in increased revenue to the Treasury and Obama has admitted same.

Rolling back the "Bush Tax Cuts" per the CBO for those making over $250K generates $70Billion and for those under $250K $300Billion.

[sailsmen]

Sen Obama debate - "MR. GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?


SENATOR OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness."



In his own words;
TRANSCRIPT:
MODERATOR: Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM and we’re joined by Barack Obama who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th district and senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago.


OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay.
But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. One of the I think tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

MODERATOR: Let’s talk with Karen. Good morning, Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.


KAREN: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place – the court – or would it be legislation at this point?


OBAMA: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way.
You just look at very rare examples during the desegregation era the court was willing to for example order changes that cost money to a local school district. The court was very uncomfortable with it. It was very hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.
The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts."

[sailsmen]

When only 4 out of 10 work for the private sector and total gov't spending per private sector worker is $40,250 you have no economic future.

[guspech750]

My friend all you have to do is vote the crooks out of office this November:)

Not saying you don't vote but sure as hell not enough of US vote.

Just sucks that standing in line is another crook waiting to be voted in.


---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

[CBT]

I got it!!!!! An ankle bracelet cell phone!!!!! Kill two birds with one stone, they only have to make one trip!! The parole officer can mount it, and also track them, WIN!!

[sailsmen]

If we beleive Obama the "rich" will benefit from the same tax rate as the not "rich", per the AP;
"The latest IRS figures are a few years older -- and limited to federal income taxes -- but show much the
FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries? - Yahoo! Finance
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FACT-CHECK-Are-rich-taxed-apf-172888580.html?x=0&.v=1[9/20/2011 9:39:54 PM]
same thing.
In 2009, taxpayers who made $1 million or more paid on average 24.4 percent of their income in
federal income taxes, according to the IRS.
Those making $100,000 to $125,000 paid on average 9.9 percent in federal income taxes. Those making
$50,000 to $60,000 paid an average of 6.3 percent.

Obama is calling for reducing the "rich" tax rate from 24.4% to 6.3%! Pres Obama stop supporting the "rich".

[Shaijack]

Billy does this mean that I can keep my Louisiana Purchase Card and cell phone???

[duhtroll]

RE: Capital gains -- We are talking about individuals in that case, not small businesses.

From the yahoo article posted:

>Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was pressed at a White House briefing on the number of millionaires who pay taxes at a lower rate than middle-income families. He demurred, saying that people who make most of their money in wages pay taxes at a higher rate, while those who get most of their income from investments pay at lower rates.

So, people who aren't working and those who inherited their wealth are paying less in taxes than those who work for a living. Obama is saying "lets even things out and have them pay the same rates."

Where is the problem? I thought you guys hated people who didn't have jobs. :flamer:

[sailsmen]

When you sell a business or stock in a public company you pay capital gains tax. Raise the tax on capital gains and you devalue the business and stock value.
There is a separate inheritance tax.
You pay income tax and with this taxed income you buy a stock. Any realized gains in the stock are taxed as capital gains. Any realized losses are capped at $3,000.

Capital is the life blood of our economy, confiscate it through taxation and you are confiscating the economy.

[Motorhead350]

Ok I must ask why even start a political thread? It's always just complaining and nothing get's done by anyone on this board.

[Phrog_gunner]

I'm sure they are sorry that their thread doesn't live up to your intellectual standards.

[Motorhead350]

I'm sure they are sorry that their thread doesn't live up to your intellectual standards.

What standards? Political threads are always a cry-fest.

[Phrog_gunner]

Well I'm sure if you complain to them about infringing on your cry-fest monopoly they will gladly attempt to accommodate you.

[Motorhead350]

Well I'm sure if you complain to them about infringing on your cry-fest monopoly they will gladly attempt to accommodate you.

I never have a cry-fest until the usual idiots enter. We are going off topic. PM me if you wanna continue this.

[MrBluGruv]

I dunno, I like where this is going. :P

[Phrog_gunner]

I will have to admit my ignorance here, but I am no cryologist, so I want to make sure I get this straight. So it doesn't count as a cry fest when you are crying due to someone else making you cry? I was WAY off. :(

[guspech750]

Just knowing my Marauder is in the garage tucked away nice and safe makes me shed a tear.


---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

[sailsmen]

Well I'm sure if you complain to them about infringing on your cry-fest monopoly they will gladly attempt to accommodate you.

The ignore list is a great feature.

[duhtroll]

"Devaluing the business" is just propaganda-speak for "cutting into my profits when I make a sale."

Well, TFB on losing profits. I pay taxes when I sell my home, too. That's the way things work for the rest of us too, except I pay more %-wise than people with no job living off Granddad's inheritance. Yet strangely you don't see me starting threads to ***** about it.

You know, propaganda like calling rich people "job creators." :rofl::rofl: (Which, if true, would mean we don't have the job loss we have had over the last 10 years since the taxes have been low all this time. But, I digress.)

And even *IF* the business was devalued as you say, you don't think that business passes costs onto consumers? So in reality, they aren't the ones feeling the pinch. It is always passed onto the buyers. Or saved by cutting costs (read: employees). The guys at the top are hardly ever inconvenienced.

Stock values run on the same type of accuracy % as meteorology. Except the weather guy isn't making more money when he says it is sunny during a downpour.

I bet the kool-aid tastes good, though.

And as far as the political cry-fest threads, Dom is absolutely right, if a bit hypocritical. Neither type of thread belongs on this site, and you'll collectively note that I am never the one to start them. It is 90%+ of the time some conservative anti-Obama rant.

Even when GWB was prez, look at the political threads and who started them. Some people need more sunshine and fluffy bunnies in their lives to offset the rampant anger shown here.

Youtube "funny cat video" and spend time doing that instead.

Please.




When you sell a business or stock in a public company you pay capital gains tax. Raise the tax on capital gains and you devalue the business and stock value.
There is a separate inheritance tax.
You pay income tax and with this taxed income you buy a stock. Any realized gains in the stock are taxed as capital gains. Any realized losses are capped at $3,000.

Capital is the life blood of our economy, confiscate it through taxation and you are confiscating the economy.

[Bigdogjim]

I never have a cry-fest until the usual idiots enter. We are going off topic. PM me if you wanna continue this.

See you come into the thread and right away start calling people names?

Stay in your forum.

[PonyUP]

Personally I have no issue on paying taxes on my stock, especially since it is a lower rate than the income tax and is in fact income. In addition, if I sell stock at a loss, I get a tax break.

I see no issue with returning to the Clinton tax rates, it is probably necessary at this point, or even returning to the Reagan rates, but I want a checks and balances put in place to make sure the money goes for necessary spending, and not a damn cell phone.

And Troll, I enjoy your insight into the political threads, and you may not frequently start them, but you always comment in them. If you feel they have no place on the board, ignore them.

Either way, there is no need to descend these threads into the anger that always exists. People have their opinions, and opinions cannot be wrong. If only we could debate these things like adults and not rail people for watching Fox, or MSNBC or tell them they are drinking the Kool Aid, then maybe we could have an actual discussion. But so many want to resort to name calling and angry posts on their comments, that of course they get shut down.

As this thread is clearly headed that way, I'll read other threads and add a IBTL

[sailsmen]

The value of a business in most cases is what it will yield to the owner when it is sold. The purpose of a business in most cases is to make a profit. I have started several businesses with money I have already paid income tax on. When I sell the business I pay additional taxes on the increase in the value of the buiness. Increase that tax and you have devalued my business which can have a loan called and can reduce the amount of money I can borrow. It also reduces the amount of capital, i.e., investors that are willing to invest because it has reduced their potential return. It reduces the number of new businesses that are started.

GOV’t does not GENERATE WEALTH. Only Entrepreneurs’ GENERATE WEALTH.USA is 35% plus applicable State Corp Tax and Singapore is 17%.

Country - USA Widget Singapore Widget

Profit - $100 $100

Tax - $ 35 $ 17

Net Profit - $65 $ 83

Difference - $18 or 28%. higher



What do businesses do with Profits? They;

Reinvest in the company resulting in more jobs

Pay Bonuses which result in higher income taxes

Pay Dividend which result in higher income taxes

Pay down Debt.

Why invest or make money in the USA when you can get a 28% higher return resulting in a more competitive viable company just on the tax? Is it any wonder the USA has the highest Corporate tax in the World?

Assuming you are married You have to have a gain of over $500K on your home to pay taxes on the gain. Gains up to $250K for an individual and up to $500K for a couple are excluded provided you lived in the home for 2 years.

Someone as you say living off grand dads inheritance would only pay a capital gains tax rate if they were selling ownership in the business or stocks at a basis higher than they inherited it for. Keep in mind Grand dad paid taxes and depending on how large the estate the estate paid inheritance tax at rates in most cases higher than income tax.

The devaluation of a business is not a cost that can be passed on to a consumer. Do you honestly think a business owner can just pass on costs as you say? If so every business woudl be profitable and never go out of business.

How many poor people creat jobs? Do you believe in Speaker Pelosi that the best job creator is welfare?
BLS Unemployemnt Rate
Clinton
1993 6.9
1994 6.1
1995 5.6
1996 5.4
1997 4.9 Clinton tax Cut
1998 4.5
1999 4.2
2000 4.0
Bush
2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
2006 4.6
2007 4.6
2008 5.8
Obama
2009 9.3
2010 9.6.

The lack of basic understanding about business economics is shocking and enables politicians to easily manipulate the ignorant.

[sailsmen]

Personally I have no issue on paying taxes on my stock, especially since it is a lower rate than the income tax and is in fact income. In addition, if I sell stock at a loss, I get a tax break.

I see no issue with returning to the Clinton tax rates, it is probably necessary at this point, or even returning to the Reagan rates, but I want a checks and balances put in place to make sure the money goes for necessary spending, and not a damn cell phone.

And Troll, I enjoy your insight into the political threads, and you may not frequently start them, but you always comment in them. If you feel they have no place on the board, ignore them.

Either way, there is no need to descend these threads into the anger that always exists. People have their opinions, and opinions cannot be wrong. If only we could debate these things like adults and not rail people for watching Fox, or MSNBC or tell them they are drinking the Kool Aid, then maybe we could have an actual discussion. But so many want to resort to name calling and angry posts on their comments, that of course they get shut down.

As this thread is clearly headed that way, I'll read other threads and add a IBTL

What if you bought that stock which most do with your after tax income, which in total can have a 40-50% effective tax rate, you then pay the cap gains tax on the gain. You also only get to write off a loss up to $3,000 but are unlimited on the cap gains amount.
I favor going back to all the Clinton Tax rates for all. The bottom 47% of filers will not pay income tax and we will all have a reason to watch gov't. It will result in collapse and a revolution against Gov't which is fine by me.

[duhtroll]

You just keep repeating the same old falsehoods.

The government most certainly does create wealth and it enables every company that does business in this country to generate wealth also, so it has a hand in their wealth "creation."

No business does it alone, but keep on spouting that nonsense about "government bad no matter what." Heck, it works for False News.

If you want to rehash the entire argument, where you couldn't show us how government can't create wealth then either, you can go here (http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/showthread.php?t=73019).




GOV’t does not GENERATE WEALTH.

As for jobs in relation to tax rates, I'll ask you this. Where are they? The rich "job creators" have had their taxes lowered for over TEN YEARS now. Obviously it is not helping.

Where are the jobs?

[sailsmen]

Having owned and/or founded 7 business these are not false hoods but real life experience.

How is the wealth in North Korea? How was the wealth in the USSR?

Gov't cannot do anything with out first taking wealth from some one else, hence Gov't does not create wealth. Thsi enable you speak of was paid for by the business. If Gov't can create wealth why don't they give everyone $1Trillion each?

I posted the BLS unemployment figures. In North Korea and the previous USSR and China all worked for Gov't and how much wealth was created? Please explain how Gov't creates wealth. What happens when we all work for Gov't?

Why should people take a risk and put up their capital, i.e. money, for a lower return when the capital gains tax rate is raised? Making the Captial Gains tax the same rate as the income tax makes it more attractive to invest in lower risk such as TBills or Corporate Bonds or tax free munis. Fewer businesses will be started and more money will be invested overseas.

Some People that have never created wealth, have never started a business and have never hired an employee are understandably ignorant.

[Phrog_gunner]

How is the wealth in North Korea? How was the wealth in the USSR?

The Cuban gov't has created tons of wealth, so that just blows your whole "theory" out of the water.

[sailsmen]

The Cuban gov't has created tons of wealth, so that just blows your whole "theory" out of the water.

The Cuban Gov't has taken tons of wealth.

They are so wealthy a client of mine delivered a ship load of donated medical supplies.

[Motorhead350]

See you come into the thread and right away start calling people names?

Stay in your forum.

Nope. Nothing directed at anyone, but if you were offended that must mean something. Now you know what it's like. Not fun ehh?

Don't ever tell me what to do. Go dictate to someone else.

[CBT]

Anyone who has ever taken an accounting class or a macro or micro economics class and thinks the government is there to help is living in a fantasy world. I should re-phrase that: anyone who thinks OUR government is there to help THEM, the worker, is living in a fantasy world.

[duhtroll]

anyone who has ever taken an accounting class or a macro or micro economics class and thinks the corporation is there to help is living in a fantasy world. I should re-phrase that: Anyone who thinks any corporation is there to help them, the worker, is living in a fantasy world.

fify .

[duhtroll]

Having owned and/or founded 7 business these are not false hoods but real life experience.

Having owned three homes and sold two, I can tell you...

Blah blah blah. You obviously don't realize that anecdotes from your own life are not evidence to be applied to the entire country.


How is the wealth in North Korea? How was the wealth in the USSR?

For the guys at the top, pretty darn good. Kinda like where we are headed.


Gov't cannot do anything with out first taking wealth from some one else, hence Gov't does not create wealth. Thsi enable you speak of was paid for by the business. If Gov't can create wealth why don't they give everyone $1Trillion each?

Repeating something doesn't make it true, no matter what Faux News says.

The government built you the infrastructure you and your businesses have used to make money. They also protect your investments via public safety. You did not pay for them with your taxes alone. I could go on, but since you refuse to see how you have had help from anyone (i.e. you have a false sense of entitlement) then it is kinda pointless.

Bottom line, you have received a lot of help from our government in making your money. You didn't do it alone. And you will collect your social security just like everyone else on this board. There's a word for folks like that.


I posted the BLS unemployment figures. In North Korea and the previous USSR and China all worked for Gov't and how much wealth was created? Please explain how Gov't creates wealth. What happens when we all work for Gov't?

If we all worked for the government, at least we would all have jobs. As long as we are making crap up, lets look at both sides.

China's economy is going to own ours pretty soon. Seems they aren't doing as poorly as you would have folks believe.


Why should people take a risk and put up their capital, i.e. money, for a lower return when the capital gains tax rate is raised? Making the Captial Gains tax the same rate as the income tax makes it more attractive to invest in lower risk such as TBills or Corporate Bonds or tax free munis. Fewer businesses will be started and more money will be invested overseas.

Yeah, 'cause no one is doing that now. :rolleyes: And if raising the CGTR means fewer people will be living off investments and go back into the workforce I think more businesses will be developed, not fewer.


Some People that have never created wealth, have never started a business and have never hired an employee are understandably ignorant.

First of all, you are making assumptions again. Secondly, experience outside of yours does not make one ignorant. A statement like yours is actually one that comes from ignorance itself.

Have a nice day.

[MERCMAN]

I started this thread because I was pissed about the free cell phones. The thread has degenerated to a political fight, so once again sidetracked. you guys really need to use the PM function, cause if we want to read about political opinions, we can subscribe to clogs, newspapers etc.

[Vortex]

At this point Ill add I actually agree with those that believe free cellphones (and hoverrounds ect) needs to go. For the money wasted on these dumb ideas (probably pushed by the manufacturers of hoverrounds and cellphone providers) you could probably hire an unemployed person to push an elderly/disabled in a wheelchair thereby helping two people and cutting the welfare rolls. Just a thought.

[guspech750]

At this point Ill add I actually agree with those that believe free cellphones (and hoverrounds ect) needs to go. For the money wasted on these dumb ideas (probably pushed by the manufacturers of hoverrounds and cellphone providers) you could probably hire an unemployed person to push an elderly/disabled in a wheelchair thereby helping two people and cutting the welfare rolls. Just a thought.

Man. Now stop that. That's crazy talk!! Geesh. :)


---
- Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!