You are aware that you will be flamed by knee jerk reactionaries who will insinuate that he is a genius of a leader because of election results and that he singlehandedly masterminded it all, aren't you? You brave soul.
"Masked Avenger" <aven...@msn.com> wrote in message
> You are aware that you will be flamed by knee jerk reactionaries who will > insinuate that he is a genius of a leader because of election results and > that he singlehandedly masterminded it all, aren't you? You brave soul.
Or supported by knee-jerk reactionaries who will insinuate that he's a drunken fool bent on murdering Iraqis and who is ruining our future and stole the presidency.
> "Trampolina" <tr...@olina.com> wrote in message > news:qtcY9.46941$Oj7.10050135@twister.nyc.rr.com... > > You are aware that you will be flamed by knee jerk reactionaries who will > > insinuate that he is a genius of a leader because of election results and > > that he singlehandedly masterminded it all, aren't you? You brave soul.
> Or supported by knee-jerk reactionaries who will insinuate that he's a > drunken fool bent on murdering Iraqis and who is ruining our future and > stole the presidency.
You are aware that you will be flamed by knee jerk reactionaries who will insinuate that he is a genius of a leader because of election results and that he singlehandedly masterminded it all, aren't you? You brave soul.
There are a lot of republicans who are less than impressed with GWB. The idea of giving tax breaks or incentives to folks who buy gas guzzling SUV's is reprehensible. It would make much more sence to give the breaks or incentives to those who buy gas SAVING vehicles.
>>You are aware that you will be flamed by knee jerk reactionaries who will >>insinuate that he is a genius of a leader because of election results and >>that he singlehandedly masterminded it all, aren't you? You brave soul.
>Or supported by knee-jerk reactionaries who will insinuate that he's a >drunken fool bent on murdering Iraqis and who is ruining our future and >stole the presidency.
You know, I always get a kick out of it when conservatives call liberals reactionaries and knee-jerk reactionaries is even better. No wonder they don't mind if Dubya has a problem with words.
The definition of reactionary is:
re·ac·tion·ar·y adj.
Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative.
n. pl. re·ac·tion·ar·ies
An opponent of progress or liberalism; an extreme conservative.
> The idea of giving tax breaks or incentives to folks who buy gas guzzling SUV's > is reprehensible. It would make much more sence to give the breaks or incentives > to those who buy gas SAVING vehicles.
Though you'll undoubtedly look it up now, chances are you have no idea what his proposal was _actually_ about or said. (Hint: has nothing to do with soccer mom or young corporate professional buying SUVs.)
>> The idea of giving tax breaks or incentives to folks who buy gas >> guzzling SUV's is reprehensible. It would make much more sence to give >> the breaks or incentives to those who buy gas SAVING vehicles.
> Though you'll undoubtedly look it up now, chances are you have no idea > what his proposal was _actually_ about or said. (Hint: has nothing to > do with soccer mom or young corporate professional buying SUVs.)
I agree that the tax break is more generalized and pertains to equipment. I've owned my own business for years and have used the break several times for computer equipment.
The break means that I can depreciate it ALL within a year instead of over several years. The tax break is significant.
But there is specific language about cars - that the gross vehicle weight must be over 6,000 pounds. It was originally intended to rule out "normal vehicles" and was for farm equipment or heavier work trucks.
However, currently it is being used MUCH more often by business people who use the loophole to buy SUVs and decked out, luxury pickup trucks ("A Texas Cadillac") instead of farm equipment.
So it does indeed have to do with people buying SUVs - not "young corporate professionals" as you say, but small business owners, self employed, consultants, etc.
> So it does indeed have to do with people buying SUVs - not "young corporate > professionals" as you say, but small business owners, self employed, > consultants, etc.
Exactly. It's an expansion of an existing tax credit, and it's aimed at (small) business investment. Anything that qualifies as a heavy truck fits the bill. Sure, lots of people are going to buy the larger SUVs (the only ones that qualify), and there will be a chunk of them who don't really need such a vehicle, but it's hardly a simple "credit for buying SUVs!" I'm a small business owner myself, and credits like this help quite a bit although I don't have the money for a large SUV (nor the need). It also helps, obviously, those who are in any way, shape or form connected to the sales of such vehicles (cars, vans, heavy trucks), which is good for all kinds of people who have no idea how good it is for them.
>> So it does indeed have to do with people buying SUVs - not "young >> corporate professionals" as you say, but small business owners, self >> employed, consultants, etc.
> Exactly. It's an expansion of an existing tax credit, and it's aimed > at (small) business investment. Anything that qualifies as a heavy > truck fits the bill. Sure, lots of people are going to buy the larger > SUVs (the only ones that qualify), and there will be a chunk of them > who don't really need such a vehicle, but it's hardly a simple "credit > for buying SUVs!" I'm a small business owner myself, and credits like > this help quite a bit although I don't have the money for a large SUV > (nor the need). It also helps, obviously, those who are in any way, > shape or form connected to the sales of such vehicles (cars, vans, > heavy trucks), which is good for all kinds of people who have no idea > how good it is for them.
But it is a VERY often abused loop hole. Having had a business for many years, I've been advised by several CPAs and financial planners to buy heavy luxury vehicles for that exact purpose.
One CPA told me that almost all of this kind of accelerated depreciation was for vehicles. It's a known loophole. I'm not blaming any administration for it continuing to be open. But the Bush administration is knowingly raising it. And they know that it will primarily be for higher middle class people to write a great deal of vehicle expense.
On 24 Jan 2003 01:01:37 -0600, Anonymous <Nobody> dented & constricted & squeezed out the following:
>But it is a VERY often abused loop hole. Having had a business for many >years, I've been advised by several CPAs and financial planners to buy heavy >luxury vehicles for that exact purpose.
>One CPA told me that almost all of this kind of accelerated depreciation was >for vehicles. It's a known loophole. I'm not blaming any administration for >it continuing to be open. But the Bush administration is knowingly raising >it. And they know that it will primarily be for higher middle class people >to write a great deal of vehicle expense.
>Big J
I was surprised to read it covered Lincoln Navigators and Cadillac Escalades (sp) - jeez people - !
Aware1 (I'm sure it's being milked for all it's worth!) --
Only a person infected with a bad case of class envy would complain about someone using their family connections and wealth to get to the top. Only a liberal rag like TIME would know that pushing the populist buttons of certain Americans would create such a reaction from readers.
You would use those kind of connections if you had them, too. Anyone would and someone who says they wouldn't is a liar. It's called advantage, but Bush used the kind that isn't federally mandated that says you have to advance someone's progress someone because their skin is black, red, or purple. The only advantage that counts in my estimation is what is provided by the spoils of the free market system. Of course if you've never had access to those spoils, you're going to resent someone like Bush who had. Bush's silver spoon upbringing would be the last thing I would think of criticizing him for.
When all else fails, attack the rich and influential, right?
I've been in enough college classrooms with minority admits who could barely write a sentence or could read beyond a 9th grade level. But they were admitted to college via federal mandate, so some wags in Washington could prove to everyone how *compassionate* and *caring* they were for the plight of the underclasses, never mind that they were dragging down the overall value of the education at that particular institution.
Think about that.
"Masked Avenger" <aven...@msn.com> wrote in message
What tax loop holes aren't abused? I've been an advocate of scrapping the entire tax code and starting over with some kind of flat tax, but not exactly like what Steve Forbes proposed years ago when he ran for prez, but a code that would drastically limit the loopholes. The IRS just can't enforce the present code anymore.
I know a small biz owner that writes off his a majority of his home electric bill (as he claims that's where his main office is) and both his trucks, even though only one is actually used in his trade. And somehow, he gets away with it.
> >> So it does indeed have to do with people buying SUVs - not "young > >> corporate professionals" as you say, but small business owners, self > >> employed, consultants, etc.
> > Exactly. It's an expansion of an existing tax credit, and it's aimed > > at (small) business investment. Anything that qualifies as a heavy > > truck fits the bill. Sure, lots of people are going to buy the larger > > SUVs (the only ones that qualify), and there will be a chunk of them > > who don't really need such a vehicle, but it's hardly a simple "credit > > for buying SUVs!" I'm a small business owner myself, and credits like > > this help quite a bit although I don't have the money for a large SUV > > (nor the need). It also helps, obviously, those who are in any way, > > shape or form connected to the sales of such vehicles (cars, vans, > > heavy trucks), which is good for all kinds of people who have no idea > > how good it is for them.
> But it is a VERY often abused loop hole. Having had a business for many > years, I've been advised by several CPAs and financial planners to buy heavy > luxury vehicles for that exact purpose.
> One CPA told me that almost all of this kind of accelerated depreciation was > for vehicles. It's a known loophole. I'm not blaming any administration for > it continuing to be open. But the Bush administration is knowingly raising > it. And they know that it will primarily be for higher middle class people > to write a great deal of vehicle expense.
wagstaff said, "You would use those kind of connections if you had them, too. Anyone would and someone who says they wouldn't is a liar. It's called advantage..."
oh, listen to you you self-satisfied piece of trash! you're saying basically, if the system works for you, you'd be crazy to change it. how selfish and myopic is that? you need to reread what you wrote and look in the mirror. there are plenty of "upper class" folks with wealth and connections who show "class" of a different, more meaninful kind. they volunteer, educate, lobby and promote a more level playing field. they are honest about a system which promotes from within while denying the same opportunities to those from deprived or disenfranchised environments who are just as or more deserving. your selfish, self-satisfied and rotten attitude is transparent, and your argument will sway no one with any true "class". no one is envious of your blindness and self-deception. your words show you to be the real trash. kiss my ass and go straight to hell.
Wow, such a warm and sensitive reply from a "tolerant" liberal. Your reply warmed the cockles of my cold, insensitive heart. I never imagined that a liberal could be so compassionate, caring, so sensitive, so tolerant of another person's viewpoint. I feel bad, that me, a cold hearted conservative, couldn't learn something from such a kind hearted liberal who really loves humankind so so so much! I'm humbled, I really am. I think I'm going out inthe cold and feed some homeless people now, perhaps invite them back to my warm home for cocktails and a snack. Perhaps invite them in to sleep on my $2,000 Persian rug, and if they choose to urinate on it inthe middleof the night, so what? I will have done my part as a fine upstanding humanitarian. Thank you, whomever you are quatorzejames" making me see the light!
"Quatorzejames" <quatorzeja...@aol.com> wrote in message
> wagstaff said, > "You would use those kind of connections if you had them, too. Anyone would > and someone who says they wouldn't is a liar. It's called advantage..."
> oh, listen to you you self-satisfied piece of trash! > you're saying basically, if the system works for you, you'd be crazy to change > it. > how selfish and myopic is that? > you need to reread what you wrote and look in the mirror. > there are plenty of "upper class" folks with wealth and connections who show > "class" of a different, more meaninful kind. > they volunteer, educate, lobby and promote a more level playing field. > they are honest about a system which promotes from within while denying the > same opportunities to those from deprived or disenfranchised environments who > are just as or more deserving. > your selfish, self-satisfied and rotten attitude is transparent, and your > argument will sway no one with any true "class". > no one is envious of your blindness and self-deception. > your words show you to be the real trash. > kiss my ass and go straight to hell.
|
