Put this in your dialogue box and smoke it:

I couldn't have said it better myself.

-- The Phantom Liberal Menace (chez@u.washington.edu), October 04, 1999

Answers

Apparently the Duke of URL was smokin' some stuff too, cause the URL I typed into the first message here went Up In Smoke!

Here it is "again":

http://www.thestranger.com/NEWS/city2.html

Don't blow any smoke in your dogma's face; the poor little pooch might get all "confused" on the way to the polls!

-- Count De Monay (chez@u.washington.edu), October 04, 1999.

So provide the quote, so we know what you mean. The last paragraph is:

"Eyman's right, our tax code stinks. But 695 is like trying to cure an anemic with leeches. If we want fairer state government, it's time to look at truly progressive taxes, like an income tax, or "green" taxes which shift the tax burden to polluting industries. In the meantime, 695 deserves not our votes, but our contempt."

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 05, 1999.

So Chez your back

I read the article at the site you listed, very good reading. Just a few questions.

The author states "But Eyman's initiative, far from fixing the problem, compounds it. In fact, it's plain evil" and "Here's the score: 695 is a baited hook. The bait is a reduction in car tab costs. Under 695, each of us, no matter what we drive, would pay $30 for our tabs" So the Government of the State of Oregon is what? Hell? They've had the same cost for tabs for as long as I have lived here (30 years).

Then the purveyor of truth states "saving the average person nearly $142 a year. Sounds pretty good, right? I mean, who couldn't use 142 bucks?" (I could, but it's more like $1300 for me) and "Well, first of all, remember that's the average. If you drive a luxury car-for example, an Infinity QX4-you're paying $727.35; whereas if you drive a 1987 Honda Civic Coupe, your tax is only a measly $47.35. Under 695, tabs for either car would cost $33.00. This reduces the total tax hit everybody takes, but is primarily a tax cut for the wealthy. Lets see, I drive a 1999 F250 Super Duty, Which I use for hauling items with, such as firewood for mom, furniture for mom, food for mom and building materials for my house (finishing the basement) I paid $750 this year. I make $38,400 a year. Does this mean I'm part of the evil rich?

Plus it would seem from the article the 60% of the people are paying 10.5% (I think its higher) of their income on taxes. This would be then a tax break for the middle class (as defined here) as they are paying the majority of the taxes.

"While rich Seattleites" Does this mean I have to move to Seattle?

"can afford to lose some state money, especially when they're getting more back in a tax cut than they're losing, the rest of us-who live in cities or in older suburbs, who are less than rich," Aren't all of us who make more than you rich? Hold on let me as my buddy B. Gates.

"But 695 is like trying to cure an anemic with leeches." Chez, haven't you heard, leeches are coming back into vogue with the medical field.

A couple of questions Jeff, What are you studying at the U? Do you expect to get paid for a job when you graduate? And if so will it be minimum wage or commission?

Good try Jeff the Chez, but no such luck this time either.

Ed - waiting for The Menace to site Cambodia after the Vietnam War as a great place to live.

-- Ed (ed_brigdes@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.

Ed,

Do you mean the Cambodia that the Russians bombed without asking permission from the People?

Oh, I'm sorry, wait -- it wasn't the Russians, it was, wait, what was his name?...oh, yeah!

United States President Richard Milhous Nixon.

Bombed Cambodia without the permission of the American Public (by way of the Congress they voted for).

Goes to show you how much greater our leaders are then all those Communist tyrants, like that horrible, horrible, evil man Castro, who guarantees free lifelong education and medical care for all Cuban citizens. Before he BRUTALLY MURDERS AND TORTURES THEM ALL!!!!!

PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!!!!!

PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!!!!!

THEY'RE OUT TO GET OUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!!!!!

-- N'importe Quelle Hors Du Monde (chez@u.washington.edu), October 05, 1999.

HHHHmmmm....

Wonder what kind of MVET Castro charges?

Westin

"Democrats understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child." -- Vice Kinkster Al Gore

-- Westin (86se4sp@my-deja.com), October 05, 1999.

Westin understands bondage.....with his Libertarin Whores.

-- (mkpow62@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

"A couple of questions Jeff, What are you studying at the U?" LINGUISTICS Do you expect to get paid for a job when you graduate? IN LINGUISTICS? And if so will it be minimum wage or commission? YOU WANT THAT SUPERSIZED, MISTER?

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

"A couple of questions Jeff, What are you studying at the U?" LINGUISTICS Do you expect to get paid for a job when you graduate? IN LINGUISTICS? And if so will it be minimum wage or commission? YOU WANT THAT SUPERSIZED, MISTER?

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

At you in stereo, phantom menace.

-- (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

Chez Jeff

No the Cambodia that had over 2 million of its citizens murdered by Pol Pot. Or was he just misunderstood by the western culture like Stalin, Mao and Ho.

Lets see, Nixon bombed Cambodia. Okay I agree with you on that. But the facts are that North Vietnam was using Cambodia as part of the Ho Chi Min trail to resupply its forces in the south. So should Nixon have just ignored them and hoped they would stop or bomb the crap out of them.

Goes to show you how much greater our leaders are then all those Communist tyrants, like that horrible, horrible, evil man Castro, who guarantees free lifelong education and medical care for all Cuban citizens. Before he BRUTALLY MURDERS AND TORTURES THEM ALL!!!!!

Yea our leaders only gave us the constitution and bill of rights. Castro came to power and took away the peoples property and rights and doles it out as he sees fit.

I hope to god you are getting an education at the U (you still havent answered my questions) because they need more people like you in Cuba.

-- Ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.

Mark,

So I guess you're implying that a Linguistics degree has no value because one who receives it won't have a cushy 30K middle management job waiting for them in the private sector.

And your point is?

-- Smasher of Republican Atom-Sized Cerebella (chez@u.washington.edu), October 05, 1999.

Natty Ed,

Stalin, Mao and Ho murdered innocent civilians in their own respective countries.

Nixon murdered innocent civilians in a country other than his own.

There's a grammatical difference there, Ed -- but NOT a moral one.

So, who'd ya vote for in '72, Ed?

Oh, and by the way: remember what this thread is about? Did you read the Stranger article?

-- I Burn Bridges (get it?) (chez@u.washington.edu), October 05, 1999.

"So I guess you're implying that a Linguistics degree has no value because one who receives it won't have a cushy 30K middle management job waiting for them in the private sector. "

Not in the least. If I ruled the world (or at least the public schools), I'd require each student to study at least two foreign languages, probably one Romance, one non Latin based. I believe that studying the nature of language and how it is put together enable us to understand the different types of models that varying people use that are integral to their thought, their idealogy, and their religion. I believe that through a study of world languages and anthropology we can all attain a broader understanding of one another. So I do indeed value your major, Jeff, but you're right, it doesn't pay real well in the private sector. Hopefully you have made your peace with that, if you intend to actually work in the field. But regardless, a broadly based education is always worthwhile, even if you don't directly apply it to what you do after graduation.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

Chez

So youve resorted to name calling since none of your arguments hold up. Youre the one that calls yourself the Menacing Liberal, Chez, Jeff (if this is your real name) and several others (dont speak French or Italian).

If innocent civilians were killed then it would be the fault of the North Vietnamese. As they were the ones using a foreign country to further their advance in the south. If Ho felt so much for the Cambodians then he would not have had his troops there. He knew what would happen.

So, who'd ya vote for in '72, Ed I didnt vote for anyone in 72, I was 14 years old. However I campaigned for Nixon. He won. Voted for the first time in 76, for Ford. Didnt think he had a chance but didnt think Carter had anything worth wasting my vote on. Which history has proven.

Chez states Oh, and by the way: remember what this thread is about? Did you read the Stranger article? Ed replies. Didnt you read what I wrote in my reply to your post. The majority of it was in response to the article. But since you missed it the first time I will post it again here.

I read the article at the site you listed, very good reading. Just a few questions. The author states "But Eyman's initiative, far from fixing the problem, compounds it. In fact, it's plain evil" and "Here's the score: 695 is a baited hook. The bait is a reduction in car tab costs. Under 695, each of us, no matter what we drive, would pay $30 for our tabs" So the Government of the State of Oregon is what? Hell? They've had the same cost for tabs for as long as I have lived here (30 years). Then the purveyor of truth states "saving the average person nearly $142 a year. Sounds pretty good, right? I mean, who couldn't use 142 bucks?" (I could, but it's more like $1300 for me) and "Well, first of all, remember that's the average. If you drive a luxury car-for example, an Infinity QX4-you're paying $727.35; whereas if you drive a 1987 Honda Civic Coupe, your tax is only a measly $47.35. Under 695, tabs for either car would cost $33.00. This reduces the total tax hit everybody takes, but is primarily a tax cut for the wealthy. Lets see, I drive a 1999 F250 Super Duty, Which I use for hauling items with, such as firewood for mom, furniture for mom, food for mom and building materials for my house (finishing the basement) I paid $750 this year. I make $38,400 a year. Does this mean I'm part of the evil rich? Plus it would seem from the article the 60% of the people are paying 10.5% (I think its higher) of their income on taxes. This would be then a tax break for the middle class (as defined here) as they are paying the majority of the taxes. "While rich Seattleites" Does this mean I have to move to Seattle? "can afford to lose some state money, especially when they're getting more back in a tax cut than they're losing, the rest of us-who live in cities or in older suburbs, who are less than rich," Aren't all of us who make more than you rich? Hold on let me as my buddy B. Gates. "But 695 is like trying to cure an anemic with leeches." Chez, haven't you heard, leeches are coming back into vogue with the medical field.

Also Chez you never answered my questions A couple of questions Jeff, What are you studying at the U? Do you expect to get paid for a job when you graduate? And if so will it be minimum wage or commission?

The reason I ask these is not to make fun of you or put you down. Its to find out if you plan on making a lot of money in your chosen career? If you dont thats fine. If you do, will you be joining the rest of us filthy rich who want to keep all that we earn or will you donate it all to charities and needy causes (whats left over after the government takes their share)?

Just wondering.

Last item is this quote I Burn Bridges (get it?) a threat? If it is please e-mail me personally so we can talk it out.

Ed  trying to keep it civil with no liberal name calling or threats

-- ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.

"So I guess you're implying that a Linguistics degree has no value because one who receives it won't have a cushy 30K middle management job waiting for them in the private sector. "

I wouldn't say that comrade Chez.

I would say that a linguistics major would get you a cushy job living off of everybody else's labor as another useless cog(clog) in the higher education scam.

A chance to write books (or rather have some promising students write books that you will put your name on) that are of absolutely no use to anyone. And force the future generations of students to pruchase the garbage while you are traveling all over the country on the Univeristy's dime, getting paid for meaningless lectures to even more meaningless people..

-- maddjak (maddjak@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

Obviously another voice heard from. Come on maddjak. Just because the tenure system tends to preserve the idealogically challenged in their tax-supported professorships, is no reason to unload on education. There's nothing wrong with knowledge, whatever you may think of the academic establishment. Being pro-ignorance is a hard sell. There are enough ignorant people around without you going to any lengths to encourage more. I do confess to years of irritation over the textbook scam issue however, especially when they weren't in my major and couldn't be sold back at the end of the quarter/semester.

-- (mark842@hotmail.net), October 05, 1999.

Ed writes:

"Lets see, I drive a 1999 F250 Super Duty, Which I use for hauling items with, such as firewood for mom, furniture for mom, food for mom and building materials for my house (finishing the basement) I paid $750 this year. I make $38,400 a year. Does this mean I'm part of the evil rich?"

No, it just means that you're astoundingly stupid with your money. What the hell are you doing buying a brand new F250 when you make under $40K a year? You should never, EVER buy a new car that costs as much as an F250 when you make that kind of money. It makes me feel real glad I'll be subsidizing your idiocy if 695 passes.

BB

-- BB (bbquax@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

and yet another voice heard from. Where do YOU get off lecturing someone about what purchase they should make with their money? Particularly when you use transit that he subsidizes? You obviously feel that you know better than the individual that produces this revenue the use to which it should be put.

"It makes me feel real glad I'll be subsidizing your idiocy if 695 passes. " And here is the crux of the philosophical divide. BB feels that he has an inherent right to Ed's MVET money, and that if I- 695 passes and Ed is not required to pay the MVET, BB believes that HE is subsidizing Ed. The differing philosophies could not be more succintly demonstrated.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

BB--"No, it just means that you're astoundingly stupid with your money. What the hell are you doing buying a brand new F250 when you make under $40K a year? You should never, EVER buy a new car that costs as much as an F250 when you make that kind of money. It makes me feel real glad I'll be subsidizing your idiocy if 695 passes."

As I pointed out in another thread, the above is a stellar example of why the whole rich guy v. poor guy argument (aka: the regressive tax argument) is an ineffective strategy against I-695. From my observation, it is extremely common for many people to purchase a more expensive vehicle than they "should" (privates and Z-28s come to mind).

As an aside, I think there's another reason why the rich guy v. poor guy argument doesn't work. Fundamentally, *most* people in the US want to be rich.

-- Brad (knotwell@my-deja.com), October 05, 1999.

Brad

You write, It makes me feel real glad I'll be subsidizing your idiocy if 695 passes. BB

And how will you be subsidizing me. I pay the taxes on it now and will continue to do so if I-695 fails. And I will pay the $30 if it passes. Unlike you who doesnt pay for the full cost of mass transit now or in the future.

B writes, From my observation, it is extremely common for many people to purchase a more expensive vehicle than they "should" (privates and Z-28s come to mind). And this power that you have to determine what people should and shouldnt be driving or can and cant afford was ordained upon you by what supreme being.

I like driving new cars, so sue me. Ive had a 82, 84, 85, 87(2), 89, 90, 93(2), 95(2), and a 99. All were brand new. Along with a couple of used Vettes and pickups. You can drive whatever you want to B and buy whatever you want to thats your choice and how you spend your money is up to you. How I spend my money is up to me and is my choice.

When you take my choice away from me then we will be living in the societies that Chez speaks so highly of.

Lastly you write, What the hell are you doing buying a brand new F250 when you make under $40K a year? I tell you the most important reason why. I was pronounced dead one time, because of a shot I got for pain from a hospital. I had been working 20 to 24 hour days. After the above happened I decided to have fun with my life instead of working my a## off and having no fun but a lot of money. I live for today Brad because once in my life I had no tomorrow.

Ed  spending as I earn it.

-- ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.

Mark,

You are a super sharp guy, and I mean that without flamethrowing irony: you have exactly described my post-graduate agenda. I personally see a world coming very soon where 1) the main concepts of linguistics and anthropology are taught at the grade school level, the better to weed out xenophobia from our young ones at an early age, and 2) a linguistics degree will be, yes, a practical key into the big bad job market. Regressive xenophobes (some of whom make this forum their home -- I won't mention names!) will just have to deal with a multicultural and multilingual America, and I'll do my part to make damn sure it arrives.

Got college credits earned, Mark? Care to join me in my crusade?

-- Jeff Stevens (chez@u.washington.edu), October 05, 1999.

"Got college credits earned, Mark? " Yea, 273 quarter credits and 161 semester credits at last count. Plus one quarter credit from a junior college for a scuba course I took (Hey, I needed PADI certification to get compressed air).

But IMHO, the REAL problem is parochialism, not xenophobia. I think that if a lot of people had more international experience (not as the Ugly American, but living in and understanding the local culture), they'd better appreciate what a rare jewel our country is, even with all the warts and bumps. I think it'd also help to smooth out the warts and pumps. But until we get that appreciation for increased linguistic and cultural diversity, I STILL wouldn't try to get rich with a bachelor's in anthropology or linguistics. But being rich isn't everything.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.net), October 05, 1999.

"I think it'd also help to smooth out the warts and pumps" Whoops, that was supposed to be bumps. I have inverse dyslexia. Too much time in academics, too little time in typing class (and that, way too long ago).

-- (mark842@hotmail.com), October 05, 1999.

Ed--

First off, be more careful with your attributions. Two of the quotes you attributed to me are not mine (they're BB's). Similarly, it appears you attributed a quote to BB that I made.

Anyhow, I'll respond to the one quote of mine. I never said I or anyone else should determine what people should drive. Quite frankly, I believe people should be allowed to make their own decisions (no matter how irrational). That being said, re-read my previous post and think about why I put the word should in quotations.

-- Brad (knotwell@my-deja.com), October 05, 1999.

Brad

Sorry for the misquotes, what with Chez using a different name on every reply. Just got B and Brad mixed up. I will be more careful in the future.

Also reread your statement and your use of should is still not clear with me. It appears that you are deciding what people should be driving. But from your last post this obviously isnt the case.

Dont want to get into a pissing match over your or my meaning of a word. So Ill drop it at that.

Again sorry for the mix-up between you and B.

Ed  thinking about a yellow 99 Mustang GT

-- ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), October 05, 1999.