HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:28:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.190520.21494@wts.com> (Jens B. Fiederer) writes:
|
|While I agree with you on the facts of this matter, that comment was
|uncalled for.  Frank may have been wrong, but in general he is accurate
|and helpful.  I think in this case he was repeating something he had taken
|for granted for a long time, which is why he didn't check it.  He SHOULD
|review his tax records -- if he has significant capital gains he could have
|quite a refund coming if he files amended returns!

On the contrary, I find Frank's dissertations FULL of unchecked facts and
heavily biased views.  I respect the stimulation of opinions which are contrary
to my own, but I find having to defend the basic facts a tiring waste of time.
Frank would benefit his own arguments significantly if he would provide a more
factual basis for his arguments.  I didn't call him any names.  I just asked
him to be more careful in the future.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I went to a museum once where all the artwork was by children.
It was all put up on refrigerators.
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
Xref: sparky or.politics:509 alt.politics.clinton:16494 alt.politics.democrats.d:383 alt.politics.elections:23176 ba.politics:6901 co.politics:1695 ne.politics:2816 nj.politics:603 ny.politics:128 talk.politics.misc:59045
From: jfr@RedBrick.COM
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: A new tax system ... was Vote...
Date: 9 Nov 92 05:15:50 GMT
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA

In article <1992Nov8.054221.29501@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>In article <BxBor5.7HA@slipknot.rain.com> robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed) writes:
>>So, if I stick my money in a mattress, or give a dollar to the homeless man on
>>the corner, I'd have to pay a consumption tax on it?  
>
>You currently pay income tax on it. Since the proposal is to replace the
>income tax, there would be no change in this regard.
>
>>Even if I stick it in a
>>bank, the bank reports interest over $400 and transactions over $10,000, but
>>I've never heard that they report account balances to the IRS...
>
>Actually, I believe they do. Alot of people get in trouble for unreported
>income (for sums well under $10,000). _Somehow_ the IRS is finding
>out about deposits...

  Where did this guy come from?  Banks do NOT report account balances to
  the IRS as a matter of course, although they will disclose that 
  information if requested to be the IRS as a routine matter of audit      
  investigation.  Banks MUST report cash transactions over $10,000
  (this is done to inhibit money laundering activities, not to catch
  tax cheats, although like dolphins in a net, if tax cheats happen
  to surface as a result, you can be sure the IRS won't throw 'em back).

  People get in trouble for unreported income for a variety of reasons.
  First of all, any money received from a corporation to an individual
  for services that is not subject to withholding taxes and is over
  $600 a year must be reported to the individual AND the IRS on a
  1099 form.  In the past (up until 1986), the forms went to the IRS
  on paper only and were never entered into the computer.  It was up
  to the individual to (on his or her honor) enter the amount on their
  return.  Now, almost all 1099s are filed with the IRS on computer and
  the IRS just cross-matched 'em all looking for missing money.  It is
  tremendously effective.  The IRS is also constantly doing things to
  find unreported income.  In a recent copy of the Card Player magazine
  (which reports on poker goings on in California and Nevada), there
  was an article on a recurring IRS "tokes" study, which tries to 
  determine how much, on average, dealers in casinos make in tips ("tokes"),
  so that they can see if dealers are reporting their tips accurately.
  They have uncovered widespread lack of tips reporting and have take
  steps to "correct" the situation.  
    
>                                              Frank Crary
>                                              CU Boulder

  I have a question, Frank.  Does CU stand for Colorado University
  or for Completely Uninformed?

  Jon
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:18:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.021509.2727@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.143036.2167@m5.harvard.edu> borden@m5.harvard.edu writes:
>>The interest on the debt benefits those who are wealthy enough to hold a
>>sufficiently large amount of government bonds.  Those who can save enough
>>tens of thousands of dollars in government bonds to exceed what they pay in
>>taxes to pay that interest greatly benefit from that interest.  

>DING!!!!  Another person who doesn't understand economics.
>Frank, the US debt is auctioned off...

I know (and I don't see it as even close to a good idea...)

>In short, you don't know what you are talking about.

However, I didn't make the comments you were refering to: That was from
a reply to one of my posts by borden@m5.harvard.edu...

                                                     Frank Crary
                                                     CU Boulder

Xref: sparky or.politics:546 alt.politics.clinton:16706 alt.politics.democrats.d:419 alt.politics.elections:23351 ba.politics:6953 co.politics:1751 ne.politics:2853 nj.politics:635 ny.politics:158 talk.politics.misc:59363
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:01:08 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Nov10.143036.2167@m5.harvard.edu> borden@m5.harvard.edu writes:
>>The interest on the debt benefits no one, rich or poor (and is more than
>>15%...)

>The interest on the debt benefits those who are wealthy enough to hold a
>sufficiently large amount of government bonds.

No, that would be true only if there was no other reason to pay the
interest. In fact, these payments are not hand outs, based on government
policy. They are part of a commitment the government made in order
to borrow money: It is the price of borrowing and benefits everyone
who benefited by the defecit (e.g. by high government spending.) 

>But in the end, the working poor and the middle class pay for the
>interest in taxes, but don't have the kind of savings to enable them to
>benefit from it. 

Wrong: They benefit from the current levels of government spending, which
the defecit makes possible. (Would you suggest, for example, that a
bank was the only one to benefit from a loan? The borrower gains money
to spend on something he wants. That is a benefit he receives in 
exchange for paying interest.)

It's a little bit frightening to see defecit spending and the payment
of interest so freely disconnected: They are the same issue; you can't
do the former without doing the later. It's suggestive of the way 
the federal debt became so large: People weren't connecting the
consequences (paying interest) to their actions (defecit spending.)


                                                 Frank Crary
                                                 CU Boulder
Newsgroups: or.politics
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: the election
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:19:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.220615.16119@klic.rain.com> keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
|Term limits is one way to restrict the money flow a bit.

Term limits impose NO restriction on the money flow.  The same special
interests will have the same money at their disposal, and will merely redirect
it.  It's true that freshmen legislators won't know what they're worth and so
will probably get less of the pie, but issues and the legal/legislative system
are complex, and term limits will not change that.  Therefore, these new hill
people will quickly come to rely on someone who knows the ropes, especially at
the federal level where only a third of the states have the initiative clout to
pass term limitations.  Most staffers make a career of it, and I think we'll
find them pocketing more of the special interest money for their influence.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I stayed up one night playing poker with tarot cards.  I got a full house
and four people died
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Subject: Re: A new tax system ... was Vote...
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 05:42:21 GMT

In article <BxBor5.7HA@slipknot.rain.com> robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed) writes:
>So, if I stick my money in a mattress, or give a dollar to the homeless man on
>the corner, I'd have to pay a consumption tax on it?  

You currently pay income tax on it. Since the proposal is to replace the
income tax, there would be no change in this regard.

>Even if I stick it in a
>bank, the bank reports interest over $400 and transactions over $10,000, but
>I've never heard that they report account balances to the IRS...

Actually, I believe they do. Alot of people get in trouble for unreported
income (for sums well under $10,000). _Somehow_ the IRS is finding
out about deposits...

                                              Frank Crary
                                              CU Boulder

Newsgroups: or.politics
From: stever@crosstalk.tv.tek.com (Steven E. Rice  P.E.)
Subject: Re: the election
Summary: We have to boot them in the correct order!
Organization: Tektronix TV Products
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 04:40:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.012942.3144@reed.edu> "V Headshape" (sharvy@reed.edu)
wrote:

> I love it that the People voted a) to impose term-limits, and b) to
> re-elect Packwood to his ump-teenth consecutive term. It suggests a
> certain scintillating clarity of thought in the collective mind that
> makes me proud to be an Oregonian, and renews faith in the soundness 
> of the democratic system. Yahoo!!

Since we only had two choices, both of whom were multi-term political
animals, the best bet was to dump Les AuCoin first, which gives us a
chance to dump Bob Packwood in six years.  It wouldn't have worked as
well the other way around, because most people don't find Les as
obnoxious as Bob.  This would make Les harder to dump six years hence.

					Steve Rice

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord! *
stever@tv.tv.Tek.com                                   [phone (503) 627-1320]
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:46:35 GMT

<Bx96p8.AKL@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com>
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.

In article <Bx96p8.AKL@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com>
dscharfe@dptspd.sat.datapoint.com (David Scharfe) writes:
|The biggest reason I hate income tax is that when you invest,
|you are taxed again on your money.  You _already_paid_your_taxes_
|when you made the money in the first place; I cannot find any
|reasonable justification for paying twice.  Please enlighten me.

But aren't you "making money in the first place"--or at least intending
to--when you invest?  Why should money you make from investing have any less
tax applied to it than money you make by any other means?
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed                     Home Animation Ltd.             503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com        5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068
 
Hawaii has always been a very pivotal role in the Pacific.  It is in the
Pacific.  It is part of the United States that is an island that is right
there.
--Dan Quayle, speaking with reporters in Hawaii, May 1989
________________________________________________________________________________
Xref: sparky or.politics:556 alt.politics.clinton:16750 alt.politics.democrats.d:429 alt.politics.elections:23394 ba.politics:6973 co.politics:1769 ne.politics:2864 nj.politics:645 ny.politics:168 talk.politics.misc:59436
From: fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 11 Nov 92 00:34:42 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Nov9.190520.21494@wts.com> jbf@wts.com (Jens B. Fiederer) writes:
>I think in this case he was repeating something he had taken
>for granted for a long time, which is why he didn't check it.  

I'm afraid that's more or less the case: I was _very_ sure that regular
income taxes are paid on capital gains (and I was completely correct in
thinking this.) I also assumed from what I had read, that the 
"capital gains tax" was a seperate thing. (For example, I've seen
editorials calling, in the same breath, for the elimination of the
capital gains tax and for capital gains to be treated "just like any
other income." Such argments don't really make any sense if "capital
gains tax" just means paying normal income tax on capital gains. I
guess I should have known better than to assume newspaper editorials
were rational...) To confuse things more, someone posted that you
did not pay taxes twice on capital gains and that capital gains 
weren't taxed as normal income (or, at least, that was my understanding
of the post.) I contradicted this, since I _thought_ the former
was incorrect and I _knew_ the later was. In any case, I was
(as has been pointed out in e-mail) in error: There is no 
double taxation on capital gains.

                                          Frank Crary
                                          CU Boulder
Newsgroups: or.politics
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: the election
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:01:59 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.182807.6064@tvnews.tv.tek.com> stever@crosstalk.tv.tek.com (Steven E. Rice  P.E.) writes:
||I said our best chance of getting rid of both Les AuCoin and Bob Packwood
||was to dump good ol' boy Les first.
|
|My answer wasn't directed toward term limits, but to why someone who
|voted for term limits would also vote for Packwood.  I certainly didn't
|intend anyone to believe that I felt good ol' boy Les had a "better"
|record in Congress than good ol' boy Bob!!  They are both skunks, but
|the smell emanating from Les AuCoin is quite a bit stronger than the
|smell that hangs around Packwood.

I highly question that.  I have no great love for Les, having seen him opine in
the direction of the greatest political opportunity in the past, but compared
to Les on this point, Bob is the grand master.  And I at least agree more with
what Les says he's going to do than with what Bob is planning.  And according
to the Center for Independence in Politics, in the last full-cycle campaign
year, Packwood collected $1,108,824 from PACs to Les's $309,200 (which, by the
way, is almost as much as Packwood collected from the finance, insurance and
real estate industry alone).

|The reason for getting rid of Les AuCoin first is that he appears
|to be young, personable, and energetic (I say "appears," because he
|is 50 years old!).  Because of his looks and his ingratiating manner,
|he is able to win people over more easily than Bob Packwood.
|Therefore, Les is the more dangerous.

And that's why he won, huh?

|As many of you noticed during the campaign, Bob Packwood has all
|the charisma of the log saws in a sawmill.  Cross him, and he'll
|cut you to sawdust.

Now and in the future.

|> It wouldn't surprise [me] to find Packwood running again in 6 years.
|
|I'm sure he will.  If Oregonians are smart enough, this time they'll
|nominate a real person to run against him, instead of a political
|robot.  Although Les AuCoin seems "different" than Bob Packwood,
|under the skin they are clones.
|
|I'm no political seer, but I believe Harry Lonsdale, as questionable
|as he is, would have defeated Bob Packwood.  With any luck, Bob will
|be knocked off in the primary six years hence, and we'll have a real
|choice.

Like Lonsdale defeated Hatfield two years ago?  I supported Lonsdale then and I
almost voted for him in the primary, but Lonsdale had never shown an ability to
win, and I think Packwood would have cut him to ribbons, as opposed to the
fairly close outcome we had with AuCoin.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I just got out of the hospital--I was in a speed-reading accident.
I hit a bookmark.
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: A new tax system ... was Vote...
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:42:41 GMT

In article <85==HH=@engin.umich.edu> jwh@citi.umich.edu writes:
|Not necessarily so.  You could simply track the amount of investment, which
|is already done, and deduct it from income.  The remainder would represent
|consumption.  Give people personal exemptions and you eliminate the
|most regressive nature.  The WSJ column has a better explanation about
|how the current tax system and method of reporting could be converted
|into a consumption based system.

So, if I stick my money in a mattress, or give a dollar to the homeless man on
the corner, I'd have to pay a consumption tax on it?  Even if I stick it in a
bank, the bank reports interest over $400 and transactions over $10,000, but
I've never heard that they report account balances to the IRS, and if they
started, I believe a lot of financial privacy advocates would start making a
whole lotta' noise.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I used to be a narrator for bad mimes
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: or.politics
From: robert@slipknot.rain.com (Robert Reed)
Subject: Re: the election
Reply-To: robert@slipknot.rain.com.UUCP (Robert Reed)
Organization: Home Animation Ltd.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 22:22:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.044022.21895@tvnews.tv.tek.com> stever@crosstalk.tv.tek.com (Steven E. Rice  P.E.) writes:
|In article <1992Nov7.012942.3144@reed.edu> "V Headshape" (sharvy@reed.edu)
|wrote:
|> I love it that the People voted a) to impose term-limits, and b) to
|> re-elect Packwood to his ump-teenth consecutive term.
|
|Since we only had two choices, both of whom were multi-term political
|animals, the best bet was to dump Les AuCoin first, which gives us a
|chance to dump Bob Packwood in six years.  It wouldn't have worked as
|well the other way around, because most people don't find Les as
|obnoxious as Bob.  This would make Les harder to dump six years hence.

Well, that certainly clarifies things.  So the purpose of term limits is to
dump politicians regardless of how you feel about their record ("less
obnoxious" equates to "higher approval")?

And if we take your position at face value, what makes you think you can get
rid of Packwood in 6 years, that measely "term limits" bill?  Packwood holds a
FEDERAL elective office and there are serious constitutional questions about
the validity of a state term limits bill.  Recognizing that and the popularity
of term limits, opportunist Packwood naturally backed that initiative after
protesting for so long regardling Measure 9 that he didn't like to take stands
on state ballot measures.  It wouldn't surprise to find Packwood running again
in 6 years.

If that was truly your intention, you probably just shot yourself in the foot.
________________________________________________________________________________
Robert Reed			Home Animation Ltd.		503-656-8414
robert@slipknot.rain.com	5686 First Court, West Linn, OR 97068

I went to a museum where they have all the heads and arms of the statues
in the other museums
--Steve Wright
________________________________________________________________________________
Xref: sparky or.politics:561 alt.politics.perot:5411 talk.politics.misc:59449
From: wandac@sequent.com (Wanda Chauncy)
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.perot,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Meeting Announcement for 3rd Major Party in OR
Date: 11 Nov 92 00:12:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Nov11.001217.10776
Distribution: or
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.


        Date:   Wednesday, November 11th
        Time:   6 - 8 pm
        Place:  North Galleria ballroom
                at downtown Portland Hilton

Everyone is welcome to come and share your ideas about what this
party is and where we want to go with it.  Currently it is known as
the Independent Initiative Party and was founded to put Ross Perot's
name on the Oregon ballot for President.  We have a unique
opportunity to shape this party from its inception.

For more information call:      Scott Keller, 222-8248
                                Ralph Copeland, 222-9471
                                Peggy Pearce, 636-9291