(the new subtitle)
"Tax reform from dead raelian cultists for dead raelian cultist"
Posted on 05/05/2006 1:35:32 PM PDT by RobFromGa
Guess you can't read if you try to spin what I said to mean that prices would increase. I haven't said that at all - and you know it.
But of course you also know that prices will decrease with the advent of the FairTax and only the tax will increase them back in an upward direction (most likely to about where they now are or perhaps a bit more or perhaps a bit less). Taxpayers will still be better off by having more disposable personal income even while paying the FairTax on these lowered pre-tax prices.
You just can't stop misstating, can you?
That's your assessment of what he says, Nightie.
I see takehome wages going up noticeably AND pre-tax prices going down at the same time as I have said many times. I couldn't care less what you like to interpret a particular economist as thinking. Most on these threads have noted your ability to miststate things to help defend the Status Quo. And you certainly misstate what he has said.
You are the guy who was in error by over 400% and would never admit it, remember??? So your analysis oif what you think was meant doesn't cut any ice at all.
Indeed you will, Dimp-Dimp. Every time you do so.
That's a very popular techique with you guys.
Sorry Rongie - I've "admitted" no such thing.
I would have thought that such wonderfully discerning gents as you Squirrels would realize that wages increasing due to the FairTax indicates takehome wages ... you know - what you can actually spend and not the amount that is shorted by what the government withholds/takes from your wages without your consent. You guys are dumb enough to thing that wages including the income/payroll taxes are indeed your "wages" when in fact they are your wages plus taxes. Perhaps you've never noticed your check is less that what you supposedly "earn".
You guys will benefit from the visibility of the FairTax since it will be plain enough so that you can understand it ... or at least a few of you (some are no doubt too ignorant).
pigdog Post 400: "I have always said..."
pigdog Post 401: "I haven't said that at all..."
Though he has no clue what he's talking about, he's least predictable...
I see takehome wages going up noticeably AND pre-tax prices going down at the same time as I have said many times. I couldn't care less what you like to interpret a particular economist as thinking.The real wage is not open to interpretation. It is what it is.
You are the guy who was in error by over 400% and would never admit it, remember??? So your analysis oif what you think was meant doesn't cut any ice at all.I was not in error. And how can you say it was 400% when you refuse to give a number yourself.
... and at least you're ignorant of what was said in the two instances.
In 400 the post related to prices decreasing pre-tax where I said "... prices will decrease a good amount ...".
In 401 the post related to straightening out his "error" (ha) where he was trying to say I agreed prices would increase. The operative part of the post was:
"... Guess you can't read if you try to spin what I said to mean that prices would increase. I haven't said that at all - and you know it.
But of course you also know that prices will decrease with the advent of the FairTax and only the tax will increase them back in an upward direction (most likely to about where they now are or perhaps a bit more or perhaps a bit less). Taxpayers will still be better off by having more disposable personal income even while paying the FairTax on these lowered pre-tax prices."
You should also actually read the last sentence in 401 since it also applies with the rest of you Squirrels who so love to warp and misquote:
"You just can't stop misstating, can you?"
So in fact you "both called it wrong", Dimp - but that's hardly new.
Thanks but I prefer not to visit your house (and would have no reason to crawl IAE) since it is far too full of misstatement, out of context quoting, and just outright untruths (such as your old chestnut about the WA state tax nonsense which isn't even applicable to the FairTax - and that's been pointed out to you before).
You're apparently one of those who - when asked what he earns - quotes his takehome pay, thinking that's your wage and in fact that's probably more truthful that stating what it costs your employer to hire you since that includes the additional amount the employer pays you for taxes but whiah you don't get to disburse for living expenses or investments (it's gonzo to Uncle Sugar to partially help support our illegal aliens). You never have control of the amount above your takehome pay so it is hardly "yours" but merely the premium you cost your employer.
Your interpreatation of the economists palaver isn't at all convincing, but nice try. Your 400% error is still a 400% error and the numbers it was based upon were given when the error was pointed out ... and they came not from me but from the source who first alerted us to your "misinterpretations" on the matter. You were off by over 400%.
Tough you don't like it! You even made Looey (our previous error percentage record holder) jealous.
|
It's not spin, pigdog, it is all there in black and white. You said it, then you try to re-spin what you said, then you lie about ever saying it. How can you lie about something so plain as day? Dumb question I guess, because you do it all the time. Debating you is pointless, as you have zero intellectual honesty. All you do is get mad and name call.
Today on his website Boortz posts the following about the Fair Tax Book 2nd edition paperback:
"Yesterday we got the first numbers for sales of the soft cover edition of The FairTax Book. We debuted as No. 3! Now ... a little historical perspective. In the 1950's Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Weisel's book "Night" debuted as No 1. on the New York Times paperback list. Then in 1966 Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood" debuted as No. 2. Now, in 2006, The FairTax Book debuts as No. 3! This is the highest first week for a paperback in 40 years!"
First of all, I am NOT disputing that FairTax Book will be at #3 on the NYT NONFICTION PAPERBACK book list when the list comes out next week. But the rest of Boortz's over-the-top comparisons are simply flat-out wrong.
First, "Night" by Weisel is #1 on the NYT Nonfiction Paperback book list right now, TODAY, and probably also next week as well. It is the OPRAH book of the moment.
Second, "In True Blood" by Capote is #2 on the NYT Nonfiction Paperback book list right now, TODAY, and probably also next week as well. It is tied in with the movie CAPOTE.
SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/pages/books/bestseller/index.html
PAPERBACK NONFICTION (as of May 11 on website)
Top 5 at a Glance
1. NIGHT, by Elie Wiesel
2. IN COLD BLOOD, by Truman Capote
3. THE COVENANT WITH BLACK AMERICA.
4. MY LIFE SO FAR, by Jane Fonda
5. THE TIPPING POINT, by Malcolm Gladwell
So, of course Boortz is confused about whatever the NYT sent him about his book and thinks that his book is #3 highest all-time debut instead of #3 for a singel week, with two books over forty years old ahead of his beloved tome.
He is either stupid or can't read. I am not taking anything away from a #3 debut on any list, even if it is the Non-Fiction Paperback list. But he can't stop there, he needs to claim highest debut in over forty years for a paperback.
Does he even think? Isn't it likely that when the Clinton bios came out in paperback they debuted at #1 on the paperback lists?
There are probably many nonfiction paperback books that came out in the past 40 years that opened at #1 on the paperback list, this is a relatively low-volume list to start with (compared with Fiction numbers).
Why does Boortz have to mis-represent everything?
The FairTax Book should have been categorized on the Fiction list. Calling the FairTax Book "non-Fiction" is like calling a Michael Moore film a "Documentary."
(the new subtitle)
"Tax reform from dead raelian cultists for dead raelian cultist"
I couldn't find the NYT bestseller archives-- Good Job!
So in that week in 2002 alone, there was a #1 and a #2 debut on the NYT Paperback Non-Fiction list, both higher debuts than The FairTax Book.
I called Boortz and brought this up on the air, and he was belligerent and cut me off.
I also wouldn't be shocked if the book had a little "help" getting to #3 (it's #30 on the Amazon nonfiction list). I'm sure there were a few bulk sales in there.
No, I think he just gets confused by big sentences, and hears selectively. When I was on the air with him, he wouldn't even listen to a word I said, he just cut off my voice and kept right on going... answering a question that was never raised.
His penchant for wild embellishment is well-known to anyone paying attention to his FairTax antics. He has no problem making things up...
A few more from the past YEAR:
Million Little Pieces debuted at #1 on NYT Non-Fiction Paperback list on October 9, 2005.
and Worth More Dead debuted at #3 (same as Boortz) on Dec 18, 2005-- about 6 months ago?
Best Paperback Debut in over 40 years-- GIVE ME A BREAK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.