Re: BEFORE Trying To Simply Hike the Fuel Tax . . .

Dan Bloomquist wrote:
> Day Brown wrote:
>> Harold Burton wrote:
>>> In article <pan.2008.05.14.02.06.55.132501@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>>  The Trucker <mikcob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> You obviously have no clue what ... the progressive
>>>> income tax is designed to do.
>>>
>>>
>>> Preserve wealth for the already wealthy, but make it much more 
>>> difficult for everyone else to achieve wealth.  i.e. don't let 
>>> upstarts get new money and displace the old farts, who are no longer 
>>> competitive.
>> In an honest system, you are correct. But that aint what we have.
> 
> Ain't requires an apostrophe. The system requires favor to work. This is

> usenet, the land of believers. A loosing battle if you post here...
Sometimes Dan, I'm wrong about putting DNR on the brain dead. I type too 
slow the way it is, and am too dyslexic to worry about apostrophes. 
hardly a line goes by wihtout some typo.

Sometimes also, as Socrates noted, its the kook, perhaps with the wrong 
reasons, that yet comes up with the right idea. Or even a wrong idea 
that is so twisted it gives me a new spin on the right one.

Now, in this case, I dont blame the oil outfits for not looking for new 
sources of alternative energy. They know how to make money off oil, and 
are not keen on some new technology to compete with it. Very well. Tax 
the bastards to motivate them. Profits are positive re-inforcement, 
taxes are negative re-inforcement. They both work.