Bush Threatens Veto Of Any Bills That Don't Include User Fees For Everyone Talking To ATC!

On Jun 30, 1:08*pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 11:16 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you intimating that Obama's ATC user fee view is aligned with
Bush's?

I think we all just assume that taxes are going to be crippling under
Obama. He's already started warning us by saying he's increasing the
social security tax. That's going to hit many of us.

Won't hit me. *By the time I'm eligible for the Socialist Security I've
been paying into all my life, it'll be gone.

Me too but the point is that Obama has pre-announced that the payroll
tax we are paying will increase.

-Robert

On Jun 30, 1:19*pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 12:19 pm, "Mike" wrote:
Oh, I should have known you're a liberal with a limited knowledge of
economics.

-Robert, MBA

Aw, Christ. *Not only a Calfornian, but an MBA. *They know EVERYTHING.

"The criticism we hear most has to do with arrogance," says Bill
Boulding, associate dean for the daytime MBA Program at Duke
University's Fuqua School of Business, "essentially that students leave
MBA programs thinking they should be CEO and tell everyone what to do
when in fact they may not even be prepared to do the job they've taken.""

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...7/ai_n21067809

:P

Oh good. You didn't have a response so you came back with a non-
sequitur argument.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 12:19 pm, "Mike" wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
...
As far as the user fees debate goes, someone is going to pay for
aviation.
The only question is who that someone is going to be.

We're paying for it now (including an aviation fund surplus) so I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

That would be a poor guess.

But since you care to guess my views on the subject, I'll take a crack at
yours. You apparently support McCain. McCain supports user fees. So I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

Furthermore, your attempts at twisting your political views towards the
subject of aviation are truly pathetic. McCain heavily supports user fees,
period. His record and statements are quite clear on the subject.

McCain heavily supports user fees, period.

As far as taxes in general goes, NOT paying taxes is more crippling.
Almost
8 years of failed supply-side, borrow-and-spend policies have without
question crippled this nation.

Oh, I should have known you're a liberal with a limited knowledge of
economics.

-Robert, MBA

What's more conservative than balancing the budget?

I should have known you're a fake conservative with a limited knowledge of
economics, regardless of whatever unverifiable credentials you care to
flaunt.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:19 pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 12:19 pm, "Mike" wrote:
Oh, I should have known you're a liberal with a limited knowledge of
economics.

-Robert, MBA

Aw, Christ. Not only a Calfornian, but an MBA. They know EVERYTHING.

"The criticism we hear most has to do with arrogance," says Bill
Boulding, associate dean for the daytime MBA Program at Duke
University's Fuqua School of Business, "essentially that students leave
MBA programs thinking they should be CEO and tell everyone what to do
when in fact they may not even be prepared to do the job they've
taken.""

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...7/ai_n21067809

:P

Oh good. You didn't have a response so you came back with a non-
sequitur argument.

He just followed your lead.

On Jun 30, 1:39*pm, "Mike" wrote:

We're paying for it now (including an aviation fund surplus) so I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

That would be a poor guess.

You really need to educate yourself on the subject of GA funding. If
you did you would realize that GA pays more in tax than we get from
the system. Those that say we are not don't realize that a Cessna uses
less services than a 747. In anycase, fuel tax is easier and cheaper
to collect than reading credit card numbers over the air. Not sure if
you are actually interested in facts though, its not clear from your
post.

But since you care to guess my views on the subject, I'll take a crack at
yours. *You apparently support McCain. *McCain supports user fees. *So I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

I don't recall saying that. I'm voting for John Galt.


-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:08 pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 11:16 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you intimating that Obama's ATC user fee view is aligned with
Bush's?

I think we all just assume that taxes are going to be crippling under
Obama. He's already started warning us by saying he's increasing the
social security tax. That's going to hit many of us.

Won't hit me. By the time I'm eligible for the Socialist Security I've
been paying into all my life, it'll be gone.

Me too but the point is that Obama has pre-announced that the payroll
tax we are paying will increase.

For a self-described economic expert, you sure have some weak points.

First, Obama said no such thing. Next, SS can't possibly be "gone" because
you will always have people paying into the system. The only thing that has
a potential to be "gone" is the SS trust fund, which was a bad idea given to
us by Reagan in the first place. Even if the SS trust fund is "gone", FICA
will still cover at least 75% of SS payouts, even if all the doom-and-gloom
predictions about SS come true decades from now.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:39 pm, "Mike" wrote:

We're paying for it now (including an aviation fund surplus) so I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

That would be a poor guess.

You really need to educate yourself on the subject of GA funding. If
you did you would realize that GA pays more in tax than we get from
the system. Those that say we are not don't realize that a Cessna uses
less services than a 747. In anycase, fuel tax is easier and cheaper
to collect than reading credit card numbers over the air. Not sure if
you are actually interested in facts though, its not clear from your
post.

Why do you continue to go down the road of pretending I support user fees?

Is silly strawman rhetoric the best you have?

But since you care to guess my views on the subject, I'll take a crack
at
yours. You apparently support McCain. McCain supports user fees. So I
guess your point is that we should pay for it twice.

I don't recall saying that. I'm voting for John Galt.

Funny, I don't either. I guess sarcasm is not your strong suit, eh?

On Jun 30, 1:49*pm, "Mike" wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in ...





On Jun 30, 1:08 pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 11:16 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you intimating that Obama's ATC user fee view is aligned with
Bush's?

I think we all just assume that taxes are going to be crippling under
Obama. He's already started warning us by saying he's increasing the
social security tax. That's going to hit many of us.

Won't hit me. By the time I'm eligible for the Socialist Security I've
been paying into all my life, it'll be gone.

Me too but the point is that Obama has pre-announced that the payroll
tax we are paying will increase.

For a self-described economic expert, you sure have some weak points.

First, Obama said no such thing. *

I guess you don't get out much...

"Obama to push for higher Social Security tax"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21739271/

So expect your paycheck to get smaller.

-Robert

Mike wrote:

For a self-described economic expert, you sure have some weak points.

First, Obama said no such thing. Next, SS can't possibly be "gone"
because you will always have people paying into the system. The only
thing that has a potential to be "gone" is the SS trust fund, which
was a bad idea given to us by Reagan in the first place. Even if the
SS trust fund is "gone", FICA will still cover at least 75% of SS
payouts, even if all the doom-and-gloom predictions about SS come
true decades from now.

Actually, SS was a bad idea given to us by FDR in the first place.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
...
On Jun 30, 1:49 pm, "Mike" wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in
...





On Jun 30, 1:08 pm, gatt wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jun 30, 11:16 am, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you intimating that Obama's ATC user fee view is aligned with
Bush's?

I think we all just assume that taxes are going to be crippling
under
Obama. He's already started warning us by saying he's increasing
the
social security tax. That's going to hit many of us.

Won't hit me. By the time I'm eligible for the Socialist Security
I've
been paying into all my life, it'll be gone.

Me too but the point is that Obama has pre-announced that the payroll
tax we are paying will increase.

For a self-described economic expert, you sure have some weak points.

First, Obama said no such thing.

I guess you don't get out much...

"Obama to push for higher Social Security tax"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21739271/

So expect your paycheck to get smaller.

I guess your reading comprehension skills aren't all that great. Obama
proposes raising the SS maximum income level, which is currently $102,000
which affects less than 5% of the population. The payroll tax rate would
remain the same. And you claim to be an economic expert?

I also see you didn't even address the rest of your ignorance and snipped it
out. Good show.