Does Warren Buffet hate rich people...

[MasterBlaster]

Bill, Do you have an alias as "Ray Cromwell" on Facebook?
The reason I ask is because your post here matches almost word for word a response on Arrington's blog that was made by him.

If you are not Ray Cromwell, I suggest that you correct your previous post and cite the original author.

[Bill Cain]

Perhaps you can post something that counters my points made.

You have a nice day.   

Bill Cain

[SunnyDaze]

Wow. Just wow.

[Sir Thrift-a-Lot]

Seems that Master Blaster is pretty hard core.   Probably listens to 104.7.

Still, Bill, when you copy/paste, the honest thing to do is to cite your source.

As usual, Jon Stewart nails it...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-august-18-2011-anne-hathaway

[Anders]

I fixed Jim Quinn's Conrad Johnson preamp.
He seemed an ok guy.

[MasterBlaster]

Perhaps you can post something that counters my points made.

You have a nice day.   

Bill Cain

Bill,

You did not make those points, Ray Cromwell did.
Your conduct on this forum has gone on for too long, and your response to this situation is the last straw for me.

Admit you copied his comments, edit your previous post to give proper credit that cites your source or you will be banned.

[OldiesButGoodies]

I agree with MB - either Bill goes by Ray Cromwell in other forums or he blatantly copied/plagiarized/stole Mr.Cromwell's thoughts.  Bill - it looks like you stole someone else's ideas to me.  As we say in Spanish - que cojones!

All - judge by yourselves:

This is an emotional rant devoid of logic. A 5% increase in marginal taxes on the rich is not going to alter entrepreneurial behavior one bit Michael and you know it. This is faith-based libertarian politics from the inner-teenager that read Atlas Shrugged.

Entrepreneurs work because they are crazy and passionate. You have to be. The vast vast vast majority of people who start businesses will fail and fail utterly within 5 years. With those odds, you have to a drive that will not be blocked by a 5% marginal tax on your returns. You're talking about people who are dreaming of 4000% ROI, and 3200% ROI is not going to dissuade them from trying.

Slippery slope rants are STUPID. The world is not binary, 0% taxes vs 100% taxes. No one is even coming close to talking about a 100% marginal tax rate.

Why should the government even be in the business of protecting your property rights? Why not follow David Friedman's lead and privatize those are well. You want government to protect patents, copyright, or your physical property? Why don't you pay more then, since you have a disproportionate amount of wealth, you should pay for your own security. Let's see how your expenses go up as society continues to devolve into shantytowns surrounding rich enclaves. Let's see how rich you can get in the future when educated workers are harder to get.

How about we place a Tariff on H1-B workers who are educated by overseas *socialist* education systems? Aren't you John Galt types free-loading off of workers trained by overseas high-tax socialist economies?

The fundamental argument you're making Michael is one of social mobility. America has the lowest social mobility of all of the OECD countries. If you're born in the bottom 40%, you and your children will with high probability, remain there.

And if taxes are such a discincentive, explain why Silicon Valley, right in the heart of "socialist" "high-tax" California, is the Mecca of entrepreneurs? High cost of living. High state taxes. Yet, incredibly dynamic.

Hmm..., wouldn't have anything to do with the history of the UC system, or maybe the Fire-At-Will rule?

To try and boil down the reasons for entrepreneurial activity, social mobility, or success to a single value, taxes, is just plain dumb.

What has Arrington produced; an emotional rant, devoid of logic. A 5% increase in marginal taxes on the rich is not going to alter entrepreneurial behavior one iota. This is simply faith-based libertarian politics from the inner-teenager that read Atlas Shrugged and was impressed.   

Entrepreneurs work because they are crazy and passionate. The vast majority of people who start businesses fail within 5 years. With such odds, you have to have a drive that will not be blocked by a 5% marginal tax on your returns. You're talking about people who are dreaming of 4000% ROI, and 3200% ROI is not going to dissuade them from trying.

Slippery slope rants, such as Arrington's, are juvenile. The world is not binary; 0% taxes vs 100% taxes. No one is even coming close to talking about a 100% marginal tax rate. 

That said, why should the government even be in the business of protecting your property rights? Why not follow David Friedman's lead and privatize those, as well. You want government to protect patents, copyrights, or your physical property? Why don't you pay more then, since you have a disproportionate amount of wealth and you should "pay" for your own security.

Let's see how your expenses go up as society continues to devolve into shantytowns surrounding rich enclaves. Let's see how rich you can get in the future when educated workers are harder to get.  Talk about a binary world.... you may get one.

And if taxes are such a disincentive, explain why Silicon Valley, right in the heart of "socialist" "high-tax" California, is a Mecca of entrepreneurs? High cost of living. High state taxes. Yet, incredibly dynamic.

To try and boil down the reasons for entrepreneurial activity, to a single value; taxes, is naive.  But, then, that's what makes a certain part of a certain political party attractive to those naive enough to buy their propaganda.   Let us pray…..

I say we Sheeve Bill.

[SunnyDaze]

Pepe, I agree with you 100% my friend.

[OldiesButGoodies]

It is doubly irritating in that not only did he steal someone else's posting,  but he judged us to be too stupid to notice.

Sheeved!

[bmwr75]

Damn Bill_Cain......appears your are dancing the SHEEVS dance.  Personally, I don't think you've yet achieved the rank of SHEEVS, but I am only one voice.

[SunnyDaze]

Again, wow. Just wow.

[Bunni]

Tsk!

[Kingman]

BYE BILL......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaxjEpar91g&feature=player_detailpage#t=22s

[MasterBlaster]

Folks,

Please don't lower yourself to the level of conduct that raised all the fuss to begin with.
Bill is welcome to stay as part of our community if he is willing to maintain a reasonable level of decorum.

What happens from this point forward is up to him.

[Solid-Mistake]

I can't believe what I'm reading, we're worried about the cost of sending Rick Santorum's kids to PA cyber school? Questions, 1) Was it illegal? 2) Did he ask for and was he granted special favors? 3) If so why was he not prosecuted? If you read the ACTUAL reports of what happened, the Penn hills school board being of the opposing party was out to make Santorum LOOK bad before the election so their "favorite son" Bob Casey could be elected. All Pennsylvania property owners and income earners pay school tax regardless if they have ANY kids in school or not. I'm glad we weren't distracted from any important issues like where Santorums kids go to schoool and we could elect big spending liberals like Casey. THAT'S WHAT REALLY MATTERS! Let's see.... we're mad at Santorum for maybe $67,000. His replacement Casey has voted for EVERY BIG BUDGET since being in office. The past 4-1/2 years Casey has been in office, the federal budget deficit more than quadruple from $250,000,000,000 to $1,620,000,000,000. Since Casey has been in office the nation debt has ALMOST DOUBLED. FROM 8,000,000,000,000 to 15,000,000,000,000 AND HE VOTED FOR ALL OF IT! This reminds me of all the hoopla over the "pay raise" If you were to figure out how much the "pay raise" cost each taxpayer it's about $2.00 year In the meantime while everyone was distracted with the "pay raise", Fast Eddie and the liberals raised the state income tax from .028% to .031% which cost the average taxpayer about $150.00 year! BOY I WISH WE WEREN'T DISTRACTED!