| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
My final wish For Ronald Reagan
That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation
George |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation Everyone does benefit from the "merit of the age", George. So the kids coming up right now are even better than we were. Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
As long as you can benefit from trickle down "kiss my ass!"
"George" wrote in message ... That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation George |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
"Romeo Rondeau" wrote: As long as you can benefit from trickle down "kiss my ass!" if it works like trickle down economics there will not be any kissing of ass for , well, ever. george |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
WillStG wrote:
Everyone does benefit from the "merit of the age", George. So the kids coming up right now are even better than we were. Thanks for explaining that, Will. Now I understand why the Backstreet boys are so much more talented than the Beatles could have ever hoped to be. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Everyone does benefit from the "merit of the age", George. So the
kids coming up right now are even better than we were. Thanks for explaining that, Will. Now I understand why the Backstreet boys are so much more talented than the Beatles could have ever hoped to be. Not a valid comparison I don't think. It's like judging a President out of context to the time he served..doesn't really say much. John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
LOL
does anything here really "say" much or is this , as I think just a slightly more intresting way to idle away hours than TV I use this and every other conversation to practice distinquishing the different contexts that we all operate inside of. John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats good dude.....really good.
"That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation" I mean that's made my day Mbrain |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Romeo dont think you get it...."The only thing
trickling down was a big fat Zero" So you ass could not possibly be able to trickle down or be kissed, the physic's is not their. Go back to the drawing board and draw another ass that works...... gray |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thats good dude.....really good.
"That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation" I mean that's made my day Since George insisted on again injecting ridicule of others faith into the thread....I think Ronny was maybe trying to appease the opposition. Just as faith is a personal choice I think Reagan thought prosperity was also. Genereally speaking..so do I. Others? John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"MBrain" wrote in message lkaboutaudio.com... Romeo dont think you get it...."The only thing trickling down was a big fat Zero" So you ass could not possibly be able to trickle down or be kissed, the physic's is not their. Go back to the drawing board and draw another ass that works...... I will do so as soon as you can form a complete sentence. :-) |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
George wrote in message ...
That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation George I was thinking about a "Night of the Living Dead" kind of re-animation... Nah, too scary! bob |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message ...
As long as you can benefit from trickle down "kiss my ass!" "George" wrote in message ... That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation George Here's my personal "trickledown" story. In the mid 80's, I had finally gotten good enough credit (through paying my bills on time, being a good citizen, yadda, yadda) to have a gear loan, a car loan, and motorcyle loan. Interest on all three of these combined in 1985 that I was able to itemize my deductions for the first time...I got a small refund, something around $400. Then they passed the "Reagan Tax Plan" and the next year they took away my deductions and on basically the same income and withholding I wound up paying $800 over and above my regular witholding. All this and the budget deficit quadrupled in eight years. I guess my taxes being higher by $1200 didn't make enough of a dent in that eh? THIS IS FACT, not some thing I made up just to bolster my opinion. That's why when I hear Republicans wail against "tax and spend" democrats I just laugh my ass off and go "yeah right". Analogeezer |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sure the economy took off. When you spend the
countries future with the largest deficits every created what do you think is going to happen.He was spending our future with smoke and mirrors. And what did they say about his deficit you can see for miles!!!! I could be president and make the economy look swell if I spend the country into a hole. and did not care who was going to pay for it down the road. Like what's going on now...... |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
ospam (WillStG) wrote in message ...
"MBrain" Romeo dont think you get it...."The only thing trickling down was a big fat Zero" So you ass could not possibly be able to trickle down or be kissed, the physic's is not their. Go back to the drawing board and draw another ass that works..... Well you can mouth off all you want "Brain", but Reagan's taxcuts DOUBLED the amount money the government took in in taxes, just like JFK's tax cuts increased revenues. Double the Government tax income from cutting taxes, how does THAT "hurt the poor"??? Furthermore it is small business owners who pay the majority of the taxes in this country and provide the most new jobs, they pay taxes on their businesses as individuals, at the individual tax rate. They are as middle class as anyone else, and it's bull**** to call them "the rich" and beat them up because you hate "the rich". Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits Are you in agreement with trickle down or against it? How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Mike)
Are you in agreement with trickle down or against it? How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. It is empirical fact that after there were accross the board cuts in the rates of income taxes that tax revenues increased under JFK, and they doubled under Reagan. This suggests that the economy benefits from lower tax rates on individual tax payers, and as the owners of many small businesses actually pay taxes on their businesses at this individual rate it is most likely that this has much to do with the success of the policy. Particularly as small businesses as a matter of FACT pay the majority of taxes in the Country and provide the most new jobs to the economy. People deride a tax cutting policy as "trickle down economics" and that a bull**** thing to call the it, in fact it's a better understanding of the reality of how the system really works out there. If you subsribe to the view tax cuts are "trickle down"economics, the model you are applying towards what the economy really is and how it operates is just plain wrong, and in the end the real results speak louder than any rhetorical slogan ever can. Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
ROTFL!!!!!!!!!
;O) "WillStG" wrote in message ... (John) Tax cuts don't increase the amount government takes in. That's ridiculous. OK, the *effect* tax cuts had was tax revenues doubled. Ridiculous? That's a FACT. The only way he could bring in *more* money after a tax cut is to bundle it with an even bigger tax increase. So who got taxed more? Income tax revenues doubled, and not because taxes were raised. It may seem counter intuitive to you and so hard to understand, but you ARE a drummer. Human nature and psychology has a lot to do with how business and the economy works, it's more complicated than your drum pedal. Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
"John" wrote in message m... Tax cuts don't increase the amount government takes in. That's ridiculous. The only way he could bring in *more* money after a tax cut is to bundle it with an even bigger tax increase. So who got taxed more? The problem is in semantics. We don't want tax cuts (well, okay, those too), we want tax RATE cuts. If I keep more of my money, I am likely to spend it. Because money is finite, but recirculating, the more I spend, the more there is. It sounds wrong, until you actually think about it. I don't want more of the limited number of dollars; I want to see the same dollars, over and over again. A good economy is one in which the money circulates. Now, if I keep spending it, and it keeps coming back to me (bonuses, raises, sprocket sales, whatever), then I keep getting taxed on it. At some point, the economy spins up to where I pay more in absolute taxes, at a lower tax rate, than I would have paid at the higher tax rate. The macro effect is that the economy gears up, everyone produces more sprockets, everyone HAS more sprockets, and life is better. When govt. increases tax rates, it cools my tendency to spend. The economy slows down, even stalls. People make fewer sprockets, because fewer people are buying them. Overall, life is not so good. Now, the counter argument is that government, in reallocating money, does not cool the economy. The money still gets spent, just not by the person that earned it. The problem with this, is that it tends to provide incentives NOT to produce sprockets. If I can get paid a lot to work hard, producing sprockets, and alternatively, get paid some (not a lot, but some) NOT to make sprockets, I've got to think really hard about whether I want to work or loaf for a living. The economy ends up cooling down because there is less incentive to be productive. And as far as complaining about people calling small business owners "rich", who the hell are you quoting? Maybe the conservative radio blowhards who tell you that's what the 'liberals' are saying? The conservative radio blowhards are usually quoting the liberal blowhards' own words. It ain't the small business owners we're worried about. It's the big corporations who don't pay any taxes that we're concerned with. And the hedge fund managers and their ilk who receive billions of dollars in perks and stock options, but since it's not officially income and there are some nice juicy loopholes in the tax code for dividends and the like, none of it gets taxed. Big corporations pay taxes, hand over fist. Sometimes they get tax breaks from local governments in order to bring jobs to the local economy. They still pay federal taxes. Last time I checked, there weren't very many people that made billions of dollars; of those that did, none of them (that I recall) were in the financial sector. Perks are carefully regulated, because they can quickly cross the line into taxable income. Stock options from the company have no value until you exercise them, and then they ARE taxed, and usually as income. Try exercising billions of dollars in stock options. You destroy the company if you do. There shouldn't be loopholes anywhere. But they're there, because the tax system, without loopholes, kills the economy. Instead of rolling back the regulations, we try to fix the inherent problems of regulations, by creating more regulations - hence, stupid loopholes. They aren't creating jobs with their tax breaks. They're creating trust funds so little Biff and Muffy can live a life without every having to work. You are confusing corporations with individuals. Corporations do not create trust funds for Biff and Muffy. And most of the Biff's and Muffy's (not all, but most) I've met, actually do go to work. They prefer to, they want to, they do. A few of them don't, but that is a failing in parenting, not economics. And, ironically, the losers usually end up broke, because they spend their money, thus, once again, oiling the economy around them. You want to get a good education on the tax code, I recommend reading a book by a knowledgeable Republican tax reporter, David Cay Johnston. The book is called "Perfectly legal". I recommend the book by Amity Schlaes. So we have two books. Big deal. Again, I can only refer you to the CBO numbers indicating, by stratification, who pays income taxes. Oh and BTW, the bit about Democrats being pro tax and Republicans anti-tax: it's all empty rhetoric. When you really look at the records, you'll see that both parties are equally adept at adjusting the tax code to help special (read already wealthy) interests. That, I don't doubt one bit -- even though it's stupid to do so purely for political gain. Pandering to the rich always produces fewer votes than pandering to the poor. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Kurt Duncan wrote:
The problem is in semantics. We don't want tax cuts (well, okay, those too), we want tax RATE cuts. If I keep more of my money, I am likely to spend it. Because money is finite, but recirculating, the more I spend, the more there is. It sounds wrong, until you actually think about it. I don't want more of the limited number of dollars; I want to see the same dollars, over and over again. A good economy is one in which the money circulates. Now, if I keep spending it, and it keeps coming back to me (bonuses, raises, sprocket sales, whatever), then I keep getting taxed on it. At some point, the economy spins up to where I pay more in absolute taxes, at a lower tax rate, than I would have paid at the higher tax rate. The macro effect is that the economy gears up, everyone produces more sprockets, everyone HAS more sprockets, and life is better. When govt. increases tax rates, it cools my tendency to spend. The economy slows down, even stalls. People make fewer sprockets, because fewer people are buying them. Overall, life is not so good. Lower rates are fine--it's the disparity in the net effective tax rate that needs to be kept in mind. It ain't the small business owners we're worried about. It's the big corporations who don't pay any taxes that we're concerned with. And the hedge fund managers and their ilk who receive billions of dollars in perks and stock options, but since it's not officially income and there are some nice juicy loopholes in the tax code for dividends and the like, none of it gets taxed. Big corporations pay taxes, hand over fist. Sometimes they get tax breaks from local governments in order to bring jobs to the local economy. They still pay federal taxes. Some big corporations pay hand over fist. Others use multijurisdictional games and interlocking invoices in order to avoid or shift taxes in ways from which most reasonable people, if given a chance to really see behind the curtain, would recoil. Last time I checked, there weren't very many people that made billions of dollars; of those that did, none of them (that I recall) were in the financial sector. Perks are carefully regulated, because they can quickly cross the line into taxable income. Stock options from the company have no value until you exercise them, and then they ARE taxed, and usually as income. Try exercising billions of dollars in stock options. You destroy the company if you do. Exercising triggers one set of problems (AMT, which desperately needs reform.) Selling is what upsets the public market. |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pandering to the rich always produces fewer votes than
pandering to the poor. Good quote. John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Don Pearce) wrote in message ...
On 11 Jun 2004 05:56:12 -0700, (Analogeezer) wrote: "Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message ... As long as you can benefit from trickle down "kiss my ass!" "George" wrote in message ... That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation George Here's my personal "trickledown" story. In the mid 80's, I had finally gotten good enough credit (through paying my bills on time, being a good citizen, yadda, yadda) to have a gear loan, a car loan, and motorcyle loan. Interest on all three of these combined in 1985 that I was able to itemize my deductions for the first time...I got a small refund, something around $400. Then they passed the "Reagan Tax Plan" and the next year they took away my deductions and on basically the same income and withholding I wound up paying $800 over and above my regular witholding. All this and the budget deficit quadrupled in eight years. I guess my taxes being higher by $1200 didn't make enough of a dent in that eh? THIS IS FACT, not some thing I made up just to bolster my opinion. That's why when I hear Republicans wail against "tax and spend" democrats I just laugh my ass off and go "yeah right". Analogeezer So you are a democrat, and you are criticizing a republican president because he did what a democrat would have done. One would have thought you'd have been pleased. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com No I'm criticizing a Republican president who sold his tax plan on the basis of it was a tax cut for the regular guy. The first thing republicans do is claim that any democrat is out to raise their taxes, while they won't do that. Reality is that both sides are after your wallet but republicans try to make it like they are getting you a tax break. The other game they like to play is cut taxes at the state or Federal level, and have the taxation burden trickle downward to the locals....we had a republican governer a while back I call him "Happy Gilmore" because he was an idiot and his name was Gilmore. He ran on a three word platform "no car tax", our state has a very low sales tax but a high tax on car ownership (e.g. about $500 per year per $10,000 of value). He never actually got rid of the car tax because they put limits on it due to the deficits he ran up when the income went away but he wouldn't cut spending enough to pay for it. Now they are having to up the sales tax, and of course localities have already raised their property taxes. The problem with this country is nobody wants to pay taxes, but at the same time nobody wants to not get government services. In the good old days when taxes were low, if you got old and sick, well you died...nobody was gonna pay for your medicine but you. The problem with the US is that everybody wants 1920's taxes with 2004 government handouts and benefits, you can't have both. Analogeezer |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 11 Jun 2004 12:25:50 -0700,
(Analogeezer) wrote: No I'm criticizing a Republican president who sold his tax plan on the basis of it was a tax cut for the regular guy. The first thing republicans do is claim that any democrat is out to raise their taxes, while they won't do that. Reality is that both sides are after your wallet but republicans try to make it like they are getting you a tax break. The other game they like to play is cut taxes at the state or Federal level, and have the taxation burden trickle downward to the locals....we had a republican governer a while back I call him "Happy Gilmore" because he was an idiot and his name was Gilmore. He ran on a three word platform "no car tax", our state has a very low sales tax but a high tax on car ownership (e.g. about $500 per year per $10,000 of value). He never actually got rid of the car tax because they put limits on it due to the deficits he ran up when the income went away but he wouldn't cut spending enough to pay for it. Now they are having to up the sales tax, and of course localities have already raised their property taxes. The problem with this country is nobody wants to pay taxes, but at the same time nobody wants to not get government services. In the good old days when taxes were low, if you got old and sick, well you died...nobody was gonna pay for your medicine but you. The problem with the US is that everybody wants 1920's taxes with 2004 government handouts and benefits, you can't have both. Analogeezer Did anybody seriously believe that he could cut taxes for the regular guy? Regular guys, who pay their taxes like good boys are where governments get their funds. The big boys, who make them fight for every cent aren't worth pursuing. Here in the UK, we have always been taxed heavily - although nothing like the communist countries of mainland Europe (particularly Scandinavia). I suppose cars are where we are hit hardest - particularly petrol, although I prefer to see taxes, which have to be raised somewhere, levied where I can make a choice about whether I join in or not. Income tax just doesn't give you that option. But when any politician, of any party tells me I will be taxed less by him, I just laugh. d Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ... Kurt Duncan wrote: cross the line into taxable income. Stock options from the company have no value until you exercise them, and then they ARE taxed, and usually as income. Try exercising billions of dollars in stock options. You destroy the company if you do. Exercising triggers one set of problems (AMT, which desperately needs reform.) Selling is what upsets the public market. You are correct. I was thinking of same-day sales, and sell-to-cover. I neglected to consider buy only. And yes, please, fix AMT. Or get rid of it. Or something. Not you... congress. Is there any way in heck all these threads can somehow go back on-topic? :-) |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , "Kurt Duncan"
wrote: "Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ... Kurt Duncan wrote: cross the line into taxable income. Stock options from the company have no value until you exercise them, and then they ARE taxed, and usually as income. Try exercising billions of dollars in stock options. You destroy the company if you do. Exercising triggers one set of problems (AMT, which desperately needs reform.) Selling is what upsets the public market. You are correct. I was thinking of same-day sales, and sell-to-cover. I neglected to consider buy only. And yes, please, fix AMT. Or get rid of it. Or something. Not you... congress. Is there any way in heck all these threads can somehow go back on-topic? :-) Sure. Let's put a tax on the bits that are discarded in audio data compression! -Jay -- x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x x-------- http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jay/ ----------x |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
"WillStG" wrote in message ... (Mike) Are you in agreement with trickle down or against it? How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. It is empirical fact that after there were accross the board cuts in the rates of income taxes that tax revenues increased under JFK, and they doubled under Reagan. How many administrations do you know of where over the term of the administration, tax revenue decreased? I would venture it to be none. So in essense, being President increases tax revenue. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
"WillStG" wrote in message
... (Mike) Are you in agreement with trickle down or against it? How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. It is empirical fact that after there were accross the board cuts in the rates of income taxes that tax revenues increased under JFK, and they doubled under Reagan. How many administrations do you know of where over the term of the administration, tax revenue decreased? I would venture it to be none. So in essense, being President increases tax revenue. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com The Fed chairman controls the coins and the economy dispite what the branches of government do or think. Politicians are only good at skimming - and I mean all of 'em. They go to office rich and come out richer. It's the American way. Political offices are bought for profit. They only do things to keep themselves in office, after all, nobody like to get fired. One of the ways elections could be more effective at finding "the right people to lead" is to prohibit media ads period. Make the playing ground level by equal time and have the government pay for it and have limits on the times and how often. It would play hell with the lobbyist and special interest, but it might just get us some elected politicians interested in the job and not the benefits. Just a thought. YMMV. --Wayne -"sounded good to me"- |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike wrote: How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. Because the lower taxes increase consumption which results in income several times, all of which is taxed, as it filters down to raw materials or is recycled through the requisite services. It's obvious. To fix the economy we need to spur consumption. What's wrong with this picture? Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
ospam (WillStG) wrote in message ...
(Mike) Are you in agreement with trickle down or against it? How do you increase government tax intake if you cut taxes? Sounds like a raise to me. It is empirical fact that after there were accross the board cuts in the rates of income taxes that tax revenues increased under JFK, and they doubled under Reagan. This suggests that the economy benefits from lower tax rates on individual tax payers, and as the owners of many small businesses actually pay taxes on their businesses at this individual rate it is most likely that this has much to do with the success of the policy. Particularly as small businesses as a matter of FACT pay the majority of taxes in the Country and provide the most new jobs to the economy. People deride a tax cutting policy as "trickle down economics" and that a bull**** thing to call the it, in fact it's a better understanding of the reality of how the system really works out there. If you subsribe to the view tax cuts are "trickle down"economics, the model you are applying towards what the economy really is and how it operates is just plain wrong, and in the end the real results speak louder than any rhetorical slogan ever can. Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits Ha. I was just reading about tax acts and so forth during Reagans administration and it appears his tax reductions weren't nearly and great as advertised. He was doing a bit of robbing peter to pay Paul. He actually increased business taxes so the increased business tax revenues, were if at all, only partially a result of reduced personal income taxes, and a direct result of good old increase in taxes. Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
Analogeezer wrote:
The problem with the US is that everybody wants 1920's taxes with 2004 government handouts and benefits, you can't have both. The biggest problem with the US is how much of our monetary resources are devoted to the military. http://www.e-tractions.com/truemajor...MzMjE3gjK3gjds -- ha |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jay Kadis wrote:
"Kurt Duncan" wrote: Is there any way in heck all these threads can somehow go back on-topic? Sure. Let's put a tax on the bits that are discarded in audio data compression! Won't work for long; neocons will insist the bits are not discarded, just moved where we can't find them, kind of like much of the CIA's budget. -- ha |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
"hank alrich" wrote in message
. .. Analogeezer wrote: The problem with the US is that everybody wants 1920's taxes with 2004 government handouts and benefits, you can't have both. The biggest problem with the US is how much of our monetary resources are devoted to the military. http://www.e-tractions.com/truemajor...MzMjE3gjK3gjds No, the biggest problem are things that we don't need anymore but due to special interest lobbying we can't seem to get rid of... like the $156 million 2004 wool subsidy, the $800 million annual milk subsidy, & programs like that. -- Neil Henderson Progressive Rock http://www.saqqararecords.com |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2004-06-09 09:26:31 -0700, George said:
That he is to benifit from trickle down salvation George HAHAHAHA you rule. ROTFLMAO |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2004-06-10 19:10:59 -0700, "Romeo Rondeau" said:
"MBrain" wrote in message lkaboutaudio.com... Romeo dont think you get it...."The only thing trickling down was a big fat Zero" So you ass could not possibly be able to trickle down or be kissed, the physic's is not their. Go back to the drawing board and draw another ass that works...... I will do so as soon as you can form a complete sentence. :-) Oh man, I mean... dude don't you know how totally LAAAAAAAME-O! comeback that was? I mean, you might as well have said, *In nasally voice* "I may have just been completely shutdown, but you can't spell. Big ****ing deal, at least the man can do basic mathematics, which by the way you so blindly and zealously follow trickle down economics, or any of Ronnie boy's illogical policies and the second rate hollywood washout propaganda. Shot out to M. Brain, my man. You were probably so outraged you were typing sloppily, I know I am. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| FA: AMPEX 350 Record/Playback Electronics w/PS FINAL DAY micpre | Pro Audio | |||
| Where are those Wascally Weapons of Mass Destwuction??? | Audio Opinions | |||
| final mix thru Langevin DVC | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
