More mindless yapping from RAO's SoCal Idiot.

Yappity-yappity-yap.

No ****, and espcially noboby wants to do it to
cover for slackers.

Funny definition you have there. dave weil is gainfully employed, owns
property, pays his due share of taxes.... If he's a slacker, how do
you define being self-sufficient?

Paying at least 1 equal share.

If I understand your illogic correctly, everybody who pays less than
"1 equal share" [of taxes] is a slacker. Aside from the prima-facie
stupidity of that proposition in a free-market economy, how is "1
equal share" calculated?


What is "after business tax revenue"? Do you mean "after-business tax
revenue" or "after business-tax revenue"? Do you even know what you
mean?

Dumb and dumber (Middius & Dormer)

That's the admission I was looking for.


Parents responsible for dependents.

So you're accusing dave of not supporting his supposed dependents?

No.

Then what did you mean? Do you even know what you mean?


What makes you think he has any?

I don't. I'm not making him responsible for others dependents.

Do you know the term "nonsequitur"?

Now you can tell us how you've "won" this "debate".

Being a non-tax payer you can't even figure out what the debate is
about. You're as useful as a brick with no mortar.

As usual, you're too stupid to differentiate between a fact and your
own speculations. To buttress my point, however, there's a ton of
evidence that you are, in fact, an idiot.