Quiklilcav wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
How about spoken like I've got lots of successful experience in business management. But then again, you're only ability to debate with me is to attack me in some form or another, since you can't make a factual argument that holds up.
And to your PS, It was a response to the typical statement you made a few posts up, and pointing out to others where your sentiment comes from.
With the way you write, I'm surprised you have not titled your self God yet. Further more, the $hit you write, it's as if you've been absent, or lived under a rock through the eras, but the kicker is you explain your opinions as factual. No matter what I, anybody, or history books says and opposes you, you (God) will ALWAYS discredit it and claim you are ALWAYS correct. People like you have to let them be and let them live in LA-LA land.
Also hypocrite, one more thing, don't bring up "attacking" as you don't do it. Heh, you went as far as to do drawings just to draw attention to your self, so your ego can be bigger once again.
Sorry Quickie, but you're a easy target of absurdity as your words replicates from a man that is a drug abuser and waxes poetically on talk radio. And like I told you before, that man has all the room to talk and spread BS, as that's how he makes money through his character, you on the other hand don't fit the category he defends, nor does DAVE JBO pays you to spread BS.
sndsgood wrote:Quiklilcav wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
How about spoken like I've got lots of successful experience in business management. But then again, you're only ability to debate with me is to attack me in some form or another, since you can't make a factual argument that holds up.
And to your PS, It was a response to the typical statement you made a few posts up, and pointing out to others where your sentiment comes from.
quiet warren buffet, why can't you understand that you shouldn't work and strive to be in that upper 1%. you should just work on being in the lower 99% and making that upper 1% pay your way.
Nobody is quieting the genius of the real Buffet. Read again.
Sometimes I wonder if any of you people know or grasp as to what or where is the 1% is?
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
Warren Buffet is a bad example to use. Despite your desire to vilify all filthy rich people, Warren Buffet is not on Quiklilcav's side. Despite being the world's richest man, he has publicly stated that the rich are NOT overtaxed and if anything the opposite is true. He has even made a challenge to any CEO in America - that if they can prove they pay a higher tax rate than their own secretary, then he will give them $1,000,000 free and clear(and IIRC he was even going to pay the tax on that $1.000,000). So far, no takers...
But then again he is rich, so he must be evil, right?
Quiklilcav wrote:^^ LMAO. Another post with zero substance on topic, proving yet again, you fail.
Funny that you claim I write as if I haven't been around. Remember, buddy, I've been around considerably longer than you have. You've read about some things I remember, so that argument, if you can call it such, holds no water. I've also asked you before what experience you have that makes you more knowledgable on economics, and given you reasons why I might better understand these things, and that's usually when you duck completely out of a thread.
If you feel like debating a concept in my post, and can do so with an ounce of intelligence, have at it. Otherwise, you're simply wasting space in these threads with your feeble mud slinging and name calling.
Yhea, whopping 8 years, half of it was masturbating to Reagan's wrinkles. But sorry Tonto, age does not mean squat, unless you have a severe case of senile or alzimers. Because again what you write is as if you're oblivious or gullible to any notion of history, era. If you did, you wouldn't get your arthritis-ridden, brittle fingers and type out and praise the failed actions of pasts, or maybe lack of common sense is your con (?). But since history happened so long and now you claim age is a resource to argue with, I wouldn't be surprise that you decide to brush-up on history by turning on the radio.
Also I don't need to re-instate my experiences as I don't have to prove nothing to a woods-living, low life like your self. Besides I answered your question in the past, forgot already?
The day you don't regurgitate what Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter spews out, then I will take you into account, 'till then we are going to have the same crap as before:
-Me telling you $hit.
-You telling me $hit.
-You claim you're God and know everything and every before you is inferior.
bk3k wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
Warren Buffet is a bad example to use. Despite your desire to vilify all filthy rich people, Warren Buffet is not on Quiklilcav's side. Despite being the world's richest man, he has publicly stated that the rich are NOT overtaxed and if anything the opposite is true. He has even made a challenge to any CEO in America - that if they can prove they pay a higher tax rate than their own secretary, then he will give them $1,000,000 free and clear(and IIRC he was even going to pay the tax on that $1.000,000). So far, no takers...
But then again he is rich, so he must be evil, right?
Depends on which rich right? Poor, middle, rich could have either side of good or evil, no?
Warren Buffet I would consider as stalwart in business thinking and actions, hence his position today.
But if you took my quote comparing to Quikie's (in thought) you sir were miss guided by my total quote. Happens to often by the lack of reading on the JBO.
Faux/fake Warren Buffet was to describe Quickies expansive Billions in his bank account as when he speaks its as if Billions is being threatened by high tax rate; as if we were living in the era when this country was at it's best.
Comprende?
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
How are we ever going to solve this economy thing with everybody fighting all the time...
LOL
As for the "upper 1%" of society.... the first person that comes to my mind is the owner of the Federal Reserve Bank.
You two - if your arguments where not 10% substance and 90% name calling(yet only "the other one" is guilty of this right?), then I might not be so quick to skim over them. Yes, you both feel the other is intellectually inferior, brainwashed scum - I think we get that already. Both of you need to get over yourselves already. Its truly ironic that one of you bothered calling me childish at one point(the reason of which was probably just because I disagreed as best as I can tell) - look at your own posts and pretend "the other one" - or perhaps myself - made them and see how you feel. You guys really are cut from the same cloth IMO - which rather than your starkly contrasting views - is probably the very reason you seemingly can't stand each other. There is nothing more annoying to a person than someone else who reflects their own vices. Equally, a person's pet peeves are almost without exception the very things that they themselves are guilty of. So instead of bickering the way you guys do - why don't you just get a room already? (just kidding - unless you're into that sort of thing - I won't judge
)
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:bk3k wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
Warren Buffet is a bad example to use. Despite your desire to vilify all filthy rich people, Warren Buffet is not on Quiklilcav's side. Despite being the world's richest man, he has publicly stated that the rich are NOT overtaxed and if anything the opposite is true. He has even made a challenge to any CEO in America - that if they can prove they pay a higher tax rate than their own secretary, then he will give them $1,000,000 free and clear(and IIRC he was even going to pay the tax on that $1.000,000). So far, no takers...
But then again he is rich, so he must be evil, right?
Depends on which rich right? Poor, middle, rich could have either side of good or evil, no?
Warren Buffet I would consider as stalwart in business thinking and actions, hence his position today.
But if you took my quote comparing to Quikie's (in thought) you sir were miss guided by my total quote. Happens to often by the lack of reading on the JBO.
Faux/fake Warren Buffet was to describe Quickies expansive Billions in his bank account as when he speaks its as if Billions is being threatened by high tax rate; as if we were living in the era when this country was at it's best.
Comprende?
Interesting to imply that I didn't read - I did. You act as if I took a minor exert from a novel you wrote and mis-characterized it - but I responded to your quote as a whole. I replied to... what you wrote rather than what you apparently think you wrote/meant to write - hence I most certainly did read what was written (rather than reading your mind).
I did not miss the point of what you did say - you where trying to characterize Quiklilcav as a person who "thinks" he is a Multi-Billionaire whom is trying to "protect his earnings" from "oppressive taxation" in which you tried to use Warren Buffet as an example - and I pointed out that Warren Buffet does not fit that mold thus is not a proper example of what you are trying to say.
Now when you just now said - "But if you took my quote comparing to Quikie's (in thought)" - I find that interesting to assume I'd do that based off of your own earlier post which I replied. In that post, you neither quoted Quiklilcav's post/point of view/anything nor did you attempt to refute one single point of his during that. In fact, there was no substance at all in that post. It was a post essentially dedicated to belittling him(and yes I'm aware through experience that he isn't afraid to do the same). So you tell me what I would compare(in thought) when there was seemingly no thought put into it? At the very least - no thought was expressed in what you actually wrote.
If you intended that to come out different, might I humbly suggest that you use the preview button before each post, read exactly what you wrote, determine if that will convey that you are trying to say to someone else (who doesn't read your own thoughts), and revise as necessary. I'll admit that I've averted many foolish sounding and/or unnecessary posts just by READING what I wrote BEFORE posting it for others to read. Sometimes I revise, sometimes I opt to post nothing at all until later - when I've better collected my thoughts and/or when emotion will not cloud my message. You might consider doing the same.
I preview every post I make.... Even if it's just a smiley face and an LOL...
And read it about 3 times.
It can come in handy.... (although some spelling errors still get through)
bk3k wrote:You two - if your arguments where not 10% substance and 90% name calling(yet only "the other one" is guilty of this right?), then I might not be so quick to skim over them. Yes, you both feel the other is intellectually inferior, brainwashed scum - I think we get that already. Both of you need to get over yourselves already. Its truly ironic that one of you bothered calling me childish at one point(the reason of which was probably just because I disagreed as best as I can tell) - look at your own posts and pretend "the other one" - or perhaps myself - made them and see how you feel. You guys really are cut from the same cloth IMO - which rather than your starkly contrasting views - is probably the very reason you seemingly can't stand each other. There is nothing more annoying to a person than someone else who reflects their own vices. Equally, a person's pet peeves are almost without exception the very things that they themselves are guilty of. So instead of bickering the way you guys do - why don't you just get a room already? (just kidding - unless you're into that sort of thing - I won't judge )
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:bk3k wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:^Spoken like if he is in the 1% category, good job faux Warren Buffet.
P.S.
I must be in your night mares as you have to include my name every time you express your opinions, I don't know... if I should feel flattered, or tell you; "sorry, I don't swing that way?"
Warren Buffet is a bad example to use. Despite your desire to vilify all filthy rich people, Warren Buffet is not on Quiklilcav's side. Despite being the world's richest man, he has publicly stated that the rich are NOT overtaxed and if anything the opposite is true. He has even made a challenge to any CEO in America - that if they can prove they pay a higher tax rate than their own secretary, then he will give them $1,000,000 free and clear(and IIRC he was even going to pay the tax on that $1.000,000). So far, no takers...
But then again he is rich, so he must be evil, right?
Depends on which rich right? Poor, middle, rich could have either side of good or evil, no?
Warren Buffet I would consider as stalwart in business thinking and actions, hence his position today.
But if you took my quote comparing to Quikie's (in thought) you sir were miss guided by my total quote. Happens to often by the lack of reading on the JBO.
Faux/fake Warren Buffet was to describe Quickies expansive Billions in his bank account as when he speaks its as if Billions is being threatened by high tax rate; as if we were living in the era when this country was at it's best.
Comprende?
Interesting to imply that I didn't read - I did. You act as if I took a minor exert from a novel you wrote and mis-characterized it - but I responded to your quote as a whole. I replied to... what you wrote rather than what you apparently think you wrote/meant to write - hence I most certainly did read what was written (rather than reading your mind).
I did not miss the point of what you did say - you where trying to characterize Quiklilcav as a person who "thinks" he is a Multi-Billionaire whom is trying to "protect his earnings" from "oppressive taxation" in which you tried to use Warren Buffet as an example - and I pointed out that Warren Buffet does not fit that mold thus is not a proper example of what you are trying to say.
Now when you just now said - "But if you took my quote comparing to Quikie's (in thought)" - I find that interesting to assume I'd do that based off of your own earlier post which I replied. In that post, you neither quoted Quiklilcav's post/point of view/anything nor did you attempt to refute one single point of his during that. In fact, there was no substance at all in that post. It was a post essentially dedicated to belittling him(and yes I'm aware through experience that he isn't afraid to do the same). So you tell me what I would compare(in thought) when there was seemingly no thought put into it? At the very least - no thought was expressed in what you actually wrote.
If you intended that to come out different, might I humbly suggest that you use the preview button before each post, read exactly what you wrote, determine if that will convey that you are trying to say to someone else (who doesn't read your own thoughts), and revise as necessary. I'll admit that I've averted many foolish sounding and/or unnecessary posts just by READING what I wrote BEFORE posting it for others to read. Sometimes I revise, sometimes I opt to post nothing at all until later - when I've better collected my thoughts and/or when emotion will not cloud my message. You might consider doing the same.
im starting to like you lol
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Quote:
I did not miss the point of what you did say - you where trying to characterize Quiklilcav as a person who "thinks" he is a Multi-Billionaire whom is trying to "protect his earnings" from "oppressive taxation" in which you tried to use Warren Buffet as an example - and I pointed out that Warren Buffet does not fit that mold thus is not a proper example of what you are trying to say.
Applause, you finally got it.
Quote:
you intended that to come out different, might I humbly suggest that you use the preview button before each post, read exactly what you wrote, determine if that will convey that you are trying to say to someone else (who doesn't read your own thoughts), and revise as necessary. I'll admit that I've averted many foolish sounding and/or unnecessary posts just by READING what I wrote BEFORE posting it for others to read. Sometimes I revise, sometimes I opt to post nothing at all until later - when I've better collected my thoughts and/or when emotion will not cloud my message. You might consider doing the same.
Better yet, I'll just put colorful pictures.
Quiklilcav wrote:bk3k wrote:You two - if your arguments where not 10% substance and 90% name calling(yet only "the other one" is guilty of this right?), then I might not be so quick to skim over them. Yes, you both feel the other is intellectually inferior, brainwashed scum - I think we get that already. Both of you need to get over yourselves already. Its truly ironic that one of you bothered calling me childish at one point(the reason of which was probably just because I disagreed as best as I can tell) - look at your own posts and pretend "the other one" - or perhaps myself - made them and see how you feel. You guys really are cut from the same cloth IMO - which rather than your starkly contrasting views - is probably the very reason you seemingly can't stand each other. There is nothing more annoying to a person than someone else who reflects their own vices. Equally, a person's pet peeves are almost without exception the very things that they themselves are guilty of. So instead of bickering the way you guys do - why don't you just get a room already? (just kidding - unless you're into that sort of thing - I won't judge )
I'd like to point out to you the significant difference here. I actually post plenty of pertinent information to a thread (look at the post I made which started him up this time), and it very often gets an idiotic snide remark from Goodwrench, which contains name calling almost without fail. I have not resorted to name calling, but I will point out the inadequecies of his posts, because his answer to almost all of mine has been to ignore the substance and go after me in his weak attempts to discredit. When I called you childish, as you refer to, was in response to a post you had made in another thread, where you resorted to a similar tactic. For the most part, I find that you offer decent arguments, and I am happy to debate that for what it is. However, when anyone resorts to foolishness of personal insults, I will not hesitate to at least throw a dig at them.
Yet, here you are using me, and as always, your opposing side. If I do so many "idiotic snides" or be "childish" why use my name on so many threads on this section? (Where the PS quote came from BTW)
But no worries, I understand you feel threatened from past discussions and your cover is out that you are just a loudspeaker for radio talk hosts, in other words no original thought process.
Listen... err Read, just because you have the time of day to search Right-wing Google (popping links) and respond every thread in the War forum, doesn't mean you're guru or god as you think you are.
I have a feeling this crap will just go forever.
THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.
I guess this is called the war forum for a reason...
but holey Christ ...
Kiss and make up already.
Quiklilcav wrote:Jason, did you even read my original post on page 4? It wasn't even addressed to Goodwrench.
Toward the end I simply mentioned his argument and why it is easily believed. It wasn't an attack, it was a point on topic.
im not saying you guys do it in every single post, but you start out debating and then it always just goes down hill into im right your wrong whine fest. one of you should just be the bigger man and when someone just attacks you and not the item your debating just ignore it and work on proving your point, if you feel someone is completely wrong. thats fine. prove your point. dont just sit there page after page yelling your wrong.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Weebel wrote:I guess this is called the war forum for a reason...
but holey Christ ...
Kiss and make up already.
This is why I love a good fight.
Usually the person who believes in his\her convictions wins.
But, with a age of 25, and my back ground, that makes me young and dumb.
Right?
Wonder why I don't fit in with 95% of my age group though, ya know, the ones with the big blissful eyes that thought our saver you elected?
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
^^^^^^^^^^Im only 3 or so years older than you and I feel the same way.
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:
But, with a age of 25, and my back ground, that makes me young and dumb.
Right?
Wonder why I don't fit in with 95% of my age group though, ya know, the ones with the big blissful eyes that thought our saver you elected?
Chris
I hear you on that. It is the same group that thinks MTV is reality. I swear watching MTV makes you dumber.
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Wonder how I am going to "fit" in to school when i go back this fall.....
ya... should be neat.
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
I only read the first post, so correct me if he changed his mind.
rodimus, you are dumb, and you should fire yourself and give your job to someone who wont be as bitchy cause they didnt get a raise.
Taetsch Z-24 wrote:Wonder how I am going to "fit" in to school when i go back this fall.....
ya... should be neat.
Chris
GED or Community college?
