Ferrari Mailing List: Maybe we need to get back onto cars,

[philville dejazzd.com (philville]

   Before some one starts to take things too personally....we have a
   fantastic list, obviously at many levels of income, education and
   opinion............Personaaly I doubt that there is any one on this
   list much diff. than any one else....go out and find some one who
   truly needs help, help them and then get back to me.
   Phil

   #1 - You're a classist. Class envy is enough justification for you
   and those like you (looters) to spend someone else's money to fix
   other peoples perceived problems (beggars). An IMMORAL and
   unjustified position for anyone to take. In the end, wealth is only
   produced when a product is created; not by stealing and handing out.
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Ric Rainbolt <ricrainbolt [at] gmail.com>
   Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:01 pm
   Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
   To: Phil Tegtmeier <philville [at] dejazzd.com>
   Cc: The FerrariList <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
   > The concentration of wealth is a function of the growing
   > disparity
   > between the productive and non-productive elements of society...
   > NOT
   > a function of having too little progression in taxes. Your
   > generalizations about the status and ability of billionaires to
   > pay
   > 0.6% more is fallous. First of all, the numbers are 35% to
   > 39.6%,
   > which is a 4.6% jump AND the magic man wants to eliminate the
   > cap on
   > FICA contributions (a nearly 15% tax hike). So we're really
   > talking
   > about closer to 19% tax increase. Secondly, the billionaires you
   > seem
   > to love to loathe are paying their taxes in capital gains NOT
   income.
   >
   > The really fallacy in your more-emotional-than-fact argument is
   > that
   > the number of people in the upper 10% of wage earners pays 72.7%
   > of
   > all personal income taxes (2005 data). Now while it may be fun
   > to
   > throw rocks at T. Boone and Mr. Buffet, they, in fact, are not
   > the
   > ones really impacted. There are over 6 MILLION families in that
   > upper
   > 10%. There are only a small number of billionaires. And throw
   > rocks
   > at the "newly-minted Millionaires" (i.e. the hard working
   > productive
   > people) if you want, but to get in the upper 10% club only
   > requires a
   > family income of $339,100... hardly rock-star income.
   >
   > What you fail to address with your sound-bite level platitudes
   > is
   > there is no MORAL right to take life and liberty from one person
   > to
   > give it to someone else. Around 60% of total federal outlays are
   > now
   > some form of income redistribution.
   >
   > The fact that there are more millionaires is: a) a good thing,
   > not a
   > bad thing, and b) due, in part, to inflation. But wait, you're
   > going
   > to tell me that the greedy 6 million families are taking more
   > than
   > their fair share from the "wellspring of prosperity", right?
   > Utter
   > Marxist bullshit, IMHO. The fact that intelligent, hard working
   > people are gaining a growing concentration of the world's wealth
   > is a
   > natural function of having larger and larger numbers of people
   > content to sucking off the teats of the productive people. At
   > last
   > estimate, over 40% of the people in this country are receiving
   > federal benefits... 40%!!
   >
   > You claim, as fact, that the rich ("those people") "aren't
   > complaining or asking for relief from this situation", which is
   > DEAD
   > wrong again. I *AM* one of those people and I know many, and
   > trust
   > me, no one I know likes it. The reason you don't see organized
   > marches or rallies or other crap like that, is that we're
   > typically
   > too busy making the products that provide the world with wealth
   > in
   > the first place. So what if billionaires aren't complaining,
   > they're
   > not the vast majority of those that will be affected by the tax
   > hikes. You claim it's a waste of time to defend folks that don't
   > need
   > defending. But your are certainly content to sit by and watch,
   > even
   > advocate, having more and more of their hard earned wealth
   > stolen
   > from them by immoral and corrupt central governments.
   >
   > The fact that the US is not as "tax progressive" as Europe is
   > another
   > BS argument. All you're saying there is that we haven't gone as
   > far
   > down the socialist/communist path as the other guy, therefore
   > it's
   > OK. Europe has lost many entrepreneurs and high-wage earners to
   > "friendlier" tax-haven countries. If it's so freaking good, why
   > do
   > all the productive people bail out? I feel the USA is about to
   > experience the same sort of exodus, as I'm not the only one in
   > my
   > circle of friends considering capital flight.
   >
   > "Freedom isn't free"... a nice emotional patriotic quote that
   > simply
   > ignores the fact that the VAST MAJORITY of government spending
   > is NOT
   > DEFENSE NOR INFRASTRUCTURE, it's WELFARE. I'd be perfectly
   > happy, and
   > am perfectly happy, paying for the former (28% of the federal
   > budget), but not happy at all paying the latter (62% of the
   > federal budget).
   >
   > Let's face the real facts:
   >
   > #1 - You're a classist. Class envy is enough justification for
   > you
   > and those like you (looters) to spend someone else's money to
   > fix
   > other peoples perceived problems (beggars). An IMMORAL and
   > unjustified position for anyone to take. In the end, wealth is
   > only
   > produced when a product is created; not by stealing and handing out.
   >
   > #2 - Taking money from someone by force is IMMORAL. It's theft a
   > the
   > point of law. There is no charity in being forcefully deprived
   > of
   > your life's product. Having a huge central government do it
   > means we
   > have very little choice nor control over who and what gets the
   > "charity".
   > #3 - No man can MORALLY make a claim to a better lifestyle at
   > the
   > expense of another, no matter what the disparities in their
   > relative
   > incomes. This is pure and simple slavery. Maybe not all-out 100%
   > human ownership, but a large fraction nevertheless. A fraction
   > that
   > is growing progressively larger. So would you make the same
   > argument
   > in 1860, that the slaves in this country neither needed nor
   > deserved defending?
   >
   > #4 - Government programs to alleviate poverty have been in place
   > for
   > over 50 years. By your own admission, these programs have had
   > just
   > the opposite effect.
   >
   > #5 - Our current crop of IMMORAL social insurance programs are
   > simply
   > not mathematically viable. A simple review of the numbers show
   > that
   > they can not and will not be able to sustain their current
   > growth
   > rates (or even hold their current standing), even if the maximum
   > marginal tax rates were increased to 100%. By 2015, the CBO
   > estimates
   > that social insurance expenditures will be over 80% of the
   > federal budget.
   >
   > #6 - If US government social insurance programs are so
   > wonderful, how
   > come all those that foisted this crap on the rest of us don't
   > even
   > participate? Most government employees are NOT in Social
   > Security.
   > Yea, point a gun at me, force me to "contribute" to "my
   > retirement",
   > give me less than a 2% return year over year, and then bail out
   > of
   > the system that I was forced to be in. Real nice.
   >
   > #7 - Even if it were MORAL (which it's not), you can't level the
   > playing field of have's and have-not's (your words). There will
   > always be brighter and more productive people and those that are
   > not.
   > That's perhaps a sad, but true fact of human nature.
   >
   > Obama's tax proposals will stick my wife and myself for another
   > $2500-$3000 per month. This weighed against the fact, as I
   > stated
   > before, that our federal tax burden is already the majority of
   > our
   > monthly budget. Who are YOU to tell ME that I'm not doing my
   > part?
   > Over half my life is spent serving the "common good" (by force,
   > but
   > not by choice). In my lifetime, and that of my wife, neither of
   > us
   > has ever taken a single direct federal benefit other than FHA
   > when we
   > bought our first house (forced on us actually). Tell me how our
   > large
   > and punishing tax burden is MORALLY justified against the TENS
   > OF
   > MILLIONS of people in this country that have NEVER paid ANY
   > federal
   > personal income taxes.
   >
   > As for viable tax havens, there are plenty of nice ones. Many
   > are
   > right off our southern coast. Some will even allow me to bring
   > my AR15's.
   >
   > Here's a quote that illustrates what I consider the whole looter
   > mentality:
   > "...because we have been guided by a Republican administration
   > who
   > believes in the simplistic notion that people who have wealth
   > are
   > entitled to keep it. They have an antipathy toward the means of
   > redistributing wealth. And they may be able to sustain that for
   > a
   > while, but it doesn't work in the long run." --Rep. Jim Moran
   > (D-VA).. .HA! D-VA, it should read C-VA (C for communist).
   >
   > When all the productive people have left or sheltered their
   > incomes,
   > who'll be left to pay for the all the social programs?
   >
   >
   > RR
   > "Unashamed capitalist for my 32 year working career"
   >
   >
   > At 01:32 PM 11/12/2008, you wrote:
   > >I won't deny that there's a growing animosity brewing between
   > the
   > >'haves' and the 'have-nots' in this country, but its hard for
   > me to
   > >sympathize with a socio-economic class of people who:
   > >
   > >- are growing in numbers, both in the number of newly-minted
   > >Millionaires and Billionaires
   > >- are growing in amounts/share of global wealth they personally
   hold
   > >- aren't complaining or asking for relief from this situation
   > >
   > >These are facts regardless of political persuasion.
   > >
   > >For me, its a waste of bandwidth to 'come to the aid' of folks
   > who
   > >don't seem to want or need defending.  Every time I read
   > of T.Boon
   > >Picken's exploits, he's made another $100 Million, he certainly
   > >isn't looking for a shoulder to cry on (Kerkorian might, but
   > its his
   > >own fault and he knows it).  They're doing well, they
   > continue to do
   > >well, and they'll do well in the future.  The pages of
   > DuPont
   > >Registry aren't getting any thinner, Ferraris in US markets
   > still
   > >have multi-year wait lists, and the one segment of the Housing
   > >market that is still VERY robust and healthy is the
   > >upper-end.  Plenty of money there, and its being enjoyed
   > and spent
   > >by the people who earned it.  Let's all put-away our
   > kleenex and pitch-forks.
   > >
   > >The US tax structure has a ways to go before it approaches
   > taxation
   > >levels of Europe, Canada or most other countries of the
   > >world.  Where ya gonna go that offers more financial
   > >opportunity?  Perhaps an Arab country that has socialized
   > its
   > >natural resources to support its citizens?  You'll be
   > leaving many
   > >of your Liberties/Freedoms you enjoy now at the door...your
   > politics
   > >and your religion might not be welcome in your new
   > >country-of-residence, either.  But if all of that means
   > absolutely
   > >nothing to you in an effort to preserve 0.6% of your income, by
   > all
   > >means.  Freedom isn't 'Free', expecially when 'We The
   > People' are
   > >spending $10 Billion per month to establish it in Iraq.
   > Feel free
   > >to lecture all the soldiers, sailors, Airmen and Marines out
   > there
   > >about how painful the Gas Guzzler tax is on the purchase of
   > your Ferrari.....
   > >
   > >And now I'm done ranting.
   > >
   > >M
   > >
   > >--- On Wed, 11/12/08, LarryT <l02turner [at] comcast.net> wrote:
   > >
   > >From: LarryT <l02turner [at] comcast.net>
   > >Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
   > >To: cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com
   > >Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
   > >Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 11:29 AM
   > >
   > >Hey Michael -  Hope you're having a good week -
   > >
   > >You're right - it doesn't have anything to do with the way
   > >Ferrari's are designed - and I won't say anymore about it
   > whether you
   > >respond to this or not. -
   > >
   > >well, if you don't care - you obviously have enough money to
   > not have to
   > >worry about it. -  *will* it bother you at some
   > point?  Because you may see
   > >these kinds of fees rise in the next few years -
   > >BTW, it could be turned into a yearly fee with the stroke of a
   > pen -
   > >
   > >May as well send me $10000 or $20000 - I deserve it as much as
   > the govt.
   > >.
   > >Well- at least you got a good laugh from my posts  ;-)
   > >
   > >Take care -
   > >Sincerely,
   > >Larry T  (74 911, 91 300D 2.5T)
   > >www.youroil.net Oil Analysis Kits &
   > >Porsche Posters/Weber parts
   > >.
   > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael James"
   > ><cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com>
   > >To: "Larry Turner" <l02turner [at] comcast.net>
   > >Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
   > >Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:05 AM
   > >Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
   > >
   > >
   > >When you're ready to compare the GAINS attained by that top 5%
   > in the past
   > >several years in relation to their tax burden, you would note
   > that the top 5%
   > >still increased their profits/wealth overall - they have not
   > lost
   > >money because
   > >of Uncle Sam. Nor will they lose money with a 0.6% increase -
   > gains
   > >made by that
   > >top 5% far surpass their US tax burden, as many in this tax
   > bracket have taken
   > >their business ventures global. Ask Kirk Kerkorian or Warren
   > Buffet if
   > >they're worried about the IRS....these folks make/lose huge
   > sums money
   > >through other activities completely unrelated to their tax bill.
   > >
   > >Are you suggesting we suspend Democracy in order to protect the
   > top 5%
   > >financial earners? Certainly 'the Rich' are capable of making
   > their case
   > >to politicians and the voting electorate regarding their plight
   > in today's
   > >economic situation. Those folks are smarter than your and I on
   > so many levels
   > >when it comes to finances, many of them voted in-support of the
   > upcoming>administration. I'm sure they had their reasons -
   > reasons you may not be
   > >privy to.
   > >
   > >BTW, what does any of this have anything to do with Ferrari
   > designing by
   > >Windtunnel instead of imagination??? Just curious....
   > >
   > >
   > >
   > >--- On Wed, 11/12/08, jashburne [at] aol.com <jashburne [at] aol.com> 
wrote:
   > >
   > >From: jashburne [at] aol.com <jashburne [at] aol.com>
   > >Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
   > >To: "Michael" <Cavallino_Rapante [at] yahoo.com>
   > >Cc: "The FerrariList" <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
   > >Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 10:35 AM
   > >
   > >This is the problem with a "soak the rich" philosophy.
   > Already we
   > >have accepted a very progressive tax structure in which the top
   > 5 percent of
   > >earners pay half or more of total tax revenues and the bottom
   > 45 pct pay no
   > >income taxes at all.
   > >
   > >When the president elect says that increasing the top tax rate
   > from 36 pct to
   > >39.6 pct is only "chump change" to a million dollar earner when
   > it is
   > >really a tax increase of $36,000 a year, this country is in big
   > trouble.>
   > >This is dangerous because politicians don't care about losing 5
   > pct of the
   > >vote when they can promise tax cuts or checks to the other 95 pct.
   > >
   > >There is a limit to how far the government can force fewer and
   > fewer people to
   > >carry more and more of the tax burden and we may be approaching
   > it.  If we are
   > >careful the most productive sectors will leave and this economy
   > will spiral
   > >downward.
   > >
   > >Rant off
   > >
   > >John
   > >------Original Message------
   > >From: Matt Boyd
   > >Sender:
   > >To: jashburne [at] aol.com
   > >Cc: The FerrariList
   > >Sent: Nov 12, 2008 8:47 AM
   > >Subject: Re: [Ferrari] Are Ferraris Losing Their Good Looks?
   > >
   > >Right!  They're rich enough, so we should just extract the
   > $$ from
   > >them.  If they can afford a gold stripe, they certainly
   > should pay
   > >some money to the government!
   > >
   > >:-?
   > >
   > >-matt
   > >'85 euro 308....with no gas guzzler fine...
   > >
   > >On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Michael James
   > ><cavallino_rapante [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
   > > > LOL, you're funny Larry.
   > > >
   > > > NEVER have I heard someone wanting to buy a new Ferrari walk
   > into a
   > >dealership and go:  "Damn, I could 'just' afford a new
   > 430, but I
   > >can't afford the car with that Gas Guzzler tax added on!
   > My dreams are
   > >over, I'm going to have to go buy a Buick now.....Damn those
   > Washington>Socialists, boo-hoo.....sniff..."
   > > >
   > > > Please - buyers are spending several thousand$$$ extra to
   > have those gold
   > >stripes painted on their Scuderia's hood to match the color of
   > the rims and
   > >have the seat-stitching threads contrast the seat
   > leather.  Do you
   > >think any of
   > >these 'extras' make the car go faster?  These folks don't care
   > >about
   > >the money, good for them.  Care to guess that the
   > California won't sell
   > >well, even in this economy?
   > >_________________________________________________________________
   > >To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
   >
   >http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/jashburne%40aol.
   com
   > >
   > >Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
   > >and F1 Headlines
   > >http://www.F1Headlines.com/
   > >
   > >
   > >Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
   > >_________________________________________________________________
   > >To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
   >
   >http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/cavallino_rapant
   e%40yahoo.com
   > >
   > >Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
   > >and F1 Headlines
   > >http://www.F1Headlines.com/
   > >
   > >
   > >
   > >
   > >_________________________________________________________________
   > >To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
   >
   >http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/l02turner%40comc
   ast.net
   > >
   > >Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
   > >and F1 Headlines
   > >http://www.F1Headlines.com/
   > >
   > >
   > >
   > >
   > >_________________________________________________________________
   > >To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
   >
   >http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/ricrainbolt%40gm
   ail.com
   > >
   > >Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
   > >and F1 Headlines
   > >http://www.F1Headlines.com/
   >
   > _________________________________________________________________
   > To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
   >
   http://lists.ferrarilist.com/mailman/options/ferrari/philville%40dejaz
   zd.com
   >
   > Sponsored by BooyahMedia.com
   > and F1 Headlines
   > http://www.F1Headlines.com/
   Philip "Phil" Tegtmeier
   39 Churchill Drive
   Elverson Pa 19520
   610.525.8949
   And, go to: ... www.PhilvilleUSA.com