in article cb47fd$juq$4@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/20/04 11:37 PM:

> Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>> in article cb2p2h$ll0$8@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
>> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/20/04 10:25 AM:
> 
>>>>> Why would that be "fair"?
>>> 
>>>> Because it would be more in line with the amount of benefits received.
>>> 
>>> How did you arrive at that figure, please?
> 
>> From the things you mentioned, from the tables you cited,
> 
> This is sufficiently vague to be a good statement for you.

I find it extremely hypocritical of you to call another person's "vague"
when you consistently refuse to clarify your comments. You throw around
terms like "disproportionate," "A LOT," and "benefit" but refuse to be
specific.

>> and common sense.
> 
> This would be a first for you.

I hate to say it, but I notices a conspicuous lack of common sense in your
messages, as you make some really ridiculous statement. For instance, it is
apparent that you never did grasp the difference be an amount and a ratio of
amounts.
 
>> You mentioned that the rich get A LOT, but you never quantify that remark so
>> I comment is not out of line with your previous remarks.
> 
> Well, there's police, banks, a legal system which disproportionately
> protects their property rights, a defense system which they increasingly
> hide behind, not risking their  own children, or benefit from directly
> in terms of contracts, etc...
> 
> All you give us is "welfare".

Let's look at the police. Most of the police work is done in the poorer
neighborhoods, where there is more crime. That is because most crime is poor
on to poor. Look at our medical system, with the free emergency room
services for the poor. (The rich pay for their medical needs). Look at
public schooling, which directly benefits primarily the poor and the middle
class, since the rich usually use private schools. Look at the legal system,
which has pro bono aid and Legal Aid groups for the poor, but the poor must
pay their own expenses. Look at the banks, where the working poor and middle
class cash their checks (to show the value of those services, look at the
higher price that the extreme poor have to pay at check cashing services).
Look at the contracts, which give the working poor and middle class jobs.
 
>>>> Apparently, you are suggesting that taxes should be based on benefits
>>>> received.
>>> 
>>> Apparently, you don't read well, or honestly.
> 
>> Again with the ad hominem attacks.
> 
> Well, it's my obvious hatred of the rich, you know?

Reread your messages in an objective light (if that is possible for you),
and you will notice from the tone of many of your comments about the rich a
deep rage that can only described as hatred.

> 
>> Why don't you write more clearly and give
> 
> I write clearly; you simply take offense at things not written.
> 
> Mike

No, your writing skills are not good, and you fail to clarify ambiguities. I
am not the only one who has asked for clarifications from you.

This is the last message that I will post in response to your messages on
this particular thread unless you totally surprise me and write a rational
thought.