Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> in article caqpgb$j8k$2@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/17/04 9:43 AM:

>> Ernest Schaal <eschaal@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>>> in article capi7q$jvj$3@news.Stanford.EDU, mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net at
>>> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote on 6/16/04 10:33 PM:

>>>> Sorry, but you're wrong again.
>> 
>>> Your previous comments are ambiguous and you have made absolutely no attempt
>>> to reduce that ambiguity.
>> 
>> My comments were clear; you are attempting to get a value judgement from
>> me. Failing that, you fabricate your own, in order to refute it.

> No, your comments were not clear,

Sorry, did you not understand "a disproporionate cut to the very rich"?

If no, why are you arguing?

If so, they were clear and you are wrong.

>and your ego is so weak that rather than

Really, psychology isn't your thing, is it?

Mike