Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

dan(at)azshowersolutions.
Guest

Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:41 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

The Aircraft Electronics Association did not sit out on this one...



LEE'S SUMMIT, MO, June 29, 2011 -- On behalf of its membership representing more than 1,300 aviation businesses, Aircraft Electronics Association President Paula Derks took issue with President Barack Obama's criticism of the general aviation industry during his remarks at a White House press co.

See Below



http://aea.net/aeatoday.asp?ID=120

Eric M. Jones

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:39 am Post subject: Re: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Clearly you distorted what President Obama said. 



He was referring to inordinate tax breaks for corporate jets. To distort this into a general bomb throwing at general aviation is silly, or worse--plain dishonest.



Every child growing up has to decide: Whether it is better to be his brothers' keeper or not. Or shall we just watch out for our own selfish interests and to hell with everyone who can't take care of themselves. Many have obviously and I think sadly, chosen the latter.



Right now 2% of the population owns 50% of EVERYTHING and 50% of the population (that half the population!) owns just 2% of everything. The conservatives' statement that "We don't have a taxation problem, we have a spending problem", is just propaganda.



See attached. And please pass it on to your friends and representatives. When the Federal Reserve releases the figures for 2010, There will be a revolution. 



And sorry for the politics.

US Wealth Distribution Update 2007.pdf

Description:

Download

Filename:

US Wealth Distribution Update 2007.pdf

Filesize:

29.77 KB

Downloaded:

557 Time(s)

_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net

n395v

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 450

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:36 am Post subject: Re: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

The first post probably doesn't belong on this forum.



And this post probably doesn't belong here and should be unnecessary.



But the second , and quite sick post , clearly doesn't belong here.



DO NOT ARCHIVE

_________________
Milt

daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:47 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

You could give half of all you own this year to the government to distribute for you, that should help.   Because you own stuff, doesn't mean you took it from someone else.

I know, I'm done now.

 



Do not archive



David Leikam



On Jul 1, 2011, at 7:39 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Clearly you distorted what President Obama said. 

 

 He was referring to tax breaks for corporate jets. To distort this into a general bomb throwing at general aviation is silly, or worse--plain dishonest.

 

 Every child growing up has to decide: Whether it is better to be his brothers' keeper or not. Or shall we just watch out for our own selfish interests and to hell with everyone who can't take care of themselves. Many have obviously chosen the latter.

 

 Right now 2% of the population owns 50% of EVERYTHING and 50% of the population (Half the population!) owns just 2% of everything. The conservatives' statement that "We don't have a taxation problem, we have a spending problem: is just disingenuous.

 

 See attached. And please pass it on to your friends and representatives. When the Federal Reserve releases the figures for 2010, There will be a revolution. 

 

 And sorry for the politics.

 

 --------

 Eric M. Jones

 www.PerihelionDesign.com

 113 Brentwood Drive

 Southbridge, MA 01550

 (508) 764-2072

 emjones(at)charter.net

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344562#344562

 

 

 

 

 Attachments: 

 

 http://forums.matronics.com//files/us_wealth_distribution_update_2007_590.pdf

dan(at)azshowersolutions.
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:23 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Sorry Gang...Probably a bad choice of venue to post to. Let's stop the thread here.

Dan B



--- On Fri, 7/1/11, David Leikam <daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   From: David Leikam <daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com>

 Subject: Re: Re: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

 To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com

 Date: Friday, July 1, 2011, 7:44 AM

 --> AeroElectric-List message

 posted by: David Leikam <daveleikam(at)wi.rr.com>

 

 You could give half of all you own this year to the

 government to distribute for you, that should

 help.   Because you own stuff, doesn't mean

 you took it from someone else.

 I know, I'm done now.

  

 

 Do not archive

 

 David Leikam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 On Jul 1, 2011, at 7:39 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote:

 

 > 

 Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

 > 

 > Clearly you distorted what President Obama said. 

 > 

 > He was referring to tax breaks for corporate jets. To

 distort this into a general bomb throwing at general

 aviation is silly, or worse--plain dishonest.

 > 

 > Every child growing up has to decide: Whether it is

 better to be his brothers' keeper or not. Or shall we just

 watch out for our own selfish interests and to hell with

 everyone who can't take care of themselves. Many have

 obviously chosen the latter.

 > 

 > Right now 2% of the population owns 50% of EVERYTHING

 and 50% of the population (Half the population!) owns just

 2% of everything. The conservatives' statement that "We

 don't have a taxation problem, we have a spending problem:

 is just disingenuous.

 > 

 > See attached. And please pass it on to your friends

 and representatives. When the Federal Reserve releases the

 figures for 2010, There will be a revolution. 

 > 

 > And sorry for the politics.

 > 

 > --------

 > Eric M. Jones

 > www.PerihelionDesign.com

 > 113 Brentwood Drive

 > Southbridge, MA 01550

 > (508) 764-2072

 > emjones(at)charter.net

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > Read this topic online here:

 > 

 > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=344562#344562

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > Attachments: 

 > 

 > http://forums.matronics.com//files/us_wealth_distribution_update_2007_590.pdf

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 

 

 

 AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

 FAQ,

    - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 List Contribution Web Site -

               -Matt

 Dralle, List Admin.

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:27 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

At 07:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  



Clearly you distorted what President Obama said.


	


   . . . which misses the fundamental point

   entirely. It's not about people having more or

   less "stuff" being treated differently from

   folks who have a different amounts of "stuff."

   It's about the abuse of law.



   The law is simply the collective manifestation

   of our individual right to self defense.

   See Bastiat, "The Law":



   http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/The_Law.pdf



   In a civilized society the law is not a tool of

   plunder, oppression or class warfare.

   As soon as a politician utters a word

   personal to any citizen, they have violated

   the founding fathers spirit and intent for

   crafting a civilized society.



   This isn't a conservative, liberal, republican,

   or democratic thing. All of those entities

   are pitting one group against another

   with arguments that go into the most

   trivial of details while ignoring

   the "elephant in the room." Liberty is a

   fundamental right to be left alone.



   The founding fathers were not interested

   in groups but in individuals. Not for their

   beliefs but for their behaviors. The honorable

   citizen protects the liberty of himself and

   his neighbors. The citizen capable of heroism

   will do so at personal risk.



   The premise of the AEA response was dead on.

   The idea that anyone should single out a

   group of individuals for special attention

   under the law completely ignores the far

   reaching ramifications for that attack upon

   liberty of millions. See:



http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/I_Pencil.pdf



   An airplane, yacht, luxury home in the mountains,

   or the lowly pencil are the sum totals of

   work-product for millions of people. The idea that

   corporate jets are separate and isolated

   from the constellation of self-interested

   providers of value all over the planet is

   misguided. It's certainly not in keeping

   with First Principals upon which this

   country was founded.



 	  Quote: 	
		  And sorry for the politics.


	


   Class warfare, plunder and oppression ARE

   indeed political. The fundamentals for creation

   and maintenance of a civilized society are

   not. Like rivets, aluminum, and oil for

   the Tefzel insulation, they are ingredients

   that go into a recipe for success. The fact

   liberty and honorable endeavors are behaviors

   as opposed to hard goods is what makes them

   unique to humans.



   If you'd like to continue this discussion,

   I can crank up another list-server engine

   on matronics.com for that purpose. I have

   a couple of them that are not in service

   at the present time.



   Bob . . .

   Bob . . .

mrspudandcompany(at)veriz
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:44 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

And sorry for the politics.



--------

Eric M. Jones



Take your "Twisted" Political views to a political website.  This is NOT the

place!!



Roger



Do not archive

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:55 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

At 09:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

<mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net>

And sorry for the politics.



--------

Eric M. Jones



Take your "Twisted" Political views to a political website.  This is NOT the

place!!


	


    Gently, gently my friend. It is

    difficult to champion honorable

    behaviors with excited pejoratives.

    Please let me deal with it.

   Bob . . .

LynnCole(at)foxvalley.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:27 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

I simply deleted the entire thread as being inappropriate to the discussion of aircraft electrics.



Do not archive

 Lynn Cole

LynnCole(at)foxvalley.net (LynnCole(at)foxvalley.net)

 



On Jul 1, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

[quote]--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)>

At 09:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ROGER &  JEAN CURTIS" <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net (mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net)>





And sorry for the politics.

--------

Eric M. Jones

Take your "Twisted" Political views to a political website.  This is NOT the

place!!

 	




   Gently, gently my friend. It is

   difficult to champion honorable

   behaviors with excited pejoratives.

   Please let me deal with it.





  Bob . . . 

          - The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

              - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

--> http://forums.matronics.com

            - List Contribution Web Site -

Thank you for your generous support!

-Matt Dralle, List Admin.

  --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 [b]

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:12 pm Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Bob,

I'm afraid that you've missed the point, as well. It isn't about jet 

owners, or oil companies; it's about fairness in application of the law. 

When an exec (employee, not owner) can have a company helicopter pick 

him up for work and the company is allowed a tax deduction for that, and 

at the same time I'm allowed no tax deduction as an employee for my 

transportation to work, the law isn't applied equitably.

If the Pres had listed every offending individual, he'd never finish. He 

was obviously just offering examples, as I just did.

Everybody hates paying taxes, but it astounds me when I hear hard 

working people who have no way out of paying more than their fair share, 

defending those who lobby (euphemism for *bribe*) their way into paying 

little or none of their share. What Eric's post doesn't mention is that 

the 50% of us who own 2% of everything, pay more than 50% of the taxes 

to support everything. Warren Buffet has said that his housekeeper pays 

taxes at a higher tax rate than Buffet. There's something very wrong 

with that.

Dan,

Throwing out your political opinion & then saying 'oops, sorry, nothing 

more should be said', just doesn't cut it. Kinda like asking you, in 

public, how long it's been since you quit beating your wife.

It distresses me greatly when I see posts that brazenly say, in effect, 

'political posts I agree with "probably" have no place here, but 

anything I disagree with is "sick, and definitely has no place here." ' 

It really makes me wonder what country this is, where only opinions we 

agree with are allowed, and anyone who disagrees is a traitor.

Charlie

On 07/01/2011 09:24 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

 At 07:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

> 

> <emjones(at)charter.net>

>

> Clearly you distorted what President Obama said.

   . . . which misses the fundamental point

   entirely. It's not about people having more or

   less "stuff" being treated differently from

   folks who have a different amounts of "stuff."

   It's about the abuse of law.

   The law is simply the collective manifestation

   of our individual right to self defense.

   See Bastiat, "The Law":

   http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/The_Law.pdf

   In a civilized society the law is not a tool of

   plunder, oppression or class warfare.

   As soon as a politician utters a word

   personal to any citizen, they have violated

   the founding fathers spirit and intent for

   crafting a civilized society.

   This isn't a conservative, liberal, republican,

   or democratic thing. All of those entities

   are pitting one group against another

   with arguments that go into the most

   trivial of details while ignoring

   the "elephant in the room." Liberty is a

   fundamental right to be left alone.

   The founding fathers were not interested

   in groups but in individuals. Not for their

   beliefs but for their behaviors. The honorable

   citizen protects the liberty of himself and

   his neighbors. The citizen capable of heroism

   will do so at personal risk.

   The premise of the AEA response was dead on.

   The idea that anyone should single out a

   group of individuals for special attention

   under the law completely ignores the far

   reaching ramifications for that attack upon

   liberty of millions. See:

 http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/I_Pencil.pdf

   An airplane, yacht, luxury home in the mountains,

   or the lowly pencil are the sum totals of

   work-product for millions of people. The idea that

   corporate jets are separate and isolated

   from the constellation of self-interested

   providers of value all over the planet is

   misguided. It's certainly not in keeping

   with First Principals upon which this

   country was founded.

> And sorry for the politics.

   Class warfare, plunder and oppression ARE

   indeed political. The fundamentals for creation

   and maintenance of a civilized society are

   not. Like rivets, aluminum, and oil for

   the Tefzel insulation, they are ingredients

   that go into a recipe for success. The fact

   liberty and honorable endeavors are behaviors

   as opposed to hard goods is what makes them

   unique to humans.

   If you'd like to continue this discussion,

   I can crank up another list-server engine

   on matronics.com for that purpose. I have

   a couple of them that are not in service

   at the present time.

   Bob . . .

   Bob . . .

raymondj(at)frontiernet.n
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:34 pm Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Well spoken, Charlie.



I fear for the future of this list if this discussion continues here. 

Those who are interested, please accept Bob's offer to create a new list 

for discussions on this topic and lets get back to a topic we can agree 

on: Free roaming electrons are evil, they need to be herded!



do not archive



Raymond Julian

Kettle River, MN



"And you know that I could have me a million more friends,

and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine



On 07/01/2011 03:08 PM, Charlie England wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>



 Bob,



 I'm afraid that you've missed the point, as well. It isn't about jet

 owners, or oil companies; it's about fairness in application of the law.

 When an exec (employee, not owner) can have a company helicopter pick

 him up for work and the company is allowed a tax deduction for that, and

 at the same time I'm allowed no tax deduction as an employee for my

 transportation to work, the law isn't applied equitably.



 If the Pres had listed every offending individual, he'd never finish. He

 was obviously just offering examples, as I just did.



 Everybody hates paying taxes, but it astounds me when I hear hard

 working people who have no way out of paying more than their fair share,

 defending those who lobby (euphemism for *bribe*) their way into paying

 little or none of their share. What Eric's post doesn't mention is that

 the 50% of us who own 2% of everything, pay more than 50% of the taxes

 to support everything. Warren Buffet has said that his housekeeper pays

 taxes at a higher tax rate than Buffet. There's something very wrong

 with that.



 Dan,



 Throwing out your political opinion & then saying 'oops, sorry, nothing

 more should be said', just doesn't cut it. Kinda like asking you, in

 public, how long it's been since you quit beating your wife.



 It distresses me greatly when I see posts that brazenly say, in effect,

 'political posts I agree with "probably" have no place here, but

 anything I disagree with is "sick, and definitely has no place here." '

 It really makes me wonder what country this is, where only opinions we

 agree with are allowed, and anyone who disagrees is a traitor.



 Charlie

 On 07/01/2011 09:24 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

> 

> <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

>

> At 07:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

>> 

>> <emjones(at)charter.net>

>>

>> Clearly you distorted what President Obama said.

>

> . . . which misses the fundamental point

> entirely. It's not about people having more or

> less "stuff" being treated differently from

> folks who have a different amounts of "stuff."

> It's about the abuse of law.

>

> The law is simply the collective manifestation

> of our individual right to self defense.

> See Bastiat, "The Law":

>

> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/The_Law.pdf

>

> In a civilized society the law is not a tool of

> plunder, oppression or class warfare.

> As soon as a politician utters a word

> personal to any citizen, they have violated

> the founding fathers spirit and intent for

> crafting a civilized society.

>

> This isn't a conservative, liberal, republican,

> or democratic thing. All of those entities

> are pitting one group against another

> with arguments that go into the most

> trivial of details while ignoring

> the "elephant in the room." Liberty is a

> fundamental right to be left alone.

>

> The founding fathers were not interested

> in groups but in individuals. Not for their

> beliefs but for their behaviors. The honorable

> citizen protects the liberty of himself and

> his neighbors. The citizen capable of heroism

> will do so at personal risk.

>

> The premise of the AEA response was dead on.

> The idea that anyone should single out a

> group of individuals for special attention

> under the law completely ignores the far

> reaching ramifications for that attack upon

> liberty of millions. See:

>

> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/I_Pencil.pdf

>

> An airplane, yacht, luxury home in the mountains,

> or the lowly pencil are the sum totals of

> work-product for millions of people. The idea that

> corporate jets are separate and isolated

> from the constellation of self-interested

> providers of value all over the planet is

> misguided. It's certainly not in keeping

> with First Principals upon which this

> country was founded.

>

>> And sorry for the politics.

>

> Class warfare, plunder and oppression ARE

> indeed political. The fundamentals for creation

> and maintenance of a civilized society are

> not. Like rivets, aluminum, and oil for

> the Tefzel insulation, they are ingredients

> that go into a recipe for success. The fact

> liberty and honorable endeavors are behaviors

> as opposed to hard goods is what makes them

> unique to humans.

>

> If you'd like to continue this discussion,

> I can crank up another list-server engine

> on matronics.com for that purpose. I have

> a couple of them that are not in service

> at the present time.

>

> Bob . . .

> Bob . . .

>

dan(at)azshowersolutions.
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:31 pm Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Sure Charlie, I'll bite...

 Dan,

 	  Quote: 	

 Throwing out your political opinion & then saying

 'oops, sorry, nothing more should be said', just doesn't cut

 it. Kinda like asking you, in public, how long it's been

 since you quit beating your wife.

Political views never cease to amaze me...we all have one and I'm sure they have been developed by each of us via nurture as well as nature. We develop them through how we view the world, first through our parents eyes and then refined by our own life experiences. I'm sure most of us (say aviators if you want a defined parameter) are quite sincere in wanting what is best for our families (I haven't beat my wife for a couple days now), our cities and our nation. However, agreement in achieving the same goal has been polarized to the extreme ON BOTH SIDES! 

 	  Quote: 	

 It distresses me greatly when I see posts that brazenly

 say, in effect, 'political posts I agree with "probably"

 have no place here, but anything I disagree with is "sick,

 and definitely has no place here." ' It really makes me

 wonder what country this is, where only opinions we agree

 with are allowed, and anyone who disagrees is a traitor.

If the shoe fits Charlie, but I didn't say it. Going back to the issue at hand...The President speaks out of both sides of his mouth (the Indians would say he speaks with forked tongue) He increases this nations debt higher than it has ever been, continues to do so, and expects everyone to roll over and let his administration tax it back into the black. I don't care if we are talking about someone selling pencils on the corner or corporate jets on the tarmac, when a certain person or group is singeled out to pay a bigger slice of the pie IT IS WRONG. We might as well just start calling Obama Robin Hood and replace his teleprompter with a bow.

I know, I know...you will say that Bush spent the hell out of the the budget as well and you are right, however, he did it for different reasons than the current administration. Were they valid reasons? I would like to think so...for things like national security and fighting the war on terror.  He did it the American way after 9-11 going over and taking it out of their hide. Was it justified? Did he do it right? Lots of opinions on that one and I believe too many politics for sure. But lets take a look at Obama now, He has continued the war as it probably needed to be, but what right does he have taking our tax dollars and bailing (buying) out corporate America? Pushing Obama Care through when IT WAS NOT the will of the people. If that wasn't a dictorial move then I will eat my hat. So now we are back to Robin Hood...smells like a whole lot of Socialism to this guy. Just remember if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and smells like a duck...

Bob, I think we need that other site now  ;>\

Dan B

 	  Quote: 	
		   Charlie

  Bob,

 I'm afraid that you've missed the point, as well. It isn't

 about jet owners, or oil companies; it's about fairness in

 application of the law. When an exec (employee, not owner)

 can have a company helicopter pick him up for work and the

 company is allowed a tax deduction for that, and at the same

 time I'm allowed no tax deduction as an employee for my

 transportation to work, the law isn't applied equitably.

 If the Pres had listed every offending individual, he'd

 never finish. He was obviously just offering examples, as I

 just did.

 Everybody hates paying taxes, but it astounds me when I

 hear hard working people who have no way out of paying more

 than their fair share, defending those who lobby (euphemism

 for *bribe*) their way into paying little or none of their

 share. What Eric's post doesn't mention is that the 50% of

 us who own 2% of everything, pay more than 50% of the taxes

 to support everything. Warren Buffet has said that his

 housekeeper pays taxes at a higher tax rate than Buffet.

 There's something very wrong with that.

 	  Quote: 	

 On 07/01/2011 09:24 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

 > 

 Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

 > 

 > At 07:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

 >> 

 M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>

 >> 

 >> Clearly you distorted what President Obama said.

 > 

 >   . . . which misses the fundamental

 point

 >   entirely. It's not about people

 having more or

 >   less "stuff" being treated

 differently from

 >   folks who have a different amounts of

 "stuff."

 >   It's about the abuse of law.

 > 

 >   The law is simply the collective

 manifestation

 >   of our individual right to self

 defense.

 >   See Bastiat, "The Law":

 > 

 >   http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/The_Law.pdf

 > 

 >   In a civilized society the law is not

 a tool of

 >   plunder, oppression or class

 warfare.

 >   As soon as a politician utters a

 word

 >   personal to any citizen, they have

 violated

 >   the founding fathers spirit and

 intent for

 >   crafting a civilized society.

 > 

 >   This isn't a conservative, liberal,

 republican,

 >   or democratic thing. All of those

 entities

 >   are pitting one group against

 another

 >   with arguments that go into the most

 >   trivial of details while ignoring

 >   the "elephant in the room." Liberty

 is a

 >   fundamental right to be left alone.

 > 

 >   The founding fathers were not

 interested

 >   in groups but in individuals. Not for

 their

 >   beliefs but for their behaviors. The

 honorable

 >   citizen protects the liberty of

 himself and

 >   his neighbors. The citizen capable of

 heroism

 >   will do so at personal risk.

 > 

 >   The premise of the AEA response was

 dead on.

 >   The idea that anyone should single

 out a

 >   group of individuals for special

 attention

 >   under the law completely ignores the

 far

 >   reaching ramifications for that

 attack upon

 >   liberty of millions. See:

 > 

 > http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/I_Pencil.pdf

 > 

 >   An airplane, yacht, luxury home in

 the mountains,

 >   or the lowly pencil are the sum

 totals of

 >   work-product for millions of people.

 The idea that

 >   corporate jets are separate and

 isolated

 >   from the constellation of

 self-interested

 >   providers of value all over the

 planet is

 >   misguided. It's certainly not in

 keeping

 >   with First Principals upon which

 this

 >   country was founded.

 > 

 >> And sorry for the politics.

 > 

 >   Class warfare, plunder and oppression

 ARE

 >   indeed political. The fundamentals

 for creation

 >   and maintenance of a civilized

 society are

 >   not. Like rivets, aluminum, and oil

 for

 >   the Tefzel insulation, they are

 ingredients

 >   that go into a recipe for success.

 The fact

 >   liberty and honorable endeavors are

 behaviors

 >   as opposed to hard goods is what

 makes them

 >   unique to humans.

 > 

 >   If you'd like to continue this

 discussion,

 >   I can crank up another list-server

 engine

 >   on matronics.com for that purpose. I

 have

 >   a couple of them that are not in

 service

 >   at the present time.

 > 

 >   Bob . . .

 > 

 > 

 >   Bob . . .

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 AeroElectric-List Email Forum -

 FAQ,

    - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -

 List Contribution Web Site -

               -Matt

 Dralle, List Admin.

ceengland(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:41 pm Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

Hi Dan,

First, my apologies; I know you didn't make the 'sick' comment, & should 

have been more careful in the structure of my previous post. I truly 

didn't intend to tie you to that comment.

Second, please don't confuse an opinion about a single issue with 

unquestioning support for for all policies.  Email really is a 

difficult medium for discussing non-technical subjects; the feedback 

loop time constant is too long most of the time & it's way too easy to 

set up destructive oscillations in the 'circuit'. (Trying to give this 

at least some aeroelectric reference....)

Your last paragraph contains enough subject matter for productive 

conversation over at least a 5 course meal. Perhaps we can get together 

some time & pursue it, either in person or on Bob's potential new 

politics list.

Charlie

On 07/01/2011 05:25 PM, Dan Billingsley wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 Sure Charlie, I'll bite...

   Dan,

> Throwing out your political opinion&  then saying

> 'oops, sorry, nothing more should be said', just doesn't cut

> it. Kinda like asking you, in public, how long it's been

> since you quit beating your wife.

 Political views never cease to amaze me...we all have one and I'm sure they have been developed by each of us via nurture as well as nature. We develop them through how we view the world, first through our parents eyes and then refined by our own life experiences. I'm sure most of us (say aviators if you want a defined parameter) are quite sincere in wanting what is best for our families (I haven't beat my wife for a couple days now), our cities and our nation. However, agreement in achieving the same goal has been polarized to the extreme ON BOTH SIDES!

> It distresses me greatly when I see posts that brazenly

> say, in effect, 'political posts I agree with "probably"

> have no place here, but anything I disagree with is "sick,

> and definitely has no place here." ' It really makes me

> wonder what country this is, where only opinions we agree

> with are allowed, and anyone who disagrees is a traitor.

 If the shoe fits Charlie, but I didn't say it. Going back to the issue at hand...The President speaks out of both sides of his mouth (the Indians would say he speaks with forked tongue) He increases this nations debt higher than it has ever been, continues to do so, and expects everyone to roll over and let his administration tax it back into the black. I don't care if we are talking about someone selling pencils on the corner or corporate jets on the tarmac, when a certain person or group is singeled out to pay a bigger slice of the pie IT IS WRONG. We might as well just start calling Obama Robin Hood and replace his teleprompter with a bow.

 I know, I know...you will say that Bush spent the hell out of the the budget as well and you are right, however, he did it for different reasons than the current administration. Were they valid reasons? I would like to think so...for things like national security and fighting the war on terror.  He did it the American way after 9-11 going over and taking it out of their hide. Was it justified? Did he do it right? Lots of opinions on that one and I believe too many politics for sure. But lets take a look at Obama now, He has continued the war as it probably needed to be, but what right does he have taking our tax dollars and bailing (buying) out corporate America? Pushing Obama Care through when IT WAS NOT the will of the people. If that wasn't a dictorial move then I will eat my hat. So now we are back to Robin Hood...smells like a whole lot of Socialism to this guy. Just remember if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and smells like a duck...

 Bob, I think we need that other site now  ;>\

 Dan B

> Charlie

>   Bob,

>

> I'm afraid that you've missed the point, as well. It isn't

> about jet owners, or oil companies; it's about fairness in

> application of the law. When an exec (employee, not owner)

> can have a company helicopter pick him up for work and the

> company is allowed a tax deduction for that, and at the same

> time I'm allowed no tax deduction as an employee for my

> transportation to work, the law isn't applied equitably.

>

> If the Pres had listed every offending individual, he'd

> never finish. He was obviously just offering examples, as I

> just did.

>

> Everybody hates paying taxes, but it astounds me when I

> hear hard working people who have no way out of paying more

> than their fair share, defending those who lobby (euphemism

> for *bribe*) their way into paying little or none of their

> share. What Eric's post doesn't mention is that the 50% of

> us who own 2% of everything, pay more than 50% of the taxes

> to support everything. Warren Buffet has said that his

> housekeeper pays taxes at a higher tax rate than Buffet.

> There's something very wrong with that.

> On 07/01/2011 09:24 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:

>> 

> Nuckolls, III"<nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com>

>> At 07:39 AM 7/1/2011, you wrote:

>>> 

> M. Jones"<emjones(at)charter.net>

>>> Clearly you distorted what President Obama said.

>>     . . . which misses the fundamental

> point

>>     entirely. It's not about people

> having more or

>>     less "stuff" being treated

> differently from

>>     folks who have a different amounts of

> "stuff."

>>     It's about the abuse of law.

>>

>>     The law is simply the collective

> manifestation

>>     of our individual right to self

> defense.

>>     See Bastiat, "The Law":

>>

>>     http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/The_Law.pdf

>>

>>     In a civilized society the law is not

> a tool of

>>     plunder, oppression or class

> warfare.

>>     As soon as a politician utters a

> word

>>     personal to any citizen, they have

> violated

>>     the founding fathers spirit and

> intent for

>>     crafting a civilized society.

>>

>>     This isn't a conservative, liberal,

> republican,

>>     or democratic thing. All of those

> entities

>>     are pitting one group against

> another

>>     with arguments that go into the most

>>     trivial of details while ignoring

>>     the "elephant in the room." Liberty

> is a

>>     fundamental right to be left alone.

>>

>>     The founding fathers were not

> interested

>>     in groups but in individuals. Not for

> their

>>     beliefs but for their behaviors. The

> honorable

>>     citizen protects the liberty of

> himself and

>>     his neighbors. The citizen capable of

> heroism

>>     will do so at personal risk.

>>

>>     The premise of the AEA response was

> dead on.

>>     The idea that anyone should single

> out a

>>     group of individuals for special

> attention

>>     under the law completely ignores the

> far

>>     reaching ramifications for that

> attack upon

>>     liberty of millions. See:

>>

>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Simple-Ideas/TRL/I_Pencil.pdf

>>

>>     An airplane, yacht, luxury home in

> the mountains,

>>     or the lowly pencil are the sum

> totals of

>>     work-product for millions of people.

> The idea that

>>     corporate jets are separate and

> isolated

>>     from the constellation of

> self-interested

>>     providers of value all over the

> planet is

>>     misguided. It's certainly not in

> keeping

>>     with First Principals upon which

> this

>>     country was founded.

>>

>>> And sorry for the politics.

>>     Class warfare, plunder and oppression

> ARE

>>     indeed political. The fundamentals

> for creation

>>     and maintenance of a civilized

> society are

>>     not. Like rivets, aluminum, and oil

> for

>>     the Tefzel insulation, they are

> ingredients

>>     that go into a recipe for success.

> The fact

>>     liberty and honorable endeavors are

> behaviors

>>     as opposed to hard goods is what

> makes them

>>     unique to humans.

>>

>>     If you'd like to continue this

> discussion,

>>     I can crank up another list-server

> engine

>>     on matronics.com for that purpose. I

> have

>>     a couple of them that are not in

> service

>>     at the present time.

>>

>>     Bob . . .

>>

>>

>>     Bob . . .

>>

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:29 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

 	  Quote: 	
		  Perhaps we can get together some time & pursue it, either in person 

or on Bob's potential new politics list.


	


   I'm working with Matt to fix some bugs in the

   list-server engines I mentioned. When Matt

   has some spare time, he'll get them squared

   away.



   At that time, I'll invite anyone who desires

   to join a discussion group for what I'll call

   Simple-Ideas. An exploration of fundamental

   truths that transcends politics (but is often

   stirred in with politics).



   Subscription to these lists is by request/invitation.

   I maintain the registered address lists manually

   for now . . . as opposed to the user management

   system that supports this list.



   Will let you all know when it's up and running.



   Bob . . .

mjpereira68(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 12:21 pm Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Charlie England <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 <ceengland(at)bellsouth.net>



 Bob,



 I'm afraid that you've missed the point, as well. It isn't about jet owners,

 or oil companies; it's about fairness in application of the law. When an

 exec (employee, not owner) can have a company helicopter pick him up for

 work and the company is allowed a tax deduction for that, and at the same

 time I'm allowed no tax deduction as an employee for my transportation to

 work, the law isn't applied equitably.


	


Excuse me, If you had a company car the  *COMPANY* would get a tax

break. It's between

you and your company whether providing you transportation is a

legitimate expense

for the company or not. If they don't provide it and you don't like it

you're free to look for

work elsewhere.



Like it or not private jet travel is a net positive. Or do you think

major stockholders would

prefer to not get all the dividends or capital gains that would accrue

without the expense

of a netjets account (after all they are greedy, right) ? Or do you

suffer under the delusion

that CEO's don't answer to anyone ?



And let me explain something to you. Any company that makes money that

isn't based

on government based preference is a good thing for you, whether you

believe it or not.

Granted GE makes some jet engines but most of the people in the

corporate jet business are not making money based on favorable

regulations in return for the political donations (as GE

and GM are doing now).



 	  Quote: 	
		  

 If the Pres had listed every offending individual, he'd never finish. He was

 obviously just offering examples, as I just did.




	


So having access to a corporate jet an "offense" now ? Or merely just

having more money

than you ?



Nearly half the people in this country do not pay any income taxes at

all.  The President is

hard at work at making that number a solid majority so the people that

think like him can do

whatever the hell they want without electoral consequence.



 	  Quote: 	
		   Everybody hates paying taxes, but it astounds me when I hear hard working

 people who have no way out of paying more than their fair share, defending

 those who lobby (euphemism for *bribe*) their way into paying little or none

 of their share. What Eric's post doesn't mention is that the 50% of us who

 own 2% of everything, pay more than 50% of the taxes to support everything.

 Warren Buffet has said that his housekeeper pays taxes at a higher tax rate

 than Buffet. There's something very wrong with that.


	


Excuse me, that's complete bullshit. The top 1% (read that as large

corporations) pay

nearly 40% of all federal revenue. The bottom 50% don't pay shit. I

don't give  a rats

butt about percentage rates (it's dollars not marginal rates that fund

the government).

As far as Buffet is concerned the stuff that comes out of his mouth is

exactly what he has to say (along with his massive political

donations/protection money to both parties) to keep the government

from destroying his company. Crony capitalism is socialism. And guess

what, every damn person on this list is going to get fried by it, long

before Buffet shrugs and

walks away offshore with enough money left over to not really give a shit.



Oh btw, if you're reading this list because you own your own airplane

or are considering

building one it means your disposable income puts you in the rich,

greedy, sob category

and you will be made a scapegoat sooner rather than later. Don't

expect the EPA to not

ban lead based fuel simply because you're going to have to take a 100

percent loss on any airplane you own not running a very low

compression engine. After all you don't need your airplane to eat so

you can afford to do your fair share by giving it up for the greater

good.



And i'm not sorry, I'm pissed.  Don't start this crap and you won't

hear it from me. The days

of some idiot calling Bush, Palin, or Bachman,  (or whoever the

designated person to

destroy is) stupid, greedy, or a war criminal or suggesting someone

more successful should do more and me saying nothing are over. Deal

with it.



c'ya,

Mike.

Bubblehead

Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 48
Location: N. Richland Hills, TX

Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:29 am Post subject: Re: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

I'm with Mike and Bob on this one 100%. 



The government uses laws, especially tax laws and now health care legislation to pick winners and losers.  If our President really believed his health care plan was good for America and Americans his administration would not be granting 100's of waivers to friends of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.  Nobody would get waivers and all would be held to the law equally.



As far as income (or wealth) distribution - not the same thing, BTW - it is none of the government's business how it's distributed and it is confiscation when they take from one to give to another in the name of "fairness."  



On income distribution, I have attached a spreadsheet that approaches this from a strictly mathematical model.  I assume income is distributed in equal increments from 10,000 to 1,000,000 over 100 people.  I then add up each block of 20 people to see what the distribution is.  For a simple straight line distribution the top 20% of wage earners get 35.8% of the income.  The bottom 20% of wage earners get 4.2% of total income.



It's mathematics that does it, not any basic unfairness in the system!



Unfairness is getting something for nothing or because of political contributions or favors.  Unfairness is working 60 or 70 or 80 hours per week and putting yourself through school and seeing 50% (total tax rate in most states when payroll, income tax, property and sales taxes are included) taken AND IT IS STILL NOT ENOUGH!



Read "The Law" and "Atlas Shrugged."



Lastly, our esteemed President said while campaigning he would met with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad any time and without precondition.  That is a privilege he will give a dictator and abuser of human rights but will not give to the opposition party when the future of our country is at stake?  What in the world is he thinking?  Reelection and political power is more important than the financial health of our country?

Income Distribution 2010 0627.xlsx

Description:

Download

Filename:

Income Distribution 2010 0627.xlsx

Filesize:

33.03 KB

Downloaded:

482 Time(s)

_________________
John
Keller, TX
RV-8 N247TD

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:51 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

How long is this inappropriate use of the Aeroelectric Connection forum going to go on? We all signed up to this forum pledging to use it for its intended purpose. THIS AIN'T IT. There are literally thousands of site devoted to political BS. There is only one AEC. How about it guys and gals, can we just talk electrons here? 



Rick Girard



On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Bubblehead <jdalmansr(at)gmail.com (jdalmansr(at)gmail.com)> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bubblehead" <jdalmansr(at)gmail.com (jdalmansr(at)gmail.com)>

 

 I'm with Mike and Bob on this one 100%.

 

 The government uses laws, especially tax laws and now health care legislation to pick winners and losers.  If our President really believed his health care plan was good for America and Americans his administration would not be granting 100's of waivers to friends of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.  Nobody would get waivers and all would be held to the law equally.

  

 As far as income (or wealth) distribution - not the same thing, BTW - it is none of the government's business how it's distributed and it is confiscation when they take from one to give to another in the name of "fairness."

  

 On income distribution, I have attached a spreadsheet that approaches this from a strictly mathematical model.  I assume income is distributed in equal increments from 10,000 to 1,000,000 over 100 people.  I then add up each block of 20 people to see what the distribution is.  For a simple straight line distribution the top 20% of wage earners get 35.8% of the income.  The bottom 20% of wage earners get 4.2% of total income.

  

 It's mathematics that does it, not any basic unfairness in the system!

 

 Unfairness is getting something for nothing or because of political contributions or favors.  Unfairness is working 60 or 70 or 80 hours per week and putting yourself through school and seeing 50% (total tax rate in most states when payroll, income tax, property and sales taxes are included) taken AND IT IS STILL NOT ENOUGH!

  

 Read "The Law" and "Atlas Shrugged."

 

 Lastly, our esteemed President said while campaigning he would met with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad any time and without precondition.  That is a privilege he will give a dictator and abuser of human rights but will not give to the opposition party when the future of our country is at stake?  What in the world is he thinking?  Reelection and political power is more important than the financial health of our country?

  

 --------

 John

 Keller, TX

 RV-8 N247TD

 

 

 

 

 Read this topic online here:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=345279#345279

 

 

 

 

 Attachments:

 

 http://forums.matronics.com//files/income_distribution_2010_0627_180.xlsx

 

 

 

 

 ===========

 -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List

 ===========

 http://forums.matronics.com

 ===========

 le, List Admin.

 ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution

 ===========

 

 

 

 	


-- 

Zulu Delta

Mk IIIC

Thanks, Homer GBYM

It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.

   - Groucho Marx



 

  [quote][b]

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:51 am Post subject: a bit O/T ...AEA Responds

At 11:29 AM 7/7/2011, you wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  


	


   As I mentioned early last week, I have another list-server engine

   on Matronics that I can dedicate to this and similar discussions.

   Matt got it de-bugged over the weekend.



   The membership list for this server has to be maintained manually.

   Further, there will be no automatic archiving function. Individuals

   who would like to have their email address added to (or removed from)

   the SimpleIdeas-List can do so by emailing their wishes to me directly at



   bob.nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com



   I have about 20 participants on the list already. I'm looking forward

   to the sharing of ideas with any of you who wish to give it a try.



   In the mean time, let's respect the wishes of attendees on the

   AeroElectric-List not to be distracted with off-topic discussions.

   Let's move it to the Simple-Ideas list.



   Thanks!

   Bob . . .

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum