Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #22507 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-03-19 07:26 -0700 |
| Last post | 2012-03-19 20:58 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 184 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 07:26 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:14 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:31 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:51 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 15:53 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 12:19 +1200
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 20:50 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 16:14 +1200
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 23:28 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-20 17:16 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-21 12:18 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-20 12:24 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-20 19:33 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-20 17:50 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 07:46 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 09:42 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:23 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:25 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-22 17:56 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 11:16 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 14:41 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 13:56 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 19:37 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 17:09 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 23:06 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 22:36 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 00:35 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 22:33 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 09:10 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback-Sorry MS Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 09:41 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback-Sorry MS Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 18:58 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-23 14:54 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 15:06 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 18:57 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 08:43 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:16 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 10:17 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:19 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:42 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 18:44 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:24 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 21:56 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 10:06 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 14:00 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 23:04 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-22 21:34 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 00:43 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-23 04:51 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 09:23 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-23 17:30 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 19:04 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-24 00:21 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:56 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 08:52 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:18 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 10:00 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 13:54 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:47 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-25 08:58 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 06:23 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-25 14:10 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-24 15:09 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 23:02 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 00:44 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 09:13 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:48 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 08:46 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 12:03 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 12:43 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:08 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-24 12:47 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:20 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:13 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:23 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 16:04 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:30 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 20:53 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 22:28 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 08:01 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 08:13 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 08:44 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 12:29 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 15:26 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 16:45 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 14:34 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:05 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-22 14:16 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 14:34 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 14:25 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 09:02 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 10:44 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 14:05 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Name> - 2012-03-23 15:20 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 19:19 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:05 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:54 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 09:48 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:53 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:15 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-25 12:01 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Douglas C. Neidermeyer" <sgt@arms.omega.faber.edu> - 2012-03-24 18:45 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:30 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Douglas C. Neidermeyer" <sgt@arms.omega.faber.edu> - 2012-03-25 18:11 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 00:10 +0000
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 17:39 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 02:50 +0000
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 21:10 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-24 15:02 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 19:09 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:39 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-25 14:02 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:42 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-23 15:52 -0600
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-23 19:24 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:04 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:43 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-24 11:22 -0600
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-24 15:16 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 16:10 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 12:19 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-24 19:31 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 12:40 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 13:46 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-25 18:14 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback russotto@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) - 2012-03-26 00:13 +0000
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-26 17:44 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:20 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:33 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-25 07:45 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-25 13:07 -0600
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 19:02 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 20:26 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 21:59 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback News <News@Group.Post> - 2012-03-24 12:42 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-24 11:09 -0600
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:45 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-23 20:00 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:43 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 10:40 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-23 22:42 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-24 08:21 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-24 18:29 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-25 09:36 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2012-03-25 13:56 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback "Thomas R. Kettler" <tkettler@blownfuse.net> - 2012-03-21 11:08 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-20 20:34 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 07:49 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 09:25 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 11:02 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 09:20 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-21 16:02 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 14:24 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> - 2012-03-21 16:38 -0600
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 16:59 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:32 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-23 14:16 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:11 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 18:49 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-22 00:45 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Steve Hix <sehix@NOSPAMmac.comINVALID> - 2012-03-21 23:09 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 07:51 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-22 08:28 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:28 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 10:10 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2012-03-21 19:09 -0500
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-21 08:23 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-22 16:34 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-22 13:45 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> - 2012-03-20 12:21 +0100
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com (Helpful Harry) - 2012-03-20 08:12 +1200
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 16:49 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:37 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 16:56 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:08 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:22 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 17:46 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 14:54 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 18:17 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:00 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:23 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2012-03-19 19:26 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 17:55 -0700
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2012-03-19 22:14 -0400
Re: Apple to Pay Dividend, Plans $10 Billion Buyback Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2012-03-19 20:58 -0700
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
| From | "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-25 14:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dfmanno-0850DA.14104725032012@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #22851 |
In article <CMudndZko83oi_LSnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > The law that the GOP wants to put into effect would require the > > > > employee have a note from her doctor declaring that the prescription > > > > is not for birth control. > > > > > > > FOR the insurance company. > > > > Required by the employer. > > But the original suggestion was that the employer would some how > know about it. They wouldn't, so there is no privacy issue as was being > raised. You're lying, again. From the bill: > Z. NOTWITHSTANDING SUBSECTION Y OF THIS SECTION, A CONTRACT DOES NOT FAIL TO > MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTION Y OF THIS SECTION IF THE CONTRACT'S > FAILURE TO PROVIDE COVERAGE OF SPECIFIC ITEMS OR SERVICES REQUIRED UNDER > SUBSECTION Y OF THIS SECTION IS BECAUSE PROVIDING OR PAYING FOR COVERAGE OF > THE SPECIFIC ITEMS OR SERVICES IS CONTRARY TO THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF THE > EMPLOYER, SPONSOR, ISSUER, CORPORATION OR OTHER ENTITY OFFERING THE PLAN OR > IS BECAUSE THE COVERAGE IS CONTRARY TO THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF THE PURCHASER > OR BENEFICIARY OF THE COVERAGE. IF AN OBJECTION TRIGGERS THIS SUBSECTION, A > WRITTEN AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CORPORATION STATING THE OBJECTION. > THE CORPORATION SHALL RETAIN THE AFFIDAVIT FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT > AND ANY RENEWALS OF THE CONTRACT. THIS SUBSECTION SHALL NOT EXCLUDE COVERAGE > FOR PRESCRIPTION CONTRACEPTIVE METHODS ORDERED BY A HEALTH CARE PROVIDER WITH > PRESCRIPTIVE AUTHORITY FOR MEDICAL INDICATIONS OTHER THAN FOR CONTRACEPTIVE, > ABORTIFACIENT, ABORTION OR STERILIZATION PURPOSES. A CORPORATION, EMPLOYER, > SPONSOR, ISSUER OR OTHER ENTITY OFFERING THE PLAN MAY STATE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS > OR MORAL CONVICTIONS IN ITS AFFIDAVIT THAT REQUIRE THE SUBSCRIBER TO FIRST > PAY FOR THE PRESCRIPTION AND THEN SUBMIT A CLAIM TO THE CORPORATION ALONG > WITH EVIDENCE THAT THE PRESCRIPTION IS NOT IN WHOLE OR IN PART FOR A PURPOSE > COVERED BY THE OBJECTION. A CORPORATION MAY CHARGE AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR > HANDLING THESE CLAIMS. <http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/text/596074> It's saying that to overcome an employer's objection to contraception coverage, the employee has to show that it's not being used for birth control. She has to submit a claim to the employer. -- D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. (George Carlin)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 15:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4f6e1bce$0$2207$c3e8da3$88b277c5@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #22769 |
Michelle Steiner wrote: > The law that the GOP wants to put into effect would require the employee > have a note from her doctor declaring that the prescription is not for > birth control. Interesting. Right wing folks in the USA often laugh at our "socialised medecine" in Canada where we allegedly can't choose our doctors and whatever other false accusations they make. (in fact, because it is a unified system, you can go to any hospital and see any doctor) It is ironic that these very people now support an employer's rights to decide what doctors and what precedures/medeines they are allowed to have.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-22 23:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <timmcn-3B7315.23025822032012@news.iphouse.com> |
| In reply to | #22648 |
In article <michelle-38A25D.13565222032012@news.eternal-september.org>, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > In article <XZydnT2wa7jy7_bSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@earthlink.com>, > Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > There are methods, well documented methods, for a person to > > "donate" to the general fund of the Treasury. I would be much more > > respectful of WB's position if he put his money where his mouth and > > voluntarily whatever he thinks he should be paying. Until them he > > is only trying to impose his outlook on others, > > Only Republicans should be able to try to impose their outlook on > others, right? > > > and taxing by what offends one is a lousy policy. > > But when the GOP does it, it's OK, right? You have to remember what motivates the GOP true believers: the unshakeable belief that they are right. Beyond all doubt. There is no question. Anyone who questions them hates America. There is one simple answer for all of the country's problems. Anything we define as a problem is a problem and nothing else is a problem. If you think something else is a problem then you are obviously hate America. America was a paradise in the past until the liberals fucked it up. Nothing the conservatives have done has ever been wrong. Even when conservative policies had bad outcomes, it was the liberals' fault. When liberal policies turned out well, it was an accident- but then, liberal policies have never, ever turned out well. The energy crisis was Jimmy Carter's fault. The Democrats hate America. Etc. Repeat to yourself ad nauseum. -- And wackiness ensues...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-23 00:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dridnXjlp-1eYvbSnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22664 |
In article <timmcn-3B7315.23025822032012@news.iphouse.com>, Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > I > You have to remember what motivates the GOP true believers: the > unshakeable belief that they are right. Beyond all doubt. There is no > question. Anyone who questions them hates America. Sounds a lot like Dem true belivers, too. Just different set of responses that are Right and True. And if you don't like their ideas you are a hater or other some such perjorative. Two sides, same coin. -- People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, until patients started presenting with sexually acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-23 09:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <CB91EF52.83E23%ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
| In reply to | #22668 |
On 3/22/12 11:44 PM, in article dridnXjlp-1eYvbSnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@earthlink.com, "Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <timmcn-3B7315.23025822032012@news.iphouse.com>, > Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > >> I >> You have to remember what motivates the GOP true believers: the >> unshakeable belief that they are right. Beyond all doubt. There is no >> question. Anyone who questions them hates America. > Sounds a lot like Dem true belivers, too. Just different set of > responses that are Right and True. And if you don't like their ideas you > are a hater or other some such perjorative. Two sides, same coin. Or "Pot, meet Kettle" But the response will be "NOT ME!!!!" And the beat goes on.......
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-23 22:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dfmanno-EF0F6D.22484723032012@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #22640 |
In article <XZydnT2wa7jy7_bSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <f72s39-7qg.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> > wrote: > > > On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:23:47 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: > > > > > Or Warren Buffet who pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than > > > his secretary does. > > > > Warren Buffet himself pointed that one out and is, I gather, a supporter > > of more taxes for the rich. > > There are methods, well documented methods, for a person to "donate" to > the general fund of the Treasury. I would be much more respectful of > WB's position if he put his money where his mouth and voluntarily > whatever he thinks he should be paying. Until them he is only trying to > impose his outlook on others, and taxing by what offends one is a lousy > policy. The deficit is just a little bit larger than one man's voluntary gift can take care of. The rich in this country have enjoyed a tax holiday for 11 years. The party is over, and they'll just have to live with the hangover. -- D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. (George Carlin)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 08:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5MudnSCBE-mXX_DSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22715 |
In article <dfmanno-EF0F6D.22484723032012@news.albasani.net>, "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote: > > > The rich in this country have enjoyed a tax holiday for 11 years. The > party is over, and they'll just have to live with the hangover. Yep, as I noted earlier their %age of income (in deference to your sensibilities in the other thread-grin) taxes paid has increased since the mid-80s while the %age had gone down and/or disappeared in the bottom half. Their effective tax rate has gone down, but on a percentage basis, much less than the hoi poloi. Some tax holiday. -- People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, until patients started presenting with sexually acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 12:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dfmanno-5D617D.12034624032012@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #22745 |
In article <5MudnSCBE-mXX_DSnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <dfmanno-EF0F6D.22484723032012@news.albasani.net>, > "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote: > > > The rich in this country have enjoyed a tax holiday for 11 years. The > > party is over, and they'll just have to live with the hangover. > > Yep, as I noted earlier their %age of income (in deference to your > sensibilities in the other thread-grin) taxes paid has increased since > the mid-80s while the %age had gone down and/or disappeared in the > bottom half. Their effective tax rate has gone down, but on a percentage > basis, much less than the hoi poloi. Some tax holiday. The share of taxes paid by the 1% has increased because their share of income has skyrocketed. -- D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. (George Carlin)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 12:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <XrOdnRfpqKQ4ZPDSnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22754 |
In article <dfmanno-5D617D.12034624032012@news.albasani.net>, "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote: > > The share of taxes paid by the 1% has increased because their share of > income has skyrocketed. Read the earlier post, there were some IRS figures that indicated that their share of income taxes has increased by about the same %age as their increase income. But then the IRS probably cooked the books. Besides, I would think you of all people would think that "the share of taxes paid by the 1% has increased because of their share of income has skyrocketed" would be a good thing. -- People thought cybersex was a safe alternative, until patients started presenting with sexually acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 11:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <CB935BAE.83FCE%ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
| In reply to | #22715 |
On 3/23/12 9:48 PM, in article dfmanno-EF0F6D.22484723032012@news.albasani.net, "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote: > In article <XZydnT2wa7jy7_bSnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@earthlink.com>, > Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> In article <f72s39-7qg.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:23:47 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: >>> >>>> Or Warren Buffet who pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than >>>> his secretary does. >>> >>> Warren Buffet himself pointed that one out and is, I gather, a supporter >>> of more taxes for the rich. >> >> There are methods, well documented methods, for a person to "donate" to >> the general fund of the Treasury. I would be much more respectful of >> WB's position if he put his money where his mouth and voluntarily >> whatever he thinks he should be paying. Until them he is only trying to >> impose his outlook on others, and taxing by what offends one is a lousy >> policy. > > The deficit is just a little bit larger than one man's voluntary gift > can take care of. > > The rich in this country have enjoyed a tax holiday for 11 years. The > party is over, and they'll just have to live with the hangover. "Tax the rich, feed the poor Till we run out, rich no more..." Those EVIL BASTARDS!!!! Class Envy worked for the Dims last couple of elections. I don't see it happening again. The wool has been sheared....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-24 12:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lqo049-87o.ln1@news.sture.ch> |
| In reply to | #22640 |
On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:41:48 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote: > In article <f72s39-7qg.ln1@news.sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> > wrote: > >> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:23:47 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: >> >> > Or Warren Buffet who pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes >> > than his secretary does. >> >> Warren Buffet himself pointed that one out and is, I gather, a >> supporter of more taxes for the rich. > > There are methods, well documented methods, for a person to "donate" to > the general fund of the Treasury. I would be much more respectful of > WB's position if he put his money where his mouth and voluntarily > whatever he thinks he should be paying. I think you are missing the point. Only a madman would want to be the only contributor IMHO. > Until them he is only trying to impose his outlook on others, and > taxing by what offends one is a lousy policy. OK I can see that argument. -- Paul Sture
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-22 16:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <jJidnZZoo_UUFPbSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #22636 |
On 2012-03-22 12:56 , Paul Sture wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:23:47 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
>
>> Or Warren Buffet who pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than
>> his secretary does.
>
> Warren Buffet himself pointed that one out and is, I gather, a supporter
> of more taxes for the rich.
I don't think he is aiming for the rich to pay a huge amount of taxes
just that there is no valid excuse for some of the rich paying so little
in taxes. His situation (low salary, high investment income) is
particularly odd. (Note he also wrote an opinion piece some years ago
regarding property taxes being out of kilter).
Romney makes a lot (all?) of their (family) income on his investments
and that constituted the bulk of his personal income. Since it was cap
gains, which are taxed low in the US, their (couple) personal income tax
(14%) was quite low v. the income. ($3M on 21.6M income (2010)).
The Obamas, in the year before he became President (2008) paid a lot
more in taxes (32% on 2.6M) on their combined income, because it was not
investment income - they actually had to work for it - and were taxed
more in consequence, while not being anywhere near as wealthy as the
Romneys.
========================================================================
The lesson is clear for the US: Reach critical mass and invest.
Then contribute to PAC/SuperPAC's that want low taxation for the wealthy.
========================================================================
From the Canadian perspective, it seems to me that in the US:
- cap gains taxes are too low
- corporate taxes are too high
- personal income tax is too high for the middle class,
too low for upper income earners
- state/county tax systems make the whole very complex
- fuel taxes are set in fixed amounts per unit sold (x cents per
gallon), this ignores inflation.
- loopholes in the tax code are too plenty and favour large corporations
- the tax code is grossly complex and itself a drag on the economy.
A look at the GINI index shows that the US is seriously tilted.
(Not that Canada is a taxpayer's paradise).
--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 09:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <timmcn-3FE959.09131621032012@news.iphouse.com> |
| In reply to | #22583 |
In article <CB8F37F3.83C08%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>, George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 3/20/12 7:50 PM, in article > michelle-1D51A2.17502720032012@news.eternal-september.org, "Michelle > Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > > > In article <CB8E8BFB.83B93%ghost_topper@hotmail.com>, > > George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> BTW, it is interesting that most of Apple's petty cash is locked > >>> up outside of the USA. Repatriating foreign cash would have > >>> costly tax implications. So today's announcement only touches US > >>> based cash. > >> > >> You can thank the current Resident for that. > > > > yeah, right; that policy has been in effect through more GOP > > administrations than Democratic ones. > > > Bush tax cuts at the beginning of the century reduced taxes on > investments. Obama wants them to go away. When thy do the top rate of > tax on long-term capital gainsmeaning any profits on shares or other > assets held for more than a yearwould rise from 15% to 20%. On > qualified dividends, it would rise from a maximum of 15% to your > marginal income tax rate. > > >> The same one that will tax the dividends that we are talking about > >> at the same rate as ordinary income > > > > Which is what it should be. Why should it be that the more money > > you make, the lower your tax rate should be? > > > > I'm not saying that. But what about the 48% who pay NO taxes. Is THAT > fair? Like GE, for example, which not only paid $0 in income taxes on $10 Billion in profits, they got a further $4.7 BILLION in taxpayer dollars as tax credits and rebates. Oh, wait, you meant the bottom half of the 99% who- BTW- DO pay taxes on their income contrary to right wing lies and distortions. Yes, that's fair. Taxes are paid on the movement of money and wealth in our society, so the people who get the lion's share of the money and wealth ay the lion's share of the taxes. If rich people want to pay less in taxes, they can pay the people who generate that wealth for them (i.e., the workers) more. There are almost no rich people in America who generate their own wealth- they got rich by figuring out how to have a lot of other people generate wealth for them and then not sharing. What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul. Something that the Republican Party, in its gleeful support of rampant greed, forgets: Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25. In case you don't recall the passage and don't want to look it up, Jesus states "Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Of course, if you're an atheist you won't buy that but the GOP uses pandering to Christianity in order to remain in power so this is something they *ought* to take into account in their policy initiatives. But they don't because the real god of the GOP is Mammon. All that fake piety is just offensive. > But that is another subject. > > >> even though you already paid taxes on you income once to *buy* the > >> stock that pays the dividends. > > > > You pay taxes on income that you use to buy goods that you pay > > sales tax on. > > So investors, who are trying to provide for themselves in their old > age and not be a burden to the public or children, should be taxed > twice on their wages and earnings? Bullshit, George. First, they were NOT taxed on the income they made if the stock was purchased through a tax deferred retirement program, which is how *most* Americans buy stocks. They are taxed when they withdraw the money from the account after retirement, paying taxes once on both the money they earned and the value accrued between buying the stock and withdrawing the money. And, since they have a measure of control over how fast they withdrawn that money they get some control over what tax bracket they fall into. Second, they were taxed on the income at the time of earning it but not taxed on the accrued value if they purchased stock through a Roth IRA program. And, since they have a measure of control over how fast they withdrawn that money they get some control over what tax bracket they fall into. Third, they were not taxed at the time of earning if they invested that money into a traditional IRA and only pay taxes at the time of withdrawal- so they are taxed once. And, since they have a measure of control over how fast they withdrawn that money they get some control over what tax bracket they fall into. This covers the majority of investors in America. The relatively few who buy significant amounts of stocks from taxed income paid their taxes on that income. They do not pay taxes on that money again- they pay taxes on the dividends they receive from those stocks (which is NEW money) and on capital gains when they sell the stock (which is also NEW money). > OK, then tell me how "fair" it is to not credit anymore than $3000 > loss on investments gone bad in a year. Tell that to the people who > lost their ass to Madeoff and Stanford. The losses to Madoff etc. were the result of greed and criminal action, not the problems of tax laws. A lot of those investors knew what they were getting into, and all of them should have considered the "too good to be true" aspect of it. Isn't it the conservatives who keep telling us that it's not the job of the government to compensate us for our bad choices and decisions? -- And wackiness ensues...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 12:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kc2dnSxFEdTgnffSnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22586 |
In article <timmcn-3FE959.09131621032012@news.iphouse.com>,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> Oh, wait, you meant the bottom half of the 99% who- BTW- DO pay taxes on
> their income contrary to right wing lies and distortions. Yes, that's
> fair. Taxes are paid on the movement of money and wealth in our
> society, so the people who get the lion's share of the money and wealth
> ay the lion's share of the taxes. If rich people want to pay less in
> taxes, they can pay the people who generate that wealth for them (i.e.,
> the workers) more. There are almost no rich people in America who
> generate their own wealth- they got rich by figuring out how to have a
> lot of other people generate wealth for them and then not sharing.
You might want to check in with the IRS. Their stats would tend to
disagree with you.
>
> What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48%
> combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a
> price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul.
Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top
1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in
2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time
the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same
timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48%
increase in taxes paid.
This is not the only stat that indicates the top 1% pay a higher
%age of total income taxes than they have % of total income (IRS: Total
income tax shares 1980-2009 and AGI shares 1980-2009).
While the average tax rate (% of AGI paid income taxes) has fallen
for the top 1% has fallen from 26.42% to 24.01%, the tax rate for the
bottom has positively plummeted from 5.09% to 1.85%.
Actually increase in disparity is largely the result of tax policies
put in place, ironically enough, because of a concern in Congress about
executive pay being too high. They effectively capped the actual salary
a person is paid to manage the company (if you look at the 10-Ks this is
largely the same today) by saying no more than that could be deducted.
But, in order to "align the interests of the executives with those of
shareholders", the tax favored stock options and bonuses.
Three things immediately occurred. (1). The executives were paid
for managing the stock price instead of the company---don't think it was
happenstance that within two years the first book cooking scandal
erupted (2), they were being paid orders of magnitude over what even the
most captive board would have had the balls to pay them in salary, (3)
the concentration of wealth accelerated-- the ratio of honcho pay to
average pay in a company had bounced around close to 30-35 times since
the 40s. This came into being and the ratio shot almost straight to
around 350 times.
>
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 16:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <CB8FAC97.83C87%ghost_topper@hotmail.com> |
| In reply to | #22595 |
On 3/21/12 11:23 AM, in article kc2dnSxFEdTgnffSnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com, "Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <timmcn-3FE959.09131621032012@news.iphouse.com>, > Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > >> >> Oh, wait, you meant the bottom half of the 99% who- BTW- DO pay taxes on >> their income contrary to right wing lies and distortions. Yes, that's >> fair. Taxes are paid on the movement of money and wealth in our >> society, so the people who get the lion's share of the money and wealth >> ay the lion's share of the taxes. If rich people want to pay less in >> taxes, they can pay the people who generate that wealth for them (i.e., >> the workers) more. There are almost no rich people in America who >> generate their own wealth- they got rich by figuring out how to have a >> lot of other people generate wealth for them and then not sharing. > You might want to check in with the IRS. Their stats would tend to > disagree with you. > >> >> What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% >> combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a >> price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul. > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48% > increase in taxes paid. > This is not the only stat that indicates the top 1% pay a higher > %age of total income taxes than they have % of total income (IRS: Total > income tax shares 1980-2009 and AGI shares 1980-2009). > While the average tax rate (% of AGI paid income taxes) has fallen > for the top 1% has fallen from 26.42% to 24.01%, the tax rate for the > bottom has positively plummeted from 5.09% to 1.85%. > > Actually increase in disparity is largely the result of tax policies > put in place, ironically enough, because of a concern in Congress about > executive pay being too high. They effectively capped the actual salary > a person is paid to manage the company (if you look at the 10-Ks this is > largely the same today) by saying no more than that could be deducted. > But, in order to "align the interests of the executives with those of > shareholders", the tax favored stock options and bonuses. > Three things immediately occurred. (1). The executives were paid > for managing the stock price instead of the company---don't think it was > happenstance that within two years the first book cooking scandal > erupted (2), they were being paid orders of magnitude over what even the > most captive board would have had the balls to pay them in salary, (3) > the concentration of wealth accelerated-- the ratio of honcho pay to > average pay in a company had bounced around close to 30-35 times since > the 40s. This came into being and the ratio shot almost straight to > around 350 times. > > >> True. So true! BTW: Nice Sig, LOL!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 19:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <timmcn-3D7272.19304821032012@news.iphouse.com> |
| In reply to | #22595 |
In article <kc2dnSxFEdTgnffSnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <timmcn-3FE959.09131621032012@news.iphouse.com>, > Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > > > > > Oh, wait, you meant the bottom half of the 99% who- BTW- DO pay taxes on > > their income contrary to right wing lies and distortions. Yes, that's > > fair. Taxes are paid on the movement of money and wealth in our > > society, so the people who get the lion's share of the money and wealth > > ay the lion's share of the taxes. If rich people want to pay less in > > taxes, they can pay the people who generate that wealth for them (i.e., > > the workers) more. There are almost no rich people in America who > > generate their own wealth- they got rich by figuring out how to have a > > lot of other people generate wealth for them and then not sharing. > > You might want to check in with the IRS. Their stats would tend to > disagree with you. Every person earning a wage in the US pays taxes on their income. Do you not look at your own pay stubs? We all pay the Social Security tax and we all pay the Medicare tax. But its truthier to say "half the population doesn't pay income tax" 'cuz then we make those poor little rich people look so much more heroic for being greedy. > > What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% > > combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a > > price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul. > > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48% > increase in taxes paid. The top 20% of Americans get 93% of the wealth, George. But they pay less than 93% of the taxes, effectively getting a massive transfer of wealth from everyone else. Hell, $800,000,000,000 of the Bush tax cuts is sitting in the national debt, having failed to stimulate the economy enough to pay for themselves (which Uncle George promised us they would do). Another transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich. Uncle George also started two unwinnable wars without paying for them- that's in the national debt. Somewhere between $804 billion and $1 trillion dollars just for Iraq so far and a total price tag of up to $3 trillion once all the long-term costs are factored in. Bush gave hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to various cronies like Halliburton via warring. He cost up to 500,000 innocent Iraqis their lives not to mention 4486 American soldiers killed and 33,184 officially wounded (but the real number is probably three times that). Their long-term health care costs will be up to $700 billion. And how are we going to make that right and balance the budget and reduce our debt? We're going to fuck over the 99% by killing Social Security and Medicare (which would mean most Americans would literally never be able to retire until they are simply to decrepit to work any longer). Cheers, dude. Gotta love GOP. More than happy to look you in the eye while they stab you in the back. -- And wackiness ensues...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 20:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4sidnTs6gs275ffSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22620 |
In article <timmcn-3D7272.19304821032012@news.iphouse.com>,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> Every person earning a wage in the US pays taxes on their income. Do
> you not look at your own pay stubs? We all pay the Social Security tax
> and we all pay the Medicare tax. But its truthier to say "half the
> population doesn't pay income tax" 'cuz then we make those poor little
> rich people look so much more heroic for being greedy.
Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are
payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since
instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get
enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax,
thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included.
>
> > > What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48%
> > > combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a
> > > price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul.
> >
> > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top
> > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in
> > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time
> > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same
> > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48%
> > increase in taxes paid.
>
> The top 20% of Americans get 93% of the wealth, George. But they pay
> less than 93% of the taxes, effectively getting a massive transfer of
> wealth from everyone else.
Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the
possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side
issues shall we?
>
> Hell, $800,000,000,000 of the Bush tax cuts is sitting in the national
> debt, having failed to stimulate the economy enough to pay for
> themselves (which Uncle George promised us they would do). Another
> transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich.
DId not happen either. If you look at the actual revenues, they
went up after the first year. If you look at the scoring from the Joint
Committee on Taxation (which was the model used by the Congress when
they voted on the decreases) the revenue increase was even higher than
what the foresaw BEFORE the cut. Go to the website for Joint Committee
on Taxation and get their final report and then go to the Stat Abstract
and compare that with what actually happened.
>
> And how are we going to make that right and balance the budget and
> reduce our debt? We're going to fuck over the 99% by killing Social
> Security and Medicare (which would mean most Americans would literally
> never be able to retire until they are simply to decrepit to work any
> longer).
Which is going to happen any way since both sides have LONG known
that they were increasing benefits much quicker than they were the taxes
used to pay for it. When (not if) SS collapses it will be one of the
most stirring bipartisan achievements in decades.
>
> Cheers, dude. Gotta love GOP. More than happy to look you in the eye
> while they stab you in the back.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-21 22:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <timmcn-81CC31.22284321032012@news.iphouse.com> |
| In reply to | #22623 |
In article <4sidnTs6gs275ffSnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <timmcn-3D7272.19304821032012@news.iphouse.com>, > Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote: > > > > > > Every person earning a wage in the US pays taxes on their income. Do > > you not look at your own pay stubs? We all pay the Social Security tax > > and we all pay the Medicare tax. But its truthier to say "half the > > population doesn't pay income tax" 'cuz then we make those poor little > > rich people look so much more heroic for being greedy. > > Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are > payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since > instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get > enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax, > thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included. Taxes on my income are not income taxes. Frog's hair duly split. > > > > What's not fair is that roughly 500 people earn as much as that 48% > > > > combined- which is about 150,000,000 Americans. Greed comes with a > > > > price, George. One of those prices is taxes. The other is your soul. > > > > > > Although at the same time, the total income tax shares of the top > > > 1% went from 24.81% of federal income taxes paid in '87 to 36.73% in > > > 2009 while the bottom half went from 6.07% to 2.25%. At the same time > > > the top 1% INCOME shares when from 12.32% to 16.93% over the same > > > timeframe. There was a 36% in income at the same time there was a 48% > > > increase in taxes paid. > > > > The top 20% of Americans get 93% of the wealth, George. But they pay > > less than 93% of the taxes, effectively getting a massive transfer of > > wealth from everyone else. > > Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the > possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side > issues shall we? Property taxes? Luxury taxes? Excise taxes? > > Hell, $800,000,000,000 of the Bush tax cuts is sitting in the national > > debt, having failed to stimulate the economy enough to pay for > > themselves (which Uncle George promised us they would do). Another > > transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich. > > DId not happen either. If you look at the actual revenues, they > went up after the first year. If you look at the scoring from the Joint > Committee on Taxation (which was the model used by the Congress when > they voted on the decreases) the revenue increase was even higher than > what the foresaw BEFORE the cut. Go to the website for Joint Committee > on Taxation and get their final report and then go to the Stat Abstract > and compare that with what actually happened. Total recapture of the tax cut was about $200 billion. But hey, I got my taxes lowered by $50! That makes it all worthwhile. > > And how are we going to make that right and balance the budget and > > reduce our debt? We're going to fuck over the 99% by killing Social > > Security and Medicare (which would mean most Americans would literally > > never be able to retire until they are simply to decrepit to work any > > longer). > > Which is going to happen any way since both sides have LONG known > that they were increasing benefits much quicker than they were the taxes > used to pay for it. When (not if) SS collapses it will be one of the > most stirring bipartisan achievements in decades. Social Security is easily fixable. Except the Republicans just plain refuse to do it. Remedial reading: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-to-nowhere/2012 /03/21/gIQAe8qYRS_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-hurts-the-poor/ 2012/03/20/gIQAX73LQS_story.html?tid=pm_pop> > > Cheers, dude. Gotta love GOP. More than happy to look you in the eye > > while they stab you in the back. -- And wackiness ensues...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-22 08:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <W9CdnQ-gJ70zifbSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22626 |
In article <timmcn-81CC31.22284321032012@news.iphouse.com>,
Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are
> > payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since
> > instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get
> > enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax,
> > thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included.
>
> Taxes on my income are not income taxes. Frog's hair duly split.
Not really. The enabling legislation for SS makes the
distinction. Besides when was the last time the SS taxes went down?
> > Of course we have no taxes on wealth and never have had, with the
> > possible exception of inheritance taxes. But hey, let's bring in side
> > issues shall we?
>
> Property taxes? Luxury taxes? Excise taxes?
Property taxes aren't wealth taxes. What are luxury taxes? Excise
taxes hardly qualify either since they include things like the taxes on
phone lines and other necessities.
>
> >
> Total recapture of the tax cut was about $200 billion. But hey, I got
> my taxes lowered by $50! That makes it all worthwhile.
Sorry, I don't understand the point.
>
> Social Security is easily fixable. Except the Republicans just plain
> refuse to do it.
>
> Remedial reading:
>
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-to-nowhere/2012
> /03/21/gIQAe8qYRS_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop>
>
Not sure why this is remedial reading on the subject since it
excoriates the plan w/o one mention of why it is wrong and no mention of
how to fix SS or MCare.
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-hurts-the-poor/
> 2012/03/20/gIQAX73LQS_story.html?tid=pm_pop>
Have to register for this one so I can't read it.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-22 08:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <yK6dnbQA2Kn7ivbSnZ2dnUVZ_r6dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #22632 |
In article <W9CdnQ-gJ70zifbSnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@earthlink.com>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <timmcn-81CC31.22284321032012@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> > > Which they get back. SS and MCare are not income taxes, they are
> > > payroll taxes and have been a whole other kettle of fish since
> > > instituted. But it is also truthier to note that the bottom 40% get
> > > enough back in credits that it pays for most of the SS and MCare tax,
> > > thus the negative rates of taxes even when these are included.
> >
> > Taxes on my income are not income taxes. Frog's hair duly split.
> Not really. The enabling legislation for SS makes the
> distinction. Besides when was the last time the SS taxes went down?
>
>
BTW: As I mentioned, the tax credits for the lower 40% (expanded
greatly under the Bush tax cuts, something ignored by those who call it
only for the rich) balance out the SS/Mcare taxes for nearly half of the
taxpaying population.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web