RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT

RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:10:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji My pure just danced ... While you were shitting yourself and vomiting on your table, you missed the fact that you were responding to the wrong person. epiphiny43 has granted us the best post, by far, in the latter part of this thread. Go and sit in the bath tub, boy. Whatever epiphany said is not relevant. Show me your post where you said taxes were passed through just as other operating expenses or even asked me if that wasn't true. Quit dancing and just give me the post number.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:18:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird I didn't say you could come out of the bathroom yet. Stay in there, boy. You stink to high heaven. You've danced, you've used a long socialist aluminum hat screed, you've spouted about three semesters of accountancy making you wise, you've suggested someone else said what you meant to say better. You can avoid all of that sort of thing by just listing the post number where you said, or asked me, that it was a pass through just like other operating costs. It's simple, it's in a post you can name or you're lying. Oh, and you called me names and told me to take a bath because I stink. Is that that fart smell again that comes when your lights and sirens go off? Just list a post.

Edwird -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:21:47 PM)
Don't forget Monsanto -> corn, soybeans, wheat, etc., all patented. Not quite the 'perfectly competitive market' used as example in class.

Edwird -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:28:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji You've danced, you've used a long socialist aluminum hat screed, ... You're vomiting again. Just stay in the tub and let it all out.

thompsonx -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:33:17 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji God, reading comprehension again. That's Ed's thesis. I asked him to explain it. I see, though, you're just as confused by what he said. How could I be confused by anything he said since my discussion is with you and not he. I said the tax was a cost of doing business that is passed through to people like you and me. No one disputes that. Are you wearing your university of dumbass hoodie again? That it's a hidden tax the government places on people. No it is not, it is a tax the government places on that corporation. That the corporation seeks to avoid the tax by passing it along to the consumer is quite another thing. Of course government costs money. But, corporations don't pay for that, they pass that cost on to people as the cost of doing business. While extoling the virtues of capitalism???how is that possible? Wouldn't a capitalist see this as an opportunity to gain market share? He could undercut his competition by the amount of the tax. Why does it not work that way?[8\|] Think about it Thompson. When you go to the butt hut and pay $100 for head. Then, say, the government comes in and charges them an extra tax. That is not how butt huts work. Yes the fed has tried and been unsuccessful. The state has a contractul agreement so this is a non starter but we have a case like this in nevada. I am sure you are not unaware of two buck chuck from trader joe. If not then look it up. It is now 2.49 but I digress. In nevada it is three buck chuck (actually $3.49)because the state put a $1 tax on it. They did not tax the corporation they taxed the consumer directly. When you say that the corporation cannot write the tax off as an operating expense sorta begs the question of why should you be able to write it off??? it is not a cost of doing busines it is a tax?

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:34:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwird quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji You've danced, you've used a long socialist aluminum hat screed, ... You're vomiting again. Just stay in the tub and let it all out. You're a lier wearing an aluminum hat and you can't list a post because there is none. You are the DUT filled with images in your head that are fantasy. You've surrendered the point. When you lied that you asked me if the tax wasn't just a pass through like other expenses you were lying and pretending that was what you said all along. You're really not worth listening to, even though you set yourself up as an expert.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:35:38 PM)
Did I spell anything wrong in the last statement or can you read it? If I did, I'll say it again and spell it properly.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:48:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Nnanji That is not how butt huts work. Yes the fed has tried and been unsuccessful. The state has a contractul agreement so this is a non starter but we have a case like this in nevada. I am sure you are not unaware of two buck chuck from trader joe. If not then look it up. It is now 2.49 but I digress. In nevada it is three buck chuck (actually $3.49)because the state put a $1 tax on it. They did not tax the corporation they taxed the consumer directly. When you say that the corporation cannot write the tax off as an operating expense sorta begs the question of why should you be able to write it off??? it is not a cost of doing busines it is a tax? Good for you Thompson. Maybe Ed will read this. You're arguing my point. I never said that a corporation writes it off. I said a corporation considers it a cost of business and passes the cost on to the consumer. You've just given an example of that. Stores in Nevada add the $1.00 tax on two buck chuck to the cost of the wine and let you pay an extra dollar a bottle. I'm pleased you've seen my point and shown others on here an example. Thank you.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 10:55:41 PM)
Oh, and Thompson, if there are no taxes at all on that bottle of two buck chuck, you'd probably pay about a dollar for it. The extra two fifty is all tax going to pay for your F35's. But, it's you paying it at the store, not the winery that makes it or the store that sells it.

thompsonx -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 11:02:23 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji ORIGINAL: thompsonx That is not how butt huts work. Yes the fed has tried and been unsuccessful. The state has a contractul agreement so this is a non starter but we have a case like this in nevada. I am sure you are not unaware of two buck chuck from trader joe. If not then look it up. It is now 2.49 but I digress. In nevada it is three buck chuck (actually $3.49)because the state put a $1 tax on it. They did not tax the corporation they taxed the consumer directly. When you say that the corporation cannot write the tax off as an operating expense sorta begs the question of why should you be able to write it off??? it is not a cost of doing busines it is a tax? Good for you Thompson. Why don't you take your condecension and stick it up your ass[:D] I never said that a corporation writes it off. I said a corporation considers it a cost of business and passes the cost on to the consumer. Which is called price fixing and colusion both of which are felonies. You've just given an example of that. Stores in Nevada add the $1.00 tax on two buck chuck to the cost of the wine and let you pay an extra dollar a bottle. I specifically said that was not true. I said the state of nevada put a $1 tax on the consumer not the corporation. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. I'm pleased you've seen my point and shown others on here an example. You must have your head up your ass if that is what you see. I pointed out that your assessment of the corporation was a felony and counter to all stated capitalist principles.

thompsonx -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 11:08:42 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji Oh, and Thompson, if there are no taxes at all on that bottle of two buck chuck, you'd probably pay about a dollar for it. Two buck chuck is jug wine, grown in the san joquin valley and bottled in a "name" winery up north. The bottle cork and lable cost more than the wine in the bottle. The extra two fifty is all tax going to pay for your F35's. But, it's you paying it at the store, not the winery that makes it or the store that sells it. Actully no. The major part of that two fifty go to enrich the fellow who bought the name of the charles shaw winery and his distributor trader joe.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 11:17:44 PM)
So...the state went to everyone's home and asked how much two buck chuck they were going to buy and assessed the tax? No they passed a law that said each bottle of wine would now cost a dollar more? just like my proposed transaction fee of ten dollars for getting head, the state put a tax on the stores for the wine and rather than accepting that tax the stores passed it to the consumers because the store isn't going to lose money to pay the government. I haven't the faintest idea why you think a corporation passing it's costs on to consumers is price fixing or collusion. Their not going to give you free stuff. If it costs to ship they figure the cost of shipping into the price. If it costs for raw materials, that is figured into the price. If the government costs them taxes, that is calculated into the price they charge the consumer. And, while I admit that my statement was condescending, it was also meant for a couple of others on here. I'll keep your request for me to stick it up my ass in mind in the future.

thompsonx -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/21/2016 11:42:48 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji So...the state went to everyone's home and asked how much two buck chuck they were going to buy and assessed the tax? Jesus you are phoquing stupid. No they passed a law that said each bottle of wine would now cost a dollar more? That is exactly what they did. just like my proposed transaction fee of ten dollars for getting head, the state put a tax on the stores Try it again dumbass the tax was on the consumer not the corporation just like sales tax is a tax on the consumer not the corporation. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. for the wine and rather than accepting that tax the stores passed it to the consumers because the store isn't going to lose money to pay the government. The state did not ask the store for any money dumbass. They asked the consumer for the money. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. I haven't the faintest idea why you think a corporation passing it's costs on to consumers is price fixing or collusion. Because the corporate tax is not a cost of doing business it is a tax on the profits of the corporation. If no one siezes the opportunity to gain market share by paying the tax, which would allow them to sell their product below market, as they are legally bound to do, that would be prima facia evidence of price fixing and colusion. Their not going to give you free stuff. They were making a profit before the tax was imposed. If it costs to ship they figure the cost of shipping into the price. If it costs for raw materials, that is figured into the price. If the government costs them taxes, that is calculated into the price they charge the consumer. Illeglly And, while I admit that my statement was condescending, it was also meant for a couple of others on here. Then address your condescending bullshit to them. I'll keep your request for me to stick it up my ass in mind in the future. It was hardly a request.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 7:00:44 AM)
Now that Ed's shown what a delusional lier he is I wonder if he'll show up here again. Maybe VML will bring another 1970's "science" study.

Lucylastic -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 7:04:28 AM)
Well, you keep coming back , why shouldnt anyone else? Silly man.

Nnanji -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 7:17:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Well, you keep coming back , why shouldnt anyone else? Silly man. Kisses sweetie.

thompsonx -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 10:56:31 AM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji Now that Ed's shown what a delusional lier he is I wonder if he'll show up here again. Maybe VML will bring another 1970's "science" study. You are hardly in a position to comment on science aren't you the fool who says that solar pannels produce only 20% of their advertised power?

BamaD -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 11:09:01 AM)
FR Was the title of this thread supposed to say wide-eyed 2nd amendment nut, or wild-eyed 2nd amendment nut?

WhoreMods -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 11:19:04 AM)
Wide Eyed and Legless. Classic rock fan.

BamaD -> RE: AW SHIT, ANOTHER SENSELESS KILLING BY A WIDE-EYED 2ND AMENDMENT NUT (7/22/2016 11:38:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhoreMods Wide Eyed and Legless. Classic rock fan. Nope, clasics, Haggard and Pride.

Page: << < prev 11 12 13 14 [15]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625