erynthered Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Good find http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...eTabs%3Darticle Another good one. The comment section is a must read too. A little snip: In a $5.4 billion revenue grab, Democrats decided that this $665 fillip should be subject to the ordinary corporate income tax of 35%. Most consulting firms and independent analysts say the higher costs will induce some companies to drop drug coverage, which could affect about five million retirees and 3,500 businesses. Verizon and other large corporations warned about this outcome. I forsee a bloody November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 It's not that I disagree with you. It's that you're an idiot. Your different viewpoint is based on you being facile and ignorant. I don't give a damn whether someone disagrees with me or not. I DO give a damn that their opinions aren't bull ****, regardless of whether I agree or disagree. If you and I were in complete agreement, I'd still denigrate you...because you're a moron. Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Read this post back to yourself and try to figure out what a !@#$ing hypocrite you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Again...it's not that I dislike your viewpoint. It's that you're an idiot. If you changed your viewpoint, you'd get just as much ****, because you'd still be an idiot. That's not be "running out of ammo"; that's me responding directly to the post that you made: you whined about being denigrated for your point of view. I responded precisely to that: it's not your point of view, it's your demonstrated incapacity to have a single rational thought rattle through your addled brain, as evidenced, for example, to somehow view bankruptcy as qualitatively different depending on the cause (death or health costs). It's not that I disagree...it's that you can't even possibly understand why someone else would disagree. That's not a point of view, that's just mental retardation. Don't like it? Don't be a retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Again...it's not that I dislike your viewpoint. It's that you're an idiot. If you changed your viewpoint, you'd get just as much ****, because you'd still be an idiot. That's not be "running out of ammo"; that's me responding directly to the post that you made: you whined about being denigrated for your point of view. I responded precisely to that: it's not your point of view, it's your demonstrated incapacity to have a single rational thought rattle through your addled brain, as evidenced, for example, to somehow view bankruptcy as qualitatively different depending on the cause (death or health costs). It's not that I disagree...it's that you can't even possibly understand why someone else would disagree. That's not a point of view, that's just mental retardation. Don't like it? Don't be a retard. Shut up, Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Read this post back to yourself and try to figure out what a !@#$ing hypocrite you are. Hell, he should read the post I RESPONDED TO, and try to figure that out. Won't happen. Heartfelt outrage is better than fact, since victimization is noble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Please Tom for the love of God what are you? Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Commie, Nazi?? I'm so !@#$ing confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Read this post back to yourself and try to figure out what a !@#$ing hypocrite you are. If by hypocrite you mean funny, I think I'd have to agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Please Tom for the love of God what are you? Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Commie, Nazi?? I'm so !@#$ing confused. Is Narcissist a political party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Is Narcissist a political party? Political party no. Politician? Every goddamn one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 It's not that I disagree with you. It's that you're an idiot. Your different viewpoint is based on you being facile and ignorant. I don't give a damn whether someone disagrees with me or not. I DO give a damn that their opinions aren't bull ****, regardless of whether I agree or disagree. If you and I were in complete agreement, I'd still denigrate you...because you're a moron. Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. DC Tom Group: Members Posts: 23,120 Joined: 3-September 01 Member No.: 68 Fan in San Diego Group: Members Posts: 7,963 Joined: 3-September 01 Member No.: 77 I think DC Tom is testing out some of the material he's written for his upcoming one man stage act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 DC TomGroup: Members Posts: 23,120 Joined: 3-September 01 Member No.: 68 Fan in San Diego Group: Members Posts: 7,963 Joined: 3-September 01 Member No.: 77 I think DC Tom is testing out some of the material he's written for his upcoming one man stage act. Or maybe September 2001 was when the current incarnation of TSW came online and they were both among the first members Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Or maybe 3 September 2001 was around the time the current incarnation of TSW was developed. Damn you, common sense! DAMN YOU!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Or maybe September 2001 was when the current incarnation of TSW came online and they were both among the first members So you've finally admitted that there's at least ONE screen name that's not me. This has got to be a first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 So you've finally admitted that there's at least ONE screen name that's not me. This has got to be a first. There's 10k+ screen names on TSW, so there's bound to be at least a couple who aren't you. But most probably are. And I suspect Conner is just some Freudian mechanism that you have developed to compensate for some kind of insecurity, most likely phallic in nature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Or maybe September 2001 was when the current incarnation of TSW came online and they were both among the first members Or maybe the chatter indicating otherwise is burning up the blogosphere while the circumstantial evidence suggesting that DC Tom and San Diego Fan share an identity continues to accumulate? We're through the looking glass here, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 Or maybe the chatter indicating otherwise is burning up the blogosphere while the circumstantial evidence suggesting that DC Tom and San Diego Fan share an identity continues to accumulate? We're through the looking glass here, people. Interesting theory but you're still lacking some substance Factor in Cruise missles at the Pentagon, George W Bush meeting Osama Bin Laden at a Frat Party in the basement of Skull and Bones, Haliburton's weather machine, and Dick Cheney in a french maid's outfit, and you might be on to something worthwhile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 There's 10k+ screen names on TSW, so there's bound to be at least a couple who aren't you. But most probably are. And I suspect Conner is just some Freudian mechanism that you have developed to compensate for some kind of insecurity, most likely phallic in nature And half of them are software agents that I wrote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 26, 2010 Share Posted March 26, 2010 And half of them are software agents that I wrote. I'm going to enjoy watching you die, Mr Anderson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 If this atrocity ever does take hold then the United States will be turned into Cuba in very short order. Liberty killer, jobs killer, wealth killer, health killer. His next move will be to lead the charge of granting citizenship to 15 million mexicans living illegally in this country and get them into union jobs in an attempt to checkmate the 2012 election. Oh yeah, they will be added to the state run healthcare system also. We officially have a "Hugo Chavez" as our president until the REAL and very angry American citizens either vote him out in 2012 or he gets impeached by a 2011 republican led congress. As we saw in VA, NJ and MA, moderate and conservative Americans don't very much like their opinions to be given the back hand. It's this monumentally radical and liberal presidential disaster like the one we are witnessing, that will propel a very conservative and very populist Sarah Palin into the presidency. I didn't think this could ever seriously happen given what a polarizing figure she is, but now I can totally see this coming to fruition. She is the polar opposite of Obama. The commie-lovin liberals are going to get "slaughtered" this november. Maybe I was too quick to judge... it's just that there as so few true conservatives on this Friggin Liberal Board. Maybe you are worthy of some respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Hey those are his good points! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Hey those are his good points! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 Hey those are his good points! I take umbrage at your suggestion. I am neither greedy, irrational, nor Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 27, 2010 Share Posted March 27, 2010 I take umbrage at your suggestion. I am neither greedy, irrational, nor Republican. Liar, you filibuster all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 So....another company figures 100M cost for that POS health care bill. ......Who do you think is going to pay for this. The consumer, period!!! Funking retards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 So....another company figures 100M cost for that POS health care bill. ......Who do you think is going to pay for this. The consumer, period!!! Funking retards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't know about the other companies, but Prudential is apparently taking a charge against the future requirement that they don't deduct federal reimbursement for their health care costs from their taxable income. I can actually get behind that particular point. Deducting government subsidies for expenses from taxable income is a pretty ridiculous practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 I don't know about the other companies, but Prudential is apparently taking a charge against the future requirement that they don't deduct federal reimbursement for their health care costs from their taxable income. I can actually get behind that particular point. Deducting government subsidies for expenses from taxable income is a pretty ridiculous practice. Nice point Tom. I would think that some/all of the Country CFO's are going to try and find any loop holes they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Maybe this better explains it....... http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archiv...counting/38206/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Maybe this better explains it....... http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archiv...counting/38206/ The comments section is fierce as hell. Apparently, anyone with even a passing knowledge of corporate accounting and SEC regs and federal law thinks Waxman should be hung by his thumbs and slow-roasted over an open fire. And I don't disagree. You can't ask companies to take a material charge but not report it because it looks bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Racist companies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 The comments section is fierce as hell. Apparently, anyone with even a passing knowledge of corporate accounting and SEC regs and federal law thinks Waxman should be hung by his thumbs and slow-roasted over an open fire. And I don't disagree. You can't ask companies to take a material charge but not report it because it looks bad. Jesus H Christ, they have to file changes with the Freaking SEC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Jesus H Christ, they have to file changes with the Freaking SEC. Yes, but I suspect you'll now see far fewer companies making their required announcements so publically now that it's clear doing so will land your ass before Congress with all your paperwork and internal documents, emails, etc. This is wicked. We'll see how long they are able to get away with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Yes, but I suspect you'll now see far fewer companies making their required announcements so publically now that it's clear doing so will land your ass before Congress with all your paperwork and internal documents, emails, etc. This is wicked. We'll see how long they are able to get away with this. !@#$ 'em. Were I one of the CEO's, I'd simply answer every grandstanding question with "The documentation in response to your question is on file with the SEC, as required by federal law." Just to hammer the point home to the thinking public that these representatives are complete !@#$wits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Wow, for all to see here on the board when DC Tom is out of ammo and/or doesn't like your viewpoint he starts to hurl insults. Way to go Tom, acting just like a typical greedy, selfish, pompous, name calling, venom spitting, irrational, pot stirring and filibustering rather than finding solutions republican. Christ, stop putting Tom up on a pedestal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 The comments section is fierce as hell. Apparently, anyone with even a passing knowledge of corporate accounting and SEC regs and federal law thinks Waxman should be hung by his thumbs and slow-roasted over an open fire. And I don't disagree. You can't ask companies to take a material charge but not report it because it looks bad. I like this one from "Grundles": This was entirely predictable. When your policies proceed from the Magic Ponies and Manna from Heaven School of Economics, it can be very offensive when somebody tries to bring unpleasant and irritating issues like "costs" and "tradeoffs" into the discussion. Talk about harshing your mellow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 So....another company figures 100M cost for that POS health care bill. ......Who do you think is going to pay for this. The consumer, period!!! Funking retards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! More Change you can believe in! Sallie Mae Blames 2,500 Layoffs on Obama's Student Loan Overhaul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 More Change you can believe in! Sallie Mae Blames 2,500 Layoffs on Obama's Student Loan Overhaul. I hope the replitards are keeping track of all this for November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 More Change you can believe in! Sallie Mae Blames 2,500 Layoffs on Obama's Student Loan Overhaul. I guess later today Henry Waxman will demand Sallie Mae bring all of its emails and other internal documents before Congress next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I guess later today Henry Waxman will demand Sallie Mae bring all of its emails and other internal documents before Congress next week. This has been known to be coming for months, at least (I heard about it nine months ago). So yeah, Waxman's probably completely blind-sided by this news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 Booo Hoooo, why are you guys always picking on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts