On 5/28/2022 1:06 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they
>>>>> were required
>>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago
>>>>> experience with
>>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the
>>>>> letter of the
>>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>>
>>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm
>>>> not saying the ultra-rich
>>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are
>>>> grossly faulty. And they are
>>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and
>>>> paying to have the laws re-written
>>>> in their favor.
>>>>
>>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and
>>>> read it over and over until
>>>> you understand.
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a
>>> democracy
>>> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one
>>> assumes,
>>> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will
>>> be changed.
>>
>> How naive!
>>
>> The American legislative processes have been systematically
>> corrupted by those with huge amounts of money to spend. To
>> treat the most currently relevant example: A majority of
>> Americans consistently says more gun control is needed.
>> Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my state)
>> actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>>
>> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people?
>> Hmm. Let's see who gets money from the NRA:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>>
>> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are
>> blatantly open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy
>> campaign "donations," gun manufacturers lobby for easier gun
>> sales; the super-wealthy lobby for tax breaks for the
>> super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for protection
>> from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
>> companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And
>> Republicans appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
>>
>
> Go read the 1945 Firearms Act. It bars[1] many things you decry and
> moreover with greater restrictions in the 1968, 1986 extensions.
>
> Background checks? Vicious murders pass those regularly in the same way
> that people with outstanding warrants get new driver's licenses and new
> charge cards. That's like advocating 'mental health services'; money is
> spent, nothing happens after that.

You're back to your frequent theme: "Everything is imperfect, so
absolutely nothing should be done." By that logic, we should repeal laws
making it illegal to steal from bike shops; because obviously, people
steal from bike shops despite the current laws, so those laws don't work.

If the laws you cite are imperfect, the truly logical move would be to
improve them. As it is, you're saying in effect that a person with a
background of deadly assault and currently under multiple restraining
orders should be able to buy whatever gun he wants whenever the urge
arises. That's absolutely nuts.

> And NRA is a pissant player in political lobbying. They have less cash
> to throw around with today's membership (newer firearms organizations
> are growing rapidly. NRA is not).

The totals I linked in a couple threads don't look pissant to me. And
judging by the behavior of the politicians who received them, the totals
are disgustingly effective.

> They do one thing, promote individual second amendment
> rights, and only that.

That's simplistic nonsense. The second amendment was not carved into
Tom's stone tablets, and was long interpreted much, much differently.
Until the NRA-backed turn to national insanity, there was no general
policy claiming any nutcase needed and was allowed firearms optimized
for mass killing.

The second amendment does not say "The right to murder groups of
schoolkids shall not be infringed."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2022 1:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members
>>> while some
>>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a
>>> paltry 4% of
>>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>>
>> The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party
>> can usually stop most legislation to which it strongly
>> objects. U.S. Senate rules are more than usually restrictive
>> that way. And Republicans in the Senate routinely stop any
>> chance of enhanced gun control.
>>
>> Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>>
>> They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding
>> the relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to
>> NRA: Even a majority of _those_ want more restrictions on
>> guns. But they're scammed by the NRA's crooked top dogs who
>> (for example) absolutely convinced them that Obama was going
>> to take all their guns away.
>>
>> There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine
>> working, and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>> https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've
>> got a big mansion, right?
>>
>>
>
> How would you feel about First Amendment prior restraint?
>
> First, secure a license to speak- fill out forms, go to a government
> office, wait to be approved, carry a speaking card with you. Then when
> you actually wish to speak you'll need a permit for a specific
> time/subject/venue. 'reasonable restrictions' as it were.

I would feel it's a blatant attempt to change the subject, substituting
a weirdly hypothetical situation for a currently atrocious one.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2022 1:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members
>>> while some
>>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a
>>> paltry 4% of
>>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>>
>> The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party
>> can usually stop most legislation to which it strongly
>> objects. U.S. Senate rules are more than usually restrictive
>> that way. And Republicans in the Senate routinely stop any
>> chance of enhanced gun control.
>>
>> Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>>
>> They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding
>> the relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to
>> NRA: Even a majority of _those_ want more restrictions on
>> guns. But they're scammed by the NRA's crooked top dogs who
>> (for example) absolutely convinced them that Obama was going
>> to take all their guns away.
>>
>> There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine
>> working, and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>> https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've
>> got a big mansion, right?
>>
>>
> To scale that-
>
> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-hospital-assn/lobbying?id=D000000116
>
>
> and those guys are not even 'big' players.

Yep. Corporate money in politics causes tons of problems. We could
switch the discussion to health care, but I'd prefer to deal with one
issue at a time, rather than follow every deflection.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:06:29 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> >> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
> >>>>>
> >>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they
> >>>> were required
> >>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago
> >>>> experience with
> >>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the
> >>>> letter of the
> >>>> law closer then most poor folk.
> >>>
> >>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm
> >>> not saying the ultra-rich
> >>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are
> >>> grossly faulty. And they are
> >>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and
> >>> paying to have the laws re-written
> >>> in their favor.
> >>>
> >>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and
> >>> read it over and over until
> >>> you understand.
> >>>
> >>> - Frank Krygowski
> >>
> >> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a
> >> democracy
> >> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one
> >> assumes,
> >> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will
> >> be changed.
> >
> > How naive!
> >
> > The American legislative processes have been systematically
> > corrupted by those with huge amounts of money to spend. To
> > treat the most currently relevant example: A majority of
> > Americans consistently says more gun control is needed.
> > Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my state)
> > actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
> >
> > Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people?
> > Hmm. Let's see who gets money from the NRA:
> > https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
> >
> >
> > That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are
> > blatantly open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy
> > campaign "donations," gun manufacturers lobby for easier gun
> > sales; the super-wealthy lobby for tax breaks for the
> > super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for protection
> > from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
> > companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And
> > Republicans appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
> >
> Go read the 1945 Firearms Act. It bars[1] many things you
> decry and moreover with greater restrictions in the 1968,
> 1986 extensions.
>
> Background checks? Vicious murders pass those regularly in
> the same way that people with outstanding warrants get new
> driver's licenses and new charge cards. That's like
> advocating 'mental health services'; money is spent, nothing
> happens after that.
>
> And NRA is a pissant player in political lobbying. They have
> less cash to throw around with today's membership (newer
> firearms organizations are growing rapidly. NRA is not).
>
> You can respect them for their consistent single-issue
> advocacy, including arming black Americans when it was
> desperately necessary, alone among national organizations
> and continuing down to today, for their safety and
> marksmanship programs etc. Or not. But they don't
> prevaricate. They do one thing, promote individual second
> amendment rights, and only that.
>
>
> [1]Not 100% bans. There are tax stamp and license provisions
> for automatics and explosives but for ~90years taxed items
> and licensed owners are virtually unknown in crime. If there
> was ever a case I don't know it.

Here is the bullshit that Frank cannot keep himself from screaming from the rooftops. Along with his totally ignorant believe that Billionaires pay no taxes when the facts show they pay lower than the maximum rates he claims that "over half of Americans want stricter gun laws". 56% who are polled in the immediate aftermath of something like the school shooting is hardly representative of "over half" since the polling agencies have decided that you and I are not going ot have our 2nd Amendment rights and they simply word questions at the most opportune time to get the anwers they want.

If Frank wishes to believe ANY of the communist bullshit he is pushing that is up to his tiny brain. But they will have to pry my guns out of my cold dead hands and they better hope that they aren't any of the first 100 that try it. Franks is more afraid of guns than he is of covid-19 and he has been pushing the line that over a million people have been killed by that. The yearly toll of gun deaths is about 20,000 and 95% of those are gang related - mostly black on black murders.

MORE people than that are killed by knives. Why isn't Frank calling for knife control? Quite "Frankly" he is an idiot.

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 3:36:27 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2022 21:48:40 -0700 (PDT), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 8:05:19 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:03:19 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 5/27/2022 12:21 AM, John B. wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, 26 May 2022 22:52:37 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >> >> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On 5/26/2022 8:20 PM, John B. wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> But Frank, you live in a democracy... and the U.S. runs about, all
> >> >>>> over the world, telling people that a "democracy" is the only way to
> >> >>>> live!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Are you now saying that it isn't?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Don't be simplistic, John. All democracies are not equal. The one I live
> >> >>> in has great room for improvement. Look at the data!
> >> >>
> >> >> But I'm not being simplistic. It is a democracy and y'all do run
> >> >> around telling people how wonderful "democracy".
> >> >>
> >> >> But how improvement?
> >> >
> >> >How improvement indeed! Um... whatever that means...
> >> >
> >> >You declined my invitation to look at data for various democracies.
> >> >Again, compared to most European democracies, the U.S. has more wealth
> >> >and income disparity, more crime, far more murders, incredibly more gun
> >> >deaths, more poverty, far worse health care, worse education, more
> >> >citizen debt, longer work weeks, fewer vacation days, far more
> >> >imprisonment, less general contentment, etc. All democracies are NOT
> >> >equal, and I see little evidence that the U.S. system is best of all.
> >> >
> >> Yes, but Frank, when I pointed out that the U.S. had more crime and
> >> thus likely a more lawless population then Canada you leaped to the
> >> defense of the U.S.
> >>
> >> And as for laying the blame for all of the U.S's ills on income
> >> disparity, I think you have your head in the clouds as I've lived in
> >> countries where the disparity between the "haves" and the "have not's"
> >> is far greater then the U.S. and we don't have the awful crimes that
> >> you flaunt.
> >>
> >> Thailand, a poor, improvised country has, currently, with the Covid,
> >> some 1.53% unemployment. Before Covid as low as 0.98%. And the U.S.,
> >> the richest country in the world, has (I read) 3.6%.
> >>
> >> The murder rate in the U.S. is 6.2/100,000, Thailand 2.6.
> >>
> >
> >On the Gini Index, Thailand has a 35.0 score. USA has 41.5. So the income equity is much better in Thailand than the USA. So your better numbers for Thailand over the USA prove that less income disparity results in better life.
> >https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI
> Yes, I looked at that and then I looked at GINI and yes the numbers
> seem to show some sort of difference, But is it real?
>
> Not to quibble but I really can't believe that it is indicative of
> what I see here every day. Perhaps if you do the calculation for
> Bangkok or even Bangkok, Korat and Changmai (the three larger cities),
> but I really can't believe it applies to the entire country, as a
> whole. I can take you to village after village in the N.E. or South
> where income is far, far lower then it is in the cities.
>
> But, is relative income, or income disparity, if you would, really an
> indication of much of anything? After all, if I have an income of, say
> 1 million a year and you have an income of 100,000 there is a
> disparage of 100::1. Oh, WoW. Terrible! Terrible! Or is it.

????????
"if I have an income of, say 1 million a year and you have an income of 100,000 there is a disparage of 100::1"
My mathematical abilities tell me that is a 10:1 ratio. That seems bad for the difference between the rural people and the city people. But in the USA we have Elon Musk compared to the clerk at the convenience store. In one of the many states that has the federal low minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. I suspect the income disparity is about 1,000,000,000:1. And that is why the USA has a much worse Gini Index than Thailand. Much greater overall disparity in income on average.

> >
> >> The U.S. has something like 7 million undocumented illegal immigrants
> >> working in the country. And some 5.9 million unemployed citizens.
> >> https://www.americanprogress.org/press/release-millions-undocumented-immigrants-essential-americas-recovery-new-report-shows/
> >> https://tinyurl.com/3z3e4xdd
> >>
> >> The question then is "Are we doing something right" or "are you doing
> >> something wrong"?
> >> >However, that doesn't mean the general concept of democracy is bad. I'll
> >> >let you dig out this data, but I suspect that those metrics are worse
> >> >for the average dictatorship than for the average democracy. That would
> >> >mean that promoting democracy as an alternative to dictatorships does
> >> >make sense.
> >> I really wonder. How much does the average citizen know about world
> >> events, the effects of minimum salary on world trade and the national
> >> economy. And, and, and.
> >>
> >> Or right here. Is Tommy the sort that you feel capable of making
> >> decisions for you? He apparently is typical of a growing portion of
> >> the Public. Witness the furor over "illegal votes" or the Washington
> >> riot.
> >>
> >> But, to be honest, I do wonder whether any political system is "best".
> >> I've noted that the greatest progress in the world, from a bombed out
> >> rubble to a modern country, the richest in the region, occurred in
> >> Singapore under a government that was, in fact, if not facade, a
> >> dictatorship.
> >
> >Depends on how you define "best". Economically, the Singapore as you say, and China too, would be successes. China was ravaged after WW2. By the Japanese. And went through an internal dispute. And had lots of mouths to feed. And now, its sort of OK economically. Is economic success "best"?
> Well, it is certainly part of it.
>
> Singapore, which as I've mentioned has, and enforces, very stringent
> laws was quite literally a bombed out rubble in 1945. There was the
> usual communist versus good guys squabbles and the outcome was that
> the "good guys' won the battle, imprisoned the communists, and went
> about rebuilding the city. When I first went there in 1960-something
> the majority of the people lived in "Kampongs - a Malay word that can
> be translated as "village" mostly without decent water or reliable
> electricity.
>
> Along with enticing labor intensive businesses to "come and open a
> business here" the government built one room "apartment" buildings and
> in a few years the people were housed in clean, multistory buildings
> with clean water and electricity.
>
> At the same time they were running around offering any labor intensive
> company - Come to Singapore (no, or very low taxes) and in are very
> short time they had, not only 100% employment they had a million or so
> Malays coming across every day to work.
>
> As soon as they had 100% employment they started emphasizing education
> -Send Your Kid To School! And, of course, searching out companies that
> were less labor intensive and much more technical'
>
> Today, the single room"apartments" are a thing of the past and
> everyone is housed in multi room apartments, with all mod cons. In
> fact car ownership - it is an island - is one of there larger
> problems.
>
> I'd guess that they have the highest living standards in South East
> Asia.

No doubt. Maybe only the gambling icon of Macau has a higher living standard per capita. I have seen Singapore mentioned a few times on the cable shows where people are buying a boat to live on full time. The show had tours of several boats and talked about the life the potential buyer would have living on them. Kind of interesting show. Showed the docks, harbor of Singapore.

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:29:22 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> > <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>
> >>
> >>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
> >>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they were required
> >>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago experience with
> >>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the letter of the
> >>> law closer then most poor folk.
> >>
> >> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm not saying the ultra-rich
> >> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are grossly faulty. And they are
> >> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and paying to have the laws re-written
> >> in their favor.
> >>
> >> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and read it over and over until
> >> you understand.
> >>
> >> - Frank Krygowski
> >
> > Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a democracy
> > where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one assumes,
> > when the majority decide the laws need changing they will be changed.
> How naive!
>
> The American legislative processes have been systematically corrupted by
> those with huge amounts of money to spend. To treat the most currently
> relevant example: A majority of Americans consistently says more gun
> control is needed. Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my
> state) actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>
> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people? Hmm. Let's see
> who gets money from the NRA:
> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>
> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are blatantly
> open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy campaign "donations," gun
> manufacturers lobby for easier gun sales; the super-wealthy lobby for
> tax breaks for the super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for
> protection from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals;

That last one is a real killer. (Ignore the NRA AR-15 guns killing school children and teachers for a moment.)
https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-business-congress-health-care-reform-medicare-756e3255a1cb4ab8c813151aec19b60c
"To do that, Congress would have to change an unusual arrangement that’s written into law.

When lawmakers created Medicare’s Part D outpatient prescription drug program in 2003, they barred Medicare from negotiating prices. Republicans who controlled Congress at the time wanted insurers that administer drug plans to do the haggling. Medicare was sidelined, despite decades of experience setting prices for hospitals, doctors and nursing homes."

Seems to me the Republicans took the bribes being offered by the pharmacy companies.

> oil companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And Republicans
> appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2022 4:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The American legislative processes have been systematically
>>> corrupted by those with huge amounts of money to spend. To
>>> treat the most currently relevant example: A majority of
>>> Americans consistently says more gun control is needed.
>>> Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my state)
>>> actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>>>
>>> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people?
>>> Hmm. Let's see who gets money from the NRA:
>>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>>
>>>
>>> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are
>>> blatantly open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy
>>> campaign "donations," gun manufacturers lobby for easier gun
>>> sales; the super-wealthy lobby for tax breaks for the
>>> super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for protection
>>> from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
>>> companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And
>>> Republicans appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
>>>
>
> Here is the bullshit that Frank cannot keep himself from screaming from the rooftops. Along with his totally ignorant believe that Billionaires pay no taxes when the facts show they pay lower than the maximum rates he claims that "over half of Americans want stricter gun laws". 56% who are polled in the immediate aftermath of something like the school shooting is hardly representative of "over half" since the polling agencies have decided that you and I are not going ot have our 2nd Amendment rights and they simply word questions at the most opportune time to get the anwers they want.

Wrong on many points, as usual. First, I did not claim (as you imply)
that no millionaires pay any taxes. But I did give multiple examples of
ultra-rich who paid no federal income tax in certain years, which is
obscene.

And surveys showing preference for more gun control happen all the time,
not just after events like the recent mass killings. Perhaps that's
because there are _always_ mass killings in America - hundreds of them
just this year, which must astonish readers in other countries.

> If Frank wishes to believe ANY of the communist bullshit he is pushing that is up to his tiny brain.

Tom, you don't even know the definition of communism. It's nothing I've
ever advocated, and it's just another generic trigger word for you. Your
use makes you look even more stupid. Drop it.

> The yearly toll of gun deaths is about 20,000 and 95% of those are gang related

Absolutely false! From https://www.gvpedia.org/gun-myths/gangs/
"Federal Bureau of Investigation estimated ... that gang-related
homicides were approximately 13% total homicides annually." Detailed
numbers are in that article.

> mostly black on black murders.

That's false too, but what are you implying? That nothing should be done
about it?

> MORE people than that are killed by knives.

In the United States? Absolutely false!
https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

Where do you get these raving ideas?

> Why isn't Frank calling for knife control?

Benefits vs. detriments, Tom. Knives are a fundamental human tool with
countless uses. Things like AR style guns have only one real use: to
rapidly kill people. They are obscene.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 11:03:28 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 1:11 AM, John B. wrote:
> > ... the point is, if you don't
> > make much then you go without. Save your money and pretty soon you
> > have got some.
> >
> > For example, I read that 95% of the U.S. population owns, or has
> > access to, an automobile. and the U.S. that is *about* 317,952,110
> > people. And the U.S. Census has it that 805,722 ride a bicycle to
> > work. So if you are po folk don't buy a car, but a bicycle.
> Since you're moving the conversation a little closer to the purported
> focus of this discussion group:
>
> I was a bicycle commuter for decades, using my bike at least
> occasionally to get to four different jobs over the years. For several
> years, I rode almost daily to one of those jobs.
>
> But in America very few people can do that. The main reason is that
> America has largely been designed around the automobile. Ever since the
> 1920s the trend has been to lower and lower densities, requiring longer
> and longer travel distances. The average commute time, one way, by car,
> is close to half an hour. By bike it would probably be 90 minutes or
> more. Few can afford to spend that time, especially if they have
> obligations like kids to take care of.
>
> In most of the country, buses are also impractical, again because of low
> density sprawl. For a specific example: I was for a time attending
> rehearsals for a musical production. Those rehearsals were in a small
> town perhaps 7 miles from me. There was absolutely no bus service
> running that route back then. There is now, but last I looked it was
> only a few times per day. I'd have to literally devote most of a day to
> bus travel to and from a 90 minute rehearsal.

Agree agree agree. I used to live in Des Moines, Iowa. Somewhat larger metropolitan area. About half million total people in the city area. They had a good bus system. $2 per ticket. But the scheduling of routes did not make it easy to get many places. Especially for impromptu appointments. An example: dental visit. I had to check and coordinate about three different bus schedules to figure out when to schedule the appointment. 9 AM for my example. That meant catching the bus near my house at 8 AM. 3/4 mile walk from my house. Taking the bus downtown, getting off and catching a different bus at about 8:35. Get to my dentist on time. 20 minutes later get out of my dental appointment. Wait an hour for the next bus to come by the dental office. Different route from the one that took me to the office.. Take it to a big mall. Wander around the big mall for about 4 hours with the old retired people who go to malls to walk for exercise. Catch a bus at about 2 PM to take me down the hill to my next bus stop. Get off and scamper across a very busy 4 lane road. Catch my bus at 2:30 to take me near home. Get off and walk 3/4 mile home. Get home about 3 PM. So for a 20 minute dental appointment, it took about 7-8 hours. Not too efficient. Bus routes are setup to handle the morning commute to work and the evening commute home from work. Good luck trying to use the buses between the primetime routes.

In case anyone is wondering, my dental office is about 12 miles from home. In warm months I did ride my bike there. Trails most of the way. But in the winter when its freezing and snow and ice, bus is better.

>
> This is reality for most Americans. For a poor person, it means that if
> they can't afford some sort of car, they can't get a job.

Bus routes in big cities are setup to handle the 8 to 5 working hours. Monday to Friday. As long as you work those hours, and only those hours, then the bus system works great. But if you worked 5 to 2 or 10 to 7, nope. For the 5 to 2 shift, you would be a couple hours late to work and have to wait around at the bus stop for a couple hours after work. And for the 10 to 7 shift, you would be a couple hours early to work everyday and you would have to walk home every night. And forget about working the weekends. Very few routes run on the weekend.

> That would be
> true even if they were a skilled and dedicated cyclist. And of course,
> cars are expensive to operate and maintain.
>
> Be wary of simplistic solutions.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 11:06:07 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:50 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >
> >
> > I've bitched about the payroll tax for over fifty years. Join me. But
> > that tax will only go up, necessarily, (although never enough to fund
> > SS/Medicare).
> Increase the _real_ tax in the mega-rich and on the largest, most
> profitable corporations. Then compensate by lowering the FIT on less
> wealthy individuals.
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

One very simple and obvious fix to the payroll taxes Andy is complaining about is to increase the amount of pay that the payroll tax applies to. $147,000 is the limit for 2022. So all of the employees earning W-2 wages above $147K do not pay any payroll taxes on their wages above $147K. Joe makes $400K so he does not pay any payroll tax on $253K of his salary. All 435 House and 11 Senate members get $174K salary. So they do not pay any payroll taxes on $27K. Payroll taxes are 15.3% of salary. Split between employer and employee. So 535 Legislatures times $27K times 15.3% equals $2,210,085 extra money to fund Social Security and Medicare. Maybe that is just too simple. Andy, would this extra $2.2 million paid into FICA cover your shop's portion?

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 12:09:15 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/28/2022 10:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members
> >> while some
> >> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a
> >> paltry 4% of
> >> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
> >> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
> >>
> >
> > Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
> >
> > The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party
> > can usually stop most legislation to which it strongly
> > objects. U.S. Senate rules are more than usually restrictive
> > that way. And Republicans in the Senate routinely stop any
> > chance of enhanced gun control.
> >
> > Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
> > https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
> >
> >
> > They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding
> > the relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to
> > NRA: Even a majority of _those_ want more restrictions on
> > guns. But they're scammed by the NRA's crooked top dogs who
> > (for example) absolutely convinced them that Obama was going
> > to take all their guns away.
> >
> > There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine
> > working, and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
> > https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
> >
> >
> > Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've
> > got a big mansion, right?
> >
> >
> How would you feel about First Amendment prior restraint?

Andy, you have heard the old phrase:
“sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me.”

I think those are very applicable to the First and Second Amendments. First: religion, speech, assemble, and petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Not really sure what the grievances right is. Second: own a gun.

Which one may cause immediate harm? Religion? The Republicans were screaming when they were forbidden from attending church during Covid. But their screaming proves not attending church caused them no bodily harm. Dead people don't scream. Speech? See my quote above. Assemble? In Madison, WI, where you live, every other Saturday in the fall 80,000 people gather in the football stadium. How many deaths does that cause? As for the grievances, I'm still not sure what that right is. As for guns? On Tuesday we had an 18 year old boy murder 19 kids and 2 adults with his Daniel Defense DDM4V7 AR-15 style rifle.

Which Amendment needs restrictions and waiting periods? Heck I got to get a government approved license to operate a vehicle in every state in the USA. That requires a written knowledge exam and a driving skills test. Conducted by a government employee. Ain't no need for a license down in Texas to buy a gun and kill kids.

>
> First, secure a license to speak- fill out forms, go to a
> government office, wait to be approved, carry a speaking
> card with you. Then when you actually wish to speak you'll
> need a permit for a specific time/subject/venue. 'reasonable
> restrictions' as it were.

I believe in most speeches before a city council or other government board, they require you to stay on topic and not deviate into how the gummit is stealing your guns and implanting tracking devices in your head. Or else they have the officer in the room remove you from the speaking pedestal. And in courts, the judge does require witnesses to answer and speak only about the question asked and stay on the main topic. Any deviations will be stricken from the records by the judge and the jury will be told to disregard the extraneous speech.

> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:51:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 4:36 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 21:48:40 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
>> <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On the Gini Index, Thailand has a 35.0 score. USA has 41.5. So the income equity is much better in Thailand than the USA. So your better numbers for Thailand over the USA prove that less income disparity results in better life.
>>> https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI
>>
>> Yes, I looked at that and then I looked at GINI and yes the numbers
>> seem to show some sort of difference, But is it real?
>
>You're reminding me of a different poster here, one who claims almost
>none of the millions of COVID deaths are real. And that the data showing
>the stock market rising during Obama's presidency is not real. And that
>the satellite data showing large reductions in polar ice mass is not
>real. And so on.
>
>Granted, not all data is of equal quality; but the standard for judgment
>should be something more than just one's personal impressions.

But who better?

I've been married to a Thai national for 50 years, speak the language,
if not fluently at least well enough to "get along", have resided in
the country during much of my marriage. My extended family, through my
wife, - coming back from a wedding my wife counted up some 100
relatives who had attended the wedding - include a collage professor,
three millionaires, a sister who married a soldier, another who is,
what one might call "penny less", and lives in a tiny village in N.E.
Thailand.

So yes, I do believe that I am qualified to have an impression.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:46:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members while some
>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a paltry 4% of
>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>
>Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>
>The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party can usually
>stop most legislation to which it strongly objects. U.S. Senate rules
>are more than usually restrictive that way. And Republicans in the
>Senate routinely stop any chance of enhanced gun control.
>
>Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>
>They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding the
>relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to NRA: Even a
>majority of _those_ want more restrictions on guns. But they're scammed
>by the NRA's crooked top dogs who (for example) absolutely convinced
>them that Obama was going to take all their guns away.
>
>There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine working,
>and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>
>Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've got a big
>mansion, right?

Or the ~800 a year that die on bicycles, or the 46,000 who die in car
crashes or justify over 1 million Covid deaths, arguing that masks and
vaccinations aren't necessary.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 3:01:00 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:06:29 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 5/28/2022 10:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > > On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> > >> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> > >>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they
> > >>>> were required
> > >>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago
> > >>>> experience with
> > >>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the
> > >>>> letter of the
> > >>>> law closer then most poor folk.
> > >>>
> > >>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm
> > >>> not saying the ultra-rich
> > >>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are
> > >>> grossly faulty. And they are
> > >>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and
> > >>> paying to have the laws re-written
> > >>> in their favor.
> > >>>
> > >>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and
> > >>> read it over and over until
> > >>> you understand.
> > >>>
> > >>> - Frank Krygowski
> > >>
> > >> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a
> > >> democracy
> > >> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one
> > >> assumes,
> > >> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will
> > >> be changed.
> > >
> > > How naive!
> > >
> > > The American legislative processes have been systematically
> > > corrupted by those with huge amounts of money to spend. To
> > > treat the most currently relevant example: A majority of
> > > Americans consistently says more gun control is needed.
> > > Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my state)
> > > actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
> > >
> > > Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people?
> > > Hmm. Let's see who gets money from the NRA:
> > > https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
> > >
> > >
> > > That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are
> > > blatantly open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy
> > > campaign "donations," gun manufacturers lobby for easier gun
> > > sales; the super-wealthy lobby for tax breaks for the
> > > super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for protection
> > > from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
> > > companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And
> > > Republicans appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
> > >
> > Go read the 1945 Firearms Act. It bars[1] many things you
> > decry and moreover with greater restrictions in the 1968,
> > 1986 extensions.
> >
> > Background checks? Vicious murders pass those regularly in
> > the same way that people with outstanding warrants get new
> > driver's licenses and new charge cards. That's like
> > advocating 'mental health services'; money is spent, nothing
> > happens after that.
> >
> > And NRA is a pissant player in political lobbying. They have
> > less cash to throw around with today's membership (newer
> > firearms organizations are growing rapidly. NRA is not).
> >
> > You can respect them for their consistent single-issue
> > advocacy, including arming black Americans when it was
> > desperately necessary, alone among national organizations
> > and continuing down to today, for their safety and
> > marksmanship programs etc. Or not. But they don't
> > prevaricate. They do one thing, promote individual second
> > amendment rights, and only that.
> >
> >
> > [1]Not 100% bans. There are tax stamp and license provisions
> > for automatics and explosives but for ~90years taxed items
> > and licensed owners are virtually unknown in crime. If there
> > was ever a case I don't know it.
> Here is the bullshit that Frank cannot keep himself from screaming from the rooftops. Along with his totally ignorant believe that Billionaires pay no taxes when the facts show they pay lower than the maximum rates he claims that "over half of Americans want stricter gun laws". 56% who are polled in the immediate aftermath of something like the school shooting is hardly representative of "over half" since the polling agencies have decided that you and I are not going ot have our 2nd Amendment rights and they simply word questions at the most opportune time to get the anwers they want.
>
> If Frank wishes to believe ANY of the communist bullshit he is pushing that is up to his tiny brain. But they will have to pry my guns out of my cold dead hands and they better hope that they aren't any of the first 100 that try it. Franks is more afraid of guns than he is of covid-19 and he has been pushing the line that over a million people have been killed by that. The yearly toll of gun deaths is about 20,000 and 95% of those are gang related - mostly black on black murders.
>
> MORE people than that are killed by knives. Why isn't Frank calling for knife control? Quite "Frankly" he is an idiot.

Doggone it. Frank beat me to calling out Tommy boy's lies. But I am going to do it too.

Tommy boy quote:
he claims that "over half of Americans want stricter gun laws". 56% who are polled in the immediate aftermath of something like the school shooting is hardly representative of "over half"

?????? Tommy, 56% IS over half. I know you are uneducated, but I would think even the dumbest, stupidest fools understand this simple math.

Another Tommy boy quote:
But they will have to pry my guns out of my cold dead hands and they better hope that they aren't any of the first 100 that try it.

Despite the rhetoric from Trump, Republicans, Qanon, NRA, the federal and state governments are not taking guns away from anyone. Unless they literally have a criminal proceeding against them. And as for your boasting about I assume killing the first 100 people who try to take your guns, that is not how it would occur. The forces assigned to take your guns would use overwhelming force. Likely armor of some kind to protect against bullets. And would likely use smoke grenades or other chemicals to incapacitate and blind you. Tommy, based on your nonsensical comments, I have to wonder if you ever really served in the military or not. Anyone who was in the active military would understand warfare much better than you seem to. As for 1, you, taking on 100, that only happens in Rambo movies. Not reality. Although I will give you that Alvin York is credited with killing 25 enemies and capturing 132 German soldiers. Armed with just a Colt 1911.

Last Tommy quote:
The yearly toll of gun deaths is about 20,000 and 95% of those are gang related - mostly black on black murders.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081
Charts from the BBC. Go down the page a little bit and you will find "How do US gun deaths break down?" There is a chart below it.
"According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a total of 45,222 people died from gun-related injuries of all causes during 2020, the last year for which complete data is available."

24,292 suicide
19,384 homicide
611 legal intervention
535 unintentional
400 undetermined

Please note that guns saved someone's life in self defense 611 times. Or the good guy killed the bad guy in 611 occasions. I suppose one can argue that merely having a gun on display caused the bad guy to run away without the good guy with the gun killing him. So the 611 is maybe an underrepresentation of the benefits of having a gun.

Tommy boy's 20,000 gun deaths is close to the 2020 total of 19,384 homicides. He apparently thinks gun suicides do not occur and should be forgotten and discredited. Like Covid, he says they did not happen. They are fake deaths I guess.

As for Tommy saying 95% of deaths are gang related and black on black, no. Below is a link to the CDC data. It shows rate of firearm homicide by race. Not totals, just per 100K. Blacks have a disproportionate 34.9 rate. Compared to the overall rate of 7.7. So even though black homicides is quite high, blacks do not make up a large enough group to move the overall above 7.7. Clearly 95% are not gang related and black on black. If that was true, the overall rate would be much much closer to 34.9. The black rate.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7042a6.htm

On Sat, 28 May 2022 12:03:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 1:11 AM, John B. wrote:
>> ... the point is, if you don't
>> make much then you go without. Save your money and pretty soon you
>> have got some.
>>
>> For example, I read that 95% of the U.S. population owns, or has
>> access to, an automobile. and the U.S. that is *about* 317,952,110
>> people. And the U.S. Census has it that 805,722 ride a bicycle to
>> work. So if you are po folk don't buy a car, but a bicycle.
>
>Since you're moving the conversation a little closer to the purported
>focus of this discussion group:
>
>I was a bicycle commuter for decades, using my bike at least
>occasionally to get to four different jobs over the years. For several
>years, I rode almost daily to one of those jobs.
>
>But in America very few people can do that. The main reason is that
>America has largely been designed around the automobile. Ever since the
>1920s the trend has been to lower and lower densities, requiring longer
>and longer travel distances. The average commute time, one way, by car,
>is close to half an hour. By bike it would probably be 90 minutes or
>more. Few can afford to spend that time, especially if they have
>obligations like kids to take care of.
>
>In most of the country, buses are also impractical, again because of low
>density sprawl. For a specific example: I was for a time attending
>rehearsals for a musical production. Those rehearsals were in a small
>town perhaps 7 miles from me. There was absolutely no bus service
>running that route back then. There is now, but last I looked it was
>only a few times per day. I'd have to literally devote most of a day to
>bus travel to and from a 90 minute rehearsal.
>
>This is reality for most Americans. For a poor person, it means that if
>they can't afford some sort of car, they can't get a job. That would be
>true even if they were a skilled and dedicated cyclist. And of course,
>cars are expensive to operate and maintain.
>
>Be wary of simplistic solutions.

Well, copying from your post, I see that " For a poor person, it means
that if they can't afford some sort of car, they can't get a job."

But the facts seem to be that 95% of the U.S. population have access
to a car. Some 317,952,115, and the U.S. Census tells us that 805,722
do ride a bike to work. Which would seem to indicate that there are
some 15,928,500 po folks in the U.S. that can't get a job.

Gee, someone ought to tell them dummies down here in the goment as I
read that they are making payments to 59 million.
https://fortunly.com/statistics/welfare-statistics/#gref

Or, perhaps to out it another way, "your assertions are without merit"
:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 6:21:27 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:46:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members while some
> >> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a paltry 4% of
> >> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
> >> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
> >
> >Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
> >
> >The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party can usually
> >stop most legislation to which it strongly objects. U.S. Senate rules
> >are more than usually restrictive that way. And Republicans in the
> >Senate routinely stop any chance of enhanced gun control.
> >
> >Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
> >https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
> >
> >They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding the
> >relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to NRA: Even a
> >majority of _those_ want more restrictions on guns. But they're scammed
> >by the NRA's crooked top dogs who (for example) absolutely convinced
> >them that Obama was going to take all their guns away.
> >
> >There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine working,
> >and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
> >https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
> >
> >Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've got a big
> >mansion, right?
> Or the ~800 a year that die on bicycles, or the 46,000 who die in car
> crashes or justify over 1 million Covid deaths, arguing that masks and
> vaccinations aren't necessary.
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

Concerning the car deaths, there have been lots of federal rules and regulations put into affect. From speed limits to seatbelts being mandatory when in the car to cars having airbags to improving the structure of cars when crashing and rollovers. So the political parties seem to care a great deal about killing people in cars and pass lots of laws. But one political party does not care at all about guns killing people. So what. No new laws. Lets eliminate the existing laws.

On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:29:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they were required
>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago experience with
>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the letter of the
>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>
>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm not saying the ultra-rich
>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are grossly faulty. And they are
>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and paying to have the laws re-written
>>> in their favor.
>>>
>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and read it over and over until
>>> you understand.
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a democracy
>> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one assumes,
>> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will be changed.
>
>How naive!
>
>The American legislative processes have been systematically corrupted by
>those with huge amounts of money to spend. To treat the most currently
>relevant example: A majority of Americans consistently says more gun
>control is needed. Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my
>state) actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>
>Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people? Hmm. Let's see
>who gets money from the NRA:
>https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>
>That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are blatantly
>open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy campaign "donations," gun
>manufacturers lobby for easier gun sales; the super-wealthy lobby for
>tax breaks for the super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for
>protection from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
>companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And Republicans
>appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.

But Frank, that is how a "democracy" works, and has always worked
since the Athenian days, and undoubtedly always will.
And you can argue that water runs up hill, "until the cows come home"
and it won't change thing one little bit.

One might ask whether, in a democracy, one should listen to Frank rave
about guns.... or the approximately 100 million that own a gun.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 28 May 2022 12:29:15 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 10:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members
>>> while some
>>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a
>>> paltry 4% of
>>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>>
>> The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party
>> can usually stop most legislation to which it strongly
>> objects. U.S. Senate rules are more than usually restrictive
>> that way. And Republicans in the Senate routinely stop any
>> chance of enhanced gun control.
>>
>> Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>> They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding
>> the relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to
>> NRA: Even a majority of _those_ want more restrictions on
>> guns. But they're scammed by the NRA's crooked top dogs who
>> (for example) absolutely convinced them that Obama was going
>> to take all their guns away.
>>
>> There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine
>> working, and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>> https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>>
>>
>> Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've
>> got a big mansion, right?
>>
>>
>To scale that-
>
>https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-hospital-assn/lobbying?id=D000000116
>
>and those guys are not even 'big' players.

Rather question who isn't lobbying?
The Black Fellows - ~14% of the population are leaping up and down,
The Italians and the Irish, of course, experienced substantial hard
feelings, but being clever folk got into politics and even elected
their own Mayors, Governors and Presidents.
Fiorello Henry La Guardia, for example was mayor of New York City from
1934 to 1945. And we all remember the poor little Irish chap from
Massachusetts, grandson of a bar owner, that made it all the way to
Washington.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 28 May 2022 12:09:11 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 10:46 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members
>>> while some
>>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a
>>> paltry 4% of
>>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>>
>> The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party
>> can usually stop most legislation to which it strongly
>> objects. U.S. Senate rules are more than usually restrictive
>> that way. And Republicans in the Senate routinely stop any
>> chance of enhanced gun control.
>>
>> Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>> They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding
>> the relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to
>> NRA: Even a majority of _those_ want more restrictions on
>> guns. But they're scammed by the NRA's crooked top dogs who
>> (for example) absolutely convinced them that Obama was going
>> to take all their guns away.
>>
>> There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine
>> working, and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>> https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>>
>>
>> Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've
>> got a big mansion, right?
>>
>>
>
>How would you feel about First Amendment prior restraint?
>
>First, secure a license to speak- fill out forms, go to a
>government office, wait to be approved, carry a speaking
>card with you. Then when you actually wish to speak you'll
>need a permit for a specific time/subject/venue. 'reasonable
>restrictions' as it were.

It might be noted too that there are laws and restrictions about gun
ownership and if the anti gunners are to be believed this is to
"control" things... Yet the FBI tables show that gun murders are
increasing, from 2015 when there were 13,847 firearm murders until
2019 there has been no decrease to less.

One might ask whether if you implement controls and they don't work
will more controls work better? One might look at the Sullivan Act
that effectively banned the ownership of pistols in New York State in
1911. According to a 2022 study, the law had no impact on overall
homicide rates.

Or the 18th Amendment which effectively outlawed booze in the
U.S....and was probably the greatest boon to organized crime that any
nation in the world has ever implemented.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:48:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 5/28/2022 10:15 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 10:44 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 5/27/2022 10:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank KrygowskiÂ
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>>>>
>>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they
>>>>> were required
>>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago
>>>>> experience with
>>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the
>>>>> letter of the
>>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>>
>>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm
>>>> not saying the ultra-rich
>>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are
>>>> grossly faulty. And they are
>>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and
>>>> paying to have the laws re-written
>>>> in their favor.
>>>>
>>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and
>>>> read it over and over until
>>>> you understand.
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>
>>>
>>> Happy to help. Call (202) 225-4965
>>>
>>> I'm sure Ms Pelosi will take your call.listen attentively,
>>> and set your thoughts into action regardless of the effect
>>> on her husband's portfolio.
>>
>> I'm not trying to canonize Pelosi. But at least she doesn't
>> seem to take donations from merchants of carnage.
>>
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>And just why am I being called a merchant of carnage?
>Care to reference any NRA member involved in a firearm crime?

Well, just like the "Black Lives Matter" thing, it is an easy target.

See, them there fellows got guns! See Guns kill people! Must be them
there fellows with them guns!

Never mind the reality that something like 30% of the U.S. public owns
guns and that FBI records documented 10,927 firearm murders in 2019,
or 1 firearm murder for every 9,189 gun owners... and 1/9189 is... not
very many.

In contrast I read that the average family size in the U.S. is
currently 3.5 and 95% of the families own cars so one might say that
there are ~95,624,696 auto owners in the U.S. and some 42,915 auto
deaths in 2021. So... 95.624,696/42915=one death per 2,228 auto
owners.
Gee... that is WoW! Cars are 4.12 times as dangerious as firearms....

But we gotta ban them guns.... see they kill people.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 5/28/2022 7:21 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:46:34 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2022 5:41 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, as noted below, the NRA claims 5.5 million members while some
>>> 40% of the U.S. population has access to a gun. So is a paltry 4% of
>>> those with access to a gun a big mover and shaker? Really?
>>> https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/
>>
>> Yes, the NRA is grossly over-influential.
>>
>> The bicameral design of U.S. legislatures means one party can usually
>> stop most legislation to which it strongly objects. U.S. Senate rules
>> are more than usually restrictive that way. And Republicans in the
>> Senate routinely stop any chance of enhanced gun control.
>>
>> Why do they do that? Here's why, yet again:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>> They are literally in the pocket of the NRA. And regarding the
>> relatively small portion of gun owners who donate to NRA: Even a
>> majority of _those_ want more restrictions on guns. But they're scammed
>> by the NRA's crooked top dogs who (for example) absolutely convinced
>> them that Obama was going to take all their guns away.
>>
>> There are enough of such gullible fools to keep that machine working,
>> and keep LaPierre in his lavish lifestyle. See
>> https://freepressokc.com/nra-executives-gold-plated-lifestyle-should-make-everyone-angry/
>>
>> Hey, who cares about a couple dozen schoolkids when you've got a big
>> mansion, right?
>
> Or the ~800 a year that die on bicycles, or the 46,000 who die in car
> crashes or justify over 1 million Covid deaths, arguing that masks and
> vaccinations aren't necessary.

Write this down and memorize it: "Consider benefits vs. detriments."
You seem to forget the concept within minutes.

We know - or at least I know, and you should know - the benefits of
bicycling. As I've often said, every study on the topic has found the
life extending benefits of bicycling far outweigh its minimal risks. Do
you really need the citations again?

By contrast: What are the benefits of letting ordinary (or worse than
ordinary) people buy guns optimized for mass shooting and combat
situations? What good does it do?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sat, 28 May 2022 13:55:31 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:29:22 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
>> > On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>> > <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>> >>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they were required
>> >>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago experience with
>> >>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the letter of the
>> >>> law closer then most poor folk.
>> >>
>> >> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm not saying the ultra-rich
>> >> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are grossly faulty. And they are
>> >> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and paying to have the laws re-written
>> >> in their favor.
>> >>
>> >> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and read it over and over until
>> >> you understand.
>> >>
>> >> - Frank Krygowski
>> >
>> > Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a democracy
>> > where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one assumes,
>> > when the majority decide the laws need changing they will be changed.
>> How naive!
>>
>> The American legislative processes have been systematically corrupted by
>> those with huge amounts of money to spend. To treat the most currently
>> relevant example: A majority of Americans consistently says more gun
>> control is needed. Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my
>> state) actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>>
>> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people? Hmm. Let's see
>> who gets money from the NRA:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are blatantly
>> open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy campaign "donations," gun
>> manufacturers lobby for easier gun sales; the super-wealthy lobby for
>> tax breaks for the super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for
>> protection from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals;
>
>That last one is a real killer. (Ignore the NRA AR-15 guns killing school children and teachers for a moment.)
>https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-business-congress-health-care-reform-medicare-756e3255a1cb4ab8c813151aec19b60c
>"To do that, Congress would have to change an unusual arrangement that’s written into law.
>
>When lawmakers created Medicare’s Part D outpatient prescription drug program in 2003, they barred Medicare from negotiating prices. Republicans who controlled Congress at the time wanted insurers that administer drug plans to do the haggling. Medicare was sidelined, despite decades of experience setting prices for hospitals, doctors and nursing homes."
>
>Seems to me the Republicans took the bribes being offered by the pharmacy companies.
>
Disregarding political parties is anyone naive enough to doubt that
those who have the ability to do so will NOT attempt to influence the
making of laws that apply to them?

And even more complex, "what is a bribe?" U.S law allows (I read)
contributories by individuals is limited to $2,900 per election. If
the 2,999 chaps that work for me want to each make a maximum donation
to the campaign of Mickey Mouse for president it is perfectly legal,'
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 5/28/2022 8:17 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:29:17 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they were required
>>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago experience with
>>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the letter of the
>>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>>
>>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm not saying the ultra-rich
>>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are grossly faulty. And they are
>>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and paying to have the laws re-written
>>>> in their favor.
>>>>
>>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and read it over and over until
>>>> you understand.
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a democracy
>>> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one assumes,
>>> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will be changed.
>>
>> How naive!
>>
>> The American legislative processes have been systematically corrupted by
>> those with huge amounts of money to spend. To treat the most currently
>> relevant example: A majority of Americans consistently says more gun
>> control is needed. Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my
>> state) actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>>
>> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people? Hmm. Let's see
>> who gets money from the NRA:
>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>
>> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are blatantly
>> open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy campaign "donations," gun
>> manufacturers lobby for easier gun sales; the super-wealthy lobby for
>> tax breaks for the super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for
>> protection from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals; oil
>> companies lobby against non-oil energy sources, etc. And Republicans
>> appointed to the courts say this is all just fine.
>
> But Frank, that is how a "democracy" works, and has always worked
> since the Athenian days, and undoubtedly always will.

So you say. Yet somehow, in dozens of other democracies there is no
obscene proliferation of mass murder weapons, there are fairer tax
structures and far less income and wealth disparity, there is far better
and less expensive health car, far lower medicine costs, far higher use
of renewable energy, far less crime, far fewer gun deaths, far better
support for arts, and far greater public contentment.

To me, that indicates there are serious problems with our current
American political system. There are also problems with a large portion
of the electorate. Imagine accepting the murder of schoolkids just to be
able to play with macho guns!

I don't believe the problems are incurable. But many conscienceless
people would have to be removed from power, and they will do anything at
all to retain power.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2022 9:39 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022 13:55:31 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
> <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:29:22 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2022 12:03 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 20:20:50 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they were required
>>>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago experience with
>>>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the letter of the
>>>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>>>
>>>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm not saying the ultra-rich
>>>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are grossly faulty. And they are
>>>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and paying to have the laws re-written
>>>>> in their favor.
>>>>>
>>>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and read it over and over until
>>>>> you understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>
>>>> Well Frank, as I've said, innumerable times. You live in a democracy
>>>> where the deciding factor is "the majority count". So, one assumes,
>>>> when the majority decide the laws need changing they will be changed.
>>> How naive!
>>>
>>> The American legislative processes have been systematically corrupted by
>>> those with huge amounts of money to spend. To treat the most currently
>>> relevant example: A majority of Americans consistently says more gun
>>> control is needed. Republicans consistently prevent that, or (as in my
>>> state) actively pass laws to _reduce_ gun control.
>>>
>>> Why would they ignore the consistent will of the people? Hmm. Let's see
>>> who gets money from the NRA:
>>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>>
>>> That's an illustration on just one issue. American laws are blatantly
>>> open to this sort of bribery. By use of heavy campaign "donations," gun
>>> manufacturers lobby for easier gun sales; the super-wealthy lobby for
>>> tax breaks for the super-wealthy; pharmaceutical companies lobby for
>>> protection from manufacturers of inexpensive pharmaceuticals;
>>
>> That last one is a real killer. (Ignore the NRA AR-15 guns killing school children and teachers for a moment.)
>> https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-business-congress-health-care-reform-medicare-756e3255a1cb4ab8c813151aec19b60c
>> "To do that, Congress would have to change an unusual arrangement that’s written into law.
>>
>> When lawmakers created Medicare’s Part D outpatient prescription drug program in 2003, they barred Medicare from negotiating prices. Republicans who controlled Congress at the time wanted insurers that administer drug plans to do the haggling. Medicare was sidelined, despite decades of experience setting prices for hospitals, doctors and nursing homes."
>>
>> Seems to me the Republicans took the bribes being offered by the pharmacy companies.
>>
> Disregarding political parties is anyone naive enough to doubt that
> those who have the ability to do so will NOT attempt to influence the
> making of laws that apply to them?

What do pharmaceuticals cost where you live? How often are school kids
gunned down there?

Don't pretend that it's impossible to fix our problems. Few other
countries have them.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2022 5:02 PM, John B. wrote:

<snip>

> Well, copying from your post, I see that " For a poor person, it means
> that if they can't afford some sort of car, they can't get a job."

Studies show that low-income residents need cars to increase their
economic well-being.

The reality is that people want to live in single family homes if
possible. Lower-income residents will endure long commutes to live in
the kind of housing they desire. We build subsidized housing to help
those that can't earn enough to pay for market-rate housing, but they
still need cars.

We are seeing falling population in my area because there is no more
land to build single-family homes so prices for the few homes that come
on the market are very high. Yet the vacancy rate for expensive
apartments is high as people move to the exurbs to buy houses
(remote-working has accelerated this trend).

On 5/28/2022 9:20 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2022 11:48:05 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 5/28/2022 10:15 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2022 10:44 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 5/27/2022 10:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 7:14:20 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 27 May 2022 12:26:07 -0400, Frank KrygowskiÂ
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> But Frank, all those rich folks paid the taxed that they
>>>>>> were required
>>>>>> to pay under U.S. tax laws. In fact, from my years ago
>>>>>> experience with
>>>>>> H&R Block I will bet you that they actually followed the
>>>>>> letter of the
>>>>>> law closer then most poor folk.
>>>>>
>>>>> John, you're having great trouble understanding this: I'm
>>>>> not saying the ultra-rich
>>>>> are violating tax laws. I'm saying those tax laws are
>>>>> grossly faulty. And they are
>>>>> faulty largely because of the ultra-rich lobbying and
>>>>> paying to have the laws re-written
>>>>> in their favor.
>>>>>
>>>>> American tax laws need to be changed. Write that down and
>>>>> read it over and over until
>>>>> you understand.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Happy to help. Call (202) 225-4965
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure Ms Pelosi will take your call.listen attentively,
>>>> and set your thoughts into action regardless of the effect
>>>> on her husband's portfolio.
>>>
>>> I'm not trying to canonize Pelosi. But at least she doesn't
>>> seem to take donations from merchants of carnage.
>>>
>>> https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/national-rifle-assn/recipients?id=d000000082
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And just why am I being called a merchant of carnage?
>> Care to reference any NRA member involved in a firearm crime?
>
> Well, just like the "Black Lives Matter" thing, it is an easy target.
>
> See, them there fellows got guns! See Guns kill people! Must be them
> there fellows with them guns!
>
> Never mind the reality that something like 30% of the U.S. public owns
> guns and that FBI records documented 10,927 firearm murders in 2019,
> or 1 firearm murder for every 9,189 gun owners... and 1/9189 is... not
> very many.
>
> In contrast I read that the average family size in the U.S. is
> currently 3.5 and 95% of the families own cars so one might say that
> there are ~95,624,696 auto owners in the U.S. and some 42,915 auto
> deaths in 2021. So... 95.624,696/42915=one death per 2,228 auto
> owners.
> Gee... that is WoW! Cars are 4.12 times as dangerious as firearms....
>
> But we gotta ban them guns.... see they kill people.

Your arguments try for "clever" but tend toward "silly."

Nobody here has called for banning all guns.

I and quite a few other people have called for banning those guns whose
designs are optimized for rapid fire combat. Those guns have no
important advantages for any practical use. Their advantages are for
killing people, or practicing for the possibility of killing people.

Countries where those guns are illegal do just fine - in fact, far
better than the U.S.

--
- Frank Krygowski