rw wrote:
Tim J. wrote:

Oh, I understand the problem. I just doubt we would agree on what
brought us to this point, how best to remedy the situation, or what
brought down the Roman Empire for that matter.

I don't think you do understand the problem.

How can you make that statement based on what I've said so far (and all
I intend to say here), which is quoted in its entirety above? You seem
to be pretty knowledgeable, almost all-knowing, about my lack of
knowledge and understanding.
--
TL,
Tim
---------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

wrote in message
...
In article ,
lid says...
I was talking about Asians and Indians and engineering
and computer science, not Canadians and entomology.

Oh I just gotta hear the rationalization of why it makes
any difference.
- Ken

How about this. . .

The taxpayer subsidizes the hell out of firms, like Intell for example, who
mostly get all kinds of state and local tax brakes, put zip into the local
schools, work the H1B visa system for all its worth, drain the **** out of
local social services because the local taxpayer pays for all the services
that the relatives of the H1B-er brings over, and then uses the foreign
worker to force unpaid overtime out of the workforce etc etc.

Here is another reason. Engineers for the most part get all kinds of subsidy
and assistance with their education. And its a fact that they get better
treatment from the State and Federal government when their industries go
thru transitions and periods of heavy unemployment. Despite these subsidies,
its been my experience that the majority of engineers and private sector
scientists hold right-wing and "libertarian" views, and are opposed to any
government helping hand, except the handouts that they get. Its twice as
gauling when the hypocrite isn't even an American citizen, and your local
school can't afford a decent math teacher because the Intell plant down the
street got a 10 year tax holiday, free roads, and all kinds of other
freebies.

Such companies have no national loyalties. Why should the average Joe
subsidize them?

Dave

"Tim J." wrote in message
...
SNIP
Oh, I understand the problem. I just doubt we would agree on what
brought us to this point, how best to remedy the situation, or what
brought down the Roman Empire for that matter.

SNIP

Same thing thats killing us . . . radical Christianity.

Dave

"rw" wrote in message
link.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
link.net...

Those are people who don't have the discipline to control their
spending,
and they know it....


Say.....I'll bet you did a calculation! :)

I always calculate my taxes ahead of time and prepay whatever I have to
prepay to avoid penalties. I recommend that practice. If you owe more
tax in one year than you owed in the previous year, there are NO
PENALTIES for underwithholding. That is very, very useful if you have a
good year. It saved me about $1200 this year, using your very low
estimate of 1.25% return. That $1200 will just about pay for my Belize
fishing trip, which I'm leaving for tomorrow morning.


And thats what I do (pay quarterly estimated taxes) and its the law. But I
suspect the main difference between viewpoints in this thread is between
folks who have primarily wage and salary income, and folk who have multiple
sources and or businesses or investments. Given that folks are not carrying
credit card balances of high interest loans, over withholding is not a bad
method of forced savings or phasing. Particularly for folks who have average
self discipline.

Dave

rw wrote in news:eIZ8e.10514$lP1.3764
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

If you owe more
tax in one year than you owed in the previous year, there are NO
PENALTIES for underwithholding.

So long as you've withheld 90% of what you paid the previous year, I
believe.

Scott