Evil Corporations Avoiding Taxes

[StevieD]

DTB I would like your opinon on this. If a person is against a war and states that fact and legally is able to avoid being drafted does that make him worse than a person who claims to be in favor of a war but uses his fathers influence to get him into an elite division of a branch of the service that has no chance of being drafted. We can add that a person who joins such a branch also goes AWOL for a year but is never charged because of his fathers influence.
Now to me I find the person who says he is against the war to be more honest than the person who claims to be in favor of it but then uses every political string at his disposal to keep from serving.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Wayne, the payne:

The master of spin and avoidance. I once again, congratulate you. You continue to post and spin, lies, half-truths, and misinterpretations. A reader of your posts, who has not followed our little disagreement over the months would think boy this Eddie is a real scumbag.

You are being a good republican, Wayne. You are very much like your leaders, the puppet Bush, and the rest of corporate america backed terrorists who currently reside in Washington. Your a liar Wayne, of zero moral fibre. You rip peope off on a daily basis and blame others. Wayne your nothing.

Your scum Wayne. Although I never anticipated changing the minds of individuals like you and Dr. Freeze, I thought if you had even the slightest modicum of truth within that lying, polished, insurance agent facade you have going for you, you would own up to some truths that the middle and left espouse. Nope, not you Wayne.

Wayne, my retired client is on a contingency fee agreement with me. You've spun my obvious posts with the girls as infidelity. By the way, I dumped Helen several months ago and am back with the trophy wife. I said I would not want my child to fight in Corporate Americas war lead by the corporate puppet Bush. I, as well as my child would fight to the death to defend the USA not the USCA. I mean if you want Wayne, Jr. to get rid of all those weapons of mass destruction so that Haliburton can get that juicy government gig from Bush and the other stockholders, go for it big guy. Or should I rephrase that "...bring em on."

Hide behind the computer. You not only a liar, hypocrite and basically a criminal, your also very weird. Most people on this site have screen names. I dont see how the fact that you are attempting to market and gather premiums from the unwary citizens of Bowling Green Kentucky by displaying your companys name here has any bearing on anything whatsoever.

You are still a conservative bigot, liar, hypocrite, low-life, insurance agent from a backwater state. Those are the facts scumball. Enjoy your time Wayne with you and the corporate criminals in charge for the time being. You and your fellow Tim McVey, John Burch types days are numbered. Your hypocrisy is slowly, but surely being exposed. I just hope a fellow lawyer does it too you personally. It would be fitting.

Now go whitewash that white picket fence in front of 65's lovely little 3 bedroom bungalow on Main Street and make plans with him for you and the Missus to meet after church tomorrow for an ice cold glass of lemondae on the veranda. Your a joke, Huck.

Eddie

 

[djv]

Holly chit does this have to get so dam nasty. I injoy much that you both post. But dam it dont need to be a bar room fight. Eddie you get extra pissed kind of easy. I think were better of attacking the opion we have on the subject. Then attacking each other.
I dont agree with 50% that may be said here. But what the hell no one made me god.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Shucks, ................... sorry. Aw gees..... I didn't do nuthin. Besides he started it.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Thats Sgt Payne Ed.

I appreciate the compliments.

Rather than be sarcastic I am going to try and help you with your case on the info I have below per your quote.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"After Dr. Fivecarsinthegarage was through with him, he left the hospital with a mid-dorsal amputation, was fitted with a nice looking prosthesis and lost his dream of dancing with Ginger Rogers.

Well were coming up for trial in January. So far my half-footed client has shelled out approximately $20,000 in costs and expenses to get experts to testify that the good doctor screwed this one up.

By the way, my guy is retired on a fixed income. 20 grand is a lot of money to him. Considering that 80% to 90% of malpractice verdicts are returned in favor of the health care providers in this jurisdiction, perhaps you would like to further explain how my client has nothing to lose."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now granted on the surface this would have every member of the ACLU in tears but if we look at it logically from info you have provided one must wonder just a tad.
Two things come to light. A: No firm wanted this case on a "pure" contingency )including your firm) or they would have absorbed the $20,000 fee ,which make me think this case ??????
B: Since you know so much about plaintiffs fianaces I have to assume that you have checked his ability to pay if desicion is not favorable,which really makes me think this case is not a high % case.
Now the big question. If the plaintiff knows this case is only a 20% chance at most (according to your figures) WHY is he risking his life savings???
Surely you are not that good at pitching. Slick Eddie maybe??
Now I am being sarcastic drat and I said I would help so here goes.

Instead of looking into the doctor I think you should be looking at the person who administered the anethesia.
My reasoning: Anyone who will risk their life savings on less than 20% chance for foot injury and knows no one will risk a pure contingency on his case probably has brain damage. --and that is where you need to turn your attention.
Either way I wouldn't want to be in his shoes.no pun intended

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

sorry Steve Didn't mean to dodge your question.
I think djv and others will concur there are few who want to be in wars and 90% of veterens from nam asked each other Why are we here.==but if it was up to each individual everyone could find some excuse as not many voluntarily want to be away from home with their life in jeopardy. If everyone had a choice I don't think you would find many to participate when needed. Each person has their own agengas in life and must follow their own set of rules.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

No premium collector:

As even you may be able to surmise, my client is rather upset with the good doctor. You see every night when he goes to bed and removes that lovely prosthetic, stares at that stump that his wonderful surgeon left him with, he gets somewhat upset.

See, the good doctor (you know, the ones who because of you and your fellow republicans, are no longer responsible for their negligence) says he did nothing wrong. Oh Wayno, I'm sure, let me repeat that, sure that you think the case is, as you say, ?????.

I have no doubt that you would fit in with the 80% or so (my figures) who make up the defense verdicts in this jurisdiction. Your logic is very skewed. I request that my clients repay the costs advanced necessary to prosecute their cases. I guess you have a problem with this.

After all, I know the your agency as well as the carriers your represent often times insure people and companies that do not pay their respective premiums. As you said, you are in the business of helping people spread their risk. Your just a people kinda person regardless of their ability to pay premiums.

Wow how giving.

You see Wayno, plaintiffs do have something to lose. And in fact, most do. Either the client or the attorney absorbs this cost (in addition to the hundreds of hours lost with no pay) But then again, I'm sure Wayno that you work hundreds of hours at the insurance business without pay. Just your way of helping people spread out their risk.

More hypocrisy by Wayno.

Eddie

 

[Rudy]

Figures that you're an ambulance chaser, Edgar -- one of the three key left-wing constituencies, union thugs and public employees being the others. Why are all your arguments based on the supposed failings of somebody else that you disagree with rather that on the merits of the philosophical discussion?

It must be a variation of the old "lawyers credo": If the facts are in your favor, argue the facts. If the law is in your favor, argue the law. If neither is in your favor, pound the table." Or in your case, assasinate their character.

 

[djv]

Carefull now in this country they estimate 40% of lawyers are Republicans. Our highest court at this point is close to being right as it has in along time. And they sure do some strange things.

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Rudy:

How can you live in the most beautiful, open-minded, tolerant, enlightened city on the planet and yet be such a dull-witted dolt. My goose-steppin friend, we need to trade hometowns.

And what member of the axis of evil do you belong too? Bible toting moral majority, corporate minion or terrorist, or Hitler youth? For one who accuses me of calling names your pretty good at it Heinrich.

Kinda generalizing about lawyers aren't you cupcake? You forgot one other ism.... that is if you dont know what your talking about blow smoke. Before you chime in with your undoubtedly superior intellect learn the facts about your young republican cousin and the history between he and I.

Then I will toss you and your arguments to the sharks off Stinson Beach. By the way, that wont take much effort by yours truly.

Love North Beach dont you.

Ed

PS: Just a guess on my part, but I dont reckon you hang out much in the Castro district, do you?

 

[StevieD]

DTB, you didn't answer my question. Since you brought up Clintons Vietnam record in negative terms I thought I would ask you who you thought acted more honestly the guy who was against the war and said so and used legal means to avoid the draft or a guy who claimed to be for the war but still used legal means to avoid the draft. Myself, I would go with the guy who said he was against it and I wouldn't trust the scum bag who thought it was ok for other people to fight while the hid behind his daddy's skirt.
I was wondering who you would throw your support behind.

 

[CardShark]

The real issues!

The real issues!

Each of your positions reflects a partial understanding of issues.
They reflect the best arguments you have for the issues when considered in the vacuum of the issue.

The ideal society should exist as follow.

Tax consumption only less essentials(that's a fight, onl;y 1 big screen TV exempted per home)

A) No Corporate Tax, No Property Tax, No Income Tax.

If the marginal rate needs to be 70% or whatever to allow for this, let it be that.

Problems fixed: Just cut a ton of agencies from the budget, federal and local.

No one taxed unfairly, All can "get by" with no tax. Luxuries are taxed.

Corporations flourish and export(LOL) less jobs


B) No more immigration except immediate family or limited political assylum.

With so many homelss/welfare/srs. in need, how can we justify it?
No harm would come from strict tightening. Don't even talk about needing the labor. If the cost of goods goes up to pay labor costs then it does. More money in the economy.

C-I) Drug testing/Alcohol testing for welfare recipients. You fail - you go into a treatment center. You come out and want aid you get tested. Fail again. Back in the center. Limit the tries and then off assistance for good at some pt/

C-II) Government workfare should be a given. This can be coupled with "Item B" Put the welfare recipients to work in the low paying immigant jobs. Free labor is cheaper than $20/day.
Or better yet, the farmers/contractors etc. can pay the goevernment the wages. We should never give aid with no work again. If mothers have children, we provide day care at the government facilities.

C-III) Down the time line, Charities(I didn't say religious) should
bear the entire welfare load. They can do it cheaper because a)
They won't hire lazy workers, b)Some people will volunteer to help (there's that zero labor cost again), c) with the tax plan people will be able to have extra money to donate, and will do so. I would!

D)Here is the main part. It is not about whether money should go to a stadium or welfare or to build roads. It is ALL PORK, and simply used to garner Votes. There is no other reason for it.
We need to REVERSE the system.

With the consumption tax plan, let local governments collect the taxes. They have a set percentage allocated to Fed and State projects. They send the money up. The fed does not send money DOWN! No More PORK! Fed and state decisions must be made based on login not on whose district someone lives in!

The details of how this would work are beyond my typing endurance. If interested email me and I will post again.

I'm tired and its dinnertime.

You all care, and that' what we all have in COMMON!


P.S. I am winning huge! Thanks to _____. Opps, sorry this was
not to meant to be an ad. But I AM! But if you want to know about the service I am using let me know. It is the Best in Sports Handicapping.

 

[Rudy]

Eddie: you've got me pegged, but why keep resorting to personal flaming? Weak arguer.

djv: 40% of laywers may be Republicans; SOMEBODY has to defend good from evil.

cardshark: you're on the right track, but such revolutionary stuff can't happen in this population. Baby steps, my man.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

DJV I have the utmost respect for many attorneys dem and reb.
It is the ones that advertise on front of phone books and on tv telling the folks how they "care about them"
You know the one like the Deutch ,I settle taxs for only $20, chick, or the guy who has many class action ads with the fine print saying other attorneys in other states may be doing the work, He's a shill making bucks on referrals. You would be amazed at how many attorneys have never been to trial and never will. Heres how they work:
Potential client client calls,1st thing make sure the defendent (usually an ins co) has means to pay.
Then send them to one of 3 or 4 doctors (they call green ink dr's in insurance industry) in town for treatment and diagnosis.
Then figure the insurance co's "tolerence level",the amount that is cheaper for them to pay than to litigate, and take your 1/3 with your out of pocket expense,a couple of phone calls and usually about 3 or 4 letters to insurance co.

Now let me be clear,this is not your general attorney as most are very competent and serve a great need and I am not inferring Eddie is one of the bad ones because I do not know.--but it is just not the small attorneys that wear this badge of shame but some of the big boys included.

Steve I do not think anyone that avoids the draft whether it be student deferment or marriage or any other just means. I say good for them including Clinton. My beef was his protesting against it while in Europe. A far as Bush in the national guard if thats what he was in,would be in position to go as many have in past year,but I think his connections would have kept him out regardless.Which is worse,you be the judge. Personally I would certainly rather show my kids a picture of me flying a jet rather than carring a picket sign---but thats just us flag wavers I guess.
---and I also think the military in general would prefer a jet pilot to a picket carrier as commander and chief--now if your looking for ACLU material I'd give the nod to the protester---and when the shit hits the fan here,which is a matter of time, I know who I don't want covering my ass--but you will see lots of leopards change spots when that happens.

 

[StevieD]

DTB, In those days it was not like today. There was no way the National Guard was going to be sent to Vietman. It was used as a dodge plain and simple. It became a way rich kids were able to dodge the draft without embarrassing their parents. In my opinion it was the real cowards way out. You make so much of someone protesting but just like the corporatre welfare you hold so dear if someone was able to buy their way out of the war then that's ok! I lost friends in that war and I am sickened not by those who protested it and not by those who fought in it but by those who chose to shun all responsibility and hide under daddy's money.

 

[djv]

DTB I understand your point. We have adds that come in to our area from law firms out of state. Many time they cleary state if you been injured and been offered what you believe is unfair call 800 we can help.
But what I also want to see are folks like Enron pay for how bad they hurt so many in this country. Trying to lay it all at the feet of Anderson accounting was a cop out. I do not understand why this adminastration did not really bang them hard. If they think that little deal with Martha and her friend needed to be hit hard. Enron tribled that if not more. Some how the real bad ones are escaping. The playing field needs more balance.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I think it is futile to discuss the issue really Stevie.
I think being in national quard come closer to serving your country than dodging the draft and evidently you do not so we'll call it a stand-off

DJV as I said before I agree with you on Enron ect people and that they should be sent in general prison population to discourage future theft--the only things that disburbs me more than not prosecuting them is giving them a pardon

Cardshark A most interesting post. You got my vote if you decide to run

Eddie I am laying $60/$50 your client is a diabetic, and if so $50/$10 you lose the case:SIB

 

[Eddie Haskell]

CardShark:

Nice ideas. Can't work in practice.

Rudy:

"Ambulance Chaser" appeared in the first sentence of your first post directed to me. You know what they say about glass houses.

Dogs:

You owe me $60.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Eddie I was hoping so. Now if you give me your mailing address I will promply forward it..(no p.o. boxes please.)

your tooooo easy Eddie :lol:

 

[Eddie Haskell]

A. Dershowitz
1000 TriState Building
432 Walnut Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202