Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Believe what you want, Waco. But I did. Only 4 years, but I was primarily an accounting and business law prof. I taught Econ, but my credentials are in accounting and law.
So you're suggesting that COG may have taught economics at the university attended by Otis Sistrunk?
If true, that would be very impressive indeed!!
That's funny, I don't remember seeing COG on Monday Night Football? Did he play for the Raiders too?
During a Monday Night Football telecast, a television camera beamed a sideline shot of the 6'5", 265-pound Sistrunk's steaming bald head to the nation. That, along with his lack of a college education resulting in the team program listing Sistrunk's academic background as "U.S. Mars" (short for U.S. Marines), prompted ABC commentator and ex-NFL player Alex Karras to suggest that the extraterrestrial-looking Sistrunk's alma mater was from the "University of Mars."
I'm glad to see that you are at least having some fun now. I think that evening out did you some good. And Lusty, that was kind of funny! But I taught on Earth. Now you can have some fun with that.
...But I taught on Earth. You did? Are you sure?? Now you can have some fun with that. OK, how about this for fun? This is a fantasy site, after all. Right? Other than sex, it's hard to beat fantasizing about not having to pay tax!
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
so COG, where did you teach Economics? the University of Mars or the City College of Uranus?
lol. don't get your undies in a bunch, most of the time i agree with your views. just not this time.
Waco Kid, it sounds like you're a bit skeptical and are having a hard time grasping the ethereal wonderfulness of the FairTax. I suspect that's because you place exaggerated faith in such quaint concepts as logic, reason, and mathematics.
You need to break the restrictive bonds of such old-fashioned, ossified thinking -- and let our esteemed extraterrestrial economics professor point the way!
If you are a very high income earner or wealthy individual, the FairTax is obviously fantastic for you, as it would greatly reduce your tax burden, possibly reducing it to a small fraction of what it is now. Even Earthbound thinkers realize that. (Those statements should ensure my candidacy for the Captain Obvious Award.)
But even those in the middle income ranges would benefit enormously. As the FairTax books and advocacy websites point out, workers get to keep their whole paycheck, since it obviously would no longer be necessary for employers to deduct withholding for income and payroll taxes. An Earthbound economist might assume that the typical taxpayer, in lieu of income and payroll taxes, would pay close to 30% more for the purchase of goods and services after the FairTax is added on. But that's not the way it works!
As the forum's esteemed University of Mars economics professor has pointed out many times, adding the 30% FairTax would not raise the price of all the stuff you buy, since current "embedded taxes" would suddenly disappear, and they approximately equal the newly added consumption tax. Pretty cool, eh?
Bottom line: Workers would keep their "whole paycheck" (gross pay) since withholding and all income tax obligations would disappear, while they would pay no more for goods and services upon which the new consumption tax is levied, since the FairTax would be approximately balanced by the elimination of the "embedded taxes." Holy mackerel!
You may be skeptical of this "embedded taxes" stuff and wonder how in the hell all this could possibly be true. Is there any analysis or research supporting the claim that embedded taxes that would be removed by the repeal of our current tax code approximately equal the 30% FairTax that would be added? Well, no. But extraterrestrial economists know for a fact that it's true. Why? Because Neal Boortz says so, that's why! Now who could argue with that?
So, who actually pays taxes to the federal government under this plan? Apparently no one on Earth knows for sure, but it might be advisable to avoid getting caught trying to hide behind a tree!
"Don't tax you. Don't tax me. Tax the guy behind the tree!"
After all of this discussion, at least one point finally seems to have been demystified.
A couple of years ago, the forum's esteemed extraterrestrial economist was subjected to much ridicule after it became plain for everyone to see that he had falsely claimed to have taught university-level economics. It isn't remotely conceivable that anyone who didn't have a clue about what "tax incidence" means, and who had obviously never even heard the term, could possibly have done so.
On Earth, at least. However ...
As we now can see, Martian strategists, through ingenious maneuvering and sleight of hand, have managed to deal away the entirety of the tax burden. Thus, there is no tax incidence, since the burden of taxation is apparently not incident upon any individual or entity. Absolutely amazing!
So it must be acknowledged that our intrepid extraterrestrial "economist" might very well have taught university-level economics -- at The University of Mars!
.
CuteOldGuy: The Perfect Dunning-Kruger Poster Boy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
It's not false. I taught here, too. Uh-huh. Suuuuuure you did! It was an exchange program. Oh, my! It sure would be fun to see you try to explain how you got someone who runs an "exchange program" in the U.S. to let you teach a subject that you know so little about. That would be just as entertaining as watching you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to coherently defend that ridiculously laughable "embedded taxes" bullshit!
(Exactly my reaction when I first read three years ago that you falsely claimed to have taught economics!)
Give it a rest, Captain. Give what a rest? You keep replying, don't you? When are you going to give lying about your academic record "a rest?" We know what you think, and don't care. Uh-huh. Sure you don't! This is really something else. Why do you repeatedly claim to have taught a subject of which you obviously have little knowledge? Are you really that insecure? Pathetic!
Now, just to try to match this rather startling discovery, I think I'll try to find someone who claims to have been a math prof -- but who has no fucking idea what the limit of a function is!
.
Keep it coming. You are sounding, dare I say it? Stupid. Says the guy who, after getting his ass handed to him in astonishingly embarrassing fashion, tops off his insult-laden meltdown with an obviously false claim that he taught university-level economics! Give it up, Captain. No one cares, including me. Then why do you keep responding with more whining? As long as you do so, I'll be happy to laugh at you some more, you obnoxious ignoramus!
So do yourself a favor. Give it up, move on to other threads that contain nothing but juvenile insults, and in the future avoid embarrassing yourself by staying out of tax-related discussions.
You didn't answer the question I asked you in my previous post. Why did you falsely claim to have taught a discipline you know nothing about? Could there have been any reason other than rank insecurity?
.
You see, now this is fun. I post something, refusing to take your bait and get into an endless pissing contest, and you melt down with lies and blather. What will you come up with next, CaptainHalfbright? Lies about my character, or my credentials? Maybe both? What will it be? Inquiring minds want to know.
