- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Capital and Taxes
by Llywarch Hen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Quotes taken from recent Tim May posts here. First we'll assume that economic benefits result in social benefits, otherwise what's the point?: >And the cloud of ideas connected with somehow forcing capital investment to >remain in the U.S....well, the best way to do this is to alter the tax laws >so that America (for example) becomes a magnet for investment. (If one is >looking to help America, that is.) Now the example of how capital gains taxes hinder investment. First we'll portray an income tax as a property tax: >something else that's terribly important: taxes must be paid on other >assets sold to raise the $100K. For example, if I own shares in Intel, >bought many years ago, I have to sell $160,000 worth of Intel stock, send a >$60,000 check to Uncle Sam and Uncle Pete . . . But this was an income tax. The capital gains are taxed at a rate less than earned wages and are free of the regressive social security and FICA taxes. Tim really doesn't want to pay his fair share, and here's the reason: >. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and then send the remaining >$100,000 to my friends. If the new investment *doubles*, my $100,000 gain >is taxed at 38% and I'm left with a gain of about $62,000. >It doesn't take a number theorist to see that I may as well have not even >bothered. So long as I just sit on the Intel stock, no taxes are owed. >Sounds like a no brainer to me. Yep, we've adopted the fuzziest-headed of liberal ideas in promoting government as an agent of change to improve things for Tim and his pals by asking wage earners to subsidize his economic activities by distributing the costs to the public so he can enjoy the profits. But this is just the result of the massive jobs program whose beneficiaries prefer to call the Cold War, MAD, and so on. The most Keynesian solution of the century combined with a not so subtle transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and renamed 'supply-side' so its clients don't have to admit they have been on welfare for the last twelve or fifteen years. Combined with a massive twelve-year capital bull market in which it would have been difficult to lose money, we have a class of people who have confused personal wealth with personal merit and the notion that they did it on their own. Is this simple dishonesty masquerading as intellectual dishonesty or just standard innocent and dim-witted Republican-Libertarian opportunism buttressed by quotations from free-market theologians? >. . . >huge "backlog" of unrealized capital gains (aka gains on paper, but not yet >taxable) is what is being spoken of when people like Jack Kemp and Steve >Forbes speak of "unleashing" the capital gains now tied up due to the high >tax rates. >Personally, I favor open borders--but no public schooling, no tax-funded >handouts, no welfare, no child support, no public hospitals, etc. This supposes that Tim paid the workers hired to clear brush from his land enough so that they could afford private schooling and excellent health care. Two more quotes and from different sources. The aristocratic complaint is quoted in Amabel William-Ellis and F.J. Fisher, M.A., _The Story of English Life_: "The world goeth from bad to worse when shepherd and cowherd demand more for their labor than the master-bailiff was wont to take in days gone by. Laborers of old were not wont to eat of wheaten bread; their meat was of beans and coarser corn, and their drink of water alone. Cheese and milk were a feast to them; their dress was of hodden grey; then was the world ordered aright for folk of this sort. Ha! age of ours, whither turnest thou? For the poor and small folk, who should cleave to their labor, demand to be better fed than their masters." A widely published remark made by Mr. George Soros: "Economic history is a never-ending series of episodes based on falsehoods and lies, not truths. It represents the path to big money. The object is to recognize that trend whose premise is false, ride that trend, and step off before it is discredited." -- Llywarch Hen

1 0

Re: Capital and Taxes
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:27 PM 8/14/96, Greg Hopper wrote: >When you consider that capital gains tax rate schedules are not indexed for >inflation, the situation's even worse than Tim's analysis implies. Since >you pay tax on the nominal rather than the real capital gain, the effective >capital gains tax rate is really higher than the quoted rate. >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Greg Hopper |Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are > >Research Department |my own and not necessarily those of >Federal Reserve Bank |the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia >of Philadelphia |or the Federal Reserve System. I certainly agree with Greg here, and find it too bad that his views do not actually express the views of the Federal Reserve. (Actually, they may, as I remember reading Alan Greenspan's stuff in Rand's books in the late 60s, e.g., "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.") Not only is there inflation to consider, there is the double taxation I should've emphasized more than I did. Wages are typically corrected for inflation (for competitiveness reasons), but capital gains are not. That stock I bought for $20 in 1975 dollars and am now selling for $40 in 1996 dollars, and paying 40% in taxes on the "gain," is clearly not really a doubling. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Stopped Clock. Was: Schlafly on Crypto
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:46 AM 8/14/96 -0400, Marc J. Wohler wrote: >At 07:59 AM 8/14/96 -0400, you wrote: >>Subject: Clinton Is Trying to be Big Brother -- Phyllis Schlafly Column 8/8/96 > >It makes me ill to agree with Schlafly on any issue, but 'Even a stopped >clock....... >Unrepentant Liberial It does seem really odd, doesn't it? But look at it this way: The only reason the knuckle-dragging conservatives are able to take the moral high-ground on this and other net-freedom issues is because the OTHER "unrependant liberals" have inexplicably abandoned the correct side of the argument. The fact that the conservatives are right may seem odd, but the behavior of the liberals is truly astonishing. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Crypto Policy Variant
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:17 PM 8/14/96, Frank Stuart wrote: >Here's my key, your honor. I used a one-time pad to do the encryption. As >you can plainly see, the encrypted file that the prosecution made such a big >deal about contains nothing but some of my favorite verses from the King James >Bible. You shouldn't infer anything from the fact that another key would >make the file contain the evil stuff that was alleged (even though it is a bit >strange that the last verse ends in the middle of a word). Frank presents a cogent example of how the Staelin plan is a nonstarter. That is, it's a nonstarter *if* we remove any formal evidence of which crypto method is attached to a program. Cycles are cheap (compared to prison terms or a bullet in the head). Therefore, it's cheaper to let folks either make their own guesses at the crypto involved, or try several, than it is to unambigiously narrow down the searches to one particular algorithm, which the State can then insist on a decryption key for. Let the Staelin Plan be warning for us to prepare for an era in which the particular crypto method should not be revealed. (Cryptographically, any of the various algorithms are "polynomially equivalent," but, practically, the "King James Defense" used by Frank, brilliantly, will probably work. It's hard to argue with Scripture.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Bart Croughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy Sandfort wrote: >I've just had an insight with regard to Bart's ongoing capital debate. In response to Perry's "green pylon" post, Bart wrote: > I am saying that the fact that American workers are better paid > than workers in Third World countries, can be explained for a > large part by the fact that there is much more capital invested > in the US than in Third World countries. Bart's error lies in his confusion of the terms "captial" and "capital investment." While capital may be used to make capital investments, there are other things it can be spent for as well (wages, taxes, supplies, etc.). If Bart were to use the term "infrastructure" then it would be clear that the ebb and flow of mere capital would have relatively little to do with infrastructure influenced wages.< What does 'capital' mean? The MacMillan dictionary of modern economics (3d edition, p. 51) says: 1) A word used to refer to a factor of production produced by the economic system. Capital goods are produced goods which are used as factor INPUTS for further PRODUCTION. As such capital can be distinguished from LAND and LABOUR which are not conventionally thought of as being themselves produced by the economic system. As a consequence of its heterogenous nature, the measurement of capital has become the source of much controversy 2) The word is also used as a term for financial ASSETS. So, I fear that it's Sandy who is confused about the meaning of the word 'capital', not me. But even if it is me who is confused about the meaning of the word 'capital' (which isn't the case), this confusion wouldn't affect my argument at all. If American capital is invested in foreign countries instead of in the US, then the total amount of capital invested in the US will be lower than it would have been if the capital had been invested in the US. So the wages in the US would be lower than they would have been if the capital had been invested in the US. The argument is still the same, and my question is still not answered. Bart Croughs

2 1

Re: Fw: Re: Free Pronto Secure Offer
by Lou Zirko 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: unicorn(a)schloss.li, cypherpunks(a)toad.com, geoff(a)commtouch.co.il Date: Wed Aug 14 21:52:47 1996 Personally I enjoyed helping to bring to market a full-featured PGP-aware mail package. It was a product that I was interested in seeing and was able to participate in making suggestions as to features, etc. It particular, Geoff was most help full in making sure that if performed under NT which was not initially supported, but is my platform (along with Linux). It is a good product and will help to ease usability of PGP for people that are afraid of the steps required by many mailers to utilize PGP. If I remember, your platform in Linux and you should not be so quick to criticize what you may have not seen. for > On Tue, 13 Aug 1996, geoff wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > "Do all the work I should be doing or have done in the first place > discover the critical flaws in my new-keen-o-ka-jive-o crypto system and > I > will give you a free copy of a critically flawed crypto system (a > $99.00 > value) ABSOLUTELY FREE. Wait, don't order yet. Included you also get > to > actually whitewash my fence and then mow my lawn. All at NO COST to > you." > > -- > I hate lightning - finger for public key - Vote Monarchist > unicorn(a)schloss.li > > > Lou Zirko (502)383-2175 Zystems lzirko(a)c2.org "We're all bozos on this bus" - Nick Danger, Third Eye -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 iQEVAwUBMhKREMtPRTNbb5z9AQEyywgAwvmF9zh46X6KpgprzbTEWsl2v8MFCOU0 s5LVvO8gt3IN3GRWAGaMsmsAuDhP7KdyG7UGSuJlstPd0sJWO+7vw6XDn4kZhsZH /3aN0FVwYJJOf51rEmHOYc0JagNRUlRIMtkiRr019JRmb+7s+6uO6B6r1ojT0SCe NOS8lHOGUOqD2OaYX8vhg2nH18AwNn+WRPsURCkcp3xhF9T3PiDasvYVCsirizqL ePk8NcOIrTR9eEp1rfTkOpx5jfG/2Q5epOrwx0a4UD/6AWebnrX0bPQC1mXtTU1P BDVDtYtgJo0YIDtDjoLqsjnSeni4ZjyVLoTc80dQgrXJN9V7g+PiFQ== =pU+b -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: photographed license plates
by Erle Greer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:51 PM 8/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In the UK they now use cameras to deter speeding; the cameras are >triggered by vehicles passing by which exceed the speed-limit, so in >theory it's only naughty people who get photographed. Interestingly >enough, there are far more places with camera warning signs than there >are actual cameras; the actual cameras are moved around at random. Even >though most of the time there isn't a camera there, almost everbody >seemed to slow down in the marked areas; probably because there's almost >100% chance of being caught if there is a camera there. I speed a lot, but I wouldn't mind seeing an automated system !!! AS LONG AS TAXES THAT PAY SPEED COPS' SALARIES GO DOWN !!! This system would free up the police force's time so greatly that they would have time to make our neigborhoods safe. hehe Vagab0nd<br> <a href="http://ww2.sd.cybernex.net/~vagab0nd/index.html">Visit web page for public key.</a>

1 0

forget photographing license plates!
by The Prisoner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

from comp.risks: Date: Tue, 13 Aug 96 15:52:22 PDT From: Greg Dolkas <greg(a)core.rose.hp.com> Subject: RISKy cars coming! "In the 22 Jul 1996 issue of Fortune was an interesting look into the future of automobile electronics, "Soon Your Dashboard Will Do Everything (Except Steer)". " >>> Does that include reporting your movements to the Central Bureau? "The topic of steering has already been discussed in this forum, but what caught my eye was a review of the "OnStar" product from GM. Besides being a navigation aid, it also contains "some anti-bonehead features". " >>> Thank God people keep trying to save me from myself. "These include the ability for you to call GM's "control center" for help if you lock your keys in the car, or forget where you parked it. >From the control center, they can "electronically reach into the car" to unlock the doors, or honk the horn and flash its lights." >>> It is extremely comforting to me -- I don't know about you -- to think that GM will maintain a control center able to communicate with my auto electronics. Shit, why not TRW?

1 0

Re: Schlafly on crypto
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:47 PM 8/14/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > >C'punks, > >On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Alan Olsen wrote: > >> Well, I can think of a few reasons to come to that conclusion. >> >> - Schlafly is the head of one of the more right-wing >> organizations in the country. > >Some right-wingers don't like free speech, most do. This >characterization is not enlightening on the question at hand. Actually, i have found that it does not matter which side you choose, right or left, they desire free speech for themselves and not for others. >> - She is very closly associated with the Buchanon campaign and >> the Christian coalition. > >Does Buchanan favor censorship of the Net? If so, what leads you >to believe Schlafly shares that particular view? This guilt by >(assumed) association is not fair nor persuasive. I am not certain about Buchanan, but i do know that the Christian coalition is very much in favor of net censorship. Actually, I can find no statements in either direction on the Eagle Forum web site. Do you know of any statements by Schlafly and/or the Eagle forum either for or against net censorship? I know of none for, and the circumstantial evidence available does not reinforce the conclusion that she is against it. >> - Her organization, the Eagle Forum, distributes a couple of >> anti-porn rant tracts (http://www.eagleforum.org/users/eagle/ >> public_html/misc/order.html) called _Pornography's Victims >> $4.95 (paperback) by Schlafly, ed._ > >Being against porn does not mean one is pro-censorship. (I don't >like smoking, but I don't think it should be illegal.) We need >something more concrete to support such an accusation. I have yet to see anyone who publishes anti-porn screeds based off of the Bundy case that does not support censorship of such materials. Can you point me to any? Or any material that would lend credence to the argument that she supports freedom for anyone except "Good God-Fearing Christians"? >> I know that he [Phyllis' son] is gay. His mother seems to have >> had some problems coming to terms with the implications of alot >> of her rhetoric involving such things... > >Really? I though she very clearly has stated that she hates the >sin, not the sinner. What evidence does Alan have that she has >had "some problems coming to terms..."? Lon Mabon also claims to "hate the sin and love the sinner". It does not prevent him from dredging up as much hate as possible for those who are gay. Actually my beliefs are based opon statements she made at the time. You may have more information on the subject than I do... >> (She seems to confuse her religion with reality on this point.) > >As does Alan. Without evidence to back up your claims, I cannot make any judgement than what I have made. Her associations with people who believe in censorship and her devotion to a branch of Christianity that supports censorship, as well as her sales of publications used to justify censorship makes me believe that she follows that course. Without specific examples that show that she does not believe in such measures, I have no reason to assume any other conclusion. >> I would say there are alot of reasons to assume that Schlafly >> would try and impose her morality on the rest of the country if >> given half the chance. > >Well Alan can say anything he wants, but he has given no >*substantive* reasons to support his prejudices. By her article >against Net censorship, Schlafly has given us at least one piece >of evidence to the contrary. Has she published against net censorship? The quoted article was about wiretapping. My search of her web site did not reveal any articles on that topic. If you have specific pointers I would like to see them. >> Look at the people she chooses to associate with. > >Jesus hung out with tax collectors and prostitutes. Look at the >people he chose to associate with. Guilt by association again? But Jesus did not try to get the prostitutes and tax collectors elected to high office... (But then again, there are no contemporary records for the existence of such a being in the first place.) >Look folks, in this battle, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Actually I view this as a fallacy. Just because the Christian Right opposes Clinton for good reasons, does not make them friends for causes that I view as just. >We KNOW what Clinton and his gang think of our privacy and >freedom of speech on the Net. Let's not cut off our noses to >spite our faces. If Schlarly wants to lend a hand, let's not >bite it, okay? Lets also not accept them just because they oppose the current threat. I believe they have a number of threats of their own. I do not disagree with the Eagle Forum on everything. (I have just read enough of her early works to make me consider her a danger to herself and others... Especially her screeds on Communism.) She has some points I consider valid on education and other areas. But just because he makes sense in some areas does not mean that I will trust either her or any of her minions in any position of power. Control freaks of either stripe worry me... If they are willing to fight against the Clintonocracy, then i will be glad to see it. Just do not expect me to be willing to swallow their religious beliefs as an alternative. If you have pointers to material that shows that she is against net censorship, then post pointers. I would like to see them. The posted article does not address the net at all, other than as communication on a one to one basis. It does not address the issues of those who post unencoded messages to the public at large. Until I have text that shows otherwise, i have little data to show that she supports freedom of speech other than on a one to one basis. --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

Re: forget photographing license plates!
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 22:43 8/14/96, The Prisoner wrote: >>>> It is extremely comforting to me -- I don't know about you -- to think >>>>that GM will maintain a control center able to communicate with my auto >>>>electronics. Shit, why not TRW? Hacker's delight. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

4 4