First Quarter Financials
04-26-2015 | 08:43 AM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,537
Likes: 0
From: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
04-26-2015 | 09:00 AM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
I never said he was a good guy. I was responding to your allegations that the coastal states are "overpriced" because they are more liberal, which is ludicrous.
04-26-2015 | 09:05 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,537
Likes: 0
From: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
I never made that allegation. I was only laughing at and responding to the propaganda and myth that San Diego is a liberal city that you twice attempted to foist off here.
04-26-2015 | 09:17 AM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Go back a re-read. You brought up politics, not me. San Diego is one of the most desirable cities in the country. That's why it is more expensive than a whistle stop town in Mississippi. It has nothing to do with politics. Replace San Diego with the Bay Area and it still holds true.
04-26-2015 | 09:43 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,114
Likes: 291
Go back a re-read. You brought up politics, not me. San Diego is one of the most desirable cities in the country. That's why it is more expensive than a whistle stop town in Mississippi. It has nothing to do with politics. Replace San Diego with the Bay Area and it still holds true.
It's scary that you even have to explain that to people. "Republican logic" doesn't get you very far
.
04-26-2015 | 10:06 AM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,537
Likes: 0
From: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
I'm glad you mentioned that.
I actually didn't bring up politics. A comment was made about Gov't fraud, to which I responded...
...then gave a link to a recent article about it, which cited reps from both parties agreeing it was an issue.
This wasn't a license for Name User to hop in with his rank political partisan dreck.
A simple re-reading of the past few pages easily shows that it was Name User who began all the political smack.
Thanks.
I actually didn't bring up politics. A comment was made about Gov't fraud, to which I responded...
...then gave a link to a recent article about it, which cited reps from both parties agreeing it was an issue.
This wasn't a license for Name User to hop in with his rank political partisan dreck.
A simple re-reading of the past few pages easily shows that it was Name User who began all the political smack.
Thanks.
04-26-2015 | 10:13 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,114
Likes: 291
I'm glad you mentioned that.
I actually didn't bring up politics. A comment was made about Gov't fraud, to which I responded...
...then gave a link to a recent article about it, which cited reps from both parties agreeing it was an issue.
This wasn't a license for Name User to hop in with his rank political partisan dreck.
A simple re-reading of the past few pages easily shows that it was Name User who began all the political smack.
Thanks.
I actually didn't bring up politics. A comment was made about Gov't fraud, to which I responded...
...then gave a link to a recent article about it, which cited reps from both parties agreeing it was an issue.
This wasn't a license for Name User to hop in with his rank political partisan dreck.
A simple re-reading of the past few pages easily shows that it was Name User who began all the political smack.
Thanks.
04-26-2015 | 10:24 AM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Back on topic, at Allegiant, our CEO takes some paltry yearly salary but he owns 20 PERCENT of the outstanding shares (approx $700 million in stock). Back before our President was kicked out, his 2013 total compensation was $5.2 million. While that is slightly above Gary Kelly's $4 million for that year, keep in mind the difference in size and revenue between the two carriers. Our president's compensation per dollar of revenue generated was 23 TIMES that of Kelly's. Executive pay is definitely out of control.
04-27-2015 | 03:28 AM
#70
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,935
Likes: 0
From: Airbus Capt
A flat tax raisea taxes on lower income people and lowers taxes for the very wealthy. It's the opposite of what we need. Our current progressive tax system is complicated but logical. If you are raising a family on 35,000 a year, you get a lower rate and deductions to help you. If you are single and making 500,000 you pay a lot in taxes...exactly how it should be. The things that make the system so damn complicated are there for a reason. The guy raising a family on 35k is spending every dime he makes to support the family (housing, food, education) takes up all the income. The guy making 500k is spending a tiny fraction of his income on the essentials, and thus should have plenty of money left over to pay taxes.
A flat tax is nothing but a pipe dream for the very high income makers.
A flat tax is nothing but a pipe dream for the very high income makers.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
