Everything Attachments - Bankrupt?

[GeoHorn]

"EA failed to honour the contract and deliver the items"
Not even close to the truth!
EA did fail to deliver at the very end, but THOUSANDS of HIGH quality items were delivered by EA over a period of years.
I am not attempting to defend EA, but let's get the facts straight.
Did you ever order any EA products for shipment to Ontario?

It doesn’t make any difference how many “AttaBoys” are rec’d…. Only One “Awshit” wipes them away, especially if it’s YOUR money they stole by deceit.

They took new order money and used it to build existing-orders product…while skimming for personal off-the-books gain.
EA seem to me to be more like a Bernie Madoff/ponzi-scheme than an honorable business-practice.

 

[Bmyers]

It doesn’t make any difference how many “AttaBoys” are rec’d…. Only One “Awshit” wipes them away, especially if it’s YOUR money they stole by deceit.

They took new order money and used it to build existing-orders product…while skimming for personal off-the-books gain.
EA seem to me to be more like a Bernie Madoff/ponzi-scheme than an honorable business-practice.

I wonder if our political leaders will be held to the same standard when Social Security goes bankrupt? Sounds very similar to me, take from an individual with a promise of future delivery only to be used to pay current debts.

 

[fried1765]

It doesn’t make any difference how many “AttaBoys” are rec’d…. Only One “Awshit” wipes them away, especially if it’s YOUR money they stole by deceit.

They took new order money and used it to build existing-orders product…while skimming for personal off-the-books gain.
EA seem to me to be more like a Bernie Madoff/ponzi-scheme than an honorable business-practice.

The horse has already left the barn!
So,.......your recommendation might be, that all those affected, should now file individual claims?
I do believe that Las Vegas offers much better odds for success!

The EA story is OVER!
There is no fix for some individual buyers!
Just the sadness, and crying remain.

 

[skeets]

I did my parking lot with "Millings" as they call them in this neck of the woods. Rolled + pack it after spreading them and they are holding up great. The next best thing to Asphalt and Free. The best pat is that it doesn't take on water link modified. No mud holes and nearly no puddling.

View attachment 130987

How in the duce did you get the millings for free, they want an arm and leg down here..

 

[GeoHorn]

I wonder if our political leaders will be held to the same standard when Social Security goes bankrupt? Sounds very similar to me, take from an individual with a promise of future delivery only to be used to pay current debts.

Social Security funding would be SOLVED….if we’d remove the “cap” on earnings and make filthy-rich (like the LL Bean thread) pay their fair share.
Social Security is a good program… we just need to make it fair and get the politicians to quit raiding the piggy-bank.

 

[NCL4701]

I wonder if our political leaders will be held to the same standard when Social Security goes bankrupt?

No.

 

[chim]

How in the duce did you get the millings for free, they want an arm and leg down here..

About 4 years ago a contractor was doing re-paving work at a high school near one of our facilities. They only wanted $50 per triaxle to haul it for us. I just contacted the super on the project and that's all it took. We got maybe 20 loads. Payment was made to the contractor (not some side deal with an opportunist superintendent).

 

[jyoutz]

I wonder if our political leaders will be held to the same standard when Social Security goes bankrupt? Sounds very similar to me, take from an individual with a promise of future delivery only to be used to pay current debts.

Actually it was always designed that way. My contributions paid the retirement for my grandparents and parents. My kid’s contributions will pay for mine. This worked well when retirees had a shorter lifespan and the boomers contributed lots of younger workers. The demographics are different today and there needs to be some adjustments to withholding, removing the income cap, etc…. It will not “go broke” because it’s politically unacceptable.

 

[D2Cat]

When SS began there were 16 contributing for every recipient. In 1960, there were 5.1 workers per beneficiary; that ratio has dropped to 2.8 today

 

[DustyRusty]

Social Security funding would be SOLVED….if we’d remove the “cap” on earnings and make filthy-rich (like the LL Bean thread) pay their fair share.
Social Security is a good program… we just need to make it fair and get the politicians to quit raiding the piggy-bank.

Every time I hear (read) "fair share" I know that there is a Democrat in the room speaking or typing.

At present, the phrase means whatever those who pay income taxes at less than the highest marginal rate decree. This is unfair to the highest earners and leaves the way open to an ever-escalating standard. Right now, the highest 1 percent of earners pay 38 percent of all income tax.

 

[jyoutz]

Every time I hear (read) "fair share" I know that there is a Democrat in the room speaking or typing.

Yep, but percentage of income paid by the highest 1% of earners is often lower that those of us in the 22% tax bracket. The higher earners end up paying a lower percentage because the tax system affords them more deductions.

 

[GreensvilleJay]

The simple, easy solution to the 'fair share' argument is to burn the entire tax laws and invoke a 4 liner ,single page tax form
1) total income from all sources
2) only ONE deduction, fixed amount,say 90% of the 'poverty line' or whatever 'they' call it..
3) 1-2= taxable amount
4) 3 x the tax rate, say 10%

This IS the 'fair share' way...The more you make ,the more you pay. @10%, 100K pays$10K, @10mill, pays $1,00,000

This 'flat tax' system will never,ever become law, due to the 2nd 'golden rule' though.

 

[fried1765]

Every time I hear (read) "fair share" I know that there is a Democrat in the room speaking or typing.

BINGO!

 

[fried1765]

Yep, but percentage of income paid by the highest 1% of earners is often lower that those of us in the 22% tax bracket. The higher earners end up paying a lower percentage because the tax system affords them more deductions.

That simply means that according to the tax laws,.......high earners ARE paying their "FAIR SHARE"!
FAIR,......per the tax code!
Why would anyone want to pay more than what the law requires?
Would you consider buying a car listed for $85K, but instead offer to pay $100K?

 

[Henro]

That simply means that according to the tax laws,.......high earners ARE paying their "FAIR SHARE"!
FAIR,......per the tax code!
Why would anyone want to pay more than what the law requires?
Would you consider buying a car listed for $85K, but instead offer to pay $100K?

Generally, I avoid talking politics and religion. But I would say that it’s not a fair share that certain people pay according to the tax laws. It’s the share they are required to pay according to the tax laws, whether that share is fair or not.

 

[fried1765]

Generally, I avoid talking politics and religion. But I would say that it’s not a fair share that certain people pay according to the tax laws. It’s the share they are required to pay according to the tax laws, whether that share is fair or not.

So.......just who makes the decision about what is 'fair"?

 

[Henro]

So.......just who makes the decision about what is 'fair"?

Fair and the way things are, are not necessarily the same…it takes some longer than others to realize this…the caste system in India might be one example…If a system works to one’s advantage, he most certainly will feel it is fair.

The system in place in North Korea might be another example…and the list goes on…I’m breaking my rule of not discussing religion or politics it seems...

 

[chim]

Fair would be a flat consumption tax. NO deductions. Same percentage for all. You spend more and you pay more.

 

[fried1765]

Fair would be a flat consumption tax. NO deductions. Same percentage for all. You spend more and you pay more.

This "fair tax" issue is a circular argument.
Many differing opinions about what is "fair".

 

[GreensvilleJay]

yeah what is 'fair'.?.. within walking distance of me.... big house, big mancave/garage, 4 acres... property taxes = $2500. quick jog down the road.. bigger house, no man cave/garage, 2 acres..property taxes = $19,000
Ain't no way you can convince me THAT is 'fair'.