Hawaii has poorest business tax climate in US?

[Miulang]

Gee, and I thought we in WA had one of the least welcoming business climates, it now turns out Hawai'i is the worst! Shoot. We didn't even make the top 5, even though we lost Boeing Corporate to Chicago. Hmmmmm...what is your Guv and the legislature doing to change the tax incentives to encourage more businesses to call Hawai'i home so your economy can become more diversified? :rolleyes:

Here: http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/money/3823384/detail.html

Miulang

[mel]

Gee, and I thought we in WA had one of the least welcoming business climates, it now turns out Hawai'i is the worst! Shoot. We didn't even make the top 5, even though we lost Boeing Corporate to Chicago. Hmmmmm...what is your Guv and the legislature doing to change the tax incentives to encourage more businesses to call Hawai'i home so your economy can become more diversified? :rolleyes:

Here: http://www.thehawaiichannel.com/money/3823384/detail.html

Good grief! How can someone not know this. Hawaii has been a tax hell for most of the 40+ years the Demcorats have been in charge at nearly all levels of government. Governor Lingle has a long way to go to reverse the huge mess created by years of Democrat "leadership" and needs the people's help by electing more Republicans into both house of the legislature.... at least 3 more in the House on top of the 15 member minority already there to create a veto proof legislature.

If you want to read about woes of Hawaii's pathetic business climate, miserable tax structure (the new bottle bill tax only cements Hawaii's reputation as a continual tax hell for business), I offer the following website links where dozens of articles and commentaries can be found:

Small Business Hawaii (http://www.smallbusinesshawaii.com): A good place to start is at SBH President's Sam Slom's monthly column "Small Business Views". The site also contains many articles and commentary regarding the sad state of business in Hawaii. There is however some hope as some state departments such as DCCA is making progress in cutting some fees and streamlining the process for business. So there is a glimmer of hope that more changes can occur.

Grassroot Institute of Hawaii: One of Hawaii's think tanks whose purpose is "is to improve the relationship between the government and the people with the objective of improving the effectiveness of the government, the business climate and in some cases, tradition, to foster an atmosphere in Hawaii that results in maximum personal freedom for every individual." Contains articles and commentary relating to many aspects of Hawaii's business climate and other issues. Grassroot Institute can be accessed from this link: http://www.grassrootinstitute.net/

Hawaii Reporter (http://www.hawaiireporter.com/): Most liberals from the tax and spend crowd probably hate this site, but for me it is a good alternate for information relating to things that are not generally reported in the daily news. Articles and commentary on numerous government, economic and tax issues. A good place to start is the weekly column by Tax Foundation of Hawaii writer and president Lowell Kalapa. This runs usually every Monday. Hawaii Reporter is not perfect but it is an alternate that many people read without boldly admitting to it.

Tax Foundation of Hawaii (http://www.tfhawaii.org/): "The Tax Foundation of Hawaii is a private, nonprofit educational organization dedicated to informing the public, more specifically the taxpayer, which means all of us, about the finances of our state and local governments in Hawaii. This means we look at how government raises the money it spends, be it taxes, user fees, or borrowing money through the use of debt. The Foundation attempts to unravel the mystery of the state budget with an annual review of legislative actions appropriating various funds for state programs and projects." This is a good place to visit if you want to know about Hawaii's onerous tax structure and why it is the way it is.

These are some starting points where you can learn more about Hawaii's continuing saga of a poor business climate. I am sure there are more and the liberal majority on this board who support some of the onerous tax and spend policies as well as the politicians who perpetuate this wrath upon Hawaii's economy can point out other sources to counter whatever is stated here.

[Konaguy]

(the new bottle bill tax only cements Hawaii's reputation as a continual tax hell for business),


Mel since your ignoring our questions in http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=3126
I have to ask them here :

Firstly if your so opposed to the bottle bill, what would you
do to encourage recycling so we don't have to build new
landfills and ship our trash to the mainland.You do know
it wastes a lot of taxpayer money in building new landfills.

Secondly you might want to take a peek at these websites
http://www.bottlebill.org/geography/usa.htm
http://www.toolkit.container-recycling.org/GetTheFacts/index.htm
http://www.nybottlebill.org/
http://www.cfpa.org/issues/bottlebill/index.cfm
http://www.weaverstreetmarket.com/article/display.php?id=499
http://www.crra.com/legislation/botbil/BOTBILL.html
http://www.polsci.wvu.edu/ipa/tech/tr_14.html

Did you know there are 10 other states that have a bottle bill laws enacted.
Are those places tax hells ?

[mel]

Did you know there are 10 other states that have a bottle bill laws enacted.
Are those places tax hells ?

Well, there are 39 other states that do not penalize consumers with a bottle bill tax. Go figure.

Hawaii is the first state in about 11 years I think to implement such a regressive, onerous tax that forces people to change their behavior in order to get their money back.

Remember, the state still keeps 1 cent off every purchase once the full monty goes into effect. It will be put into a special fund to manage this taxing program.

The state let me remind you has a dismal record managing their special funds.

I don't have to answer your questions regarding recycling and stuff. If people want to, they should do it voluntarily and not be forced with a monetary penalty on every purchase.

This kind of legislation only punishes consumers and hurts business.

Of course I don't expect the liberal majority at this board to understand anything that keeps our money in our own pockets. Everything liberals want to do is a scheme to part you, me and all the other taxpayers away from more of our hard earned money.

[Miulang]

Of course I don't expect the liberal majority at this board to understand anything that keeps our money in our own pockets. Everything liberals want to do is a scheme to part you, me and all the other taxpayers away from more of our hard earned money.
Mel, contrary to what you believe, the majority of people on this board are not what you would characterize as being liberal . On the basis of what I have seen for responses over the last couple of months, most are thoughtful moderates who for the most part don't fall for any ideological rhetoric (conservative or liberal) without first considering the issues. Neocons or leftist liberals are the ones who wish to believe that it's an "you're either for us or you're definitely against us" situation in all cases. Extremists from both ideologies refuse to admit that everything is not all black-and-white: there's a lot of gray in between. If you looked at people's political leanings, I bet it would be more of a bell curve, with the majority of people smack dab on the fence. So for the liberals and the conservatives to convince the fence straddlers, I think it behooves those people to be less strident and more thoughtful when discussing the issues.

Miulang

[mel]

A response to the above would be a subject for another thread. I'm too tired to repsond to this, maybe later.... much later.

[Konaguy]

I don't have to answer your questions regarding recycling and stuff. If people want to, they should do it voluntarily and not be forced with a monetary penalty on every purchase.



This statement sums up your me, me, me opinion.
You obviously just care about yourself and not the environment.
If you had some foresight you would see the bigger picture
you would see why the bottle bill is important.
But you fail to to do that. Luckily you are not in charge to make
decisions or I would be very unhappy living here.

I would suggest you look at the links I posted with an
open mind and not with the closed minded way you are
currently.

[mel]

This statement sums up your me, me, me opinion.
You obviously just care about yourself and not the environment.
If you had some foresight you would see the bigger picture
you would see why the bottle bill is important.
But you fail to to do that. Luckily you are not in charge to make
decisions or I would be very unhappy living here.

I would suggest you look at the links I posted with an
open mind and not with the closed minded way you are
currently.

It's not only me that wants to keep my money away from the clutches of the state. There are many others who feel the same way. The only problem is that they are not here at this board where the liberals or the liberal leaning moderates dominate most of the discussion with their one sided viewpoints too.

Take away, take away, take away our money. That is the liberal and liberal leaning moderate agenda.

The bottle bill is just another money grab being perpetuated by the left leaning Democrats who continually want to and have punished the people of Hawaii with this law. It is an economic burden and punishment for our wallets... our income... the wages we work for and earn. A tax upon a tax.

You liberal environmentalists have won on this thing. All I can do is complain and remind people how the bottle bill tax will be a burden on our income, our economy and Hawaii's wage earners. Burden. Economic burden.

You just don't get it.

http://macpro.freeshell.org/notax/notax-s.gif

[Konaguy]

You just don't get it.



Sorry to say Mel, you do not get it as you fail to see the big picture
here. It is not worth my time to explain my side further if your going
to mudsling and slam me for my my opinions. You do know your
capitalistic views do have flaws in them too, just like everyone else
views. You don't seem to grasp that though as it seems you just try
to portray your views as perfect with no flaws.

http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=12793&postcount=18

[mel]

Sorry to say Mel, you do not get it as you fail to see the big picture
here. It is not worth my time to explain my side further if your going
to mudsling and slam me for my my opinions. You do know your
capitalistic views do have flaws in them too, just like everyone else
views. You don't seem to grasp that though as it seems you just try
to portray your views as perfect with no flaws.

My opinions are being slammed too, not only by you but a few others in topics where I least expected to.

Great you don't have to waste your time explaining anything because as you and I and the rest of the liberal minded people know, none of us will change our opinions.

I concede that the left leaning liberals have for now, long won the war on this bottle bill law. You don't have to bother with me, the conservative gnat in this big liberal mix.

My money is lost everytime I will buy a bottled beverage.. not only my money, but everyone else's too. Sunk cost, double taxation at the checkout line. Punishment by the liberal left who still run most of the State Government.

Bad for Hawaii's economy. We're stuck at being on the perpetual bottom of the national tax hell heap. Sad for consumers. Sad for all the wage earning taxpayers. Bad for business. Sad for our economy. Sad for Hawaii.

http://macpro.freeshell.org/notax/notax-s.gif

[Miulang]

It's extremely important for the State to encourage farmers and small business people with tax incentives. If you want a sustainable economy in Hawai'i, you have to rely less on the "big boys" from the Mainland and cultivate and encourage what you already have there: the people and companies who have a vested interest in supporting the economy in Hawai'i and who plow profits back into your economy, not ship it off to some corporate highrise up here on the Mainland.

Those big corporations that might be enticed to set up shop in Hawai'i through generous tax incentives can just as easily pack up their bags and leave as soon as the profits dry up and Hawai'i will be left holding the bag. I would hope that the state Administration (regardless of the party in power du jour) would be encouraging more agribusiness--and I'm not talking monoculture like pineapple or sugar here--so Hawai'i can become more self-sustaining and not be just one barge strike away from being crippled. Farming ain't glamorous and it's certainly hard work, but lots of local families survived the Depression by raising their own food. Don't let more farmland get plowed under for development; once the condos and highrises are erected, there's no turning back.

Miulang

[Konaguy]

Mel I agree with you that we are overtaxed and have too much bureaucracy.
This was the main reason why I voted for Linda Lingle. Because I thought she could help eventually change things around. From my viewpoint I'm seeing progress in changing the People's Republic of Hawaii stigma that has haunted us for years.

I'm not a fan of incresed taxes, but you have look at the bigger picture. Capitalism with its many positives has many faults to it also. Going into
more detail in that regard would be going O/T. But I personally believe
that this bottle bill won't be a negative "the sky is falling" situation that
Mel is predicting.

Currently the sides of our roads are littered with trash, our landfills
are maxing out. We need to encourage people to recycle to lessen the
burden on our landfills. Mel wants to do the capitalistic approprach which
is not working. Thus we need to go in a different direction.

Mel, if you did not preach how great capitalism is and show there is flaws
with it also you would get less flack from other people. Your "your way
or the highway approach ruffles a lot of people the wrong way.

[pzarquon]

The bottle bill thread is here (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=3126). Mel and Aaron, I think you've both got good points. There's no need to package them with presumptions and dismissals of the other's opinion. Like Miulang's saying, no one here is an extremist on either end, and life ain't black and white. Let's try and enjoy the nuances rather than pointlessly pigeonholing each other.

I voted for Linda Lingle too, by the way.

Again, as to the topic...

I agree, Hawaii has a wholly business unfriendly environment. Steve Forbes famously called the state "The People's Republic of Hawaii" in a stinging Forbesmagazine piece, and we deserved every lickin' he doled out. When he came back to visit in 2000, everyone was waiting for an apology. Instead, he said, "Things have gotten better, but not by a hell of a lot."

It's not just the taxes. It's the reams of regulations. It's the convoluted procedures and requirements just to set up shop. I remember getting a GET and doing other paperwork just to start a tiny partnership in 1997. We were in danger of spending more man-hours dealing with the state than we did actually running our business.

I see there are efforts being made to streamline things. Our online DCCA business registration and information resources (http://www.hawaii.gov/portal/business/) are pretty good (http://www.businessregistrations.com), now, compared to other states. But building a one-stop-shop where you can get all the forms you need doesn't quite solve the underlying problem of, "Why do we need so many forms in the first place?"

Instead of coming up with bigger and sexier tax incentives for niche businesses, I'd love to see an across the board, but more moderate, reduction in overall taxes.

[mel]

I agree, Hawaii has a wholly business unfriendly environment. Steve Forbes famously called the state "The People's Republic of Hawaii" in a stinging Forbesmagazine piece, and we deserved every lickin' he doled out. When he came back to visit in 2000, everyone was waiting for an apology. Instead, he said, "Things have gotten better, but not by a hell of a lot."

It's not just the taxes. It's the reams of regulations.

I was looking for my copy of that article today. It really tied the previous Governor in a knot. :)

In terms of the dreaded bottle bill, it is not only a new tax but a forced regulation that hurts business. This is what I have been saying all day. This is the kind of legislation that further erodes Hawaii's reputation as a business friendly state. Retailers who have to deal with the bottle bill will suffer and pass the costs along to us.



I see there are efforts being made to streamline things. Our online DCCA business registration and information resources (http://www.hawaii.gov/portal/business/) are pretty good (http://www.businessregistrations.com), now, compared to other states. But building a one-stop-shop where you can get all the forms you need doesn't quite solve the underlying problem of, "Why do we need so many forms in the first place?"

Instead of coming up with bigger and sexier tax incentives for niche businesses, I'd love to see an across the board, but more moderate, reduction in overall taxes.

I have to say for the DCCA, they have been moving in the right direction in helping improve Hawaii's business climate. Director Mark Recktenwald has been the main mover and shaker in that department in trying to make things better for business and consumers. One of the newest things that DCCA has implemented is the Hawaii Business Express (http://pahoehoe.ehawaii.gov/BizEx/) system for new businesses. I was at the press conference when this was unveiled about 2 weeks ago. You can read the press release at Small Business Hawaii's (http://www.smallbusinesshawaii.com/2004/Breaking10-08.html) website.

Because the DCCA has been making strident improvements with their services this past year or so, the majority Democrats in the legislature tried to stymie the success of this department by drafting legislation that would have raided their funds. What worked for the DCCA under the Democratic administrations in year past all of a sudden don't work for the Lingle administration in the eyes of the Democrats.

You can read more about this bill that was vetoed by the Governor and was surprisingly not overridden.

Don't Repeal the Compliance Resolution Fund (http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?326b6f08-0ffc-4204-80bc-38157b915483)

DCCA Raid Bill Should be Vetoed (http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?881e53d2-21cc-4b72-9031-1e62b15a26ae)

The Compliance Resolution Fund is Only a 'Problem' to the Extent that the Legislature Refuses to Let Agency Fix It (http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?3faa0bf7-43bf-41d6-9dc4-d137d7713ab7)
From the above article:

The vision of a self-supporting DCCA has been a success. Documents that used to take months to process now take a few days, or can be handled instantly online. According to recent surveys by the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses, businesses gave DCCA the highest marks among the state’s departments for customer satisfaction.

It was against this backdrop that some legislators proposed a bill (SB2525) that would have eliminated the CRF and transferred most of the fund (more than $30 million) into the general fund in order to balance the budget. Not surprisingly, businesses and others overwhelmingly opposed this measure -- the testimony ran 40-1, 80-1 and 70-1 against it in three different hearings -- with only the Tax Foundation supporting the bill. In vetoing the bill, Gov. Linda Lingle commented that "When I first heard about this bill, I thought that the legislature had looked around for the one department that was really performing well, and then tried to do what they could to turn it into just another bureaucracy.

When the Governor mentions "the legislature" in regards to the bill, she means the Democrat majority. The Senate and House Republicans were dead set against this bill, especially after it was amended and the raid was inserted in. The bill was so bad that some Democrats in the Senate also opposed it. See bill status at this link. (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/status/SB2525.asp)

What happened this past legislative session is that the majority Democrats in many cases tried to thwart many of the reforms that the Lingle administration had proposed. Some of these related to improving the business climate. The majority often times never wanted any of it and continued to do things in their old prescribed ways of years past.

That is why it is so important to at least elect a few more Republicans into the legislature so that the Governor's proposals can pass without the threat of a veto overrride.

With more business friendly legislators in the big square building, things then can slowly improve.

There are many ideas that could be tried in the coming year, such as the repeal of the General Excise Tax on food and medicine. This was part of the Governor's and Senate Minority's platform... nothing came of it because none of the Democrats wanted to even give this bill a hearing.

And that is why in part we continue to be stuck with this gawd-awful reputation of being one of the worst states with a high tax burden.

http://macpro.freeshell.org/notax/notax-s.gif

[mel]

Mel I agree with you that we are overtaxed and have too much bureaucracy.

I'm not a fan of incresed taxes, but you have look at the bigger picture. Capitalism with its many positives has many faults to it also. Going into
more detail in that regard would be going O/T. But I personally believe
that this bottle bill won't be a negative "the sky is falling" situation that
Mel is predicting.

As a staunch "no new taxes" kind of a guy I cannot accept any new tax increase. I have to stick to my principle of not supporting tax increases or those politicians who do so. I have to remain consistent on this point.

Perhaps the sky will not fall with the implementation of the bottle bill. However no one can deny that this will be a financial burden on taxpayers and the businesses who have to implement the program in a state "partnership".

Currently the sides of our roads are littered with trash, our landfills
are maxing out. We need to encourage people to recycle to lessen the
burden on our landfills. Mel wants to do the capitalistic approprach which
is not working. Thus we need to go in a different direction.

So we have to be punished with a new tax to force us into compliance? That is a sad state of affairs. What's next? Forced compliance to recycle computer monitors and parts upon every purchase? Beverage containers are not the only things littering the roads. I don't throw stuff out of my car onto the roadway. Perhaps a cigarette butt tax for all the smokers is next to "encourage" (punish) them from throwing their butts on the road and at the beach.

These kinds of laws and the mere proposals of legislation like this scare business. It may scare investment away from the islands. It continually mires our state's reputation as being anti-business. It has been that way for way too long.


Mel, if you did not preach how great capitalism is and show there is flaws
with it also you would get less flack from other people. Your "your way
or the highway approach ruffles a lot of people the wrong way.

I am just advocating my opinion for no new taxes. Taxes hurt. We already pay more than enough taxes here in the Aloha State.

http://macpro.freeshell.org/notax/notax-s.gif

[Konaguy]

I have been gone for a few hours to work and came to a conculsion.
It is not worth it to further express my opinion on this as you will
just shoot my opinion down.

It is because your ultra conservative views really bug the heck out me,
As does the people with ultra liberal views drive me up the wall also.

[kamlost]

okay okay... got different opinions.. different views.. i agree with Mel on this one though but let's take a break for a

http://www.earlham.edu/~parkero/webkids/Combos/Group%20Hug.jpg

[mel]

Who are these people? (OT)

[admin]

Kamlost, is that image from your webpage (Ron Parker (http://www.earlham.edu/~parkero/) at Earlham College)? If not, live linking photos and other files from random sites is bandwidth theft. Please see our notes on "Images in Posts (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showthread.php?t=31)."

[Glen Miyashiro]

So we have to be punished with a new tax to force us into compliance? That is a sad state of affairs.
Well, yes. It is a sad state of affairs when people don't exercise self-restraint and take advantage of the kindness of others. But that's the way people are, and that's why we have laws in the first place. Or are you of the viewpoint that all government and all laws are evil, and that we should simply leave people alone and they'll do the Right Thing?


What's next? Forced compliance to recycle computer monitors and parts upon every purchase?
Actually, this is not a bad idea. So long as electronics manufacturers continue to sell products that contain dangerous chemicals (lead, mercury, etc.) there will be a hazard associated with their disposal. Your typical CRT has about 10 pounds of lead in it, and these babies usually end up getting crushed and buried in a landfill. I'm not comforted by the presence of all that toxic lead in the ground. :( However, I have hope that the advent of cheap LCDs will mean that the use of toxic heavy metals in monitors will be decreasing.


Beverage containers are not the only things littering the roads. I don't throw stuff out of my car onto the roadway. Perhaps a cigarette butt tax for all the smokers is next to "encourage" (punish) them from throwing their butts on the road and at the beach.
I wish! Cigarette butts are in my opinion even more unsightly than discarded bottles and cans, but it would be pretty hard to implement a butt-control law. I'd rather that the cigarette companies came up with a filter material that deteriorated quicker, so those damned things wouldn't stick around on the roadsides quite so long.

[pzarquon]

Cigarette butts are in my opinion even more unsightly than discarded bottles and cans, but it would be pretty hard to implement a butt-control law.Butt-control law? I like that. I'd draft it and propose it, just to get the phrase on the books!

I say, eliminate cigarette filters altogether, or build them out of super-biodegradable paper or something. Sure, they won't block much in the way of carcinogens, but, then you help the environment on two fronts: less litter, and a shorter period of time for each individual litterer to litter!

Seriously, though, Mel raises a decent point as to our main topic: Hawaii's business climate. After all, the bottle bill will help control litter and counter the carelessness of individual consumers, but the impact on retailers is not insignificant. Like the state's mandatory health insurance laws, while the benefit to society overall is significant, it does make running a company in this state more trouble than it's sometimes worth.

We've got a capitalist state with a sprinkling of socialism. Like Mel, I'd worry about swinging too far toward the "state aid" end of the spectrum, but like Glen, I'm pretty skeptical that a laissez faire, "money, like water, flows naturally where it needs to go" attitude will guide society and individuals to doing the right thing on their own. After all, if it did, we wouldn't need law enforcement at all! :)

[Glen Miyashiro]

Mel raises a decent point as to our main topic: Hawaii's business climate. After all, the bottle bill will help control litter and counter the carelessness of individual consumers, but the impact on retailers is not insignificant. Like the state's mandatory health insurance laws, while the benefit to society overall is significant, it does make running a company in this state more trouble than it's sometimes worth.
Here's a point that I don't quite understand. The bottle bill fee is applied to every beverage-container-selling business in the state, right? And from what I have heard, the businesses say that they will be passing the fee on to the consumer in the form of commensurately higher prices, right? So, if the consumers are really footing the bill, then the businesses aren't losing any money, right? Where is the financial harm to the businesses? :confused:

[Miulang]

businesses aren't losing any money, right? Where is the financial harm to the businesses? :confused:

I think it's the inconvenience factor, Glen. Businesses would have to collect and store the bottles/cans until they could be picked up. Any real estate used for non-revenue generating line items like this is considered a cost to the business.

Miulang

[Glen Miyashiro]

OK, back to the original point about the state's lousy business tax climate. I think that focusing on the tax issues overlooks a basic structural problem with Hawaii's economy that makes those high business taxes so painful: the fact we are a low-wage, tourism-based, service economy. That kind of economy doesn't generate much wealth, which means that businesses are struggling because their customers are struggling.

The real question is, what can we do to create more wealth in the state, and keep it in state? Just lowering business taxes all by itself won't do it; I suspect that'll just mean that the same old businesses will make a little more money, and nothing will really change. What we need are different kinds of businesses that can grow new industries.

[Miulang]

OK, back to the original point about the state's lousy business tax climate. I think that focusing on the tax issues overlooks a basic structural problem with Hawaii's economy that makes those high business taxes so painful: the fact we are a low-wage, tourism-based, service economy. That kind of economy doesn't generate much wealth, which means that businesses are struggling because their customers are struggling.

The real question is, what can we do to create more wealth in the state, and keep it in state? Just lowering business taxes all by itself won't do it; I suspect that'll just mean that the same old businesses will make a little more money, and nothing will really change. What we need are different kinds of businesses that can grow new industries.

It's like I said previously, Glen. Get away from courting the big boy corporations from the Mainland and try to foster and promote growth among companies and businesses (including especially your farmers) who have a real stake in the growth/survival of the 'aina, so your economy can become more diversified. You're still one boat strike away from catastrophe as long as you don't do that. Up here on the mainland, we have a whole lot more choices. In Hawai'i unfortunately, you're at the mercy of the shipping industry for lower cost (notice I didn't say low cost goods, because everything is more expensive over there) commodities shipped from the Mainland. :(

Miulang

[LikaNui]

I have been gone for a few hours to work and came to a conculsion.
It is not worth it to further express my opinion on this as you will
just shoot my opinion down.

But, you were shooting down his opinions, so I fail to see the difference.
Part of debating the issues is presenting your case; if you feel strongly about your case then present your viewpoint intelligently and convince people to change their minds about whatever the issue is. If someone can't do that, then it is presumed they have a weak case to begin with.
As for all this name-calling and finger-pointing, I'd like to think we're all mature enough to discuss the message without 'shooting the messenger'. Let's stick to the issues and not to the personalities.

[Konaguy]

But, you were shooting down his opinions, so I fail to see the difference. Part of debating the issues is presenting your case; if you feel strongly about your case then present your viewpoint intelligently and convince people to change their minds about whatever the issue is. If someone can't do that, then it is presumed they have a weak case to begin with.
I look at this way, I said my peace about that certain subject. If
I continued on I would just cover the same ground over again.
To me it was pointless to continue to try to convince Mel my point view
since he was locked into his views on the subject.

[mel]

I will get back to you folks on this subject. Had a minor medical emergency last night.