Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=SmootSmack;567954]True, very true. I think he was talking about the person in the clip in his post there as well. [B]As a whole though, I personally think he does tend to talk down to others in the parking lot. Particularly those who don't see eye to eye with him[/B].[/quote]I think even he would have a difficult time arguing that point, but I'm sure a YouTube clip or two would wind up somewhere in the response. LOL

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=SmootSmack;567962]You having trouble writing today? Your grammar is all over the place today. Anyhow, I actually [think] you are pretty educated, smart, know what you're talking about, etc. I just happened to think your style tends to be somewhat belittling at times. Have I been that way in the past? Sure. Can I still be that way sometimes. Most likely. But I would hope that I don't do it with the frequency you do it (or at least as often as I and others perceive you do).[/quote]

OK, I admit it, I'm not good at multi-tasking and often my grammar tends to be the first suffer. It's a limitation I struggle with every day but I soldier on.

This is all lighthearted stuff, certainly nothing to be offended by. I try not to talk down to people but sometimes the frustration gets the best of me. People need to brush it off, jab back and move on.

Re: Obama Care
 

New House GOP scare chart on universal healthcare is out. Damn, even to me it looks scary:

[IMG]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/GOPHealthchart.png[/IMG]

Re: Obama Care
 

Just to be fair and balanced, here's the new House Democrats' response:

[IMG]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/Demaidehealthchart.png[/IMG]

Re: Obama Care
 

Do you think that chart is real?

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=firstdown;567963]He has me[B] proff reading[/B] his post.[/quote]

That just made this whole thread. LOL!

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;567961]You know, I'm insulted by your inference that I have hard time not insulting people. I would demand an apology but I don't think you would give me one. Oh well, such is life.[/quote]

Actually, as SS33 pointed out, I may have misinterpreted your post. So that being the case, I do apologize. However, you do tend to get a bit insulting at times. And considering you said "don't label me" to me the other day, I think it's a bit hypocritical given the labels/jabs you throw around here at times.

Anyway, no worries.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=firstdown;567963]he has me [b]proff [/b]reading his post.[/quote]

lol!!!

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;567983]Just to be fair and balanced, here's the new House Democrats' response:

[IMG]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/Demaidehealthchart.png[/IMG][/quote]

haha, now that is funny.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=firstdown;567838]You must not have much fath in your fellow Americans. I say more people will do what right and what happens, happens. It sounds like you think more people are willing to throw out any ethics they have for the sake of their job and I just don't think thats true. Does it happen? Yes everyday and we see it on the news but the news never shows the people who risk their job to do what right. You really seem to hate corporations and I'd love to hear your solution to your concerns.[/quote]

You're right. It's not most, but some. I don't hate corporations, but I feel they can easily go astray with just a few bad executives.

LOL @ SS

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;568052]You're right. It's not most, but some. I don't hate corporations, but I feel they can easily go astray with just a few bad executives.

LOL @ SS[/quote]

Tell me that isn't you ;)

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568047]That just made this whole thread. LOL![/quote]
You know I did that on purpose.

Re: Obama Care
 

yeah, ok :)

Re: Obama Care
 

The latest on Obama Care:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/16/house-dems-votes-health/"]Congressional Budget Director Warns Health Care Bills Will Raise Costs - Political News - FOXNews.com[/URL]

When Harry Reid is accussing the CBO of playing partisan politics considering the balance of power in DC you have to find that incredibly laughable. This should be a very clear, very loud signal to all those that aren't wearing their partisan hats 24x7. The left wing of the Dem party and the White House should take a major step back and truly evaluate different solutions to health care reform rather than the piss-poor current Health Care legislation.

[URL="http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854"]IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- It's Not An Option[/URL]

From the article: "It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there [B]on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.[/B]
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" [B]section of the bill clearly states:[/B]
[B]"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.[/B]

So the lefties who railed against Bush and the Patriot Act have no problem with this Administration and Congress trampling on individual freedom.....

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;568279]The latest on Obama Care:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/16/house-dems-votes-health/"]Congressional Budget Director Warns Health Care Bills Will Raise Costs - Political News - FOXNews.com[/URL]

When Harry Reid is accussing the CBO of playing partisan politics considering the balance of power in DC you have to find that incredibly laughable. This should be a very clear, very loud signal to all those that aren't wearing their partisan hats 24x7. The left wing of the Dem party and the White House should take a major step back and truly evaluate different solutions to health care reform rather than the piss-poor current Health Care legislation.

[URL="http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854"]IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- It's Not An Option[/URL]

From the article: "It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there [B]on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.[/B]
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" [B]section of the bill clearly states:[/B]
[B]"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.[/B]

So the lefties who railed against Bush and the Patriot Act have no problem with this Administration and Congress trampling on individual freedom.....[/quote]

LOL @ Orwellian. I'm very impressed IBD, not so very slick stuff but scary nonetheless. Word of caution though IBD, if you're going to go after mainstream Americans to share your views avoid using righting rhetoric. The right wing is already with you and you really don't want to be seen as impartial. Did you see the wingnut vocabulary that I saw? I'm starting to suspect there's a wingnut grammar book out there, one that's due for a major tuneup.

[quote]With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to [B]the left's expansion[/B] of the [B]welfare state [/B]will be removed.
The public option [B]won't be an option[/B] for many, but rather a [B]mandate[/B] for buying [B]government care[/B]. A [B]free people[/B] should be outraged at this advance of [B]soft tyranny[/B].
Washington does not have the [B]constitutional or moral authority[/B] to outlaw [B]private markets[/B] in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn't be [B]killing business [/B]opportunities, or [B]limiting choices[/B], or [B]legislating[/B] [B]major changes[/B] in [B]Americans' lives[/B].
It took just 16 pages of reading to find this [B]naked attempt[/B] by the political powers to [B]increase their reach[/B]. [B]It's scary[/B] to think how many more [B]breaches of liberty[/B] we'll come across in the final 1,002.
[/quote]

Re: Obama Care
 

between Slinging Sammy and Saden, I think the whole IBD quote is now in bold!

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;568297]LOL @ Orwellian. I'm very impressed IBD, not so very slick stuff but scary nonetheless. Word of caution though IBD, if you're going to go after mainstream Americans to share your views avoid using righting rhetoric. The right wing is already with you and you really don't want to be seen as impartial. Did you see the wingnut vocabulary that I saw? I'm starting to suspect there's a wingnut grammar book out there, one that's due for a major tuneup.[/quote]Orwellian is pretty over the top, but outside of trying to discredit the source.....one should focus on the actual impact of the current legislation, confirmed by the House Ways and Means Committee, that this bill will outlaw private individual health insurance.

Certainly one on the left who is for personal freedom to the point of justifying a woman's right to a late-term abortion for mental health reasons would have a problem with the government disallowing a private citizen to pay for his/her own health insurance through a private insurance company with his/her own money? You do still believe that the money U.S. citizens earn is their money and not Premier Obama's and the Politburo's, right?

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;568314]Orwellian is pretty over the top, but outside of trying to discredit the source.....one should focus on the actual impact of the current legislation, confirmed by the House Ways and Means Committee, that this bill will outlaw private individual health insurance.

Certainly one on the left who is for personal freedom to the point of justifying a woman's right to a late-term abortion for mental health reasons would have a problem with the government disallowing a private citizen to pay for his/her own health insurance through a private insurance company with his/her own money? You do still believe that the money U.S. citizens earn is their money and not Premier Obama's and the Politburo's, right?[/quote]

See, I'm smart enough to doubt IBD's claim because a) a law preventing private commerce would not stand up to a constitutional challenge, b) democrats aren't stupid enough to expose themselves like that politically, and c) I know IBD is no friend of mine, they're like Jim Cramer in paper form. I wonder who in the House Ways and Means Committee confirmed their suspicion?

Anywho, we're both men capable of [URL="http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf"]reading the bill[/URL] for themselves. The subsection IBD referenced is part of a broader section that insures going forward that any government Qualified Health Benefits Plan meets certain requirements (affordable coverage, essential benefits, and consumer protection). That is to say private sector enterprises that want universal healthcare $$$ have to adhere to these set of rules. Now you're wondering what does this have to do with any of the scary stuff put forth by IBD? Well, the government has a grandfather clause in the bill which says private enterprises don't have to adhere to these rules with respect to individuals they currently have signed up.

Furthermore, both you and private enterprises are free to conduct business as usual (individually or through employer/group) but if the private enterprise want to sign you up under universal healthcare they must adhere to government requirements. Seems pretty reasonable and not so scary. If you didn't have such provisions private enterprises would sign-up their healthy clients through their own private plan and the not so healthy clients under universal healthcare.

I don't believe the hype and the snipes from IBD types.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;568279]The latest on Obama Care:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/16/house-dems-votes-health/"]Congressional Budget Director Warns Health Care Bills Will Raise Costs - Political News - FOXNews.com[/URL]

When Harry Reid is accussing the CBO of playing partisan politics considering the balance of power in DC you have to find that incredibly laughable. This should be a very clear, very loud signal to all those that aren't wearing their partisan hats 24x7. The left wing of the Dem party and the White House should take a major step back and truly evaluate different solutions to health care reform rather than the piss-poor current Health Care legislation.

[URL="http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854"]IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- It's Not An Option[/URL]

From the article: "It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there [B]on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.[/B]
When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.
It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" [B]section of the bill clearly states:[/B]
[B]"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.[/B]

So the lefties who railed against Bush and the Patriot Act have no problem with this Administration and Congress trampling on individual freedom.....[/quote]

Good thing I'll be grandfathered in if this bill passes. I have great private medical insurance. Thank goodness "Premier Obama" (LOL by the way) can't strip me of that.

Interesting stuff here:

[url=http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=328]Director’s Blog » Blog Archive » The Long-Term Budget Outlook[/url]

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568372]Good thing I'll be grandfathered in if this bill passes. I have great private medical insurance. Thank goodness "Premier Obama" (LOL by the way) can't strip me of that.

Interesting stuff here:

[URL="http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=328"]Director’s Blog » Blog Archive » The Long-Term Budget Outlook[/URL][/quote]

We prefer the title "Emperor Obama" thank you. "Lord Obama" is also acceptable.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;568337]I wonder who in the House Ways and Means Committee confirmed their suspicion?[/quote]Good question.

[quote]Anywho, we're both men capable of [URL="http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf"]reading the bill[/URL] for themselves. The subsection IBD referenced is part of a broader section that insures going forward that any government Qualified Health Benefits Plan meets certain requirements (affordable coverage, essential benefits, and consumer protection). That is to say private sector enterprises that want universal healthcare $$$ have to adhere to these set of rules. Now you're wondering what does this have to do with any of the scary stuff put forth by IBD? Well, the government has a grandfather clause in the bill which says private enterprises don't have to adhere to these rules with respect to individuals they currently have signed up.

Furthermore, both you and private enterprises are free to conduct business as usual (individually or through employer/group) but if the private enterprise want to sign you up under universal healthcare they must adhere to government requirements. Seems pretty reasonable and not so scary. If you didn't have such provisions private enterprises would sign-up their healthy clients through their own private plan and the not so healthy clients under universal healthcare.

I don't believe the hype and the snipes from IBD types.[/quote]While IBD exaggerated the claim that private insurance will be outlawed, the Bill does force private insurance carriers to comply with the rules/regulations of the Health Insurance Exchange and new coverage may be purchased [B]only[/B] through the Exchange.

[URL="http://mediamatters.org/research/200907160040"]IBD falsely claimed House health bill would "outlaw individual private coverage" | Media Matters for America[/URL]

from the link: "Individual health insurance plans that do not meet the "grandfather" conditions would still be available for purchase, but only through the Exchange and subject to those regulations."

This error in source-checking or reading comprehension by the folks at IBD still doesn't account for the massive price tag (estimated by CBO at $ 1.5T, real numbers likely over $ 3T) or the fact that covering the uninsured could be done with tax-credits or vouchers much more cost-effectively rather than a full-scale government take-over of health care.

So, you and I, who are both at least reasonably intelligent/educated spent more than a minute or two researching and understanding what is involved in about 2-3 pages of this bill. There are 1018 pages in the .pdf. At the very least, don't you agree that more time should be taken to truly understand and evaluate such a major piece of legislation rather than ramming it through due to political considerations.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;568297]LOL @ Orwellian. I'm very impressed IBD, not so very slick stuff but scary nonetheless. Word of caution though IBD, if you're going to go after mainstream Americans to share your views avoid using righting rhetoric. The right wing is already with you and you really don't want to be seen as impartial. Did you see the wingnut vocabulary that I saw? I'm starting to suspect there's a wingnut grammar book out there, one that's due for a major tuneup.[/quote]

Funny thing is you high lighted the stuff the left seems to ignore.

Re: Obama Care
 

This whole proposal highlights to me the problem with Washington politics. Both sides are so eager to do something about something that they ignore the details. The throw together a mishmash of proposals with no real understanding of what they mean in the real world. Slap a nice name on it so it sounds awesome. Put it out there and ignore everyone with a clue saying it wont work and then they pass it. The only people I see who are behind this deal are politicians. Oh plenty of people are behind the principles attached, they are truly noble and worth pursuin,g but this proposal is a steaming pile and everyone knows it. But at the end of the day politicians get to say they did something.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=FRPLG;568428]This whole proposal highlights to me the problem with Washington politics. Both sides are so eager to do something about something that they ignore the details. The throw together a mishmash of proposals with no real understanding of what they mean in the real world. Slap a nice name on it so it sounds awesome. Put it out there and ignore everyone with a clue saying it wont work and then they pass it. The only people I see who are behind this deal are politicians. Oh plenty of people are behind the principles attached, they are truly noble and worth pursuin,g but this proposal is a steaming pile and everyone knows it. But at the end of the day politicians get to say they did something.[/quote]
Saden

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=FRPLG;568428]This whole proposal highlights to me the problem with Washington politics. Both sides are so eager to do something about something that they ignore the details. The throw together a mishmash of proposals with no real understanding of what they mean in the real world. Slap a nice name on it so it sounds awesome. Put it out there and ignore everyone with a clue saying it wont work and then they pass it. The only people I see who are behind this deal are politicians. Oh plenty of people are behind the principles attached, they are truly noble and worth pursuin,g but this proposal is a steaming pile and everyone knows it. But at the end of the day politicians get to say they did something.[/quote]

Seriously. It has the feel of the Dems wanting to shove 20 years worth of agenda down our throats ASAP. Especially the fact that Obama is pushing hard to get this crammed through Congress before the August recess.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568435]Seriously. It has the feel of the Dems wanting to shove 20 years worth of agenda down our throats ASAP. Especially the fact that Obama is pushing hard to get this crammed through Congress before the August recess.[/quote]
They want it passed before people wake up and realize what a sh!t a$$ plan he has. The term socialist for Obama is become to mild of a term.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=firstdown;568436][B]They want it passed before people wake up and realize what a sh!t a$$ plan he has.[/B] The term socialist for Obama is become to mild of a term.[/quote]

I mean it really does kind of feel that way. Why is it so damn urgent to force something this nation will struggle to pay for for decades through so quickly?? It's not as easy for Obama and Co to play fear politics with this one like they did with the pork.. um stimulus package.

Take your time and get it right. Overhauling the entire health care system should not be a hasty process. This administration really comes off as arrogant.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568437]I mean it really does kind of feel that way. Why is it so damn urgent to force something this nation will struggle to pay for for decades through so quickly?? It's not as easy for Obama and Co to play fear politics with this one like they did with the pork.. um stimulus package.

Take your time and get it right. Overhauling the entire health care system should not be a hasty process. [B]This administration really comes off as arrogant.[/B][/quote]

Ahhhhhh!! Now I see the attraction for saden.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568437]I mean it really does kind of feel that way. Why is it so damn urgent to force something this nation will struggle to pay for for decades through so quickly?? It's not as easy for Obama and Co to play fear politics with this one like they did with the pork.. um stimulus package.

Take your time and get it right. Overhauling the entire health care system should not be a hasty process. This administration really comes off as arrogant.[/quote]

Its not about reducing cost or providing better care its a power grab by the Democrats no matter what the cost is or the damage it does. They just want control over more people so they can use them to gain votes. Thats why they did not want to allow Americans to use 2% of thier SS to invest on their own. Thats how they work and how they gain their power.

Re: Obama Care
 

We elected them on the basis of what they would do for us today not tomorrow. If the job doesn't get done now it's still there waiting to be done tomorrow and who knows what tomorrow may bring?

Arrogant eh? This coming from a man who said he should be at the front of the line in the waiting room because he paid and poor people don't. Come to think of it Steve Jobs aught be able to cut in front of you in the waiting room and on the wait lists.

If anything I'm filled with love for the meek. Be careful my friend before you label, you have a few labels on your forehead already.


Joe, you keep popping up randomly taking jabs but my chin seems to be holding up just fine. Ain't no glass jaw here dog. You need to work on your hooks and uppercuts cause your jabs are ineffective.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;568449][SIZE=5]We elected them on the basis of what they would do for us today not tomorrow. [/SIZE]If the job doesn't get done now it's still there waiting to be done tomorrow and who knows what tomorrow may bring?

Arrogant eh? This coming from a man who said he should be at the front of the line in the waiting room because he paid and poor people don't. Come to think of it Steve Jobs aught be able to cut in front of you in the waiting room and on the wait lists.

If anything I'm filled with love for the meek. Be careful my friend before you label, you have a few labels on your forehead already.


Joe, you keep popping up randomly taking jabs but my chin seems to be holding up just fine. Ain't no glass jaw here dog. You need to work on your hooks and uppercuts cause your jabs are ineffective.[/quote]
You should have said we elected them on the bases of what they would do for us today and not worry about its cost until tommorow.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=saden1;568449]Joe, you keep popping up randomly taking jabs but my chin seems to be holding up just fine. Ain't no glass jaw here dog. You need to work on your hooks and uppercuts cause your jabs are ineffective.[/quote]

Fair enough.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GMScud;568437]I mean it really does kind of feel that way. Why is it so damn urgent to force something this nation will struggle to pay for for decades through so quickly?? It's not as easy for Obama and Co to play fear politics with this one like they did with the pork.. um stimulus package.

Take your time and get it right. Overhauling the entire health care system should not be a hasty process. This administration really comes off as arrogant.[/quote]

See to me it isn't about a power grab or anything like that. I think philosophically they'd rather try to address a problem however they can, right or wrong, rather than wait and try to do it right. To them it is worse to do nothing than to try something that probably won't work. That basic moral compass points them away from reason and helps them embrace political gamesmanship. And this isn't just Democrats, it is everyone. It's the way our nation is governed now.

Re: Obama Care
 

For all of you think I should fork out more money when I already send them over $1400 a month for SS which they say might run out please explain why I should be willing to give them more money? Thats just what they take from me for SS. Yes today was bill day at the office and I just get ticked when I look at those numbers. I think of how much earlier and how much more money I would have if I could keep invest that money into my retirement account. Now I have people telling me I need to fork over more money for another programe and they can't even fix what is allready broken. So For Obama and others who want more of the hard earned money of mine they can just pucker up and kiss my a$$. Ok, now that I'm done with that rant I have a 1:30 Tee time to relax and get my weekend started. I usually win money playing golf I wonder if some Dem. will be waiting on the 19th hole to get his share.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=FRPLG;568461]See to me it isn't about a power grab or anything like that. I think philosophically they'd rather try to address a problem however they can, right or wrong, rather than wait and try to do it right. To them it is worse to do nothing than to try something that probably won't work. That basic moral compass points them away from reason and helps them embrace political gamesmanship. [b]And this isn't just Democrats, it is everyone. It's the way our nation is governed now.[/b][/quote]

Exactly. It's the way now, and the way it's been ever since I can remember (past 15 years or so).

Congress can act quickly, if it wants to. They pushed through something like $75B for Afghanistan in about a week, but things like health care and education seem to be neglected. At least you'd never see so much money for them pushed through so quickly.

On principle though, I think we're usually best served by doing something, rather than nothing, even if that something could/might fail.

One of my favorite quotes of all time:

"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
- Teddy Roosevelt

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=firstdown;568470]For all of you think I should fork out more money when I already send them over $1400 a month for SS which they say might run out please explain why I should be willing to give them more money? Thats just what they take from me for SS. Yes today was bill day at the office and I just get ticked when I look at those numbers. I think of how much earlier and how much more money I would have if I could keep invest that money into my retirement account. Now I have people telling me I need to fork over more money for another programe and they can't even fix what is allready broken. So For Obama and others who want more of the hard earned money of mine they can just pucker up and kiss my a$$. Ok, now that I'm done with that rant I have a 1:30 Tee time to relax and get my weekend started. I usually win money playing golf I wonder if some Dem. will be waiting on the 19th hole to get his share.[/quote]

This is genuinely funny. Good job!

Keep in mind, you probably would have much less, or possibly no, "hard earned money" if there was no government/infrastructure. It's a give and take, not just a take.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;568480]Keep in mind, you probably would have much less, or possibly no, "hard earned money" if there was no government/infrastructure. It's a give and take, not just a take.[/quote]Please explain how the federal government/infrastructure allows private individuals & companies to make money? As far as the government infrastructure goes we already pay for that, far more than we should. The government provides military to make sure we don't get taken over, OK. Interstate roads receive federal funding, I get it. Possibly some oversight into banking and finance, OK I get that too. What else could the fed possibly do to make sure I have "hard earned money"? I'd gladly keep my 7.8 or so percent of my paycheck for SS and Medicare and handle my own retirement. States/localities provide over 94% of education funding. Police and Fire are provided through state and local taxes.

You will recall, I'm sure, from your history lessons that there was no income tax in the U.S. until the early part of the 20th century. The country was doing just fine economically without it.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;568508]Please explain how the federal government/infrastructure allows private individuals & companies to make money? As far as the government infrastructure goes we already pay for that, far more than we should. The government provides military to make sure we don't get taken over, OK. Interstate roads receive federal funding, I get it. Possibly some oversight into banking and finance, OK I get that too. What else could the fed possibly do to make sure I have "hard earned money"? I'd gladly keep my 7.8 or so percent of my paycheck for SS and Medicare and handle my own retirement. States/localities provide over 94% of education funding. Police and Fire are provided through state and local taxes.

[B]You will recall, I'm sure, from your history lessons that there was no income tax in the U.S. until the early part of the 20th century. The country was doing just fine economically without it[/B].[/quote]

Shhhh. History only counts when it proves the United States is mean and big Government saved the day.

Wait, I am sorry, that is just how the NEW history books portray it.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;568508]Please explain how the federal government/infrastructure allows private individuals & companies to make money? As far as the government infrastructure goes we already pay for that, far more than we should. The government provides military to make sure we don't get taken over, OK. Interstate roads receive federal funding, I get it. Possibly some oversight into banking and finance, OK I get that too. What else could the fed possibly do to make sure I have "hard earned money"? I'd gladly keep my 7.8 or so percent of my paycheck for SS and Medicare and handle my own retirement. States/localities provide over 94% of education funding. Police and Fire are provided through state and local taxes.

[B]You will recall, I'm sure, from your history lessons that there was no income tax in the U.S. until the early part of the 20th century. The country was doing just fine economically without it.[/B][/quote]

I'm sure you recall from your own history lessons that there was in fact an income tax imposed during the Civil War, and that much of the debate regarding the necessity of an income tax that led to the constitutional amendment surfaced in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War. Apparently, the US Congress and three-quarters of the union's states believed that the country was not doing "just fine" without an income tax.

Oh, and you say that it is "possible" that there may be some justification for the federal government's use of power to provide "some" oversight of banking and finance? Meaning, that this is a close call? That no oversight might not be a bad idea. Wow.

Re: Obama Care
 

[quote=BringBackJoeT;568523]I'm sure you recall from your own history lessons that there was in fact an income tax imposed during the Civil War, and that much of the debate regarding the necessity of an income tax that led to the constitutional amendment surfaced in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War. Apparently, the US Congress and three-quarters of the union's states believed that the country was not doing "just fine" without an income tax.

Oh, and you say that it is "possible" that there may be some justification for the federal government's use of power to provide "some" oversight of banking and finance? Meaning, that this is a close call? That no oversight might not be a bad idea. Wow.[/quote]Certainly the crisis of the Civil War constituted extreme measures (income tax). Even so, the tax was less than the SS tax alone is today.

And I'm not saying there should be "no oversight" into the financial system, but not the monstrosity of regulations/legal burdens companies must jump through for the government.

You really should read Chapter 1 of The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz to understand how the Income Tax really came to be. As is the same today, the Income Tax (or expansion of taxes) was a Democrat creation, and unfortunatley a few liberal Republicans signed on.

Again, as usual with lefties, my original point wasn't countered....at all, only nit-picking minor details. Please enlighten me, how does the federal government/infrastructure allow/facilitate private individuals & companies to make money? And do you believe the cost of that is worth about 33% of a mid-high end workers income?