If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(American Thinker)   We just saw the Court sanction unlimited taxation on behavior and give permission to lie about it at the same time   (americanthinker.com) divider line 459
    More: Sad, punishments, Charles Krauthammer, supreme courts, Ways and Means Committee, Turbotax  
•       •       •

2142 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jun 2012 at 9:30 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



459 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-29 10:56:26 AM  

cchris_39: unexplained bacon:
what would you do about heathcare in the US?

I think single payer is a better option than Obamacare, but it's not happening...yet.
what do you see as a better alternative? repealing Obamacare I get, it's the replace part I don't think is realistic, mostly because the people calling for this have nothing to replace it with, am I wrong?

Glad you asked!

First, let's remember that 89% of Americans are already satisified with their coverage. But to improve things:

1. Pay doctors to be doctors and nothing else. No more doctor owned heart hospitals, surger centers, imagining centers, etc. They strip the high margin business and better insured patients out of regular hospitals and have a perverse incentive to self-refer.
2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.
3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.

Others feel free to add to the list.


1) Doctors in private practice have a right to regulate their own business. With the system as it is now, there is incentive to do what they are doing. With a single payer system you will not see those high profile doctors go away, but you will see them insulating themselves further, while many family practices will be able to concentrate on care and services. There will always be a divide in practices. Some folks will pay more, and there are doctors there to take their coin.

2) Folks go to the ER because they often can't afford to go elsewhere. Urgent Care facilities even are expensive if you don't have insurance, and this is part of the issue. It's not that folks are just silly, but there is a financial aspect for not being turned away, and being billed later.

3) Antibiotics aren't all equal. There's a reason why we don't sell a lot over the counter. There's a reason you get prescriptions. In the real world, you don't just a power up box to "Cure Disease" or a magical "First Aid Pack"...
 
2012-06-29 10:56:48 AM  

Pincy: vinniethepoo: Let doctors opt out of accepting gummint insurance if they want to. Tax those who do so an additional 20%, and give those who opt in a tax break.

I don't understand why doctors would have a problem with Obamacare. It means that more people will be covered by insurance and thus more people will be able to see a doctor which means more patients that will be able to pay because they have insurance. Granted, I'm not a doctor so maybe I'm missing something here. But I always thought it was good for business to have more paying customers?


Well, it's good for hospitals because they'll wind up getting off the hook for unpaid medical costs. Hence why hospital stocks went up yesterday. For individual doctors, it's a bit more complicated... there are a lot of repercussions in terms of whether this will move doctors away from a fee-for-service model and towards pay-for-performance. Some of that is probably inevitable, but there are a lot of issues involved that impact doctors financially in different ways.

In the end though, it's good for patients to be able to get insurance, because it helps them be healthier, so... win for doctors.
 
2012-06-29 10:56:54 AM  

Brandyelf:
LTC(R) Allen B. West
Member of Congress


Both of those lines make me farking sick
 
2012-06-29 10:57:59 AM  

cchris_39: Nebulious: cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


So I guess you must be pretty upset that homeowners get an extra tax break and that emergency rooms must treat the uninsured.


I have no problem with tax incentives that encourage highly desirable social and economic behavior. That would be like objecting to your employer's ability to deduct your salary. We WANT people employed.


Like a tax incentive to encourage the highly desirable social and economic behavior of having health insurance?
 
2012-06-29 10:58:25 AM  

cchris_39: First, let's remember that 89% of Americans are already satisified with their coverage.


Ya, 89% of Americans who have coverage that is. What about the percentage of Americans who don't have coverage?
 
2012-06-29 10:58:29 AM  

starsrift: cchris_39: 3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.

Others feel free to add to the list.

The issue with this is that overuse of antibiotics (which would have to be a standard part of such hypothetical kit) creates an environment for anti-biotic resistant strains to occur. Furthermore, not all strains of 'flu' are vulnerable to the same antibiotics; that is to say, this is unnecessarily medicating those sick people. There's a reason why that shiat ain't OTC.


There are days when I feel like crap for engaging the conservatives and 'libertarians' in debate. It's like playing dodgeball with a bunch of first graders.
 
2012-06-29 10:59:01 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: cchris_39: Nebulious: cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......


So I guess you must be pretty upset that homeowners get an extra tax break and that emergency rooms must treat the uninsured.


I have no problem with tax incentives that encourage highly desirable social and economic behavior. That would be like objecting to your employer's ability to deduct your salary. We WANT people employed.

Like a tax incentive to encourage the highly desirable social and economic behavior of having health insurance?


No, no. Having people go to the emergency room and offload the costs onto everyone else is much more desirable both socially and economically.
 
2012-06-29 10:59:22 AM  

cchris_39: 1. Pay doctors to be doctors and nothing else. No more doctor owned heart hospitals, surger centers, imagining centers, etc. They strip the high margin business and better insured patients out of regular hospitals and have a perverse incentive to self-refer.
2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.
3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.


1. So, you're willing to restrict their liberty to practice in the free market? You know what they say about those who give up liberty for security.
2. Who decides how to restrict ER care? That sounds like some kind of healthcare rationing board.
3. That idea quite frankly sucks for about 20 different reasons, including: allergic reactions, development of antibiotic resistance, antibiotic overuse, and so on.
 
2012-06-29 10:59:55 AM  
Republicans were right, America's economic system has been destroyed, the markets are responding:

Dow Jones
12,810.20 +207.94 (1.65%)

Healthcare +1.73%
Financial +1.90%

America's Job Creators have responded. LIIBBBBSSSSS!!11
 
2012-06-29 11:01:54 AM  

NateGrey: Republicans were right, America's economic system has been destroyed, the markets are responding:

Dow Jones
12,810.20 +207.94 (1.65%)

Healthcare +1.73%
Financial +1.90%

America's Job Creators have responded. LIIBBBBSSSSS!!11


Ah, I see the Bush recovery is in full force today.
 
2012-06-29 11:01:59 AM  

cchris_39: 1. Pay doctors to be doctors and nothing else. No more doctor owned heart hospitals, surger centers, imagining centers, etc. They strip the high margin business and better insured patients out of regular hospitals and have a perverse incentive to self-refer.
2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.
3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.


Those are the stupidest farking things I've ever heard when talking about how to reform health care. Seriously, those are some of the absolute worst ideas a human being could come up with in this subject. There is so much intermingling stupidity I don't know how to address it first, but I'll try.

Public health is a very farking important thing. People do not get sick in a vacuum. They do not get injured in a vacuum. In a direct way, people getting colds, flus, and other communicable illnesses can result in epidemics. When one person has "the sniffles" and the ER doesn't treat them, pretty soon 20 people will get the sniffles. Then the sniffles will get worse.

Antibiotics are not some magical pill that simply destroy disease. They are useful in many ways, but only in certain cases. If you choke down antibiotics every time, I don't know, YOU GET THE SNIFFLES, pretty soon those sniffles will mutate to the point that antibiotics will not effect them. And those sniffles will start killing.

There are many kinds of doctors, and the more specialized the doctor the more likely they'll be the best people to run a specialized facility. Surgery centers should, you know, be manned by surgeons, which are a type of doctor. Cardiologists are good for running "heart hospitals," whatever the fark those are. Oncologists are probably the right choices to run cancer centers.

You do understand that there are more illnesses than "the sniffles" and more types of doctors than family doctors, right? Medicine is a big and complicated thing, and if all we had to deal with was colds and all we had to do was see nurse practitioners to get a one-size-fits-all prescription, health care wouldn't be a fraction of what it costs now.
 
2012-06-29 11:03:27 AM  

NateGrey: Republicans were right, America's economic system has been destroyed, the markets are responding:

Dow Jones
12,810.20 +207.94 (1.65%)

Healthcare +1.73%
Financial +1.90%

America's Job Creators have responded. LIIBBBBSSSSS!!11


Don't be silly. The fact that the markets are responding so vigorously is a testament to their ability to soldier on in the face of this unmitigated disaster. If the SC had decided to make it unconstitutional, we'd be up five thousand points and Healthcare companies would be giving away puppies and lolly pops.
 
2012-06-29 11:03:28 AM  

cchris_39: Yep. We now live in an a country where the government can tax our very behavior and half the poulation is elated about it.

Those who sacrifice liberty for security.......



except liberty and security have NOTHING to do with taxes.

Troll harder
 
2012-06-29 11:04:33 AM  

Pincy: NateGrey: Republicans were right, America's economic system has been destroyed, the markets are responding:

Dow Jones
12,810.20 +207.94 (1.65%)

Healthcare +1.73%
Financial +1.90%

America's Job Creators have responded. LIIBBBBSSSSS!!11

Ah, I see the Bush recovery is in full force today.


It is the only hope of getting out of the Obama recession.
 
2012-06-29 11:04:44 AM  

Bloody William: Medicine is a big and complicated thing, and if all we had to deal with was colds and all we had to do was see nurse practitioners to get a one-size-fits-all prescription, health care wouldn't be a fraction of what it costs now.


Ohhh... I bet the costs would be pretty much the same. :)
 
2012-06-29 11:04:52 AM  

Infernalist: I didn't say that. I 'said' that if it takes a personal investment, if it takes a family member coming out as gay in order for you to challenge your own idiocy, then you're a coward and a hypocrite.

I have NO gay family whatsoever, but when I hit about 15, I looked at the bigotry and homophobia and thought to myself "that is farking retarded. Who are they hurting? Why should I hate them?"

I'm not black or Hispanic, nor do I have any intimately close friends of either nationality, but when I grew old enough to think for myself, I found myself completely uncaring and indifferent toward the idea of hating them due to skin color. Mind you, I was raised in Texas.

No, you don't have to be born a Democrat in order to claim it, but you can expect derision and mockery when you come out and tell people if it wasn't for your gay sister, you'd still be a GOPer.


Fair enough. I just get pretty pissed off at the purity tests, and the "with us or against us" type attitudes and feel I need to start calling people on it. Insulting and labeling people isn't a good way to finding a middle ground (yeah, I called you a cock first.. sorry bout that.) Basically, when someone from the other side of the aisle expresses some common ground, I think it's a better approach to commend them on it and work with them than to attack them for being hypocrites and idiots for not agreeing 100%. I could argue about this crap forever, but I need to get back to work.
 
2012-06-29 11:07:44 AM  

Erix: Fair enough. I just get pretty pissed off at the purity tests, and the "with us or against us" type attitudes and feel I need to start calling people on it. Insulting and labeling people isn't a good way to finding a middle ground (yeah, I called you a cock first.. sorry bout that.) Basically, when someone from the other side of the aisle expresses some common ground, I think it's a better approach to commend them on it and work with them than to attack them for being hypocrites and idiots for not agreeing 100%. I could argue about this crap forever, but I need to get back to work.



You are right, but there is something infuriating about people who will only to the right thing when it affects them.
 
2012-06-29 11:07:52 AM  
I have been amazed by two things---how quickly the Right has turned on John Roberts (for caving to the pressure of Chicago thugs and/or accepting their bribes), and how many "Constitutional Scholars" regularly post on Breitbart/Fox/Free Republic.
 
2012-06-29 11:08:27 AM  

WhyteRaven74: Also every justice can write their own opinion for a decision. There are some notable cases where you'll have 3 or 4 opinions. Then there's Roe v Wade, where there are opinions from every single justice.


Oh wow, I had no idea.

Edsel: There are a lot of fascinating sidebars here regarding how the votes went... for example, plenty were surprised that Kennedy stuck with the right wing, so it could be that Roberts tried to bring him along but failed. It's also been suggested that Roberts initially was with the right wing but switched sides, as it seemed to some like Scalia's opinion was written as though it was supposed to be the majority opinion. Also, some have suggested that Roberts went with the liberals in exchange for their agreement on the Medicaid expansion opinion.


It's always amusing to me how people think of the Supreme Court as some apolitical and "above-it-all" deliberative body. Even if it doesn't engage in horse-trading directly, It's always been political and always will be. It's the nature of the system. Of course, the overt partisanship of Scalia in recent times is a particularly exaggerated version of this.
 
2012-06-29 11:08:39 AM  
I foresee a shortfall of revenue as opposed to costs.

How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?
 
2012-06-29 11:08:40 AM  
FTA: "What Scalia says, and I reiterate, is that ObamaCare was not enacted as a tax program, and therefore Roberts was writing a new bill to call it a tax program."

Roberts was writing a new bill. Oh man, I really hope the derposphere picks up that line of "thought" and runs with it. "America is destroyed! Obama is the usurpiest empty suited dictator EVAR! Repeal.....ummmm RobertsCare!"
 
2012-06-29 11:09:41 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "Many, many states are not going to be able to afford expansion of Medicaid a


What's funny is the feds are on the hook for the vast majority of the expenditure increases. The cost to the states is a small part of it, and depending on demographics could be very little.
 
2012-06-29 11:09:43 AM  

pxsteel: I foresee a shortfall of revenue as opposed to costs.

How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?



If you don't know the answers to these basic questions, how are you able to make predictions about it?
 
2012-06-29 11:10:30 AM  

Edsel: cchris_39: 1. Pay doctors to be doctors and nothing else. No more doctor owned heart hospitals, surger centers, imagining centers, etc. They strip the high margin business and better insured patients out of regular hospitals and have a perverse incentive to self-refer.
2. Modify EMTALA. We don't treat sniffles at the ER anymore.
3. Sell a basic a basic antiobiotic kit OTC. At my house (maybe yours too) a good 90% of primary care visits are to get prescriptions for basic sinus and upper respiratory infections. That alone elminates millions of unnecessary doctor visits.

1. So, you're willing to restrict their liberty to practice in the free market? You know what they say about those who give up liberty for security.
2. Who decides how to restrict ER care? That sounds like some kind of healthcare rationing board.
3. That idea quite frankly sucks for about 20 different reasons, including: allergic reactions, development of antibiotic resistance, antibiotic overuse, and so on.


agrees
1. sounds socializismy
2. sounds death panely
3. sounds conspiracy-y

If Obama proposed that he would called a "mega-super-Hitler"
 
2012-06-29 11:11:14 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Infernalist: Lovely. So, you were a die-hard GOPer until your sister came out of the closet and made the whole 'evil gayz' thing very personal to you.

I take comfort in the fact that if your sister hadn't come out of the closet, you'd still be a GOPer.

That basically describes all GOPers. Insulation from the ideas of other people is one of the core beliefs of the system. Hence the disdain for / fear of visiting other countries, hatred of education, etc. Conservatism only makes sense in a total ideological vacuum. The only way for it to survive is to destroy its competitors.

And 99 times out of 100, "libertarian" == "still a GOPer but I can't admit it to myself or others".


I'm willing to bet that most Republicans who call themselves "libertarian" have no idea that the Libertarian Party is pro-choice, opposes corporate welfare, supports protecting the environment, opposes government action which supports any religion, opposes anti-LGBT bigotry, opposes the criminalization of marijuana, supports the right to join labor unions, and opposes U.S. foreign intervention. I'll bet they call themselves 'Libertarian' or 'Independent' because they're too embarrassed to say they're Republican.
 
2012-06-29 11:11:36 AM  

Tumunga: Dr Dreidel: 64 comments, and no one's mentioned what the "lie" is.

Is that how Obama danced around calling it a tax during a press conference? When he wasn't under oath (and imagine how hilarious THAT would be - a sworn press conference)?

// also, what's the Doughy Pantload's reaction?
// do we know he hasn't suck-started a shotgun over this ruling?

So, if you're not under 'oath', and you lie, it's not a lie? My wife would LOVE to know about that one.


It's a lie, but it's more like a fart in a windstorm. It amounts to nothing (legally speaking), and the fact that the bill was public information that theoretically was vetted by The Peoples' Representation in Congress, the 'lie' itself outed by the very thing being lied about.

Anyone responsible enough as a citizen or legislator would already have known about the lie, so the time to get all butthurty about it before the bill got passed. If you'd like, go search google for all the times the GOP (perhaps a Democrat or two as well) called it a tax. The wool was only pulled over the eyes of those who were already not paying attention.

// also, unlimited taxation (without apportionment) was already allowed under the 16th Amendment
// also, lying during a press conference is not illegal - Obama could say that the United States of America Bonerland was founded in 1957 by Some Guy, and there would be no legal recourse
 
2012-06-29 11:12:07 AM  

Erix: Infernalist: I didn't say that. I 'said' that if it takes a personal investment, if it takes a family member coming out as gay in order for you to challenge your own idiocy, then you're a coward and a hypocrite.

I have NO gay family whatsoever, but when I hit about 15, I looked at the bigotry and homophobia and thought to myself "that is farking retarded. Who are they hurting? Why should I hate them?"

I'm not black or Hispanic, nor do I have any intimately close friends of either nationality, but when I grew old enough to think for myself, I found myself completely uncaring and indifferent toward the idea of hating them due to skin color. Mind you, I was raised in Texas.

No, you don't have to be born a Democrat in order to claim it, but you can expect derision and mockery when you come out and tell people if it wasn't for your gay sister, you'd still be a GOPer.

Fair enough. I just get pretty pissed off at the purity tests, and the "with us or against us" type attitudes and feel I need to start calling people on it. Insulting and labeling people isn't a good way to finding a middle ground (yeah, I called you a cock first.. sorry bout that.) Basically, when someone from the other side of the aisle expresses some common ground, I think it's a better approach to commend them on it and work with them than to attack them for being hypocrites and idiots for not agreeing 100%. I could argue about this crap forever, but I need to get back to work.


You see common ground. That's admirable. I used to think like that, too.

But, again, I'm from Texas. I've seen the GOP at its finest.

When I see someone come out and say "I used to be a GOPer, but then my sister came out as gay and boy I was mad at first, but then I started thinking about that and now I'm not a GOPer anymore.."

When I see someone say that, I see someone saying "I would happily still be homophobic and hateful to gays, but I love my sister." And that's hypocrisy.

There's no great moral standing in that. There's no moment where he decides to do the 'right thing' simply because it's the moral thing to do.

You ask one man, "Why do you support gay rights?" and he says "Because of my sister."

You ask another man "Why do you support gay right?" and he says "Because it's the right thing to do."

Who do you have more respect for?

And that's why I got angry. As for the insult, don't worry about it. When I get insulted, I consider it bonus points on my score.
 
2012-06-29 11:12:26 AM  

pxsteel: How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?


Hmm, maybe the IRS will have to develop some system for reviewing and investigating the accuracy of submitted tax returns. They could call it an audit or something.
 
2012-06-29 11:12:40 AM  

fracto73: pxsteel: I foresee a shortfall of revenue as opposed to costs.

How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?


If you don't know the answers to these basic questions, how are you able to make predictions about it?


I do know the answers. You don't think that I can find a doctor that will take cash and never say a word?
 
2012-06-29 11:12:52 AM  

pxsteel: I foresee a shortfall of revenue as opposed to costs.

How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?


Ya, I was thinking that same thing. Are we all going to have to file proof of insurance vouchers with our 1040s from now on?
 
2012-06-29 11:13:29 AM  

pxsteel: I foresee a shortfall of revenue as opposed to costs.

How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?


You should have your parents explain it to you?

Oh you are a Republican, have you tried going to FreeRepublic or NewsMax, they have very informative articles on how this is the worst thing to ever happen in the history of the universe.
 
2012-06-29 11:15:05 AM  
If we can teach people the dangers of 4 hour erections, we can teach them to treat their own sinus infections.
 
2012-06-29 11:16:29 AM  

cchris_39: If we can teach people the dangers of 4 hour erections, we can teach them to treat their own sinus infections.


And if they don't know about an allergy to a particular antibiotic, then that's just excess population that is curbed.

Brilliant thinking there, champ.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2012-06-29 11:16:38 AM  

Weaver95: Erix: Weaver95: i'm not sure the GOP has figured out exactly what the propaganda spin on this issue is supposed to be: Limbaugh was saying that 'Obama lied' and that SCOTUS just handed the GOP a victory. others in the GOP blogosphere are saying they're going to move to canada, or shoot Justice Roberts, or 'go galt'. there's a persistent fantasy among some GOP voters that the Republicans can just dummy up another lawsuit next year and automagically repeal Obamacare in 2013-14.

Weaver, I really assumed you'd be against Obamacare. I had you pegged as a libertarian, and this is a pretty significant intrusion of government into people's lives, regardless of if it's for good reasons on not. I'm curious why you're not pissed that the government can now tax the absence of a particular behavior. Or is it just that most republicans have gotten so ridiculously polarized that it's just more fun to see them scream?

/an honest question from a libby lib.

well, as far as 'government intrusion', the Patriot Act is a far far worse abuse of our rights and freedoms. want to fight the good fight? repeal THAT monster and i'm with you all the way. same with most of the 'war on drugs' legislation and funding. As for Obamacare? look - health care reform HAS to happen. spending is out of control, there IS no 'free market' when it comes to health care pricing and the GOP has no plan for dealing with our rotting health care system. Obamacare, for all its flaws, is a valid attempt to at least deal with a problem that's currently out of control and only going to get much, much worse. so as a libertarian my choice is between a BAD plan or NO plan. I'd rather go with the bad plan and then try to work on the details as we go rather than have NO plan and hope that things magically get better all on their own.


QFT. And it still surprises me to this day that the time has come where we agree on topics like this.
 
2012-06-29 11:16:38 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: pxsteel: How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?

Hmm, maybe the IRS will have to develop some system for reviewing and investigating the accuracy of submitted tax returns. They could call it an audit or something.


Do you know how many people don't file tax returns?
 
2012-06-29 11:17:55 AM  

Pincy: Ya, I was thinking that same thing. Are we all going to have to file proof of insurance vouchers with our 1040s from now on?


That's pretty much what we do in Massachusetts. Your Insurance provider gives you a form detailing that you were covered for the year (or part of the year), which must be submitted with state tax filings in order to avoid the penalty (unless you fall into one of the categories exempted).

Pretty simple, actually. It's gets mailed to you and you keep one for your records and submit the other with your taxes.
 
2012-06-29 11:18:02 AM  
So, people of the left, you don't have any problem being lied to?
 
2012-06-29 11:18:06 AM  
Guess what, your tax dollars already pay for health care - every time someone uses the ER as a first-line of medical defense because they can't afford anything else, your municipality and/or state pays for it. The whining about that is the healthcare equivalent of never giving your car an oil change or tune-up and then biatching about the cost to buy a new engine when it seizes.
 
2012-06-29 11:18:13 AM  

fracto73: Erix: Fair enough. I just get pretty pissed off at the purity tests, and the "with us or against us" type attitudes and feel I need to start calling people on it. Insulting and labeling people isn't a good way to finding a middle ground (yeah, I called you a cock first.. sorry bout that.) Basically, when someone from the other side of the aisle expresses some common ground, I think it's a better approach to commend them on it and work with them than to attack them for being hypocrites and idiots for not agreeing 100%. I could argue about this crap forever, but I need to get back to work.


You are right, but there is something infuriating about people who will only to the right thing when it affects them.


I agree, but I try not to get hung up on that. Particularly if it happens at a young age, when it's the first time you actually had to deal with the cognitive dissonance. Just because I've already gone through the struggle of dealing with cognitive dissonance and the subsequent re-evaluation of my entire world view doesn't mean everyone else has. Sometimes it takes being forced to confront the flaws in your position before you even recognize that they exist, and sometimes that trigger is something like a gay relative. I don't care what the motivating factor is, as long as they eventually figure it out.
 
2012-06-29 11:18:45 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "Many, many states are not going to be able to afford expansion of Medicaid and these exchanges that are going to try to be forced down states' throats through 'ObamaCare.' I would like to see governors be tough and opt out of this and exert our 10th Amendment rights and tell President Obama, who does not understand the Constitution -- he even being a constitutional lecturer and supposed scholar in our Constitution, not understanding and probably never reading or absorbing the 10th Amendment to understand that states have rights.

"We are sovereign states that can make up our own minds...Pew! Pew! Pew!"


Hey, remember when all those governors got all, "Tenth amendment! States rights!" about the stimulus package, and then took the money anyway?

Yeah now switch out "stimulus" with "Obamacare."
 
2012-06-29 11:20:40 AM  

DGS:
QFT. And it still surprises me to this day that the time has come where we agree on topics like this.


Common sense isn't necessarily common, but at some point, folks need to put down the pitchforks, and realize that Democrats and Republicans aren't enemies. They are often coming from different perspectives, but lately, the Wing Nut Brigade is dominating the debate with ranting and raving, and that isn't good for the process.

We need to debate the issues, not the "sides" but examine each issue, and then compromise on issues. That is how our representative democracy is supposed to work. We are killing that with politics played like a gottverdammt sport...
 
2012-06-29 11:20:51 AM  

pxsteel: Philip Francis Queeg: pxsteel: How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?

Hmm, maybe the IRS will have to develop some system for reviewing and investigating the accuracy of submitted tax returns. They could call it an audit or something.

Do you know how many people don't file tax returns?


So all income tax provisions are unenforceable in your opinion?
 
2012-06-29 11:20:57 AM  

pxsteel: Philip Francis Queeg: pxsteel: How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?

Hmm, maybe the IRS will have to develop some system for reviewing and investigating the accuracy of submitted tax returns. They could call it an audit or something.

Do you know how many people don't file tax returns?


...and?
 
2012-06-29 11:21:36 AM  

keylock71: Pincy: Ya, I was thinking that same thing. Are we all going to have to file proof of insurance vouchers with our 1040s from now on?

That's pretty much what we do in Massachusetts. Your Insurance provider gives you a form detailing that you were covered for the year (or part of the year), which must be submitted with state tax filings in order to avoid the penalty (unless you fall into one of the categories exempted).

Pretty simple, actually. It's gets mailed to you and you keep one for your records and submit the other with your taxes.


There is a guy at you local flee market that sells the forms for $10 $12 for duplicates
 
2012-06-29 11:21:46 AM  
cdn.epicski.com
 
2012-06-29 11:22:11 AM  

stewmadness: So, people of the left, you don't have any problem being lied to?


It's Constitutional, biatches.
 
2012-06-29 11:22:32 AM  

stewmadness: So, people of the left, you don't have any problem being lied to?


What lie? That it's a tax now but wasn't called one at first? Personally, I've thought of it as a tax since it was first introduced. It was pretty obvious how it worked, so I didn't really give a crap what word was used to describe it. Not sure why the descriptor word matters that much, unless you didn't really understand the law in the slightest.
 
2012-06-29 11:22:34 AM  

pxsteel: Philip Francis Queeg: pxsteel: How is the government going to enforce the tax? How will they know that I don't have insurance?

Hmm, maybe the IRS will have to develop some system for reviewing and investigating the accuracy of submitted tax returns. They could call it an audit or something.

Do you know how many people don't file tax returns?



Why do you hate personal responsibility?
 
2012-06-29 11:24:13 AM  

intelligent comment below: Brandyelf:
LTC(R) Allen B. West
Member of Congress


Both of those lines make me farking sick


Too bad West didn't stay in the military longer. If he did, his tombstone would have said: "FRAGGED BY HIS OWN TROOPS".
 
2012-06-29 11:24:29 AM  

Erix: stewmadness: So, people of the left, you don't have any problem being lied to?

Not sure why the descriptor word matters that much


Remember, these are the same people who think they have to protect the word "marriage".
 
Displayed 50 of 459 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report