The Glade 4.0

No, Potatoes don't inflict any pain, so they are not involved. Well, ok they might on some girls, but I haven't met to many of those types.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

You don't get to define the context. The word means what it means, and a burden placed upon people is appropriate to our discussion. In fact, it's the crux of the discussion.

Therefore: demonstrate how one can avoid that tax.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

You don't get to redefine the context, DFK, to suit your argument. We are talking very specifically about government taxation - money the government collects from us in order to pay for services.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

We sure are.



You've added that caveat, despite the noun definition of the word in question having clauses that disagree with you.

Take it up with either Miriam or Webster.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Monte, which side of the taxation balance sheet do you fall under? Asset, or liability?

_________________

Oh, that's really irrelevant to whether he's properly using the language.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

I don't quite understand your question, Shuyung. What are you driving at?

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Does it help to rephrase the question as net asset or net liability?

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

No.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

He is asking whether you receive net benefits from the government (don't pay Federal income taxes), or whether you give net benefits to the government (pay Federal income taxes).

Personally I think it's irrelevant to the topic, but feel free to answer if you want.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Do you pay more in taxes than are expended on you? I was just curious, as it seemed you were inclined to adjudicate burden earlier in the thread.

_________________

I don't understand how my tax burden is relevant to the discussion, Shuyung.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

It's hard to calcuate. The government operates in deficit. To balance the books, they sell Treasury Bonds that ultimately get monetized by The Fed. The bonds get monetized because when they mature, the money from the sale of the bond doesn't ever do anything to increase revenues proportionate to the par value of that bond.

Therefore, one must valuate their dollar denominated assets (cash, savings deposits, any debt obligations owned as an asset, cash components of investment portfolios etc.) This is ultimately how the tax materializes when it is deferred rather than paid for directly by tax revenues.

So it's actually a very difficult and obfuscated matter to calculate your true tax liability (as in the taxes the taxpayer is liable for) since so much taxation is done through monetization. This is one of the prime motivations behind ending The Fed. The other being that having no currency is not a feasible solution in this day and age. We need a liquid means by which to trade.

edit: edited for clarity

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

Is this in the right thread?

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine

Yeah, he's responding to Shuyung, I think.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Well the debate has started and fortunatly it's never gonna pass guys.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-ge ... .Overhaul/

To finance the expanded coverage, Reid proposed higher taxes as well as cuts totaling hundreds of billions of dollars in projected Medicare payments. Hardest hit would be the private insurance Medicare plans, although providers such as home health agencies would also receive significantly less in future years than now estimated.

Wanna know why? Because Obama said so;



Since it doesn't do that, I expect an immediate veto when the Pelosi/Reid power grab goes to be signed. Oh an in addition...




and most importantly;


See folks, it's ok he's only redistributing their money.... Anyone know the web address where this happens?....

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/11/the-100-million-health-care-vote.html

Apparently Mary Landrieu demanded $100 million for Louisiana in exchange for her vote to begin debate, and is now demanding an additional $300 million if they want her vote to end debate.

Money well spent if a good public option can pass. Of course, Joe Liebermann will get in the way of that. Sigh.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

How will putting extra money for onestate be well spent?

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Doh! The ends justify the means, don'tcha know?

Wow.

_________________
The Dude abides.

Your position on this boggles me, Montegue. The CBO has audited the version which passed the house. It breaks the Dime Promise and will increase the number of uninsured. The H1N1 situation indicates that it will lead to rationing of care. The new provisions and standards for Mammagrams indicate that they're not concerned with general female health (40-50 is the highest risk age bracket and the new Medicare provisions and the standards in the house bill will push minimum covered age to 51). So ...

What good is going to come of this? Why are you still so gung ho for it when what we already know about the version that passed the House says it will hurt the people you want covered?

_________________

1) Rationing of Care already occurs, only private corproations are in charge of that rationing.

2) The CBO estimates the Senate bill will lower the deficit by nearly a trillion dollars over the next 20 years.

3) The H1n1 argument is a red herring.

$) The new provisions and standards are *not* law, nor have they been adopted. Please educate yourself on the source of those reccomendations, and the surrounding science that supports them. You are making an appeal to emotion without any real justification.

What good will come of this? 94% of the nation will have access to quality, affordable health care. We will not longer be at the mercy of private insurance companies willing to let us die to save their bottom line. I will have the option to go out and get affordable insurance through the government instead of giving a private insurance company a dime of my money. We will save nearly a trillion dollars in the next two decades. We will be on the road to universal health care coverage. I will point out that Bush's tax cuts cost us two trillion dollars.

In case you hadn't noticed, Khross, I feel that health care is a *right*, like police protection and military protection. If a single senator needs pork barrel money to do the right thing, so be it.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

I'm really curious as to what the "conservative" solution to the very real problems we have right now with private health care are. Right now when you get one of the blacklisted pre-existing conditions, most of which are through no fault of your own, the only way you can get insurance is through an employer's group plan. If you try to procure it for yourself you will be instantly and automatically rejected.

When you go on an employer's group plan, which is required to cover you, that employer's rates go up. This gives him a huge incentive to figure out who has the big medical problem and find a reason to fire them or not hire them in the first place. Yes, this is illegal but it still happens a lot. I mean, there are studies that show employers are reluctant to hire anyone with a black or Arabic-sounding name even if their credentials are good, and that doesn't even affect the bottom line.

I mean, do we really want a system that tells people born with autism, or Crohn's disease, or scoliosis that they can never get health insurance for the rest of their lives, unless they can find a totally honest employer willing to sacrifice a huge amount of his bottom line instead of bending the law? Because that's the system we have now. Some of these arguments are terrifying, especially from the far-right conservatives who say people who don't have insurance shouldn't be treated at all. It's really a twisted form of eugenics, if you're born with a genetic condition, you're blacklisted from insurance, and nobody is required to treat you, meaning you'll die really quickly.

The problem is, financially it has to come down to either eugenics or wealth redistribution if the person with the condition isn't paying out of pocket. There is nothing magical that insurance carriers provide, so there's nothing magical they can do. If someone has a pre-existing condition, that means the premiums of everyone else on that carriers policy must go up. The insurance company cannot pay the difference, that's impossible, not a question of business ethics. As premiums rise, people with low risk categories are going to drop insurance because the premiums start to outweigh the benefit of the policy's payout and may even eventually become unaffordable. As these people drop the policy, the premiums of those remaining go up and it will force even more people out.

People do voluntarily redistribute their own wealth for those with unfortunate circumstances: there were several fundraisers when I was in middle school for a kid with spina bifida.

I'd like to know what the "liberal" solution is, if you want to play the label game. Because there is a very real problem with these medical conditions: they cost a lot of money to treat. When you point this out, you are labeled as a monstrous killer and unemotional tyrant of some sort.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones