| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
lilnubber |
|||
|
Kudos on the thread title, Canadian.
|
|||
ZombieLinda |
|||
|
The economy is going to suck no matter who wins.
The Middle East is going to be a clusterfuck no matter who wins. Mexicans are going to keep invading so we can get used to the inevitable NAU no matter who wins. Why don't the campaigns just go back to having a cute-off between these two little angels?
<3 At least there will be adorable Christmas specials no matter who wins. |
|||
lilnubber |
|||
|
I do love the litte Palin girl spit shining Trig's hair. That is so adorable. <3
|
|||
StarrEise |
|||
lilnubber wrote: That is so disgusting. |
|||
merkyl |
|||
|
Actually if you start with the head rubbing, it looks like she's tasting the baby.
|
|||
Sloansalad |
|||
|
tardbaby without mustard? No way man.
|
|||
blockhose |
|||
The rich actually do not benefit most from the State welfare system. The rich pay privately for what they want in addition to being forced to contribute to the welfare state. Listen people, I don't want to see this statement again unless its to just antagonize or mock. For those who actually feel sorry for the rich because they "pay into a system that provides them no benefits", you need to open your goddam eyes. The wealthy have benefited the most from the system. If the system wasn't what it is, they wouldn't be financially comfortable. The extra taxes is a fair compensation given how well the system has worked for them. As for those who do get the most assistance from welfare and other gov't programs - they get it because the system has not worked well for them. And frankly, the assistance they do get is diddly squat compared to how well off the wealthy are. Really, people... just how nonsensical is it to walk around with plenty of cash, investments, retirement, and your kids educations covered, and complain because you gotta fork out some dough so the poor sap on the other side of town can eat for the week? Sounds kinda selfish and assholish, don't it? You know why is sounds that way? Because it IS. And don't fucking even start with me about the poor being lazy leeches. The vast majority who rely on gov't assistance would gladly move up the freaking income ladder on their own if they had the means. So, please. Dispense with the "poor rich" arguments once and for all. If it helps you any, consider the extra taxes the rich pay as maintaining the system that allowed them to be rich in the first place. I'm blockhose, and I approve this message. |
|||
Remington Steele |
|||
|
You're making me love you, blockhose.
|
|||
AllMenAreIslands |
|||
blockhose wrote: Not buying your "explanation." I am tired of this
Fuck off with your commie talk, block. |
|||
lilnubber |
|||
|
Blockhose is my new board crush.
|
|||
Quiddity |
|||
|
Most of those who are rich are rich because they worked hard (with the occassional exception like my Senators, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy who have never worked
a day in their lives due to getting it through inheritance or marrying someone who likewise didn't work for her dough). They deserve it. If you're poor
and its not due to a disability or handicap, or some unfortunate death like a significant death in the family or a natural disaster or something like that,
then all I have to say to you is work harder. I'll repeat AMAI, go screw with your communist/socialist bullshit ;)
|
|||
Pahrump Mania |
|||
|
The economy can be saved if we were to keep our energy dollars in this country. It's that easy. That would also make what goes on in the middle east and
elsewhere less important. I don't know if I trust either current candidate to do what is needed, McCain talks about "all of the above", which is
what we need, but I fear that if oil prices dip a little we'll be back to relying on fossil fuels again since using what is cheapest coincides with free
market ideals. Obama would need to stand up to the conservationists and promote drilling and nuclear. The thing is, he'd have a better chance of getting
around those obstacles if he wanted to since he's from the same team.
The key to a strong economy, more security, and a better future is energy. |
|||
Quiddity |
|||
Pahrump Mania wrote: |
|||
Pahrump Mania |
|||
Quiddity wrote:I tried to not just blame liberals, because conservatives only seem to look at the price of oil, and as long as it's cheap enough they do nothing about future energy needs. After 8 years of Bush we are no better off in terms of energy independence. |
|||
Goosehead |
|||
|
Sweden has a plan to be carbon-free in 15 years. Sweden has one of the highest taxation rates in the world, and enjoys one of the biggest welfare states. Very
few people 'fall through the cracks', as it were.
|
|||
springfeverish |
|||
|
Blockhose <3.
|
|||
Remington Steele |
|||
|
Hey, Goosehead, did you see that documentary on CBC Newsworld where they described what Norway does with their oil profits? Those Scandinavians have some great
ideas.
|
|||
ohboy |
|||
|
washington post article on mccain's
health care plan
|
|||
Remington Steele |
|||
|
FYI, your avi has Tourette's.
|
|||
springfeverish |
|||
|
Jane Bryant Quinn for Newsweek
Vetting McCain's Health Plan
Tax credits would move people out of group plans and into individual policies where the benefits aren't as good.
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Oct 13, 2008
If you think that "The Market"-whatever market-always works for the best, you'll love John McCain's version of health insurance reform. It uses the tax code to shove you toward individual policies (more "choice!") and away from comprehensive, employersupported plans. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center puts the cost of his proposed subsidies at $1.3 trillion over 10 years. But a funny thing happens on the way to spending that much money. Almost all of the subsidy goes to people who have health insurance already, says Sherry Glied, a professor of health policy at Columbia University. The Tax Policy Center figures that, after 10 years, the plan cuts the number of uninsured by only 1 million, out of 45.7 million now. Barack Obama's $1.6 trillion plan would take 34 million off the rolls of the uninsured. McCain's idea is pretty simple. Tax the value of employer-paid health insurance as part of your regular income (62 percent of the nonelderly are in these plans). In return, he'd give everyone a refundable tax credit-$2,500 for individuals, $5,000 for family coverage-to offset the cost of any health policy they choose. Here's how the McCain plan falls out: • Initially, most of the people in employer plans would get a bonus from the government . Their new tax credit would exceed the amount of extra taxes they owed. For the young and healthy, the bonus could be quite large. Older workers with health problems might get a minimal bonus but still do OK. Over the years, however, the value of the credit would be eroded by health-care inflation, and your tax cost would rise. • If you already buy your own health insurance, the tax credit would chop your premium cost by $2,500 or $5,000 . The self-employed lose the deduction they get for health-insurance premiums but would generally still come out ahead (again, until inflation intervened). • If you ' re uninsured, the tax credit helps you purchase coverage . The only hitch-a big one-is that you have to be able to afford the premiums up front. The tax credit comes later. The government will send it to the insurance company, which will apply it to your account. To see how much the McCain plan helps, I asked Scott Leavitt, president of the National Association of Health Underwriters, to price typical policies for healthy singles, couples and families in the Chicago area. It appears that the credit could pretty much cover the premium in your 20s and 30s, even early 40s, making it a good deal. At 55, however, a couple might pay more than $12,000-difficult for older people with modest incomes. • The Tax Policy Center estimates that 20 million workers will leave the employer-based system, not always voluntarily . Midsize and smaller companies are likely to drop their plans and tell you to use the credit to buy a policy yourself. • It ' s a shock to move from group plans into the harsh world of individual insurance . You get "choices" (rah, rah). But the policies cost more and cover less than company plans do-especially for women, older people and those whose health is less than perfect. That is, if you can find coverage at all. In 2006, the Commonwealth Fund studied working-age adults hunting for individual policies. One fifth were charged more or rejected for health reasons. More than half found it hard or impossible to secure a policy they could afford. Conservatives love health plans that throw more of the costs on you. When it's hard to pay the bills, you see the doctor less. Through the "magic of the marketplace," that's supposed to slow the rate of increase in medical costs. Friends, there's zero evidence that that works. In the long run, tax credits will raise your costs without changing the game. And we still won't have helped most of the uninsured. |
|||