One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Confused
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 32 next>>
Jan 18, 2014 00:17:50   #
lone_ghost wrote:
I am not going to go into details and everything is rounded to the highest number but after calculating my taxes, insurance, and FICA. Just about 1/3 of my company's income goes to support people who do not work. To be fair 25% goes towards people who actually need help. 75% goes to unemployment benefits for those who are able to work but do not.

I am not going to go into a diatribe about this but if that 1/3 was going into my company's pocket even minus the 25%, I could probably pay myself.
I am not going to go into details and everything i... (show quote)


Just think how much you could lower you income tax ( by 35 % ) if the cowards in Congress closed all tax loopholes . For every dollar for " those who able to work but do not " we spend 10 dollars on the rich in tax loopholes . You complain about the dime and the dollar gets away .. The top income tax rate under the Simpson / Bowles is 24 % .
Go to
Jan 18, 2014 00:16:39   #
lone_ghost wrote:
I am not going to go into details and everything is rounded to the highest number but after calculating my taxes, insurance, and FICA. Just about 1/3 of my company's income goes to support people who do not work. To be fair 25% goes towards people who actually need help. 75% goes to unemployment benefits for those who are able to work but do not.

I am not going to go into a diatribe about this but if that 1/3 was going into my company's pocket even minus the 25%, I could probably pay myself.
I am not going to go into details and everything i... (show quote)


Just think how much you could lower you income tax ( by 35 % ) if the cowards in Congress closed all tax loopholes . For every dollar for " those who able to work but do not " we spend 10 dollars on the rich in tax loopholes . You complain about the dime and the dollar gets away .. The top income tax rate under the Simpson / Bowles is 24 % .
Go to
Jan 17, 2014 23:58:10   #
carolyn wrote:
Why did Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the three other Americans die in Benghazi, Libya on Sept.11, 2012? We now know that President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and CIA Director David Petraeuswere were likely behind a mishandled gun trafficking program that ended arming radical jihadist rebels who stormed the U.S. consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya on that fateful day. Is there any wonder the bitch, Hillary Clinton asked what the big deal was that four Americans were killed over something she helped botch up?

townhall.com/.../29/benghazigate-obamas-secret-gunrunning...
Why did Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the thr... (show quote)


It will all come out if they don't kill the remaining witnesses . So far 15 who have cooperated have been killed .
Go to
Jan 14, 2014 20:33:15   #
BoJester wrote:
Christie may be the best hope the republicans have, and the conservatives are doing everything they can to knock him off the track. As far as the rest of the gang, none look very good at this point.



http://news.yahoo.com/christie-beat-hillary-104500627--politics.html


And yet the Democrats in Iowa have already started an " anyone but Hillary " campaign . The Democrats would make a huge mistake running her . " What does it matter " was her end .
Go to
Jan 6, 2014 11:51:14   #
ldsuttonjr wrote:
For all the attention Obamacare has drawn in recent weeks, few observers have noted that the law is having the unexpected, yet most welcome, effect of transforming scores of millions of Americans, virtually overnight, into generous benefactors of the less fortunate. A real-world example—representative of countless millions of similar situations—will make this crystal clear:
Let’s say that you are a healthy, hardworking 54-year-old single adult in San Francisco earning $45,960 per year—the income level at which federal Obamacare subsidies from your fellow taxpayers are no longer available to help you pay your monthly health-insurance premiums. As a San Francisco resident, you are permitted to choose from among 16 separate Obamacare-compliant insurance plans. Four of these are so-called “Bronze” plans, low-level policies whose average premium will cost you $453 per month, or $5,436 per year. In exchange for those premium payments, a Bronze plan will cover 60% of your medical expenses—that is, after you meet the $5,000 out-of-pocket annual deductible. For this priceless peace of mind, you can thank Obamacare—the Democratic Party’s gift to a grateful America.

Let us contrast your case with that of Joe, another 54-year-old single individual in San Francisco, who happens to be an obese alcoholic and longtime drug abuser with little ambition and no history of ever having held a full-time job for very long. Joe currently earns $15,860 per year, which is just above the income level that would have made him eligible for Medicaid. Because Joe doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, Obamacare stipulates that he must now purchase his own health insurance—thereby proving that, contrary to the shrill rhetoric of conservative naysayers, no one gets an undeserved free ride under Obamacare.
Like you, Joe can choose from among 16 separate plans that are available to San Francisco residents. But unlike you, he is eligible to receive federal government subsidies—money that other, wealthier Americans, such as you, magnanimously “contribute” toward the healthcare expenses of financially “disadvantaged” individuals. If he selects one of the four Bronze plans (whose average monthly premium is $453), Joe qualifies for $452 in average monthly subsidies—meaning that, regardless of which Bronze plan he chooses, he will pay a monthly premium of exactly $1. You read that correctly. The very same healthcare plan that would cost you $453 per month, is available to Joe for $1 per month—i.e., the cost of three oatmeal-raisin cookies at your local Subway sandwich shop. Over the course of a year, you will pay a total of $5,436 in policy premiums, while Joe, who sadly failed to qualify for free healthcare through Medicaid, will pay his own fair share of $12. This is all in the interest of social justice, you understand. And please, don’t even think about whispering that Obamacare might be some sort of “wealth redistribution” scheme, lest you expose yourself as a petulant reactionary who doesn’t give a damn about sick people.
Oh, imagine what a wonderful world it would be if we could somehow transfer this same brand of Obamacare-style fairness to realms other than health insurance. In such a utopia, for example, the $25,000 new automobile that you purchase would cost a deserving soul like Joe just $55. Your $100 nightly fee at a motel would be 45 cents for Joe. And the $25 hardcover book you purchase at Barnes & Noble would set Joe back about a nickel. What’s that, you say? These items aren’t life-and-death necessities, like medical care, and thus don’t serve as useful analogies? Good point! Let’s stick with real necessities, such as food and housing: The same load of groceries that costs you $250 would cost Joe 55 cents. Your $1,200-per-month rent or mortgage payment would be available to Joe for about $2.65 a month. And the $250,000 home you seek to buy could be Joe’s for about $552. Yes, we’re talking about a veritable paradise of fairness!
But let’s return, for a moment, to the subject of healthcare in the here-and-now. Suppose you decide to opt for something substantially better than the aforementioned Bronze plan. As a resident of San Francisco, you can also choose from among four separate Silver plans, which each pay 70% of your medical costs (after a $2,000 annual deductible) and have an average monthly premium of $614. For Joe, these same four plans are available for an average of $38 per month—thanks to the marvelous, magical subsidies that are built into Obamacare. In fact, one of the Silver plans in particular would cost Joe just twenty nickels per month—a darned fair deal for someone needing healthcare, wouldn’t you say? And again, try not to view the disparity between your fee and Joe’s fee as some form of “wealth redistribution,” but rather as an opportunity for you to cultivate the fiscal virtue that our president terms “neighborliness,” whereby those who are “sitting pretty”—like you—extend a helping hand to the “less fortunate”—like Joe. Yes indeed, think about how deliriously happy you’re making good-ol’ Joe!
Now, if you’re feeling somewhat bold and are inclined to seek out even better coverage, you might opt to enroll in one of San Francisco’s four Gold insurance plans, which pay 80% of your medical costs (with no deductibles) and have an average monthly premium of $752. For Joe, the average cost of such a policy is $166 per month.
And then there are the top-of-the-line policies—the four Platinum plans—which will pay 90% of your medical expenses and will cost you, on average, $843 in monthly premiums. For Joe, by contrast, the cost of these plans will run about $258 a month.
So, let’s review: Joe can have the very best coverage available—the type of Platinum plan that our revered overlords in Washington have carefully secured for themselves—for roughly half the cost that you must pay for the most meager, bare-bones, low-end Bronze coverage in existence. Or, alternatively, he can have:
a Gold plan for about one-third of what you pay for the Bronze;
a Silver plan for one-twelfth of what you pay for the Bronze; or
his own Bronze plan for less than four-tenths of 1 percent of what you pay for the same plan.
 

And why is Joe able to do all this? Because you, my generous comrade, are largely buying his plan for him. Hooray for you! Hooray for advancing the vision that our president so eloquently laid bare just one month ago, when he identified the eradication of “inequality” as the motive that “drives everything I do in this office.” Ain’t it wonderful to be part of such a grand crusade?
And in case you seek additional cause for celebration, rest assured that Obamacare imposes the same type of fairness and equity on family plans as it does on individual plans. For instance, a 54-year-old San Francisco couple with two grown children (ages 19 and 20) living at home—and with a $94,200 household income (the income level at which subsidies are no longer available)—can enroll in a bare-bones Bronze family plan (with an annual deductible of $10,000) for an average monthly premium of $1,175. Meanwhile, an identically structured San Francisco family whose household income is $32,500—just above the level that would have qualified them for Medicaid—can obtain a Bronze plan for precisely $4 per month. Yes, the same plan that costs $14,100 per year for the first family, costs $48 per year for the second family.
The four Silver family plans, meanwhile, have an average monthly premium of $1,593 for the first family, and $81 per month for the second family. Annual outlays would be $19,116 for the first family, vs. $729 for the second family.
This, in a nutshell, is the exquisite beauty of Obamacare: It is redistribution … er, um, er … It is neighborliness on a scale never before seen in this country. And many millions of Americans are poised to reap its glorious benefits! As a form of shorthand, you can simply refer to these fortunate millions as “Democrats,” in honor of the party of benefactors that is, at this very moment, purchasing their eternal political allegiance with your dollars. Take pride in the fact that this wonderful arrangement is but one aspect of the “fundamental transformation” of America that our president is so faithfully pursuing, true to his word. At its essence, it is an arrangement designed to take from certain individuals according to their ability to pay, while giving to other individuals according to their need—a profoundly neat and elegant formula if ever there was one. It almost makes you wonder if anyone else has ever thought of anything like it before.[1]
NOTE:
[1] A central principle of Marxism, popularized by Karl Marx himself, is this: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
And why is Joe able to do all this? Because you, my generous comrade, are largely buying his plan for him. Hooray for you! Hooray for advancing the vision that our president so eloquently laid bare just one month ago, when he identified the eradication of “inequality” as the motive that “drives everything I do in this office.” Ain’t it wonderful to be part of such a grand crusade?
And in case you seek additional cause for celebration, rest assured that Obamacare imposes the same type of fairness and equity on family plans as it does on individual plans. For instance, a 54-year-old San Francisco couple with two grown children (ages 19 and 20) living at home—and with a $94,200 household income (the income level at which subsidies are no longer available)—can enroll in a bare-bones Bronze family plan (with an annual deductible of $10,000) for an average monthly premium of $1,175. Meanwhile, an identically structured San Francisco family whose household income is $32,500—just above the level that would have qualified them for Medicaid—can obtain a Bronze plan for precisely $4 per month. Yes, the same plan that costs $14,100 per year for the first family, costs $48 per year for the second family.
The four Silver family plans, meanwhile, have an average monthly premium of $1,593 for the first family, and $81 per month for the second family. Annual outlays would be $19,116 for the first family, vs. $729 for the second family.
This, in a nutshell, is the exquisite beauty of Obamacare: It is redistribution … er, um, er … It is neighborliness on a scale never before seen in this country. And many millions of Americans are poised to reap its glorious benefits! As a form of shorthand, you can simply refer to these fortunate millions as “Democrats,” in honor of the party of benefactors that is, at this very moment, purchasing their eternal political allegiance with your dollars. Take pride in the fact that this wonderful arrangement is but one aspect of the “fundamental transformation” of America that our president is so faithfully pursuing, true to his word. At its essence, it is an arrangement designed to take from certain individuals according to their ability to pay, while giving to other individuals according to their need—a profoundly neat and elegant formula if ever there was one. It almost makes you wonder if anyone else has ever thought of anything like it before.[1]
NOTE:
[1] A central principle of Marxism, popularized by Karl Marx himself, is this: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
For all the attention Obamacare has drawn in recen... (show quote)


Well done .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:58:50   #
jasfourth401 wrote:
The best way to view this glop is to imagine molten peanut butter. That's what the consistency is like. In order to shove it through a pipeline you need to inject steam to heat it, or add solvents (a newer technology) to decrease viscosity. You can also view this stuff as liquid coal. By definition it is known as bituminous sands.


Yes . And guess who is the recipient of the " new technology " and it's toxicity ? Why don't they put the glop in a hopper and refine it where it came from ? They would need to use less oil to create the steam .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:41:38   #
Constitutional libertarian wrote:
Go to factchecks us oil refining capabilities. In 1982 we had 301 refineries and today we have 149. Yes, they are much more efficient than they were 25 years ago but they are running at full capacity and cannot keep up with demand.


Then why did they shut them down ? Maybe because the damn oil companies ( now deemed person-hood for the purposes of campaign cash ) do whatever the hell they want . If they are over worked then quit exporting oil products .
The Keystone pipeline is a replacement of an existing pipeline . It isn't about oil production , it's about property rights and TransCanada and Koch thinking they can do anything . Replace the pipeline using the existing right of way , period . Private industry does not have eminent domain rights . And their profits are not covered under national security .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:34:51   #
suber wrote:
well maybe too manypeople not want a free world as a pipe line could do much good . Suber


Maybe those effected don't want the pollution . Perhaps a refinery in Canada would be the answer . Might cost Koch a few bucks but so what ?
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:25:07   #
Dummy Boy wrote:
http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen_press.htm

Read about how Government corruption should be addressed....


Sounds like Elanor Roosevelt could speak for the TEA Party .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:15:49   #
Dummy Boy wrote:
This has always been true...power corrupts all, so we need to get away from the Federal "diet" and move to states rights, county rights and city rights.


The diet of term limits .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 12:03:12   #
Confused wrote:
Laws ? What laws ? Emperor O has spoken . The correct answer is the AGs are correct . No law can be changed via the executive branch . Even an arrogant dumb ass like Obama knows that .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 11:57:10   #
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm no legal scholar, but the AGs AND BARACK OBAMA are, and I do believe all of us are held to the law that is passed on by Congress, not bits and pieces of it. However, this "President" who perceives himself as King, KNOWS he can alter anything he chooses because there is no one in authority who has the guts to defy him. Including SCOTUS.


Laws ? What laws ? Emperor O has spoken . The correct answer is the AGs are correct . No law can be changed via the executive branch . Even an arrogant dumb ass like Obama knows that .
Every one should not file income taxes on April 15th and send him and IRS into a tail spin . See how they handle a little push back from the purse strings .
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 11:52:31   #
bmac32 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_kT-Ma8OSO8


I often wonder what goes on in that dimension of reality .
I guess we will have to wait till that time . What is more surprising is seeing a white person on Sharpton's show . Was Mellisa Harris-Perry sick that day ?
Go to
Jan 3, 2014 11:44:05   #
OldSchool wrote:
An unintentional mortal blow to the Obama administration and its Middle East policy.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/caroline-glick/the-new-york-times-destroys-obama/


And hopefully a political career ending blow to Hillary Clinton and her life of corruption and lies .
Go to
Jan 2, 2014 01:02:17   #
Raylan Wolfe wrote:
You are forgetting that the ACA will be very popular in a few months!


If it so popular then why did Obama delay the employer mandate that will cancel 60 million more policies currently employer funded till after the midterm elections ? You keep making excuses for this fraud ...http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/17270-fast-and-furious-fbi-now-linked-to-murder-of-u-s-border-agent
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 32 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.