Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 02:54:38 PM



Title: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 02:54:38 PM
Enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 02:58:02 PM
Awesome. I defer all my political decisions to Matt Damon anyway.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 02:58:38 PM
Awesome. I defer all my political decisions to Matt Damno anyway.
Why would you do that?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 02:59:21 PM
Why would you do that?

It was a sarcastic response.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 03:00:49 PM
Holy shit!

Matt Damon knows what the hell he's talking about here.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Stavios on September 10, 2008, 03:01:13 PM
he is spot on !

did she really said dinosaurs were on earth 1000 years ago ?  ???


 ???


 ???

if so, maybe it was a joke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 03:01:20 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:02:23 PM
he is spot on !

did she really said dinosaurs were on earth 1000 years ago ?  ???


 ???


 ???

if so, maybe it was a joke
No. Sarah Palin is a young earth Creationist and believes the world is 6000 years old.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 03:02:31 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!

Considering you can't see YouTube on a phone... How do you know what he said?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:02:47 PM
Why would you do that?

Makes it so I don't have to think.  ;)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:03:09 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!
Link me to this EXACT statement or post the video.  I bet you can`t.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Stavios on September 10, 2008, 03:03:50 PM
No. Sarah Palin is a young earth Creationist and believes the world is 6000 years old.

that's one stupid woman


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:03:59 PM
No. Sarah Palin is a young earth Creationist and believes the world is 6000 years old.

Hey we agree on something - she's a religious fanatic.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:04:18 PM
Makes it so I don't have to think.  ;)
Take Matt Damon out of the equation and just listen to the words he says.

Do you agree or disagree with what he is saying and if so why or why not?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: ironneck on September 10, 2008, 03:05:17 PM



haha candidizzle is da man!
....did that slut really say that?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Stavios on September 10, 2008, 03:05:50 PM
I found the bulldog with lipstick joke pretty aweful



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 03:06:36 PM
TuHolms its fron the left and TA I dont need to see the video


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:07:26 PM
Take Matt Damon out of the equation and just listen to the words he says.

Do you agree or disagree with what he is saying and if so why or why not?

In all seriousness. I agree completly with what he says - look at the facts about her. I've got a huge issue with her being ultra conservative & it appears she's a religious fanatic (two things I can't stand). I wouldn't vote for McCain/Palin if you had a gun to my head.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:07:54 PM
It's absolutely terrifying that she claims to believe this, literally:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

Damon is right... it is like a terrifying Disney movie... hockey mom becomes leader of free world. But when you consider her pastor said on FOX news last night that the end of the world is coming, and all people will run to alaska to escape form a nuclear holocaust... that is scary.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: ironneck on September 10, 2008, 03:09:49 PM
It's absolutely terrifying that she claims to believe this, literally:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism

Damon is right... it is like a terrifying Disney movie... hockey mom becomes leader of free world. But when you consider her pastor said on FOX news last night that the end of the world is coming, and all people will run to alaska to escape form a nuclear holocaust... that is scary.

how can someone believe this shit????????
what a dumb whore...angela merkel powns that dumbass


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 03:10:02 PM
TuHolms its fron the left and TA I dont need to see the video

I understand your premise, but I would think that you should actually see the video before you instantly dismiss it.

Why is it "From the left"?

Who made up this "left v. right" bullshit anyway?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:10:06 PM
TuHolms its fron the left and TA I dont need to see the video

Joe, you should watch it.  Tell us what he's wrong about.  You spend hours debating religion and politics, and you won't listen to a single differing opinion on both?  It's 1:40 long... don't you have less than 2 minutes to learn?

I listen to Rush, hannity, and laura ingraham daily.  I also listen to olbermann and msnbc daily.  it's only through listening to both sides of the argument that you understand.



I'm sadly disappointed in you for being closed-minded here.  Matt Damon's words are sobering and may bring your Palin high back to earth.  And it's nothing negative about her at all, actually.  It's a shame you don't have the courage to look at both sides of the issue.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:10:10 PM
TuHolms its fron the left and TA I dont need to see the video
Is that because you are lying perhaps.  Why can`t you just link us or show us?  I will admit you are correct if you can do this.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:11:37 PM
Joe, you should watch it.  Tell us what he's wrong about.  You spend hours debating religion and politics, and you won't listen to a single differing opinion on both?  It's 1:40 long... don't you have less than 2 minutes to learn?

I listen to Rush, hannity, and laura ingraham daily.  I also listen to olbermann and msnbc daily.  it's only through listening to both sides of the argument that you understand.



I'm sadly disappointed in you for being closed-minded here.  Matt Damon's words are sobering and may bring your Palin high back to earth.  And it's nothing negative about her at all, actually.  It's a shame you don't have the courage to look at both sides of the issue.

Come on Rob it makes it easier to argue if you don't listen to or understand the other side.  ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:13:24 PM
I heard that her pastor said something along the lines that anyone who doesn't support George W. Bush will burn in hell. Also, her church's motto regarding gay people is "pray away the gay".


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:13:59 PM
I heard that her pastor said something along the lines that anyone who doesn't support George W. Bush will burn in the hell. Also, her church's motto regarding gay people is "pray away the gay".  

Do you have a link or anything to that?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Stavios on September 10, 2008, 03:14:42 PM
Come on Rob it makes it easier to argue if you don't listen to or understand the other side.  ;D

 ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:14:50 PM
I heard that her pastor said something along the lines that anyone who doesn't support George W. Bush will burn in hell. Also, her church's motto regarding gay people is "pray away the gay".

Greta interviewed both her new and old pastor last night.  They're a little nuts.  Believe the end of the world is coming, and people will hide in alaska.  Seriously.  She attended these 2 churches for 20 years.  Yikes.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 03:15:08 PM
Cant do it from a phone on a LaCross field. When I get back to my office I will find it and post it.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Alex23 on September 10, 2008, 03:16:34 PM
That's not Candidizzle.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:16:43 PM
Do you have a link or anything to that?
Here is one of them: http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/mccain/1150170,gay090708.article


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:17:20 PM
Do you have a link or anything to that?
Sarah Palin's church hopes to 'pray away the gay' and convert homosexuals to heterosexuals

September 7, 2008
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1150170,gay090708.article
FROM ASSOCIATED PRESS


ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Gov. Sarah Palin’s church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

‘‘You’ll be encouraged by the power of God’s love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality,’’ according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed for about six years.


Palin’s conservative Christian views have energized that part of the GOP electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain’s candidacy before he named her as his vice presidential choice. She is staunchly anti-abortion, opposing exceptions for rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples.

Focus on the Family, a national Christian fundamentalist organization, is conducting the ‘‘Love Won Out’’ Conference in Anchorage, about 30 miles from Wasilla.

Palin, campaigning with McCain in the Midwest on Friday, has not publicly expressed a view on the so-called ‘‘pray away the gay’’ movement. Larry Kroon, senior pastor at Palin’s church, was not available to discuss the matter Friday, said a church worker who declined to give her name.

Gay activists in Alaska said Palin has not worked actively against their interests, but early in her administration she supported a bill to overrule a court decision to block state benefits for gay partners of public employees.

At the time, less than one-half of 1 percent of state employees had applied for the benefits, which were ordered by a 2005 ruling by the Alaska Supreme Court.

Palin reversed her position and vetoed the bill after the state attorney general said it was unconstitutional. But her reluctant support didn’t win fans among Alaska’s gay population, said Scott Turner, a gay activist in Anchorage.

‘‘Less than 1 percent of state employees would even apply for benefits, so why make a big deal out of such a small number?’’ he said.

‘‘I think gay Republicans are going to run away’’ if Palin supports efforts like the prayers to convert gays, said Wayne Besen, founder of the New York-based Truth Wins Out, a gay rights advocacy group. Besen called on Palin to publicly express her views now that she’s a vice presidential nominee.

‘‘People are looking at Sarah Palin as someone who might feasibly be in the White House,’’ he said.
Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:17:41 PM
She is also against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:18:25 PM
Thanks.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: QuakerOats on September 10, 2008, 03:18:30 PM
she's loonier than a Christmas fruitcake, batshit nuts.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:19:10 PM
Cant do it from a phone on a LaCross field. When I get back to my office I will find it and post it.
I will hold you to that.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:19:52 PM
That's not Candidizzle.

How can you tell? No acne?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:19:56 PM
Here is another interesting link:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/palins_past_pastor_bushfoes_he.html

This is regarding her former church's pastor:
Kalnins has preached that critics of Bush will be banished to Hell, questioned if people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to Heaven, charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;" and that Jesus "operated from that position of war mode."



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:21:00 PM
She is also against abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

Which is another reason (to my long list of reasons) why I won't vote for her.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:23:42 PM
TA, are you going to vote for Obama or an independent candidate?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 03:24:54 PM
TA, are you going to vote for Obama or an independent candidate?

I believe he already said Obama.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:29:20 PM
Cant do it from a phone on a LaCross field. When I get back to my office I will find it and post it.

Joe, if you will watch this less-than-2-minute clip, i'll happy watch or analyze any clip you wish.  Rush, hannity, or anyone else.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: MCWAY on September 10, 2008, 03:32:45 PM
I heard that her pastor said something along the lines that anyone who doesn't support George W. Bush will burn in hell. Also, her church's motto regarding gay people is "pray away the gay".

Wrong on both counts!!

This was on Greta Van Strusstren's show last night. She interviewed Palin's (current or former, I can remember which one) pastor.

That "pray away the gay" isn't that church's motto. Furthermore, anything about "the gay" had to do with the pastor allowing James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" ministry, which does have a ministry for those wanting to leave homosexuality" to appear at his church.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:34:46 PM
Yes, the pray away the gay was exaggerated.  As was the anti-bush stuff.

There were other things that worried me.

First, the pastor said palestinian bombings were god's punishment to jews.
Then Palin herself got on the mic and said the oil pipeline and war in iraq were god's will.

Remember that Bush himself admitted he never consulted sec of defense Rumsfeld before invading Riaq- but he did consult with Jesus.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 03:37:19 PM
"Swamppolitics"? WTF is that?? No wait, lemme guess!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Stavios on September 10, 2008, 03:37:54 PM

Remember that Bush
First, the himself admitted he never consulted sec of defense Rumsfeld before invading Riaq- but he did consult with Jesus.

 :o


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: QuakerOats on September 10, 2008, 03:38:01 PM
she sounds like a backwoods Pentecostal to me. :-\


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tommywishbone on September 10, 2008, 03:38:12 PM
No. Sarah Palin is a young earth Creationist and believes the world is 6000 years old.

6000? I've got socks older than that.

She'd make a great president... if this were the year 1008 instead of 2008.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 03:38:54 PM
TA, are you going to vote for Obama or an independent candidate?
Obama of course. He is a step in the correct direction for a future Kucinich, Wexler, Ventura candidacy.  The zeitgeist is moving I just wish it was a bit faster.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 03:39:28 PM
she sounds like a backwoods Pentecostal to me. :-\

I do believe that's what she is.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:40:15 PM
Wrong on both counts!!

This was on Greta Van Strusstren's show last night. She interviewed Palin's (current or former, I can remember which one) pastor.

That "pray away the gay" isn't that church's motto. Furthermore, anything about "the gay" had to do with the pastor allowing James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" ministry, which does have a ministry for those wanting to leave homosexuality" to appear at his church.

How am I wrong about what her pastor said? He’s on record saying “I question the salvation” of people who voted for John Kerry and that critics of President Bush are going to hell.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:42:01 PM
she was penecostal for 20 years, then changed to a non-demoninational church 6 years ago when she devised the plan to be governor.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:42:36 PM
How am I wrong about what her pastor said? He’s on record saying “I question the salvation” of people who voted for John Kerry and that critics of President Bush are going to hell.

this part is correct- he later said he was only joking.

I can't imagine joking about something like that unless you realluy believed it.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 03:43:56 PM
this part is correct- he later said he was only joking.

I can't imagine joking about something like that unless you realluy believed it.

Nobody jokes about that shit.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: QuakerOats on September 10, 2008, 03:44:13 PM
she was penecostal for 20 years, then changed to a non-demoninational church 6 years ago when she devised the plan to be governor.

does she speak in tongues?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 10, 2008, 03:45:27 PM
TuHolms its fron the left and TA I dont need to see the video
::)  You're officially an idiot! Here's a quote from a guy who was around while the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Read it and start learning:

"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."  - Sun Tzu


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: BroadStreetBruiser on September 10, 2008, 03:45:57 PM
the coach needs to retire.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: QuakerOats on September 10, 2008, 03:47:11 PM
hahahahaa, "6000 years old" i love how these idiots can ignore scientific facts and believe bullshit like that and Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the parting of the Red Sea and those fairy tales. ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:52:39 PM
In early 2007, Palin's administration approved an initiative to pay a $150 bounty to hunters who killed a wolf from an airplane in certain areas, hacked off the left foreleg, and brought in the appendage.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 10, 2008, 03:54:35 PM
In early 2007, Palin's administration approved an initiative to pay a $150 bounty to hunters who killed a wolf from an airplane in certain areas, hacked off the left foreleg, and brought in the appendage.
Ah yes, chasing down a wolf until it is spent, and then plugging it. Classy.  ::)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tweeter on September 10, 2008, 03:55:54 PM
I just don't understand why so many people are supporting her. Regardless of whether or not you agree with her religious beliefs, she is very inexperienced. McCain is in his 70's so there is a decent chance that something could happen to him, and Palin would become President.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 03:58:36 PM
I just don't understand why so many people are supporting her. Regardless of whether or not you agree with her religious beliefs, she is very inexperienced. McCain is in his 70's so there is a decent chance that something could happen to him, and Palin would become President.

she's an unknown.  she's pretty.  

she's a religious extremist.  She is.  She stood in church and said an oil pipeline is God's will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS_VduCWhzM


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The True Adonis on September 10, 2008, 04:00:27 PM
she's an unknown.  she's pretty. 

she's a religious extremist.  She is.  She stood in church and said an oil pipeline is God's will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS_VduCWhzM
How is she pretty? I think people give her too much credit in that department. I don`t get it. People really must be blind. hahaha

She is obese for one.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: bigj2k3 on September 10, 2008, 04:02:23 PM
We should elect the man who:
1. Tells us to "protect the least of these" from the bible, but lets his brother live in a hut in Kenya.  George Hussein Obama lives on less than a dollar a month in a 6x8 hut.
2. Works with his family for a muslim overthrow of the govt. in Kenya.
3. Takes it upon himself to apoloigize for all of America while in foreign countries.
4. Has a good friend, William Ayers of the Weather Underground. A United States terrorist group who bombed the pentagon and NYC Police headquarters. When Ayers was asked about it on 9/11, he was quoted in the New York Times as saying "I don't regret setting bombs, I'd do it again." Ayers was released from prison because of an FBI evidence error. When Obama's campaign was asked about the relationship the campaign stated they were friendly.
5.Who followed this man for 20 years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 04:03:44 PM
big2k3,

Are you attempting to deflect the thread into an anti-Obama thread?

Why not defend palin's activities?

If the judge asks me if I killed a guy, can I bring in some dude who killed two folks, and the judge lets of mee of the hook?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: bigj2k3 on September 10, 2008, 04:05:29 PM
The messiah is a great speaker without his teleprompter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Cap on September 10, 2008, 04:06:45 PM
Considering you can't see YouTube on a phone... How do you know what he said?
Iphone? Ipod Touch?

BTW, why does anyone listen to celebs when it comes to politics?  They are skewed in their liberal lifestyles and almost always vote for one side and the presidency really doesn't impact their daily lives.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: bigj2k3 on September 10, 2008, 04:06:58 PM
big2k3,

Are you attempting to deflect the thread into an anti-Obama thread?

Why not defend palin's activities?

If the judge asks me if I killed a guy, can I bring in some dude who killed two folks, and the judge lets of mee of the hook?
yes, b/c while mccain and palin are not that great the alternative is far worse. the lesser of 2 evils.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: JOCKTHEGLIDE on September 10, 2008, 04:07:23 PM
MATT DAMON SMART MAN,,,,,SMARTER I POLITICS  ::)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 04:08:25 PM
Yes, the pray away the gay was exaggerated.  As was the anti-bush stuff.

There were other things that worried me.

First, the pastor said palestinian bombings were god's punishment to jews.
Then Palin herself got on the mic and said the oil pipeline and war in iraq were god's will.

Remember that Bush himself admitted he never consulted sec of defense Rumsfeld before invading Riaq- but he did consult with Jesus.

I thought that's what she said at her churchs youthgroup.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 04:09:46 PM
Iphone? Ipod Touch?

BTW, why does anyone listen to celebs when it comes to politics?  They are skewed in their liberal lifestyles and almost always vote for one side and the presidency really doesn't impact their daily lives.

He has admitted that he didn't look at it... no point in defending him.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 10, 2008, 04:12:10 PM
"Iraq War is God's Will".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EgwoWVNoic


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Rimbaud on September 10, 2008, 04:12:25 PM
she's an unknown.  she's pretty.  

she's a religious extremist.  She is.  She stood in church and said an oil pipeline is God's will.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS_VduCWhzM

That's was classic.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: nicky.smth on September 10, 2008, 04:15:01 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!

How do you get that cellphone on every post?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 20inch calves on September 10, 2008, 04:17:20 PM
i hate when actors share there political views..i mean really who cares what he thinks?  i don;t. most actors are idiots..radical in there thinking. they should all stick to there acting and keep there opinions to themselves


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: bigj2k3 on September 10, 2008, 04:18:45 PM
An intelligent celebrity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnciLhH1sKM


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 05:06:06 PM
I will hold you to that.

My mistake, he was referring to Clinton..........what he's basically saying is "Obama made the wrong choice"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM537BgCsMg


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 05:09:00 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!
Good to know I was right......and I didn't even have to see it to know I was right.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: bigj2k3 on September 10, 2008, 05:24:56 PM
Biden also said that McCain is qualified for president, that he would want to run with him, and that Obama is not qualified.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAathmeMVSY


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: gordiano on September 10, 2008, 05:30:54 PM
I understand your premise, but I would think that you should actually see the video before you instantly dismiss it.

Why is it "From the left"?

Who made up this "left v. right" bullshit anyway?

Well said.

Personally I think, anybody who blindly backs a "party" is a fool. Use your heads people......THIS WOMAN COULD BE PRESIDENT! Are you fucking kidding me?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Dorian01 on September 10, 2008, 05:35:00 PM
Her church has a whole "America will be destroyed by God" kind of thing going. "God takes the sin personally". Also Jews For Jesus.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Cap on September 10, 2008, 06:03:47 PM
He has admitted that he didn't look at it... no point in defending him.
I was just referring to you talking about seeing it from a cell phone.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 10, 2008, 07:03:49 PM
Yep, yet again the schizophrenic left is full of shit:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

Notice that factcheck.org has these things called sources, you sort of need them when your making a point about someone's past, if you don't you kind of look like an idiot making shit up.

Just because you "want" something to be true, doesn't mean it is. You know, just like when people say Obama has enough experience to run for President ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Ross Miller on September 10, 2008, 07:14:34 PM
Truth huh? Thats funny considering everything the left has put out has been proven to be lies. Hey, did you hear that Biden said that Palin would easily make a good President and she would be a great vice president? "Quite frankly, I think shes a better pick than me"

Obama and the left.....OWNED!

He said that about Clinton you idiot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM537BgCsMg


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 10, 2008, 07:36:36 PM
My mistake, he was referring to Clinton..........what he's basically saying is "Obama made the wrong choice"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GM537BgCsMg

Apology accepted "Ross Miller"!!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: divcom on September 10, 2008, 08:10:34 PM
Biden also said that McCain is qualified for president, that he would want to run with him, and that Obama is not qualified.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAathmeMVSY

Oh...boy!  How things change when he has a chance to be VP?  Wonder what he has to say about the current one in office, if McSame can make it 4 yrs without passing away and leaving us in the hands of Pantyline.    


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 10, 2008, 08:15:29 PM
I was just referring to you talking about seeing it from a cell phone.

Yes... I know the iphone can do it... However, if on an iphone, it doesn't use the mobile page, it uses the regular page, because it's safari is registered as a full browser.

Coach's cell phone logo means he's not using an iphone.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calmus on September 10, 2008, 08:16:59 PM
Oh...boy!  How things change when he has a chance to be VP?  Wonder what he has to say about the current one in office, if McSame can make it 4 yrs without passing away and leaving us in the hands of Pantyline.   

I'll paypal you 30 bucks if you post a pic of her pantyline.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: arce377 on September 10, 2008, 09:41:07 PM
  ....


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: nycbull on September 10, 2008, 11:45:53 PM
In early 2007, Palin's administration approved an initiative to pay a $150 bounty to hunters who killed a wolf from an airplane in certain areas, hacked off the left foreleg, and brought in the appendage.

yes this is true, wolves are attacked by planes to kull them, using the myth that they overpopulated whern really their land was stolen from them.....this happens as well
with wild horses in the desert, they are corralled using airplanes and then all gunned down...all with tax payers money...This happens even when there are offers to adopt or translocate these animals....It is just more proof that Repubs enjoy the sensless slaughter of animals just to give a boost to their penis's and the penoirs's. 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calfzilla on September 11, 2008, 12:02:51 AM
Matt Damon is just another Hollywood left wing nutjob.  He keeps talking about her experience but I would say her and Obama are pretty much equally experienced. 
    I will be sure to boycott all of Matt Damons past and future movies.  How many getbiggers are with me?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 12:07:54 AM
Enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk

  The stupidity of Americans leaves me both appalled and aghast. The greatest mystery in the Universe, to me, is not how to achieve cold nuclear fusion, or how to imbue sentience to a machine, the Paulli Paradox or even the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis, but how exactly a country of morons like the U.S.A managed to achieve First World status. It truly defies Human comprehension and logic how this came to pass. If you were to coldly analyse all data that refers to the U.S and it's people, you would deduce that it is a Third World status nation - evolution banned from the school curriculum in several American states, highest amount of high school drop outs among all developed countries, highest amount of children raised by single parents of all devleoped nations, highest homicide rate of all developed nations, highest rate of adult illiteracy. It is incredible.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calfzilla on September 11, 2008, 12:21:17 AM
 The stupidity of Americans leaves me both appalled and aghast. The greatest mystery in the Universe, to me, is not how to achieve cold nuclear fusion, or how to imbue sentience to a machine, the Paulli Paradox or even the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis, but how exactly a country of morons like the U.S.A managed to achieve First World status. It truly defies Human comprehension and logic how this came to pass. If you were to coldly analyse all data that refers to the U.S and it's people, you would deduce that it is a Third World status nation - evolution banned from the school curriculum in several American states, highest amount of high school drop outs among all developed countries, highest amount of children raised by single parents of all devleoped nations, highest homicide rate of all developed nations, highest rate of adult illiteracy. It is incredible.
When the US first achieved First World status we were a very different country.  Most of the people who made the country a success have since died or are dying off.  Because of the far left, political corectness and groups like the ACLU we are slipping.  Hope is not lost but we do need a change. 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: freespirit on September 11, 2008, 12:28:27 AM
No. Sarah Palin is a young earth Creationist and believes the world is 6000 years old.

In that case, she's not to be taken serious.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: KillerMonk on September 11, 2008, 12:29:55 AM
 The stupidity of Americans leaves me both appalled and aghast. The greatest mystery in the Universe, to me, is not how to achieve cold nuclear fusion, or how to imbue sentience to a machine, the Paulli Paradox or even the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis, but how exactly a country of morons like the U.S.A managed to achieve First World status. It truly defies Human comprehension and logic how this came to pass. If you were to coldly analyse all data that refers to the U.S and it's people, you would deduce that it is a Third World status nation - evolution banned from the school curriculum in several American states, highest amount of high school drop outs among all developed countries, highest amount of children raised by single parents of all devleoped nations, highest homicide rate of all developed nations, highest rate of adult illiteracy. It is incredible.
Agreed,

A world power and number 1 economy in the world without universal healthcare disgusting.

A bad Disney movie lol


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 03:12:57 AM
 The stupidity of Americans leaves me both appalled and aghast. The greatest mystery in the Universe, to me, is not how to achieve cold nuclear fusion, or how to imbue sentience to a machine, the Paulli Paradox or even the solution to the Riemann Hypothesis, but how exactly a country of morons like the U.S.A managed to achieve First World status. It truly defies Human comprehension and logic how this came to pass. If you were to coldly analyse all data that refers to the U.S and it's people, you would deduce that it is a Third World status nation - evolution banned from the school curriculum in several American states, highest amount of high school drop outs among all developed countries, highest amount of children raised by single parents of all devleoped nations, highest homicide rate of all developed nations, highest rate of adult illiteracy. It is incredible.

Nobody has banned evolution from the curriculum in any state, where do you get this crap?

America would be on par with every other industrialized nation when it comes to murder rate, drop out rate, illiteracy etc. if you factor out the minorities.

See this is what annoys me about leftists. When it comes to information that portrays America in a negative way, you guys run around with your heads up in the air with your mouths open, like turkeys in the rain ready to swallow whatever comes your way. When it turns out to be bullshit you guy pretend like it didn't happen and move on to the next BS issue like nothing ever happened.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 03:21:32 AM
Agreed,

A world power and number 1 economy in the world without universal healthcare disgusting.

A bad Disney movie lol

You have no idea what you're talking about


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 03:22:19 AM
Nobody has banned evolution from the curriculum in any state, where do you get this crap?

America would be on par with every other industrialized nation when it comes to murder rate, drop out rate, illiteracy etc. if you factor out the minorities.

See this is what annoys me about leftists. When it comes to information that portrays America in a negative way, you guys run around with your heads up in the air with your mouths open, like turkeys in the rain ready to swallow whatever comes your way. When it turns out to be bullshit you guy pretend like it didn't happen and move on to the next BS issue like nothing ever happened.

  Who said I'm a leftist? I am actually a libertarian. I don't take sides in this debate because both the Democratic and Republican parties restrict freedoms, although in different areas and for different reasons. I am simply scrutinizing the stupidity of your country's people. Nothing more. And even though evolution hasn't been banned from the school curriculum yet, the legislatures of several stats in the south have considered it. And don't overestimate the capabilities of Caucasian Americans, because although more literate and civil than minorities in general, they are still subpar when compared to other Caucasian peoples like the Swiss and the Norwegians, for instance.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Benny B on September 11, 2008, 03:43:39 AM
Why would you do that?
Because he's a smart guy. He was saying Obama should be president 2 1/2 years ago. One of the first people I heard say so.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: KillerMonk on September 11, 2008, 03:44:23 AM


A world power and number 1 economy in the world without universal healthcare disgusting.


You have no idea what you're talking about
So the USA has universal healthcare my wrong ::)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 11, 2008, 04:47:23 AM
Universal health care would be a joke here. You have a dude who already wants to take 50% of your pay and now he's going to tack on more for shitty health care that the left thinks its free. Enough with the socialist (communist) agendas. To begin with if he does that think of how many Dr's would be defaulting on student loans and how many more people that want to become Dr's can't. Again, Left = no commonsense.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: KillerMonk on September 11, 2008, 05:01:14 AM
Universal health care would be a joke here. You have a dude who already wants to take 50% of your pay and now he's going to tack on more for shitty health care that the left thinks its free. Enough with the socialist (communist) agendas. To begin with if he does that think of how many Dr's would be defaulting on student loans and how many more people that want to become Dr's can't. Again, Left = no commonsense.
That shows how fucked up the system is, like lipstick on a pig :P


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 05:02:41 AM
Universal health care would be a joke here. You have a dude who already wants to take 50% of your pay and now he's going to tack on more for shitty health care that the left thinks its free. Enough with the socialist (communist) agendas. To begin with if he does that think of how many Dr's would be defaulting on student loans and how many more people that want to become Dr's can't. Again, Left = no commonsense.

My country has universal healthcare and it's working fine and dandy. We are also mostly leftists and it's working fine and dandy. We are actually considered to be role models for the rest of the western world for our advanced welfare. Big taxes yes, but I still somehow manage to pay my bills and food and still have enough to travel and enjoy hobbies on with my below average pay. Strange huh?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: m8 on September 11, 2008, 05:04:14 AM
I agree with Candidizzle on this one.
BUT I'm not an american citizen anyway so I really couldn't care less.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: m8 on September 11, 2008, 05:08:10 AM
"Iraq War is God's Will".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EgwoWVNoic

What a dumb bitch.
Funny thing is that the average american LOVES that shit.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calfzilla on September 11, 2008, 05:11:52 AM
I still don't understand why people are so in love with universal healthcare.  It's like some people think the government is giving it to them but in reality the government is stealing their money, pissing a large portion away and then providing healthcare with what is left.  Seriously where do these people think the government gets money?  From the money fairy?  A private HSA is much cheaper.   


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 05:12:23 AM
 Who said I'm a leftist? I am actually a libertarian. I don't take sides in this debate because both the Democratic and Republican parties restrict freedoms, although in different areas and for different reasons. I am simply scrutinizing the stupidity of your country's people. Nothing more. And even though evolution hasn't been banned from the school curriculum yet, the legislatures of several stats in the south have considered it. And don't overestimate the capabilities of Caucasian Americans, because although more literate and civil than minorities in general, they are still subpar when compared to other Caucasian peoples like the Swiss and the Norwegians, for instance.

First of all, not my country, I'm European.

Which legislatures have considered banning evolutions? What stopped them from doing so?

Please show some statistics that compare Swiss and Norwegian Caucasians to American Caucasians. You realize Americans Caucasians ARE German and Swiss and Norwegian and Dutch Caucasians right?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 05:13:04 AM
My country has universal healthcare and it's working fine and dandy. We are also mostly leftists and it's working fine and dandy. We are actually considered to be role models for the rest of the western world for our advanced welfare. Big taxes yes, but I still somehow manage to pay my bills and food and still have enough to travel and enjoy hobbies on with my below average pay. Strange huh?

Which country would that be?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: KillerMonk on September 11, 2008, 05:21:29 AM
My country has universal healthcare and it's working fine and dandy. We are also mostly leftists and it's working fine and dandy. We are actually considered to be role models for the rest of the western world for our advanced welfare. Big taxes yes, but I still somehow manage to pay my bills and food and still have enough to travel and enjoy hobbies on with my below average pay. Strange huh?
My country Australia has some of the lowest taxes in the developed world and we have a great healthcare system.

My cousin had a severe wrist injurie resulting severd tendons and arteries the poor bastard had have all his tendon micro surgery to rejoin them, he was airlifted by helicopter and many return visits to his surgeon.Moneytry costs zero.Had he been in the states with no insurance i hate to think.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 05:23:10 AM
Which country would that be?

I'll let that be a mystery for a while.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 05:26:03 AM
My country Australia has some of the lowest taxes in the developed world and we have a great healthcare system.

My cousin had a severe wrist injurie resulting severd tendons and arteries the poor bastard had have all his tendon micro surgery to rejoin them, he was airlifted by helicopter and many return visits to his surgeon.Moneytry costs zero.Had he been in the states with no insurance i hate to think.

That's cool, very nice when universal healthcare steps in and helps those who wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise. But my gosh, according to The Coach, leftish politics sucks all the money out of your pocket!! How on earth do you pay for your other expenses???


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: gymguy on September 11, 2008, 05:29:18 AM
He's a great actor, but I really don't care who he likes and dislikes. His opinion, nor that of any other actor, could ever sway my own way of thinking...


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 11, 2008, 05:36:14 AM
Universal health care would be a joke here. You have a dude who already wants to take 50% of your pay


Joe, be honest.

He wants to take 50% of YOUR pay.

For those of us making under $100,000.... Obama will actually save us some money.

www.ObamaTaxCut.com



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 11, 2008, 05:37:14 AM
I agree with Candidizzle on this one.
BUT I'm not an american citizen anyway so I really couldn't care less.

Well a moral imposing religious nut as the potential leader of the most powerful nation in the world should ring some alarm bells by anyone.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 05:47:31 AM
I'll let that be a mystery for a while.

Why? Because you know that your health care system is having serious problems and you don't want anyone messing up your argument?

Look, Universal Health Care is a bad idea, and I'll explain why.

Let's say you have a gas station, one day you decide your going to give away gas for free, what is going to happen? Your going to have people lining around the block to get your gas whether they need it or not. This is basic supply and demand. Since you have now created unlimited demand, you are unable to keep up the supply. So you have to either: have people wait in line for a long time, deny people gasoline, or do both.

Healthcare is subject to the laws of supply and demand as well. If you make it "free" then you create a huge surge in demand because people have no need to have any discretion. So countries that have this system have to do is have people wait (these countries have huge waiting lists and you know it), or deny people which happens as well. Who do you think gets denied? People that use and need healthcare the most: old people. Since government has complete control over the system, they can deny treatment to anyone they wish and there is nothing the people can do about it (unless they have a shitload of money and can get treated in the US).

Another problem with government run healthcare is that it is run by the government. Government is wasteful and inefficient, they are terrible at providing services compared to the private sector. This is mainly because if your a private organization and your inefficient and wasteful then you go bankrupt! If government is inefficient and wasteful it is rewarded with more tax dollars, so it encourages general shittiness.

If you look at cancer survival rates among American's and countries, you'll find that America is on the top. American men have a 5 year survival rate of 66 percent versus 47 percent for European men (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba596/) This is because American men have more treatment options and are treated faster than European men. This is because American men aren't denied treatment and American men are treated much faster than European men, and yes ALL American men are treated, nobody is denied treatment in the US, even illegal aliens.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 05:52:35 AM

Joe, be honest.

He wants to take 50% of YOUR pay.

For those of us making under $100,000.... Obama will actually save us some money.

www.ObamaTaxCut.com



Big problem with that chart is that the bottom 50% of income earners pay only about 4% of the Federal tax burden. So what exactly is getting cut? They're not paying any taxes! When you factor things like EIC into that, hell they're not only not paying taxes but they're getting free money, and where is that money coming from? The producers in the economy. This is just a ploy to redistribute more money from the top earners to the losers on the bottom.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need, right 240?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 11, 2008, 05:54:28 AM
it's not fair, but it's reality.

yes, it's taking money from the top 5%, and giving it to the bottom 95%.

if youre not in the top 5%, most won't mind.  many would rather have an extra grand per year than keep it fair.  sad but reality.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Samourai Pizzacat on September 11, 2008, 05:57:46 AM
Why? Because you know that your health care system is having serious problems and you don't want anyone messing up your argument?

Look, Universal Health Care is a bad idea, and I'll explain why.

Let's say you have a gas station, one day you decide your going to give away gas for free, what is going to happen? Your going to have people lining around the block to get your gas whether they need it or not. This is basic supply and demand. Since you have now created unlimited demand, you are unable to keep up the supply. So you have to either: have people wait in line for a long time, deny people gasoline, or do both.

Healthcare is subject to the laws of supply and demand as well. If you make it "free" then you create a huge surge in demand because people have no need to have any discretion. So countries that have this system have to do is have people wait (these countries have huge waiting lists and you know it), or deny people which happens as well. Who do you think gets denied? People that use and need healthcare the most: old people. Since government has complete control over the system, they can deny treatment to anyone they wish and there is nothing the people can do about it (unless they have a shitload of money and can get treated in the US).

Another problem with government run healthcare is that it is run by the government. Government is wasteful and inefficient, they are terrible at providing services compared to the private sector. This is mainly because if your a private organization and your inefficient and wasteful then you go bankrupt! If government is inefficient and wasteful it is rewarded with more tax dollars, so it encourages general shittiness.

If you look at cancer survival rates among American's and countries, you'll find that America is on the top. American men have a 5 year survival rate of 66 percent versus 47 percent for European men (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba596/) This is because American men have more treatment options and are treated faster than European men. This is because American men aren't denied treatment and American men are treated much faster than European men, and yes ALL American men are treated, nobody is denied treatment in the US, even illegal aliens.

It's not free numbnuts!

It has been privatized, making it adhere to free market mechanics. +- 80€ a month guarantuess every citizen of holland proper healthcare.

How people have the audacity to say it doesn't work is beyond idiocy. Many europeans countries have proven the opposite for long.

And btw Coach, this has jack all to do with communism, you should not confuse it with socialism, but hey that would require you to read.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 06:01:51 AM
Why? Because you know that your health care system is having serious problems and you don't want anyone messing up your argument?

Look, Universal Health Care is a bad idea, and I'll explain why.

Let's say you have a gas station, one day you decide your going to give away gas for free, what is going to happen? Your going to have people lining around the block to get your gas whether they need it or not. This is basic supply and demand. Since you have now created unlimited demand, you are unable to keep up the supply. So you have to either: have people wait in line for a long time, deny people gasoline, or do both.

Healthcare is subject to the laws of supply and demand as well. If you make it "free" then you create a huge surge in demand because people have no need to have any discretion. So countries that have this system have to do is have people wait (these countries have huge waiting lists and you know it), or deny people which happens as well. Who do you think gets denied? People that use and need healthcare the most: old people. Since government has complete control over the system, they can deny treatment to anyone they wish and there is nothing the people can do about it (unless they have a shitload of money and can get treated in the US).

Another problem with government run healthcare is that it is run by the government. Government is wasteful and inefficient, they are terrible at providing services compared to the private sector. This is mainly because if your a private organization and your inefficient and wasteful then you go bankrupt! If government is inefficient and wasteful it is rewarded with more tax dollars, so it encourages general shittiness.

If you look at cancer survival rates among American's and countries, you'll find that America is on the top. American men have a 5 year survival rate of 66 percent versus 47 percent for European men (http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba596/) This is because American men have more treatment options and are treated faster than European men. This is because American men aren't denied treatment and American men are treated much faster than European men, and yes ALL American men are treated, nobody is denied treatment in the US, even illegal aliens.

You're right about a few things. Yes, sometimes the waiting lists can get long. Yes the goverment are awful at doing business. Cool that the U.S has the best cancer survival %.

The supply and demand argument really doesn't have any credibility behind it. People don't become hypocondric just because there is universal healthcare. When people are sick, they ARE sick. And I would like to claim that universal healthcare does a much better job at preventing sickness than a insurance based does.

Why don't you look at the classic list over % of infant deaths? U.S is close the the bottom and I think you'll find my country in the top 2. A list that is considered by many to be a true testament to the overall health in a country.

Oh and wait. isn't there like 50 MILLION people in the U.S without a health insurance. I guess they're not important, who cares if they get sick. As long it doesn't cost anyone more dollars. You whine about waiting lists, well 50 million people in the U.S doesn't even have a list to be put on.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 11, 2008, 06:08:06 AM
Newsflash: Just because state run healthcare works in Sweeden or Barbados or Luxemburg, doesn't mean it will work in America. America's dense population, humongous amount of illegal immagrints and already existing socialized healthcare program (Medicaid) will make running socialized healthcare impossible, impractical and unbelievably inefficent.

Could you imagine this dysfunctional, partisan, backward government which can't find its own ass with two hands trying to provide guaranteed healthcare for every man, woman and child?

For anyone who wants a picture of what life will be like, go to the DMV at any major American city, go through security at an airport or go down to your local post office. State/federal run institutions are poorly run beauracratic disasters.

The poorest of the poor have healthare thru medicaid. The well to do can afford private insurance. The middle class simply need a boost in the form of a tax break or some government loophole which will enable them to purchase health insurance cheaper.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:10:55 AM
It's not free numbnuts!

I know it's not free, nothing is free that's why I put "free" in quotations, but that was totally lost on you. Good job of being a jackass btw.

It has been privatized, making it adhere to free market mechanics. +- 80€ a month guarantuess every citizen of holland proper healthcare.

So your saying that Holland is moving away from a Universal Health Care system and moving towards a free market system. Wow, thanks for making my point for me.

How people have the audacity to say it doesn't work is beyond idiocy. Many europeans countries have proven the opposite for long.

Show me this proof, how have they proved the opposite? How do you measure success. It damn sure hope it isn't measured by cancer survival rates. Oh, and life expectancy isn't a measure of a healthcare system because it involves many factors that have nothing to do with healthcare.

And btw Coach, this has jack all to do with communism, you should not confuse it with socialism, but hey that would require you to read.

What are the major differences between a communist system and a socialist system? Do you even know?



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: ironneck on September 11, 2008, 06:12:13 AM
that's what i like about germany...everything works great here..ok the taxes are high but therefore everything is done the right way...


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 11, 2008, 06:18:12 AM
Universal health care would be a joke here. You have a dude who already wants to take 50% of your pay and now he's going to tack on more for shitty health care that the left thinks its free. Enough with the socialist (communist) agendas. To begin with if he does that think of how many Dr's would be defaulting on student loans and how many more people that want to become Dr's can't. Again, Left = no commonsense.
LOL. You equate Socialism with Communism!? You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you.  ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: BM OUT on September 11, 2008, 06:18:57 AM
Enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk


Obama has done NOTHING in his life.NOTHING!!!!He is a rabble rouser in the vain of Rv.Al and Rev. Jackson.A "community organiser".No accomplishment,no legislation,nothing but an empty suit and an empty head.If I have to hear him stutter and stammer much longer Im going to puke.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 06:20:58 AM
Newsflash: Just because state run healthcare works in Sweeden or Barbados or Luxemburg, doesn't mean it will work in America. America's dense population, humongous amount of illegal immagrints and already existing socialized healthcare program (Medicaid) will make running socialized healthcare impossible, impractical and unbelievably inefficent.

Could you imagine this dysfunctional, partisan, backward government which can't find its own ass with two hands trying to provide guaranteed healthcare for every man, woman and child?

For anyone who wants a picture of what life will be like, go to the DMV at any major American city, go through security at an airport or go down to your local post office. State/federal run institutions are poorly run beauracratic disasters.

The poorest of the poor have healthare thru medicaid. The well to do can afford private insurance. The middle class simply need a boost in the form of a tax break or some government loophole which will enable them to purchase health insurance cheaper.

But really, what is the alternative? Sure you can keep on going with insurance base healthcare and ignore millions of people that can't afford it. But that causes suffering as well.

This medicaid thing is new to me. Are they able to give every poor being healthcare and to what extent? Who pays their bills?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:21:32 AM
The poorest of the poor have healthare thru medicaid. The well to do can afford private insurance. The middle class simply need a boost in the form of a tax break or some government loophole which will enable them to purchase health insurance cheaper.

It goes beyond that, people need to be able to have more choice when it comes to health care.

For example, it is ILLEGAL for me to purchase insurance in Indiana. I am forced to buy it in my own State. What sense does that make? If insurance was able to compete nationwide you'd see a dramatic drop in prices (competition does that).

Also, when you buy insurance you have to be covered for everything. You can't customize your coverage, my 52 year old mother has to be covered for child birth expenses, what the hell for? If you could buy custom plans, you'd be able to drop all the unnecessary shit and make it that much more affordable. I'm a 27 year old male, I'm probably not going to suffer from cardiovascular disease anytime soon, but yet I have to be covered for it. Why can't I just buy a cheap "disaster" insurance that'll cover me if I injure myself (much more likely).

Think of it in terms of car insurance, you don't use your car insurance when you change your oil do you? No, that would make it retarded expensive, but that's what we do with our medical insurance. If we had to pay for our own maintenance care out of pocket we'd shop around and be much more aware of the cost of our care. Since we don't have to worry about it because insurance covers it, costs are out of control.

Another thing is taxes, businesses can claim their health insurance as a tax credit, individuals can't, why the hell not?

We can make simple common sense changes here and save a lot of time and money. The answer is giving people more choices in their medical care, not less.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Coach on September 11, 2008, 06:23:48 AM
Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 06:26:44 AM
Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.

Meanwhile 50 million people in the U.S doesn't have health insurance. A great solution indeed Mr. Republican!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:28:11 AM
But really, what is the alternative? Sure you can keep on going with insurance base healthcare and ignore millions of people that can't afford it. But that causes suffering as well.

This medicaid thing is new to me. Are they able to give every poor being healthcare and to what extent? Who pays their bills?

Nobody is being ignored here, period.

Everyone that is poor is covered for everything, including dental, vision, emergency care, medication, everything. You have a 3 dollar co-pay, that's it. Trust me I know, I'm a college student and my family and I are on it. If I had an affordable alternative I wouldn't be on it because the paperwork involved is a nightmare, but the system is set up so that is almost impossible for me to do.

The only problem is that it's astronomically expensive, and the bureaucracy involved is time consuming. Doctors now spend more time doing paperwork than actually treating people. Doctors are also having a hard time getting the government to compensate them properly, so many health care providers are dropping medicaid altogether, it just isn't worth the trouble.

All Universal Health Care will do is make Medicaid 20 times bigger and that much more inefficient.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 11, 2008, 06:32:53 AM
Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.
Capitalism --> Socialism --> Communism

There is/are a significant difference(s), both in theory and practice.  ;)

 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:33:42 AM
Capitalism --> Socialism --> Communism

There is/are a significant difference(s), both in theory and practice.  ;)

 

What are those differences?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 06:37:49 AM
What are those differences?

Well, for one thing, communism has a overwhelming tendency to break apart. It is a nice idea with communism but I just don't think humans are made for it.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SOMEPARTS on September 11, 2008, 06:41:06 AM
that's what i like about germany...everything works great here..ok the taxes are high but therefore everything is done the right way...



What would you say is the total tax burden percentage on an upper middle class household in Germany?

Does it exceed the 33% federal income tax I pay - plus crazy property and school tax, 7% state sales tax on everything I buy, gas tax, tax on all utilities, etc? I even have a 1% income tax for the town I live in for chrissakes.

I'm guessing I pay 40% of my yearly income right now easy.....anyone who wants to raise it or close loopholes for my LLC isn't getting my vote. This is it for me and I'll fib or fire employees if it goes higher.

IMO many of these health plans should be run at the state level to even have a chance.

The USA is too big and diverse in population density and culture to have a single plan for all states.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:41:49 AM
Well, for one thing, communism has a overwhelming tendency to break apart. It is a nice idea with communism but I just don't think humans are made for it.

Yeah it does that. I don't think it's a nice idea at all. Everybody being a worker ant, having no rights as an individual at all and being completely controlled by an unelected government. Terrible idea.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 11, 2008, 06:45:54 AM
What are those differences?
LOL. The books detailing these differences are door stoppers and you want a quickie answer!?  :o

/use your google-fu, my friend


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 06:50:05 AM
LOL. The books detailing these differences are door stoppers and you want a quickie answer!?  :o

/use your google-fu, my friend

I know the differences, I just want to know what you think, that's all. Your "door stopper" argument doesn't fly, it's like Einstein said: "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough".

People here keep saying how different Socialism is from Communism, but never explain how.

Personally I think it's just a matter of degrees. Socialism is Communism-lite as far as I'm concerned.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dr.chimps on September 11, 2008, 06:53:36 AM
I know the differences, I just want to know what you think, that's all.

People keep saying how different Socialism is from Communism, but never explain how.

Personally I think it's just a matter of degrees. Socialism is Communism-lite as far as I'm concerned.
Socialism is 'basically' a transitional state between Capitalism and Communism - to some the Utopia, a classless, stateless society. Me I'd rather live in a Capitalistic state for all it's contradictions and inherent problems.

/class is out. i'm back to work


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 11, 2008, 06:59:14 AM
I know it's not free, nothing is free that's why I put "free" in quotations, but that was totally lost on you. Good job of being a jackass btw.

So your saying that Holland is moving away from a Universal Health Care system and moving towards a free market system. Wow, thanks for making my point for me.

Show me this proof, how have they proved the opposite? How do you measure success. It damn sure hope it isn't measured by cancer survival rates. Oh, and life expectancy isn't a measure of a healthcare system because it involves many factors that have nothing to do with healthcare.

What are the major differences between a communist system and a socialist system? Do you even know?

Holland is not on a 'free' market system. There are very strict rules to the selling of health insurance. Everyone can afford it and is required by law to have it. No one will ever be denied healthcare because of it and the changes you will ever be in debt because of medical reasons are very, very slim.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 07:05:39 AM
Holland is not on a 'free' market system. There are very strict rules to the selling of health insurance. Everyone can afford it and is required by law to have it. No one will ever be denied healthcare because of it and the changes you will ever be in debt because of medical reasons are very, very slim.

Bullshit:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/332/7553/1293 (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/332/7553/1293)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 11, 2008, 07:12:03 AM
Bullshit:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/332/7553/1293 (http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/332/7553/1293)

Do you understand the concept of an illegal immigrant? It has to stop somewhere don't you think? The point is every registered person in Holland is insured. Even those on wellfare.

Do you want to compare the number of homeless people in the US and in Holland?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 07:35:07 AM
Do you understand the concept of an illegal immigrant? It has to stop somewhere don't you think? The point is every registered person in Holland is insured. Even those on wellfare.

Do you want to compare the number of homeless people in the US and in Holland?

I live in America buddy, more specifically in the South, I am all to aware of the concept of illegal immigration. But here's the thing, America treats it's illegal immigrants, they never turn them down. It's a problem here because the illegals are using the ER's as doctors offices and they never pay their bills. The rest of us pick up that tab.

Your health care utopia in Holland denies care to illegals. So don't lecture us on how wonderful the Dutch system is.

What would comparing the number of homeless people in the US and Holland have to do with health care? Why not compare something relevant to health care like: cancer survival rates! Yeah, see one of my previous posts about that one.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dkf360 on September 11, 2008, 07:46:12 AM
Are you saying The Roach equates 1 + 1 = 3?

LOL. You equate Socialism with Communism!? You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you.  ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 11, 2008, 07:47:17 AM
I live in America buddy, more specifically in the South, I am all to aware of the concept of illegal immigration. But here's the thing, America treats it's illegal immigrants, they never turn them down. It's a problem here because the illegals are using the ER's as doctors offices and they never pay their bills. The rest of us pick up that tab.

Your health care utopia in Holland denies care to illegals. So don't lecture us on how wonderful the Dutch system is.

What would comparing the number of homeless people in the US and Holland have to do with health care? Why not compare something relevant to health care like: cancer survival rates! Yeah, see one of my previous posts about that one.

The article states some hospitals are denying care to illegal immigrants, not all. You won't take my word for it but these are isolated incidents. And in the article they are even talking about setting up a fund for these people. Leaving literally everybody between our borders, even the people who are not supposed to be here, 'insured' of healthcare.

If everyone gets treated in your country already then why is healthcare such a big issue? Why do I keep hearing about people in your country with these huge medical bills? This is where the Dutch system is superior because every registered person is insured.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dkf360 on September 11, 2008, 07:48:20 AM
Well do you understand it enough to explain it simply?

I know the differences, I just want to know what you think, that's all. Your "door stopper" argument doesn't fly, it's like Einstein said: "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough".

People here keep saying how different Socialism is from Communism, but never explain how.

Personally I think it's just a matter of degrees. Socialism is Communism-lite as far as I'm concerned.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Mars on September 11, 2008, 07:51:37 AM
she should be shot between her eyes, the pig.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 11, 2008, 08:17:28 AM
There's a lot of plausible-sounding bullshit being regurgitated as reasoned and informed opinion in this thread...


Some simple FACTS:

America currently ranks 37th for healthcare in the world, it is far from the best healthcare system around.

Infant mortality in the US is comparable to that of non-industrial Third World country.

HMOs are run for PROFIT... that profit costs lives: denial of coverage; denial of service; denial of drugs.

Not for profit government departments are NOT inefficient, they are in fact far more efficient cost-wise than the private sector has ever been... the inefficiencies seen in these fields are caused by chronic underfunding, which in part is promoted by private-sector lobbyists eager to benefit from the privatization of these same sectors.

Statistics for cancer survival rates pushed by small-government Republicans and HMOs (Giuliani just made up the figures he quoted in the Republican debates for example) are patently FALSE!

US cancer survival studies do NOT include:
-the 1% of Americans that are homeless
-the 2-3% of Americans that are illegal immigrants
-the 50 million (16%) of Americans who are not insured
-the huge disparity in life expectancy between whites and minorities (black males don't get cancer as often as they only live to be 58 or so on average)
-the insured who are denied coverage as a profiteering strategy by HMOs


...and the most important FACT of all:
Americans currently pay considerably more per capita (nearly twice) for their 37th best healthcare system in the world than the French pay for their best healthcare system in the world.


Socialised/universal American government funded healthcare WOULD mean a tax increase... but that increase would be something on the order of 20% of what the insured are currently paying in premiums... and for that tax-increase/cost-decrease Americans would get:
-truly universal healthcare
-a first world healthcare system
-treatment for the homeless (mentally-ill homeless cause crime)
-treatment for poor drug addicts (less crime)
-treatment for immigrants (again, less crime)
-considerably less bankruptcy among the middle class
-considerably less divorce/domestic violence/child physical abuse etc as all these things are fueled by monetary pressures such as medical bills

Arguing AGAINST socialised healthcare is just plain ignorant and stooopid.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 08:34:06 AM
There's a lot of plausible-sounding bullshit being regurgitated as reasoned and informed opinion in this thread...


Some simple FACTS:

America currently ranks 37th for healthcare in the world, it is far from the best healthcare system around.

Infant mortality in the US is comparable to that of non-industrial Third World country.

HMOs are run for PROFIT... that profit costs lives: denial of coverage; denial of service; denial of drugs.

Not for profit government departments are NOT inefficient, they are in fact far more efficient cost-wise than the private sector has ever been... the inefficiencies seen in these fields are caused by chronic underfunding, which in part is promoted by private-sector lobbyists eager to benefit from the privatization of these same sectors.

Statistics for cancer survival rates pushed by small-government Republicans and HMOs (Giuliani just made up the figures he quoted in the Republican debates for example) are patently FALSE!

US cancer survival studies do NOT include:
-the 1% of Americans that are homeless
-the 2-3% of Americans that are illegal immigrants
-the 50 million (16%) of Americans who are not insured
-the huge disparity in life expectancy between whites and minorities (black males don't get cancer as often as they only live to be 58 or so on average)
-the insured who are denied coverage as a profiteering strategy by HMOs


...and the most important FACT of all:
Americans currently pay considerably more per capita (nearly twice) for their 37th best healthcare system in the world than the French pay for their best healthcare system in the world.


Socialised/universal American government funded healthcare WOULD mean a tax increase... but that increase would be something on the order of 20% of what the insured are currently paying in premiums... and for that tax-increase/cost-decrease Americans would get:
-truly universal healthcare
-a first world healthcare system
-treatment for the homeless (mentally-ill homeless cause crime)
-treatment for poor drug addicts (less crime)
-treatment for immigrants (again, less crime)
-considerably less bankruptcy among the middle class
-considerably less divorce/domestic violence/child physical abuse etc as all these things are fueled by monetary pressures such as medical bills

Arguing AGAINST socialised healthcare is just plain ignorant and stooopid.


The Luke

This is the pwnage-hammer right here. I would like to see any republican confront these arguments. Especially the one that says you pay more for a bad healthcare than France does for a top-notch one. Your "I want to keep my money!!" argument just flew right out the window.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: dkf360 on September 11, 2008, 08:44:12 AM
I'm ready for the Roach to ignore everything that's written and state that Luke's numbers are made up bullshit written by liberal nuts. Furthermore, he will claim that he has proof to refute these numbers. And further pressing by the critical thinkers in this forum for follow-up on his promise to provide proof will get ignored.

There's a lot of plausible-sounding bullshit being regurgitated as reasoned and informed opinion in this thread...


Some simple FACTS:

America currently ranks 37th for healthcare in the world, it is far from the best healthcare system around.

Infant mortality in the US is comparable to that of non-industrial Third World country.

HMOs are run for PROFIT... that profit costs lives: denial of coverage; denial of service; denial of drugs.

Not for profit government departments are NOT inefficient, they are in fact far more efficient cost-wise than the private sector has ever been... the inefficiencies seen in these fields are caused by chronic underfunding, which in part is promoted by private-sector lobbyists eager to benefit from the privatization of these same sectors.

Statistics for cancer survival rates pushed by small-government Republicans and HMOs (Giuliani just made up the figures he quoted in the Republican debates for example) are patently FALSE!

US cancer survival studies do NOT include:
-the 1% of Americans that are homeless
-the 2-3% of Americans that are illegal immigrants
-the 50 million (16%) of Americans who are not insured
-the huge disparity in life expectancy between whites and minorities (black males don't get cancer as often as they only live to be 58 or so on average)
-the insured who are denied coverage as a profiteering strategy by HMOs


...and the most important FACT of all:
Americans currently pay considerably more per capita (nearly twice) for their 37th best healthcare system in the world than the French pay for their best healthcare system in the world.


Socialised/universal American government funded healthcare WOULD mean a tax increase... but that increase would be something on the order of 20% of what the insured are currently paying in premiums... and for that tax-increase/cost-decrease Americans would get:
-truly universal healthcare
-a first world healthcare system
-treatment for the homeless (mentally-ill homeless cause crime)
-treatment for poor drug addicts (less crime)
-treatment for immigrants (again, less crime)
-considerably less bankruptcy among the middle class
-considerably less divorce/domestic violence/child physical abuse etc as all these things are fueled by monetary pressures such as medical bills

Arguing AGAINST socialised healthcare is just plain ignorant and stooopid.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Tapeworm on September 11, 2008, 08:55:09 AM
My country Australia has some of the lowest taxes in the developed world and we have a great healthcare system.

My cousin had a severe wrist injurie resulting severd tendons and arteries the poor bastard had have all his tendon micro surgery to rejoin them, he was airlifted by helicopter and many return visits to his surgeon.Moneytry costs zero.Had he been in the states with no insurance i hate to think.

Lol.  Lies, lies, lies KM!  I registered a Pty Ltd so I'd have to pay only 30%.  Upper level wages and individual earnings are taxed at nearly 50%.  Anyone from another country agree that's low?

Also, Aus is moving more and more toward privatization.  When I got here in '99, almost no one had private coverage.  Now, almost everyone has it.

However, the US needs to pull it's finger out when it comes to health care.  A government which allows a large portion of its people to die unnecessarily because they're poor is basically an aristocracy.  It's fucking medieval.  It's certainly not what the founding fathers had in mind when they said "for the people."  

Some of these "patriots" of capitalism love their wallet more than their countrymen.  That's fine, just have the sack to admit it.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 11, 2008, 09:02:03 AM
Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.

The government already does that Coach... They tell you to give them their money and then they send it to Iraq.

You're already in a Socialist state... That's what the bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac prove.

Your taxes are already going to Social Programs Coach... The biggest one going right now is this place called Iraq.

Your current leaders don't even keep the money at home where it can benefit our economy... They send it across to a fucking desert.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: shootfighter1 on September 11, 2008, 09:49:46 AM
Kucinich TA?  I respect your opinions bro as you post sources & defend your statements...but Kucinich is a lunatic.  He is the rep for our district and has the worst attendance record for representitives.  The only issues he addresses in the district are the ones that get him TV time.  Horrible leader.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: shootfighter1 on September 11, 2008, 09:52:00 AM
While Damon has some legit concerns, his assertion that McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dying in his presidency is unfounded.  McCain probably has some unusual genetics in that his mom is a very healthy 96.  Longevity over age 90 is most predicted by genes (more than lifestyle).
Also, while Palin talks about being a hocky mom, thats just to identify with common women.  Being a govenor of Alaska with 83% approval ratings is not just being a 'hocky mom'.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 11, 2008, 09:57:31 AM
While Damon has some legit concerns, his assertion that McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dying in his presidency is unfounded.  McCain probably has some unusual genetics in that his mom is a very healthy 96.  Longevity over age 90 is most predicted by genes (more than lifestyle).

I dunno...

his father passed away at 70.  Mccain also suffered from all sorts of physical ailments due to vietnam torture - but he does have seriously good health care, due to being senator, and a millionaire.

I'm sure he'll be fine, but there is more of an urgency to look at VP nominee, when Dem party has a healthy 47-year old who plays basketball with college kids each day, and is in better shape than 98% of the people his age.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: chester_bbb on September 11, 2008, 10:38:54 AM
::)  You're officially an idiot! Here's a quote from a guy who was around while the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Read it and start learning:

"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."  - Sun Tzu

Di d he kill any dinos? ;D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 11, 2008, 11:58:47 AM
There's a lot of plausible-sounding bullshit being regurgitated as reasoned and informed opinion in this thread...


Some simple FACTS:

America currently ranks 37th for healthcare in the world, it is far from the best healthcare system around.

What criteria was used to make this list? Just because the WHO says something doesn't mean it's correct.

For example, I'm from one of the 20 countries on this list. My grandfather was diagnosed with a particularly aggressive form of glaucoma, he was put on a waiting list for, get this: 1 YEAR. This is standard procedure in Europe, here in America he would have been seen the following week. Which one would you consider to be health care?

Infant mortality in the US is comparable to that of non-industrial Third World country.

Ok, all it took was short trip to Wikipedia to refute that pile of bullshit. America has 6.3 deaths per 1000 births, compare this to 4.7 for the Netherlands, 4.8 for the UK, and 5.0 for New Zealand. Now compare actual third world countries such as Sierra Leone (160.3 per 1000), Afghanistan (157), and Somalia (110.97). Not even close, where do you get this nonsense? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate)

HMOs are run for PROFIT... that profit costs lives: denial of coverage; denial of service; denial of drugs.

You think people in Universal Health Care systems aren't denied treatment? Think again http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/health/2512639/Kidney-patients-denied-too-expensive-life-extending-drugs.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/health/2512639/Kidney-patients-denied-too-expensive-life-extending-drugs.html)

Who is denied anything in the US? It it ILLEGAL to deny people health care in the US. Just look at the millions of illegal aliens who are abusing the system.

Not for profit government departments are NOT inefficient, they are in fact far more efficient cost-wise than the private sector has ever been... the inefficiencies seen in these fields are caused by chronic underfunding, which in part is promoted by private-sector lobbyists eager to benefit from the privatization of these same sectors.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Are you insane? Have you ever been to the DMV, dealt with Social Services, anything? The private sector is MUCH more efficient than the government. Inefficiency in government is because it is almost impossible to fire anyone, and government bureaucracies cannot go bankrupt. They have no incentive to be efficient, all they have to do is claim their piss poor performance is because of "lack of funding" and demand more money. If a private business is inefficient then it goes out of business and is replaced by a business that is more efficient.

Just look at Jack Welch, the guy took over GE and began a policy of flushing out the bottom 10% of performers annually, the result was a super efficient corporate machine. The government needs a policy like this, big time.

Statistics for cancer survival rates pushed by small-government Republicans and HMOs (Giuliani just made up the figures he quoted in the Republican debates for example) are patently FALSE!


US cancer survival studies do NOT include:
-the 1% of Americans that are homeless
-the 2-3% of Americans that are illegal immigrants
-the 50 million (16%) of Americans who are not insured
-the huge disparity in life expectancy between whites and minorities (black males don't get cancer as often as they only live to be 58 or so on average)
-the insured who are denied coverage as a profiteering strategy by HMOs

Why is that? Because you say so? This is something you have to back up for it to have any credibility. Oh and I see one festering pile of horseshit in that laundry list already. The life expectancy of African American males is 70 years not 58 http://www.webmd.com/news/20080611/life-expectancy-reaches-new-record (http://www.webmd.com/news/20080611/life-expectancy-reaches-new-record)

...and the most important FACT of all:
Americans currently pay considerably more per capita (nearly twice) for their 37th best healthcare system in the world than the French pay for their best healthcare system in the world.

First of all it's about 1.5 times as much. French doctors are also paid a lot less than American doctors (1/3). But your right, American health care expenses are ballooning out of control. But this is because the American health industry is the most regulation industry in the world. What it needs is to give people more choices about their health care, and make common sense changes that could make health care more efficient and affordable. Making Medicaid and Medicare a mandatory nationwide system is NOT the answer.

Socialised/universal American government funded healthcare WOULD mean a tax increase... but that increase would be something on the order of 20% of what the insured are currently paying in premiums... and for that tax-increase/cost-decrease Americans would get:

Do you actually research this stuff or do you just make it up as you go along? America has one of the highest tax rates in the industrial world and you think jacking it up 20% would be no big deal? A 20% increase on someone making 60 grand a year would be an increase of 12,000 dollars a year. I don't know anyone who's paying that high of a premium.

Plus, the thing is that the top earners here pay most of the taxes, so the top 10% is going to foot most of the bill. Raising taxes on the top earners is just increasing the tax burden on American businesses, small and large. If you believe that huge tax hikes won't have a negative effect on the American economy I have a bridge to sell you.

-truly universal healthcare
-a first world healthcare system
-treatment for the homeless (mentally-ill homeless cause crime)
-treatment for poor drug addicts (less crime)
-treatment for immigrants (again, less crime)
-considerably less bankruptcy among the middle class
-considerably less divorce/domestic violence/child physical abuse etc as all these things are fueled by monetary pressures such as medical bills

- American healthcare system is a first world system
- The homeless are treated
- Drug addicts are treated
- Illegal immigrants are treated
- Any less bankruptcy due to socialized medicine will be offset by an increase in unemployment due to higher taxes
- Medical bills are responsible for divorce, domestic violence, and child abuse? Where do you get this crap from?


Arguing AGAINST socialised healthcare is just plain ignorant and stooopid.


The Luke

No arguing against something without backing your points up and using false statistics is stoooopid.

[/quote]


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: shootfighter1 on September 11, 2008, 12:18:25 PM
"The private sector is MUCH more efficient than the government. Inefficiency in government is because it is almost impossible to fire anyone, and government bureaucracies cannot go bankrupt. They have no incentive to be efficient, all they have to do is claim their piss poor performance is because of "lack of funding" and demand more money. If a private business is inefficient then it goes out of business and is replaced by a business that is more efficient".

This is exactly how it is.  I have had the experience of small personally ran companies and working as a contractor for the gov.  Its blatantly obvious when you've had experience with both.  More direct gov control is not good.  I understand regulation in some circumstances, but not full gov control.

Luke, where the hell did you get those figures?  Lots of that info is incorrect.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 11, 2008, 01:01:43 PM
Bodvar,

I suppose I should link each and every piece of info I post so I'm not at the mercy of google-fu experts such as yourself... but then again, you dismiss a WHO report (WTF?!) so what would be the point.

But I'll give you some pointers so you can do a little more research...


-America HAS the 37th ranked healthcare system (look-up the 2007 WHO Report)

-America's 6.3 deaths per 1,000 DOES put America in contention with Third World countries
...UN report: 32 countries beat the US (the USA only barely beat Croatia... which was a war zone in the early 90's)
...CIA report: 42 countries beat the US
   ...add to this the fact that it is generally agreed that US figures are grossly UNDER REPORTED

-people are in fact denied treatment in most European countries, but the denial rate is several orders of magnitude lower than it is in the US (and that's among the insured US citizens, the uninsured are denied coverage routinely)

-if you don't think government-run social services are efficient then doesn't that equate to criticism of your socialized Armed Forces? Are you not supporting the troops?

-the life expectancy of Black males is actually 58ish (that might be out of date though). The figure you got (70) was a life expectancy from a medical site... that doesn't factor in the homicide rate, does it?

-you contend Americans only pay 1.5 times as much as the French for healthcare per capita... well, you are comparing the wrong figures:
You should factor in not only government funding per capita, but also government spending per capita and also include the per capita PRIVATE spending on insurance premiums, medications, and uninsured health spending... then the figure is actually substantially more than twice what the French pay.

-the 20% tax increase I referred to is a 20% increase in the amount of tax that Americans CURRENTLY spend via taxes on healthcare... NOT a 20% increase in tax, NOT a 20% income tax.
As it stands now Americans pay almost as much healthcare tax as the French do... but then they have to go spend roughly the same amount AGAIN from their own pockets in private insurance premiums in order to be properly covered. (Guess I should have been clearer)

That's tantamount to paying 80% of the cost of French-style universal healthcare in taxes and then paying the same amount again to be (almost) fully covered... all the while being terrified of the government offering universal healthcare for the same price the French pay in taxes? Aren't the French getting much better value for money?  



You see Bodvar, I disagree with your viewpoint because I'm more informed than you are... not because I am uninformed.

You're starting from the assumption that I'm wrong... then have to go searching for conflicting data. Why not just do lots of research and come around to my viewpoint (reality).


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 04:04:42 PM
First of all, not my country, I'm European.

  Then you're even worst than I first suspected...

Quote
Which legislatures have considered banning evolutions?

  Several states of the south.

Quote
What stopped them from doing so?

  It ended in the Supreme Court, and they ruled that they don't have the right to stop evolution from being taught at schools.

Quote
Please show some statistics that compare Swiss and Norwegian Caucasians to American Caucasians. You realize Americans Caucasians ARE German and Swiss and Norwegian and Dutch Caucasians right?

  "Sigh"

   No, Americans of Swiss, Norwegian and Dutch ancestry are not Swiss, Norwegian and Duth: they are Americans. We are comparing nationality here, and not ethnicity. I said that white Americans compare very poorly in terms of education, scholarships and culture to their Caucasian brethen in Switzerland and Norway, which is true.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: TerminalPower on September 11, 2008, 04:10:48 PM
If Matt Damon had an original thought, it would be lonely.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 04:12:55 PM
  I don't know why this argument went towards universal health care. My posts having nothing to do with universal health care in any way, shape or form. In fact, as a libertarian, I am against universal health care because everyone should pay their own medical bills and not expect others to. The whole argument over universal health care is slly because, ultimately, you will be paying for it either way. The only difference is that in a universal health care system you are allowing the government to decide how to spend your money to take care of your health. Does that make any sense?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 11, 2008, 04:42:06 PM
 I don't know why this argument went towards universal health care. My posts having nothing to do with universal health care in any way, shape or form. In fact, as a libertarian, I am against universal health care because everyone should pay their own medical bills and not expect others to. The whole argument over universal health care is slly because, ultimately, you will be paying for it either way. The only difference is that in a universal health care system you are allowing the government to decide how to spend your money to take care of your health. Does that make any sense?

Yes an awesome idea, it is working real fine. Really fine to say the least, I mean you only have 50 million people without a health insurance!!
But everyone to their own. We wouldn't want to step on your precious freedom.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 06:55:13 PM
Yes an awesome idea, it is working real fine. Really fine to say the least, I mean you only have 50 million people without a health insurance!!
But everyone to their own. We wouldn't want to step on your precious freedom.

  Gentleman, someone has to pay for it. Money and resources don't come out ex nihilo. Suppose you are wealthy and have $100,000 a year to spend on medical needs if you need it. Now suppose that the government, through taxes, robs $50,000 of you, and provides you with the equivalent of $10,000 in medical care a year. This means that the government is stealing from you $40,000 a year and using it to take care of the medical needs of other people. How is this fair? How is this ethical? So a person who is shiftless and wastful and never cared saving for the eventuality of a disease gets their medical bills taken care of with your money. Again, how is this fair? Not only will the government be stealing $40.000 from you, but the $10.000 that it will be giving you back will be of very low quality care, in some public hospital with poor equipment and the worst doctors - the best doctors work for themselves in the private sector.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 11, 2008, 06:58:44 PM
funniest part - we're not bowwoing 800 bil a year to build factories.

we're borrowing that much to consume.  it's not getting invested in anything.

only being spent on lead toys and smart bombs and $600 toilet seats from haliburton.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 07:14:44 PM
funniest part - we're not bowwoing 800 bil a year to build factories.

we're borrowing that much to consume.  it's not getting invested in anything.

only being spent on lead toys and smart bombs and $600 toilet seats from haliburton.

  The U.S.A is in an irreversible spiral of decadence. Go read "History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire" and you will see that the same colossal historical forces that brought Rome to it's knees are clearly showing themselves when it comes to the U.S. These include:

  - Loss of power from the nucleus that built the empire's greatness to multi-polar political groups that catter to the particular interests of their own ethnicity and not the country's interests - Latin patricians in the case of Rome, Anglo-Saxon Notheastern elite in the case of the U.S

  - Ultimately invincible barbarians at the gate - Germanics and Turanid tribes in the case of Rome, Mexicans and Latin-Americans in the case of the U.S.

  - World status dependent on prohibitively expensive and unsustainable military might - military budget outstrips GNP capacity in the long-run.

  - The inevitable decline in status that follows from having a smaller and smaller % of the World's population - the U.S is currently only 4% of the World's population, and despite mass immigration it will shring to 2% by 2050.

   No matter who gets elected, they will only hasten or slow the decline process, but the process itself is irreversible. McCain might boost the economy by lowering taces and envouraging self-reliance, and Obama might decrease interracial tensions from being the first non-white president, but ultimately either of them will only be able to slow the decline process, which is utterly irreversible.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: TerminalPower on September 11, 2008, 08:32:11 PM
Enjoy :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk

Maybe Dumb fuck Matt will promise to move to Canada when she becomes president, one can only hope for both.  Notice how this mental midget refers to her as a hockey mom in a demeaning way. 

I sense some sexism in his comments or did he forget WE DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA EITHER?  HE HAS NO RECORD!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 11, 2008, 10:25:18 PM
  Gentleman, someone has to pay for it. Money and resources don't come out ex nihilo. Suppose you are wealthy and have $100,000 a year to spend on medical needs if you need it. Now suppose that the government, through taxes, robs $50,000 of you, and provides you with the equivalent of $10,000 in medical care a year. This means that the government is stealing from you $40,000 a year and using it to take care of the medical needs of other people. How is this fair? How is this ethical? So a person who is shiftless and wastful and never cared saving for the eventuality of a disease gets their medical bills taken care of with your money. Again, how is this fair? Not only will the government be stealing $40.000 from you, but the $10.000 that it will be giving you back will be of very low quality care, in some public hospital with poor equipment and the worst doctors - the best doctors work for themselves in the private sector.

It's fair because everybody is paying exactly the same amount for basic health insurance. From the low to the high incomes. From single moms to lawyers with a ridiculous hourly rate, everybody pays. And because of that the amount is low. Medical care in the countries where the system is set up in this way (Holland, Denmark, Germany, France to name a few) doesn't vary very much in terms of quality (which according to some statistics mentioned here is better than in the States) from hospital to hospital. How the hell is that not fair?



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 11, 2008, 10:46:42 PM
Maybe Dumb fuck Matt will promise to move to Canada when she becomes president, one can only hope for both.  Notice how this mental midget refers to her as a hockey mom in a demeaning way. 

I sense some sexism in his comments or did he forget WE DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA EITHER?  HE HAS NO RECORD!

He has more of a record than she does... Plus he makes himself available to the Press every single day... She's so scared she only had one interview in 2 weeks.

Not to mention she had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was... How does she not know this when I know this?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: TerminalPower on September 11, 2008, 10:51:34 PM
He has more of a record than she does... Plus he makes himself available to the Press every single day... She's so scared she only had one interview in 2 weeks.

Not to mention she had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was... How does she not know this when I know this?

Tu, she was the governor of Alaska not some punk actor.  Obama was a community organizer if we are taking that route.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 11, 2008, 10:53:08 PM
Tu, she was the governor of Alaska not some punk actor.  Obama was a community organizer if we are taking that route.

He was a state senator, and then a US senator.

If you want to go THAT route... She was the runner up in a beauty pageant.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: TerminalPower on September 11, 2008, 10:58:25 PM

If you want to go THAT route... She was the runner up in a beauty pageant.


Barak voted "present" over a 160 times, not much of  a senator.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 11, 2008, 11:00:44 PM
It's fair because everybody is paying exactly the same amount for basic health insurance. From the low to the high incomes. From single moms to lawyers with a ridiculous hourly rate, everybody pays. And because of that the amount is low. Medical care in the countries where the system is set up in this way (Holland, Denmark, Germany, France to name a few) doesn't vary very much in terms of quality (which according to some statistics mentioned here is better than in the States) from hospital to hospital. How the hell is that not fair?

  Really? What about all those poor people with AIDS and other ailments that require expensive medication year-round? Obviously, the money to pay for 99% of their medical expenses is not coming from their pockets, but from other people's pockets.

  The reason why it is unfair is because regardless the government is taking away your money and spending it on other people. Lots of poor people who get universal care are those who need it and wouldn't be able to afford it on their own, so the government steals a little bit of money from everyone and uses a disproportional amount of it on a small percentage of the poor population who has incredible medical bills.

  Even if everyone paid the same for universal health care - which is not the case in many countries where the rich pay far more -, it still would only be fair if everyone had the exact same yearly medical expense, which is not the case. Why should I give $10.000 of my money every year to the government for health care if I am going to use practically none of it and the $10.000 will be used on other people? I could save the money and use it for myself when I got sick and actually needed medical care. The whole thing is a sham. It is robbery, plain and simple. The dowtrodden of the Society should learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting mommy - the upper classes - and daddy - the state - to pay their way through life.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 11, 2008, 11:04:10 PM
Barak voted "present" over a 160 times, not much of  a senator.

What did she vote for?

Let's see... She ask for money for  a bridge to nowhere. No vote there.
She didn't have a US passport until 2007... No vote and absolutely no foreign exposure.

Hell dude... I've had a passport for over 13 years and I'm not a politician... Christ how backwoods is this bitch?

She has requested 750 Million in earmarks... The most per capita in the nation. Still not a vote but unbelievable considering there's not even 700,000 people in that state.

She has made the state a per diem for the 312 nights she has spent at home ($16,951 in total allowances) and for her family's travel expenses ($43,490, an additional $93,000 for Palin herself)

She makes her constituents pay for her family's travel!

This is just what I DO know about her... which, because she refuses to say anything on a daily basis, I'll admit isn't much.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 12, 2008, 02:32:47 AM
 Really? What about all those poor people with AIDS and other ailments that require expensive medication year-round? Obviously, the money to pay for 99% of their medical expenses is not coming from their pockets, but from other people's pockets.

  The reason why it is unfair is because regardless the government is taking away your money and spending it on other people. Lots of poor people who get universal care are those who need it and wouldn't be able to afford it on their own, so the government steals a little bit of money from everyone and uses a disproportional amount of it on a small percentage of the poor population who has incredible medical bills.

  Even if everyone paid the same for universal health care - which is not the case in many countries where the rich pay far more -, it still would only be fair if everyone had the exact same yearly medical expense, which is not the case. Why should I give $10.000 of my money every year to the government for health care if I am going to use practically none of it and the $10.000 will be used on other people? I could save the money and use it for myself when I got sick and actually needed medical care. The whole thing is a sham. It is robbery, plain and simple. The dowtrodden of the Society should learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting mommy - the upper classes - and daddy - the state - to pay their way through life.

You should learn to look a little further. In my country I'm cosidered 'right wing'. But I, as do many other people on the right here, recognise the need for a social security net (of which the universal care is a part). How do you think an economy fairs when a significant amount of the population is in debt? What about crime rates when people can't even afford the most basic necessities? All these things will influence your quality of life too. And a lot of them can be minimalised by setting up a social security net.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: lovemonkey on September 12, 2008, 03:19:12 AM
 Really? What about all those poor people with AIDS and other ailments that require expensive medication year-round? Obviously, the money to pay for 99% of their medical expenses is not coming from their pockets, but from other people's pockets.

  The reason why it is unfair is because regardless the government is taking away your money and spending it on other people. Lots of poor people who get universal care are those who need it and wouldn't be able to afford it on their own, so the government steals a little bit of money from everyone and uses a disproportional amount of it on a small percentage of the poor population who has incredible medical bills.

  Even if everyone paid the same for universal health care - which is not the case in many countries where the rich pay far more -, it still would only be fair if everyone had the exact same yearly medical expense, which is not the case. Why should I give $10.000 of my money every year to the government for health care if I am going to use practically none of it and the $10.000 will be used on other people? I could save the money and use it for myself when I got sick and actually needed medical care. The whole thing is a sham. It is robbery, plain and simple. The dowtrodden of the Society should learn to take care of themselves instead of expecting mommy - the upper classes - and daddy - the state - to pay their way through life.

Good god man, have you ever been to a country with universal health care? Trust me, rich people are still rich and everyone pays their fuckin taxes (for the most part). The system with universal health care WORKS in so many countries that is is ridiculous to say otherwise. 10.000$ a year for healthcare? hahhaha you must be nuts. If people were forced to pay that kinda taxes for uni healthcare only, there would be riots and swinging of guillotines before you could say the word "bankrupt".


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 12, 2008, 03:33:04 AM
Good god man, have you ever been to a country with universal health care? Trust me, rich people are still rich and everyone pays their fuckin taxes (for the most part). The system with universal health care WORKS in so many countries that is is ridiculous to say otherwise. 10.000$ a year for healthcare? hahhaha you must be nuts. If people were forced to pay that kinda taxes for uni healthcare only, there would be riots and swinging of guillotines before you could say the word "bankrupt".

I pay < 1000 euros a year, around 80 euros a month.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: muscleforlife on September 12, 2008, 03:45:18 AM
Borderline communism Chimps, he want you and to depend on the Government for everything, he want to dictate where and who my money goes to, he wants to tell me and you what health care system to use and so and so on. I understand the difference but its not much.


hell,
This administration is about to hand out multibillions to private companies....freddie and fannie with the auto industry next in line with it's hand out.
All bullshit,politicians spend our money wherever they want to and we have NO SAY in the Matter.
Sandra


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 12, 2008, 04:59:39 AM
Gibson ate her alive in that interview.  She isn't ready to be president.  Throw out all the resume stuff.  When asked why she's ready to face down Putin, the answer was "I can see Russia from Alaska!"

Simpleton answer there.  Watch what happens should she have to assume the office for any reason.  Putin will test her minute #1. 

Heck, she just said if Israel wants to attack Iran, we shuld let them.  Even Bush himself keeps stopping them.  She doesn't understand what happens when 15% of the world's oil suddenly stops flowing.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 12, 2008, 05:28:48 AM
Ok, the former president of Russia is going to test the vice presidental nominee because of some dopey interview? 240 your as delusional as Obama. I suppose McCain will be at the golf-course or shuffule board court with George W. Bush drinking the blood of dead Iraqi's and plotting the next 911 while Palin is busy delivering her teenage daughter baby, cooking a roast and running the free world. No cabinet members, no embasadors, no secratary of defense and oh yeah, no president  ::)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 12, 2008, 05:33:13 AM
Ok, the former president of Russia is going to test the vice presidental nominee because of some dopey interview? 240 your as delusional as Obama. I suppose McCain will be at the golf-course or shuffule board court with George W. Bush drinking the blood of dead Iraqi's and plotting the next 911 while Palin is busy delivering her teenage daughter baby, cooking a roast and running the free world. No cabinet members, no embasadors, no secratary of defense and oh yeah, no president  ::)

All I know is that Obama has had THOUSANDS of interviews in the last 19 months.
Palin has had ONE.

And in that one interview, she looked more unprepared than any of the other 3 people on the tickets.  She believed should could change topic form Putin to gas pipeline.  She believed she could deflect georgian policy with a pun about being able to see Russia from alaska.

That shit might work on housewives, but it won't work on intelligent voters.  If you took party affiliation and obama hatred out of the equation - and just watched that video.  And you were asked, "Is this woman prepared to face down Putin in a nuclear confrontation?"...

I think we all know what the answer would be.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 12, 2008, 06:12:07 AM
The point is she wont face down Putin in a Nuclear conflict!

Did Al Gore face down Milsosevic? Did Dick Cheney face down Saddam? The president is the commander and chief. The vice president is in the background advising, doing administrative stuff, attending fund raisers and performing general duties of the executive branch. Foreign policy is generally an area reserved for the President and his cabinet members with the VP taking a backseat. The secretary of defense, national security counsel, embassadors, President, etc. do this stuff.   


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: tu_holmes on September 12, 2008, 11:05:05 AM
The point is she wont face down Putin in a Nuclear conflict!

Did Al Gore face down Milsosevic? Did Dick Cheney face down Saddam? The president is the commander and chief. The vice president is in the background advising, doing administrative stuff, attending fund raisers and performing general duties of the executive branch. Foreign policy is generally an area reserved for the President and his cabinet members with the VP taking a backseat. The secretary of defense, national security counsel, embassadors, President, etc. do this stuff.  

Considering that she could very well be President... I think it matters BIG TIME.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 12:50:34 PM
Bodvar,

I suppose I should link each and every piece of info I post so I'm not at the mercy of google-fu experts such as yourself... but then again, you dismiss a WHO report (WTF?!) so what would be the point.

Not dismissing, questioning, big difference. I don't just accept any piece of information that comes from an official organization, even if it supports my viewpoints.

For example, this WHO lists Cuba as 39th, and we all know via Michael Moore what a paradise Cuba is. But there have been reports coming out refuting this Utopian version of Cuba. For example when Fidel Castro became gravely ill did he depend on a Cuban doctor for treatment? No, he flew in a Spaniard http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-12-25-castro-surgeon_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-12-25-castro-surgeon_x.htm). Why would he do that if Cuban health care is a model for the world.

Recently pictures have surfaced of REAL Cuban hospitals http://therealcuba.com/Page10.htm (http://therealcuba.com/Page10.htm) All I'm saying is somebody here is lying, and communists have a long history of lying to the rest of the world.

But I'll give you some pointers so you can do a little more research...


-America HAS the 37th ranked healthcare system (look-up the 2007 WHO Report)

Yeah but Cuba is 39th, I question the methods of the WHO

-America's 6.3 deaths per 1,000 DOES put America in contention with Third World countries
...UN report: 32 countries beat the US (the USA only barely beat Croatia... which was a war zone in the early 90's)
...CIA report: 42 countries beat the US
   ...add to this the fact that it is generally agreed that US figures are grossly UNDER REPORTED

Your numbers are right but your conclusion is wrong, according the CIA factbook, the the US is number 181 out of 222 countries. The average of the European Union is number 180, do you think that the European Union is on par with a Third World country too? https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html)

The United Nations Population Division ranks the US as 163rd out of 195 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate)

According to your logic, Malta, Costa Rica, Poland, Greece, Hungary, Chile, The Faroe Islands, South Korea, and Russia are on par with third world countries. Real Third World countries are countries like Haiti (number 37), which has an infant mortality that is 10 times higher than the US, and Angola (number 1) which has a rate that is 30 times higher.

Who agrees that US figures are under reported? I've never heard of that. Can you back this up at all?

-people are in fact denied treatment in most European countries, but the denial rate is several orders of magnitude lower than it is in the US (and that's among the insured US citizens, the uninsured are denied coverage routinely)

Denied coverage and denied treatment are two very different things. NOBODY is denied treatment in the US, it is illegal. Look at all the illegal immigrants that are abusing the system here to get free treatment. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/may/10/local/me-uninsure10 (http://articles.latimes.com/2005/may/10/local/me-uninsure10)

-if you don't think government-run social services are efficient then doesn't that equate to criticism of your socialized Armed Forces? Are you not supporting the troops?

First of all, that statement is just dumb.

The military is not a social service program, Armed Services are run differently than other government institutions. Mainly because the military is a constitutionally mandated function of the Federal Government. The military has the power to hire and fire it's personnel as they please, there is no military union "protecting" soldiers jobs, like there is with other government workers. I'm not saying the military is perfect, but it is run much differently and more efficiently than other functions of government. 


-the life expectancy of Black males is actually 58ish (that might be out of date though). The figure you got (70) was a life expectancy from a medical site... that doesn't factor in the homicide rate, does it?

Yeah it fucking does, life expectancy factors in all causes of mortality. It would be worthless if it didn't. Why would a medical site factor in deaths caused by accidents and not murders? One of the reasons black men live about 6-7 years less than white men is the high homicide rate. Where the fuck did you get the 58 number? The last time black men had a life expectancy of 58 was in 1950 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus07.pdf#022 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus07.pdf#022)


-you contend Americans only pay 1.5 times as much as the French for healthcare per capita... well, you are comparing the wrong figures:
You should factor in not only government funding per capita, but also government spending per capita and also include the per capita PRIVATE spending on insurance premiums, medications, and uninsured health spending... then the figure is actually substantially more than twice what the French pay.

No the figures I was looking at was comparing both private and public spending. Why would anybody do a comparison and leave a huge chunk of health care spending out? That would make the study laughable.

-the 20% tax increase I referred to is a 20% increase in the amount of tax that Americans CURRENTLY spend via taxes on healthcare... NOT a 20% increase in tax, NOT a 20% income tax.
As it stands now Americans pay almost as much healthcare tax as the French do... but then they have to go spend roughly the same amount AGAIN from their own pockets in private insurance premiums in order to be properly covered. (Guess I should have been clearer)

Ok I see what you mean now. Yeah, that figure is probably too low, Americans spend way too much on health care, and health care has become bloated and inefficient, this I agree with you on. I just disagree on the solution, that's all.

That's tantamount to paying 80% of the cost of French-style universal healthcare in taxes and then paying the same amount again to be (almost) fully covered... all the while being terrified of the government offering universal healthcare for the same price the French pay in taxes? Aren't the French getting much better value for money?  

That all depends, if your a high income earner in France and you never get sick, your getting fucked in the ass when it comes to health care expenses. If your a low income earner and your always sick, your getting a hell of a deal. I just don't like a system where what you pay in doesn't reflect on the service you get. Like here in American, the more you pay in taxes, the less you use government services, that's bullshit. If I'm going to pay half of my earnings into something, I want my money's worth. Is that so unreasonable?


You see Bodvar, I disagree with your viewpoint because I'm more informed than you are... not because I am uninformed.

I just love that combination of arrogance and ignorance, you must be an Obama supporter :)

You're starting from the assumption that I'm wrong... then have to go searching for conflicting data. Why not just do lots of research and come around to my viewpoint (reality).

The Luke

Look, in case you haven't noticed I'm familiar with these issues, I'm just backing up my point so you can see that I'm not just making shit up. All I've done is shown that most of your information is blatantly false, and your coming to conclusions based on faulty information. Bad information = bad conclusion.

You seem to be very uninterested about your own statistics, it is very easy to look this stuff up. Your lack of curiosity is puzzling to me. Your mind operates like most leftists: you are the smartest guy in every room, you know the "truth" and everything you say is "reality" no matter what information anybody provides to the contrary. Everybody that disagrees with you is an idiot, and you do not feel the need to back up what your saying because everything you say is automatically true because you are "enlightened".

When you want to find out the truth about anything, you have to take a hypothesis and try to prove it false. You don't make a hypothesis and then look for information to support it, that's really bad science. However, I'm sure your convinced that everything I say is automatically stupid and should be ignored so I doubt you'll give any of this a second thought.





Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 01:09:34 PM
  Then you're even worst than I first suspected...

Oh yes, a European that doesn't tote the leftist ideology. I guess that's like when an American black thinks like I do, that makes him an "Uncle Tom" or not really black. I guess I'm not really European :)

  Several states of the south.

  It ended in the Supreme Court, and they ruled that they don't have the right to stop evolution from being taught at schools.

Yes, this was Epperson v. Arkansas, which ended in the Supreme Court ruling that any laws banning evolution were unconstitutional. But this was in 1968, 40 years ago, it isn't relevant at all today. Hell WWII only ended 63 years ago, should we still hold Nazism and Hitler against the Germans?

  "Sigh"

   No, Americans of Swiss, Norwegian and Dutch ancestry are not Swiss, Norwegian and Duth: they are Americans. We are comparing nationality here, and not ethnicity. I said that white Americans compare very poorly in terms of education, scholarships and culture to their Caucasian brethen in Switzerland and Norway, which is true.

Ok so since these people moved out of Europe several generations ago they are nothing like the people in their country of origin?

Education is piss poor in America except when you look at tertiary education attainment. The US is second only behind Canada. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_edu_att_ter-education-educational-attainment-tertiary (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_edu_att_ter-education-educational-attainment-tertiary) If scholarships here are so shitty, then why do so many Americans have college education?

Tell me how the hell you measure culture? What are the criteria?



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 12, 2008, 01:29:27 PM
Bodvar,


Your arguments are pretty weak... it's the typical Republican catchphrase and soundbite thinking bullshit.

Pity the poor high-earners who haven't gotten sick but still have to pay into healthcare... we must right this injustice:
Fuck the poor! Fuck orphans! Fuck widows! Fuck those with congenital diseases!

They should have paid in before they got poor/were born/lost their husbands/picked faulty genes!

Should a millionaires sick kids be denied coverage seeing as THEY haven't paid in yet? Or should healthcare be dependent on your social status/parents/class?

All men created... something... um... equal something, I think....?


Dude, this is retarded... you are skeptical of the WHO and UN Health World Health Reports? Because you can't find differing data from a Republican think-tank perhaps? Sounds like your mind is already made up.

National statistics are routinely manipulated in the US... the census isn't fully inclusive... unemployment figures are so finagled as to be completely incredible etc etc. This is well known outside the US.

For the record Americans CURRENTLY pay twice PER CAPITA of what the French pay for their healthcare system... ALL 36 countries ranked higher than the US have accomplished that by instituting some form of universal healthcare.... it just WORKS! AND IT'S CHEAP!


America has the WORST homelessness rate; the worst prisons; the highest incarceration rates; the worst literacy and the highest crime/murder rates in the developed world... time to take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger.


The Luke
  


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: headhuntersix on September 12, 2008, 01:32:38 PM
Yeah and after all that, we're still number one.....sorry ur jealous.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Dos Equis on September 12, 2008, 01:38:39 PM
Yeah and after all that, we're still number one.....sorry ur jealous.

lol.  True.  And people from around the world keep moving here:

"As of 2006, the United States accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than any other country in the world.  In 2006, the number of immigrants totaled 37.5 million." 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States#Contemporary_immigration



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 12, 2008, 01:49:16 PM
Actually, Ireland gets more immigrants (per head of population) than pretty much any other developed country...

A few years ago (May 1st 2001 if memory serves) we allowed new EU accession country citizens to come and work freely in Ireland... totally open economy... six weeks later we had 400,000 new immigrants (half of them Polish), with a population of only 4 million that's a 10% increase in population in 42 days (and ALL of them, legal and illegal, were given FREE education and FREE healthcare).

Americans would shit their pants if that happened in the US... we only noticed that Irish girls were suddenly working out to compete with the sudden influx of ultra-hot Eastern European girls.

Our system is inclusive and socialised so we were able to tolerate/absorb such an influx.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 240 is Back on September 12, 2008, 01:50:34 PM
bragging about how many immigrants you have?

eeew.  that's like a girl bragging about how many dudes bang her.

IMO... if you have a college degree, you can get citizenship.  If not, don't bother.  At least you know they'll speak english and be able to contribute to society somehow.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Butterbean on September 12, 2008, 02:57:37 PM
I haven't read this whole thread thoroughly but I'm curious as to why some people vehemently reject that life (not the earth itself but life [since Matt Damon was addressing dinosaurs]) could have only been on earth for let's say under 10,000 years?





Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calmus on September 12, 2008, 03:35:46 PM
I haven't read this whole thread thoroughly but I'm curious as to why some people vehemently reject that life (not the earth itself but life [since Matt Damon was addressing dinosaurs]) could have only been on earth for let's say under 10,000 years?





Because science (the thing that allows you to be posting on the internet) indicates that it cannot be so.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Butterbean on September 12, 2008, 03:41:43 PM
Because science (the thing that allows you to be posting on the internet) indicates that it cannot be so.
Thanks for answering calmus.  Re: science.....are you talking about carbon dating or the geological column or something else?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: calmus on September 12, 2008, 03:54:38 PM
Thanks for answering calmus.  Re: science.....are you talking about carbon dating or the geological column or something else?

Any branch of science: geology, astronomy, biology.... take your pick.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 04:02:14 PM
Bodvar,

Your arguments are pretty weak... it's the typical Republican catchphrase and soundbite thinking bullshit.

No, my arguments are very strong, I actually can back up my arguments, you can't.

Pity the poor high-earners who haven't gotten sick but still have to pay into healthcare... we must right this injustice:
Fuck the poor! Fuck orphans! Fuck widows! Fuck those with congenital diseases!

Wow, what a reasonable logical conclusion. You must have put a lot of thought behind it.

This attitude is childish, if I'm not for complete government control of health care then I want to see poor people and children die. Nobody is against a safety net for those who cannot provide for themselves, least of all me, but people need to take responsibility for their own health care.

When government has control of something you have a "tragedy of the commons" situation. Since nobody owns their own health care, they don't feel they have any personal responsibility to keep the costs down, that in turn drives up the price for everyone.

They should have paid in before they got poor/were born/lost their husbands/picked faulty genes!

You have completely melted down here. I've annihilated your unsubstantiated so called "points", and instead of logically debating my counter-points you throw out this emotional mindless drivel.

Should a millionaires sick kids be denied coverage seeing as THEY haven't paid in yet? Or should healthcare be dependent on your social status/parents/class?

No, I'm saying health care should become completely private, except if people completely cannot take care of themselves. That way it will become affordable and effective. People should be responsible for their own healthcare, not reliant on the government.

All men created... something... um... equal something, I think....?

CREATED equal, not guaranteed everything equally. According to this logic, everyone has a right to a house and car, that would make everybody equal right? It's not fair some people have BMW's and some others don't, so the government should take from the people that own BMW's so others "less fortunate" can have them too. That would be "fair" right?. Before you even start, health care is NOT a right, so that IS a good comparison.

Dude, this is retarded... you are skeptical of the WHO and UN Health World Health Reports? Because you can't find differing data from a Republican think-tank perhaps? Sounds like your mind is already made up.

Oh my God, did you even read what I posted? What do you think of those Cuban hospitals with roaches and fecal matter splattered on the walls? Do you ever see that in an American hospital? No. What about Castro flying in a Spaniard when he got sick. Where did Clinton get his heart surgery? America. Where did Ted Kennedy get his tumor operated on, America. Where did Castro get treatment? Spain. Why do you think that is? I'm saying that those numbers don't add up, and there is nothing at all wrong with being skeptical of the UN, I mean look at all the bad shit that has been going on with that organization over the years.

But no, I'm incapable of thinking for myself, I must be a mindless RNC robot taking orders through an antenna in the back of my skull. Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to intellectually disagree with you, isn't it?

National statistics are routinely manipulated in the US... the census isn't fully inclusive... unemployment figures are so finagled as to be completely incredible etc etc. This is well known outside the US.

Any proof of this? I didn't think so.

For the record Americans CURRENTLY pay twice PER CAPITA of what the French pay for their healthcare system... ALL 36 countries ranked higher than the US have accomplished that by instituting some form of universal healthcare.... it just WORKS! AND IT'S CHEAP!

1.5 is the number unless you can prove otherwise. Tell me what are the tax rates in these countries? How long are their waiting lists? Do you really think that all these reports over the years detailing the severe problems UHC systems have is just some conspiracy in order to make a national health system look bad? Do you think Medicaid and Medicare are cost efficient well run institutions? Have you ever been to a Veterans Hospital?


America has the WORST homelessness rate; the worst prisons; the highest incarceration rates; the worst literacy and the highest crime/murder rates in the developed world... time to take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger.

The Luke
 

Hm, let's see what Wikipedia has to say about this matter. America has a 99% literacy rate, the EXACT same as Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Guyana, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, South Korea, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate). Wow your statement turned out to be total bullshit, again! What a surprise.

As far as homelessness http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2003/0210/homeless/story.html (http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/2003/0210/homeless/story.html), yes the card carrying member of the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" Time magazine, states that Europe homelessness rate are about the same as they are in the US.

Tell me again why high incarceration rates are bad and why prisons need to be good? Are you saying we need to have more criminals on the street and pamper the ones that are in prison? I say fuck that, let them live in tents and hit rocks all day, it is suppose to be punishment after all.

As far as the crime rate, New Zealand, Finland, Chile, and the United Kingdom all have a higher crime rate than the United States http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita)

Just because I don't let you get away with your lies about American statistics doesn't mean I have a "USA #1" foam finger on my hand.

Every so called fact you spout out here is wrong, what does it feel like to know that everything you believe about this country is false? Does your psyche even allow you to comprehend what has happened here? Or are you going to ignore these facts and go right along believing what you want to believe?







Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 04:05:46 PM
I haven't read this whole thread thoroughly but I'm curious as to why some people vehemently reject that life (not the earth itself but life [since Matt Damon was addressing dinosaurs]) could have only been on earth for let's say under 10,000 years?

Because they are religious zealots.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Cardfan on September 12, 2008, 04:08:58 PM
do your homework dude


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 12, 2008, 04:13:10 PM
Thanks for answering calmus.  Re: science.....are you talking about carbon dating or the geological column or something else?

...dating has become such a big field since the 70s that there are now about 200 different (geological) dating techniques.

For example, dendochonology (dating by tree rings) has provided a very precise year by year record for most of the worlds local climates that in some instances goes back hundreds of thousands of years.

A good analogy is the idea of collating millions of random paragraphs (individual petrified tree cross-sections) into one huge book (a dendochronological climate record) by matching the overlapping sentences (ring widths). These are year specific databases... so if you can count back from this years growth ring through a couple of hundred thousand preceding years growth rings then the Earth can't really be 10,000 years old.


The fact that American politicians can dispute this type of thing (evolution; natural selection; geology) is simply staggering...

For example: Would you vote for someone who said the following...
"The theory that any two odd numbers always add together to give an even number is just a that: a theory. Scientists haven't yet added together all the possible combinations of odd number pairings using numbers between one and infinity... so how do they know? Till someone can proven to me otherwise I'll continue to believe what I've read in the sacred book of Klatuu, that there exists a special pair of odd numbers that, once added together, sum to an odd number"

You wouldn't vote for someone skeptical of the theory of basic arithmetic would you?

Well, hate to break it to you, but evolution is a mathematical fact...



The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 12, 2008, 04:19:03 PM
Luke you are a rabid homosexual.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 04:28:13 PM
This is such a problem with being a secular right winger. We have to deal with the religious zealots. I'd love nothing more than to create make the Republican party a secular institution, but no we have to appease the Bible thumpers. These people want to force their ideology on the rest of us, just like the left does.

I live in North Carolina, and in some counties here they actually put chains on the beer sections at grocery stores on Sundays. Because it's the S-A-B-B-A-T-H. Yes, your not suppose to be buying beer you should be worshiping the Lord. Fuck that, if I want to buy beer and get shitfaced on a Sunday morning, that's my prerogative. Same thing with the left, look at the stupid ban on incandescent light bulbs, what fucking business is it of yours what kind of light bulbs I use? If I want to eat trans fats, smoke cigarettes indoors while drinking beer on Sunday under 50 regular light bulbs, that's my damn business.

Just look at the crap we have to deal with, The Creationists Museum for example. Yes, people walked with dinosaurs, just like the Flintstones! What an embarrassment.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 12, 2008, 04:31:36 PM
Libertarian= The only sane way to go


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 12, 2008, 04:32:48 PM
Bodvar,


Your arguments aren't well reasoned... you dismiss; misconsture and straw-man at every turn...

-you do realise that most European countries that have universal healthcare ALSO have private healthcare right? In Ireland, if you wait too long for an elective surgery the government will send you too a private hospital (if the private hospitals are full then you get sent abroad for surgery all expenses paid).

-you do realise there is a delineation between socialism and communism right? Universal healthcare is necessary to avoid the societal damage done by the rampant price gouging and coverage denial that is standard business practice for HMOs. It is not a slippery slope to taxpayers buying BMWs for the homeless.

-you do realise that people are routinely denied treatment in the US, right?

-you know that US hospitals regularly dump non-covered patients, right?

-you do know that the only way European homelessness and crime rates can only be considered comparable to those in the US is if you either add Third World Eastern European (non-EU) countries (Hungary; Turkey; Albania etc) to the EU average (homelessness) or use different standards for what constitutes serious crime (rapes; shootings and murder rates are much, much higher in the US), right?


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 12, 2008, 05:21:04 PM
Bodvar,


Your arguments aren't well reasoned... you dismiss; misconsture and straw-man at every turn...

I can't fault your persistence, but I back up my points with statistics, nothing more. Can you show me where I've used the straw-man logical fallacy?

-you do realise that most European countries that have universal healthcare ALSO have private healthcare right? In Ireland, if you wait too long for an elective surgery the government will send you too a private hospital (if the private hospitals are full then you get sent abroad for surgery all expenses paid).

You do know that your arguing against your own point right? If government care is so superior, why would they have to send people to private hospitals or abroad to get treated?

Did you know that your "Irish miracle" is due to oppressive American taxation? Most of your growth has been due to American companies fleeing the tax system here? If America would wise up and fix its tax system, your little welfare state would be in trouble. Good job on your tax rates though, who would have known that dramatically reducing corporate tax rates would create such an economic boom. Just another thing I admire about the Irish.


-you do realise there is a delineation between socialism and communism right? Universal healthcare is necessary to avoid the societal damage done by the rampant price gouging and coverage denial that is standard business practice for HMOs. It is not a slippery slope to taxpayers buying BMWs for the homeless.

Like communism and socialism, the difference between seizing my paycheck to pay for someone else's health care and seizing it to buy someone else a car or house is a matter of degrees. The concept is the same but it's just a matter of how far your willing to go.

It IS a slippery slope, right now. The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all Federal income taxes. The top 50% pay 97% and the top 1% pay 39% of all Federal income taxes http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls)

This means America is moving towards a system where the producers pay the entire tax burden to take care of the non producers, this is number 2 in the communist manifesto. If you determine that one individual is responsible for the health care of another, why not his mortgage? Why not his car payments? Why not his food bill? Where does it stop?

About the HMO's do you understand the different between denying coverage and denying treatment? Those are two totally different things.

-you do realise that people are routinely denied treatment in the US, right?

Where? Show me one person that was denied treatment of anything. Prove it.

-you know that US hospitals regularly dump non-covered patients, right?

Your statements are worthless without proof. I just don't accept what some guy on the internet says as truth, I need for it to be substantiated. As should you.

I showed you before that American hospitals are having huge problems with illegal aliens using ER's as their private practice. Why would American hospitals treat uninsured illegal immigrants but throw out uninsured citizens? Doesn't add up at all.

-you do know that the only way European homelessness and crime rates can only be considered comparable to those in the US is if you either add Third World Eastern European (non-EU) countries (Hungary; Turkey; Albania etc) to the EU average (homelessness) or use different standards for what constitutes serious crime (rapes; shootings and murder rates are much, much higher in the US), right?

The Luke

Do you honestly think that the EU uses different standards than the US when measuring crime? How do these statistics differ? Why would an international organization compile a list on crime statistics without using controls to correct any disparity between the different collection methods used by each country? Are you saying that Nationmaster.com which is lauded as "a statistician's dream" by the BBC World and "astounding and easy to use" by the New York Times, is run by a bunch of idiots that do not understand basic concepts of gathering statistical data?

This is called denial, your precious UK has a higher crime rate than the United States. I know it's a shock, but it's the truth, you need to learn to deal with this.

Why are you so unwilling to back anything you say up? Do you just think everything is true just because you say it? I've used basic statistics and refuted everything you say but you keep on throwing stuff out here without proof like you haven't lost all credibility. This is like arguing with a child.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 12, 2008, 06:11:23 PM
Bodvar, you must be new here. No liberal who posts on this website can ever back up any argument they make without resolving to fictional statistics and emotional diatribes that are totally irrelevant to the issues. Dont waste your time with them dude. Just make fun of them, make your point and keep it moving. You'll give yourself carpal tunnel trying to reason with these morons.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 12, 2008, 07:40:59 PM
You should learn to look a little further. In my country I'm cosidered 'right wing'. But I, as do many other people on the right here, recognise the need for a social security net (of which the universal care is a part). How do you think an economy fairs when a significant amount of the population is in debt? What about crime rates when people can't even afford the most basic necessities? All these things will influence your quality of life too. And a lot of them can be minimalised by setting up a social security net.

  It's not my fault that people are economic failures and can't take care of themselves. The talk about universal health care and of the social security net is tempered by the pragmatic reality that ultimately someone needs to pay for it. Like I said, money and resources do not appear ex nihilo. I don't need a social security net: I can take care of myself and this should be the case for every other adult person in the society. Sure, a cripple or someone with Down's Syndrome can't take care of themselves and should receive some sort of support from the state, but I don't see why I should pay hundreds or thousands of dollars a year that will go all to pay for the AIDS medication of some ghetto thug who catched the disease because he never cared to use condoms, or to support the kids he had even though he can't support them because he never cared to use condoms. How is this fair to me? Why should I pay for the mistakes of other people?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: CigaretteMan on September 12, 2008, 07:56:36 PM
Good god man, have you ever been to a country with universal health care? Trust me, rich people are still rich and everyone pays their fuckin taxes (for the most part). The system with universal health care WORKS in so many countries that is is ridiculous to say otherwise. 10.000$ a year for healthcare? hahhaha you must be nuts. If people were forced to pay that kinda taxes for uni healthcare only, there would be riots and swinging of guillotines before you could say the word "bankrupt".

  You just don't get it, do you, no matter how many times I explain this to you? I am going to explain this one last time, and if you don't get it this time then I will just let it go.

  I don't care whether taxes for universal health care are $10,000 or only $100 a year . This is irrelevant. The bottom line is that it's still theft on the part of the government. Why? Because the medical needs of people are assymetrical. That is, if I pay $100 for health care, most of it will be going to people who suffer from chronic diseases like diabetes, AIDS, renal falure, etc. Of those $100 that I pay, I will be using $10 at the most if any, and $90 will be going to pay the medical bills of the chronically ill. The government is stealing from me anyway, plain and simple. The system isbased on abuse in the sense that some people use far more of the medical services than they pay in taxes. Furthermore, even if everyone used exactly what they pay in taxes a year on the public health sevices, it would still be wrong. Why? Because the government would be using my money as it sees fit. I know how to best spend my own money on my own health, thank you very much.

  You communists are the most shameless people in the World. You feel no shame or remorse whatsoever of stealing people from their hard-earned money to fit your political agendas. If you feel so strongly about this, then why don't you sell you own properties and use your own money to pay for the health, education and recreation of all the shiftless people in Society? Why do you want to force us people who support ourselves to pay for things we don't want to? It's so easy to be charitable with other people's money, isn't it?                                                                   


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Cardfan on September 12, 2008, 08:03:08 PM
  You just don't get it, do you, no matter how many times I explain this to you? I am going to explain this one last time, and if you don't get it this time then I will just let it go.

  I don't care whether taxes for universal health care are $10,000 or only $100 a year . This is irrelevant. The bottom line is that it's still theft on the part of the government. Why? Because the medical needs of people are assymetrical. That is, if I pay $100 for health care, most of it will be going to people who suffer from chronic diseases like diabetes, AIDS, renal falure, etc. Of those $100 that I pay, I will be using $10 at the most if any, and $90 will be going to pay the medical bills of the chronically ill. The government is stealing from me anyway, plain and simple. The system isbased on abuse in the sense that some people use far more of the medical services than they pay in taxes. Furthermore, even if everyone used exactly what they pay in taxes a year on the public health sevices, it would still be wrong. Why? Because the government would be using my money as it sees fit. I know how to best spend my own money on my own health, thank you very much.

  You communists are the most shameless people in the World. You feel no shame or remorse whatsoever of stealing people from their hard-earned money to fit your political agendas. If you feel so strongly about this, then why don't you sell you own properties and use your own money to pay for the health, education and recreation of all the shiftless people in Society? Why do you want to force us people who support ourselves to pay for things we don't want to? It's so easy to be charitable with other people's money, isn't it?                                                                   
That's what they don't get. Every supporter of B. H. Obama wants free healthcare. They want free everything. Why should the hardworking among us keep on keepin on? If this Muslim guy is elected....we gonna get it handed to us. Fuck you whitey!


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 12, 2008, 09:01:41 PM
  It's not my fault that people are economic failures and can't take care of themselves. The talk about universal health care and of the social security net is tempered by the pragmatic reality that ultimately someone needs to pay for it. Like I said, money and resources do not appear ex nihilo. I don't need a social security net: I can take care of myself and this should be the case for every other adult person in the society. Sure, a cripple or someone with Down's Syndrome can't take care of themselves and should receive some sort of support from the state, but I don't see why I should pay hundreds or thousands of dollars a year that will go all to pay for the AIDS medication of some ghetto thug who catched the disease because he never cared to use condoms, or to support the kids he had even though he can't support them because he never cared to use condoms. How is this fair to me? Why should I pay for the mistakes of other people?
You oversimplify the safetynet society we have to fit your prejudice that the law of the jungle should apply and those failing or not carrying their end of the load are getting their just desserts.

Do you believe all taxation is stealing or just the portion that's allocated to entitlements and social insurance?

Is your economic model of asymmetrical medical needs based on Obama's plan or are you pulling numbers out of the air?

Why do we communists want you to pay your share of taxes for the benefit of the general public as a whole?  You are your brother's keeper.  Fate may single you out for a need based governmental benefit someday.  And it's in society's interest to not have abject poverty rampant in our country.

It's easy to cry that all your money is yours b/c you earned it.  That's superficial selfishness.  Mine mine mine.  You've achieved nothing on your own.  If not for those that came before you and our federal government, you wouldn't even have the money in your pocket.  The gov. that mints your money, that protects  your proprietary interests, that protects your borders--your person--your personal property, that sponsors R&D so that you have an Internet, that maintains your highways, libraries, parks, that insures your bank accounts, that provides loans for your education (the list can go on for pages, but you get the idea)--that government is the fucked up mechanism emblematic of our social contract.

You are not an island.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 13, 2008, 01:05:49 AM
As far as the crime rate, New Zealand, Finland, Chile, and the United Kingdom all have a higher crime rate than the United States http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita)

Crime is a very wide concept. Speeding is a crime.

Murder rate: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap

5 USA
14 UK
19 Germany
53 Netherlands
66 Denmark

Assault: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass_percap-crime-assaults-per-capita

6 USA
8 UK
18 Netherlands
24 Denmark
26 Germany

Paints quite a different picture doesn't it? Please don't try to bend statistics in your favor.





Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Benny B on September 13, 2008, 03:55:34 AM
That's what they don't get. Every supporter of B. H. Obama wants free healthcare. They want free everything. Why should the hardworking among us keep on keepin on? If this Muslim #### is elected....we gonna get it handed to us. Fuck you whitey!
LOL at the racist buffoon.  :D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Michaeloz on September 13, 2008, 03:57:43 AM
  You just don't get it, do you, no matter how many times I explain this to you? I am going to explain this one last time, and if you don't get it this time then I will just let it go.

  I don't care whether taxes for universal health care are $10,000 or only $100 a year . This is irrelevant. The bottom line is that it's still theft on the part of the government. Why? Because the medical needs of people are assymetrical. That is, if I pay $100 for health care, most of it will be going to people who suffer from chronic diseases like diabetes, AIDS, renal falure, etc. Of those $100 that I pay, I will be using $10 at the most if any, and $90 will be going to pay the medical bills of the chronically ill. The government is stealing from me anyway, plain and simple. The system isbased on abuse in the sense that some people use far more of the medical services than they pay in taxes. Furthermore, even if everyone used exactly what they pay in taxes a year on the public health sevices, it would still be wrong. Why? Because the government would be using my money as it sees fit. I know how to best spend my own money on my own health, thank you very much.

  You communists are the most shameless people in the World. You feel no shame or remorse whatsoever of stealing people from their hard-earned money to fit your political agendas. If you feel so strongly about this, then why don't you sell you own properties and use your own money to pay for the health, education and recreation of all the shiftless people in Society? Why do you want to force us people who support ourselves to pay for things we don't want to? It's so easy to be charitable with other people's money, isn't it?                                                                   
Dude you are way out of touch with your thoughts on universal healthcare. Yo just can;t seem to grasp that it works fine in other countries.
You have no idea about communists countries and their running if you feel they steal from their own people.
Amother out of touch Americain.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 13, 2008, 05:46:55 AM
It IS a slippery slope, right now. The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all Federal income taxes. The top 50% pay 97% and the top 1% pay 39% of all Federal income taxes http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls)

This means America is moving towards a system where the producers pay the entire tax burden to take care of the non producers, this is number 2 in the communist manifesto. If you determine that one individual is responsible for the health care of another, why not his mortgage? Why not his car payments? Why not his food bill? Where does it stop?

I'd like to tackle this because only the innumerate fall for this type of statistic...

As it stands now in the US the top 1% of wealthiest people pay 39% of all federal income taxes... this is true. But it doesn't mean what you guys think it means.

The bottom 150 million earners pay only 3% of the federal income tax, but the top 1% earn more than the bottom 150 million combined. There is a chronic wealth disparity.

Federal income taxes are one thing... but what about total tax burden?

The top 1% don't consume enough to pay their fair share of sales tax, property tax, food taxes etc.

Here's a simple minded example: the (sales) tax on cornflakes.
There are only about 500,000 super rich (top 1% earners), but they earn as much as the bottom 150 million. The bottom 150 million eat 150 million bowls of cornflakes each day, the top 1% eat only eat 500,000 bowls of corn flakes... so the cornflake tax is hitting the poor disproportionately hard: they are carrying 99.67% of the cornflake tax for that 51% of the population (top 1% and bottom 50%).

The bottom half of the population pays half of the cornflake tax... but doesn't earn half the income.

Similarly, the poor are carrying the vast bulk of the tax burden for food, clothes, gasoline, cars, childcare, medical costs, consumables... the poor are in effect paying the vast bulk of the tax on lifes necessities.

The rich are paying the vast bulk of the tax burden for social programs (funded by federal taxes)... but the social programs are shitty and underfunded, and proportionately to total income the rich are getting a very good deal.

The top 1% might be paying 39% of federal taxes... but they don't earn 13 times what the bottom 150 million earn (who pay 3% of the federal taxes), they earn 300 times what the poor earn on average and should be paying considerably more.

The wealth disparity is so great that the top 1% shouldn't be paying 39% of federal income tax, they should be paying 50% to 60%.

Don't just use the gist of what the figures SEEM to say... do a little math.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 07:14:24 AM
Crime is a very wide concept. Speeding is a crime.

Murder rate: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap

5 USA
14 UK
19 Germany
53 Netherlands
66 Denmark

Assault: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_ass_percap-crime-assaults-per-capita

6 USA
8 UK
18 Netherlands
24 Denmark
26 Germany


Paints quite a different picture doesn't it? Please don't try to bend statistics in your favor.





Speeding is a misdemeanor, what do you think they use jaywalking in there too?

What you did is BLATANTLY dishonest (or just stupid I'm not sure which yet). You used TOTAL amount of murders, which ranked the US as number 5 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap) NOT the murder rate. Murder rate is murders per capita, where the US ranks as number 24 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)

Do you understand the difference between total murders and murders per capita? You have to divide the numbers of murders by the population to get the murder rate of the country. Just look at India, when you look at total murders, India is number 1 with 37,170 murders which is more than twice the amount you find in the US. BUT when you divide the number of homicide victims by India's 1.1 billion population, then you get a homicide rate of 0.033 per 1,000 which ranks India as #26. Do you see the difference here?


Here are few more statistics you may find interesting

Burglaries: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_bur_percap-crime-burglaries-per-capita

1 Australia
3 Denmark
7 United Kingdom
12 Iceland
17 United States


Rapes: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita

1 South Africa
3 Australia
5 Canada
9 United States
10 Iceland


Robberies: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rob_percap-crime-robberies-per-capita

1 Spain
7 Portugal
8 United Kingdom
11 United States

Drug Offenses: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_dru_off-crime-drug-offences

1 Germany
2 United Kingdom
3 Canada
17 Netherlands
34 Denmark
41 United States

Car Thefts: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_car_the_percap-crime-car-thefts-per-capita

1 Australia
3 United Kingdom
7 Canada
9 United States

Embezzlement's: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_emb_percap-crime-embezzlements-per-capita

1 Czech Republic
4 Norway
12 Switzerland
20 Denmark
30 United States

Frauds: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_fra_percap-crime-frauds-per-capita

1 Germany
2 United Kingdom
9 Canada
11 France
18 United States

This confirms what I said, America does not have the highest crime rate in the world.

Paints a completely different picture doesn't it? Please stop trying to bend statistics in your favor.

 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 13, 2008, 07:37:31 AM
Bodvar,

Got the table for murders per capita?

I seriously doubt there are any developed countries ahead of the US.



The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: headhuntersix on September 13, 2008, 07:43:47 AM
Dude you are way out of touch with your thoughts on universal healthcare. Yo just can;t seem to grasp that it works fine in other countries.
You have no idea about communists countries and their running if you feel they steal from their own people.
Amother out of touch Americain.


It works fine...where is it working fine...in Canada where people wait months for normal procedures...or maybe England where they made manditory minium wait times in ER's...except to get around that they make patients wait in the meat wagon so the time doesn't start. Plus we're 350 million or more people...and I'm not paying for some assholes medical bills. Work hard, get a job, buy insurance.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Tapeworm on September 13, 2008, 07:56:34 AM

It works fine...where is it working fine...in Canada where people wait months for normal procedures...or maybe England where they made manditory minium wait times in ER's...except to get around that they make patients wait in the meat wagon so the time doesn't start. Plus we're 350 million or more people...and I'm not paying for some assholes medical bills. Work hard, get a job, buy insurance.

 ???

I've been to an ER in England.  Walked straight in even though it was a trivial problem and I was a foreigner without ID.

Health care and education should be basic rights in a civilized nation.  They should quit wasting your money elsewhere and provide for the needs of the citizenry. 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 08:37:49 AM
I'd like to tackle this because only the innumerate fall for this type of statistic...

You such an elitist pompous ass, do you know that?


As it stands now in the US the top 1% of wealthiest people pay 39% of all federal income taxes... this is true. But it doesn't mean what you guys think it means.

The bottom 150 million earners pay only 3% of the federal income tax, but the top 1% earn more than the bottom 150 million combined. There is a chronic wealth disparity.

I'm sorry a chronic wealth disparity? Should everyone have equal wages? If you look at those number again the top 1% pay a much higher percentage of their earnings than the bottom 50% do. The bottom 50% pay nothing, what's the problem here? Something else, notice that when the evil George W. Bush who hates the poor and black people took office, the top 1% went from having 33.89% of the Federal income tax burden to 39.38%. Wow, he's really looking out for his rich buddies huh?

FYI, we have an ACHIEVEMENT disparity, not a wealth disparity. If you are willing to work your ass off in this country you will never have a problem with money. People that are poor generally are that way because of the choices they make, likewise for the rich. The best thing we can do is get rid of this "woe is me" attitude we have here and get people off their asses and help them support themselves. Not throw more government money at them. It's like they say, give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish he'll eat for a lifetime. Lefties generally whine that we're not giving people enough fish.

Federal income taxes are one thing... but what about total tax burden?

The top 1% don't consume enough to pay their fair share of sales tax, property tax, food taxes etc.

Are you crazy? How high are property taxes on a mansion on high dollar real estate compared to a dumpy trailer in a trailer park? How much more do you pay in sales tax on a Bentley compared to a used Honda (hint, it's about 100 times as much)? How much sales tax do they rich pay on yachts (hint, about what the average person makes in 20 years)? The rich pay a large portion of the sales, property tax, ect. Plus what the hell is a food tax? There's a sales tax but there is no food tax on top of that.

Do you know how much more stuff the rich buy than the poor? How many people are employed because some rich guy wants to buy a yacht?

Here's a simple minded example: the (sales) tax on cornflakes.
There are only about 500,000 super rich (top 1% earners), but they earn as much as the bottom 150 million. The bottom 150 million eat 150 million bowls of cornflakes each day, the top 1% eat only eat 500,000 bowls of corn flakes... so the cornflake tax is hitting the poor disproportionately hard: they are carrying 99.67% of the cornflake tax for that 51% of the population (top 1% and bottom 50%).

The bottom half of the population pays half of the cornflake tax... but doesn't earn half the income.

First of all, rich people don't eat cornflakes :) They hire their personal chefs to cook them up some ridiculously expensive gourmet 5 course breakfast meal, but regardless.

Ok let's do a little math! 150,500,000 bowls of cereal a day, and lets say there are about 10 bowls per box, so that is 15,050,000 boxes, with a box of corn flakes being about 4 dollars which equals 60.2 million dollars times the sales tax (0.06) = $3,612,000 per day in corn flake tax. Now lets look at the most expensive Yacht in the world, which sells for about $103 million, so if that guy were to sell it he would have to pay $6,180,000 in sales tax. That means one guy buying one boat will pay 1.7 times in sales tax than 155.5 million people pay for eating cornflakes in one day.

Do you have any idea how many yachts and luxury cars and big screen TV's and other ridiculously expensive items are being purchased every day by rich people? There are over 1 million millionaires in this country, that's a LOT of expensive shit being purchased. Your argument about the rich not paying their fair share of property and sales tax doesn't wash.

Similarly, the poor are carrying the vast bulk of the tax burden for food, clothes, gasoline, cars, childcare, medical costs, consumables... the poor are in effect paying the vast bulk of the tax on lifes necessities.

If the poor have money to buy all those things in that sort of magnitude are they really that poor?

This is basic logic, I'm sure you agree that rich people hold onto most of the wealth in this country. If they hold onto the most wealth they must also spend the most, and if they spend the most then they must pay the most sales tax right?

Let me use some statistics from a left wing website against you. According to The Nation http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060529/friedman (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060529/friedman), the bottom 50 percent of earners only have 3 percent of the total wealth in America. How could people that hold that little wealth pay the majority of sales taxes? These two points are mutually exclusive, you either pay the vast bulk of sales taxes OR you only control 3 percent of the wealth. It cannot be both.

The rich are paying the vast bulk of the tax burden for social programs (funded by federal taxes)... but the social programs are shitty and underfunded, and proportionately to total income the rich are getting a very good deal.

Huh? Your saying the rich are getting a good deal because the 39% tax burden they are paying is going to programs that are shitty and underfunded? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. How is paying a huge portion of your income into a shitty program you never use a "good deal"?

The top 1% might be paying 39% of federal taxes... but they don't earn 13 times what the bottom 150 million earn (who pay 3% of the federal taxes), they earn 300 times what the poor earn on average and should be paying considerably more.

Your not very good with numbers are you? According the IRS, the top 1% earn an average of about 370,000 dollars, the poor have an average income of about 17,000. That means that the top percent earn about 22 times as much as the poor, not 300 times.

Actually tax information is misleading because it doesn't include tax credits like the Earned Income Credit, which pays about 3000 dollars on average just for having kids. So people making less than 30,000 are getting all their state and federal taxes back AND getting 3000+ dollars just for having a child! So the poor not only don't pay any taxes but they get free money from the government at the expense of the top earners. Poor people have a negative tax burden.

The wealth disparity is so great that the top 1% shouldn't be paying 39% of federal income tax, they should be paying 50% to 60%.

I go back to that The Nation article, it states that the top 1% control 30% of the wealth and but have 39% of the tax burden, that means the rich are paying MORE than their "fair share". It also states that the bottom 50 percent control 3% of the wealth and have 3% of the burden. Seems like things are exactly as you would like them to be! Oh, and like I said before, if you add EIC and other tax "credits" that 3% disappears and becomes a negative number. Seems like America is already the socialist paradise you want it to be!

Don't just use the gist of what the figures SEEM to say... do a little math.


The Luke

I did, now lets see your math :)


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 08:48:07 AM
Bodvar,

Got the table for murders per capita?

I seriously doubt there are any developed countries ahead of the US.



The Luke

Yeah I posted it earlier http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)
#1     Colombia:   0.617847 per 1,000 people    
#2     South Africa:   0.496008 per 1,000 people    
#3     Jamaica:   0.324196 per 1,000 people    
#4     Venezuela:   0.316138 per 1,000 people    
#5     Russia:   0.201534 per 1,000 people    
#6     Mexico:   0.130213 per 1,000 people    
#7     Estonia:   0.107277 per 1,000 people    
#8     Latvia:   0.10393 per 1,000 people    
#9     Lithuania:   0.102863 per 1,000 people    
#10     Belarus:   0.0983495 per 1,000 people    
#11     Ukraine:   0.094006 per 1,000 people    
#12     Papua New Guinea:   0.0838593 per 1,000 people    
#13     Kyrgyzstan:   0.0802565 per 1,000 people    
#14     Thailand:   0.0800798 per 1,000 people    
#15     Moldova:   0.0781145 per 1,000 people    
#16     Zimbabwe:   0.0749938 per 1,000 people    
#17     Seychelles:   0.0739025 per 1,000 people    
#18     Zambia:   0.070769 per 1,000 people    
#19     Costa Rica:   0.061006 per 1,000 people    
#20     Poland:   0.0562789 per 1,000 people    
#21     Georgia:   0.0511011 per 1,000 people    
#22     Uruguay:   0.045082 per 1,000 people    
#23     Bulgaria:   0.0445638 per 1,000 people    
#24     United States:   0.042802 per 1,000 people    
#25     Armenia:   0.0425746 per 1,000 people    
#26     India:   0.0344083 per 1,000 people    
#27     Yemen:   0.0336276 per 1,000 people    
#28     Dominica:   0.0289733 per 1,000 people    
#29     Azerbaijan:   0.0285642 per 1,000 people    
#30     Finland:   0.0283362 per 1,000 people    

Columbia, Venezuela, Russia, Estonia, South Africa, and Poland are considered developed countries, as are most of the others on that list.

Look I'm not saying America doesn't have a homicide problem, just that it isn't the worst in the world like you said.

Considering the amount of guns that are available in the United States, it isn't as bad as one would think. Another thing you must consider is that African Americans are about 12% of the population but commit over 50% of the homicides http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm) If it wasn't for that unfortunate fact, the American murder rate would be cut in half. Same thing with the crime rate in general, factor out black people and the crime rate and incarceration rates fall by 50%. Not racist just fact.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 13, 2008, 09:26:07 AM
Yeah I posted it earlier http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)
#1     Colombia:   0.617847 per 1,000 people    
#2     South Africa:   0.496008 per 1,000 people    
#3     Jamaica:   0.324196 per 1,000 people    
#4     Venezuela:   0.316138 per 1,000 people    
#5     Russia:   0.201534 per 1,000 people    
#6     Mexico:   0.130213 per 1,000 people    
#7     Estonia:   0.107277 per 1,000 people    
#8     Latvia:   0.10393 per 1,000 people    
#9     Lithuania:   0.102863 per 1,000 people    
#10     Belarus:   0.0983495 per 1,000 people    
#11     Ukraine:   0.094006 per 1,000 people    
#12     Papua New Guinea:   0.0838593 per 1,000 people    
#13     Kyrgyzstan:   0.0802565 per 1,000 people    
#14     Thailand:   0.0800798 per 1,000 people    
#15     Moldova:   0.0781145 per 1,000 people    
#16     Zimbabwe:   0.0749938 per 1,000 people    
#17     Seychelles:   0.0739025 per 1,000 people    
#18     Zambia:   0.070769 per 1,000 people    
#19     Costa Rica:   0.061006 per 1,000 people    
#20     Poland:   0.0562789 per 1,000 people    
#21     Georgia:   0.0511011 per 1,000 people    
#22     Uruguay:   0.045082 per 1,000 people    
#23     Bulgaria:   0.0445638 per 1,000 people    
#24     United States:   0.042802 per 1,000 people    
#25     Armenia:   0.0425746 per 1,000 people    
#26     India:   0.0344083 per 1,000 people    
#27     Yemen:   0.0336276 per 1,000 people    
#28     Dominica:   0.0289733 per 1,000 people    
#29     Azerbaijan:   0.0285642 per 1,000 people    
#30     Finland:   0.0283362 per 1,000 people    

Columbia, Venezuela, Russia, Estonia, South Africa, and Poland are considered developed countries, as are most of the others on that list.

Look I'm not saying America doesn't have a homicide problem, just that it isn't the worst in the world like you said.

Considering the amount of guns that are available in the United States, it isn't as bad as one would think. Another thing you must consider is that African Americans are about 12% of the population but commit over 50% of the homicides http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm) If it wasn't for that unfortunate fact, the American murder rate would be cut in half. Same thing with the crime rate in general, factor out black people and the crime rate and incarceration rates fall by 50%. Not racist just fact.

Columbia: ...Fark, smoldering civil war and ransom kidnappings
Venezuela: ...economic collapse, major drug trade
Russia: ...economic collapse, hyperinflation, dictator
Estonia: ...former communist state that was Soviet funded, now impoverished
South Africa: ...regularly either the murder or rape capital of the world, impoverished
Poland: ...former communist state that was Soviet funded, now impoverished and corrupt

Seriously dude, none of these are considered First World countries (not anymore anyway).

This is what I meant by your arguments being weak... just LOOK at the company America is keeping on that list! Sandwiched between Bulgaria and Armenia... come on dude.


You make claims about black communities... look at the poverty rates among American blacks, it's not a racial thing. A lot of the countries on that list (former Soviet block) are homogeneously white.

You hymn and haw about my statistics being faulty because you find one differing report, but when you delve a little deeper and the trends agree with my contentions you start making excuses... Come on, do a little more research... all you are proving is that you aren't really up to speed on the reality of the situation, and shouldn't have been branding the better informed liars in the first place.

When are you "Fuck-the-Poor!" Republicans going to get a little enlightenment... it's cheaper long run for society as a whole to give homeless man a house, a car, a money manager and a million dollars than it is to deny him any kind of help at all?


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Slapper on September 13, 2008, 09:41:55 AM
[...]People that are poor generally are that way because of the choices they make, likewise for the rich.[...]

You are basically saying that people who are poor are so because of personal choice. So... someone who lives in a box does so because he wants to.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: SquatAss on September 13, 2008, 09:59:01 AM
Speeding is a misdemeanor, what do you think they use jaywalking in there too?

Point is we don't know what is used for these statistics.

Quote from: Bodvar
What you did is BLATANTLY dishonest (or just stupid I'm not sure which yet). You used TOTAL amount of murders, which ranked the US as number 5 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap) NOT the murder rate. Murder rate is murders per capita, where the US ranks as number 24 http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)

An honest mistake: the link even says murder per capita: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap

With Germany and the Netherlands at 49 and 51 respectively and the US at 24 it is still a very significant difference.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 10:12:34 AM
Columbia: ...Fark, smoldering civil war and ransom kidnappings
Venezuela: ...economic collapse, major drug trade
Russia: ...economic collapse, hyperinflation, dictator
Estonia: ...former communist state that was Soviet funded, now impoverished
South Africa: ...regularly either the murder or rape capital of the world, impoverished
Poland: ...former communist state that was Soviet funded, now impoverished and corrupt

Seriously dude, none of these are considered First World countries (not anymore anyway).

Nope wrong, Estonia is considered a first world country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World)

But if you read what I posted you'd notice that I stated that: America does have a homicide problem, but it isn't the murder capital in the world like you said. That's all.


This is what I meant by your arguments being weak... just LOOK at the company America is keeping on that list! Sandwiched between Bulgaria and Armenia... come on dude.

My argument was never that American didn't have a problem. I was just refuting your statement where you claimed America has the highest murder rate in the world. In which case I am correct and you are wrong.


You make claims about black communities... look at the poverty rates among American blacks, it's not a racial thing. A lot of the countries on that list (former Soviet block) are homogeneously white.

Why don't you show me where your get your statistics from? I'm getting tired of researching every single unfounded point you make, I feel like I writing a term paper, yet your not looking up a thing.

Look: http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/USRacialEthnicAndRegionalPoverty.aspx (http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/USRacialEthnicAndRegionalPoverty.aspx)
As of 2006, 20% of African Americans live in poverty versus 8 percent of whites. That is a quotient of 2.5

White people make up 76% of the population, blacks make up 12% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_demographics_of_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_demographics_of_the_United_States)

Now look at homicide statistic for the races: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm)
According to this site: "In 2005, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites."

That means that black people are 2.5 more like to be poor than whites but they are 6 TIMES more like to commit murders. Not a racial thing my ass.

You hymn and haw about my statistics being faulty because you find one differing report, but when you delve a little deeper and the trends agree with my contentions you start making excuses... Come on, do a little more research... all you are proving is that you aren't really up to speed on the reality of the situation, and shouldn't have been branding the better informed liars in the first place.

Well here's the thing YOU DON'T PROVIDE ANY SOURCES WHATSOEVER. I'd love to compare my sources (which are airtight) to yours, but you don't provide yours. I have no idea where you get your information. Why don't you enlighten me about these amazing sources of yours so we can make a comparison? What are you afraid of?

When are you "Fuck-the-Poor!" Republicans going to get a little enlightenment... it's cheaper long run for society as a whole to give homeless man a house, a car, a money manager and a million dollars than it is to deny him any kind of help at all?

The Luke

That is so naive it's ridiculous. Nobody is talking about denying homeless people help, nobody. We just differ on how he should be helped. Right wingers want to institute a policy of tough love, encourage the man to take care of himself. Lefties like yourself would rather keep him dependent on government his whole life.

You really think giving homeless people all that shit will be less expensive. Hm let's see, a million dollars plus a house and a car would be about 1.25 million dollars. Multiply that by the estimated 3 million homeless people and you get 3.75 trillion dollars, larger number than the entire Federal budget. Keep in mind that a good portion of homeless people are mentally insane and alcohol or drug addicts, not exactly the most financially responsible people out there.

I'd like to know how you came to this conclusion? Why do you think taking 3750 billion dollars away from productive citizens and give them to unproductive citizens would help anybody?


Look The Luke, I keep responding to your statements with well reasoned, logical, and well sourced arguments. All you do is say "well your just dumb" and then go on another tirade of unsubstantiated left wing propaganda. You find my tendency to look up information irritating for some reason, and you criticize my information without provide any information to the contrary. Unless you start backing up what your saying you've pretty much admitted defeat in this little debate.

My hunch is that your sources are so blatantly biased and flawed that you wouldn't dare post them up here because you know that you'd be laughed right out of here.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 10:14:59 AM
You are basically saying that people who are poor are so because of personal choice. So... someone who lives in a box does so because he wants to.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D



God your stupid. Nobody chooses to be a drug addict but because of the day to day choices they make they end up that way. Same thing for poor people, nobody wants to be poor but since they make bad choices in their lives they end up that way.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Butterbean on September 13, 2008, 10:15:15 AM
Any branch of science: geology, astronomy, biology.... take your pick.
OK I'll pick them all.  Can you please give me a short explanation addressing each as to why you reject that life could be less than 10,000 years old? 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 10:16:26 AM
Point is we don't know what is used for these statistics.
Yes we do

An honest mistake: the link even says murder per capita: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders_percap

With Germany and the Netherlands at 49 and 51 respectively and the US at 24 it is still a very significant difference.

That still doesn't make it the murder capital of the world, which is what The Luke was claiming. I never said America doesn't have a homicide problem, that would be a retarded statement.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 13, 2008, 10:18:21 AM
I go back to that The Nation article, it states that the top 1% control 30% of the wealth and but have 39% of the tax burden, that means the rich are paying MORE than their "fair share". It also states that the bottom 50 percent control 3% of the wealth and have 3% of the burden. Seems like things are exactly as you would like them to be! Oh, and like I said before, if you add EIC and other tax "credits" that 3% disappears and becomes a negative number. Seems like America is already the socialist paradise you want it to be!

I did, now lets see your math :)

...this shows you missed my point, but at least I can now understand where the misunderstanding comes from.

Take these two groups, the top 1% of American earners and the bottom 50% of Americans:

Both groups earn the same amount:
-top 1% pay 39% of total federal taxes
-bottom 50% pay only 3% of total federal taxes
   ...seems pretty unfair doesn't it?

But consider that there are only about 500,000 people in the top 1% bracket, there are 150 million in the bottom 50% bracket (the poor)... So this means:
-the poor pay 300 times the food tax the super rich pay (that's 29,900% more)
-the poor pay 200 times more of the total cost/burden of healthcare (that's assuming ALL the uninsured fall into this category) that's 19,900% more
-the poor pay 30 times as much of total car tax (assuming the average rich dude's car is 10 times more expensive) that's 2,900% more
-the poor pay three times more sales tax (assuming the average rich dude buys 100 times more "stuff") that's 200% more

Factor in that the poor must suffer:
-100% of the worst neighbourhoods
-100% of the violent crime
-100% of street crime
-the worst services
-33% non-coverage for healthcare
-the worst literacy
-100% of the worst schools

...the super rich are kinda getting off easy really aren't they?

Who is paying the bulk of the increase in gas prices...? Do rich people drive millions of miles per year?

Which group is getting fucked over?


Use a little common sense Bodvar... there's no point in manipulating or selectively sampling statistics when the other side can actually deduce the implications... think through your argument.


The Luke
PS- I said America had the highest murder rate in the developed world, not "the world".


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Michaeloz on September 13, 2008, 02:22:46 PM

It works fine...where is it working fine...in Canada where people wait months for normal procedures...or maybe England where they made manditory minium wait times in ER's...except to get around that they make patients wait in the meat wagon so the time doesn't start. Plus we're 350 million or more people...and I'm not paying for some assholes medical bills. Work hard, get a job, buy insurance.
Thgankyou, you are an uneducated redneck who as no idea how this health system works, and obviousley have never lived in a country with the benifits of this health sysstem.

Continue to be lost in tour ignorance.
You are no more than a 1 eyed republican, who can't see the truth


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: headhuntersix on September 13, 2008, 02:28:36 PM
First off welcome to the english language...second I'm an American and have always had medical coverage, either paid for by my parents or myself. I'm highly educated, not a redneck. I've read the horror stories and would not want Uncle Sam running my health care. I've got military health care but we can use off post doctors like most big insurance companies. I would not want to wait months to be checked for cancer or get an MRI. Keep ur socialist bullshit.

I think I answered ur post but I'm really not sure.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 02:58:32 PM
...this shows you missed my point, but at least I can now understand where the misunderstanding comes from.

No, I'm pretty sure I not only got your point but I annihilated it, there is no misunderstanding here I know exactly where you are coming from and I am trying to point out the error of your thinking.

Take these two groups, the top 1% of American earners and the bottom 50% of Americans:

Both groups earn the same amount:
-top 1% pay 39% of total federal taxes
-bottom 50% pay only 3% of total federal taxes
   ...seems pretty unfair doesn't it?

But consider that there are only about 500,000 people in the top 1% bracket, there are 150 million in the bottom 50% bracket (the poor)... So this means:

First of all, as usual you back nothing up, and your statistics have been consistently wrong up until now and I have no reason to think these aren't wrong as well. I mean seriously where do you get these numbers? The Daily Kos?

Let's go back to the raw IRS data: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/05in05tr.xls)
According to IRS.gov (I know what a terrible source), there were 1,326,116 returns in the 1% bracket, almost 3 times what you were claiming. Also only 132,611,637 filed taxes in 2004. Where exactly are you getting this 150 million number from?

Keep in mind that more than 42 million Americans have no tax burden whatsoever http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.html (http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.html)

-the poor pay 300 times the food tax the super rich pay (that's 29,900% more)

There is no food tax in the United States. But I'm sure you mean the sales tax on food.

Ok first we have to factor out the people that are on food stamps. In 2006 26,294,464 people were on food stamps http://www.frac.org/html/news/fsp/2006.10_5Yr.html (http://www.frac.org/html/news/fsp/2006.10_5Yr.html). Since most of these are families we can safely assume that at least three times that amount are being fed with that money (that's low balling it, poor people have a lot of kids). So that's 150 million cut in half right there. So 75 million ordinary slobs (not all of the lowest tax bracket are poor by a long shot).
NOW we can assume that those 1.3 million people in the 1% tax bracket buy more expensive food than the people on the bottom 50% (they shop at Whole Foods). If the average person spends 250 bucks a week on food, the rich easily spend at least 4 times that amount, that would be about 1000 bucks a week.

So we have 1.3 million people spending 1000 bucks a week, that's 1.3 billion dollars, and the bottom 75 million paying 250 bucks a week, which is 18.75 billion a week. So that means the bottom 50% is paying 14.42 times as much as the top earners, and you said what 300 times? Where did you get that number?

-the poor pay 200 times more of the total cost/burden of healthcare (that's assuming ALL the uninsured fall into this category) that's 19,900% more

First of all, you have to consider how many people are actually poor in the United States, Wikipedia states that about 12-16% of Americans fall under the poverty line, that's about 48 million people. Now consider how many people are on Medicaid (government health care for poor people) that number is 53 million people http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:oGvBQ6mC3NsJ:www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7306%2520Ten%2520Myths%2520about%2520Medicaid_Final-3.pdf+how+many+people+are+on+medicaid&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us (http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:oGvBQ6mC3NsJ:www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7306%2520Ten%2520Myths%2520about%2520Medicaid_Final-3.pdf+how+many+people+are+on+medicaid&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us) So it is safe to assume that virtually all poor people in the United States are covered by government health insurance.

When you consider the uninsured people in the US, you have to keep in consideration that our illegal immigrants are big part of this number, and they do get treated and they don't pay their bills. Who gets stuck with the bill for these people? Why the American tax payer! Who pays the American tax bill? See what I mean? The top earners are the ones footing the bill for the poor, via Medicaid, and via the astronomically high insurance costs the top earners have to pay.

I ask again where do you get your numbers? How do you come to this conclusion? I'm really interested in how you come up with these statements of yours.



-the poor pay 30 times as much of total car tax (assuming the average rich dude's car is 10 times more expensive) that's 2,900% more

Your assuming that all poor people own cars and that rich people only own one car (at least that's what I think since you never explain your numbers).

Well let's do some more math! Since we can assume almost all rich people own at least 2 cars, and that only about 75% of the bottom earners own one car, and we can assume the average costs of rich peoples vehicles is about 100,000 dollars (probably a low estimate) and the average poor people's car costs about 5000 bucks. That means rich people own 130 billion dollars worth of cars and the poor own 500 billion dollars worth of cars. That's 4 times as much not 30. You must also consider rich people own airplanes, ATV's, jetski's, motorcycles, and all kind of other expensive toys that more than make up that difference.

-the poor pay three times more sales tax (assuming the average rich dude buys 100 times more "stuff") that's 200% more

Ok we went over this before. According to The Nation (which I assume you agree with), the bottom earners own 3% of the total net worth of this country and the top 1% own 33.4% of the total. How can the poor own 1/10th as much stuff as the top 1% but pay three times as much sales tax? That doesn't make any sense.

Factor in that the poor must suffer:
-100% of the worst neighbourhoods
-100% of the violent crime
-100% of street crime
-the worst services
-33% non-coverage for healthcare
-the worst literacy
-100% of the worst schools

Your dealing with absolutes which pretty much means I can disregard this information. Especially since, as usual, The Luke feels no need to back anything up. Poor neighborhoods have 100% of the violent crime? Really, so your saying there is 0% crime in non-poor neighborhoods? Are you really this stupid or are you just fucking with me here?

...the super rich are kinda getting off easy really aren't they?

So because the rich take care of their shit and don't put up with crime that they have it easy? It's not easy to get rich in this country, unlike the UK the vast majority of wealth here in the US is new money. We don't have an upper class that sits on their ass and does nothing for generations, we have nothing like the House of Lords.

Rich people make good decisions, take big risks, and work their asses off to get where they are, and people like you want to punish them for that.

Who is paying the bulk of the increase in gas prices...? Do rich people drive millions of miles per year?

No but they own airplanes and fly a hell of lot more than poor people. When you consider that an average airliner burns about 1000 gallons of fuel per hour and a private jet burns about 500 gallons per hour, that kind of puts stuff in perspective doesn't it?

So if your a rich guy and fly from New York to California, which takes about 5 hours and your in your private jet, you'll burn about 2500 gallons of fuel. Then when you consider that the average person drives about 12,000 miles which is about 32 miles per day. That is about 1.5 gallons of fuel per day. So one rich guy flying to California burns as much fuel in that day as 1666 average people burn driving their cars.

Which group is getting fucked over?

Well not the poor at least! Free health care for 53 million of them, free food for at least 50 million of them. All this and they don't have to pay a dime! Not only that they get thousands of dollars of free money in the form of Earned Income Tax credits! Poor people have it made in the US!

Now look at some statistics about the average poor person in the United States taken from the Census Bureau: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm)

- Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

- Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

- Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

- The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

- Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

- Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

- Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

- Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Wow, sounds like poor people in America are having a tough time! But just ignore this because the US Census Bureau is full of lies.

Use a little common sense Bodvar... there's no point in manipulating or selectively sampling statistics when the other side can actually deduce the implications... think through your argument.

What am I manipulating? I am using solid basic facts and statistics to make a common sense point. God only knows what data you are using to come to your conclusions. Again I challenge you to provide the sources of your information.

Do you really think I'm not thinking through my arguments? Are you even reading my posts? Anyone with an ounce of sense can see that I can back up everything I say with simple and credible statistics and you can't. You come back at me with make believe numbers and think you have accomplished something, it's quite pathetic actually.

The Luke
PS- I said America had the highest murder rate in the developed world, not "the world".

I actually concede that one, when you look at the developed world, then indeed the US is the highest, BUT

You said:

America has the WORST homelessness rate; the worst prisons; the highest incarceration rates; the worst literacy and the highest crime/murder rates in the developed world... time to take off the "USA #1!" giant foam finger.


I did prove that America does not have the worst homelessness rate, or the worst literacy rates, or the highest crime rates in the developed world. So your still not looking too good with that statement.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Michaeloz on September 13, 2008, 03:01:15 PM
First off welcome to the english language...second I'm an American and have always had medical coverage, either paid for by my parents or myself. I'm highly educated, not a redneck. I've read the horror stories and would not want Uncle Sam running my health care. I've got military health care but we can use off post doctors like most big insurance companies. I would not want to wait months to be checked for cancer or get an MRI. Keep ur socialist bullshit.

I think I answered ur post but I'm really not sure.
Highly educated I question that? You have read the horror stories? Dudfe get out and live in the real world. You Ameriacans can't see past your own noses and worst beleive everthing that your corrupt media feeds you.

You are so far out of touch it's laughable.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: UGMT on September 13, 2008, 03:09:21 PM
Saw this and thought of this thread! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080913/ap_on_re_us/beverly_hills_homeless


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 13, 2008, 05:27:39 PM
Bodvar,

I'm getting a really teenage vibe from your arguing... I had thought it was obvious that I was using your top 1% pay 39%; bottom 50% pay 3% Federal Income tax factoid ALONE to extrapolate all those figures, put I guess you missed that.

I had thought the cornflakes tax argument would simplify it sufficiently for you... but obviously not as you explained the faults in your calculations pretty articulately:

Ok let's do a little math! 150,500,000 bowls of cereal a day, and lets say there are about 10 bowls per box, so that is 15,050,000 boxes, with a box of corn flakes being about 4 dollars which equals 60.2 million dollars times the sales tax (0.06) = $3,612,000 per day in corn flake tax. Now lets look at the most expensive Yacht in the world, which sells for about $103 million, so if that guy were to sell it he would have to pay $6,180,000 in sales tax. That means one guy buying one boat will pay 1.7 times in sales tax than 155.5 million people pay for eating cornflakes in one day.

...don't you see the fault in that?

You actually made MY point!

From your example the only way the top 1% of earners can match the sales tax burden imposed on the bottom 50% through CORNFLAKES is if they spend $21.9 BILLION on LUXURY ITEMS per year. That's TWICE the gross annual income of an industry such as Hollywood!

Think about that, the poor pay so much tax during breakfast that the rich would have to buy an extra brand new BMW (approx: $43,000) each year just to keep things fair...

Don't you see that?

Don't you understand that the poor pay more of the tax burden than the rich because they so grossly outnumber the rich, right?


If you're getting your figures from sources such as the ultra-conservative George Dubya worshiping Heritage Foundation (a Republican Spin House) then I guess the UN is wrong and the American poor are doing really well.

Does any else reading this think this guy is cherry-picking his statistics and redrawing definitions to suit his arguments? Or is it just me? Come on lurkers... chime in, the truth is being buried under bullshit here.


The Luke

PS-lots of your statistics are just propaganda: 99% literacy in the US...? Are you kidding, the high school dropout rate in Texas is something like 40%.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: 24KT on September 13, 2008, 05:51:16 PM
All I know is that Obama has had THOUSANDS of interviews in the last 19 months.
Palin has had ONE.

And in that one interview, she looked more unprepared than any of the other 3 people on the tickets.  She believed should could change topic form Putin to gas pipeline.  She believed she could deflect georgian policy with a pun about being able to see Russia from alaska.

That shit might work on housewives  NEO-CON God bots, but it won't work on intelligent voters.  If you took party affiliation and obama hatred out of the equation - and just watched that video.  And you were asked, "Is this woman prepared to face down Putin in a nuclear confrontation?"...

I think we all know what the answer would be.

(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/snarl.gif)
Excuse Me!  There's no need to insult housewives like that.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 13, 2008, 07:28:51 PM
Bodvar,

I'm getting a really teenage vibe from your arguing... I had thought it was obvious that I was using your top 1% pay 39%; bottom 50% pay 3% Federal Income tax factoid ALONE to extrapolate all those figures, put I guess you missed that.

Teenage vibe? I guess that's support to be some lame ass insult. The last time I was a teenager, Bill Clinton was President.

You INCORRECTLY used that information. I never said there were 500,000 people in the 1% bracket or 150 million in the bottom bracket, that's something you conjured up.



I had thought the cornflakes tax argument would simplify it sufficiently for you... but obviously not as you explained the faults in your calculations pretty articulately:

...don't you see the fault in that?

You actually made MY point!

Yeah for one it is a faulty comparison. It's purely hypothetical. Like I pointed out earlier there are 26 million people that are on food stamps, most of those people have families, a HUGE portion of the bottom earners don't pay a damn thing for their food.

But I ask you ONE MORE TIME: How can the bottom 50% of earners pay the majority of sales tax when they only control 3% of the wealth?


From your example the only way the top 1% of earners can match the sales tax burden imposed on the bottom 50% through CORNFLAKES is if they spend $21.9 BILLION on LUXURY ITEMS per year. That's TWICE the gross annual income of an industry such as Hollywood!

21.9 billion dollars on luxury items is peanuts, the top 1% are worth 7.775 TRILLION dollars, do you think they just sit on this money? Fuck no, we have a negative savings rate in this country, Americans love to spend money. Those people worth 7.775  TRILLION dollars are spending a lot of money on a lot of shit, and the sales tax they are paying buying that stuff makes the money the bottom 50% pay look like chump change. Remember the bottom 50% are only worth 763 billion dollars, they don't have much buying power at all, regardless of their numbers.

Think about that, the poor pay so much tax during breakfast that the rich would have to buy an extra brand new BMW (approx: $43,000) each year just to keep things fair...

Don't you see that?

No you think about this: the poor get a shit load of support from food stamps, and who pays for that? The rich! So the rich are not only paying for their own food, but they are feeding the poor as well.

Here's something I missed earlier:
javascript:void(0);
Here's a simple minded example: the (sales) tax on cornflakes.
There are only about 500,000 super rich (top 1% earners), but they earn as much as the bottom 150 million. The bottom 150 million eat 150 million bowls of cornflakes each day, the top 1% eat only eat 500,000 bowls of corn flakes... so the cornflake tax is hitting the poor disproportionately hard: they are carrying 99.67% of the cornflake tax for that 51% of the population (top 1% and bottom 50%).


Now let's look at some raw data from the Tax Foundation http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html (http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html)

The top 1% earned 21.20% of the income (but paid 39% of the the tax burden) and the bottom 50% earned 12.51% of the income (but paid 4% of the tax burden). Those two groups did NOT earn the same amount, the top 1% made almost double what the bottom 50% earned. How the hell would the bottom 50% earn about half as much but pay most of the sales tax burden? Doesn't add up does it? Not only that but the rich pay Capital Gains Taxes which are almost 3 times higher than the sales tax, the poor don't pay this tax at all.

Are you getting this yet? It doesn't matter how many people populate the bottom 50%, what matters is how much money do they have to spend as a whole compared to the top 1% as a whole.

Another thing is you keep talking about this 150 million people. The bottom 50% had only 66,306,000 people file taxes, that means that the rest of those people either work under the table or are dependent of the government. People that buy stuff with food stamps don't pay sales tax
anyway.

Like I said you are coming to incorrect conclusion because you are using faulty statistics.

Don't you understand that the poor pay more of the tax burden than the rich because they so grossly outnumber the rich, right?

I refuse to believe you are this stupid.

Don't you understand that the rich pay more the tax burden because their incomes are vastly larger than what the bottom 50% earn? Don't you understand that one guy that earns 1 billion dollars has as much spending power as 67,000 average poor people? What is relevant isn't how many people you are talking about, but how much money each of those people have.


If you're getting your figures from sources such as the ultra-conservative George Dubya worshiping Heritage Foundation (a Republican Spin House) then I guess the UN is wrong and the American poor are doing really well.

HA! You had no problem with me citing data from liberal rags such as The Nation and Time magazine, but using the Heritage Foundation is a crime against humanity. Seems to me that I get my information from a very broad spectrum of sources.

Plus the Heritage article there is quoting facts from the Census Bureau. Do you really think the Heritage Foundation would just lie about these statistics and think it could get away with it? It would be ruined if it pulled a stunt like that. If you can show me where these figures are wrong, by all means go ahead. But since you have yet to provide a single source for any of the bullshit you have written over the last few days, I doubt that is going to be happening.

 
Does any else reading this think this guy is cherry-picking his statistics and redrawing definitions to suit his arguments? Or is it just me? Come on lurkers... chime in, the truth is being buried under bullshit here.

The Luke

Hahaha, no because everybody can see how badly your getting your ass kicked here except you.

I'm not cherry picking a thing. I'm using very broad statistics, like total number of taxes being paid, total number of people on Medicaid and Food Stamps, crime rates per capita, literacy rates for entire countries, etc etc. These are broad figures that cover whole countries and populations. In comparison your statistics are made up and unsupported.

The only source for The Luke's statements so far are... The Luke :)

I feel like I'm being beaten into submission with stupid.

PS-lots of your statistics are just propaganda: 99% literacy in the US...? Are you kidding, the high school dropout rate in Texas is something like 40%.

Oh yeah, the CIA factbook and the United Nations Development Programme are just Rovian propaganda machines of the diabolical right!

Hey genius, kids learn to read BEFORE they get into high school. Actually even before jr. high school. They learn to read in elementary school, look up the drop-out rates there smart guy  ;D



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 14, 2008, 06:29:33 AM
Bodvar,

You have continuously conflated the following:
-income and wealth
-taxed population with actual population
-taxed income with actual income
...misquoting someone in order to prove them wrong is intellectually dishonest.

IRS figures don't mean much when they don't include the homeless (2-3 million); illegal immigrants (12-16 million); nor the ultra-rich (offshore accounts etc allowing them pay very little, if any tax).

So the 66ish million you keep quoting ignores at least 14 million people... if you included dependent children too that figure is approximately 150 million.


I can point out the errors in the rest of your stats (they are pretty selectively chosen)... but it would take quite a while... but I'd prefer if you would re-read a few more of my posts... watch the language closely, what you are doing is the exact same thing you did when I claimed America had the worst murder rate in the DEVELOPED world... you changed it to WHOLE WORLD thereby falsifying my assertion.

The figures don't lie... and your protestation that Estonia is a First World country rings hollow.

Similarly, you conflations also falsify my assertions... but only because you are (possibly deliberately) misconstruing and misquoting my claims.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 14, 2008, 10:23:25 PM
Bodvar,

You have continuously conflated the following:
-income and wealth
-taxed population with actual population
-taxed income with actual income
...misquoting someone in order to prove them wrong is intellectually dishonest.


Misquoting? Are you saying I've been altering your quotes? I mean seriously what the hell are you talking about? All I've done here is quote you and then destroy your points with data from the IRS, census data, the UN, etc etc. I give you figures over whole countries, tax information for the entire United States, and you accuse me of manipulating numbers and cherry picking information? This from the same guy who used an example about people eating cornflakes to prove his point about the total sales tax burden of the poor?

For the 100,000th time, where do you get your information? What are your sources? I'm sure you think your some sort of expert or something, but this is the internet, it is anonymous, all we have is logic and information that is scattered across the internet. An intelligent argument involves taking facts and then making a logical point or refuting an illogical point based on those facts.

Do you have any idea how stupid you look when you try to argue my well researched points with your fairytale statistics?

IRS figures don't mean much when they don't include the homeless (2-3 million); illegal immigrants (12-16 million); nor the ultra-rich (offshore accounts etc allowing them pay very little, if any tax).

So the 66ish million you keep quoting ignores at least 14 million people... if you included dependent children too that figure is approximately 150 million.

IRS figures don't mean much. Tell me what does then? What figures do matter The Luke? Please let me see the numbers that matter (and their sources).

You don't count children when your talking about who's paying taxes, kids don't have income so they don't buy stuff, their parents do. Your also making a mistake when you totally ignore the impact of Medicaid and Food Stamps on the lowest earners. Both of those programs make any arguments about how much of a tax burden the poor have compared to the rich look ridiculous.

Here's some more food for thought from Wikipedia about the American sales tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States)

- Arizona, California, Indiana, Iowa, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington EXEMPT groceries from the sales tax

- Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon have NO sales tax

- Arkansas and West Virginia have a reduced sales tax rate on groceries (3%)

- Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wyoming allow an income tax credit to compensate poor households for taxes they pay on food.

Now you have to also consider that 25 million people are on Food Stamps http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/faqs.htm#24 (http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/faqs.htm#24) and about 53 million people have free government insurance from Medicaid http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7306%20Ten%20Myths%20about%20Medicaid_Final-3.pdf (http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/7306%20Ten%20Myths%20about%20Medicaid_Final-3.pdf)

Now when you look at all this data and the fact that the bottom 50% only have 3% of the wealth, how could you still conclude the poor are paying the majority of sales tax? Your "simple minded" cornflakes example has been completely annihilated my friend.

Now which one of my sources has been manipulated? The total amount of people on Medicaid and Food Stamps? The facts on American Sales Taxes? The total wealth compared to income levels? Which ones of these sources is bad and why?

I can point out the errors in the rest of your stats (they are pretty selectively chosen)... but it would take quite a while...

You mean you actually know how to post sources? You sure had me fooled. Actually I have yet to see this happen, so I'll believe it when I see it.

Oh ok, IRS data covering every tax payer, information about the total number of people on Medicaid and Food Stamps, Census data, crime rates per capita for ENTIRE countries, these are selectively chosen stats? Why don't you show me some stats that are broader than this? Please, I'd like to see that.

I'd love for you to point out the errors of my stats and then back up your points with data, but I'm not sure your intellectually capable of doing that.

but I'd prefer if you would re-read a few more of my posts... watch the language closely, what you are doing is the exact same thing you did when I claimed America had the worst murder rate in the DEVELOPED world... you changed it to WHOLE WORLD thereby falsifying my assertion.

The figures don't lie... and your protestation that Estonia is a First World country rings hollow.

I've read all of your posts very carefully and put a lot of thought and research behind my responses to each and every one of your point. You haven't done anything close to that for my posts.

I made one mistake and I admit that, it wasn't done purposely, and I admitted error and corrected my statement. You've made dozens and dozens of errors, you have yet to admit ONE. Please show me where I have made other such mistakes.

Well not really, you could make a case for Estonia being a first world country but that isn't relevant to the subject, it is not one of the 34 countries classified as developed nations, so the USA is still number one. You were correct on that one point.

But don't forget The Luke YOU were wrong about America having the highest crime rate, worst homelessness rate, and the highest illiteracy in the developed world. You have yet to admit your errors, or defend your statements. How about showing me some statistics that prove that America has the highest crime rate in the developed world? I won't be holding my breath for that ;D

Similarly, you conflations also falsify my assertions... but only because you are (possibly deliberately) misconstruing and misquoting my claims.


The Luke

First of all you are using much too complex a vocabulary for a man of your capabilities. Your trying a little too hard here.

What you have to understand is that I'm debating your points on face value, I'm not altering anything, I'm arguing you based on what you say, nothing more.

Since you would like for me to re-read some of your brilliant posts, lets take a couple of my favorite arguments of yours from Friday.

Don't you understand that the poor pay more of the tax burden than the rich because they so grossly outnumber the rich, right?

Double check this one, you'll see that I haven't altered it one bit. Now here you are claiming that the poor have more of the sales tax burden because they outnumber the rich. I'm assuming when you say "outnumber" that you mean that there are more of them. Of course the obvious problem with this point is that rich people have more money than poor people (I'm pretty sure you agree with that). I'm sure since you stated that America has a "wealth disparity" problem that rich people not only have more money than poor people, they have a LOT more money than poor people. It doesn't matter how many people a group has it matters how much money they have.

One Bill Gates (50 billion dollars) is worth the same as 1 MILLION people that are worth $50,000 (those are not poor people). If you figure poor people are worth around $15,000, then one Bill Gates is worth 3.33 million poor people. Do you see where you are wrong here? Now how did I misconstrue or misquote anything here?

Here's another gem:
PS-lots of your statistics are just propaganda: 99% literacy in the US...? Are you kidding, the high school dropout rate in Texas is something like 40%.

Now you think you have proved that the American literacy rates cannot be 99% because Texas has a high school dropout rate of about 40% (no source of course). So I'm assuming that you mean that since the high school dropout rate is 40% then it is impossible that America has a high literacy rate right? Am I getting your quote right here?

Of course then I point out the obvious fact that children learn how to read in elementary school which is WAY before high school (I don't think I need a source for that one). So it's pretty obvious that there is no relation between high school dropout rates and literacy rates.

What did I misquote or misconstrue here?


The thing is that you can't stand the fact that I'm eating you alive here, so you rationalize to yourself that I must be "misconstruing" and "misquoting" your claims, it just can't be because my arguments are superior to yours. After all, you are "enlightened" and I'm just a knuckle dragging conservative right?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: gcb on September 15, 2008, 02:07:52 AM
those poor rich people - having to pay for the infrastructure that helps give them their wealth - my heart bleeds  :'(


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 03:55:01 AM
those poor rich people - having to pay for the infrastructure that helps give them their wealth - my heart bleeds  :'(

So the money rich people have is given to them? They don't earn it? Do you know that the government generates no wealth? That's right the government produces NOTHING. Only individuals and businesses produce wealth, government merely takes that money at the point of a gun and redistributes it (inefficiently), while compensating itself handsomely for its troubles.

I bet your heart does bleed, fucking lib ;D

I'd argue that this infrastructure that the rich are paying for is preventing them from making money rather than vice versa. The crushing tax system here encourages individuals and businesses to get the hell out and do business where taxes are lower. Did you know that America has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world?

The rich pay virtually all taxes in this country, and completely support millions upon millions of poor people. Hell our poor people here have an obesity problem, they have so much food available to them that they're way too fat. The top 50% provide free health care for over 50 million people in the form of Medicaid, feed over 25 million people in the form of Food Stamps. This isn't even including the housing subsidies, WIC, household bills subsidies, tax credits for people that don't pay taxes, etc etc.

The poor are living like kings compared to poor people in most countries in the world. Poor kids in Africa are starving (I know I see em on tv), poor kids in America are become more obese by the day. Poor kids in most Asian countries have very limited access to health care, a huge portion American poor kids get free health care via Medicaid.

So yeah don't give me this the poor poor pitiful poor nonsense. The wealthy pay the entire bill while the poor get fatter by the day. You should be worried about high taxes on the rich, because if they are pushed too far businesses will LEAVE, its a global economy, you don't have to be in the US anymore, you can run your businesses from anywhere, and if the rich leave who exactly is going to pay the 3 trillion dollar government budget? The poor?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on September 15, 2008, 04:34:22 AM
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/snarl.gif)
Excuse Me!  There's no need to insult housewives like that.
neocons aren't god bots.  They use god to their political advantage but they don't believe any of that.  To bad people don't bother to ask what church bill kristol and the like go to...  each week they play the faith minded like a cheep trick, no questions asked... sad and pathetic...


unless that's what you meant by godbot lol.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 15, 2008, 04:46:05 AM
Bodvar, you should have heeded my advice earlier. You cant reason with intentionally stupid people. Its a waste of time. He has no sources to back up his points or statistics except his own "mind". You'll notice a continuing trend on this website- Liberals dont back up anything they say ever. Just make them feel stupid and go on your merry way. There are much better things to do with your time.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on September 15, 2008, 04:49:58 AM
Bodvar, you should have heeded my advice earlier. You cant reason with intentionally stupid people. Its a waste of time. He has no sources to back up his points or statistics except his own "mind". You'll notice a continuing trend on this website- Liberals dont back up anything they say ever. Just make them feel stupid and go on your merry way. There are much better things to do with your time.
::) oh bullshit...  you name it, I'll back up anything I've said on this board.  go ahead dickhead, name it... let's get it on bitch :D


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 05:09:28 AM
Misquoting? Are you saying I've been altering your quotes? I mean seriously what the hell are you talking about?

Eh, yes... you are misquoting me at pretty much every turn...

America has the WORST homelessness rate; the worst prisons; the highest incarceration rates; the worst literacy and the highest crime/murder rates in the developed world...
PS- I said America had the highest murder rate in the developed world, not "the world".

...and here's the misquote:
That still doesn't make it the murder capital of the world, which is what The Luke was claiming.
But if you read what I posted you'd notice that I stated that: America does have a homicide problem, but it isn't the murder capital in the world like you said. That's all.
I was just refuting your statement where you claimed America has the highest murder rate in the world. In which case I am correct and you are wrong.

...there are lots of other examples, mostly conflations of points I made with your inaccurate paraphrasing (ie: I reference the bottom 150 million poorest, you conflate that with the 12-16% classified as poor).

...similarly, you quote figures claiming that the top 1% of earners in the US only average $370k per year, then in the next breath contend that there are a million millionaires in the US... never realising that conflicts with your earlier average.

You claim American doesn't have the highest homelessness rate in the developed world... yet the only way it compares to Europe is if you include some of the worlds poorest failed states in the European average (Albania, Armenia, Romania etc)... which is what you did when quoting your statistic.

The fact is: Americas homelessness rate is just over 1%, way higher than any other developed country.

You don't seem to see the fault in the IRS figures, you don't seem to comprehend that those figures don't include:
-the ultra rich (who pay very little if any tax)
-the homeless
-illegal immigrants

...see what I'm getting at? The IRS and income tax statistics don't give the whole story, the population discrepancy between the poor (bottom 150 million people) and the super rich (somewhere around 500,000 when you include those who have the money but don't necessarily appear on the tax figures) is so vast that the poor are paying a disproportionate share of the tax burden.

If you still think the American poor have it so good, maybe you should consider the rationale behind food stamps... the rich have oppressed the poor to the point of starvation. The UN living index figures prove all these points; the UN child mortality figures prove this... but instead you opt for cherry picked figures from the Heritage Foundation (the front page of the site asks "What would Ronald Reagan do? for fucks sake!).


Conceding that ALL your figures are right (they aren't) then how do you explain the reality on the ground?

Why does the UN, Amnesty International and WHO rank America so poorly?


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Benny B on September 15, 2008, 05:26:38 AM
Bodvar, you should have heeded my advice earlier. You cant reason with intentionally stupid people. Its a waste of time. He has no sources to back up his points or statistics except his own "mind". You'll notice a continuing trend on this website- Liberals dont back up anything they say ever. Just make them feel stupid and go on your merry way. There are much better things to do with your time.
Go to the nearest swimming pool, submerge yourself under water, and hold your breath until you pass out. Upon awakening, repeat.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 15, 2008, 06:03:43 AM
So the money rich people have is given to them? They don't earn it? Do you know that the government generates no wealth? That's right the government produces NOTHING. Only individuals and businesses produce wealth, government merely takes that money at the point of a gun and redistributes it (inefficiently), while compensating itself handsomely for its troubles.
The government produces many, many things that benefit our society.  (Technically its the people occupying governmental slots but that's alot to type).  Gov. Production:  R&D (research and development)---the internet did not create itself--gov. did that.  Do like your water system?  Gov produced that.  How about your insured bank accounts--FDIC is gov.  Did you take out a subsidized loan for educational purposes?  That's government.  Do you have a dollar in your pocket?  Did you mint that?  No the gov. did.  How about those property rights you have?  Do you enforce them with your personal handgun?  Of course not, the gov. legal system keeps what's yours yours.  How about consumer protection standards?  You like safe products or do you want to go back to 'buyer beware'--that's some value added service from our gov.

When's the last time you created your own highway system?  You haven't b/c the fed. gov. did it for you.  We could go on and on about the GI Bill, satellite infrastructure, anti-trust laws which keep our free market humming along, the EPA, OSHA, FDA add value to our lives by making sure that crooked private businessmen have minimal standards of acceptable behavior.  How about gov. sponsored medical r&d?  There are so many things that our government produces they boggle the mind.  And you couldn't think of one thing?


Quote
I'd argue that this infrastructure that the rich are paying for is preventing them from making money rather than vice versa. The crushing tax system here encourages individuals and businesses to get the hell out and do business where taxes are lower. Did you know that America has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world?
Everybody pays taxes, not just the 'rich.'  FICA/FUTA, sales, value added, income.  Did you know that state corporate taxes are deductible at the federal level?  Did you know that through creative accounting and corporate welfare, your local McDonald's worker paid more in taxes than most US corporations.  According to the GAO, btn 1998 and 2005, nearly 2/3 of of large US corporations paid zero corporate taxes to the US federal gov.  http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/


1.3 million companies with at least $250 million in assets or at least $50 million in sales paid NO TAXES at all.

I guess that's how a 15-39% tax rate does not reflect reality.


Quote
The rich pay virtually all taxes in this country, and completely support millions upon millions of poor people. Hell our poor people here have an obesity problem, they have so much food available to them that they're way too fat. The top 50% provide free health care for over 50 million people in the form of Medicaid, feed over 25 million people in the form of Food Stamps. This isn't even including the housing subsidies, WIC, household bills subsidies, tax credits for people that don't pay taxes, etc etc.
Income tax--yes, all taxes--absolutely not.


Quote
The poor are living like kings compared to poor people in most countries in the world. Poor kids in Africa are starving (I know I see em on tv), poor kids in America are become more obese by the day. Poor kids in most Asian countries have very limited access to health care, a huge portion American poor kids get free health care via Medicaid.
I see you reference the old myth that our poor are well-fed fat people living it up on the dole.  In fact, according to you, they are not just fat but living like kings as well.  No hyperbole there.

Millions and millions of american children and elderly are hungry.  That's a fact.  http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/?q=node/view/104

How can you say that they are living like kings?


Quote
So yeah don't give me this the poor poor pitiful poor nonsense. The wealthy pay the entire bill while the poor get fatter by the day. You should be worried about high taxes on the rich, because if they are pushed too far businesses will LEAVE, its a global economy, you don't have to be in the US anymore, you can run your businesses from anywhere, and if the rich leave who exactly is going to pay the 3 trillion dollar government budget? The poor?
Big business is already fleeing this country to avoid paying its fair share of taxes--It uses American infrastructure but does not want to pay for it.

To me that's betraying america for selfish reasons.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 06:17:19 AM
Decker... thanks.



The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 07:21:36 AM
Eh, yes... you are misquoting me at pretty much every turn...

The only misquote I did was about the murder capital of the world instead of developed world. That was an honest mistake and I admitted it and corrected myself. This of course means I'm an intellectually honest and reasonable guy.

Where else have I misquoted you? Please show your quote and where I altered that quote. BTW, correcting your inaccurate figures with statistical data is not "misquoting".

...and here's the misquote:

Wow you used three quotes pertaining to the same thing, and I also admitted a few times that I made an error with that quote and corrected myself. You really got me there!  ::)

...there are lots of other examples, mostly conflations of points I made with your inaccurate paraphrasing (ie: I reference the bottom 150 million poorest, you conflate that with the 12-16% classified as poor).

Um, what did I misquote here?

So the fact that I used the CORRECT figure of 12-16% poverty rate (no source to prove me wrong), then I'm using inaccurate statistics? Your number of 150 million poorest is a bullshit number you pulled right out of the air, unless of course you prove otherwise. YOU are the one that are using incorrect data not I. All of your assumptions are based on fictional data. Don't accuse my data of being inaccurate unless you have data to the contrary.

...similarly, you quote figures claiming that the top 1% of earners in the US only average $370k per year, then in the next breath contend that there are a million millionaires in the US... never realising that conflicts with your earlier average.

See this proves how weak your grasp of tax information is. The top 1% INCOME EARNERS, that is how much the top 1% earned in one year. Did it ever occur to you that these people had money BEFORE they earned that money for that year. You should read more, you'd be surprised how rewarding it can be.


You claim American doesn't have the highest homelessness rate in the developed world... yet the only way it compares to Europe is if you include some of the worlds poorest failed states in the European average (Albania, Armenia, Romania etc)... which is what you did when quoting your statistic.

Still waiting on a source of information to prove the contrary.


The fact is: Americas homelessness rate is just over 1%, way higher than any other developed country.

It's only a fact if you can back it up, I see no source here.

You don't seem to see the fault in the IRS figures, you don't seem to comprehend that those figures don't include:
-the ultra rich (who pay very little if any tax)

If the ultra rich pay little or no tax, how can they have 39% of the total income tax burden? Please explain that little paradox.


-the homeless
-illegal immigrants

Neither of those two groups pay any income tax, and I showed you in my last post that 21 States in the US have reduced or no sales tax on groceries.

Now I looked up the population of these states based data from the Census Bureau (I know, part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy) http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0004986.html (http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0004986.html)

Here's what I found:

- The sum of the populations of all the States that have no sales tax at all, no sales tax on groceries, reduced sales tax on groceries, or tax rebates for poor people's grocery expenditures equals: 118,063,000

- If you factor out the States that only have reduced sales tax or just rebates for the poor, then the population of States with no sales tax on food equals: 103,043,000

- Let's assume we live in The Luke's world where you determine the amount of poor people by dividing the population in half (in this version of reality, if you make $30,000 a year you are "poor"). Now you have 51,521,500 poor people who pay no sales tax on their food. Add in the 22.7 million people that are on Stamps and that's 74,221,500 poor people that don't pay a dime in food sales taxes!

- Since every credible source on planet earth will put the American poverty rate at about 12-16% We can assume that America has at the very most 48 million people at poverty level.

- The poor in America average somewhere around $15,000 - $18,000 dollars per year, that means if you would consider the poor in America a separate country, then they would have the same wages as the AVERAGE person in Malta and Taiwan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita)





...see what I'm getting at? The IRS and income tax statistics don't give the whole story, the population discrepancy between the poor (bottom 150 million people) and the super rich (somewhere around 500,000 when you include those who have the money but don't necessarily appear on the tax figures) is so vast that the poor are paying a disproportionate share of the tax burden.

Ok you keep using these 500,000 and 150 million numbers. Where do you get those numbers? I've already shown you that the top 1% of earners number 1.3 million people.

You keep saying that the poor are paying a disproportionate share of the taxes but I have shown you LOADS of data disproving that. Unless you have some credible data to the contrary it is safe to say that statement is bullshit.

I ask you one more time The Luke: How can the bottom earners pay the majority of taxes when they only have 3% of the wealth? (why do you keep ignoring this question?)

If you still think the American poor have it so good, maybe you should consider the rationale behind food stamps... the rich have oppressed the poor to the point of starvation.

Oppress the poor to the point of starvation? Let's consider some facts here:

Here is a chart taken from the CDC:
(http://www.zymesllc.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/obesity_map31.jpg)

Now, notice that highest concentration of obesity is in the southern states, these states are also the POOREST states. If the rich are oppressing the poor to the point of starvation (the idea that there are staving people in the US is hilarious), then why is the greatest concentration of obese people in the poorest States?

I just love your logic (if you could call it that) on the Food Stamps. So since America has a Food Stamp program for the poor then that proves that the rich are oppressing the poor. So if the program was done away with that would prove that there is no oppression? I doubt it, if there was no Food Stamp program, then that would prove to you that America is oppressing the poor ;D There is no winning scenario of America here: if they have a Food Stamp program, that proves America is oppressing the poor; if they didn't have a Food Stamp program, that proves America is oppressing the poor. Gotta love moonbat logic!

But no I used dishonest methods to come to this conclusion, like cherry picking the obesity rates for the entire United States. What a narrow and dishonest statistic :)

The UN living index figures prove all these points; the UN child mortality figures prove this... but instead you opt for cherry picked figures from the Heritage Foundation (the front page of the site asks "What would Ronald Reagan do? for fucks sake!).

I already made you look like a fool when it came to infant mortality rates. Greece, and Malta are both part of the 34 developed countries and they have higher infant mortality rates than the United States. You claimed that the United States had an infant mortality rate on par with a third world country, and I pointed out that third world countries have infant mortality rates than are 10-30 times higher than the United States. This is based on data United Nations Population Division and the CIA factbook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate)
UN child mortality rates prove my point and disprove yours.

I used the Heritage Foundation for a source yes, only because it referred to figures from the Census Bureau, you have yet to contest these facts with data of your own, so they stand. I also used The Nation and Time magazine as sources, both lean hard to the left, are only left wing sources credible to you?

Conceding that ALL your figures are right (they aren't) then how do you explain the reality on the ground?

You can't just say my figures are incorrect without providing figures of your own. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend?

What reality would that be? The actual reality or The Luke reality? I promise you those two are not the same thing.

Plus if you assume all my figures are correct, then they prove that the reality on the ground is quite different than what you are claiming. How can you assume my figures are correct but that they are contradicted by reality at the same time? Your critical thinking skills leave a lot to be desired my friend.

Why does the UN, Amnesty International and WHO rank America so poorly?

The Luke

In what regard?

Let's do some more research shall we?

- I Already went over the infant mortality numbers a few times, just refer back to that.

Life expectancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy)

- This list contains CIA information and UN information, since the UN information uses data estimated for the 2005-2010 period (it's only 2008). We'll go by the CIA data which uses 2007 estimates. The life expectancy of the US is 78.06, which ranks ABOVE Ireland (77.9), Denmark (77.96), and Portugal (77.87). Hm, looks like the US has a higher life expectancy than your country of Ireland, and this DESPITE the highest homicide rate in the developed world and the African American population with their low life expectancy (58 years for black men according to you).

Crimes per capita: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita)

- Again, New Zealand, Finland, Denmark, and the UK have higher crime rates per capita than does the United States. You dismissed these numbers as inaccurate but you never explained why or showed any information to the contrary, so those numbers stand until you can prove otherwise.

So I'm not sure where you get this idea that America has the highest crime rates or infant mortality rates, that's clearly total bullshit.

Here's a better question: Why does the UN routinely ignore the plight of people in Sudan being ethnically cleansed by Muslims, but screams "genocide" every time Israel responds with military force against terrorist attacks?

I'm sure you agree that most of the world hates the US, and that the rest of the world makes up the majority of the UN. Would it be so unreasonable to assume that the UN could have biases against the United States? I mean you have no problem dismissing IRS and Census data as problematic, but then assume everything out of the UN is totally without fault. Your skepticism is very selective.

Keep in mind, this same UN brought us the Oil for Food Scandal, total inaction in Rwanda that resulted in the deaths of over 1 million people, complete failure to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world, and many other problems.



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: George Whorewell on September 15, 2008, 07:55:30 AM
Prediction: This thread will continue for 15 more pages with Bodvar continuing to own Luke and Luke continuing to pretend like Bodvar is wrong.

Dude give it up. You cant force people to be smart by beating them up with books and hoping the knowledge sinks in.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 08:07:23 AM
Bodvar,

Let me explain just ONE point (your posts are becoming too long winded), as it explains where you are going wrong with your statistics...

Hopefully, if you can grasp this you might go back over your figures and see the fault... instead of starting with a faulty premise and running it into the ground.


You continuously make statements such as the following:
See this proves how weak your grasp of tax information is. The top 1% INCOME EARNERS, that is how much the top 1% earned in one year.

...when that is false.

The IRS federal income tax figures don't reflect income... they reflect the DECLARED income of those who filed tax returns. As Decker has already pointed out (in a post I hope you read) there are many, many exceptions to this. The tax code is very nuanced and highly manipulated. The rich use perks/benefits-in-kind/write-offs/tax-havens/loopholes etc to avoid tax in ways not available to the poor.

But I'll give you a simple one: would Wesley Snipes be included in your figures?

What you need to do Bodvar is look at a breakdown of total government income, that will give you a better idea of how the system works and how it favours the rich, not the poor.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 15, 2008, 08:14:40 AM
...
I ask you one more time The Luke: How can the bottom earners pay the majority of taxes when they only have 3% of the wealth? (why do you keep ignoring this question?)
The vast bulk of gov. revenue comes from taxing earned/unearned income and transfers of property.  The US doesn't have a wealth tax unless you count capital gains as wealth (I don't, it's passive unearned income).  I think the estate tax should be called a wealth tax.  That's fair.  Except the US has no federal estate tax.
Quote
...


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 09:02:17 AM
Prediction: This thread will continue for 15 more pages with Bodvar continuing to own Luke and Luke continuing to pretend like Bodvar is wrong.

Haha, I think I'd lose my mind way before this gets to 15 pages :)

Dude give it up. You cant force people to be smart by beating them up with books and hoping the knowledge sinks in.

No, I'm fully aware that The Luke is totally immune to logic. But, if I can show anyone else the light that's reading this threat, well then I've done my good deed for the day.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 09:04:17 AM
Decker... thanks.



The Luke

Notice that Decker is using SOURCES, that makes his points much more credible. You really should give that a try.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 11:14:42 AM
The government produces many, many things that benefit our society.  (Technically its the people occupying governmental slots but that's alot to type).  Gov. Production:  R&D (research and development)---the internet did not create itself--gov. did that.  Do like your water system?  Gov produced that.  How about your insured bank accounts--FDIC is gov.  Did you take out a subsidized loan for educational purposes?  That's government.  Do you have a dollar in your pocket?  Did you mint that?  No the gov. did.  How about those property rights you have?  Do you enforce them with your personal handgun?  Of course not, the gov. legal system keeps what's yours yours.  How about consumer protection standards?  You like safe products or do you want to go back to 'buyer beware'--that's some value added service from our gov.

Ok, I didn't say that the government didn't produce anything valuable, what I said is that the government generates no wealth of it's own. The income of government depends entirely on seizing portions of income on businesses and individuals who do produce wealth.The government has no money of its own, only money generated by its subjects, money is generated by business and business is privately owned in America. Building a bridge does not generate wealth, the truck driver driving over it does, and he paid for that bridge with his own money, it's not like the bridge was a gift!

Government also gives grants for research. But just because the government helped discover the cure for cancer doesn't mean it created any wealth. After the cure is discovered a privately owned organization must hire people, build factories, develop distribution lines, spend money marketing, and then the cure for cancer generates wealth. The drug company generated the wealth, not the government, and the grant money the government provided came from the drug company to begin with in the form of the taxes it paid.

Enforcing property rights, consumer protection status, insuring banks, all this is made possible by money generated by businesses and individuals, and none of these things directly generate wealth, they merely facilitate the process. That is a very big difference.

As far as minting, printing money doesn't create wealth. If it did Zimbabwe with it's 11 thousand percent inflation rate would be the richest country on earth. Printed money only reflects the spending power of the consumer, you can't print more wealth.

Generating wealth is very specific, it is when you take money, invest and grow it. Government does not grow money, private organizations do.


With that said I ask you, yes the government does provide infrastructure, law enforcement, utilities (last time I checked people have to pay their water bills). But where did the government get that money in the first place? From the taxpayer, seized at the barrel of a gun.



When's the last time you created your own highway system?  You haven't b/c the fed. gov. did it for you.  We could go on and on about the GI Bill, satellite infrastructure, anti-trust laws which keep our free market humming along, the EPA, OSHA, FDA add value to our lives by making sure that crooked private businessmen have minimal standards of acceptable behavior.  How about gov. sponsored medical r&d?  There are so many things that our government produces they boggle the mind.  And you couldn't think of one thing?

Yes, but the government cannot do any of things without taking this money from tax payers. The government uses our money to provide services for us, you act like this is done out of some kind of generosity. I'm getting a feeling that you believe government owns all of the money in the country and they just generously hand it down to us. That thinking is completely backwards, we own the money, and we hand it down to THEM whether we like it or not.

This is like when I was forced by my local government to pay for my house being connected to a sewer system (I had no choice). According to your logic, I was given a gift by the government, even though I had to pay for it myself. Do you feel like you are giving your local grocery store a gift when you purchase your food?

Everybody pays taxes, not just the 'rich.'  FICA/FUTA, sales, value added, income.  Did you know that state corporate taxes are deductible at the federal level?  Did you know that through creative accounting and corporate welfare, your local McDonald's worker paid more in taxes than most US corporations.  According to the GAO, btn 1998 and 2005, nearly 2/3 of of large US corporations paid zero corporate taxes to the US federal gov.  http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/

I'm assuming your referring to taxes rates here right? The idea that McDonalds worker are paying more in taxes than large corporations is ludicrous.

Yes corporations use all kind of deductions and loopholes to avoid taxation, as do individuals, but that doesn't mean that businesses don't pay any taxes. Your article here is referring to large corporations. Keep in mind 99% of private organizations in America employ less than 500 people http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap4.htm (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap4.htm)

Now as far as your statement about everybody pays taxes, well that's true, but that's not the whole story:
(http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/images/revenue1_4.GIF)

Now you see here that the VAST majority of Federal tax money comes from Individual Income Taxes, Payroll Taxes, and Corporate Income Taxes, a mere 5% come from from Excise taxes and other sources. Keep in mind that the Federal Government collects over 3 trillion dollar per year.

Now sales tax doesn't factor in here because it is administered by the state. There's not much data on how much sales tax is collected unfortunately, but we can make a pretty good estimate based on the data we have.


I'll use Wikipedia data if you don't mind, I know college professors frown on it (only because it's too easy), but were not writing an essay here or anything.
Sales tax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States)
California:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California)

- First you have to remove the states that don't have a sales tax and subtract their population. These are Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon for at total of 7,484,000. With about 300 million population you have about 292,516,000 people.

- Now lets look at California, according to this source California collects about 28 billion dollars worth of sales tax per year. Divide this by the population    36,553,215, and you get exactly $766 worth of sales tax per person. Now California's median income is in 11th place, so I'm comfortable using this number for the entire US population. What you get is about 224 billion dollars if every person in America is paying an average of 766 dollars per capita. Now keep in mind California has a very high sales tax rate and we are not even taking into consideration what goods are exempt from the sales tax.

- 224 billion dollars total sales tax collected is 7.5% of the total income Federal Income taxes of 3 trillion dollars. NOW you have to consider that states and counties also collect income taxes, and those income taxes are just as heavily progressive as the Federal Income Tax.

- Again lets consider California's tax system, my source says it collects 40 billion dollars in income taxes. Keep in mind that California taxes are very steep, so this estimate will probably be high. But anyway, same formula as the sales tax: SIT / population = $1094 per capita, times the US population = $328 billion. This is one tenth of the Federal Income taxes, and there is no reason to believe that State Income taxes aren't collected by similar margins as Federal Income Taxes.

- So that means that FIT ($3,000 billion) + SIT ($328 billion) + ST ($224 billion) = 3.552 trillion dollars. So total state sales tax account for about 6.3% of the total of those three figures. Not exactly a big percentage is it? Keep in mind that I proved pretty convincingly that there is no way in hell the bottom 50% of earners are paying the majority of the sales tax.




1.3 million companies with at least $250 million in assets or at least $50 million in sales paid NO TAXES at all.

Sure they did, dividends tax (double taxation if you ask me), property taxes, sales taxes, capital gains taxes, payroll taxes (you know that your employer pays half of your payroll tax right?). Of course big businesses do avoid paying taxes, but they wouldn't really bother if America's corporate tax rate wasn't so astronomically high and complicated. The very article you posted suggesting lowering the Corporate tax rate in order to increase revenues, I agree with them.

Also keep in mind that these corporations create tax paying jobs, ok ACME doesn't pay any corporate taxes, but it employs 100,000 people who pay income taxes. Really corporations are taxed on multiple levels, first they have to pay an income tax on their earnings, then they have to pay a dividend tax when they pay dividends to their stock holders, then they pay their employees, who in turn have to pay some of THAT money that was taxed before, as personal income taxes. It's like an assembly line of taxation! I'm personally for the FairTax, which is a national retail sales tax that replaces all other forms of taxation. Check it out, it's interesting! http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer (http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer)

I guess that's how a 15-39% tax rate does not reflect reality.

Sure it does, IRS numbers only reflect the number of people that filed taxes, the income they declared, and the amount of taxes they paid. You can see what percent of the burden each tax bracket shares and the top 50% pay 97% of all Federal Income Taxes. The bottom 50% pay 3%. According to IRS.gov numbers the top 1% earned 21.2% of the total amount of funds earned in 2005, yet they paid 39% of the burden. The bottom 50% earned 12.8% yet only had 3% of the Federal Tax burden which is by FAR the largest source of government funds in this country. How can you conclude that the poor have this huge burden? The numbers don't add up at all.

The Luke mentioned the undeclared income in this country, which is true it exists, but most of it is owned by wealthy people (who already foot the bill). He wanted to make the point that because homeless people and illegal aliens aren't counted that the IRS numbers aren't significant. Newsflash! Homeless people don't have money because they don't work, that's why their homeless, and illegal immigrants are made up mainly of low skilled laborers, they don't exactly have a lot of purchasing power. 10 million Mexicans working on the fields making 5 bucks an hour isn't statistically significant at all.

Income tax--yes, all taxes--absolutely not.

I think I have proven my point sufficiently


I see you reference the old myth that our poor are well-fed fat people living it up on the dole.  In fact, according to you, they are not just fat but living like kings as well.  No hyperbole there.

See my numbers in previous posts, American poor people live like kings compared to the average person in most of the world. This is not a myth, there is a ton of data backing this up.

Millions and millions of american children and elderly are hungry.  That's a fact.  http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/?q=node/view/104

Ah the hungry nonsense, this is the most asinine movement I've ever seen. I'm an EXSS student, we are required to go into the health problems America faces quite extensively, the #1 problem we encounter here in America is obesity. The idea that hunger is a problem in the United States is delusional, people are either too fat or hungry, not both.

Now I agree that the poor have a malnourishment problem, but that is because of the poor choices they make. Calorie intake is NOT an issue for poor people in America at all, this hunger thing just drives me crazy, I remember hearing the criteria for "hunger" it was something ridiculous like: "missing one meal a week or month". Under that criteria, I suffer from "hunger", even though I'm 225 lbs and anywhere from 15-20% bodyfat and I take in anywhere from 3500 to 4500 calories per day. The criteria used for those worthless phrases such as "food insecure" are so vague and stupid. I'm sorry I'm very passionate about this, America has an obesity epidemic and some morons are claiming that Americans have a "hunger problem", stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life.

Here's just a few articles dealing with this issue:
86 Per Cent Of American Adults May Be Obese By 2030: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/116358.php (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/116358.php)

Obesity Highest In Children From Lower Income Areas: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/121473.php (http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/121473.php)



How can you say that they are living like kings?

They have way too much food, they get free health care, and they get free money in the form of tax credits (even though they didn't pay any taxes). All this and they don't have to do shit or pay hardly any taxes at all. They have it MADE.


Big business is already fleeing this country to avoid paying its fair share of taxes--It uses American infrastructure but does not want to pay for it.

To me that's betraying america for selfish reasons.

American businesses pay a huge portion tax bill directly and generate the jobs that provide the income for the rest of it, they use infrastructure that they pay for already, plus they employ millions of people who in turn pay taxes. If businesses in this country didn't pay their "fair share" (who determines what a fair share is anyway?), then the Imperial Federal Government wouldn't be able to do a damn thing.

No, the American government is betraying its people by driving American businesses away and discouraging foreign businesses from investing here, with their stupid tax policies and wasteful spending. Businesses are not the enemy, government is. The sooner people realize this the better off we will be.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 11:44:13 AM
Bodvar,

Let me explain just ONE point (your posts are becoming too long winded), as it explains where you are going wrong with your statistics...

I'm sorry that your ADHD is preventing you from reading my very detailed and informative posts, you don't know what your missing  ;D

Hopefully, if you can grasp this you might go back over your figures and see the fault... instead of starting with a faulty premise and running it into the ground.

Does this mean your going to use sources now?

You continuously make statements such as the following:
...when that is false.

The IRS federal income tax figures don't reflect income... they reflect the DECLARED income of those who filed tax returns. As Decker has already pointed out (in a post I hope you read) there are many, many exceptions to this. The tax code is very nuanced and highly manipulated. The rich use perks/benefits-in-kind/write-offs/tax-havens/loopholes etc to avoid tax in ways not available to the poor.

The IRS Federal Income tax figures don't reflect income? That statement made my brain hurt.

Look there are people that don't declare income sure, but like you said those people are homeless people, illegal aliens, and rich people. Now out of those three groups who do you think has the most money? I'm guessing your point is that the poor have all this hidden income somewhere which they are spending in droves (they're not that poor then are they?). But the fact is that homeless people and illegal aliens don't have a lot of money, homeless people beg for change on the street, illegal aliens work for peanuts on construction sites and farms. These rich people stashing money away are BUYING stuff.

Plus you have to consider that about 132 million people filed taxes in 2005, there were about 73.4 million children in America at that time (kids don't pay taxes) http://www.childstats.gov/AMERICASCHILDREN/tables/pop1.asp?popup=true (http://www.childstats.gov/AMERICASCHILDREN/tables/pop1.asp?popup=true) There were about 8 million people that were unemployed looking for work. God only knows how many people are unemployed and NOT looking for work (unemployment rates don't count these people). Then you have about 30 million illegal alien who work for peanuts. So the total of all those people I just listed is 244,011,637 (just trust me). So that's about 50 million people unaccounted for, and I bet a HUGE chunk of those people are not working at all.

But I'll give you a simple one: would Wesley Snipes be included in your figures?

Oh man you got me there! No wait.... Wesley Snipes is in PRISON. That's a huge incentive to not cheat on your taxes, if you get caught you go to jail. But of course there is no way to determine how much money out there is unaccounted for. But that isn't relevant, what is relevant is that we know exactly how much money the government collected and where it came from, it doesn't matter that there are people that avoid paying taxes, that doesn't change the facts about who's paying the tax bill.

What you need to do Bodvar is look at a breakdown of total government income, that will give you a better idea of how the system works and how it favours the rich, not the poor.


The Luke

Sure buddy lets look at that breakdown, BAM!

(http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/images/revenue1_4.GIF)

I also calculated the total American sales tax and state income tax as 6.3% and 9.2% of total revenues respectively. We also know that State Income taxes are heavily progressive just like the Federal Income tax, and we've determined (anybody that has any sense at least) that the wealth pay a vast majority of the sales tax.

So like I said the rich in America the vast majority of all taxes in the United States. Unless of course you want to call the lottery a tax (I do), then you see the poor paying the biggest share of the bill. Some people call the lottery a tax on the stupid, I wholeheartedly agree with them :)



Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 12:28:43 PM
Good work Bodvar...

You're halfway there.
Compare your graph of Federal income with graphs of government spending; total wealth relative to population and total wealth generated.

Then you'll have your answer.


The poor do pay the bulk of the tax burden... as tax burden is the total amount of tax relative to income/wealth.

The rich might pay large percentages of their income in tax... but the poor pay a larger percentage in total tax through costs that are not asset acquisition.

A rich guy paying 6% sales tax on a Lamborghini is not in the same position as a piss poor ghetto kid paying 6% sales tax on macaroni and cheese... one of them has acquired an asset.



The Luke 


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 15, 2008, 01:17:28 PM
Ok, I didn't say that the government didn't produce anything valuable, what I said is that the government generates no wealth of it's own. The income of government depends entirely on seizing portions of income on businesses and individuals who do produce wealth.The government has no money of its own, only money generated by its subjects, money is generated by business and business is privately owned in America. Building a bridge does not generate wealth, the truck driver driving over it does, and he paid for that bridge with his own money, it's not like the bridge was a gift!
The US government is the people--we are not its subjects b/c we are governed by consent of the governed.  The US gov.'s money is the People's money. 

The Tennessee Valley Authority generated no wealth?  The Civilian Conservation Corp added no value to the country.  I would say that the creation of the Internet and the R&D infrastructure attendant to that creation (phone lines, electrification, satellites, software) would qualify as wealth generators.  At least it was when the technologies were freely given to private business.  That's an old trick:  socialize the cost of doing business while privatizing the profits in the hands of a few.

All government is redistributive.  That is its nature: to redistibute where resources are needed.  If that bridge, from your example, was not created and maintained then there would be no truck driver making a living (oversimplification).  The Public Interest demands solid infrastructure to function efficiently.  Without it, privatized roads and bridges would spring up making interstate and intrastate travel an unworkable and expensive mess.

Quote
Government also gives grants for research. But just because the government helped discover the cure for cancer doesn't mean it created any wealth. After the cure is discovered a privately owned organization must hire people, build factories, develop distribution lines, spend money marketing, and then the cure for cancer generates wealth. The drug company generated the wealth, not the government, and the grant money the government provided came from the drug company to begin with in the form of the taxes it paid.
Governmental scientists do all sorts of R&D in many areas of study.  The gov. doesn't only contribute to the process by subsidizing private research.  There is also the nexus btn federal grants and state subsidized schools.  I cannot deny that the Federal Gov, as an organizational entity, is an initiator and sustainer of productive and profitable work. 



Quote
Enforcing property rights, consumer protection status, insuring banks, all this is made possible by money generated by businesses and individuals, and none of these things directly generate wealth, they merely facilitate the process. That is a very big difference.
That, or the government just borrows the money or prints more money.


Quote
As far as minting, printing money doesn't create wealth. If it did Zimbabwe with it's 11 thousand percent inflation rate would be the richest country on earth. Printed money only reflects the spending power of the consumer, you can't print more wealth.
I was referencing the minting of money as one of the many governmental duties to the people and not as a means of generating wealth.  Government's role in maintaining the organization of this country is beyond question.  We couldn't have each state/individual minting its/his own money.  That would be bad.


Quote
Generating wealth is very specific, it is when you take money, invest and grow it. Government does not grow money, private organizations do.
Governmental agencies stocked with scientists, laborers, administrators cannot generate wealth?  Is it the role of government to generate wealth?

I would say no.  What is the role of government?  To reallocate resources according to organizational principles reflecting the will and morality of the People.   Can the Gov generate wealth? Absolutley.  Look at the above examples.  However government seems to be an enabler for wealth creation.  Like you pointed out in your cancer drug example. 

I guess there is something to a government by and for the people in this context.

Quote
With that said I ask you, yes the government does provide infrastructure, law enforcement, utilities (last time I checked people have to pay their water bills). But where did the government get that money in the first place? From the taxpayer, seized at the barrel of a gun.
Maybe the feds are gunning for you for nonpayment of taxes (I'm joking).  Remember, our country was founded on Taxation with representation.  We consent to be taxed b/c we have political representation (a say) in how we are taxed.  No guns involved here.  It certainly isn't theft.


Quote
Yes, but the government cannot do any of things without taking this money from tax payers. The government uses our money to provide services for us, you act like this is done out of some kind of generosity. I'm getting a feeling that you believe government owns all of the money in the country and they just generously hand it down to us. That thinking is completely backwards, we own the money, and we hand it down to THEM whether we like it or not.
There is no "THEM".  It is WE THE PEOPLE who are the government.  Now some of us may not like the way some of the money is spent, but at least we have our say.  We can't win every battle, no one can, but there are times of victory.


Quote
This is like when I was forced by my local government to pay for my house being connected to a sewer system (I had no choice). According to your logic, I was given a gift by the government, even though I had to pay for it myself. Do you feel like you are giving your local grocery store a gift when you purchase your food?
I was in a similar situation with lateral hookups.  What pissed me off more is that the locals don't want a concrete road where I live.  So in the meantime, I have no concrete approach and a shitty blacktop road.
I was outvoted by my neighbors.  As for your particular problem, you have to consider a few things.  You live in a community.  At some time, the civil engineers decided that the best course of action for sewage/sanitation was one system managed by the city.  That's reasonable.  You could embark on a campaign to change that, but your neighbors would likely vote you down.

We live in a free society.  That freedom cannot be confused with license.  We can't do whatever we please b/c of existing obligations/situations.


Quote
I'm assuming your referring to taxes rates here right? The idea that McDonalds worker are paying more in taxes than large corporations is ludicrous.
You have to be fair to me.  The discussion was geared towards the tax rates paid by big corporations.  My comparison, while true, was meant to elicit a sense of shame about the real taxes paid by the big corporations whining about tax rates...most of them pay nothing.


Quote
Yes corporations use all kind of deductions and loopholes to avoid taxation, as do individuals, but that doesn't mean that businesses don't pay any taxes. Your article here is referring to large corporations. Keep in mind 99% of private organizations in America employ less than 500 people http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap4.htm (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap4.htm)
We were discussing corporate tax rates.

Quote
Now you see here that the VAST majority of Federal tax money comes from Individual Income Taxes, Payroll Taxes, and Corporate Income Taxes, a mere 5% come from from Excise taxes and other sources. Keep in mind that the Federal Government collects over 3 trillion dollar per year.
I was not referring to the magnitude of taxes paid.  You made a statement that the poor pay nothing in taxes.  If they earn dollar one, they are paying taxes.  That's a fact.  And that was why I wrote what I wrote.  The federal rev. for 2007 was less than 2.7 trillion dollars.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state


 

...

Quote
I'll use Wikipedia data if you don't mind, I know college professors frown on it (only because it's too easy), but were not writing an essay here or anything.
You know that does piss me off too.  Wikipedia is really pretty good.  When I use it as a source, I'm not troubled by it.  I have found some questionable entries, but on the whole, it's pretty good.

Quote
Sales tax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States)
California:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California)

I'm not sure why you are providing all this sales tax data.

Quote
Sure they did, dividends tax (double taxation if you ask me), property taxes, sales taxes, capital gains taxes, payroll taxes (you know that your employer pays half of your payroll tax right?). Of course big businesses do avoid paying taxes, but they wouldn't really bother if America's corporate tax rate wasn't so astronomically high and complicated. The very article you posted suggesting lowering the Corporate tax rate in order to increase revenues, I agree with them.
Again, I was referencing your statements that Corporations pay high corporate taxes.  Most pay nothing.  The notion of other taxes is not lost on me.

Any tax at all is too much for many corporate CEOs.  That's just not practical.


Quote
Also keep in mind that these corporations create tax paying jobs, ok ACME doesn't pay any corporate taxes, but it employs 100,000 people who pay income taxes. Really corporations are taxed on multiple levels, first they have to pay an income tax on their earnings, then they have to pay a dividend tax when they pay dividends to their stock holders, then they pay their employees, who in turn have to pay some of THAT money that was taxed before, as personal income taxes. It's like an assembly line of taxation! I'm personally for the FairTax, which is a national retail sales tax that replaces all other forms of taxation. Check it out, it's interesting! http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer (http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer)
Yup, any time there is a taxable event, a tax can  be charge.'

Quote
Sure it does, IRS numbers only reflect the number of people that filed taxes, the income they declared, and the amount of taxes they paid. You can see what percent of the burden each tax bracket shares and the top 50% pay 97% of all Federal Income Taxes. The bottom 50% pay 3%. According to IRS.gov numbers the top 1% earned 21.2% of the total amount of funds earned in 2005, yet they paid 39% of the burden. The bottom 50% earned 12.8% yet only had 3% of the Federal Tax burden which is by FAR the largest source of government funds in this country. How can you conclude that the poor have this huge burden? The numbers don't add up at all.
I was referring to corporate income tax and not personal income tax.  I can see why you thought I was talking about personal income taxes.  I used the Clinton era corporate top marginal rate of 39% instead of the current Bush rate of 35%.  Sorry for the confusion.


Quote
...See my numbers in previous posts, American poor people live like kings compared to the average person in most of the world. This is not a myth, there is a ton of data backing this up.
Myth: Lots of poor people are fat… they're not suffering.

Fact: Fat has more to do with genes and past starvation than current nutrition.

Summary

Many of our stereotypes about fat people, besides being cruel, are myths. Recent medical research shows that being overweight may not be a sign of prosperity at all, but of past poverty and starvation. The body has natural defenses against starvation, and when it experiences enough of it, it slows down the body's metabolism to make less food go further. Because poor people are more likely to go through periods of starvation than rich people, they are more likely to trigger these natural defense mechanisms.

Argument

The above myth is an unusually cruel stereotype, but one that gets repeated with surprising frequency in debates on the Internet. It is an observation many people especially make about black people: "There are too many fat black people to believe they're suffering from malnutrition and poverty."

American society has a neurotic obsession about weight. It worships an ultra-thin "ideal" personified by gaunt models and waif-like celebrities. So intense is the social pressure to conform to this unnatural weight that 200,000 American women suffer anorexia nervosa each year from trying. (1)

The flip side of this neurosis is intolerance towards fat people. And when such people also claim to be poor, critics can -- and often do -- erupt in open hostility.

Like so many prejudices, this one is rooted in myth. Dr. Martin Seligman, an authority on obesity, writes: "Nineteen out of twenty studies show that obese people consume no more calories each day than non-obese people. In one remarkable experiment, a group of very obese people dieted down to only 60 percent overweight and stayed there. They needed one hundred fewer calories a day to stay at 60 percent overweight than normal people needed to stay at a normal weight." (2)

What's going on here? In 1995, Dr. Jules Hirsch of Rockefeller University published the results of a landmark study that proved that the body has a "thermostat" when it comes to maintaining its natural weight. His research team recruited 18 people who were obese and 23 who had never been overweight. They were required to live at a clinical center while their diet and activities were carefully controlled. In volunteers who gained weight, metabolism was speeded up by 10 percent to 15 percent. In those who lost weight, metabolism was 10 percent to 15 percent slower than normal. (3)

In other words, when people fall below their natural weight, their bodies slow down metabolism to try to regain it. When people gain weight, it speeds up metabolism to burn it off.

Scientists have long known there is a significant genetic component to weight. Identical twins reared apart weigh virtually the same throughout their lives. (4) Adopted children do not resemble the weights of their adoptive parents, but they do resemble the weights of their natural parents, especially the mother. (5) Interestingly, thinness seems more inheritable than obesity, which suggests that social factors may play a greater role in obesity.

But does this mean that obesity is genetic destiny? Dr. William Bennett of Cambridge Hospital says not necessarily; he suggests that the thermostat "set point" for natural weight can shift gradually over time in response to external factors. For example, eating a high-fat diet tends to raise the set point, while regular exercise tends to lower it. (6)

Dr. Seligman argues that when a person is subjected to starvation repeatedly or over long periods, the body gradually adjusts by storing more fat in preparation for the next time. This would have been a crucial survival feature in early humans, when hunting seasons could alternate between feast and famine, not only for days but even weeks or months at a time. Natural selection would have favored those who could survive periods of prolonged starvation by storing fat more efficiently.

Interestingly, Seligman points out that the body can't tell whether starvation is voluntary or involuntary. If a person goes on a diet (a euphemism for starvation), the body's ancient survival mechanisms kick in: "The body defends its weight by refusing to release fat, by lowering its metabolism, and by insistently demanding food. The harder the [dieter] tries not to eat, the more vigorous these defenses become." (7) Seligman concludes that this is why all diets -- no exceptions -- are proven long-term failures, and why the weight loss is guaranteed to return in the following year or two.

The political ramifications of these findings are obvious. Poor people are more likely to go through repeated or prolonged periods of starvation, and the fact that they are overweight does not at all mean that they are consuming more calories than other people. Look at it this way: if they were eating more food than normal, their bodies would be burning it up faster to maintain their natural weight. A 1976 study illustrates this point dramatically. The researchers paid a group of prisoners to add 25 percent to their weight by eating twice their normal amount of food. The first few pounds came easily, but, surprisingly enough, there was no further weight gain. (8)

In light of these findings, the best response to any overweight person -- rich or poor -- should be open-mindedness and acceptance.


Endnotes:

1. America Anorexia and Bulimia Association, Newsletter, 1985. This statistic is widely misquoted as 150,000 to 200,000 fatalities, not sufferers. But fatalities actually number a few hundred per year.
2. Martin Seligman, What You Can Change and What You Can't (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1993), pp. 177-8.
3. "Body Plays Weighting Games: Fat or Thin, Metabolism Adjusts to a 'Set Point'", San Jose Mercury News, March 9, 1995, p. 1A.
4. Albert Stunkard et al., "The Body-Mass Index of Twins Who Have Been Reared Apart," New England Journal of Medicine 322 (1990).
5. Albert Stunkard et al., "An Adoption Study in Human Obesity," New England Journal of Medicine 314 (1986).
6. San Jose Mercury News.
7. Seligman, p. 183.
8. E. Sims, "Experimental Obesity, Diet-Induced Thermogenesis, and Their Clinical Implications," Clinics in Endocrinology and Metabolism 5 (1976), pp. 377-95.

source: Steve Kangas

Quote
Ah the hungry nonsense, this is the most asinine movement I've ever seen. I'm an EXSS student, we are required to go into the health problems America faces quite extensively, the #1 problem we encounter here in America is obesity. The idea that hunger is a problem in the United States is delusional, people are either too fat or hungry, not both.
So the means tested Food Stamp program is a hoax alleviating a problem (hunger) that doesn't exist?  I disagree.

The experts would also disagree with you:

• In 2006, nearly 37 million people (12.3%) were in poverty.
• In 2006, 7.6 (9.8%) million families were in poverty.
• In 2006, 20.2 million (10.8%) of people aged 18-64 were in poverty.
• In 2006, 12.8 million (17.4%) children under the age of 18 were in poverty.
• In 2006, 3.4 million (9.4%) seniors 65 and older were in poverty.
 Source:  U.S. Census Bureau. Carmen  DeNavas-Walt, B. Proctor, C. Lee.  Income, Poverty, and Heath Insurance Coverage in the United States:  2006.

I've seen estimates up to 35 million people live in some degree of hunger/malnutrition.  If even 10% of that were true, it would be a scathing indictment of the riches country on earth.  These hungry people do exist.  Schools see them show up for class.  Emergency rooms see them at their doors.  They are not the figment of the imagination of liberal empathists or freeloders.

Quote
Now I agree that the poor have a malnourishment problem, but that is because of the poor choices they make. Calorie intake is NOT an issue for poor people in America at all, this hunger thing just drives me crazy, I remember hearing the criteria for "hunger" it was something ridiculous like: "missing one meal a week or month". Under that criteria, I suffer from "hunger", even though I'm 225 lbs and anywhere from 15-20% bodyfat and I take in anywhere from 3500 to 4500 calories per day. The criteria used for those worthless phrases such as "food insecure" are so vague and stupid. I'm sorry I'm very passionate about this, America has an obesity epidemic and some morons are claiming that Americans have a "hunger problem", stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life.
By gov. standards I am considered wayyyy overweight b/c I weigh 220 and I'm 6'1".  Instead of using a weight index, why don't you access the percentage of the population utilizing emergency food services, soup kitchens and other charitable handouts.  You know, where the quality of food is shit but lifesaving.

Quote
Here's just a few articles dealing with this issue:
I will give them a look. Thanks.

Quote
They have way too much food, they get free health care, and they get free money in the form of tax credits (even though they didn't pay any taxes). All this and they don't have to do shit or pay hardly any taxes at all. They have it MADE.
Yes, it's one year long party for the destitute.  Poverty affects millions of people in this country.  Old people, kids, invalids, mental crackups and you seem to be wanting to drop the hammer on these people b/c they cost you some tax revenue.  That's unacceptable.

Our own government states that over 37 million people live below the poverty threshhold. 
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty07/pov07hi.html

Are some of them playing the system?  Sure.  Are you going to kill these tax supported poverty programs and risk sending a few million kids and old people to bed hungry or worse?  I guess so.

Quote
American businesses pay a huge portion tax bill directly and generate the jobs that provide the income for the rest of it, they use infrastructure that they pay for already, plus they employ millions of people who in turn pay taxes. If businesses in this country didn't pay their "fair share" (who determines what a fair share is anyway?), then the Imperial Federal Government wouldn't be able to do a damn thing.
We the People through our electorate determine what a fair share is.  American Business is also similar to government.  Without the most important cog, the people, neither would exist.  The problem with big business is that it tends to corrupt.  It lends itself to oppressive monopolies.  It tends to exploit workers for the bottom line.  It tends to exhaust resources with no eye to the future.  Remember child labor?  Remember secondclass treatment for women and minorities?  Remember Enron, Adelphia, Bear Stearns, the S&L Scandal, the Housing Scandal etc. 

Big Business needs regulation by the government to ensure an even playing field...sort of like referees.


Quote
No, the American government is betraying its people by driving American businesses away and discouraging foreign businesses from investing here, with their stupid tax policies and wasteful spending. Businesses are not the enemy, government is. The sooner people realize this the better off we will be.
The government is not your enemy.  You are the government.

You are not Big Business.  You have no say in a private corporation.  Of all business models, the modern corporation is easily the most fascist form:  the top down control of the CEO, of a board of directors.  The voiceless worker left to the whim of total authoritative control of the corporate management is a faceless voiceless plebe.

At least in government, you have a voice.  In private big business, you don't.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 01:29:00 PM
Good work Bodvar...

You're halfway there.
Compare your graph of Federal income with graphs of government spending; total wealth relative to population and total wealth generated.

Then you'll have your answer.

What the hell are you talking about? The IRS tax information and that graph CLEARLY shows that the tax burden is squarely on the shoulders on the top 50% of earners. How the hell are you coming to a different conclusion.

The graph shows and the tax data show that income taxes account for 60% of the Federal Budget, and that the top 50% pay 97% of that bill, with the top 1% paying 39%. These are figures based on ACTUAL income and ACTUAL money paid to the government.

Hello! 60% equals a majority. I showed that sales taxes only accounts for about 6 percent of total taxes COLLECTED, even if the poor paid 100% of that, they'd still be paying way less in taxes than the rich pay.

Are you saying that the government is collecting money it isn't reporting?

The poor do pay the bulk of the tax burden... as tax burden is the total amount of tax relative to income/wealth.

Please express this mathematically. Saying "the tax pay the greatest burden" over and over again isn't making a point, it's more like just being annoying.

Use the data you have at your disposal and make your case using statistics and mathematics, if your capable of doing so that is.


The rich might pay large percentages of their income in tax... but the poor pay a larger percentage in total tax through costs that are not asset acquisition.

What does it matter whether the rich are buying assets or not? Sales taxes does not distinguish between the two. Plus I made a damn good argument about the poor, sales tax, and groceries. I pretty much proved that the poor pay virtually nothing in sales tax when it comes to food. You should read my posts, I put a lot of work in them.


A rich guy paying 6% sales tax on a Lamborghini is not in the same position as a piss poor ghetto kid paying 6% sales tax on macaroni and cheese... one of them has acquired an asset.


The Luke 

Yes, not the same at all. One person is paying 15 grand in sales taxes, and the other is eating food provided by Food Stamps at the expense of the tax payers.

What does the fact that the guy purchased an asset have to do with anything? It's totally irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you buy 200,000 dollars worth of beer or a 200,000 dollar car. You paid the same in sales taxes and your declared income is the same. Tax burdens are not calculated by net worth, only by income generated for that year.


[/quote]


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 01:38:40 PM
Bodvar,

Again,Compare your graph of Federal income with graphs of government spending; total wealth relative to population and total wealth generated.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 15, 2008, 02:16:26 PM
Give me a couple of days on that post Decker, getbig has taken up so much of my time in the last few days that I'm getting behind on my school work. I want to give your post my full attention.

The Luke, Decker here actually knows how to debate, you don't. So I'm not even going to bother answering your dumbass posts anymore, I suggest you sit back and watch Decker and me debate this issue properly, you might learn something.

Böðvar out


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 15, 2008, 03:16:40 PM
Bodvar,

I used to argue these points by posting links to hard factual data... but it's hard to counter filtered data with more data. I prefer, (from experience) what has happened here.

You've already conceded the homicide statistic... why? Because you had to research the statistics yourself.

The same will happen as you dig further into your positions on poverty and taxation.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 15, 2008, 04:55:32 PM
Give me a couple of days on that post Decker, getbig has taken up so much of my time in the last few days that I'm getting behind on my school work. I want to give your post my full attention.

The Luke, Decker here actually knows how to debate, you don't. So I'm not even going to bother answering your dumbass posts anymore, I suggest you sit back and watch Decker and me debate this issue properly, you might learn something.

Böðvar out
About that response of yours, you don't have to answer every entry like I did.  I saw how long my response was and I'm sorry I gotta put anyone through reading all that. I'm not trying to be a dick about it, it's just that the posts are getting really long and I think I waS sort of repetitve anyways.
I'll try to be more brief in the future. 

Back to the philly dallas game for me.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: gcb on September 15, 2008, 05:12:24 PM
So the money rich people have is given to them? They don't earn it? Do you know that the government generates no wealth? That's right the government produces NOTHING. Only individuals and businesses produce wealth, government merely takes that money at the point of a gun and redistributes it (inefficiently), while compensating itself handsomely for its troubles.

I bet your heart does bleed, fucking lib ;D

I'd argue that this infrastructure that the rich are paying for is preventing them from making money rather than vice versa. The crushing tax system here encourages individuals and businesses to get the hell out and do business where taxes are lower. Did you know that America has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world?

The rich pay virtually all taxes in this country, and completely support millions upon millions of poor people. Hell our poor people here have an obesity problem, they have so much food available to them that they're way too fat. The top 50% provide free health care for over 50 million people in the form of Medicaid, feed over 25 million people in the form of Food Stamps. This isn't even including the housing subsidies, WIC, household bills subsidies, tax credits for people that don't pay taxes, etc etc.

The poor are living like kings compared to poor people in most countries in the world. Poor kids in Africa are starving (I know I see em on tv), poor kids in America are become more obese by the day. Poor kids in most Asian countries have very limited access to health care, a huge portion American poor kids get free health care via Medicaid.

So yeah don't give me this the poor poor pitiful poor nonsense. The wealthy pay the entire bill while the poor get fatter by the day. You should be worried about high taxes on the rich, because if they are pushed too far businesses will LEAVE, its a global economy, you don't have to be in the US anymore, you can run your businesses from anywhere, and if the rich leave who exactly is going to pay the 3 trillion dollar government budget? The poor?

Jees not this again - take any millionaire put him in the middle of the congo jungle with no infrastructure and come back a year later to see how much wealth he has generated on his own. Your argument is full of holes - individuals are only able to generate the sort of wealth they do because of infrastructure and the hard work from all the little cogs in the machine. Stop and think about it - could individuals generate the same level of wealth in say Roman Times.  You are so willing to swallow everything that you are told hook line and sinker because you think one day you will be part of the one percent.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 21, 2008, 11:15:45 AM
About that response of yours, you don't have to answer every entry like I did.  I saw how long my response was and I'm sorry I gotta put anyone through reading all that. I'm not trying to be a dick about it, it's just that the posts are getting really long and I think I waS sort of repetitve anyways.
I'll try to be more brief in the future. 

Back to the philly dallas game for me.

Yeah I agree, but I'd like to respond to some of your points anyway. Even though I'm spending WAY more time on this thread that I should ;D

The US government is the people--we are not its subjects b/c we are governed by consent of the governed.  The US gov.'s money is the People's money.

Not according to the left, their general attitude is that the government owns the money and it distributes the money back to the people. Tell me do you really feel that the current government (legislative and executive) is working "for the people" nowadays? Excuse me if I'm a bit more cynical than that, people in government are worried about power and doing whatever necessary to maintain and grow that power. They don't give a damn about you or me, just look at the approval ratings for the President (twenties) and Congress (teens).

That, or the government just borrows the money or prints more money.

Borrowing yes, but government can't print more wealth. If you print more money than there is buying power behind it you just dilute the worth of your currency. Say you have an economy is worth 10 units and each unit is worth 1 dollar. If you decide to print twice as many dollars, then all you have done is made one dollar worth half a unit. This is the basis for inflation.

I was referencing the minting of money as one of the many governmental duties to the people and not as a means of generating wealth.  Government's role in maintaining the organization of this country is beyond question.  We couldn't have each state/individual minting its/his own money.  That would be bad.

No argument there

Governmental agencies stocked with scientists, laborers, administrators cannot generate wealth?  Is it the role of government to generate wealth?

I would say no.  What is the role of government?  To reallocate resources according to organizational principles reflecting the will and morality of the People.   Can the Gov generate wealth? Absolutley.  Look at the above examples.  However government seems to be an enabler for wealth creation.  Like you pointed out in your cancer drug example.

That's exactly what I said, government does not generate wealth, only private organizations can do that. The main purpose of government is to make sure those private organizations can operate as efficiently as possible, therefore providing more jobs and creating more wealth for everyone. Yes, you need to have some sort of tax for government to operate. My argument is that government has become too bloated, too disconnected from the average person, too big and inefficient for its own good

When businesses are taxed and regulated too much then government is not an enabler for wealth creation, it's an obstacle. That's why we see businesses fleeing to tax havens such as Ireland (with it's low 12% corporate tax rates). If you regulate and tax and entity too much it will leave, you can be mad and call them "unpatriotic" or whatever, that won't bring them back. We live in a global economy, you can do business from anywhere and everywhere, businesses will go where the government causes them the least interference. Right now America has the second highest corporate tax rate, only Japan's is higher and their economy has been suffering for a very long time. There is also an estimated 1 trillion dollars out there because of our stupid tax system, imagine if the tax system was reformed and that money came back over here in our economy, do you have any idea what a boost that would be for us?

My bottom line is: The US government hurts businesses more than they help.

I guess there is something to a government by and for the people in this context.
Maybe the feds are gunning for you for nonpayment of taxes (I'm joking).  Remember, our country was founded on Taxation with representation.  We consent to be taxed b/c we have political representation (a say) in how we are taxed.  No guns involved here.  It certainly isn't theft.

No guns involved? Let's see here, if you don't pay your taxes then your going to be arrested. Who arrests you? The police. What do the police have? Guns. Those guns aren't for looking cool, they are for shooting you. If you don't want to be arrested, then one of the options the police have (the last option), is to shoot you dead. No guns involved my ass.

Look, if you look at any poll that measures people's satisfaction with the government, then you'll find that the VAST majority of people are unsatisfied. I never consented to be taxed, yet I have to pay them whether I like it or not. Someone made that decision for me.

This is why I like the FairTax, you CHOOSE when you pay your taxes (only when you buy stuff). No IRS, nothing. If you buy stuff you pay your taxes, if you want to hold on to your cash, that's your business. That's the kind of tax system most people would like to have, not the Income Tax that nobody on this planet understands. I mean the compliance cost for the tax code is more than 200 billion dollars per year. That's money spent just to keep people with guns from hauling your ass off to jail. What a colossal waste of resources.

I was in a similar situation with lateral hookups.  What pissed me off more is that the locals don't want a concrete road where I live.  So in the meantime, I have no concrete approach and a shitty blacktop road.
I was outvoted by my neighbors.  As for your particular problem, you have to consider a few things.  You live in a community.  At some time, the civil engineers decided that the best course of action for sewage/sanitation was one system managed by the city.  That's reasonable.  You could embark on a campaign to change that, but your neighbors would likely vote you down.

We live in a free society.  That freedom cannot be confused with license.  We can't do whatever we please b/c of existing obligations/situations.

So you have no concrete approach, and a shitty blacktop road you don't want. That's just wonderful isn't it? Gotta love the government.

No this situation was not reasonable, I had a perfectly good septic tank that worked just fine. I just had a money hungry local government that forced a system on me that I didn't want or need, but they'd send people with guns to take away my freedom if I didn't cough up the cash for the service I didn't need. Does that sound like a free society to you?

Plus I hate democracy, it's just mob rule. If 51% of the people want to screw the other 49% then they can. This is a Republic with restrictions on what the government can do. I don't remember reading the part where the government can force me to pay for a service I don't want or need. Sorry, you will never convince me that's a good thing.

You have to be fair to me.  The discussion was geared towards the tax rates paid by big corporations.  My comparison, while true, was meant to elicit a sense of shame about the real taxes paid by the big corporations whining about tax rates...most of them pay nothing.

No this discussion was about how much tax burden the poor had. The Luke thinks that the poor pay the vast majority of taxes, I disagree. I argued your point in that context.

You just jumped in the middle of it, that's all.

My point was that while big corporations avoid one tax, they pay a lot of others, directly and indirectly. Think of it this way too, if the tax rate was much lower, they would be less likely to avoid paying them. Avoiding taxes, taking advantage of loopholes etc., is costly, got to hire a lot of lawyer, lots of man hours etc. If the tax rate is 12% instead of 45%, then it really isn't worth spending so much money to avoid anymore. This is why Ireland's economy exploded when it reduced it's corporate tax rate.

We were discussing corporate tax rates.

No you were discussing corporate tax rates, we were talking about tax burdens and income brackets.  ;)

I was not referring to the magnitude of taxes paid.  You made a statement that the poor pay nothing in taxes.  If they earn dollar one, they are paying taxes.  That's a fact.  And that was why I wrote what I wrote.  The federal rev. for 2007 was less than 2.7 trillion dollars.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state

They are paying payroll taxes yes (that's a whole other discussion there), and sales taxes. But not income taxes which make up the VAST majority of government income. I've already shown that sales taxes make up less than 7% of all taxes paid.

Here's another personal income tax graph:

(http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/images/graph_indtaxcum.gif)

As you can see the tax burden doesn't even break even until you get to the 50th percentile. That mean that the bottom earners either have no burden or a NEGATIVE burden, which means they get back more tax money than they pay. Note that this graph is almost 10 years old and since then the burden has shifted even MORE to the right.

Another thing you must consider, is that the poor are the ones that are receiving the benefits of these social programs. Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment benefits, WIC, welfare, housing assistance, utilities assistance. Rich people aren't benefiting from these programs, yet they're paying virtually 100% of the bill. So the amount of services the poor are getting compared to what they pay in is quite lopsided.

Myth: Lots of poor people are fat… they're not suffering.

Fact: Fat has more to do with genes and past starvation than current nutrition.

Ok, next time just send me the link, no need to copy and paste the whole thing.

This article leaves out the BIGGEST issue regarding weight loss, physical activity. It is true that caloric intake has remained largely stable over the last 100 years, but physical activity has gone way down, thus the obesity problem

As far as genes are concerned, if you get enough exercise the "obesity" gene has no effect. Look at this study done on the Amish http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN0846769020080908 (http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN0846769020080908)
Here you see that because the Amish are so physically active, the gene does nothing. You need inactivity in order for this gene to be an issue at all.

All of this is irrelevant to the point, in order to become obese you need excess caloric intake. You cannot be hungry and fat at the same time, it doesn't work that way. Poor people have higher obesity rates than wealthier people, this is a fact.

So the means tested Food Stamp program is a hoax alleviating a problem (hunger) that doesn't exist?  I disagree.

Just because you have a program that gives away free food, that doesn't mean that it is necessary. I'm on food stamps right now, me and my whole family, food stamps are given based on income not based on malnutrition. You could be the fattest slob on the planet, you will get food stamps if your income is low enough. Likewise for rich people, if you are dying of hunger and a millionaire, you will not get food stamps, even though you're malnourished.

The experts would also disagree with you:

• In 2006, nearly 37 million people (12.3%) were in poverty.
• In 2006, 7.6 (9.8%) million families were in poverty.
• In 2006, 20.2 million (10.8%) of people aged 18-64 were in poverty.
• In 2006, 12.8 million (17.4%) children under the age of 18 were in poverty.
• In 2006, 3.4 million (9.4%) seniors 65 and older were in poverty.
 Source:  U.S. Census Bureau. Carmen  DeNavas-Walt, B. Proctor, C. Lee.  Income, Poverty, and Heath Insurance Coverage in the United States:  2006.

I've seen estimates up to 35 million people live in some degree of hunger/malnutrition.  If even 10% of that were true, it would be a scathing indictment of the riches country on earth.  These hungry people do exist.  Schools see them show up for class.  Emergency rooms see them at their doors.  They are not the figment of the imagination of liberal empathists or freeloders.

"The" experts eh? So people that disagree with your point can't be experts. Ok sure :-\

Notice that your statistics do not mention anything about calorie intake. Your basing your argument on poverty=hunger, which I'm saying is untrue based on obesity statistics.

Look you go on about this hunger nonsense. How do you define hunger? What is the criteria? I looked on the sources you provided and I could not find what constitutes "hunger". You can say that 35 million people suffer from hunger, but that statement is meaningless unless you can give a definite answer on what exactly hunger is. Look I need to see hard data on these "hungry" people, I don't trust a bunch of bleeding hearts telling me something is so without giving me hard data.

Btw, I've heard that "hunger" is defined as missing one meal a month. That means there are a lot of lardasses suffering from "hunger" ;D

By gov. standards I am considered wayyyy overweight b/c I weigh 220 and I'm 6'1".  Instead of using a weight index, why don't you access the percentage of the population utilizing emergency food services, soup kitchens and other charitable handouts.  You know, where the quality of food is shit but lifesaving.

Yes, because your number are skewed because you have a high percentage of muscle (I assume you do since this is a bodybuilding site). I'm actually 6'1 and 220 too, and my BMI is almost 30, but I carry quite a bit of muscle so it's off. But, think about how few people actually carry that much muscle, maybe half of a percent of the population (at most)? We're outliers and don't really matter when you look at the whole population.

BMI is a pretty good indicator of obesity (not overweight so much). If your 5'9 and 203 pounds (30 BMI), there is like a 99.9% chance that you are a fatass. So BMI measurement are not insignificant. They are also highly measurable and accurate, if you're normal weight or underweight you will not register as obese, if you're obese you will not measure as underweight or normal weight.

Now your talking about using percentage of the population using food stamps and such. This is a HIGHLY inaccurate way to measure nutrition rates. Because utilization of these services is NOT based on caloric intake, or body composition. These are based on income alone, and when you consider that low income earners have high obesity rates, then you see how horribly bad this idea would be. If you used your method, then a morbidly obese poor person on food stamps would register as hungry and malnourished.

Yes, it's one year long party for the destitute.  Poverty affects millions of people in this country.  Old people, kids, invalids, mental crackups and you seem to be wanting to drop the hammer on these people b/c they cost you some tax revenue.  That's unacceptable.

Your totally mischaracterizing what I'm saying here. I'm not complaining about the poor, nor do I think that they are paying too little in taxes. This whole argument with The Luke was basically me refuting his claim that the poor have some large tax burden. That's all. Your putting words in my mouth, I'm in favor of having a safety net for invalids. I don't like supporting people that are fully capable of supporting themselves but choose not to. Your insinuation that I'm some evil asshole that wants to drop the hammer on kids and old people is unacceptable and dishonest.

Our own government states that over 37 million people live below the poverty threshhold. 
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty07/pov07hi.html

When you consider their income alone. How much are they getting when you factor in all the social services they receive? How about all the people that don't have traditional incomes, do you know you can have a high net worth but be considered in poverty because you don't really earn a traditional income. You can make a lot of assumptions based on income alone, but they don't tell the whole story by a long shot.

Are there poor people in America? Absolutely. Is it because they don't have the opportunity or access to resources to get themselves out of poverty? Absolutely not.

Should there be a safety net for people who can't take care of themselves? Absolutely. Should that safety net be used to support people that can support themselves but choose not to? Fuck no.

Are some of them playing the system?  Sure.  Are you going to kill these tax supported poverty programs and risk sending a few million kids and old people to bed hungry or worse?  I guess so.

Why kill it? Why not reform it? So your saying that the only two options are killing it and leaving it alone? Your totally using a straw man argument here.

We the People through our electorate determine what a fair share is.  American Business is also similar to government.  Without the most important cog, the people, neither would exist.  The problem with big business is that it tends to corrupt.  It lends itself to oppressive monopolies.  It tends to exploit workers for the bottom line.  It tends to exhaust resources with no eye to the future.  Remember child labor?  Remember secondclass treatment for women and minorities?  Remember Enron, Adelphia, Bear Stearns, the S&L Scandal, the Housing Scandal etc.

Big Business needs regulation by the government to ensure an even playing field...sort of like referees.

Yes, a bunch of economically illiterate (more like retarded) government subjects decide what a fair share it, all while voting themselves a pay raise at the expense of the top earners.

American business is nothing like government. For one I don't HAVE to deal with a business I don't like, I can boycott that business. I HAVE to deal with the government whether I like it or not. Another difference is that businesses can go bankrupt, the government can't. The government is the ultimate monopoly. Yes, any large organization with a lot of power tends to corrupt people, but who has more power or resources than the government? Individual businesses pale in comparison to the power and wealth of the Imperial Federal government.

You mention Bear Stearns, Enron etc. Those businesses fucked up and now they're done. There is no Enron, Bear Stearns is no more. When the government fucks up then what happens? Nothing, they just blame it on lack of funding or whatever and go about their business. Remember most government positions are by appointment, we the people control a very small percentage of government hiring. Plus these assholes in power make is so it's impossible to get rid of them, a Senate seat now is almost a life-time appointment.

When it comes to business we the consumer have ultimate power, we vote with our wallets, if we as a population don't like Wal-Mart, then we can all choose to not go. Wal-Mart cannot force you to shop there. Government however CAN force you to do it's bidding, at the barrel of a gun no less.

The government is not your enemy.  You are the government.

You are not Big Business.  You have no say in a private corporation.  Of all business models, the modern corporation is easily the most fascist form:  the top down control of the CEO, of a board of directors.  The voiceless worker left to the whim of total authoritative control of the corporate management is a faceless voiceless plebe.

At least in government, you have a voice.  In private big business, you don't.

If I am the government, then why does it do just about everything I don't want it to do? Why can't I just separate myself from it if I decide I don't like it?

The modern corporation is dependent on consumers doing business with it. Look at Enron, they fucked their people over, and now they're bankrupt and their leaders are either dead or in prison. We decided that Enron was shitty so we the people destroyed them. Individuals buy products, buy stock, we control the fate of businesses. If you don't like a business you can organize a boycott, organize a union, start a negative marketing campaign against them. Individuals have a lot of say when it comes to big business.

Government however is run by a political class that looks out for one another, their interest is their own power, and like Abe Lincoln said: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Government power is the greatest power in the nation. No other entity can take away your freedom or even your life like the government can. Businesses can only violate people's rights if the government allows them to, and if this does happen it isn't businesses fault but the governments.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 21, 2008, 11:47:46 AM
Bodvar,

I used to argue these points by posting links to hard factual data... but it's hard to counter filtered data with more data. I prefer, (from experience) what has happened here.

You prefer having your ass handed to you post after post and not backing up your points at all?

I see your point, that is a lot easier than what I do.

You've already conceded the homicide statistic... why? Because you had to research the statistics yourself.

No, because I read your question wrong, the statistic never changed. You think I don't read my own statistics?


The same will happen as you dig further into your positions on poverty and taxation.


The Luke

Prove it then big guy! Let's see some hard data, oh wait I forgot, your not going to do that are you? Instead of relying on me to do your research, why don't you just make it easier for everyone and do it yourself? I mean it's your point after all.

You seem to think that tax burden is based on income AND net worth. Nobody measures tax burden this way. Look I've done PLENTY of digging and made a compelling argument. Your statement saying that you used to back up your points but don't anymore is well... stupid. You can't back up anything you say because there is no hard data backing up your points, because your points are wrong. The end.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Bodvar on September 21, 2008, 12:10:05 PM
Jees not this again - take any millionaire put him in the middle of the congo jungle with no infrastructure and come back a year later to see how much wealth he has generated on his own. Your argument is full of holes - individuals are only able to generate the sort of wealth they do because of infrastructure and the hard work from all the little cogs in the machine. Stop and think about it - could individuals generate the same level of wealth in say Roman Times.  You are so willing to swallow everything that you are told hook line and sinker because you think one day you will be part of the one percent.

So if you take one wealth guy out of his own civilization and put him in a shithole with no infrastructure, then if he doesn't change the entire civilization and generate wealth all by himself then he.... well I don't know, I have no idea what your point is here.

Look the infrastructure wouldn't exist without people creating wealth, and who do you think employs these little "cogs"? Poor people? Fuck no, jobs are created by rich people taking big ass risks in return for big ass rewards. Without investors and people willing to take risks, then you don't have a fucking economy. No economy = no job = no government revenue. People generating wealth came before government. People generating wealth can exist without government. Government cannot exist with people generating wealth.

Think about it, when is the last time a poor person or a middle class person gave you a job? The rich create the jobs in our economy, the do this in order to make themselves wealthy. We benefit from the desire of rich people to make lots of money, they need to buy our services or they have nothing. Everybody wins, this is why capitalism succeeded and communism failed.

You think there weren't any rich Romans? The average Roman had a HELL of a better life than the average Hun or Goth. Their taxes were waaaay lower than ours is today. The Romans had a merchant economy and it allowed them to rule the world for hundreds of years.

Good job of making up what my motives are for me. I base my opinion based on fact and logic, I have no idea what yours is based on but it's not based on any significant amount of critical thinking, that's for sure.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Busted on September 21, 2008, 02:01:34 PM
Federal Income taxes are illegal... According to the Constitution ALL taxes must be "portioned" in order to be LEGAL.  Federal Income Tax is NOT PORTIONED.


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: The Luke on September 21, 2008, 02:18:49 PM
Bodvar,


Jesus Christ... chronic cognitive dissonance. Convinced of the delusion and immune to criticism.

So much of what you say is wrong that I don't know where to begin... so I'll simply reiterate my same old refrain:

COMPARE A CHART OF GOVERNMENT INCOME TO A CHART OF GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND YOU'LL GET SOME UNDERSTANDING OF THE DYNAMICS OF THE ECONOMY.


The Luke


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: gcb on September 21, 2008, 06:10:26 PM
So if you take one wealth guy out of his own civilization and put him in a shithole with no infrastructure, then if he doesn't change the entire civilization and generate wealth all by himself then he.... well I don't know, I have no idea what your point is here.

Look the infrastructure wouldn't exist without people creating wealth, and who do you think employs these little "cogs"? Poor people? Fuck no, jobs are created by rich people taking big ass risks in return for big ass rewards. Without investors and people willing to take risks, then you don't have a fucking economy. No economy = no job = no government revenue. People generating wealth came before government. People generating wealth can exist without government. Government cannot exist with people generating wealth.

Think about it, when is the last time a poor person or a middle class person gave you a job? The rich create the jobs in our economy, the do this in order to make themselves wealthy. We benefit from the desire of rich people to make lots of money, they need to buy our services or they have nothing. Everybody wins, this is why capitalism succeeded and communism failed.

You think there weren't any rich Romans? The average Roman had a HELL of a better life than the average Hun or Goth. Their taxes were waaaay lower than ours is today. The Romans had a merchant economy and it allowed them to rule the world for hundreds of years.

Good job of making up what my motives are for me. I base my opinion based on fact and logic, I have no idea what yours is based on but it's not based on any significant amount of critical thinking, that's for sure.

Well you are a bit heated under the collar there. No the truth is that the government also creates jobs, and no wealth is not generated by rich people - it is generated by produce. Rich people maybe the driving force, but then the government can also be a driving force - this is important in times of recession when no one wants to invest. And my point simply put is that the infrastructure contributes to the wealth people generate - while you are arguing that it does not. If it does contribute then is it not right and proper that those that make the wealth put back into that infrastructure?


Title: Re: JASON BOURNE Speaks the TRUTH on Sarah Palin!
Post by: Decker on September 22, 2008, 06:14:05 AM

Quote
Not according to the left, their general attitude is that the government owns the money and it distributes the money back to the people. Tell me do you really feel that the current government (legislative and executive) is working "for the people" nowadays? Excuse me if I'm a bit more cynical than that, people in government are worried about power and doing whatever necessary to maintain and grow that power. They don't give a damn about you or me, just look at the approval ratings for the President (twenties) and Congress (teens).
I don’t know what the left, as a group, thinks.  Our elected reps try to appease their constituency by bringing home federal spending.  If these officials bring home the pork, they keep their jobs.  It always points back to the people.  That’s the vicious cycle of politics.  When does gov. action not point back to the people?  How about these trillion dollar bailouts of private companies running their businesses like a craps table?  How does that happen?  Oversight regulations are relaxed or unenforced to “get gov. off the back of big business” and corruption runs rampant.   

Quote
…When businesses are taxed and regulated too much then government is not an enabler for wealth creation, it's an obstacle…... Right now America has the second highest corporate tax rate, only Japan's is higher and their economy has been suffering for a very long time. There is also an estimated 1 trillion dollars out there because of our stupid tax system, imagine if the tax system was reformed and that money came back over here in our economy, do you have any idea what a boost that would be for us? My bottom line is: The US government hurts businesses more than they help.
As we’ve seen though, most big corporations pay nothing in corporate taxes in this country.  In fact, the government ends up paying them for their creative accounting.

At what point does this invisible corporate tax burden become too much for these big companies to shoulder?

I want gov. regulating these companies to the extent that referees regulate a football game—to ensure fair play by compliance with existing laws.

Quote
No guns involved? Let's see here, if you don't pay your taxes then your going to be arrested. Who arrests you? The police. What do the police have? Guns. Those guns aren't for looking cool, they are for shooting you. If you don't want to be arrested, then one of the options the police have (the last option), is to shoot you dead. No guns involved my ass. 

The income tax payments are done through voluntary compliance.  If you have a good reason for not paying your fair share, go through the proper channels to make your case.  We have in the US taxation by consent of the taxed.  We have a voice in our tax system. 

Quote
Look, if you look at any poll that measures people's satisfaction with the government, then you'll find that the VAST majority of people are unsatisfied. I never consented to be taxed, yet I have to pay them whether I like it or not. Someone made that decision for me.  This is why I like the FairTax, you CHOOSE when you pay your taxes (only when you buy stuff). No IRS, nothing. If you buy stuff you pay your taxes, if you want to hold on to your cash, that's your business. That's the kind of tax system most people would like to have, not the Income Tax that nobody on this planet understands. I mean the compliance cost for the tax code is more than 200 billion dollars per year. That's money spent just to keep people with guns from hauling your ass off to jail. What a colossal waste of resources.
Although your consent to taxation is required (through voluntary compliance), the consent of the people was needed to implement it in the first place.

The Fair Tax fails b/c it would need an enforcement branch much like the IRS—who is going to guarantee correct compliance—correct amounts, improper avoidance etc.  The Fair Tax is not a good idea for that reason and these:  tax hike for poor, massive black market for avoidance, oppressive tax rate, along with massive tax avoidance putting a premium on foreign purchases over those in the US…

I see in another part of your response where you recognize the flower of direct democracy as the lynch mob.  That’s good b/c it’s a reminder of how shitty democracy can really be in practice.  You made a smart observation.  We live in a democratic republic.

Quote
They are paying payroll taxes yes (that's a whole other discussion there), and sales taxes. But not income taxes which make up the VAST majority of government income. I've already shown that sales taxes make up less than 7% of all taxes paid.
Quote
Here's another personal income tax graph:

Quote
As you can see the tax burden doesn't even break even until you get to the 50th percentile. That mean that the bottom earners either have no burden or a NEGATIVE burden, which means they get back more tax money than they pay. Note that this graph is almost 10 years old and since then the burden has shifted even MORE to the right.
Quote
Another thing you must consider, is that the poor are the ones that are receiving the benefits of these social programs. Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment benefits, WIC, welfare, housing assistance, utilities assistance. Rich people aren't benefiting from these programs, yet they're paying virtually 100% of the bill. So the amount of services the poor are getting compared to what they pay in is quite lopsided.
The income tax burden is apportioned according to the ability to pay.  We americans are in this together.  We are the government.  Our government is by and for the people.

As a matter of principle you have those with the strongest arms do the heaviest lifting.  You don't have your grandmother move your barbells from the basement to the attic and you don't have the poor pay the same income tax rate as the affluent. 

Progressive graded tax rates are fair and in the best interest of our country.  A man is entitled to the fruits of his labor but no man is an island nor should he want to be.  His successes are built on the shoulders of those that came before him.  These things were developed by his citizen predecessors:  roads, phones, internet, justice system, defense, currency, moderated market place all depend on tax dollars for maintenance.

Further, the rich people/employers that create jobs are only part of the equation.  The worker that fills those positions should be just as revered.  Let's see the wealthy operate their factories and service industries without workers.  See that type of contention just shows that both employer/leader and employee/follower are necessary pieces to the labor puzzle:  We are in this together.

Out of that arrangement, the employer takes a larger share of the workproduct's reward. 

He pays more in taxes because he earns more money.  The country needs all the leaders it can get.  These people shouldn't be complaining and crying about the tax burden.  They should be proud that they are major contributors to our society.  That doesn't mean don't be vigilant in reassessing what is the proper tax rate though.

I think if you look at the redistribution of gov. tax dollars, you may want to look at wealth instead of income.  10% of the US population owns over 70% of our country’s wealth. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth#In_the_United_States
Then I would look at gov. expenditures on that 10%.  Do the trillion dollar bailouts and billion dollar no-bid gov contracts start to add up when compared to the annual costs of AFDC or the like?  I would say yes.

Further, I would say that this 10% does get the bulk of its income from capital gains—not taxed under income tax rates.


Quote
When you consider their income alone. How much are they getting when you factor in all the social services they receive? How about all the people that don't have traditional incomes, do you know you can have a high net worth but be considered in poverty because you don't really earn a traditional income. You can make a lot of assumptions based on income alone, but they don't tell the whole story by a long shot.
Quote
Are there poor people in America? Absolutely. Is it because they don't have the opportunity or access to resources to get themselves out of poverty? Absolutely not.
Quote
Should there be a safety net for people who can't take care of themselves? Absolutely. Should that safety net be used to support people that can support themselves but choose not to? Fuck no.
That’s why we should look at wealth instead of income.  There are CEOs that draw $1 in income annually but collect millions in capital gains. 

Are there people that play the system of AFDC and the like?  Yes.  I don’t think you’d find anyone that says that’s acceptable.  In the interest of helping people in need, those programs work.  I won’t condemn them b/c there are a few bad apples. 

Quote
...American business is nothing like government. For one I don't HAVE to deal with a business I don't like, I can boycott that business. I HAVE to deal with the government whether I like it or not. Another difference is that businesses can go bankrupt, the government can't. The government is the ultimate monopoly. Yes, any large organization with a lot of power tends to corrupt people, but who has more power or resources than the government? Individual businesses pale in comparison to the power and wealth of the Imperial Federal government.
Quote
You mention Bear Stearns, Enron etc. Those businesses fucked up and now they're done. There is no Enron, Bear Stearns is no more. When the government fucks up then what happens? Nothing, they just blame it on lack of funding or whatever and go about their business. Remember most government positions are by appointment, we the people control a very small percentage of government hiring. Plus these assholes in power make is so it's impossible to get rid of them, a Senate seat now is almost a life-time appointment.
Quote
When it comes to business we the consumer have ultimate power, we vote with our wallets, if we as a population don't like Wal-Mart, then we can all choose to not go. Wal-Mart cannot force you to shop there. Government however CAN force you to do it's bidding, at the barrel of a gun no less. 

Government can go bankrupt.  It would mean the dissolution of our country.  Individual businesses pale in comparison to the size and power of the federal gov.  American businesses in the aggregate do not.  When entire business sectors go corrupt, it is something you cannot boycott or ignore.  The damage reverberates throughout the economy.

When gov. fucks up we have (had) self correcting measures operating on an honest assessment of the damage at hand.  In our gov. procedure there is always room for redress.

Walmart can easily force you to shop its store.  It can undercut the competition pricewise driving all competitors out of business or marginalizing them.  It does this through monopoly practice and undercutting labor costs on the production side.

Quote
If I am the government, then why does it do just about everything I don't want it to do? Why can't I just separate myself from it if I decide I don't like it?
Quote
The modern corporation is dependent on consumers doing business with it. Look at Enron, they fucked their people over, and now they're bankrupt and their leaders are either dead or in prison. We decided that Enron was shitty so we the people destroyed them. Individuals buy products, buy stock, we control the fate of businesses. If you don't like a business you can organize a boycott, organize a union, start a negative marketing campaign against them. Individuals have a lot of say when it comes to big business.
Quote
Government however is run by a political class that looks out for one another, their interest is their own power, and like Abe Lincoln said: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Government power is the greatest power in the nation. No other entity can take away your freedom or even your life like the government can. Businesses can only violate people's rights if the government allows them to, and if this does happen it isn't businesses fault but the governments.
You are not a dictator.  You have to work in the framework of a citizen in a society of others.  If you feel as strongly as you do, then convince others of your plight and build a coalition to make a change.

I thought it was Lord Acton that made that quote about power and corruption.

Big Business can take our lives (look at the scandals in Columbia for a grotesque example: http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia73.htm  ), pollute our air, make our water undrinkable and furnish us, for a price, inherently dangerous products.