and then.....

[Straw Man]

YES!

You're fucking quote is "8 years of free fall with increasing momentum."  
You said it was "8 years of free fall" and during those "8 years of free fall" there was "increasing momentum."  

Saying something existed for "8 years" means it was in existence for those 8 years.  That's exactly what you said.  




And it's not arguing "semantics."  What you're proposing is "pragmatics," which I'm also not arguing.  I'm quoting your entire post word for word, not interpreting any particular word or phrase in any manner what-so-ever.  So yes, I suppose using the exact wording of your post in its entirety is the "best I've got."  

Regardless, you're apparently no longer arguing that it was in free fall for 8 years--only "free falling" for a year.  
In that case, I would argue that expecting a one-year free fall to "stop on a dime" is well within the range of reasonable expectation....and that's exactly what the STIMULUS was sold as....and failed to do.  


You can't argue both sides.  
If you want to argue that it was an "8 year free fall" and that's why it couldn't be reversed quickly, I will argue that it wasn't an "8 year free fall" (and it seems you agree with this).

If you want to argue that it couldn't be stopped on a dime, then I will argue that it was a one-year free fall (which you agree) and the STIMULUS was supposed to stop and reverse it.  If you want to argue that the stimulus did reverse the one year free fall....and things are peachy-keen now....I'll just agree too disagree, because I don't believe the economy is better today than it was when the stimulus was enacted.

instead of changing my quote and pretending I said something I didn't why not just show my quote

here it is again

If you're going to put quotation marks around something then make sure it's exactly what I said and not what you think I said

look at your words above in quotation marks and then show me where you see them in that order in my quote below

you constantly repost the same charts
do you even know how labor participation is calculated

did you notice it stared going to down as soon at Bush got in  office and really fell off a cliff in 2008 (the last year of the Bush administration in case you had forgotten)

How to you stop a free fall that has been building in momemtum for 8 years and more importantly what does this have to do with Howie inability to understand even the most basic things about taxes

[doison]

instead of changing my quote and pretending I said something I didn't why not just show my quote

here it is again

If you're going to put quotation marks around something then make sure it's exactly what I said and not what you think I said

look at your words above in quotation marks and then show me where you see them in that order in my quote below

Holy shit, I clicked "quote" ON YOUR POST to reply to it.  I quoted the entire post exactly as you worded it.  I didn't change a single letter.  

I didn't "quote" you, I replied to your post and included your entire post, word-for-word.  


I'm honestly fucking weirded out right now.  I didn't interpret anything in any way.  I copied the post you made on page one of this thread, word for word.  I didn't even "right click" copy and paste it....I REPLIED to the post by clicking "quote" on the upper right hand corner of your post so that it my post would be a unique reply to your exact post in its entirety.  


AGAIN, here is YOUR ENTIRE POST, word-for-word...an exact replica of your original post without a single word altered in any form what-so-ever.  

of course because 8 years of free fall with increasing momentum could have been stopped and reversed on a dime, especially considering how much priority the Repubs gave to helping improve the job market by cooperating with the Obama administration

It is:
quote author=Straw Man
topic=435534.msg6243929#msg6243929 date=1344366386

It's on the first fucking page of this thread....

[Straw Man]

Holy shit, I clicked "quote" ON YOUR POST to reply to it.  I quoted the entire post exactly as you worded it.  I didn't change a single letter.  

I didn't "quote" you, I replied to your post and included your entire post, word-for-word.  


I'm honestly fucking weirded out right now.  I didn't interpret anything in any way.  I copied the post you made on page one of this thread, word for word.  I didn't even "right click" copy and paste it....I REPLIED to the post by clicking "quote" on the upper right hand corner of your post so that it my post would be a unique reply to your exact post in its entirety.  


AGAIN, here is YOUR ENTIRE POST, word-for-word...an exact replica of your original post without a single word altered in any form what-so-ever.  

It is:
quote author=Straw Man
topic=435534.msg6243929#msg6243929 date=1344366386

It's on the first fucking page of this thread....

that's all it takes to get you "weirded" out

I see you're referring to my second post and when I went back and looked I thoughtyou were referring to my first post

my mistake - sorry to have accused you of changing my quote

what exactly is it about the labor utilization rate that troubles you so much

Did you look at my other post where I mentioned the scale of the chart

Did you look at the longer term chart

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000?years_option=specific_years&include_graphs=true&to_year=2010&from_year=1948

Is your beef that I said it started to go down when Bush got in office and fell off a cliff in 2008 and then later typed 8 years of free fall (again - my mistake in not recognizing which quote you were referring to)

[George Whorewell]

Doison is clearly outmatched in the wits department here. In fact, all of us are.

Straw's otherworldly talent for linguistic interpretation and his deadly use of the bold function to emphasize particular words are too much for Doison to handle.

Doison, give up while you can.

[howardroark]

the answer is you suck at communicating and still don't understand the basics of income taxes

how exactly does the 2500 in spending with non-HSA dollars INCREASE your tax liability

let's use your same example but let's at least use the correct HSA contribution which for an individual under 55 is 3100

Your gross wages are 50,000 and you put 3100 into your HSA leaving you 46,900 in taxable wages

explain to me exactly how your taxes on that 46,900 will change if you have 2500 in expense for non-allowable OTC medication

Try to keep in mind that your taxable wages of 46,900 NEVER CHANGES regardless of whether you spend the 2500 on aspirin or whether you spend it on beer and pot or whether you put it in a savings account (and in this case we'll ignore the taxes on your interest income)

Clearly you are fucking retarded because you bolded the parts of my post which point out that I'm analyzing under the assumption that you put the same amount of money away into your HSA. Do you just not understand the concept of a budget restraint?

[Shockwave]

Doison is clearly outmatched in the wits department here. In fact, all of us are.

Straw's otherworldly talent for linguistic interpretation and his deadly use of the bold function to emphasize particular words are too much for Doison to handle.

Doison, give up while you can.

Savage sarcasm, you're last few posts have had me cracking up.
Carry on.

[Straw Man]

Doison is clearly outmatched in the wits department here. In fact, all of us are.

Straw's otherworldly talent for linguistic interpretation and his deadly use of the bold function to emphasize particular words are too much for Doison to handle.

Doison, give up while you can.

bfd - I didn't know which quote he was referring to

when I noticed my mistake I admitted it and apologized

that's what adults do

still no answer back as to why he cares so much about the labor utilization rate

[Soul Crusher]

bfd - I didn't know which quote he was referring to

when I noticed my mistake I admitted it and apologized

that's what adults do

still no answer back as to why he cares so much about the labor utilization rate

you voted for obama and still not have apologized for that tragic error. 

[Straw Man]

Clearly you are fucking retarded because you bolded the parts of my post which point out that I'm analyzing under the assumption that you put the same amount of money away into your HSA. Do you just not understand the concept of a budget restraint?

I bolded the parts of your quotes where you kept saying the in order to keep your tax bill the same you have to change your spending

how you spend your non-HSA dollars never changes your tax bill

do you understand that or not?

You seem to both understand it and not understand it in the same sentence

Straw Man - since you're turning it into a personal thing: care to explain this away? Or do you simply use distractions because you couldn't find your ass with flashing pointers showing you the way?

But okay dude, allow me to explain this to you with simple math, since you're apparently too dense to use your own mind:

Annual Income $50,000
Addition to HSA $5,000
Medical Expenses $5,000
Non-Medical Spending $45,000

Now say that the government decides to stop allowing you to use your HSA for all medical expenses; now you can only use your HSA for half of your medical expenses. Your point is that your tax bill won't change if you'll continue putting $5,000 into your HSA, which is true. But now you have $2,500 in additional medical expenses that are not tax deductible and thus will have to come out of your regular $45,000 income. That means that in order to keep your tax bill the same, you'll have to spend less on other things OR save less (outside of your HSA) in order to be able to afford that $2,500 in non-deductible medical expenses. So either way the tax change takes a bite out of your budget.

Annual Income $50,000
Addition to HSA $5,000
HSA Medical Expenses $2,500
Non-HSA Medical Expenses $2,500
Non-Medical Spending $42,500

[Straw Man]

you voted for obama and still not have apologized for that tragic error. 

I only apologize for things I've actually done wrong not thing you imagine

[howardroark]

how you spend your non-HSA dollars never changes your tax bill

THAT'S MY FUCKING POINT YOU RETARD.

With the reduction of what is tax-deductible, you have two choices:
1. Put less in your HSA and pay more in taxes.
-OR-
2. Keep your tax bill the same by putting the same amount in your HSA, but reduce spending on non-medical items because you'll have to move medical spending on non-deductible items into your regular budget. It's called a budget restraint: you don't have an unlimited amount to spend so you have to make choices.

The point is that either way its the government taking a bite out of your budget, the only difference being that one way is direct (taxation) and one indirect (changing your utility-maximizing behavior through the threat of taxation).

[Straw Man]

THAT'S MY FUCKING POINT YOU RETARD.

With the reduction of what is tax-deductible, you have two choices:
1. Put less in your HSA and pay more in taxes.
-OR-
2. Keep your tax bill the same by putting the same amount in your HSA, but reduce spending on non-medical items because you'll have to move medical spending on non-deductible items into your regular budget. It's called a budget restraint: you don't have an unlimited amount to spend so you have to make choices.

The point is that either way its the government taking a bite out of your budget, the only difference being that one way is direct (taxation) and one indirect (changing your utility-maximizing behavior through the threat of taxation).

your budget is not your tax bill

if you put the maximum into your HSA (as in my original example and yours) then your tax bill never changes and how you spend your non-HSA dollars never effects your tax bil

do you agree with that point?

[howardroark]

your budget is not your tax bill

if you put the maximum into your HSA (as in my original example and yours) then your tax bill never changes and how you spend your non-HSA dollars never effects your tax bil

do you agree with that point?

Yes. I have stated that repeatedly. Do you understand that if you keep your tax bill the same, you end up getting a bigger bite out of your budget because you have to replace non-deductible medical spending with non-medical spending in your regular budget?

[Straw Man]

Yes. I have stated that repeatedly. Do you understand that if you keep your tax bill the same, you end up getting a bigger bite out of your budget because you have to replace non-deductible medical spending with non-medical spending in your regular budget?

that is correct but you originally characterized the minor change in HSA rules as a tax increase which it is not